HOME is not gaming, or about gaming. Instead of doing HOME, they should have released all the games within home as simple (free, or cheap) PSN downloads with player matching - even as a "all-in-one". That would have been about gaming.

IMO, HOME is *all* about revenue. Companies can sign up to create content for it - Sony can charge them for this, charge them for tools, charge them for advertsing space, ... then charge consumers micropayments for a host of things, etc.

Sony said so themselves - its all about monetising the PS3 in "new" ways, and extracting more revenue from existing PS3 users.

Problem is - they need to get all the users interested, and using it first - THEN you can make money out of it. I also agree completely with the "too hardcore" comments from what I have read - it just doesn't sound like any sort of good, social, casual experience.

Its obviously a long-term project for Sony - but I shudder to think how much they have spent on it so far.

They have to be going somewhere with Home to actually get the users to use the thing. They made something totally uninteresting that is geared towards making money, yet they can't seem to get people interested. Why? Because it truly isn't needed. Even on the internet, chat programs such as Msn or AIM will be much more widely used that instant messangers such as imvu. It's just not needed to interact with normal people.

And BTW, IMVU is full of douchebags and perverts. I reeeeaaally wonder if Home will walk the same path.

The_vagabond7's last two posts were pure win. Bravo.

I never said Home is gaming, but gaming in it's idea is pointless, in the end we gain nothing but for the fact we are entertained. So far off one night of Home, i was entertained enough to think it was worth it.

You are right on the revenue thing, in my opinion this is far better money spent then the millions spent on that gem of a game called Too Human. Advertising space for example is a great one, the posters could be filled with anything, the big screens with adverts for cars and companies will pay for that and this money could come in for years to come. If Sony had developed a game, like Too Human, the money the spent would have come from one moment on launch and then fizzled away.

By the looks of what is there, I'm not going to say Sony didn't spend a lot but I'm thinking it was probably less them most new blockbuster games. The environments aren't too detailed, they aren't pushing for graphical superiority. It's just a world. Character creation has existed in game for years, they could have bought that and then tweaked it, the animations are simple. For all we know they could have spent less on this then they did WipEout HD.

I spent more time with home. I won new clothes playing the arcade which was fun and I dressed in an echochrome suit with 2 other people and did the robot. (random people) We all had the blue icebreaker beanie on too. I talked to those people... surprisingly I had fun... but it was so random and all that I don't ever expect to do anything like that again. Whenever anyone came up to us and looked confused or asked questions we would say random stuff. "Where did you get the clothes" "At the awesome store"

I ran around a few minutes while I was waiting for far cry to download and yelled "ITS NOT A WOMAN ITS A MAN BABY!" when I saw guys trying to talk to girls.

HOME needs something to get me to keep coming back. The Unchated mini game was awesome but was really short then I was bored. I went to my home to spruce it up. (if you read my post before I said I removed everything cause the lay out was lame) but I got bored after putting down one peice of furniture so I picked it up and just put like 20 couches in front of the door. then all I have are tables and kitchen table chairs on the belcony of my HOME. .... then I was bored (Seriously not joking about this, All I did was make a pile of couches tables and chairs in awkwards spots)

(I think the club can get me to come back but I havent checked it out yet. It was not working for me tonight)

And someone said something like "Advertise to people who don't already have a ps3 instead of wasting money on people who have one"

Well few things. 1 - Sony is advertising their own products. I don't think they are spending much money on that. 2 - Sony is advertising things like the key pad and stuff which most ps3 users dont have and might not know exsits. 3 - Red Bull and twilight (the movie) are advertising in HOME so I think sony is making money. (Basically I don't think they are using money that is in their ad budget. I think they are actually making money. I wouldn't be surprised if their ad budget is directly linked with how well home takes off)

So I take it you'd enjoy a kick to your nuts as long as you didn't have to pay for it?

I appreciate good sarcasm and would like to say that I appreciate the original post. It's really that pointless?

 what a stupid analogy. Is a kick to the nuts suppose to be a service that someone might enjoy? Doubt it.

People pay for all sorts of weird shit

Plus I think I'd rather get kicked in the nuts than use Home