Part of the appeal of the PlayStation Network is that – currently at least – you don’t need to pay anything to play with your friends online. Of course, one could reasonably argue that much of the cost of running the network in this way is offset (that’s for another article entirely) but the fact is that you can buy a PlayStation 3 (or a Vita) and a game (assuming it’s new, or doesn’t require an online pass at all) and jump straight into some online gaming.
[drop2]And whilst that’s likely to remain the case for the current machines (and perhaps should be something Sony shouts about more) as Sony posts one ridiculously massive loss, analysts have weighed in with their opinion on where the service itself will be heading away from just thinking about gaming.As Kaz Hirai attempts to steer the PSN into new territory, things might well have to change, and Hirai has already stated that he intends to “increase sales by enriching [Sony’s] catalog of downloadable game titles and subscription services available through the PSN platform.”
“I think it’s unlikely that they will require a fee,” says Michael Pachter, analyst for Wedbush. “But think they will strip down the free version to multiplayer and not much else in order to encourage people to pay the fee.”
Another analyst, M2’s Billy Pidgeon thinks that Sony will continue to tier the pay-for options. “Providing networked services for online gaming is not inexpensive,” he said, “and charging for these services would help Sony defray those costs. I think Sony would best benefit by continuing to build out on the currently employed freemium model, charging for enhanced, tiered and incremental items, services and add-ons to add value to the online gaming experience.”
The general consensus is that Sony need to leverage the other non-gaming offerings and tie up some deals with content distributors in the same way Microsoft have. But offering up online gaming without immediate cost is clearly something that the PlayStation brand needs to hang on to.
Source: GI.biz.
HoboCastro
The key word being gaming. If I require a tiered system of membership to access streaming content I’ll be very annoyed.
ron_mcphatty
Does Live have as much downtime as PSN? I’ve still not played on an XBox, I’m still stuck in 2007 :)
a inferior race
No. The only two times I havent been able to access it when I should have been, was when they turned it off for a day to update and when half of England and most os Scotland lost broanband for a day.
deadwelsh
PS+ has gotten better since starting, way better, but i still dont want it at all.
Taking away free stuff and asking me to pay for it would really alienate me and I would imagine many other loyal fans.
I am on my 5th ps3 now, so they have had a massive chunk of cash from me already, not including any game purchases or other consoles (ps1, ps2, psp x2, and until now I was considering a vita)!
Sony have some great exclusives, but I fear that next gen I will be going for a PC as these exclusives aren’t enough to keep me a PS customer if all these rumours around next gen turn out to be true.
Biggest joke of this is the next article reports on another massive amount of PSN downtime, something I would be extremely vexed about if I had paid for the privilege to use the PSN, as these are not isolated incidents, its turning into a weekly joke, especially since the many weeks of downtime post hacking.
BigCheese
Been a loyal Playstation fan boy, but I’d fell incredibly let down if we were subjected to online subscription fees. As long as we continued to have access to the PS Store, chat and software updates, however, I’d be fine; I don’t play online MP enough to justify spending a penny on it