intelfreak

• 11:58am EST - January 10th, 2009
• 1

old news

Simi

• 12:27pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 2

This is scary and sad... After playing LBP, I now have a level of expectation very high concerning the customability* (if thats a word) of the new games.. Seriously.. 5 bucks for a virtual suit? WTF!?

RocManX

• 12:52pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 3

The sad sad gamers that contributed to this . . . . . makes me sick

iamcorbindallas

• 1:03pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 4

people will pay rediculous amounts of money to be special.

Zephyr

• 2:09pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 5

I really hope that they consider cutting the prices. Many things within home are stupid and need to get adjusted. They said that they are listening to the feedback and therefore I don't see why they won't change what's bad and make it good.

ephracis

• 2:10pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 6

maybe now they can afford lowering the price of the console?

Ocelot1987

• 3:27pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 7

I'm glad sony's making some money back from the cost of producing the PS3. I like the company so I'm not really mad about them making a ridiculous amount of cash on something stupid. Its not my money anyway. lol

Punisher99

• 3:27pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 8

@#6 one million dollars doesnt even come close to even scratching the surface of the amount of money Sony have lost in selling PS3s.

ephracis

• 3:31pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 9

#8: This is just the beginning of Home, I bet there will be even more money earned as they put more items into it.

area51employee

• 4:50pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 10

would you guys rather have to pay $50 a year to have the online experience or pay  .49 cents for a virtual shirt?  i'd opt to pay the .49 cents for the shirt.  think about it. 

Muzikguy

• 5:07pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 11

I thought that was going to be the plan in the first place?

Free_Agent

• 5:11pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 12

 @10

I would be glad to pay $50 a year for the PSN if it could match the speed/content that live offers, but it can't. Hence, free service. I'm not complaining about having a free service, but the PSN is the PS3's weakest link imo. We need free trials for every game. I can download 6 times as many game demos at twice the speed. No need to even mention how superior the TV/Movie content is on live. I'm not saying that Live doesn't have it's own problems, but the PSN is free for a reason.  It has improved alot in the last 5-6 months though. Hopefully Sony just keeps the ball rolling.

droopysp

• 6:44pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 13

and its still only in beta mode

blacksharinganx

• 7:41pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 14

user generated content whts tht like making them?

French

• 7:51pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 15

@12
Isn't the whole point of online gaming like Live and PSN about playing games online?  They both offer the same thing in that sense, yet one is free and one costs money.  I can't see spending $50 a year on demos.

El Penetrator

• 11:13pm EST - January 10th, 2009
• 16

Took them all this time to make 1 million? That's pathetic...

tanner1

• 1:48am EST - January 11th, 2009
• 17

All iwant is party voice chat up 2 8 players, also a pool table & bowing alley in my sh*g pad

stennex

• 6:40am EST - January 11th, 2009
• 18

The RedBull flting game was great. Imagine millions of gamers on a server and Home was still able to generate great graphics. In the future i believe all gaming will done from servers hosted by these big corporations. The days of brick and mortar are numbered. Gametap and Steam have already started that. Home really shows how powerful the PS3 is as a online networked system.

terminator12259

• 7:04am EST - January 11th, 2009
• 19

good to see sony making some money off of home, they developed it long enough it is good to see they get some of their money back

Xandure

• 7:49am EST - January 11th, 2009
• 20

I will spend as much money as I want to make me FEEL SPECIAL.