seems doable, with 36 mil PS3's out there( according Vgcharts numbers) seems like an easy task to get that many subcribers, about 10 of my PSN buddies have it and I will most likely get it soon(maybe this weekend)
1 to 2 million? It wouldn't surprise me if there was more subscribers then that now.
Well... dunno how much r there, but im already one of the subscribers XD (3 months, but yea)
LET'S GO KNICKS
| Reasonable said: His estimate seems to rely to much entirely on other estimates - cost of running PSN, etc. - for my liking to be much use. Really, this is just a guess. At best a very losely informed guess. I'm not saying PSN is profitable or not or how many PSN Plus Sony would need to make it profitable, but this really doesn't shed much light on the situation in my view. What about HOME transactions? Where do they figure? What does PSN generate from transactions? How much of the costs do they cover? |
Was going to say the same thing. Where are all the other factors?
What they need is a consistantly growing PS Plus install base for the first year. 12/100 people on my friends list have thus far subscribed to the service, but almost all of those subscribed in the first month, with maybe one subscribing since. This results in a very profitable first month, and a very profitable month when all those people have to renew, but that isn't until October of next year given the three free months for signing up over the first two months. So that's two months in over a year in which they'll make a decent return on the service.
They need a steady stream of new people signing up over that first 12 months for a consistant profit base, one that continues each consecutive year with renewals.
The only things appearing soon that could convince more people to sign up are the LBP2 and KZ3 betas, which I assume will be PS Plus exclusive for at least some time.
selnor said:
The problem is PSN being entirely free bleeds money for Sony. PSN costs loads to maintain. Its a fact. Sony know this which is why the paid service is now there. I dont know why so many less people download films etc of PSn ( probably due to Blu Ray films? ) But Sony need to recoop costs of a hole in their pocket which is PSN. It is great that consumers get for free PSN. But as a business decision it would seem it was the wrong choice. Because not enough people care that PSN is free and Live is pay. Otherwise PSN online games would get near the numbers of Live players. But it doesnt. |
You've got good points and I agree with ya. PSN costs loads to maintain is a fact and I know that. My point was that Sony should give more features on top of big discounts to PS Plus Members so that they can attract more PSN Members to subscribe and that way that can make up the loss from PSN. That way people can justify and recommend Plus to others that Plus is worth $50 per year because of such and such features and big discounts each week.
| Cross-X said: Sony needs to add FEATURES and not DISCOUNTS the whole time with PS Plus. People pay for XBL because it's the only means of playing Online games with friends whereas PSN can already do that without Plus so for the majority of PSN owners, PS Plus is not really needed because all it is is basically a bunch of discounts. Cross Game Chatting The above are just a few examples of some of the features PS Plus should intergrate so that it gives Gamers the reasons why they should subscribe for PS Plus. Remember they named it PlayStation Plus and not PlayStation Network Plus. Give Gamers features of the PlayStation and not just discounts on the PSN. |
I only agree with adding services that both cost money for Sony to support and that people don't really need to Plus. Adding features that cost little/nothing to support wouldn't be right. Such things shouldn't be restricted to certain users.
This is why I believe cross game voice chat shouldn't be added to Plus, as it's a P2P feature inherent to OS that should cost little (if anything) for Sony to support once implemented. Plus it would be a pivotal feature for the community aspect of PSN, one that I don't feel should be limited to some people just because they're willing to pay.
Cloud Storage, on the other hand, is a luxury service that would cost Sony a decent amount to support, and it's something that I believe is justifiable to charge for, and it's something I'd gladly hand over money for given the benefits it provides. I actually hope they announce it soon.
What I like about PS Plus at the moment is that it consists mostly of special deals on various content. It's basically a rewards program for frequent PSN users, and in the future, it looks as if they'll only be adding more content (like betas) and/or services (Hulu, etc.) that would make sense to charge for. It's all extra stuff that some people would be willing to fork over cash for, but for those who do not want or cannot afford to pay the fee, they're not missing out on anything. No important features are currently restricted to Plus members.
I honestly think future betas for first party titles could be a great boon for the service if they handle it right. Guaranteeing access for ALL Plus members to a beta exclusively, or at least for a set amount of time before others are allowed in through other means (random invites, pre-order bonuses, w/e), would probably get a decent number of people on board. Within the next year and a half we'll see betas for LittleBigPlanet 2, Socom 4, Killzone 3, and probably Uncharted 3 and Resistance 3, so they'd have the opportunity to get a good chunk of the fanbase of each series on board (though there's a good bit of overlap between each series, I'm sure).
Also, simple math should make you realize making MMO fees a part of the service is a pipe dream. Most MMOs go for $15 a year. $50 a year would cover three MMO fees PLUS all the other stuff you get free. It would make both Sony and any the companies behind any MMOs involved lose an assload of potential revenue. This is why Hulu Plus will not be free for PS Plus members.
So all the digital content that's bought on PSN is just nothing....and only PSN Plus can generate profit for PSN as a whole. Yea...and Hulu makes no money even though it's free.....
Fufinu said:
|
make a lot more sense ! thx u
Time to Work !
dallas said:
exactly, but this runs off of the big telecom's data networks which power your laptop's internet (if you have a service) as well as things like text messages. So, sony/MS have to have a pay per rate kind of agreement. Now, Since sony is just 1 customer that they have to deal with using all of this data versus 36 million PS3 owners doing the same thing, i'd imagine that Sony would get an awesome rate off of it, but it has to be expensive as people sometimes play for 2-3 hours at a time. |
Maybe there's something wrong with my English... But are you telling my my laptop's internet is using WiFi, as well as the text messages I send with my cell phone? Because AFAIK that technology is limited to pretty short range. Also, there's still lots of phones out there that don't support WiFi at all. Even today, most cheaper models, even new ones, don't support it.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
