Network now...NEWS
Sony May Introduce PSN Subscription Model
Sony Computer Entertainment CEO Kaz Hirai has confirmed that the company is exploring the possibility of introducing a PlayStation Network subscription model.
While online gaming on PS3 is expected to remain free, unspecified premium PSN services could be charged for.
"SCE will further increase sales by offering users new entertainment through the combination of hardware, software, peripheral and PlayStation Network," Hirai said in a statement issued to CVG. “Especially in the online area, we are studying the possibility of introducing a subscription model, offering premium content and services, in addition to the current free services."
The platform holder released Hirai's statement this afternoon as a follow up to recently published Sony conference presentation materials that referenced the introduction of a “new [PSN] revenue stream from subscription,” as well as the release of a “non-game software development kit” for PSN in the second quarter of FY2010.
Contact Us / About Us / Advertise With Us / BeltwayBlips / TechBlips / MassiveBlips / GamerBlips / FAQ
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
With the need for additional revenue streams never more apparent than it is now, I can't really blame Sony for wanting to charge for online play
So, the extra money they're making on overpriced and locked-on-the-disc DLC isn't already enough? Between the free online play, Microsoft's recent banning of consoles, and the price drop, PS3 sales have increased quite a bit. Imposing an annual fee would cut some of that momentum short.
Microsoft's insistence on putting apps like Facebook, Twitter, and Last.fm behind the paywall is paving the way for things to come. I might've been OK with that if they were actually integrated into the dash, but they're all standalone apps. I can already do that for free on every other platform I have (minus the Xbox 1, another M$ platform).
The nickle & diming on both sides is getting out of hand. I've lost track of the number of "DLC" items I've downloaded that were 100K unlocks for content which was on the disc I'd already paid for. The unlockables & cheats of yore are all paid DLC now. We can thank Microsoft and EA for starting that particular trend early on this gen. I'm guessing that was partially how they got EA onboard Live with EA Ports.
Only a complete douche would pay extra per month to play their $60 game online.
subscription models...another reason PC gaming is better. Too bad consoles are killing it anyway.
As long as gaming online remains free its fine.
They'll try like hell to make you want to step up to paid/'premium' but I don't think even Sony is foolish enough to take away anything that's currently free. RIGHT KAZ?
Remember my posts earlier this week about Sony moving to a paid model?....
These companies are selling to their shareholders as well as consumers. Their shareholders are not the least bit happy about the losses this division continues to have when they see a proven revenue stream from a direct competitor, which would make those losses disappear almost instantly. Considering PS3 consumers aren't purchasing enough software for the old model to work, it only makes sense for Sony to start listening to their shareholders, rather than the consumers who already bought a system. They already have our money, so even if they only get 10-20% of the existing base to buy into this it's still more revenue than they're currently getting.
I expect they'll take a two-tiered approach where initially they'll ease in with things like Qore, etc. being included in a subscription, before fully adopting MS' approach and charging for online play. Make no mistake though, PS3 owners will be paying to play online before this generation is done.
Make no mistake though, PS3 owners will be paying to play online before this generation is done.
So you've ruled out the possibility that Sony might pressure Microsoft into unbundling basic online play from the Gold package and offering it for free? It may not seem likely but it's not impossible, especially with all the extraneous geegaws they've been bolting onto Gold lately.
I call bs, if Sony charge for online gaming this gen I'll eat my hat. There may be an online subscription for Gold online, better bandwidth, access to certain materials in certain games. They'll be shooting themselves and their business model in the foot if they start making people pay for basic online services though, especially since their services are sub par. However charging a small amount for certain premium services which are great to have but not necessary to play online is a good idea in my opinion and I'll certainly sign up. I pay for Live Gold and appreciate the service. Obviously it would be cool if it was free. But it's not. Likewise I'll pay a small fee for PSN if they have appropriate content delivered through it worth my money.
I wont be, at all- I'll just go without playing online via my console.
It's people like you who've paid MS and are happy about it that are shafting the rest of us in the long term.
Arron,
"It's people like you who've paid MS and are happy about it that are shafting the rest of us..."
When xbox live first came out almost 7 years ago it was available as broadband only, for 50 dollars a year, and at a time when broadband penetration wasn't even close to what it is today. It was the only online gaming console at the time so I had no choice but to pay if I wanted to play online. Eventually I had one other choice and that was puchase a PS2, purchase the network adapter, and play online for free against a mix of broadband and dialup users. I'm sorry, I'll pay for a premium service relative to the competition before I ever play online against latent-crazy 56k users.
Now that I've been playing and meeting people over the last near 7 years I'm not going to abandon a community I'm a part of because I have to pay $3.85 a month for online gaming.
So please don't blame me for Sony starting to charge for online services just because I decided to spend 4 bucks a month on an entertainment service that is important to me. That's not even a value meal at Burger King a month I'm giving up to play online and for a quality service. Easiest annual choice I have to make. And the great thing is Arron, if Sony starts charging for online play and you don't want to pay for it? You don't have to.
Nick,
It is people like you who are at fault here. There is absolutely no reason under the current climate for you to pay to play online and flimsy excuses like "it's got cross game chat so it's worth it" (even though cross game chat is available to silver members) just mean it's less likely that other companies who've been running a free model quite happily for years now will continue to do so. I don't see why I should have to pay to use a P2P online system.
As long as Sony keep the online gaming aspect of it free I'm ok with them charging for 'premium' features that I never use- however the day they start charging for online gaming is the day that I stop playing online using my console.
Well Arron I respect your view on it but I have no choice. I have a 360 and if I want to play online I have to pay. My other choice is to pony up 400 bucks for a PS3 and an online game to take advantage of the free service. I'm not huge on thinking live is so much better than PSN because I've never played a Sony title online before it's just more that I don't have a choice. Sure after 8 years I will have payed for enough live for it to equal a PS3 and 1 online title but even with xbox 1 and 360 combined I haven't paid 400 bucks for live. If I had a PS3 first and it had Halo on it, well then I'd be enjoying free multiplayer. As it is now, my requirements to get a PS3 (system, game, new TV stand) would run me 600+ bucks and that is more a reason why I'm not doing that at the time. Plus, I wouldn't stop playing my xbox online just because I had free online on the PS3. Plus, I only play Halo online (for the most part) because I suck at everything else so I have no need for free online multiplayer on the PS3. I guess blame me for liking Halo then lol.
Let's be honest. This probably means some random premium content for subscribers for the rest of this gen, then online gaming on PS4 will turn out to be a "premium service". It's just a way of gently easing us in to the idea that Sony can't really afford not to charge for something that it's main rival is charging for succesfully.
Alternatively, I guess the subscription might relate largely to premium services for the other sony products which are soon to gain psn connections. Either way, I don't think Sony are going to want to cause argument by suddenly charging us to play PS3 online, but I expect it to turn up at the next gen.
While i agree that Sony may want to charge for online play with the PS4 it seems unlikely that they will introduce charges for only one system when PSN will still be free for PS3 and PSP users. What will probably happen is that they will introduce a premium play online service with cross game features like those of xbox live to run along side the existing network then slowly downgrade PSN until you are forced to pay if you want a decent lag free game. That way they can keep small bandwidth games running fine on PSN for the casual gamer but they still have the hardcore by the balls, all with the bonus of still claiming to have free online gaming.
It will be a certainty if people continue to pay to use online gaming functions on the 360. I just think it's incredibly short sighted of those people.
I'm happy with what I get for my money. It's hardly breaking the bank.
Exactly. Really it comes down to an individual consumer's choice: if you feel you get what you pay for (personally experience wise I get much more than what I pay for it), then pay for the service, if you don't, then don't subscribe.
But the problem is with people that have a sense of entitlement, and instead of accepting the reality/consequences of their decision, they'd rather point fingers. I think ArronC07 doesn't get how the free market works. There's absolutely nothing wrong with people paying for something they feel they get value out of, because if it truly was a universal rip off, there wouldn't be nearly as many Gold subscribers.
That being said, if Sony offers subscription services that I feel I would get value from, I'd subscribe no question. But if I didn't feel like it was worth it, you would not see me blaming the people that choose to subscribe as the reason the services are not free.
Well said, Peter. It's ironic that guys like ArronC07 who point fingers at consumers actually paying for product as the problem when it is, in fact, those who don't understand business and feel entitled to free gaming who are the problem and result in layoffs/closures in the gaming industry.
Even more ironic is the fact that all the people arguing against paying $3-4 a month for everything Live! has to offer didn't mind paying $400-600 for a PS3 while the alternative systems cost hundreds less.
Another point about the console market is that the development of each new system costs it's manufacturer billions, then they have to sell at a loss for the first few years on the market, it's just not the same as the PC model, so they have to find more ways of making back their investment, paying for online services makes a great deal of sense if want to see another console generation, because if they don't make money it'll be us suffering when only Nintendo remains in the game.
Exactly, The day PSN provides an equivalent service to Live, I'd happily pay.
They need to make money period.
This makes sense. Most hardcore gamers (the most likely group to use PSN) already own a PS3 if they were ever going to buy one at all.
My point being if 'free PSN' is a great selling point then the market that selling point appeals to is becoming saturated and will therefore not be such a great thing for Sony anymore.
However the millions of PSN users who already exist, for the most part, will bite the bullet and pay, especially as the only alternative will be paying for LIVE instead.
All Sony need to do is undercut MS, say £20 a year and they will keep the vast majority of PSN users
You better not turn this into online gaming charges, or alot of people will be pissed Sony!