Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sony May Charge For PlayStation Network

Posted by Soulskill on from the i'm-sure-that-will-be-popular dept.

In an interview with IGN, Sony's VP of marketing, Peter Dille, responded to a question about the PlayStation Network by saying that the company is considering charging for the service. He said, "It's been our philosophy not to charge for it from launch up until now, but Kaz recently went on the record as saying that's something we're looking at. I can confirm that as well. That's something that we're actively thinking about. What's the best way to approach that if we were to do that? You know, no announcements at this point in time, but it's something we're thinking about." This follows news of a customer survey from last month that listed possibilities for subscription-based PSN features.

10 of 212 comments (clear)

  1. When Hell freezes over... by sumthinboutjesus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a gamer who has made purchasing decisions based on the fact that PSN is free and Xbox Live costs money, I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console wars. The only way I see this working out is if all the current services offered by PSN are free and these new features are optional, not essential for having a good gaming experience, and priced modestly. Otherwise, I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum, just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition.

    1. Re:When Hell freezes over... by sznupi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd go further - such move would be so unbelievably stupid that I can't help but suspect there's something else at play here.

      Spreading such rumors and causing a bit of an "outrage"...which has a "side effect" of spreading the message that Sony network service is free, while MS one is not?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    2. Re:When Hell freezes over... by Xest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is, whilst yes, the PS3 is making headway, it's coming at too big a cost to them.

      It's not clear that the PS3 is even making a profit on the hardware itself yet, certainly it wasn't even as recently as 6 months back. The PSN costs a lot to run, so they're effectively subsidising that too. This of course becomes more of a big deal when they have to fund additional features to try and keep up with XBox live but do not receive income for it like Microsoft does with Live.

      So yeah they certainly have momentum now, but it's costing them too much to be sustainable, so they have a choice of breaking even and pissing people off, or continuing to haemorrhage money in the hope that some day they will indeed be able to make it all back.

      Microsoft made the same mistake with the original XBox in that it costs them a fortune, but they learnt from it, sure they still lost money on the hardware for a while, but not so much that they couldn't get it profitable within a few years. They also realised that XBox live is a good way to help fill that gap, in that by charging for it, they're both avoiding losing money there, and making up for some of the money lost on the hardware as well as being able to use the money to fund continued development.

      Of course, I agree it's nice to have things for free, but sometimes that just isn't practical, at least in the long run. I'd wager this is why Nintendo didn't really bother with a decent online experience at all- because it would be just an additional cost for them that detracts from their profit.

    3. Re:When Hell freezes over... by delinear · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What, spreading the word that your service is free by telling people you plan to charge for it? Colour me dubious. Some people care about the cost of being online, some don't, and as far as I can tell the only affect this would have is to put off the people who were attracted to the free service because they know it can be yanked at any time.

      Sure they might do another announcement that they considered all the options and decided to stay free, but what's the likelihood that it'll get anywhere near the coverage this will - we all know that bad news sells clicks or whatever it is big media's in the market for these days.

  2. Exactly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I bought the PS3 recently, my first console since the original nintendo. The lowered price, Uncharted 2, and the free ps3 online were the top deciding factors on which console to buy, in that order.

    If they started charging now. Wow. That would factor in *hugely* in my decision on what to purchase in the future.

  3. As Long as... by TheQuantumShift · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Multiplayer is free, I couldn't care less. I don't want "Early access to content" or the like, I just want to fire up Street Fighter and get my ass handed to me. I don't want "Exclusive themes" or access to psone games I played a decade ago; I just want to be able to virtually shoot a guy in the face once in a while...

    --

    Shift happens. Fire it up.
  4. Who's hosting the Game? Sony or Publisher/Dev? by Amigori · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Here's how I see it:
    • Playstation Home? Charge for it. I used it a few times when I first signed up, but it doesn't really do anything. I'm sure the costs outweigh the virtual trinkets and mini games they sell.
    • Playstation Store? Access needs to be free. Any store costs should be included in the price of the game/movie/tv show/theme pack/etc. Plus, on the movies side, it costs enough already to rent or buy movies.
    • Multiplayer Games? Who is hosting the server? EA, R*, etc? The hosting cost should be figured into the price of the game. Or they (Pub/Dev) charge a separate subscription fee. Sony hosting the server? Charge for it, XBox Live style.

    I have no issue with paying for PSN as long as the price is reasonable. I paid for XBox Live for years, before I got rid of my XBox. $60/yr is perfect, $5/mo. That's $5m per month with 1m users (random user number). I couldn't see servers, bandwidth, datacenter, licensing, and power costs being beyond $60m per year, but then again, IANA MMO SysAd. Any more than $60, and it will fail. Maybe they could get away with a $100/yr price if they included a full Skype client, with video...maybe.

    --
    "The quality of life is determined by its activites."--Aristotle
  5. Re:IT makes sense to align costs and revenues by Brianech · · Score: 4, Informative

    the PSN already charges for content. It charges the PUBLISHER. Companies have to pay 16cents a gigabyte of content downloaded (demos included).

  6. The effect of Paying for PSN? by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, I can imagine my neighbors would hear me shouting "Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii" as my PS3 sailed past their windows.

  7. For "Premium" features, not the base stuff!!!! by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 4, Informative
    The charges would be for new and extra features. Not what it already does.

    http://www.gamepro.com/article/news/213014/premium-psn-service-planned-wont-affect-online-gaming/

    "Sony is considering adding a subscription-based version of the PlayStation Network, but the company denies that it will charge customers to play games online."

    http://www.next-gen.biz/news/sony-may-introduce-psn-subscription-model

    "Especially in the online area, we are studying the possibility of introducing a subscription model, offering premium content and services, in addition to the current free services." (Emphasis added.)

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!