Ben-DutkaThey can no longer claim the PlayStation 3 "has no games." They can no longer question whether or not Blu-Ray will become the accepted high-definition medium. They can no longer say that the PlayStation Network "has a long way to go." But no matter how many hurdles the PS3 clears, the media always wants to place more in its path.
This isn't a promotional push for the PS3; this is merely a counter to the extraordinarily negative backlash regarding Sony's latest move: according to the MTV Multiplayer blog, Sony will now be charging publishers a bandwidth fee when PSN users download content. This "PlayStation Network Bandwidth Fee" will cost publishers 16 cents per gigabyte of content downloaded and although this does apply to free and paid content, publishers are only charged for the free stuff for the first 60 days of Network availability. Many game journalists have leaped all over this, as if a starving child had finally found another anti-Sony tidbit to snack on. They were running out of ammunition, but now they've found another bullet.
A popular article out there is this one at SF Video Game Examiner, and it essentially labels this new development as a crucial blow, and Sony fans should be "livid." It says "you'll be sorry you don't own an Xbox 360," and that it's a "no-win situation for publishers." The argument is that 1 million downloads of a 1GB demo will cost a publisher $160,000, and one source has already said- "It definitely makes us think about how we view the distribution of content related to our games when it is free for us to do it on the web, on Xbox Live, or any other way including broadcast than on Sonys platform." The final conclusion basically tells consumers to avoid the PS3 for this very reason. We don't know about you, but this is an absurd sentiment.
There isn't a single solitary gamer on Mother Earth who would count this as a catalyst one way or the other when considering a console purchase. The Network remains free. 1 million downloads of a 1GB demo? …when the hell is that going to happen? How often has it happened? Arguing that there are 20 million+ PSN accounts allows you to say that 1 million might be believable, but the previous number was between 17 and 18 million, and Sony has freely admitted that includes PlayStation accounts made on the PSP and PC, and it likely includes multiple accounts as well. Taking this into account, and the fact that a grand total of maybe two or three demos per year would reach the aforementioned 1 million plateau, and I seriously doubt smaller publishers will even care. Most content isn't 1GB in size, anyway! Are we really going to say to someone, "oh, you shouldn't buy the PS3 because such-and-such publisher might not put such-and-such demo up on the PSN?" You've got to be kidding me.
Here's the bottom line- the Network is still free . The vast majority of gamers go online to play games. All they know is that it's free on the Network and it isn't free on Live. Nobody lists demos as a major priority when selecting a console to buy, and if you evaluate the numbers correctly , this fee won't smash publishers as hard as some people would like to claim. My favorite part of the article is where it says that "Sony has, in one fell swoop, effectively guaranteed that you'll be making your demos, trailers, and hefty add-on content exclusive to Xbox Live." I also suppose that every last consumer on earth is choosing between the PS3 and 360…not a one already has the 360 at home and is merely considering a PS3 purchase. Oh wait…in our estimation and from what we've seen, there are a whole lot more members of the latter group. How exactly does this stop them – or really, anyone – from buying a PS3? Man, why not just stand outside Sony HQ with picket signs saying-"
"We don't know what you're going to do next concerning the PS3, but we're sure it's bad and we won't stand for it any longer!"
'rolls eyes'
This was definantly a bad move on sony's part… why sony, why?
its not that bad.
just means we wont have as much downloadable games and demos.
Is just for free stuff. The rest that isen't free won't be charged.
Read the article. It clearly states "this does apply to free and paid content".
Also, I just read through this thread and saw many of the posters here crying this will be bad because developers won't post their stuff on PSN.
STOP IT NOW!
That is excatly what the MTV Blog and the SF Video Game Examiner want you to think. This result is unproven. Why don't you wait and see if anything changes before you overreact.
I posted this on another forum:
Demos are only charged for the first 60 days, paid for content always has the 16 cents charge.. In other words if they make money from costumes that they charge £3 for and it is 1 meg in size, after 1000 downloads ( £3000 profit) they get charged 16 cents .
After 4,000,000 downloads (£12 million pounds sales) they get charged
4,000,000 downloads at 1 meg download = 4,000 GB bandwidth
16 cents = $0.16
0.16×4,000 = $640
A whopping 640 dollars
£12,000,000 profit and they pay $640 for the bandwidth.. You have to be an idiot to complain, considering your possible profit margins, which wouldnt even be possible without the psn.. (By the way £12 Million is equivalent to round about
$16-20 Million Dollars, which makes this whole thing completely ridiculous now)
(check the SFIV costumes this is what I am basing this off of, and they charge nearly £5 per costume pack ) If you dont download it they dont get charged, if you do download it then they have to pay peanuts for the bandwidth and make a killing with the pofit..
It is true that not everything is this tiny in size, but your average map pack is 100 MB and runs in at £10.. Demos, while they generate no instant cash for the company they are what help to sell the game and even then.. It is controlled only the first 60 days are they charged (first 2 months) .. Makes perfect sense.. Its not an extortionate $50 a year while all the while you have advertisements pumped through to you on the NXE..
Thank you psxextreme for putting out such a level headed response regarding this.. How appropriate that it is all from unverified anonymous sources…
All things considered, why doesn't Sony start pumping adverts onto the XMB ? I wouldn't mind if it enables them to remove the associated cost and keep the service free..
I read that article and thought it's just another hit seeking ploy. Though it does answer a lot of questions concerning the psn store content.
Its sad that it has to come to this but life's life, its me or them and i prefer it be them.
Either way, having 100 demos does'nt do much in the end, i'd rather be at Home (Xi update tomorrow) than download demos for games i will never rent let alone buy.
Last edited by karneli lll on 3/22/2009 11:10:55 PM
Thats sucks for the publishers but its just business not personal. All the free stuff sony is offering us the money has to be made up some way. As long as they dont start charging us for the psn im cool with it.
I don't like that move from sony now we'll be lucky to have 3rd party demo on psn
They really are running out of bullets for that gun, if this affects anyone, itll make fewer devs making demos, and I gotta tell ya… demos SUCK even for great games. DLC SUCKS, and it'll just force devs to actually complete their games on the disc. 360 gets all that exlcusive DLC that nobody wants anyway, so I don't give a rip.
No intelligent person would let this factor into a console purchase. The industry is gettin desperate and grasping at straws because Sony is going to destroy MS at GDC.
dlc sucks? alot of dlc is great and adds longevity and value to the games YOU play.
like what? it's mostly worthless crap to bilk you out of money, even if Sony had Lost and Damned I wouldn't get it.
@WorldEndsWithMe I couldn't agree more, but also maybe thats why there are certain ps1 games coming to psn store and not every ps1 titles, it make perfect sense because developers and publishers thinking about bandwidth fees. To me as long as sony keep there agreement with gamers on psn free service Im happy. M$ won't u give up and focus on creating better software.
I take that back, sorta, its trash unless its for something like warcraft or burnout paradise, otherwise… just content held hostage that coulda been on the disc.
I'm not sure rell, (bear that in mind) but I think Sony can put up all the PS1 games they want because the bandwidth there would be theirs to handle, and they can't very well charge themselves.
It's typical for commercial companies to "inter-charge" amongst departments… If they feel they can sell enough PS1 games to warrant the bandwidth fee then why not… remember, only once the person has actually bought that PS1 title will Sony permit a download…
Therefore the download bandwidth fee would be automatically included.
Q!
"i am home"
first im not convinced this is true yet. second, this could be a bad thing for us consumers in the fact that devs may take this fee into consideration and end up charging us more for games to download or DLC.
I think I could manage an extra dollar per 6.25gb's.
Ben, its true to say that 1 million downloads is a little absurd… But when demos of, lets say, Gran Turismo and GOWIII drop on the psn, I think we'l be hitting that 1 mil mark, if not more.
But then again, for those develepors, it wont be that much of a biggy.
"you'll be sorry you don't own an Xbox 360,"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!…….AAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
I agree. That is funny!
Last edited by Tim Speed24 on 3/23/2009 7:43:25 AM
Yes, we should all migrate to the 360 where WE pay for the advertising instead of the developers. LOL
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA…..I rather own a Virtual Boy than a 3fixme
One of these days, when that guy's 360 overheats and blows his house up in flames, he'll be sorry he didn't get rid of it on e-bay…
Last edited by Itdoesntmatter on 3/23/2009 11:12:04 AM
I bet none of you have ever owned a 360. Stop being ignorant fanboys. Just because a blog on MTV says something about 360 it doesn't mean you can go bashing something which you don't have a clue about.
I had 3 360's and they all RROD'd on me…go look me up my gamertag is: GMyth….
The 360 is a joke of a system, I saw no use for it on the rare ocassions when it wasn't gettin repaired…i got tired of Halo and Gears of War, they both scream TEENAGER at me…that system has no games other than those two (i hear it has RPGs but im not into that genre), all of its "exclusives", I just download the game torrent on a pc (cant do that with ANY ps3 exclusive)
My 360s were louder than my vacuum cleaner, it was hotter than my central heating system, it broke down on me like a cheap suit every time, it lagged on me all the time AND i still had to pay to play and to top it off it was gaming with mostly loud/obscene kids across America that find it fascinating to yell racia/sexuall slurs…the entire system felt so outdated…from the DVD cases to the batteries in the controllers, to the disc tray poppin out…etc…also i cannot handle the message the consumers are sending out there that advertising does more for their pockets than hardware reliability…people have shown they have no problems buying multiple systems if it breaks on them, maybe Sony should make shoddy hardware too? Make more money that way…
If a Microsoft spokesman (and basically everyone who has adopted Sony bashing as a sport) can hold a press release that is nothing but an anti-Sony PS3 bashing, then I can do the same on a website…
Last edited by Itdoesntmatter on 3/23/2009 1:59:25 PM
This KIND OF only affects the publishers. No one is going to choose one console over another just because of this.
Like someone choosing Burger King over McDonalds because Mcdonalds charges Heinz to sell their ketchup and Burger King doesn't.
Albeit a bad move, I think Sony is doing this because they were in the red last year and this could help them somewhat.
Last edited by ImTheMan on 3/22/2009 11:33:43 PM
I don't seem to understand the fee. Do WE as gamers have to pay anything, or its only the Devs?
I don't think they should have added that Fee, but if it doesn't cost me, I'm okay. Also, I'd appreciate if "journalists" now a days did a bit of research before writing articles.
Just the publishers. The Network is still free for all.
I'll be sorry I don't own an XBOX 360 when? LOL I'll be sorry I don't own an XBOX 360 when Obama saves the world. I mean, I guess it makes an excellent doorstop while doubling as an unreliable space heater.
Last edited by somethingrandom on 3/22/2009 11:44:26 PM
LOL…Obama saves the world…
I think this is a brillent move by sony. First of all developers will reconsider making shitty DLC for games and just add that content to the orginal disk like it should be (i'm looking at you PoP) and second why shouldn't they be charged. They want us to buy there game right? well sell it to me baby, make me a great and awesome game that will blow my socks off and make the demo show that, then i'll give you your cash.
Bump
And that´s the bottom line!
I agree.
@ Fenrir
Because StoneCold says so!!
Sorry, I couldn't help myself…
Now there's some forward thinking BigTones.
Let your OPonion be heard BIg tones. Very very good point!
Oh come on, seriously. Posting advertising typically costs money right?… demo's are basically advertising. So you mean to tell me that a publisher who's made a game big enough and good enough to warrant 1 million downloads of it's 1Gb demo wouldn't be willing to cough up a little dough to get that kind of exposure? Besides, if it's really that big a deal just make a smaller demo.
And as far as paid DLC goes, who cares? The publishers can just tack an extra $0.16/Gb on the cost of the DLC and nobody will even notice. I wouldn't. "OH NO!! that new rockband song is $2.01 instead of $2.00, the end is nigh. DAMN YOU SONY!!"
I agree with gumbi. Besides, if the game is any good they will make their money back.
Very well put. I think this move has a touch of brilliance myself.
In fact, I could see MS hopping on this idea real quick so they could at least lower the cost of xbox live.
Well done gumbi, now get that finger outta my face 🙂
I've never thought about it that way…well I've nevr thought about it..But anyway good point Gumbi. It is just a playable ad.
I was thinking the same thing, This is just an advertising cost. How many companies don't spend $160,000 on Advertising? Sure the PSN may suffer a bit, but this isn't going to affect it too much.
This is just something for the Anti PS3 people to add to the fire. Why isn't anyone saying that Sony are charging the publishers so that the end customer doesn't have to pay more…or they could charge the customer and end up with the same thing Microsoft is doing…
Why are there so many people willing to overlook what Microsoft is doing? It seems that no matter how good of a system Sony has made, it's been nothing but bad publicity for it since day one. And yet it's still here…
That's what I was thinking. Also they could charge 15 cents for a demo….that's the cost of…well….nothing….and since it's all VISA, it can be done….hey why not charge 30, then everyone wins…….and the consumer won't care.
oh yeah by the way everyone the secret game is either gta5, mg5, kh3, or ff7 remake
Ben, your article speaks my mind… well put. As long as the network remains free for me I am happy; if Sony want to charge me to play online I would sell my PS3 presto, invest in a decent PC and play online with my uncapped 20 dollar 2mb cable internet connection…
What Sony has done is correct. Its a good filter of sorts. We will see quality and not rubbish one hopes…
The other comments from that article you quote about people migrating in droves to the 360, or reasons why people would not now chose a PS3, are just stupid and short sighted…
Lets all remember one thing… the 360 had a one year head start… the PS3 has done EXCEPTIONALLY well, with a year disadvantage under its belt, to be in sights of over taking 360 within the next 12 to 18 months… it sounds long but it isn't, especially with a price drop in hand… to have come back from a years launch delay and still be 5-7 million consoles away from 360 is a mighty fine achievement I must add…
Q!
"i am home"
Last edited by Qubex on 3/23/2009 12:36:40 AM
I agree with Qubex, I think most people here cling to their PS3 not because of fanboyism (I'm looking at you LIVE cost defenders) but because the damn thing is just so attractive in every aspect. I realize an outsider coming in here would probably just see a Sony love-in but the fact is we choose the best because we want the best, and so far… we HAVE the best.
I agree with you "WorldEndsWithMe"; very true… you pay for the best… in quality, production value and style… and now exclusives… it is all happening and will only get better…
Q!
"i am home"
True. I'm just happy with the quality product that I got.
I don't see what the big deal over this is. It's just business. Again, as Ben said, it's just another way for paid-off "Xbots" (I use it in quotes because these guys are paid by MS to be Xbots) to rip the PS3 for no other reason except it's fashionable and they are taking dirty money to do so.
Again, I like the 360. I owned two of them. However, the 360 controller gave me arthritis, I didn't want to pay $60 any more to play online with a bunch of kids, the console has durability issues and there is little in the way of exclusives that interest me. That's my opinion and I think if all these journalists, bloggers and websites weren't on the take, that's what they would say, too.
I think long ago we all decided to ignore this crud. We all know the truth about MS and the media being in bed together and only the Xbots are deluded enough to believe that's not true.
Most Xbots actually pay Microsoft to be Xbots… =)
It might be a shot in the dark, but if sony were thinking of doing a price drop, could this be a way of deferring the amount of money they would loose on every console sold to the publisher?