Sony has taken great losses on PS3 why don't they charge for PSN?

I mean don't get me wrong I'm glad that they don't and in a perfect world XBL would be free as well. But when you have a company that has squandered all of its PS2 profits in 2 years with the PS3 and they are looking for ways to make revenue and profit. You'd think that they would charge for online or something. I mean hell it doesn't have to be $50 but one of the suites in Sony had to say, "Yeah um we are losing mad money we need to find a way to make more revenue." and surely enough someone else must have said, "Hey MS is making a killing off of XBL why don't we charge a fee as well albeit smaller as to maintain more attractive or what not."

I mean from a business standpoint it does have me scratching my head. I mean these guys need to find every way possible to make money seeing as how the PS3 is currently a financial disaster.

Then again things like this could be a huge turn off and turn more people towards 360 and XBL but hey its speculation.

Your thoughts.

Apparently a lot of product placement exists in Home like that silly red bull airplane game.

The amount of advertising money Sony gets from corporations advertising on Home surely offsets the costs.

Its just a shame gamers actually think HOME means something when its just a way fro Sony to make money off of ads.

I personally think they are trying to Appeal to the PC gamer crowd, and previous PS2 gamer crowd.

Also, charging would mean they would HAVE to use that revenue to destroy or attempt to destroy Xbox Live.

I do agree, that it would be a money maker, like LIVE is for Micro$oft, but they are trying to get more gamers online I think.

It's funny, because once those gamers go online due to PS3, and then they get a 360, they may not go back.

PS3 could be seen as a GATEWAY CONSOLE ONLINE EXPERIENCE, one which M$ is capalizing on. Eh.

I personally think they are trying to Appeal to the PC gamer crowd, and previous PS2 gamer crowd.

Also, charging would mean they would HAVE to use that revenue to destroy or attempt to destroy Xbox Live.

I do agree, that it would be a money maker, like LIVE is for Micro$oft, but they are trying to get more gamers online I think.

It's funny, because once those gamers go online due to PS3, and then they get a 360, they may not go back.

PS3 could be seen as a GATEWAY CONSOLE ONLINE EXPERIENCE, one which M$ is capalizing on. Eh.

XTy

To me the PS3 doesn't really appeal to the PS2 crowd. The PS2 was largly built on the casuals and lets be serious Sony priced the casuals out of the equation from the start at launch and its pretty much still happening now with the Wii and 360 arcade.

If the PS3 had crushed the competition like it was expected then I doubt PSN would be free. If I'm not mistaken when you buy a PS3 it certifies that PSN is and always will be free with your purchase of the system so isn't it ilegal to charge later on because that would be false advertisement?

PSN should be free just like XBL since PCs have a superior online than both and they don't pay.

What would the cows think then? :lol:

I don't think it would be a good idea. It would just be more negative press, not to mention a huge backlash from PS3 owners and an even worse comparison to XBL.

Apparently a lot of product placement exists in Home like that silly red bull airplane game.

The amount of advertising money Sony gets from corporations advertising on Home surely offsets the costs.

Its just a shame gamers actually think HOME means something when its just a way fro Sony to make money off of ads.

Cole-Protocal

No one would pay for it. It isn't known as a quality system like Xbox LIVE.Parasomniac

[QUOTE="XTy"]

I personally think they are trying to Appeal to the PC gamer crowd, and previous PS2 gamer crowd.

Also, charging would mean they would HAVE to use that revenue to destroy or attempt to destroy Xbox Live.

I do agree, that it would be a money maker, like LIVE is for Micro$oft, but they are trying to get more gamers online I think.

It's funny, because once those gamers go online due to PS3, and then they get a 360, they may not go back.

PS3 could be seen as a GATEWAY CONSOLE ONLINE EXPERIENCE, one which M$ is capalizing on. Eh.

Blackbond

To me the PS3 doesn't really appeal to the PS2 crowd. The PS2 was largly built on the casuals and lets be serious Sony priced the casuals out of the equation from the start at launch and its pretty much still happening now with the Wii and 360 arcade.

While I agree with you, I never said Sony's was a sound strategy, just one I am speculating on what Sony is doing.

Price is a huge issue, but I think the Sony bigwigs feel that once you get it, it better be worth it. Who actually knows.

You asked, I threw out the best answer so far, imo. It's just what I think, but if they are going for that Hardcore market, I covered that as well, by saying "The PC gamer crowd."

It is interesting, seeing as how it could help them, even at $20 a year. I would hate it though, I hate when I getted booted on 360 from matches on GeoW2, and I pay for that.

I don't think that they would have been able to. PSN had too much catching up to do to justify a fee compared to Live, and now that its closer to Live, they can't start a fee or else they will alienate their fanbase, who naturally enjoys the free PSN.SpruceCaboose

I have to agree with you

I don't think that they would have been able to. PSN had too much catching up to do to justify a fee compared to Live, and now that its closer to Live, they can't start a fee or else they will alienate their fanbase, who naturally enjoys the free PSN.SpruceCaboose

Apparently a lot of product placement exists in Home like that silly red bull airplane game.

The amount of advertising money Sony gets from corporations advertising on Home surely offsets the costs.

Its just a shame gamers actually think HOME means something when its just a way fro Sony to make money off of ads.

PS3's almost at its break even point, actually. I can give you links if you want. GodofBigMacs

Apparently a lot of product placement exists in Home like that silly red bull airplane game.

The amount of advertising money Sony gets from corporations advertising on Home surely offsets the costs.

Its just a shame gamers actually think HOME means something when its just a way fro Sony to make money off of ads.

i bet that if the ps3 would have been 300 dollers at launch without a bluray player that atleast 30 million copys(twice as much as now) would have been sold, see what happened there? they try to make us happy and we take a dump on their face by not buying it, they made a really reliable product with great hardware and good games planned and then everyone bashes them, cmon they are loosing like 200 dollers a pop trying to make us happy thats a damn shamejk212

They came out the gate at $600, with vastly inferior multiplats, online, and games. Not to mention the Wii came out of no where. What did you expect to happen? The consumer didn't take a dump on Sony they merely found alternatives.

[QUOTE="GodofBigMacs"]PS3's almost at its break even point, actually. I can give you links if you want. Blackbond

lets see here, ps2 sold 140 MILLION copys, the ps3 sold 17 million, umm im pretty sure they arent jumping off their roofs any time soon bruh

[QUOTE="Blackbond"][QUOTE="GodofBigMacs"]PS3's almost at its break even point, actually. I can give you links if you want. jk212

lets see here, ps2 sold 140 MILLION copys, the ps3 sold 17 million, umm im pretty sure they arent jumping off their roofs any time soon bruh

i bet that if the ps3 would have been 300 dollers at launch without a bluray player that atleast 30 million copys(twice as much as now) would have been sold, see what happened there? they try to make us happy and we take a dump on their face by not buying it, they made a really reliable product with great hardware and good games planned and then everyone bashes them, cmon they are loosing like 200 dollers a pop trying to make us happy thats a damn shamejk212

yeah, hopefully they don't go the nintendo route and make a wii like console next-gen. But since they lost so much money on the ps3 I wouldn't be surprised.

sony sold around 245 million playstation ones and twos, multiply that by the cost, then subtract the profits earned by these with the loss of the ps3, and boom they still have LOADS of cash so thats why they didnt care for making it unprofitable as long as its a GOOD CONSOL cough cough 360 breaks down every 6 months cough cough wii has gamecube or worse graphics cough coughjk212

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3169439

Yes when your PS3 losses have eclisped your PS2 profits you still have loads of cash....Sure they have lots of money because they are Sony. But loads? What defines loads?

Two years of PS3 erasing a near decade of what the PS2 the largest userbase ever earned.

sony sold around 245 million playstation ones and twos, multiply that by the cost, then subtract the profits earned by these with the loss of the ps3, and boom they still have LOADS of cash so thats why they didnt care for making it unprofitable as long as its a GOOD CONSOL cough cough 360 breaks down every 6 months cough cough wii has gamecube or worse graphics cough coughjk212

[QUOTE="jk212"]sony sold around 245 million playstation ones and twos, multiply that by the cost, then subtract the profits earned by these with the loss of the ps3, and boom they still have LOADS of cash so thats why they didnt care for making it unprofitable as long as its a GOOD CONSOL cough cough 360 breaks down every 6 months cough cough wii has gamecube or worse graphics cough coughSpruceCaboose

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="jk212"]sony sold around 245 million playstation ones and twos, multiply that by the cost, then subtract the profits earned by these with the loss of the ps3, and boom they still have LOADS of cash so thats why they didnt care for making it unprofitable as long as its a GOOD CONSOL cough cough 360 breaks down every 6 months cough cough wii has gamecube or worse graphics cough coughbez2083

[QUOTE="jk212"]sony sold around 245 million playstation ones and twos, multiply that by the cost, then subtract the profits earned by these with the loss of the ps3, and boom they still have LOADS of cash so thats why they didnt care for making it unprofitable as long as its a GOOD CONSOL cough cough 360 breaks down every 6 months cough cough wii has gamecube or worse graphics cough coughBlackbond

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3169439

Yes when your PS3 losses have eclisped your PS2 profits you still have loads of cash....Sure they have lots of money because they are Sony. But loads? What defines loads?

Two years of PS3 erasing a near decade of what the PS2 the largest userbase ever earned.

From my understanding, that article was refuted, as it was about that Year, or something to that effect.

I bet they would love to charge for PSN, but they can't because they can't go back and retroactivly change there contracts with 3rd parties, or change the online games that have been already released without a lot of work on the part of 3rd parties.

Next gen... I hope not, but it's probably going to happen.

From my understanding, that article was refuted, as it was about that Year, or something to that effect.

XTy

PS3 fans aren't as dumb as lemmings.Sure many of us paid $600 for it and suffered through a year of bad ports but we won't pay for something that's supposed to be free.Rockman999

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

[QUOTE="jk212"]sony sold around 245 million playstation ones and twos, multiply that by the cost, then subtract the profits earned by these with the loss of the ps3, and boom they still have LOADS of cash so thats why they didnt care for making it unprofitable as long as its a GOOD CONSOL cough cough 360 breaks down every 6 months cough cough wii has gamecube or worse graphics cough coughXTy

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3169439

Yes when your PS3 losses have eclisped your PS2 profits you still have loads of cash....Sure they have lots of money because they are Sony. But loads? What defines loads?

Two years of PS3 erasing a near decade of what the PS2 the largest userbase ever earned.

From my understanding, that article was refuted, as it was about that Year, or something to that effect.

From your understanding it was refuted? Um you're going to have to provide some support for that statement.

Ok well one of the main reasons I bought a PS3 was the fact that I could game online free. BTW Sony are already making money out of home from what I heard plus they are close to breaking even on PS3. Oh and they cut the cost of PS3 by 35%, there was a link somewhere but I cant be bothered to get it :D Anyway Sony wont be losing money in 09. Oh and why are you worried for Sony? didn't you want them to fail????? Swift_Boss_A

Um no Sony is not breaking even. They are only breaking even with hardware that they are selling. That isn't just going to magically make all the losses go away. You realize Saying Sony is breaking even would mean that the PS3 would be equally successful in fincanial sense to the PS2 as PS3 has incurred more losses then PS2 profits.

Why would I want them to fail? BlackBond is immune to the likes of the Maverick ways.

I mean don't get me wrong I'm glad that they don't and in a perfect world XBL would be free as well. But when you have a company that has squandered all of its PS2 profits in 2 years with the PS3 and they are looking for ways to make revenue and profit. You'd think that they would charge for online or something. I mean hell it doesn't have to be $50 but one of the suites in Sony had to say, "Yeah um we are losing mad money we need to find a way to make more revenue." and surely enough someone else must have said, "Hey MS is making a killing off of XBL why don't we charge a fee as well albeit smaller as to maintain more attractive or what not."

I mean from a business standpoint it does have me scratching my head. I mean these guys need to find every way possible to make money seeing as how the PS3 is currently a financial disaster.

Then again things like this could be a huge turn off and turn more people towards 360 and XBL but hey its speculation.

Your thoughts.

Blackbond

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

I mean don't get me wrong I'm glad that they don't and in a perfect world XBL would be free as well. But when you have a company that has squandered all of its PS2 profits in 2 years with the PS3 and they are looking for ways to make revenue and profit. You'd think that they would charge for online or something. I mean hell it doesn't have to be $50 but one of the suites in Sony had to say, "Yeah um we are losing mad money we need to find a way to make more revenue." and surely enough someone else must have said, "Hey MS is making a killing off of XBL why don't we charge a fee as well albeit smaller as to maintain more attractive or what not."

I mean from a business standpoint it does have me scratching my head. I mean these guys need to find every way possible to make money seeing as how the PS3 is currently a financial disaster.

Then again things like this could be a huge turn off and turn more people towards 360 and XBL but hey its speculation.

Your thoughts.

Soxenhart

Sony still LOSE money every PS3 sold me thinks.

Apparently a lot of product placement exists in Home like that silly red bull airplane game.

The amount of advertising money Sony gets from corporations advertising on Home surely offsets the costs.

Its just a shame gamers actually think HOME means something when its just a way fro Sony to make money off of ads.

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

I mean don't get me wrong I'm glad that they don't and in a perfect world XBL would be free as well. But when you have a company that has squandered all of its PS2 profits in 2 years with the PS3 and they are looking for ways to make revenue and profit. You'd think that they would charge for online or something. I mean hell it doesn't have to be $50 but one of the suites in Sony had to say, "Yeah um we are losing mad money we need to find a way to make more revenue." and surely enough someone else must have said, "Hey MS is making a killing off of XBL why don't we charge a fee as well albeit smaller as to maintain more attractive or what not."

I mean from a business standpoint it does have me scratching my head. I mean these guys need to find every way possible to make money seeing as how the PS3 is currently a financial disaster.

Then again things like this could be a huge turn off and turn more people towards 360 and XBL but hey its speculation.

Your thoughts.

Soxenhart

Did you really just say that? :|

http://play.tm/wire/click/2288746/

LOL bro research before posting because sony is making more money with the PS3 than microsoft with the 360! I am not saying that sony sells more PS3's but theyre expensive so they earn more money =) just look at the stats and you will see!Soxenhart

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

I mean don't get me wrong I'm glad that they don't and in a perfect world XBL would be free as well. But when you have a company that has squandered all of its PS2 profits in 2 years with the PS3 and they are looking for ways to make revenue and profit. You'd think that they would charge for online or something. I mean hell it doesn't have to be $50 but one of the suites in Sony had to say, "Yeah um we are losing mad money we need to find a way to make more revenue." and surely enough someone else must have said, "Hey MS is making a killing off of XBL why don't we charge a fee as well albeit smaller as to maintain more attractive or what not."

I mean from a business standpoint it does have me scratching my head. I mean these guys need to find every way possible to make money seeing as how the PS3 is currently a financial disaster.

Then again things like this could be a huge turn off and turn more people towards 360 and XBL but hey its speculation.

Your thoughts.

Soxenhart

Unbelivable, simply wow. This is why Business and Econ should be prerquisites for SW posting. You're claiming that since the PS3 is more expensive they earn more money? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

You realize that the 360 and the Wii selling for less money make more money than a PS3 sale right? You know why? Because even though the PS3 is sold at a higher price tag its sold at a loss, while the other two consoles even though they are cheaper they sell for a profit.

How the hell can Sony earn more money on PS3s when they sell for a loss LOL.

You have no idea what you are talking about. If Sony is making more money with PS3 then MS with 360 then how did the PS3 lose more money then the PS2 made profit?

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3169439

In other words how is a console that has erased the last near decade of PS2 profits making more money then the 360?

I think you are the one that needs to do some research.