The video game industry is a business, and we fully understand the need for profit. But how would you feel about fees associated with the PlayStation Network?
The rumor that Sony would eventually require fees for the Network has been around since the PS3's inception, but Sony has often said over and over again that they don't want to do this. In fact, we distinctly recall one Sony executive (it may have been Susan Panico) saying that free Network access was like a "universal right," or something like that. But the rumor has returned again, as some sources, including TAWKN and PS3Center, have taken some information from a recent survey and postulated that fees may be imminent. But it won't be a subscription fee like Xbox Live; it'd be a one-time fee that gives you access to content for both the PS3 and PSP. In other words, maybe you'd pay one amount that would allow you to download a certain number of downloadable content pieces, including full games and add-ons. We're not sure how this would relate to the current costs that accompany premium content, but perhaps one overall price for the month might actually save a gamer some money if he takes full advantage of the download limit. Who knows? We're just tossing some ideas out there.
Of course, some of you might want to just leave things as they are. I don't have a problem with the current set-up, personally; I kinda like this whole "just pay for what you want when you feel like it" thing.
I would pay if it's to improve the network so it can become better and it can surpass the competition in every way (not that it's too far off).Other than that I would leave it how it is now.
Last edited by Hexen on 5/20/2009 9:55:58 PM
No, absolutely not. One of the main reasons I got a PS3 is cause I could play online for free.
I have a 360, and aside from custom soundtracks and cross game voice chat (few little things here and there) the PSN is not at all different.
I think they should just leave it as it is. Don't fix what's not broken, methinks.
Just to clarify, you'd still "play online" for free. This is just talking about content on the Store; online Network access would remain free.
i still think a "pay as you go" kind of system is always more efficient then "fixed terms"
they should pull a mobile phone company move, give us the option every time you buy…
[What System Plan Would You Like To Use For Your Purchase Today?]
[Pay Full Price – $19.99] [Sub. Fee – $29.99]
that's just the way i see it… if that works for sony, then il support it… i'd buy the subscription fee either way though… (Granted those damn psn cards actually show their faces up north… how long does that funking take???)
this sounds like a good idea but it can go either way with different gamers
i think they should just let you choose between the two, a monthly fee or the "pay as you go thing"
that way no one will complain
also, a good idea would be to give the video store this option as well
……oh…….oh………NAW HELL NAW!!!!!!!
no no no
they probably try to screw us out of the function that allows 4 friends to download psn games for free!!!
i've got like 20 gigs worth of free games thanks to my bro & mates.
Leave everything download related as it is!
PS.its a hard life being a bum.
lol, well said… i live off of demos too….(-_-;)
Being a mooch is rough man.
it certainly is,besides after working for the same company for 8 yrs,i think i deserve some bum time.
Anyone who says no to free game is less intelligent that a used tea bag!!
Think they should leave it how it is, why change it ?
Yeah I like how things are, I wouldn't want anything to change regarding fees and paying for content.
LOST ftw
Put a 10-15 dollar a month price to be able to download any and all content = making an ass load of money due to a 600% spike in business. Really, does the average user spend more than that per month on DLC? I'm including full games here.
Last edited by fatelementality on 5/20/2009 10:33:15 PM
this shoulda been this way @ the start, but as we all know, the store sucked hard core upon release, and even up to march/april 2008… we're only just recently getting high quality store system, and if this idea takes of, then i'm a supporter, if not im happy…
Sony knows best… if they do something, it has to benifit us somehow… cuz remember… they arent microsoft.
i do, depending on the stores updates and such. I know for a fact i've spent $200+ on psn alone
that could work as an optional separate scheme for users who like the idea,but keep the current way for payment & downloading too.
I did say average user though. Ben, any idea what the average PSN user spends in the store per month? I guess you would have to exclude the video store.
this would shut up the xbox live its better quote .
I agree. I have a hard enough time being able to buy the games I want let alone getting the wife to let me pay some sort of fee to have access to a store for games. I also live off of the demos and getting a demo for free has led to more game purchases than I would have thought, but if I have to pay some fee on the front end, I wouldn't be able to pay that fee and I wouldn't end up being able to play the demos and thus would not be buying as many games. It's easier to trade a game and get another one than it is to justify a bank statement or a psn purchase (frankly, I've never seen one) So, my wife would support this idea, but I wouldn't.
Not sure how I feel about this. I need a little more info on how they would be doing this to really form a opinion.
I have 33 BluRay games and 37 hdd games from the psn. It seems to me they are making plenty of money the way it is. I'm quite sure there are people who've spent more than I have.
Yes but Im quite sure people have spent alot less than you too. I've only spent about £30 (about US$70)and I've had my PS3 since launch.
I dont need it, but if I had the extra dough, why not get GT5P and Flower and all the other things I missed for a nominal fee? I just wouldn't want it to be like a year long contract.
Agreed. Something that could be monthly or yearly maybe? Like XBL. You only really missed alot of eye candy with GT5P. No customization at all. It was alot harder that way. If you really want to check it out, get a used copy somewhere for like 15 bucks. Worth every penny of that just to watch your screen turn into butta
There is customisation in GT5P, very little tho. Gear ratios, weight, airodynamics, BHP etc. Not the same as GT4 when you could buy parts but it in all fairness just a demo.
Yeah…
hmm… subscription based drm perhaps? play whatever you like so long as your subscription remains current… doesn't sound all that bad – depending on the price and what is included under the plan.
More bills?
No thank you
Pay what you want to play is the way to go
I agree with you and that's what I would do personally. It would just be nice to have as an option if you did buy frequently. Especially if you own either Guitar Hero or Rock Band. All of those songs can break you quickly.
i rather pay a flat price and download
-warhawk booster packs
-Cod Map Packs
-KZ2 DLC
-Socom
-Flower
-Re5 versus unlock
-cuboid
-Ragdoll kung fu
-burn zombie burn
-pain
-Pain DLC
-Burnout Paradise DLC
-Burnout Paradise
the list goes on… Rather than pay the 5-15 bucks each… hell if the main fee is 20 bucks a month, instant savings…
but this WILL ONLY WORK IF THE ORIGINAL OPTION IS KEPT. ppl do hate being forced into fees, but if given the option it psychologically works in a positive way. (an example is democracy vs. dictatorship; but yu do run into those who rather the dictatorship, then the democracy..)
Ben that survery (which i took) was geared toward a Subscription fee rental service (think gamefly) for PSP games only. you would pay a certain amount each month and be able to rent a certain amount of games each month.
Last edited by crapreviews on 5/21/2009 12:05:29 AM
That sounds like the Go!View service we have in the UK for movies and TV programmes.
Before everyone flies off the handle, I think this may be related to the news about potentially renting games from PSN for the PSP.
Think about it this way, you can either buy the content you want as and when you want it, or you can rent content for a specific period, and finally you can choose to pay a fixed monthly fee and get immediate access to anything you want. I know that won't work for a lot of people, but equally so a lot of people would consider paying a fee for unlimited access to everything on PSN. Obviously you lose everything if you don't pay up, and there might even be a requirement that you log in to the PSN for your use to be authenticated. But it's not a terrible idea, assuming that it's just another option.
As Ben has pointed out this isn't a payment for accessing pSN or playing games you own, it would be a monthly fee for PSN downloadable content.
Slow down and think people.
Yea lets put it this way..
PSN Fee's = PS3 Up for sale
if im gonna pay for the network i may as well go with Xbox live
but if this for game rentals and full access to full games only, then sure, y not. but as i said b4 over fee to play games, screw that. back to PC gaming or Xbox
sorry to burst your bubble, but M$ and companies like Onlive (and the possibility of steam.) will eventually manopolise the pc gaming sector, thus leaving the ps3 as the only free serious online gaming system…
It wouldn't bother me if they started charging for the actual network, but that's just me……..I'm still surprised that sony isn't charging for the network given that the entire company is scrambling to find a nickle anywhere.
They may have posted losses, but Sony is far from hurting. They have too much invested elsewhere (TV's, computers, Sound equipment, mp3 players, etc.)
Last edited by fatelementality on 5/21/2009 12:56:17 AM
I believe it was the TVs that were hurting more than PS3 sales.
Wonder if this is like..say…netflix or blockbuster, where you can pay for a month's supply or year's supply and rent and receive and turn back in whenever you want before getting a new one with no late fees?
I am sorry, but if they started charging for PSN; I would sell my PS3!
Q!
"i am home"
like that, Q?
Actually King James, I probably wouldn't sell it, use it as a multi-media hub; but I cannot justify more cost for playing the already expensive content. Sony are already making very good money – and I find it a struggle to keep up by purchasing title after title.
So what I need is PSN to remain free – which I think will be be the case as Sony shouldn't charge us for playing online; and only purchase the odd AAA title that is really worth playing on the hardware.
I really do hope that "future" PSN-based subscription charging models do not become an all encompassing charge for everything…
Q!
"i am home"
I doubt this will turn into a "Payed for PSN". As mixedkidbx said abouve, this may be tied to the PSP Game rental thing.
And if it does come on to the PSN, It will most likely be a optional payment plan. I doubt they would give up a system that works quite well. And this is just for content. You can still play games online with out any fees.
Hmmm…a one time payment for downloads and content on the store…interesting. I frankly don't know what to say since I mainly download demos and haven't downloaded any actual full games (I only have a PSP, not a PS3 – so no add-ons either).
SuperStardust for PSP has add-ons. 🙂
Its also a great game as well 🙂
I wouldn't care if they only made it an optional subscription where you could still buy things normally (and possibly save money with the subscription).