Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony to start charging for PSN? Pachter says...

PSN to cost?

Hell no!
F you, Pachter!
Maybe
Yes
See results
Pokemonbrawlvg said:
@S.T.A.G.E My family has Xbox Live Gold on the 360. When, it's not paid for the Xbox is partically useless. How come you have to have a Gold account to watch Hulu and Netflix?! This makes no sense! Can't even watch Youtube!


LOL My sentiments exactly. Im still questioning what we're paying for besides layout updates.



Around the Network

I switched back to FREE/SILVER today. Despite them offering 3 mo. for $10 or $39.99 for a year. I'm done with ME3 MP and I'll be moving soon anyway. I'll buy a month to try Halo 4 MP and maybe Fable 4 this fall.

I can transfer and use NetFlix on my comp if I want but it doesn't have much I want to see lately. Free XBL is perfectly acceptable to get trailers, dlc, updates, patches although some demos come out a few weeks later. No big deal.

OT: If Sony make the move gradually by not adding new features to the base service and adding and promoting them as only on SEN+ they'll  gradually increase their monthly income without a backlash. Taking things away from the Sony crowd could prove problematic. They can get kinda vocal. ;-p



JazzyJeez said:
Capulous said:

That still doesn't make sense. He claims that it can only cost $60, then goes on to say that you need to look elsewhere for a lower price for the year?

I doubt that list of games would add up to $1200. What if you already have most of those games? Then what are you getting from the PSN+?


And that's a problem unique to PSN+?

What you expect Sony to do, inspect every users purchase history to give a unique update?

It's like saying a store isn't having a sale because you've already got the discounted items.

Do you even know what we are discussing? He is stating that PSN+ gives every member $1200+  of stuff every month. I'm asking where this number is coming from? If  people have most them and/or they have no interest in them; then how are they still getting this $1200 value every month? We are trying to discuss preceived value. If you have most of those games, then you are basically paying a fee for what? Basically, I was asking what other services and products do PSN+ offer that would equate to $1200+.

Ask far as I know, most stores do not require you to pay a $50 yearly premium to shop there and have access to their sales either. But I not going to get into bantering about analogies with you as we are already a bit off topic discussing the preceived values of PSN+ and Xbox LIVE Gold.



S.T.A.G.E. said:
You're speaking of the top MMO's. Online gaming is a right. If you want a premium MMO you have the right to buy or ignore it. This EA has had their eye on Blizzard and WOW because they want some of that monthly profit. In other games third parties pay for the servers themselves. Xbox Live cannot be ignored because it renders the 360 useless without it.

How is onine gaming a right? You and VGKing seem to agree that it is, but I would really like to hear an explanation on why you consider it a right.



S.T.A.G.E. said:

Yeah, it was pretty much the consensus by everyone but Microsoft. Xbox Live Silver is downright worthless. As for Sony,they wanted to start online after the time Sega did (hiring Microsoft to help them) because they had been trying to do online gaming since the Genesis era. The only thing Microsoft has ever done for gaming is create a pay to use your own online service. Has it helped or hurt gaming? It's only left things in question and split a marketshare between the same group of gamers. I guess it helped get Sony off of Nintendos back, but yeah thats about it. Yeah if I don't like Xbox Live don't use it...yes...and get locked out of My Xfinity, Netflix and the like? Microsoft should leave those things optional on Xbox Live Silver like Sony does for standard PSN. Netflix has nothing to do with Xbox Live and the system of choice to use it is PS3 for a reason.

Xbox Live can be a lower price or even free. Explain to me what is worth paying for? I've gone through it quite a few times and everytime I do the list of things worth paying for drops drastically. You already pay for your online, Microsoft is just becoming a middle man and forcing you to pay a toll.

You were the one who brought rewards into this when it isn't exactly free to add to things Microsoft does when they really aren't doing anything.

As for this months PSN Plus update: Does Microsoft do....this?

http://blog.us.playstation.com/2012/03/26/playstation-plus-april-preview-free-shank-2-and-shift-2-unleashed-ghost-recon-future-soldier-beta/

Free games, Free trials, discounted games, free and discounted themes and avatars and much more. Don't equate PSN PLUS with Xbox Live Gold...they are not the same. As I said PSN Plus would be like a tier above Live like a Platinum.  Standard PSN and Xbox Live Gold share more similar functions.

PSN's start showed just how little Sony was invested in online gaming. If they were very interested in it, they sure didn't seem to show it. Last generation's Xbox LIVE showed them people were interested in online gaming; it still took them awhile to get something together.

Well, this is getting pointless. We already discussed the free games, discounted items, etc... and you have not answered anything. LIVE rewards is free, it is part of Xbox as you get rewarded for things you do on Xbox, as well as other things. Is it really that hard to grasp? You just keep bringing the same things up without addressing anything else.

Anyway the topic has been de-railed enough, so I am just going to step out of the thread. Thanks for the discussion.



Around the Network
Capulous said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Yeah, it was pretty much the consensus by everyone but Microsoft. Xbox Live Silver is downright worthless. As for Sony,they wanted to start online after the time Sega did (hiring Microsoft to help them) because they had been trying to do online gaming since the Genesis era. The only thing Microsoft has ever done for gaming is create a pay to use your own online service. Has it helped or hurt gaming? It's only left things in question and split a marketshare between the same group of gamers. I guess it helped get Sony off of Nintendos back, but yeah thats about it. Yeah if I don't like Xbox Live don't use it...yes...and get locked out of My Xfinity, Netflix and the like? Microsoft should leave those things optional on Xbox Live Silver like Sony does for standard PSN. Netflix has nothing to do with Xbox Live and the system of choice to use it is PS3 for a reason.

Xbox Live can be a lower price or even free. Explain to me what is worth paying for? I've gone through it quite a few times and everytime I do the list of things worth paying for drops drastically. You already pay for your online, Microsoft is just becoming a middle man and forcing you to pay a toll.

You were the one who brought rewards into this when it isn't exactly free to add to things Microsoft does when they really aren't doing anything.

As for this months PSN Plus update: Does Microsoft do....this?

http://blog.us.playstation.com/2012/03/26/playstation-plus-april-preview-free-shank-2-and-shift-2-unleashed-ghost-recon-future-soldier-beta/

Free games, Free trials, discounted games, free and discounted themes and avatars and much more. Don't equate PSN PLUS with Xbox Live Gold...they are not the same. As I said PSN Plus would be like a tier above Live like a Platinum.  Standard PSN and Xbox Live Gold share more similar functions.

PSN's start showed just how little Sony was invested in online gaming. If they were very interested in it, they sure didn't seem to show it. Last generation's Xbox LIVE showed them people were interested in online gaming; it still took them awhile to get something together.

Well, this is getting pointless. We already discussed the free games, discounted items, etc... and you have not answered anything. LIVE rewards is free, it is part of Xbox as you get rewarded for things you do on Xbox, as well as other things. Is it really that hard to grasp? You just keep bringing the same things up without addressing anything else.

Anyway the topic has been de-railed enough, so I am just going to step out of the thread. Thanks for the discussion.


The only thing Microsoft is good at is online OS. They proved that when they helped Sega with the Dreamcast. Sony's strong point was never supposed to be online, its creating tech and games. Xbox Live is their only strong point, but at this point paying for it is debatable. Making games is their only true weak point from a first party perspective. We're not going off topic, we've been talking about the validity of charging for online this whole time. Gotta hand it to Sony though , they learned pretty quickly with someone as adept to online OS as Microsoft.



I still don't think Sony will charge for online, PSN+ seems to be doing it job, though Sony has lost a great deal of money, I'm sure they recovered a fraction of it back with PSN+

if Sony does charge for online I hope they make a free to play option.

i can picture them charging next gen as it would have to have extras to boot to make it worthwhile but i wont be one of them to purchase online play

I don't mind paying for it.

As long as they remove the DLC region locking and PSN ACCOUNT ONLINE PLAY region locking.

Around the Network
Gamers only have themselves to blame when Sony does start charging for PSN, Sony watched as MS raked in millions from gold subscriptions that gamers gladly cough up every year. Why would they not start charging for PSN.