I'd pay for it but I'd be disappointed. But hopefully they would use that money to work towards bringing cross-game voice chat and invites quickly. I play more online games on my PS3 than 360 right now and I still pay for Live; so yeah, I would pay for it.

A...but i wouldn't think of it has helping Sony...i'd be cursing the hell out of them..

I might just keep using it but I will never pay for what is supposed to be free. Don't quote me on this, though, as never is such a strong word. Still, it should be pretty safe to say I won't be paying for PSN or any other basic online function.

In all honesty, I'd pay for it. And I would pay $50 for it at the most. For that money, they'd better toss in a headset (it could be cheap like the 360's) and they'd better step up their online offerings.

I mean it. I would gladly pay.

Check this link 

<img src = "http://img72.imageshack.us/my.php?image=270110lbackpw5.jpg" />

The backcover of Killzone says Features of Playstation Network are subject to change without notice. 

psn does cost money to sony and microsoft, but online is something that should no doubt be free. we pay 60 dollars for a game and that should be enough. but if they were to charge money for psn, people will pay anyways though they wouldnt like it. like xbl, you just pay for it though your not happy about it.

I choose C.

A - I would pay the same as XBOX live since I have no problem paying for that already.  Does paying for it piss me off? Yes.  The "extra" features with a gold membership mean jack shit to me.  Hopefully if PSN ever resorted to something like this theywould offer some sort of "extra" features that are actually useful.

I would't pay for it. I don't want to pay for anything i'm already paying for.
Would just stick to the free version and stick to gaming pc games online

id pay for it easy, couldnt live without online