Analysts: Sony could defray costs by stripping down PSN’s free services

[Scrubs42]

I envision Sony putting PSN into tvs Blu ray players and laptops so the service just wouldn't be limited to gamers. Sony can make more money thru tv buyers that want Vudu Netflix Hulu Cinema Now by offering PSN to the mass consumers thru PSN subscription service.

This, However we got to stop think of PSN as PSN. It's now SEN. Sony Entertainment Network.

If they did go to an all paid tier system, I would see interesting in having a tier that would allow you access to PS+, Netflix, VUDU and other subscription services. The fact is you have currently we have to pay twice to get access sub services, ISP and the Service.
I can't see many people wanting to pay thrice, ISP, SEN, Sub Service.

If Sony could strike a deal with these Sub Services I would imagine a lot of people would probably take up the more expensive option to have access to many of these Sub Services and to be able to play online aswell.

However someone mentioned earlier their 360 is a dust collector due to sub fees.
I can see this happening to the PS3 aswell for casual gamers who might only have time to play less than 10 hours a week of their favourite game (most casual game out there is COD, and the only replayablitly in that is online) saying it's not worth the cost.

Our Sony Bluray Player + Surround Sound System has an XMB screen similar to the PS3, yet I never use it, as to access the internet I need to buy a SONY bluray player dongle and there is nothing there that interests me. However I would warrant a purchase if my Subscription SEN account would allow me access to Netflix + Music. Then I could be playing in the other room, while my girlfriend is watching a movie. (However that would have to allow the same account signed into two devices, must be a way around that, surely allowing it if they are on the same network/router)

[Bigdoggy]

okay, this is the part I don't get. Why in the blue hell are certain people on here wanting to actually pay for a online service, forget the fact that it will be different, it WONT. the only difference is you will have to pay. "I would rather pay for a free service" in my own words, do us all a favor and take a hike. just because you pay for a service does NOT mean it will be better. o.O geezes

Anyway, Will the things that are free still be free? YES

will knew things be in a subscription base once the PS4 hits? YES.

some people need to use their head. if they strip down the PSN service and took things that were free and made it so you had to pay, I am 100% certain you will see a HUGE decline in future Playstation purchases and in that case Sony will definitely lose out on potential sales that they could benefit from.

[Dennis Dyack]

some people need to use their head. if they strip down the PSN service and took things that were free and made it so you had to pay, I am 100% certain you will see a HUGE decline in future Playstation purchases and in that case Sony will definitely lose out on potential sales that they could benefit from.

Lose to who? MS already has a subscription and the Wii/Wii U cant compete with the Playstations's games. Sony knows that they can charge and people will pay.

[Bigdoggy]

Lose to who? MS already has a subscription and the Wii/Wii U cant compete with the Playstations's games. Sony knows that they can charge and people will pay.

you can't turn around and charge for services that are free. right now they are building there fanbase back up, so things are free right now, if those same things later on the PS3 become subscription based, I already know for a fact the sales of PS3 unites will drop dramatically. PS4 units will also drop compared to a 3rd Xbox console which a lot of people may move right to if Sony does pull that bullshit.

Take current free services and turn around and charge for them = a disaster and I will be right here saying "I told you so". You can take a service that costs money and make it free without any problems but take a free service and then charge for it will create a disaster which sony doesn't need. honestly, to me it looks like some people want others to migrate over to the Xbox by saying "sony should take the current free service and charge for it" in all reality, that is what would happen, Xbox sales would actually climb, don't believe me? just do research on business strategies and within that "business ethics" that have failed.

Even I would move right to the Xbox if sony pulled that crap.

[Sufi]

^Exactly.

If I have to pay for PSN then I'll probably just move over to Xbox.

Though what would keep me is if PSN on PS4 was as good as Live is now, for free. I'm pretty sure they can easily do that, since PSP Vita already is doing somewhat of it.

[Kauldron]

okay, this is the part I don't get. Why in the blue hell are certain people on here wanting to actually pay for a online service, forget the fact that it will be different, it WONT. the only difference is you will have to pay. "I would rather pay for a free service" in my own words, do us all a favor and take a hike. just because you pay for a service does NOT mean it will be better. o.O geezes

Anyway, Will the things that are free still be free? YES

will knew things be in a subscription base once the PS4 hits? YES.

some people need to use their head. if they strip down the PSN service and took things that were free and made it so you had to pay, I am 100% certain you will see a HUGE decline in future Playstation purchases and in that case Sony will definitely lose out on potential sales that they could benefit from.

The mindset that "just because you are paying for a service makes it better" is the most perplexing bit of ignorance I've ever seen. I will never understand it.

[Dennis Dyack]

you can't turn around and charge for services that are free. right now they are building there fanbase back up, so things are free right now, if those same things later on the PS3 become subscription based, I already know for a fact the sales of PS3 unites will drop dramatically. PS4 units will also drop compared to a 3rd Xbox console which a lot of people may move right to if Sony does pull that bullshit.

Take current free services and turn around and charge for them = a disaster and I will be right here saying "I told you so". You can take a service that costs money and make it free without any problems but take a free service and then charge for it will create a disaster which sony doesn't need. honestly, to me it looks like some people want others to migrate over to the Xbox by saying "sony should take the current free service and charge for it" in all reality, that is what would happen, Xbox sales would actually climb, don't believe me? just do research on business strategies and within that "business ethics" that have failed.

Even I would move right to the Xbox if sony pulled that crap.

It doesn't make sense that a PS3 owner would jump ship becuase they have to pay for online play when the alternative is the same.

A true PS fan would stick with Sony since they will have to pay anyway. I just don't see someone who prefers the PS to the Xbox jumping ship when the end result is the same, paying for online play.

Leaving a gamers favorite exclusives with the same end result won't happen.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[MacP]

I see this happening only time will tell

[Sub-stance1]

It doesn't make sense that a PS3 owner would jump ship becuase they have to pay for online play when the alternative is the same.

A true PS fan would stick with Sony since they will have to pay anyway. I just don't see someone who prefers the PS to the Xbox jumping ship when the end result is the same, paying for online play.

Leaving a gamers favorite exclusives with the same end result won't happen.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

I agree with that, and honestly I really don't take people seriously when they say such things. Just like all this talk about "if MS or sony does this or that they will lose my support next gen" is mostly BS.

[Dennis Dyack]

I agree with that, and honestly I really don't take people seriously when they say such things. Just like all this talk about "if MS or sony does this or that they will lose my support next gen" is mostly BS.

It's all BS. People will pay, they always do.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[TEJ2025]

It's all BS. People will pay, they always do.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Not everybody. Some can't afford it.

[radgamer420]

Not everybody. Some can't afford it.

If that the case then they probably cant afford to buy a 3 or 400 dollar console and 60 dollar games either.

[Bigdoggy]

It doesn't make sense that a PS3 owner would jump ship becuase they have to pay for online play when the alternative is the same.

A true PS fan would stick with Sony since they will have to pay anyway. I just don't see someone who prefers the PS to the Xbox jumping ship when the end result is the same, paying for online play.

Leaving a gamers favorite exclusives with the same end result won't happen.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

no see, that's where you are completely wrong. "a true PS fan" don't pull that garbage out, it's not only ridiculous but ultra lame or should I say uber lame. lol my point still stands and I have yet to see a solid counter from anyone. the reason there isn't one is because I'm right on this matter, I know that I am.

you main question would be "why would I move to another console that does the same" well it's easy, because their 3rd party developer support is a lot stronger compared to current PS3 and that's a fact. right now I assume this could be the same for the PS4 (even though it's not out yet), unless I hear otherwise but whatever.

last time I checked PSN wasn't losing any money at all so I have no idea with "PSN is losing money" actually came from because that's pure bullshit.

they will just make multiple package options while trophy support and playing online is free, just like they have been doing. the $6.2b loss or whatever was from other departments. Sony did NOT lose 6.2b just from PSN so people can just toss that right out hte window because that is just dumb to begin with.

Where is all this so called research coming from, derpville? jeepers

[Sub-stance1]

no see, that's where you are completely wrong. "a true PS fan" don't pull that garbage out, it's not only ridiculous but ultra lame or should I say uber lame. lol my point still stands and I have yet to see a solid counter from anyone. the reason there isn't one is because I'm right on this matter, I know that I am.

you main question would be "why would I move to another console that does the same" well it's easy, because their 3rd party developer support is a lot stronger compared to current PS3 and that's a fact. right now I assume this could be the same for the PS4 (even though it's not out yet), unless I hear otherwise but whatever.

last time I checked PSN wasn't losing any money at all so I have no idea with "PSN is losing money" actually came from because that's pure bullshit.

they will just make multiple package options while trophy support and playing online is free, just like they have been doing. the $6.2b loss or whatever was from other departments. Sony did NOT lose 6.2b just from PSN so people can just toss that right out hte window because that is just dumb to begin with.

Where is all this so called research coming from, derpville? jeepers

Well, when you look at what sony's worth is now compared to what it used to be, $6.2 bil loss will hurt. Those losses can start to affect other divisions as well. That's a huge amount of money. That's enough to affect any corp no matter how large or rich they are.

[Dennis Dyack]

no see, that's where you are completely wrong. "a true PS fan" don't pull that garbage out, it's not only ridiculous but ultra lame or should I say uber lame. lol my point still stands and I have yet to see a solid counter from anyone. the reason there isn't one is because I'm right on this matter, I know that I am.

you main question would be "why would I move to another console that does the same" well it's easy, because their 3rd party developer support is a lot stronger compared to current PS3 and that's a fact. right now I assume this could be the same for the PS4 (even though it's not out yet), unless I hear otherwise but whatever.

last time I checked PSN wasn't losing any money at all so I have no idea with "PSN is losing money" actually came from because that's pure bullshit.

they will just make multiple package options while trophy support and playing online is free, just like they have been doing. the $6.2b loss or whatever was from other departments. Sony did NOT lose 6.2b just from PSN so people can just toss that right out hte window because that is just dumb to begin with.

Where is all this so called research coming from, derpville? jeepers

We'll just have to disagree on each and every point.

We can go back and forth but will never agree.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[Sufi]

It doesn't make sense that a PS3 owner would jump ship becuase they have to pay for online play when the alternative is the same.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

But it's not the same. I would take Live over PSN any day of the week if it were free.

[Bigdoggy]

We'll just have to disagree on each and every point.

We can go back and forth but will never agree.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

well you obviously made it perfectly clear that you will disagree just for the sake of disagreeing "we'll just have to disagree on each and every point" with that comment. therefor your input on this matter doesn't even matter to begin with o.O honestly, are you going to disagree when I said that Sony's $6.2b loss isn't actually on the PSN side of things. It's within there HDTV department and phones I believe as well as stereo equipment, speakers, etc etc.

not to long ago Sony said it was the HDTV department that created such a huge loss to begin with and that was just the stepping stone of it all. PSN hasn't created a loss.

you can't take a loss on those and aim it right at PSN saying that PSN created a loss of $6.2b or to even slightly aim such loss to PSN for PSN to make up for the difference, what the heck. o.O

[Chille]

It's all BS. People will pay, they always do.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

I wouldnt, id refuse to tbh, id just play my games offline

[Dennis Dyack]

I wouldnt, id refuse to tbh, id just play my games offline

But you would still buy a Playstation console?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[TEJ2025]

If that the case then they probably cant afford to buy a 3 or 400 dollar console and 60 dollar games either.

Not the case at all.

[radgamer420]

Not the case at all.

Didnt say it was the case for you. What I'm saying is if somebody can afford to buy a 3 or 400 dollar console with 60 dollar games then surely they can afford an online fee. But if somebody refuses to pay based on principle then that I can understand.

[Sufi]

Didnt say it was the case for you. What I'm saying is if somebody can afford to buy a 3 or 400 dollar console with 60 dollar games then surely they can afford an online fee. But if somebody refuses to pay based on principle then that I can understand.

That has never made sense to me.

If someone can buy a house, then can afford a ferrari too?

Just because you paid for something that is up there, doesn't mean you all of a sudden should have more money to spend elsewhere.

Not to mention, even if you had the money, it doesn't mean you want to spend it in that way.

[MATRIX 2]

That has never made sense to me.

If someone can buy a house, then can afford a ferrari too?

Just because you paid for something that is up there, doesn't mean you all of a sudden should have more money to spend elsewhere.

Not to mention, even if you had the money, it doesn't mean you want to spend it in that way.

It's more like saying if you can afford the house, then you can afford the property tax on it or electricity bill to run it.

[Sufi]

It's more like saying if you can afford the house, then you can afford the property tax on it or electricity bill to run it.

except bills don't cost the same amount that you will pay for the house in a few years down.

Not to mention, there are houses that have electricity, better (PC) or not as good (PS3) but have no cost to it.

point is that online play shouldn't cost money. it already costs the developers that money. they already charge us for that through their one-time purchase price.

just because a person can afford something, doesn't mean they should or that they would want to.

[radgamer420]

That has never made sense to me. If someone can buy a house, then can afford a ferrari too? Just because you paid for something that is up there, doesn't mean you all of a sudden should have more money to spend elsewhere. Not to mention, even if you had the money, it doesn't mean you want to spend it in that way.

Big difference between a Ferrari and a 60 dollar a year online fee. Is 60 dollars a year (most people dont even pay that)really going to make or break you? If so then you propably shouldn't be spending your money on a 3 or 400 dollar game console and 60 dollar games if things are really that tight. Now if you CAN afford it and just dont want to pay it then I already said that I can understand that. In fact I said that in the very post you quoted. How does that not make sense?