Sony To Detail "Premium PSN" Plans At E3

ranulf writes "VG247 is reporting that Sony will reveal their plans for 'premium PSN' services next month at E3, even though they've long stated that one of the PS3's advantages over the 360 is that they offer PSN for free. In addition to the premium services, they intend to offer a free PSN game to subscribers each month (from a choice of 'two to four games'), which should make the premium PSN effectively free if you already bought a game every month. VG247's source claims 'nothing planned will impact the service’s current free aspects,' and that 'there’s nothing in the premium package which will gimp regular PSN users.'"

Comments

Playstation, ask the Xbox how this one turned out

[mjwx]

Once upon a time, long ago there existed a service called Xbox Live. It was free and children played hapily, until the EVIL LORD GATES decided that he would monetise the service and the free version went away if you wanted to play on line.

The same thing will happen to the PSN, first they'll start by adding new features only for "Premium" subscribers just as MS only added new features for "Gold" subscribers. After a while Sony will start taking away features from the free service whilst maintaining them on the "Premium" service. Little features at first, hardly noticeable, a form of slow attrition. Then before you know it, there is no functionality left. Game publishers like EA and Activision will jump right on board making their games playable only over "Premium" subscriptions. Now Sony has the numbers on the Playstation 3 they will start to monetise it, to bleed money from their existing customer base as sales are bound to drop off.

It is antics like this that are the reason I remain a PC gamer. To be nickled and dimed for such basic service like online multiplayer and internet chat is ridiculous to me.

Why doesn't Slashdot have a Star Wars opening credits formatting option?

Re:Playstation, ask the Xbox how this one turned o

[Mike Mentalist]

Once upon a time, long ago there existed a service called Xbox Live. It was free and children played hapily, until the EVIL LORD GATES decided that he would monetise the service and the free version went away if you wanted to play on line

Xbox Live was not free on the original Xbox. On the 360 they changed it so you only had to pay if you wanted to play online.

Bang goes your boring conspiracy story.

It is antics like this that are the reason I remain a PC gamer. To be nickled and dimed for such basic service like online multiplayer and internet chat is ridiculous to me

As a generic gamer who quite happily plays on the PC and game consoles without any problem it seems ridiculous to me that people purposefully restrict themselves over small details like this.

Sony can't be trusted

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry for the knee-jerk reaction, but Sony still hasn't won my trust back over the retroactive removal of the Install Other OS feature from already-bought PS3s. I really should have learned better than to trust them after the rootkit fiasco, too. Now that they have twice demonstrated their willingness to sabotage their customers' private property in order to protect their own business model, it's absurd to think that I or any self-respecting geek would want to do business with them any more.

"Effectively" is rather subjective

[IBBoard]

they intend to offer a free PSN game to subscribers each month (from a choice of 'two to four games'), which should make the premium PSN effectively free if you already bought a game every month

That depends entirely on what games they give away as the free options. I've not got a PS3 and not seen the PSN (why waste money on a cut-down computer that isn't even as good as the real thing?) but if you buy the best game from the PSN each month then I doubt that it would be the one that they put in the list of freebies. Chances are it'll be some fairly naff one or a middle of the range one that they just want to increase the numbers on without giving away anything they could make good money on.

Re:"Effectively" is rather subjective

[iwannasexwithyourmom]

(why waste money on a cut-down computer that isn't even as good as the real thing?)

awesome graphics, and not having to constantly upgrade to play the newest games at full quality.
I don't have the latest-greatest $600 graphics card Nvidia is selling, but I would imagine I'd have to pay that much(or more) to get an experience similar to the PS3. I currently own a card that is about $100 on the current market (was $300 when I bought it), and I simply can't play games like Mass Effect and Far Cry if I crank the graphics up. PS3 provides a consistant (and awesome) experience for me, every time I turn it on.

Re:"Effectively" is rather subjective

[Gadget_Guy]

awesome graphics, and not having to constantly upgrade to play the newest games at full quality.

Well, there's your problem. Your full quality on the PS3 is the same as mainstream quality on the PC. But since you know that it is possible to get better quality on the PC you feel that you are missing out on something.

I currently own a card that is about $100 on the current market (was $300 when I bought it), and I simply can't play games like Mass Effect and Far Cry if I crank the graphics up.

Well don't crank the graphics up. Leave it at mainstream settings and you will get your PS3 experience. The advantage of the PC is that if you decide to play a game again in a few years time then you will get improved visuals due to the advances in graphics and CPU. But in my opinion the improvements are not compelling enough to warrant spending hundreds more on a top of the range video card right now.

Re:"Effectively" is rather subjective

[Amarantine]

Yeah, but if you got an Xbox 360, you can't play God of War or Mario. If you got a Playstation, you can't play Alan wake or Zelda. If you have a Wii, you can't play Little Big Planet or Halo. It's true that most interesting titles are for consoles these days, but to play *all* of the interesting titles, you need 3 consoles. If you only have 1 console (and many people do), even then there is no guarantee you can play all console-exclusive titels, since one console != another console.

Re:Playstation, ask the Xbox how this one turned o

[Tukz]

I understand your point completely, but how about giving the benefit of the doubt for once?

I know it's the old story of "but they promised!", but currently I see no signs that Sony is moving currently free services over to Premium services.
And why should they? It's a huge selling point for the PS3 still. Free online multiplayer. Taking that away, could seriously cut down their userbase.

I think this idea, on paper, is great. Add new features and services, but only available to paying customers as opposed to the current PSN where everyone is roaming free for "basic" services (buy games, download trials, play online etc).

If people want some of the more exotic features, you pay a subscription. You don't have to, it won't cripple your current experience.
If Sony manages to keep this strategy, I really can't see a problem with it.

Re:Sounds Ok

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but it'll only be a matter of time before SONY, those lieing cheat bastard fucks, arbitrarily start disabling aspects of it. Honestly, how naive would you have to be to spend anything on a SONY product, at this point?

Re:Playstation, ask the Xbox how this one turned o

[mjwx]

I understand your point completely, but how about giving the benefit of the doubt for once?

It's Sony.

If this comment was about IBM, Shell, BP, or even Microsoft I could somehow, in some weird alternate universe put aside my all too useful cynicism and give them the benefit of the doubt.

But it's Sony, one of the most anti-consumer companies ever to exist.

If people want some of the more exotic features, you pay a subscription. You don't have to, it won't cripple your current experience.
If Sony manages to keep this strategy

I just can't see that happening. I reckon the PS3 hardware sales are going to level off, it's a natural thing for this to happen after a while and it will/has happended to the Wii and Xbox360 (and all products really) so it's a logical assumption that Sony wants to start monetising it's existing user base.

Re:Playstation, ask the Xbox how this one turned o

[Narishma]

You're clearly deluded if you think "OtherOS" was a huge selling point for the PS3. I doubt the majority of PS3 users even knew they could install an OS on their PS3 when it was possible.

Chose Linux support over PSN

[amaiman]

Too bad I no longer have access to PSN since I refused to install the update that would have removed Linux support from my console, so I won't be able to use this premium subscription. Maybe I'm cynical, but I read "nothing planned will impact the service’s current free aspects" as "of course, any NEW multiplayer games you buy will be subject to the new 'premium' requirement to play online"... Sony does have a documented history of promising one thing and then doing exactly the opposite.