Slashdot Mirror
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.'"
Sounds good, especially if you get to pick the PSN title
Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your home!
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?
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
When has Xbox Live ever been free? I'm sure I've been paying for it since 2003
Launched in November 2002 there were two levels of subscription, Xbox Live Silver and Xbox Live Gold, the Silver subscription was free but fairly useless (I think it's still around but no-one acknowledges its existence any more). Microsoft was pretty quick to Monetise XBL.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Why doesn't Slashdot have a Star Wars opening credits formatting option?
That option is only available to premium Slashdot subscribers.
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.
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.
As far as I know, you could never play online with a Silver subscription. So what's changed? Nothing. They did not "slowly take away" features on Xbox Live. If anything, they *added* features. But yeah, paying for online play is a pain (but it still offers a little more than just your typical dedicated server in the PC world).
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.
- Don't do what I do, it's probably not healthy nor safe. -
You're full of shit. When Live first launched, there was no Silver and Gold, only subscribers. The Silver and Gold levels weren't introduced until the 360 launched in 2006, and you have NEVER been able to play online with a Silver subscription, outside of a promo weekend deal.
My sig can beat up your sig.
Yeah. live has always had the paid for model, it might've been free on beta but i'm pretty sure you still had to buy the pack.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
I should probably add to that, the original Live was NEVER, at any point, FREE. If you wanted to play online with an original XBox, you had to either pay, or use tunneling software software like XBConnect or X-Link.
My sig can beat up your sig.
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.
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.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
... if it means I will see fewer 12 yrs old in multiplayer games. And I am serious.
As it is, even when playing mature rated games, there are still far too many immature kids in the game, either griefing outright, or in other ways to spoil the fun for everyone, and in general unable to behave with minimal civility that most adult typically show, even when online.
Although the design of PSN and the games already shielded it somewhat (eg lack of global chat, only voice chat within squad with mute function, so we don't have to see/hear the incessant crap talk), in game griefing/annoying behaviour is still somewhat unavoidable (eg camping in own team's base and destroying vehicles as they spawn, or destroying vehicles because another teammate will reach it first).
If the premium for pay network has fewer kids there, and the price is modest, I will sign up in a snap. Better service for more money (ie not for better hardware spec or higher machine power, but just better usage experience), I know this is difficult concept for some people here, but lots of normal people think it could be worth it.
Oliver.
Yeah they said the same about achievements. Then came out with their trophies.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
I understand your point completely, but how about giving the benefit of the doubt for once?
We tried that when they released the slim PS3 without Other OS support ("don't worry, they won't take it away from current PS3s"). Look how that turned out.
No Sony would never degrade the free online multiplayer as it's a huge selling point just like the other OS option is a huge selling point, oh wait...
As a consumer I resent this, but cmon. There *IS* a cost to having servers running 24/7. I loved playing Battlefield Bad Company (1) with my friend, we must have racked up a COUPLE HUNDRED hours playing it online, and we were almost always on full teams of 12 a side, 24 in total. What does that cost? Certainly more than what he paid for his secondhand copy of the game! I paid full price, but even $120 NZD (~$85 USD) for the game is not really that much with development costs on top of A COUPLE HUNDRED HOURS playing it online.
It reminds me of my student friends who have always grown up using P2P and Bit Torrent to download music, now movies, games. They complain that hit songs on iTunes cost a whopping COUPLE BUCKS NZ. The kind of money you can find between couch cushions, even at a student flat. They always say "it should cost less, if it were 20cents a song I'd buy it". Yeah right, so all those top notch (or not, depending on your view of current music!) producers and "musicians" should work for free? They should make the final sale price go from $2 for hours of their work, to 20 cents? But then you'd just complain that it should be FIVE cents!
I'm 22, I feel that as an adult, there comes a time when you have to stop whining over a buck or two here, or ten dollars a month, whatever something like this *MIGHT* end up costing. "Value for Value", my friends have all gotten many, MANY hours of entertainment out of this single game, why shouldnt the companies get a steady drip of a few bucks to help out with costs? We never had a problem with one of us paying $6 NZD (~$4USD) a month for unlimited calls (and txts) to a cellphone number so we could always talk while playing.
I'm a consumer, I dont have a well paying job, I'd rather *everything* was free online! But the fact is, there are COSTS, and if I enjoy the end result, whats a couple bucks? And dont give me the old "boiling a frog slowly so it doesnt notice" routine, not only because I like animals, but because its not like "we give in to paying a whole two bucks a month, and then its 20 bucks a month, and then its 100 a month, and then its your firstborn..."
There are costs to providing us all with entertainment, 24/7, worldwide. We are all (mostly) adults, whats a couple bucks to you for all those hours of enjoyment?
---
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.
Mada mada dane.
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.
12 year olds have more disposable income than you, so don't expect fewer of them on a paid network. They don't have mortgage/rent or car payments. They don't have to buy their own food. They just ask for Mommy's credit card (or don't ask, Mommy won't notice anyway).
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
If half the people complaining about OtherOS removal had actually used it, Sony would be the richest corporation in the world
Irrelevant. There are plenty of other examples of Sony boning customers. Rootkits, anyone?
As it is, you probably don't even know just how limited the hardware actually was for other operating systems - you certainly couldn't play games on it. OtherOS never was aimed at end-users.
I'm highly familiar with how limited the hardware was, notably that the hypervisor prevented most GPU access because the GPU had access to main memory. Of course, all the hypervisor actually HAD to do was enforce memory protection, so it's clear that Sony took this action to prevent using it for games. However, this is a complete red herring, it's easy to see why you're too cowardly to log in. The PS3 plays Games without the 'Other OS' option; running Linux was for everything else. Sony canned it because it enabled Blu-Ray copying, to which you have a right (for backups.)
If Other OS functionality wasn't aimed at end users, it would only need text console support. Everything you said is wrong. Go away.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Nice, great answer. Because only a few people use it it's ok to take it away after it's been paid for. That's how every thing should be. Only a few people compared to the overall population use skateboards, lets go out and pound those kids and take their boards back. /end sarcasm
I bought my PS3 instead of a Wii because I wanted to put Linux on it. I use Linux on my PS3 for development and testing and as a 3D rendering node.
I don't see where other people get the right to say because only a few people paid to use it it's ok for it to be taken back. Weather or not someone knew it could be installed, they still paid for it. Don't bother going into the, "It wasn't a major part of the cost of the PS3, so you really didn't pay for it" argument.
1) Sony had to pay the team developing the Other OS feature, therefore they had to spend money on it. If you think for a second those wages weren't factored in to the price, you're not all that bright.
2) If you pick up two stakes as a Buy one get one free deal, the second stake isn't really free. You still had to pay for the first one so really you're just spreading the cost out over two instead of one. You're still paying for both. Kind of like buying a gaming console and getting a computer for free. But hay that second stake is just going to sit in your freezer for a week anyway. I guess it's ok for the grocery store to come and take it back.
The current service lacks much of the functionality of xbox live. I don't mind paying a small amount for the service if they provide me a better experience. I don't game that much anyway. However, if prices start outweighing the services they provide me with I'll drop the service and console in the trash and be done with it.
Console History Fail. I just threw away my initial Xbox Live Starter Kit disc with MechWarrior on it. It came with a headset. I believe it cost me about $40 (I worked at a game store at the time). I bought it when I started playing halo 2 online. There was no silver subscription service at the time, that was created with the 360 so that MS could sell digital downloads to people who didn't subscribe to XBL. Before the Xbox Marketplace on the 360, there was no functional reason to have a silver account.
Believe it or not, the xbox having a built in LAN connection (and not allowing dial up connections) was a big deal at the time for consoles. PS2's network adapter was expensive, and other consoles only had phone-jacks. Microsoft screws up a lot, but that first xbox was pretty revolutionary with some of the features it had.
Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
There are plenty of PC games that require a subscription to play online. So what are you talking about?
Because I got screwed so badly with the Linux option. Not that this matters to me, I decided to keep Linux and forgo all PSN access, but Sony has lost the "benefit of the doubt" once and for all.
It was the selling point for me. It's why I own one. Games were a bonus. Yeah, that's backwards, I know. Dropping support for it was understandable. Kicking it off the systems is a breach of contract. I'm looking to join one of the lawsuits if it gets awarded class-action status. I won't make more than a few bucks, but if I can poke Sony in the eye, I'll feel better.
Seeing how they lose money money to the PS3 I fail to see how they would make money if people bought it for OtherOS instead of for games.
I'm only an occassional gamer.
I'll play for a month, then I'll have a busy month or two and my PS3 will just collect dust.
Free online play was a key deciding factor for me, I'm not willing to pay for a service that I don't use on a regular basis.
The US Air Force alone purchased over 2000 PS3s for this feature, not to mention all the universities that purchased them.
Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
There is no troll in the above comment. Not only is it my actual opinion, but it's also wholly factual. When will modpoints be taken away from the masses of asses and given to the responsible? Oh wait, rationality would reduce page views.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
We have already seen Sony show that they don't care by breaking into and rooting customers computers, DRM'ing everything from games to the hair on my Dogs ass, then on to the PS3- they disabled the install other os feature, taking away a part of the originally promised features. Why should this even be news now. They are simply continuing on in their quest to take away every feature that made the PS3 a more desirable product over the xbox. Now that they have you locked in, you will see that the exra $$ you laid out for the PS3 with its Linux, and "Free online gaming" is now just an xbox that cost you a $200.00 premium to begin with. Oh and there is still fewer games.---move along, nothing to see here, business as usual at Sony.
"Computers are a lot like Air Conditioners" "They both work great until you start opening Windows"
But it's Sony, one of the most anti-consumer companies ever to exist.
I won't argue there, but Sony hasn't been so bad with the PS3. Yeah, the install other OS option was attractive to me, but I never used it. I play games on the PS3, I run linux on my PCs.
Also, the PS3 supports quite a bit of standard hardware. Standard power cable, no expensive proprietary external brick. Bluetooth for headset connection. USB storage/charging. 2.5" SATA Hard Disk. Included 802.11g, as well as wired ethernet.
It's not like consumers have been totally shafted by Sony on this device.
As others have mentioned, you are mistaken, since the silver membership was released with the 360.
Xbox 360 will offer a multi-tiered system for its Live component. One of those tiers will be free.
Members of the free tier, dubbed Xbox Live Silver, will have access to the system's online community function, allowing them to chat with other players and freely download game demos. They will not be able to play games with others except during occasional 'free preview' opportunities (much like those that cable movie channels sometimes offer).
Xbox Live Gold members will pay an as-yet undetermined annual or monthly fee to play with or against others. Current Xbox Live members, who currently pay $50 per year, will be able to keep their online nicknames.
Unless you can find a reference to XBL Silver from 2002, your comparison doesn't hold water. XBox Live added free features to its subscription-only service, while Sony is adding for-pay features to its free service.
Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
Sony has proven their disloyalty to customers time and again. Its only a matter of time before PSN heads down the same road as xbox live. They must believe they can support themselves on hardcore gamers alone, because I know I'm not going to pay 20$ a month to get fragged 10 times a minute by some fat loser who plays 18 hours a day.
There is silver and gold. I am a silver member. Silver = Not Gold. As a silver member you can go online. You can purchase game / items from the online store. I can't play games with online connectivity. I refuse to pay a monthly fee to play. Sometimes my games come with a free month of gold, but I don't even use that. The only thing I have ever bought, were expansion packs and songs for rock band.
I gave Sony the benefit of the doubt with my PS3 until they pried away my Other OS feature.
I'm very interested to see how these class action lawsuits turn out.
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
... if it means I will see fewer 12 yrs old in multiplayer games. And I am serious.
Um, have you ever tried playing a game on Xbox Live? It's the only "premium" multiplayer service I've ever used and it's filled to the brim with foul mouthed 12 year olds.
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
FFXI on the Xbox 360 has always been available to Silver subscribers (asking people to pay two subscription fees just to be able to play at all is too much for even Microsoft to ask).
If we let Blu-Ray die, then we're all fools.
Digital Distribution of video sucks. As of now, now service, be it cable, satellite, netflix, etc can deliver anywhere near the same quality of video as on a bluray disc. They all decompress their movies into very low bitrates that do not hold up well under fast motion, and are barely passable with low motion.
I will ALWAYS opt for the Blu-Ray disc. If I want to own a movie... I want the highest bitrate possible, so that the video quality is what it should be.
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.
The market changes as time goes on, so does the company's direction to either maintain market share or to get more money. I doubt Sony will care about maintaining user base if they dominates at 90% of the market share and they can get a a sizable revenue from tens of millions of users. XBox Live was up front about the fee since the beginning. A sticker shock for sure but they are not deceptive of their intentions. They have maintained their position since day one, and somehow there are people willing to pay for the service.
I have to say for a lot of things Microsoft managed to messed up lately they did all right with the Xobx Live service.
Dreamcast had a broadband adapter that installed by replacing the modem that shipped with it. However: a) DHCP didn't work with it and b) it had a production run of about three. GameCube also had a broadband adapter that plugged into one of the serial ports, which is actually not that hard to come by.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo....Thats impossible!
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.
Apparently you've never played any MMO, the Sims, or downloaded any additional DLC on your PC? While you may lament the age of DLC and premium online subscription fees, but until an open-source alternative arises the pricing models will change until they milk the consumers for all they're worth. Welcome to capitalism. The free service, allegedly, is not going away. Personally, I'd wait and see what they are going to offer at E3.
Still offered more free functionality, and more open accessories, then the competition.
I don't really think it's that Sony is evil and they're on a "quest to take away every feature that made the PS3 a more desirable product over the xbox." Being a corporation that's interested in making money, it's more likely that someone said "increase profit margin, or lose your job" to someone down the ladder, and thus we got (1) reduction in hardware capability and hardware manufacturing price, and now (2) reduction in features in the software. What got them in a pickle in the first place was they made a box that was too expensive for most people to want to buy, and then had to suck features away to make it sustainable in the long run. Sony _has_ been horrible to their customers in the past, and they're being horrid now, taking away features that people used to have. But it's not about poodle-shooting evil, it's about the "need" for increased profits pushing people to do unscrupulous things.
"...And who wants to make buttprints in the sands of time?" ~Bob Moawad
Don't mistake this for fanboyism or anything like that (I have both a PS3 and Xbox), but XBox has the only online service thats worth paying for. PSN and Wii are pathetic. The funny part was that the idea of paying for online gaming was one of the big sticking points that PS3 fanboys had against the Xbox. I guess now that Sony has a sizable market share, it's about time to change that tune. Oh well, at least it plays blu-ray.
If it took you this long to realize that Sony can't be trusted, you haven't been paying attention. In my opinion, Sony is one of the most diabolical customer-screwing companies in existence.
I remember years ago people saying they bought a PS2 instead of an XBox because Microsoft was evil, and I thought that these people were morons who were just parroting the usual "M$ is the evil!" sentiments frequently heard on the internet.
Don't get me wrong. MIcrosoft is no angel, but they haven't done nearly as much to screw their customers over as much as Sony has. Now, if we talk about their competition, that might be a different story, but not when it comes to their customers.
When it comes to "biting the hand that feeds you", you almost have to go into the realm of politics to find individuals or organizations that can out-evil Sony. ;-)
"You're full of shit. When Live first launched, there was no Silver and Gold, only subscribers."
Hi! You're full of shit. There were MANY games which were playable online under a silver subscription for free.
I was a support tech, want me to start breaking down the list of games Silver subscription users could play BEFORE 2008?
Starting in 2008 Silver and Gold accounts lost distinction and Silver accounts were allowed to play all games online free.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Umm, games that already required a monthly fee were playable online for free under a Silver account. Microsoft didn't have the balls to try double-charging.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
In other news, the US Air Force and US universities are morons. You don't purchase consumer hardware if you want reliability.
It's called Consumer Off The Shelf (COTS). Government does it all the time to save money hence why it has its own acronym. The USAF Could have bought a bunch of IBM Cell based servers and $10K a pop, but Instead decided to try and save tax payers some money by buying a much cheaper products that were advertised as doing what they needed them to do. I also highly doubt this was the decision of one or two people. The process I have to go through to buy a piece of hardware or software needs to be approved by several higher ups as well as people in the IT department. I write the software for and build data collection and tracking equipment so I know. But hay, maybe the Canadian Government has a better structure for buying hardware and software then the Americans do.
There were MANY games which were playable online under a silver subscription for free.
I was a support tech, want me to start breaking down the list of games Silver subscription users could play BEFORE 2008?
Yes please, I was unaware of any (aside from those that didn't use XBL for online).
Starting in 2008 Silver and Gold accounts lost distinction and Silver accounts were allowed to play all games online free.
Ummmmm, the only references that I can see to this are temporary offers, usually weekends, and one that ran for several arcade games for a couple of months. As far as I can tell, Silver users can only play online during these special offers. Have a link that proves me wrong? I'd love to get my fiance playing online without needing to buy her another account.
Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
That doesn't change that the XBox was the first to be networked out of the box, without the need for an add-on.
Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
As time goes on, more store bought PS3 games will also require you to update your firmware, they will even provide the minimum supported version on disk "for your convenience." Don't think just because you don't go on the PSN that you are safe to keep buying games.
Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
They mocked the Xbox 360 because it could only play select games from the previous generation. New PS3s only play some games from the PS1 days and none from the PS2 unless you have older hardware.
They touted the PS3 as a computer, you can even install a full OS. When they removed the Other OS option for the PS3 slim they promised that it would remain in the older systems. No Other OS on any system anymore, even the ones they promised not to remove it from.
They mocked Xbox 360 for having to pay for gold membership, saying see our online service is free. Now we are getting PSN "Gold".
They lie about why the Sixaxis controller doesn't have rumble, saying it isn't needed. Then tote what a great feature it is when the Dualshock 3 controller comes out.
They lie, and lie, and lie and lie. How are we supposed to trust anything they say anymore?
For the record, I do not own an Xbox 360, nor do I plan to ever buy a console from Microsoft again. With the way things are going, I might just never buy a console ever again.
Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
I was a support tech
I'm so so sorry...
Ogre Wedding Planners llc.
BP, or even Microsoft
*really*? I have to disagree on both of those...
Ogre Wedding Planners llc.
Buy Sony and you get what you pay for... Well maybe not, they might just take it away, or limit your use. Its only fair, I mean its not like you own it or anything, or were sold something that was advertised with certain features or anything... right?
I am going to go out on a limb here and call it right now. Sony is going to screw everyone it can.
Because Sony is Evil. They can't help it. Its like trying not to punch a kitten.
Satelite can deliver HD quality images. Cable proably can to (dont have it here) netflix is streaming so obviously that wont deliver blu ray quality. I just think the cost of blu ray is overall prohibitive. You may demand the highest quality regardless but whos to say you cant download that quality? You can download qualitys higher that blu ray if you have a display capable of it. I just think a media server is the best way to go and is the way johnny as-little-effort-as-possible is going to go for it. A big HD and suitable connection is much cheaper than a blu-ray player. Price+convinence really puts DD at a winner. And thats direct download. Not streaming. Of course the companies can easily fuck it up with drm issues etc but thats besides the point. My point anyway.
If you really want the highest quality to watch movies as they should be, you should be on film and projector. More resolution than you could possibly need there.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Aw, come on, give him a brake.
"This thing does science so hard, you say, 'I've never seen that much science.'" -Sam
Yet another attempt to monetize as an afterthought. Expect several more links to "Premium PSN" to clog up the XMB alongside the multiple redundant store icons, non-hideable ticker, and forced-at-startup "What's New" button. Remember the first issue of Qore, with all the promoted extras which turned out to be one bad (and hidden!) Pong clone and access to exclusive game content that was not realized for several months? That is an idea of to expect here. My guess is that the giveaway games will be of the type that require followup, not-free DLC to be fully realized.
All you have to do to cash in is burn down your house!
Hi! You're full of shit, AND lack reading comprehension.
When I said "when Live first launched", meant the original XBox version. On the original XBox, you either subscribed and got all the features, or you didn't, and got none of them. No Silver, no Gold, just subscribers.
As to why I say you're full of shit, it's because Silver accounts STILL don't have access to online multiplayer. Couch multiplayer, yes, ability to buy stuff off of XBLA, yes, online multiplayer, NO. The only exceptions have ever been the occasional free weekend, and FFXI, on account of it requiring a separate subscription fee. There was NO change to this, in 2008 or any other year.
You can find a table with an accurate comparison between Silver and Gold accounts here. If you doubt Wikipedia's accuracy, try Microsoft's list. You'll notice neither list includes online multiplayer on the Silver tier.
My sig can beat up your sig.
The big reason is that PSN doesn't moderate their community like XBL, partly because they don't have income to pay for moderators and partly because the publishers are expected to do the moderation. Thus, the cheater on the PS3 needs to be banned from every single game, whereas on XBL a single ban applies to their entire account. As well, the PS3 cheater can just get a new account (for free), whereas there is a monetary incentive to not get banned on XBL (you don't get refunded for time you were banned).
Of course, this change in PSN isn't going to change anything about this problem.
Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
Trust me, it was easier working on the units themselves at Solectron than dealing with full-on customer support.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
The parent stated that there was some level of openness when the system first launched, and THEN Microsoft "monetized" it. The reality is that it STARTED "monetized", and free features were added years later when the 360 launched.
The complete opposite of the truth is NOT a "trivial mistake".
My sig can beat up your sig.
How was this a troll comment?
It didn't fit into the moderator's world view, so it clearly MUST be a troll.
My sig can beat up your sig.
Only on Slashdot can an anti-Microsoft post containing false info end up as +4 Insightful.
You simply cant download bluray bitrate files in realtime for viewing. Most blu-rays video streams are 40GB in size, which a very high bitrate.
The HD movies that get streamed on TV, Netflix, Video On Demand, Xbox Live, etc.. are all very low bitrate, and much smaller file sizes because they compress their videos heavily.
they compress them so heavily that fast motion scenes break down the image quality severely, often obscuring the actually action on screen. Often you can see "floating" peices in the motion in even low motion scenes, as the compression is so low.
See the thing about digital delivery of videos, you're at the mercy of the providers bandwidth usage cost. They dont want to spend the money for the bandwidtht o provide you a video on par with a bluray. And its not just the provider... Its your own broadband services etc. Theres a lot of "business" that gets in the way of image quality. On sattalites, its lack of bandwidth on the sattelites themselves... All Sat TV providers and cable providers compress some channels more than others to squeeze in all of their channels into their bandwidth. Now what also happens is the channels that provide them that video... ALSO compress their video to meet their own bandwidth limitations...
You're getting a compressed image that will never be on par with a blu-ray.