Slashdot Mirror


Sony Charges Publishers For DLC Bandwidth Usage

tlhIngan writes "Since October 1, 2008, Sony has been billing game publishers for DLC bandwidth usage. The game companies are forced to pay 16 cents per gigabyte downloaded by users (the 'Playstation Network Fee') regardless of whether the content is free or paid. The good news is that free content will only be billed during the initial 60 days it's up, but paid content will require fees forever. (No word on whether free content will mysteriously disappear after 60 days, though.) Given that some popular game demos run over a gigabyte by themselves, it could easily start costing publishers serious money (16 cents each for a few million downloads adds up). So far, it hasn't cut down the content available (or few publishers have started pulling content), but it's too soon to tell. It should be noted that Microsoft isn't charging publishers any money for content on Xbox Live, though some may argue that the 'gold premium content' is the same thing." Perhaps this is one of the reasons various publishers are pressuring Sony for a PS3 price cut.

7 of 127 comments (clear)

  1. $0.16/GB is a pretty good price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    $0.16/GB is what you'd pay to serve content at pretty huge volumes. If they published it on any other website, they'd probably pay more.

    1. Re:$0.16/GB is a pretty good price by Doctor_Jest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Quite true... and since there's not a "gold subscriber" subsidy like there is on Live, I think it's reasonable. It's not unheard of, considering the installed base, to charge for this, but I'm sure since Sony's been taking it on the chin P.R. wise, this will be magnified more than it really needs to be.

      To each his own. :) I wonder if anyone knows the going rates for Live content? I know the absurdly small file size probably nullifies that, as far as live arcade stuff goes, but what about demos? Does MS charge EA for demo space or is it simply rolled into the cost of your yearly gold membership? It's late... I'll google that tomorrow. :)

      --
      It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
    2. Re:$0.16/GB is a pretty good price by kyrre · · Score: 4, Informative

      Amazon S3 is likely one of the cheaper providers of storage. They charge from 17 cents pr gigabyte of download. In addition they will costs 10 cents pr gigabyte. They also charge pr request.

  2. I support this by electrosoccertux · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hopefully this will keep publishers from shipping broken/empty games with plans of patching them up later (*cough* UT3 *cough*); and we could go back to actually getting a working game on the disk, not a game in need of a patch and more content.

    1. Re:I support this by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hopefully this will keep publishers from shipping broken/empty games with plans of patching them up later (*cough* UT3 *cough*); and we could go back to actually getting a working game on the disk, not a game in need of a patch and more content.

      Think about the math a bit. It's not exactly a deal-breaker to patch a game at $.16 per GB. That's only 16 cents out of their bottom line per game if they had to send a massive 1GB patch down to each user. Still, it's hard to say if this means we'll be less likely to see large, free demos to download on the PS3 in the future. It's probably more likely that publishers will still do this, but just factor this cost into their advertising budgets.

      Still, it just doesn't strike me as the wisest of decisions to alienate publishers when your console isn't exactly leading the pack. Publishers might be just slightly less inclined to publish on their platform in the first place, and Sony can't really afford to lose too much ground at the moment.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    2. Re:I support this by c1t1z3nk41n3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe I'm too cynical but I find it more likely at this point that they'll just take the money and run. They already have your money after all, why pay for patches?

  3. not all that bad by timmarhy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    it doesn't look anymore expensive than paying for hosting else where to serve your files, and it's a damn sight better than expecting us to pay for it. i sense this story is an attempt at the usual /. sony hate nonense

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....