Why do lems insist Sony will charge for online play next gen?

When no evidence exists to support this.

Sony have taken a different route this gen than MS, they have piled up the onine passes, and offered PS+, a way to get sub money without preventing people from playing half a game they already own if they chose not to subscribe.

More recently they did a survey of different 'tiers' of PS+, so that if you pay more, you get more benefits, such as discounts on every item on the PS store.

Sony have used free online as a selling point over the competition, and it works. I would never pay for Xbox live, when I can get PSN for free. (although those free trial codes that come with 360 games are handy :lol: )

Just wonder why lems are so certain they will charge for online play next gen, when nothing suggests they will.

Is it because they are trying to justify the money they have spent on live this gen? or because they are certain that MS will be charging them again next gen?

Or does some evidence exist that Sony will be charging? I'd like to see it if so.

I Don't insist but rather think that it's just logical :o

Sony's been bleeding a bit this gen and watching their competitor make bank on it's on-line strategy this gen and since they are a for profit company well, lets just say if they don't charge next gen, I'll be extremely :shock:

That is unless the unthinkable happens and MS announces they will not charge a fee for XBLG next gen. but to me, that snowball in hell has a better chance. :P

I Don't insist but rather think that it's just logical :o

Sony's been bleeding a bit this gen and watching their competitor make bank on it's on-line strategy this gen and since they are a for profit company well, lets just say if they don't charge next gen, I'll be extremely :shock:

That is unless the unthinkable happens and MS announces they will not charge a fee for XBLG next gen. but to me, that snowball in hell has a better chance. :P

SecretPolice

I never seen any threads on Lems insisting on anything. But it seems like it would be a smart Move by Sony to do so.

They are jaded that they have to pay to play online. Heil68

Whatever they are doing right now clearly isnt working. Kaz Hirai said a while back that PSN isnt even profitable (meaning that they lose millions every year running the service) and their projected estimation for it to become profitable was 2012. Unfortunately, this was back in 2010 BEFORE the PSN hack (when PSN lost $2 billion dollars).

What cows just refuse to understand is that SONY IS PISSING AWAY MONEY. Cows want to bury their heads in the sand, while everybody sings kumbiya and blows smoke up their ass, and ignore the fact that Sony is PISSING away BILLIONS of dollars, and NOTHING seems to be changing.

Not saying their "doomed" but if you cant clearly understand a financial report, or the basic concepts of numbers, that is your problem. They just increased their losses to $6.4 BILLION dollars for this year. I want you to look at that number again. 6.4 BILLION. Now, I want you to understand that Sony is only worth 18 billion right now. They are taking a loss on EVERYTHING they are doing right now, PS3 games that arent selling (and losing money), PSVita that is selling at a loss, and isnt moving software, they are on the verge of releasing PS4 (which means more losses, for at least the next couple years).

Yet cows for some reason think that Sony is going to magically spend uber amounts of money next gen making a powerful system, (losing more money) just to win a System Wars. Cows have got to be the most ignorant, selfish, self entitled group of internet nerds I have ever seen :lol:

Cows gonna cow.

If free isn't helping charging won't either. It's not very clear why xbox is more popular than the PS3 to be honest but online is not one of them. Really.. who really buys a game to play online besides CoD or BF? it would make no sense to invest in online that way. It won't do them any good... what they do have to do is reduce the cost of making their products.

I Don't insist but rather think that it's just logical :o

Sony's been bleeding a bit this gen and watching their competitor make bank on it's on-line strategy this gen and since they are a for profit company well, lets just say if they don't charge next gen, I'll be extremely :shock:

That is unless the unthinkable happens and MS announces they will not charge a fee for XBLG next gen. but to me, that snowball in hell has a better chance. :P

SecretPolice

Like you said a snowball in hell has a better chance....

Replying to what you said above, I don't think Sony will charge people to play online, it'll be a step backwards, unless they make PSN better in a way that justifies the price to pay.

Also Microsoft with its new market strategy of selling $99 Kinect 4GB Xbox 360 bundle with a 2-year $15 per month plan, I'm seeing THAT as next gen's XBLG setup. Assuming it works this gen...

If free isn't helping charging won't either. It's not very clear why xbox is more popular than the PS3 to be honest but online is not one of them. Really.. who really buys a game to play online besides CoD or BF? it would make no sense to invest in online that way. It won't do them any good... what they do have to do is reduce the cost of making their products.

Joedgabe

MS has shown that people will pay for online, that is reason enough.

I Don't insist but rather think that it's just logical :o

Sony's been bleeding a bit this gen and watching their competitor make bank on it's on-line strategy this gen and since they are a for profit company well, lets just say if they don't charge next gen, I'll be extremely :shock:

That is unless the unthinkable happens and MS announces they will not charge a fee for XBLG next gen. but to me, that snowball in hell has a better chance. :P

SecretPolice

Dont worry bro, the power of love will see Sony through. Who cares about making money, when you've:

-posted losses every year for the past 7 years

-flushed 80% of your company's net worth down the toilet

-lost 2/3rds of your marketshare,

-lost EVERY single penny you made off of the PS2 (the most successful console of all time :lol: )

-Are STILL losing money on most of the things you are doing

-losing money on unprofitable games gamers dont want to play,

-PSN outage losing them $2 billion dollars, PSN STILL not being profitable (and most likely wont ever become profitable within the next 3-5 years),

-Just released the PSVita and selling at a loss (and it wont be profitable for 3 years)

-are about to release PS4 (another investment that wont be profitable for 3 years)

-just posted a $6.4 billion dollar loss in ONE year, when your company is only worth $18 Billion (the competition makes that in 3 months btw)

After all of that, who cares about a $2 billion dollar YEARLY revenue stream? What Sony is doing right now is clearly working. Gamers would rather play PSN because it is free and free is better, so their investment is clearly paying off.

they just want Sony to start charging to claim ownage on something. Lemmings are so desperate these days that they just want to remember that 2007 feel when they had things to brag about.

BUY POM!!!

It has been hinted at and overtly stated for the past two years in the magazine.

Sometimes subtle and sometimes very very clearly.

It is pretty much a lock that some form of subscription will be in place.

Also, I think everyone knows that when it does 'Cows' will come up with a

technicality for why it doesn't count or why they are not hypocritical for accepting

it.

Hm. Sony charging for online play is pretty risky, methinks. They are pretty much going to be pitching it to a crowd that is used to being able to play online for free. Some will ragequit, some will just pay the fee. What they probably won't get is people deciding to switch over from another platform. The people using different platform are happy with their service and even if they improved PSN to be on par or ever better than anything else on the market, they wouldn't just decide "Well, I'd better get on PSN too even though all of my friends are on XBL/Steam/Ninty Network."

Still Sony may decide to just accept that the userbase will shrink, charge for online play, monetize whoever they can and forget the rest.

Hm. Sony charging for online play is pretty risky, methinks. They are pretty much going to be pitching it to a crowd that is used to being able to play online for free. Some will ragequit, some will just pay the fee. What they probably won't get is people deciding to switch over from another platform. The people using different platform are happy with their service and even if they improved PSN to be on par or ever better than anything else on the market, they wouldn't just decide "Well, I'd better get on PSN too even though all of my friends are on XBL/Steam/Ninty Network."

Still Sony may decide to just accept that the userbase will shrink, charge for online play, monetize whoever they can and forget the rest.

stizz-

You forget that Sony's in the business for the money just like Nintendo & Microsoft are. They're not in the gaming industry to please some fanboys on the internet.

it's bad for consumers but smart for business. I don't see why they wouldn't. I hope they don't though.

[QUOTE="stizz-"]

Hm. Sony charging for online play is pretty risky, methinks. They are pretty much going to be pitching it to a crowd that is used to being able to play online for free. Some will ragequit, some will just pay the fee. What they probably won't get is people deciding to switch over from another platform. The people using different platform are happy with their service and even if they improved PSN to be on par or ever better than anything else on the market, they wouldn't just decide "Well, I'd better get on PSN too even though all of my friends are on XBL/Steam/Ninty Network."

Still Sony may decide to just accept that the userbase will shrink, charge for online play, monetize whoever they can and forget the rest.

Shinobi120

You forget that Sony's in the business for the money just like Nintendo & Microsoft are. They're not in the gaming industry to please some fanboys on the internet.

And that's exactly why they need to lure the consumer in and not out.

The free online multiplayer is a great marketing tool to achieve that. Maybe this is why the Europeans has chosen the PS3 over Xbox don't you think? The Xbox came out a year earlier yet the PS3 has surpassed its sales in every region but the US.

[QUOTE="Shinobi120"]

[QUOTE="stizz-"]

Hm. Sony charging for online play is pretty risky, methinks. They are pretty much going to be pitching it to a crowd that is used to being able to play online for free. Some will ragequit, some will just pay the fee. What they probably won't get is people deciding to switch over from another platform. The people using different platform are happy with their service and even if they improved PSN to be on par or ever better than anything else on the market, they wouldn't just decide "Well, I'd better get on PSN too even though all of my friends are on XBL/Steam/Ninty Network."

Still Sony may decide to just accept that the userbase will shrink, charge for online play, monetize whoever they can and forget the rest.

Gue1

You forget that Sony's in the business for the money just like Nintendo & Microsoft are. They're not in the gaming industry to please some fanboys on the internet.

And that's exactly why they need to lure the consumer in and not out.

The free online multiplayer is a great marketing tool to achieve that. Maybe this is why the Europeans has chosen the PS3 over Xbox don't you think? The Xbox came out a year earlier yet the PS3 has surpassed its sales in every region but the US.

Only because that the PS3 was riding off of the big success of the PS2 & that they done tons of price drops just to even stay competitive to the 360 in sales.

Business wise,it makes a lot of sense and it is a smart move.

But I don't like it.

MS has shown that people will pay for online, that is reason enough.

rzepak

This.

It is low blow to consumer, though. You pay for the online gaming with isp and game.

Why do cows insist sony isn't dying?

It just sounds logical when Sony has never posted a profit on PSN. They've got to do something to start making some moolah.

When no evidence exists to support this.

Sony have taken a different route this gen than MS, they have piled up the onine passes, and offered PS+, a way to get sub money without preventing people from playing half a game they already own if they chose not to subscribe.

More recently they did a survey of different 'tiers' of PS+, so that if you pay more, you get more benefits, such as discounts on every item on the PS store.

Sony have used free online as a selling point over the competition, and it works. I would never pay for Xbox live, when I can get PSN for free. (although those free trial codes that come with 360 games are handy :lol: )

Just wonder why lems are so certain they will charge for online play next gen, when nothing suggests they will.

Is it because they are trying to justify the money they have spent on live this gen? or because they are certain that MS will be charging them again next gen?

Or does some evidence exist that Sony will be charging? I'd like to see it if so.

BibiMaghoo

Why do cows insist sony isn't dying?

TopTierHustler

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

Why do cows insist sony isn't dying?

Nonstop-Madness

They fact they ignore these things is funny.

i don't see how they can charge.

they are still years behind xbl in refinement.

who is going to pay for the 2nd or 3rd best subscrption service when it comes to consoles?

It just sounds logical when Sony has never posted a profit on PSN. They've got to do something to start making some moolah.

Raymundo_Manuel

3 years ago they were worth $45 billion, now they are worth $18 and falling. They are also projecting for the losses to INCREASE, and that wont change until 2014. (they said the same thing in 2010 about being profitable in 2012. Look where that turned out.) Dont you see, profit doesnt matter, the power of luv will power the Playstation 3!

i don't see how they can charge.

they are still years behind xbl in refinement.

who is going to pay for the 2nd or 3rd best subscrption service when it comes to consoles?

Riverwolf007

[QUOTE="Nonstop-Madness"][QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

Why do cows insist sony isn't dying?

TopTierHustler

They fact they ignore these things is funny.

[QUOTE="Nonstop-Madness"][QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

Why do cows insist sony isn't dying?

TopTierHustler

They fact they ignore these things is funny.

And the fact that Sony keeps just piling on more and more BILLIONS onto their projected losses like nothing. Literally, pulling it out of thin air, and not even blinking, and they arent even doing ANYTHING about it.

They just announced a 3 billion loss a few months ago, and then they just slapped another 3.4 billion on it without blinking. PSN has NEVER made a profit, and they projected in 2010 to be profitable in 2012 (before the PSN hack happened. Dont even DREAM about it now). Want to know the worst part about it? Not only will Cows will say the same thing when they slap the NEXT 3 billion loss out of thin air, but it doesnt seem like Sony is doing anything about it either.

Both cows and Sony want the issue to just go away by ignoring it.

they already are...psn plus

so next gen to go fully pay to play at a cheaper price then xbox live is not far fetched thinking

they just doing a test run on it this gen to get feed back is what i think

i fully expect them to go that route next gen

which now makes the Wii U more appealing if that happens

assuming xbox next and ps4 don't blow them outta the 3rd party support next gen with graphics

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

[QUOTE="Nonstop-Madness"] Why do lemmings insist that Sony is dying ? Lemmings are more worried about Sony dying than Cows. Nonstop-Madness

They fact they ignore these things is funny.

Sales have always been a factor in the metagame. That has never changed, and it never will change. The only people who want it to change, are the people who are losing. Those very same people, coincidentally, are the ones who created those rules in the first place.

On topic to your post, profits do matter, because, it WILL affect the PS4 whether people want to believe it or not. Do you think Sony is going to take a huge risk investment on the console? How do you expect them to go about that? Materializing another several billion dollars they cant afford, out of thin air?

The tiers system would be good because it means instead of paying for one fixed subscription I can choose the subscription that best suits my needs, I rarely buy from PS Store and hardly play online so a cheaper subscription would do me fine, kind of like Mobile Phone contracts, i choose one that won't break the bank yet provides the services I want. Pretty good idea if you ask me, one of very few good ideas Sony has provided to their customers.

On topic: Lems are just jelly that we can choose to pay or not, if they don't pay they get practically nothing, it's almost like paying for oxygen to them, they buy the console to play games not to sit in single player for the rest of the console's life so it's only natural they try to justify paying for online.

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

i don't see how they can charge.

they are still years behind xbl in refinement.

who is going to pay for the 2nd or 3rd best subscrption service when it comes to consoles?

BibiMaghoo

i care about putting in a game and not sitting there for a 10 min update or patch followed by a 6 min install.

i would pay for that in a heartbeat.

people want to say psn is free all the time but it is bullshyt because the only difference is psn charges you in time instead of cash.

i can make more cash, i can't make more time.

[QUOTE="Raymundo_Manuel"]

It just sounds logical when Sony has never posted a profit on PSN. They've got to do something to start making some moolah.

StrongDeadlift

3 years ago they were worth $45 billion, now they are worth $18 and falling. They are also projecting for the losses to INCREASE, and that wont change until 2014. (they said the same thing in 2010 about being profitable in 2012. Look where that turned out.) Dont you see, profit doesnt matter, the power of luv will power the Playstation 3!

[QUOTE="BibiMaghoo"][QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

i don't see how they can charge.

they are still years behind xbl in refinement.

who is going to pay for the 2nd or 3rd best subscrption service when it comes to consoles?

Riverwolf007

i care about putting in a game and not sitting there for a 10 min update or patch followed by a 6 min install.

i would pay for that in a heartbeat.

people want to say psn is free all the time but it is bullshyt because the only difference is psn charges you in time instead of cash.

i can make more cash, i can't make more time.

whats sad is some here might really think like this. They have said Sony is taking one for the team. Maybe the "team" should all subscribe to ps+ and support Sony.cainetao11

This. But dont get me wrong, my posts ITT arent about justifying the price of XBL, I do think it should be free, etc.

My posts were mainly making fun of Cows dismissal of the fact that Sony is in deep sh!t. Ive also heard that "taking one for the team" comment on here :lol:.

Sony could post another $8 billion dollar loss tomorrow, and cows will act like things are business as usual at Sony. Where do they think this money is coming from?

To be fair, its because EVERYONE is assuming MS will go fully casual next gen, and its not an entirely wrong thing to think given their current marketing and games.

Its kind of hard to predict what Sony would do when their approach the last few generations have been wildly inconsistent, so with PS+ and online passes its at least plausible they might try this. Of course its not a big deal when you consider how MS already charges for online, so its like a fat guy making fun of a skinny guy because he might get fat with his eating habits.

[QUOTE="BibiMaghoo"][QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

i don't see how they can charge.

they are still years behind xbl in refinement.

who is going to pay for the 2nd or 3rd best subscrption service when it comes to consoles?

Riverwolf007

i care about putting in a game and not sitting there for a 10 min update or patch followed by a 6 min install.

i would pay for that in a heartbeat.

people want to say psn is free all the time but it is bullshyt because the only difference is psn charges you in time instead of cash.

i can make more cash, i can't make more time.

EDIT: Also, lol. You CAN pay to not waste that time, its called automatic updates, and is a feature of PS+......

Because they are jealous, they know that it sucks playing for online and they see PS3 owners across the river having a great time and playing online for FREE and having more money to save on those new awesome exclusives that they keep getting, and it makes them start doing massive damage control.

P2P gaming costs vitrually nothing, there is no real cost associated with it, Lems are in a constant state of denile and lying to themeselves in a vein attempt at trying to justify the fee. They wish XBL was free too, they just won't admit it.

It's funny how they complain about PSN beng free, but they won't complain about XBL charging. Rather than get pissed off at PSN they should get pissed off at XBL instead and ask for it to be free, ask the fundamental question:

"What am I truly getting with an XBL subsrciption"? "

Why can't XBL have free online like PSN and everyone else"?

"Why am I the only one who has to pay"?

They won't ever do that though, they are called Lemmings for a reason. MS will raise the price of XBL again, might not be this gen, but it will most certainly happen again. Have no doubt about it, they will try to make excuses and try to defend the fee once again.