Lunchtime Discussion: PSN Premium
If it was done properly, could it work out for the better?Published 01/12/2009 at 12:00 by CaptainMurdo
Lunchtime Discussion: Board Games [37]
Lunchtime Discussion: AI [35]
Lunchtime Discussion: Advertising [35]
As I am sure you are all aware, Xbox Live is a paid for service and the Playstation Network is free. But let’s think: What if the PSN wasn’t free? What if Sony slightly undercut Microsoft but gave just as good, if not better, services and connection speeds to each paying customer and the same existing service to non-payers. Would you be interested in paying £3.99 a month or £35.99 a year (yes, I checked the XBL prices) for a faster, more stable connection to every online service Sony offer, including iPlayer, PS Store (Video and Game), ad-free Vidzone and maybe many more?
The small price might also mean more applications to everyone, not just the Premium users – although they would get priority. The Beeb certainly aren’t happy with Microsoft for only allowing Gold users the iPlayer capability, if it ever comes. I currently have both XBL and PSN and must say I am impressed with the speed and instantaneousness (just go with it) of XBL. Things just work. No need to trophy sync or even wait on your friends list to appear. It’s seamless.
Rumours will always fly around regarding this subject but what do you, the customer who perhaps paid £425 at launch, want from the PSN? If Sony offered more, would you pay more?
Comments
Please note that all comments are the opinion of the individual author and not TheSixthAxis.
deadairspace | 01/12/2009 12:03
Member
263 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
I’m pretty certain that I’d pay for a PSN premium if it meant more and better! Although I personally can’t fault the current PSN service that much – but then I don’t have an Xbox so maybe I’d have a different view point if I did.
Erroneus | 01/12/2009 12:04
Wanted "Trophy Hunter" but was too late.
2982 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
I would pay for a premium service, if it was priced around 25£. It should include things like instant trophy sync, no adds in vidzone, early access to beta and demoes. VIP avatars, VIP themes and maybe even some sort of “vip” gamercard with more options to tweak in size, color.
spooner_22 | 01/12/2009 12:09
Member
1184 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
Instant trophy sync…how about ANY trophy sync at all!!?? Mine still isn’t working!
djdustb | 01/12/2009 12:47
Member
1309 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
I like the idea that you have come up (what is includeded in the package) but the price does not sit right with me. I just feel that £300 a year is a lot to shell out for on tope of normal games and the console itself.
djdustb | 01/12/2009 12:48
Member
1309 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
I really need to spell check before posting.
Erroneus | 01/12/2009 14:16
Wanted "Trophy Hunter" but was too late.
2982 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
The 25£ would be per year off course
Roynaldo | 01/12/2009 12:05
Member
2999 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
Im sure it would benefit Sony no end but, well, No!
spooner_22 | 01/12/2009 12:08
Member
1184 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
I wouldn’t want to pay…but ultimately if it came down to it I probably would. To be honest, I think PSN is great the way it is…they don’t need to add endless applications…just leave it…whats wrong with just Games, Vidzone, Facebook integration and iPlayer…yea people want cross game chat, but other than that I can;t see what else needs to be done. Likelyhood is they will end up charging, and I mean just for what we have now, maybe the free one will just allow you to play games…but I wouldnt care coz I never use Vidzone or iPlayer anyway!
shields_t | 01/12/2009 12:55
Member
1647 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2008
Agreed, I also like the PSN just the way it is, but I’d pay a nominal monthly fee depending on what was provided for that price. I take it £3.99 is the amount Microsoft charge for a gold xbox live account? What do xbox users get for that?
shields_t | 01/12/2009 12:59
Member
1647 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2008
Sorry, didn’t notice cc_star answered my question on price, but can anyone tell me what xbox users get for that price?
flatspikes | 02/12/2009 13:25
Member
586 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
Gold Members Get:
1. Access to deal of the week
2. Access to demo’s before Silver members
3. Access on online multiplayer
4. Access to Sky Player (if you have a subscription)
5. Access to Facebook App.
6. Access to Twitter App.
7. Access to Last FM App.
8. Access to 1 in 100 game
9. Xbox live party
10. Access to latest videos & trailers first..
I think there maybe more too… I only signed up to it last night!
bunimomike | 01/12/2009 12:09
Member
4810 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
Here’s a crazy idea. Why don’t Sony sneak a smidge on-top of current prices. Enough to make a difference to them but not to affect us individually. Then the heavy PSN users will be paying more towards the upkeep of the PSN. The light users (read: someone like me not streaming stuff, etc) chipping in a little less. Or am I extra-strength cuckoo.
hazelam | 01/12/2009 12:42
Member
3951 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
haven’t they already been doing that?
for europe and psp titles at least.
TheShepanator | 01/12/2009 18:34
Member
562 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2009
Why don’t we just send sony a cheque to give them our souls and be done with it.
nouveller | 01/12/2009 12:09
Member
66 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2009
If the UK gets a decent broadband overhaul rather than the average of around 3MB then I might consider it. But for heavy duty downloading, I’m guessing this is the big pull for the ‘premium service’, my PS3 would have to be on 24/7 to get any of the content.
DoodlesROCKS | 01/12/2009 12:11
Member
147 TSA Points | Member since: Sep 2009
I’d certainly pay for a premium service if it gauranteed better stability and the ability to sync trophies!!…(or should that come standard anyway?!?)
cc_star | 01/12/2009 12:13
Team TSA: Writer
7891 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
I would pay roughly the same amount as an Xbox Live Gold Subscription (about £26 best price) to have a PSN which was much improved than the current one
a) Faster, must faster…. why can’t I download at the same rate as I can from my PC
b) More complete, eg. Has a web interface, so I can browse the store from anywhere, and queue downloads from any PC
c) More reliable… I’ve never had connection problems with the PSN, but some games seem to have – Fat Princess is almost unplayable because of lag and dropped voicechat, and BF:1943 suffers from random disconnects and dropped voicechate – I know this is down to the developer needs to tweak their titles further but that simply wouldn’t happen on XBL as MS’s framework and the fact they own & run all the sever farms means it’s their responsibility, and they don’t have the finger pointing which goes on between SCEE & 3rd Party devs.
d) Mandatory demos….
e) Additional XMB features for PSN premium members… Party text/chat rooms which can game launch into the same in-game lobby, and when you finish the game you return to the party chatroom, swap disks and all game launch into another game’s lobby… instead of the million different ways of inviting people we have now, only to find they don’t always work
So yes, I would pay an equivelent amount to XBL Gold (£26 best price) to have the above features…. the free option (as it is now) is here to stay…
Raen | 01/12/2009 12:16
Team TSA: Writer
3724 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
Just to clarify do you mean RRP of £26, or you can purchase for £26?
spooner_22 | 01/12/2009 12:20
Member
1184 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
Mandatory demos?? Like you have to play game demos you mean? Why would they do that?
I dunno why people get problems downloading…mines probably faster than my PC, i get 1mb per second or maybe a bit faster on PS3
RadioactiveMouse | 01/12/2009 12:26
Member
552 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2009
There haven’t been many demos on any consoles recently. Not like it really matters though, as I’m pretty busy with L4D2, AC2 and Battlefield Bad Company 2 Beta
Raen | 01/12/2009 13:20
Team TSA: Writer
3724 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
As in a developer has to release a demo for any downloadable title. All XBLA titles have a demo, it’s in the rules.
jacklum | 01/12/2009 15:40
Member
991 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
I played 100 games on BF:1943 with no disconnects whatsoever. Meanwhile, the 360 launch of BF:1943 was much more problematic by all accounts.
Tuffcub | 01/12/2009 12:13
Team TSA: Writer
4075 TSA Points | Member since: Dec 2008
PSN is fine for me as it is, tyhe only thing I may consider paying for is no ads in Vidzone, that’s about it.
kevatron400 | 02/12/2009 12:58
Don't call him Kevatron400.
1763 TSA Points | Member since: Dec 2008
I agree with you on this one, but if they could keep the PSN as it is for now, but perhaps offer more if you pay, that’s fine. If there was a compulsory charge (like there is on the 360?) that would ruin it for me.
freezebug2 | 01/12/2009 12:15
Member
1424 TSA Points | Member since: Dec 2008
If they kept the quality of PSN as it is now as a Silver service for free and introduced a paid for Gold service that had all the advantages and quaility that has been mentioned then that might work as no one would feel pushed into paying for the service and still have a choice. Oh and Bronze could be people like Huntertryfe who has only got a dial up connection….lol, only joking mate.
RadioactiveMouse | 01/12/2009 12:16
Member
552 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2009
Don’t you think it would cause a scism within the current customers?
Personally I would see the whole splitting the consumer content as a wrong move. I would air towards value added services such as a monthly cost for those wishing to use the movie rental service or looking for early access to specific pre-release demos (like pre-order bonuses, kinda like Qore). PSN already has an area for a subscription based service in the account management so I can’t see it being to difficult to implement.
Charging for anything to do with gaming on a console that has prided itself as a free online gaming service seems like a a contradiction in terms.
lewis815 | 01/12/2009 12:16
Member
731 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
I must be the only person in the world that has a faster connection on my PS3 than my Xbox! And also the only person that has never had a problem with the PSN, but multiple problems with Xbox Live..
Raen | 01/12/2009 12:18
Team TSA: Writer
3724 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
Yep pretty much.
RadioactiveMouse | 01/12/2009 12:18
Member
552 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2009
My PS3 downloads are much quicker than my flatmates Live downloads too.
Not really sure why seeing as we have horrific download speeds here.
pvwradtke | 01/12/2009 12:22
Member
222 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
Other than getting downloadable games (demos and purchases) and game videos, I don’t have much use for all PSN features. I mean, last time I played online was BlazBlue and it was in August. I don’t care for paid premium services, as long as I can have my digital content and I can play online every once in a while. But I do have to say that *IF* I had to pay to play online (as in XBL), I’d have never played any game online (except for free weekends, that’s it).
ytevo79 | 01/12/2009 12:26
Member
118 TSA Points | Member since: Jun 2009
I am more then happy with my free PSN and would never pay to play online. Gaming is expensive enough as it is.
But if Sony want to include a premium service then thats fine with me as long as its the ’same’ standard service that keeps on going and we dont start getting left behind which wouldn’t surprise me so it forces you to go premium.
RadioactiveMouse | 01/12/2009 12:31
Member
552 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2009
That’s what worries me more than anything with a split tier structure. It’s only natural for a business to try and get more people to move onto the service that nets them more dosh
I like the free service at the moment but see that the service needs to rack up the money in order to improve. I think they should try to broaden the PSN to other devices in order to get a wider audience and therefore more likelyhood of return on the content on PSN that can be bought.
3shirts | 01/12/2009 12:30
Member
2500 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
I think there is a danger that people ‘forget’ that PSN is part of the purchase price. I bought my PS3 on launch day so I paid a lot of money for something that included free online services etc for life. If they did create a premium service it would offer little incentive for them to improve the free one which, lets NOT forget, we did pay for, however indirectly
scavenga | 01/12/2009 12:57
Member
537 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
Exactly.
I’d never pay for a full net service – ISP costs are brutal as they are.
I’d just have to give up on any online play, and swear at Sony under my breath each and every day.
Paranoimia | 01/12/2009 15:00
Member
482 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
I disagree. Like you, I paid £425 at launch. But I paid for the console, and the console alone. In fact, what I paid didn’t (at the time) even cover what it cost Sony to build the console.
Everything I paid for was in the box, and as such, everything since then, and including the free PSN access, is a bonus.
Even if we do look at it your way, it was never, ever claimed that PSN would be free ‘for life’. Though I do agree/accept that it would be very difficult for Sony to get away with charging for online gaming now, and I honestly don’t believe they will. Having said that, MS do effectively charge for access to free services in Twitter and Facebook, so I suppose it’s not entirely impossible.
As for the question in the article – yes, I would pay, *IF* the services it offered were of use to me. But if online gaming remains free (as I’m sure it will), it’s difficult to see what they could add to a subscription service to tempt people to pay.
I personally would never use cross-game chat. But a Party Chat would be nice. If they combined that with an offer of 3 or 4 HD rentals from the movie store when new films are released, rather than the current SD purchases only, I’d might pay.
Paranoimia | 01/12/2009 15:04
Member
482 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
And I need to check my replies better for spelling and grammar.
cc_star | 01/12/2009 15:31
Team TSA: Writer
7891 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Its an integral part of the purchase decision, not a bonus… its not like Sony suddenly switched on online-multiplayer two years into the consoles lifespan, if they did that – then it would be a bonus.
MS aren’t charging for free services… Its not like subscriptions have gone up since they offered them, or they’ve only offered them to a new dearer ‘platinum’ subscription service, its merely added value to what is already there.
Sony have recently gone on record as saying what is already there with the PSN will continue to be free, and if they do a premium offering then it will indeed include extra benefits.
I can’t see them chucking free games or movies in, but instead making a more robust infrastructure which isn’t as subject to the voodoo powers of the internet gods as the current one seems to be.
If they add in robust party features and game-launching from the XMB, discounts on content (like a deal of the week, for premium subscribers) and compel developers to make demos for all downloadable titles, then I’d pay as much as Gold costs (£26 best price)
If however the premium service doesn’t come with quantifiable improvements and benefits then I’ll carry on with the ‘good enough’ service which is currently offered for free.