| Cunning_Linguist said:
Andrew House: It might depend on the game. One area that I'm particularly excited about is the idea of asynchronous gaming, whereby the game experience is existing either on a PS3 or on your NGP, and then the 3G ability is the real-time, you know, "you're under attack, you've got to go do something"; messaging, just keeping that link with you, which clearly is not very heavy in terms of data traffic, but creates a whole different sense to the experience.
Continuous link to a game running on your PS3 wherever you are. I travel a lot for work and often to places that are in the middle of the countryside where I have periods with nothing to do for a few hours sometimes. This kind of functionality would be awesome for me but will probably be unlikely for the reasons I have stated above. I hope developers do account for people that may not have access to wi-fi but have 3G, I really do, but I can see them not wanting to waste time or money on it. I guess I'm in the minority but you can't deny, if there is a lack of userbase there is a lack of investment and as I said what would be the point of having the 3G enabled device at all then. |
So you can buy content through 3G, web browse or use any application that is network enabled without being tethered by WiFi network availability.
Anyone questioning the usefulness of such a feature may as well be questioning the usefulness of 3G network compatibility in any device.
The real question in the future should be more along the lines of what type of network enabled devices wouldn't have 3G or 4G network connectivity as they continue to become the norm. Not everyone will be willing to pay for the hardware compatibility or the monthly access fees, but this is hardly a reason why any developer interested in exploring a mobile network enabled gaming experience would consider it a waste of money.
If anything, those who are paying for 3G connectivity are going to want apps that justify the access fees and will buy them.
