By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Why doesnt Sony charge for PSN membership?

 

Should Sony charge for PSN membership?

Yes, it makes sense. 108 24.16%
 
NO! 297 66.44%
 
I couldn't care less, man-bear-pig! 42 9.40%
 
Total:447
Staude on 20 January 2012
osamanobama said:
because its something that should be free. paying to use your own internet connection is not cool


This quite simply. I never understood why some would pay for their net twice.

 

Regarding the reason it would increase sales. I disagree. I cannot speak for anyone else, But I would likely limit how many games I purchase if I'd even purchase their next console at all.



Check out my game about moles ^

Around the Network
binary solo on 20 January 2012

The do charge for PSN. It's called PSN+ (does the plus symbol work on this website yet?). People who pay for plus get tangeable benefits, like cheaper PSN games, free games, earlier access to some content, exclusive access to other content.

As long as on PSN you can play online and shop online and get 3rd party paid for services (like Netflix) online for free then pretty much everything else could be rolled into PSN plus, including demos and betas, and I wouldn't really care.

With online pass, publishers (incl Sony) have an additional revenue stream for keeping online play free to new game buyers, so there's really no need to make online multiplayer/coop a paid for service.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

mjk45 on 20 January 2012
Millenium said:
PlaystaionGamer said:
Millenium said:
PlaystaionGamer said:
Millenium said:
Because then they'd have to upgrade PSN to make it worth it.

And then they couldn't share Publishers fees anymore for releasing demo's and stuff.


its weird... PSN and Live are the same as it is



Sorry my friend, but this time we'll have to agree to disagree, IMO psn isn't on par.

i actually agree with you!
PSN has more dedicated survers and allows games like LittleBigPlanet to able to run on the platform.... which they cant on live due to microsoft wanting to keep control over... well nothing. glad i get the better online and its free..

i guess PSN isnt on par.. its far above it. not opinion though, just factual stuff :)



Guess we'll have to agree to disagree some more

Instead of generalising about the service by saying " imo psn isn't on par" and  I'll have to disagree , tell us why it isn't on par  and are the differences  worth the price, to me the simple answer to your attitude would be, its more to do with I have a 360 and play on live and that's my preference , than the actual differences real or imagined of the two networks , same can be applied in reverse to those who  PS3/PSN is the platform of choice.



Research shows Video games  help make you smarter, so why am I an idiot

Mad55 on 20 January 2012
demonfox13 said:
VGKing said:
Mad55 said:
The ps4 will more than likely charge the ps3 is to far in now to do so.


Nope. If the Vita is any indication, they will keep the free PSN with an optional subscription with PSN+ which has much better value than Xbox Live IMO.



knaw to me thats different with the handheld and all. 



S.T.A.G.E. on 20 January 2012
man-bear-pig said:

I dont understand why Sony dosent charge for PSN membership. Microsoft gets away with charging £40 a year and is still hugely successful, so why dosent Sony begin to charge? If i was in charge of Sony i would undercut Microsoft and charge £30 a year, and this would have only positive effects;

1.) They would get higher revenue from it and it would cost them nearly nothing to administer.

2.) PS3 sales would likely increase because  it would be in direct competition with Microsoft and consumers would likely choose the PS3 as they want the best deal.

It seems like a no-brainer to me, so why dont they do it? Is there a reason why they dont do it that i dont know? Are they making a stupid mistake?

They would have higher revenue, but then again we are paying for our internet. They and Microsoft arent creating dedicated servers so its pointless. This is wh they created PSN Plus, so the things worth paying for are under that banner. That by itself is worth the money. Nintendo even agrees with this methodology. I would worry If I was Microsoft next gen, because Sony will have cross game chat and will revamp PSN next gen. They also want to watch where their backs because they will not have a year head start over Sony either. Sony wants to keep the launches as close as possible because if that occurs they will never outsell them even in a close race.



Around the Network
Persistantthug on 21 January 2012
selnor said:
Problem is microsofts gold service has so much more content now since the update. I have and use 10 different dedicated apps. Xbla has got 8 exclusive titles this year already. An option of 5 different film services with dedicated apps by February 15. The thing is, the Xbox is not really just a games console anymore. I understand if people aren't interested in that, but clearly many are.

Its catch 20. I don't believe Sony would be able to justify charging for psn. If Microsoft keep getting xbla exclusives and supplying applications for dedicated entertainment then I would never pay for psn.

I believe pandorax was right in what he said without realising what he said.
The next gen will be the last console gen with any resemblence to consoles. Even then next gen I believe PS and Xbox will be very very different in what they offer. And how their services operate. I believe Xbox will


The bolded part of your assertion bothers me...and mind you, it's not just your sentiment, but others as well.

 

The fact that PSN has many different online features, apps and services that you and others just seem to discount....as if it doesn't exist.  PSN has DIRECT TV....PSN has MLB...PSN has NHL....PSN got YOUTUBE and HULU first....PSN has Netflix...PSN has VUDU, LOVEFILM, BBC, VidZone, MUBI, and other movie and Television services....PSN has Twitter, Facebook.....PSN has a browser that can traverse the internet and get tons of legal and possibly illegal content, including free Porn.  I myself have every episode of True Blood and Dexter downloaded to my PS3's harddrive, and I don't even have Showtime or HBO.

What bothers me is the fact that PS3 has all of these online features and more, but the sentiment is "PS3/PSN doesn't have that much".   But then when the XBOX gets some of these new features, some of which the PS3 has had for years, the sentiment changes to "oooh, look what the XBOX 360 has just recieved...it's awesome!"

 

 

Why do people pretend the PS3's online features are useless or don't exist until they arrive on the XBOX 360?



S.T.A.G.E. on 21 January 2012
Persistantthug said:
selnor said:
Problem is microsofts gold service has so much more content now since the update. I have and use 10 different dedicated apps. Xbla has got 8 exclusive titles this year already. An option of 5 different film services with dedicated apps by February 15. The thing is, the Xbox is not really just a games console anymore. I understand if people aren't interested in that, but clearly many are.

Its catch 20. I don't believe Sony would be able to justify charging for psn. If Microsoft keep getting xbla exclusives and supplying applications for dedicated entertainment then I would never pay for psn.

I believe pandorax was right in what he said without realising what he said.
The next gen will be the last console gen with any resemblence to consoles. Even then next gen I believe PS and Xbox will be very very different in what they offer. And how their services operate. I believe Xbox will


The bolded part of your assertion bothers me...and mind you, it's not just your sentiment, but others as well.

 

The fact that PSN has many different online features, apps and services that you and others just seem to discount....as if it doesn't exist.  PSN has DIRECT TV....PSN has MLB...PSN has NHL....PSN got YOUTUBE and HULU first....PSN has Netflix...PSN has VUDU, LOVEFILM, BBC, VidZone, MUBI, and other movie and Television services....PSN has Twitter, Facebook.....PSN has a browser that can traverse the internet and get tons of legal and possibly illegal content, including free Porn.  I myself have every episode of True Blood and Dexter downloaded to my PS3's harddrive, and I don't even have Showtime or HBO.

What bothers me is the fact that PS3 has all of these online features and more, but the sentiment is "PS3/PSN doesn't have that much".   But then when the XBOX gets some of these new features, some of which the PS3 has had for years, the sentiment changes to "oooh, look what the XBOX 360 has just recieved...it's awesome!"

 

 

Why do people pretend the PS3's online features are useless or don't exist until they arrive on the XBOX 360?

 


Its because Xbox Live sells an astheticly pleasing way of putting all of the features together. I've properly scowered PSN and the have had a lot of things way before Microsoft whilst being free. Its Microsoft whom STILL hasnt justified the price. Sony has way more things going on, Microsoft just does the same and wraps it with a pretty bow. Microsoft could pitch a third party as if it was exclusive and a lot of people who arent core gamers would buy it. The game Microsoft is playing has little to do with substance but rather imagery outside of Kinect.



adriane23 on 21 January 2012

They charge for Playstation Plus. What they're not doing is trying to rape their customers for something that they've offered for free since the PS2. Playing online. Nintendo also doesn't charge for playing online right?



I am the Playstation Avenger.

   

Persistantthug on 21 January 2012

Also,

 

Because the VITA is free online, and because it plays games that the PS3 plays and that the PS4 will probably play as well,  The PSN is likely to remain free for the next generation.

 

Expanded upgrade options, such as with PSN+, will remain.

 

Because of the VITA, Sony's already tipped their hand regaring PSN fees.



S.T.A.G.E. on 21 January 2012

This video is a great example of why Sony and Nintendo dont charge for online and what Xbox Live is doing to the gaming industry if corporations follow their lead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqymlqNWiYI&feature=related