PSN should start charging

well if they want to lose customers, sure why not

Does anyone else agree with me here?

Wardemon50

[QUOTE="AgentA-Mi6"]

[QUOTE="heretrix"]That and 100 percent total intergration of all it's games with the service.

heretrix

http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2009/03/23/cross-game-chat-confirmed/

Sony is already working on cross game chat, things are bound to get intersting when a firmware update comes with cross game chat for PSN, there are less and less reasons to pay for Xbox Live I think

I think PSN is ok though, I ain't mad it. And I hate that I come off as some one who bashes it. I'm not, I just don't think it is as good or better than XBL. It being free means nothing to me. People often confuse lowering the bar with actual quality when thinking that way.

And see, that's where there is a disconnect from those supporting Live's fees and those arguing against them. If MS, or even Sony wanted to charge for every single little option that isn't directly tied to online multiplayer on their respective networks, I'd have no issue with it. And I'm certainly not trying to compare the extraneous features of either system and call them = or the PSN superior. All I'm saying is that online multiplayer, which is one of the many "services" Live has, should be made free. If you and others really want the added bells and whistles that Gold membership provides then I think they should be there and MS should charge you whatever they think you're willing to pay. But charging you to play your game on your system with your internet connection and your hardware playing server is ludicrous.

You can praise every aspect of Live all you want. You can extoll the advantages of each feature over its PSN counterpart, and exclaim that all the exclusive features are by far worth the yearly dues you pay. But MS doesn't seem to think they can keep a sizeable portion of their subcribers without forcing them to pay to use the online portion of their games. The average Live subscriber doesn't care about a virtual popcorn fight, or twittering.... they only want to get on, find their friends, and get a game going. The PC and PS3 can provide those services at the same level as the 360, but for free. We should be fighting against charges to use our own property and bandwith, not defending the fees that exist and push for more to follow suit...

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

[QUOTE="AgentA-Mi6"]

http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2009/03/23/cross-game-chat-confirmed/

Sony is already working on cross game chat, things are bound to get intersting when a firmware update comes with cross game chat for PSN, there are less and less reasons to pay for Xbox Live I think

santoron

I think PSN is ok though, I ain't mad it. And I hate that I come off as some one who bashes it. I'm not, I just don't think it is as good or better than XBL. It being free means nothing to me. People often confuse lowering the bar with actual quality when thinking that way.

And see, that's where there is a disconnect from those supporting Live's fees and those arguing against them. If MS, or even Sony wanted to charge for every single little option that isn't directly tied to online multiplayer on their respective networks, I'd have no issue with it. And I'm certainly not trying to compare the extraneous features of either system and call them = or the PSN superior. All I'm saying is that online multiplayer, which is one of the many "services" Live has, should be made free. If you and others really want the added bells and whistles that Gold membership provides then I think they should be there and MS should charge you whatever they think you're willing to pay. But charging you to play your game on your system with your internet connection and your hardware playing server is ludicrous.

You can praise every aspect of Live all you want. You can extoll the advantages of each feature over its PSN counterpart, and exclaim that all the exclusive features are by far worth the yearly dues you pay. But MS doesn't seem to think they can keep a sizeable portion of their subcribers without forcing them to pay to use the online portion of their games. The average Live subscriber doesn't care about a virtual popcorn fight, or twittering.... they only want to get on, find their friends, and get a game going. The PC and PS3 can provide those services at the same level as the 360, but for free. We should be fighting against charges to use our own property and bandwith, not defending the fees that exist and push for more to follow suit...

Does anyone else agree with me here? I mean, if Sony were smart, they'd start charging for PSN. It would give Sony a new source of revenue and I'm sure people wouldn't mind doing it once it's implemented (They can either pay or complain and chances are, most people will pay). I guess I see it like this: If Xbox Live has so many paying customers, why hasn't it dawned on Sony to start charging?

Wardemon50

To those wondering about MMO subscription fee's vs xblgold, and of course we will use blizzard for the example, blizzard creates constant flow of content updates and hardware updates to there gaming servers, yes they use there own servers, and have a lot of them. Your paying for what is essentially monthly DLC + hardware upkeep.

when you play halo etc on xbl you are not using microsofts hardware or bandwidth, you are using other players as servers. Same as on a pc, anyone can download a dedicated server and host it. Online gaming does not need to cost the gaming companys anything, let the ISP's host the dedicated servers.

Would any of you say no to your local ISP having a dedicated and completely free halo3 server?

want your cross game chat for free, ill raise that and give you cross platform for free with skype/steam and ventrillo. Online gaming will always be free but the M$ fanboys have to make threads like this to justify there own purchases.

edit: typo

I don't think PSN should charge anything at all. I love it.

well the way i see it they cant go wrong if they started to charge people would pay and even if people were mad it wouldnt matter because they can only go up from free. They would be making a ton of money no matter what happened. I wouldnt advide the go that route though.

Well here's my question: What would you do if they started charging for PSN? Would you boycott PSN (causing absolutely no disturbance for Sony) Would you switch to 360? Would you switch to PC gaming since it's free? Would you swithc to the Wii since it's free? What I'm trying to say is that there is no real repercussion to Sony charging because most people would accept it and pay. Those who wouldn't wouldn't. Those who are dead set against it would punch sand.Wardemon50

[QUOTE="Wardemon50"]Well here's my question: What would you do if they started charging for PSN? Would you boycott PSN (causing absolutely no disturbance for Sony) Would you switch to 360? Would you switch to PC gaming since it's free? Would you swithc to the Wii since it's free? What I'm trying to say is that there is no real repercussion to Sony charging because most people would accept it and pay. Those who wouldn't wouldn't. Those who are dead set against it would punch sand.tok1879

To those wondering about MMO subscription fee's vs xblgold, and of course we will use blizzard for the example, blizzard creates constant flow of content updates and hardware updates to there gaming servers, yes they use there own servers, and have a lot of them. Your paying for what is essentially monthly DLC + hardware upkeep.

when you play halo etc on xbl you are not using microsofts hardware or bandwidth, you are using other players as servers. Same as on a pc, anyone can download a dedicated server and host it. Online gaming does not need to cost the gaming companys anything, let the ISP's host the dedicated servers.

Would any of you say no to your local ISP having a dedicated and completely free halo3 server?

want your cross game chat for free, ill raise that and give you cross platform for free with skype/steam and ventrillo. Online gaming will always be free but the M$ fanboys have to make threads like this to justify there own purchases.

edit: typo

kate_jones

well the way i see it they cant go wrong if they started to charge people would pay and even if people were mad it wouldnt matter because they can only go up from free. They would be making a ton of money no matter what happened. I wouldnt advide the go that route though.

Gen007

[QUOTE="Gen007"]

well the way i see it they cant go wrong if they started to charge people would pay and even if people were mad it wouldnt matter because they can only go up from free. They would be making a ton of money no matter what happened. I wouldnt advide the go that route though.

tok1879

[QUOTE="tok1879"][QUOTE="Wardemon50"]Well here's my question: What would you do if they started charging for PSN? Would you boycott PSN (causing absolutely no disturbance for Sony) Would you switch to 360? Would you switch to PC gaming since it's free? Would you swithc to the Wii since it's free? What I'm trying to say is that there is no real repercussion to Sony charging because most people would accept it and pay. Those who wouldn't wouldn't. Those who are dead set against it would punch sand.Wardemon50

[QUOTE="tok1879"][QUOTE="Gen007"]

well the way i see it they cant go wrong if they started to charge people would pay and even if people were mad it wouldnt matter because they can only go up from free. They would be making a ton of money no matter what happened. I wouldnt advide the go that route though.

Wardemon50

:lol:

No thanks...

So you're saying MS should include multiplayer with silver? That's a GREAT business strategy...Wardemon50

Why not? No one tries to justify Live's cost with online multiplayer anymore... why? Because it doesn't offer anything more in that areana for the price. The justification for Live by its fans has been the other features for Live. THOSE are the things everyone says makes it the superior service. So why not end the controversy? Put online multiplayer on silver and keep all those super Live features on Gold! I mean, at least that way we'd see how many people actually believe the extras are worth the cost...

You seem dubious. You mean you don't think people would still jump at the chance to pay for the other Live services? It's OK. MS doesn't believe that stuff either, or they would have stopped the embarrassment a long time ago.

It will end though. America Online used to try and justify their service with a bunch of extra little things... for awhile they were even the biggest comany in the online arena. Now no one uses their services for free.

No way. That one of the biggest reasons why I got a PS3 instead. GodofBigMacs

yea that was one reason for me as wellanother was rrod and liking PS3 exclusives way better.

shhh.. be quiet or sony might hear you.. :P

Imagine being charged to breathe air.

That's what it's like to be an X-Bax 360 Live lover. You love to pay for things that everyone else gets for free.

PS3 gamers don't pay to play online, Wii gamers don't pay to play online, PC gamers don't even pay to play LIVE online.

Only the lemming pays to play online. They say it's better. But you know why they think it's better? Because they pay for it.

Some men pay for sex because they simply can't get it anywhere else. The lemming pays for online gaming for the same reason.

[QUOTE="Brownesque"][QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

Yea thats the only reason I saw xbl is a bit better then psn. cross game/party chat and instint invite. Thats the only thing I really want for psn.

finalfantasy94

Thats why I say a bit better. Still not good enough to get my money.i dont agree when people say leaps and bounds better.

only people with lemming logic will say that xbox live is leaps and bounds better than psn

they think just cause u pay it makes it better lol

i dont see how xbox live is better when it makes u host ur matches

so let see xbox live 30-50$ makes u host < psn free service has dedicated servers for exclusives

so xbox live people enjoy ur added content, getting the amazing demos a week early and keep keep downloading ur drm protected content that u cant share with ur friends

while i enjoy the only thing i care about and thats actual online gameplay

in which case there is no difference between xbox live and psn i tested mulit plat games on both xbox live and psn and guess what no difference

xbox live people enjoy ur 16 player matches with halo 3

psn people enjoy ur32 player matches with kz2

i wouldnt pay for it. im not going to pay for online for both systems

because PSN's only advantage over XBL is that it's freefunsohng

Dedicated servers which equal smoother play experience and less lag, more players and its not restricted as compared to XBL allowing for mods and other such things, plus PSN games are usually much bigger then XBL games since there is no size limit.

You lemms will never givePS3 credibility because you are too busy trying to defend MS milkage, the real cows are you guys this gen Im afraid. I still say XBL is better with it's community with party system and cross game chat but dang Sony is improving the online experience with every update.

[QUOTE="funsohng"]because PSN's only advantage over XBL is that it's freeSwift_Boss_A

Dedicated servers which equal smoother play experience and less lag, more players and its not restricted as compared to XBL allowing for mods and other such things, plus PSN games are usually much bigger then XBL games since there is no size limit.

You lemms will never givePS3 credibility because you are too busy trying to defend MS milkage, the real cows are you guys this gen Im afraid. I still say XBL is better with it's community with party system and cross game chat but dang Sony is improving the online experience with every update.

i dont know if u can say xbox live community is better because all games say online experience not rated (can u say 12 year old cryiing or talking trrash on a mic)

plus i saw a xbox360 thread that was asking which xbox live game had the worst community and the poll had their top games

halo 3, gears 2 & cod 4

halo 3 got the most votes for worst online community

Does anyone else agree with me here? I mean, if Sony were smart, they'd start charging for PSN. It would give Sony a new source of revenue and I'm sure people wouldn't mind doing it once it's implemented (They can either pay or complain and chances are, most people will pay). I guess I see it like this: If Xbox Live has so many paying customers, why hasn't it dawned on Sony to start charging?

Wardemon50