[citation][nom]Hydrotricithline[/nom]Long of the short, the entire PSN network was setup to something sub-par, to facilitate a 'free' service. I look at it something more like steam, players have their own servers and it just simply connects them together. Having a service like this as it is with PSN caters (catered) to my gemographic, where I'm an avid pc owner and enthusiast, I had the console for the kids, and to play the occasional release game (orginally the Rockband series) and Blueray movies. Most of the interaction with PSN has simply been to get downloadable content that I purchased as addon's to my PS3 games/software. Having a pay/subscription based model I believe would undermine the entire principle that the PSN seemed to originally have been created for. Although I do recognize a good 50% of the comments here as xbox360 'trolls', I will have to agree that PSN is no where near the status of XboxLive. Even going to the point of playing with PC users on the XBL network. PSN to my knowledge doesn't even begin to touch on that, aswell as hosted servers, and added content for the XBL that PSN lacks. Understanding that xbl is subscription, and PSN is free the differences in the two services are understandable, almost expected. Implimenting the subscription services on the PSN I don't think the majority of the ps3 owner user base is being kept in mind, the majority if not all of the titles on ps3 wouldn't utilize or support a server 'upgrade' on the PSN, even with the assumption that the user base would be willing to pay for such a service. Whereas the demographic I represent, I would imagine encompasses the mainstream user base. I turn it on from time to time, play a game or two, and put it down. I don't see the need or use for having a manditory subscription based service for a PSN. If they were inclined to change their service offerings for some enthusiast crowd, (hosted servers and extra bells and whistles and what not) I'm sure they could do quite well in the high school dropout, or the "stay at home and console for 15+hrs a day" demographics. I'm not sure however it would be taken aswell by the causal user base. As with myself, I enjoy console games as something I can pick up from time to time, as a break from the 'pc world', and play for ten minutes, or an hour as suits my time and needs, press the power button, turn it off and forget about it. I would be hesitant to even consider paying for something that I simply have no need for or use; as before mentioned I bought the ps3 console under the understanding that the PSN network was free. Without the network being accessable to everyone, my gaming console just turned into a Blueray player with console controllers.My thoughts;Not yours.[/citation]
I have entirely different thoughts on PS3's productivity and use when compared to Xbox 360.. but let's not go there.
However, i must speak out on PSN... PSN is obviously free, and henceforth, not that great a service. However, it does come pretty close to that of what Sony's counterpart, Microsoft has, the XBL. XBL might be better in a couple of aspects, including greater number of players, some slight more extra features, but overall... there isn't that much improvement over the PSN... so i think it's kinda weird that ppl are criticizing PSN for their money making plans, whereas XBL has had this joke of a service(yup both are hopeless if not free... ie none is worth the $$) paid for so long and nobody says a word..
PSN, although free, would also become a joke if paid...like XBL.. however, if they keep their current service free, and only make select new features (ie betas, new selective voice chat- if they ever have it, discounts etc..) paid... then IMHO they would definitely be able to overcome XBL and would be considered a much better service... ofcourse it'll take some time to compete with XBL.. but it will happen, provided the above does happen.