The lights are on
In a presentation last month, Sony's Kaz Hirai mentioned that Sony was considering a premium PSN service that would come with a monthly fee. New comments from the company show that this idea is clearly gaining momentum.
Speaking to Nikkei Electronics, Sony Computer Entertainment executive vice president and chief technology officer Masayuki Chatani again brought up the pay-to-play topic: "In addition to single-payment packaged software, there are also schemes like monthly fees or per-item charges," explained Chatani when talking about new ways for Sony to generate revenue.
Sony already has an array of per-item charges, whether you're talking about PSN content or items in Home, but monthly fees are clearly something different. Kaz Hirai, in his previous remarks, also mentioned the possibility of charging for a premium PSN subscription, but further reiterated that there would always be a free option as well.
Any of you guys pay for the furniture and clothes in Home?
[via Joystiq]
Email the author Matthew Kato, or follow on Twitter, and Game Informer.
I don't mind as long as I can continue to play the games online for free. I feel like paying 60 dollars is enough of a fee for me to play online with out having to worry about more money.
Per item charges? OK.
A monthly fee? No freaking way!
The costs factor is one of the big selling points of PS3 for me. Yeah, it costs a big more up front than the XBox Arcade, but you don't have to buy a separate (and overpriced) hard drive or wireless system. And you don't have to pay for an overpriced Gold account.
I sure hope Sony doesn't end up killing that kind of goodness.
As long as there is a free option that has ATLEAST online play, I'm happy. If the premium comes with considerable bonuses, I would be happy to pay monthly. But if the online play goes into the premium, I would be rather disappointed considering the ps3's free online play is one of its major assets.
I own both the PS3 and the 360 and most definately prefer the 360 due greatly to XBOX Live. I don't see myself paying for both and I have no plans on jumping ships. On the other hand, if it appeals to PS3 owners in a way that Live appeals to me, then it would be good for Sony.
as said by others, as long as the paid subscription services are simply SUPPLEMENTAL to the online experience, i don't mind this new service coming. as long as it doesn't change what's in place now i'm all for it.
For me it really depends on what they offer with the premium subscription and what they take away from the free one. I really don't play online, so if I could still have access to the store and friends (communication, comparison, etc), then I'd be fine.
And I totally agree with post about free online play. If I had to pay to play online with my PS3, I might consider selling this thing. It would be a huge mistake to take away free online play. Monthly fees for an upgraded edition that stays out of the way of free online play? It could be good for those who are interested ...
I get kind of surprised when there is a huge backlash when a paid online subscription is mentioned for the PS3. Don't most people already pay for XBox live? No one wants to pay more, but you can't hate Sony for doing something similar to Microsoft. Especially when it looks like the online gaming will still be free.
the paid service is fine as long as i dont have to pay it to play online
I don't really care since I got rid of my ps3 a while back.
As long as I can play games, get achievements and trophies, etc. online for free, just like I am now, I'll be fine with this. But, one of the big selling points for the PS3 was that I didn't have to pay some ungodly fee for monthly service, like with XboxLive -- I don't like the thought that PSN might end up that way.
as long as online play is free, thats all that really matters, right?
forget that! these "premium" subscriptions are just a way to suck more money out of our pockets. I already am paying for XBL, dont screw me over sony!
and what exactly would be the difference between the standard free and "premium" subscription?
^ Good question.
uhhhg this better not effect anything that i can already do.
Okay, first of all, while I do not like to pay extra for things like online gaming, the $50/year subscription to Live is not "ungodly," it's just business. Some are willing to pay, others are not, such is life. Secondly, if they decide to charge for extra online content that does not change the present experience, then no one needs to complain. And even if they charge for online play, all that says is that Sony has failed to make an intelligent business move, the end
I don't think it'll happen this gen of consoles. It's one of Sony's selling points, the free PSN.
IF they were to do this, they might find success if they offered the DLC and per item content at a reduced rate to offset the per month charge. On the other hand, premium content is rarely ever truly 'premium' and eventually gets offered to the rest of the gaming community due to the fact that if it isn't they've excluded part of their market. So... going for a fee doesn't seem like it would be advantageous in terms of fan base and user retention. If anything, it might unify and solidify the competitor market.
See now those whos got mad in my blog for saying it would never happen. now heres your GI edition proof.
I want to know what exactly they would add to PSN for a monthly fee. If they started charging for what I currently get in the service, that would be unacceptable. However, for added features, it might be worth a nominal fee. And yes, I have purchased a modest amount of Home items, but no more than five dollars worth in total. I'm mostly satisfied with the free items they give away.