300°

Is free PSN dead?

Do passes and premium-tier services threaten Sony's network?

Read Full Story >>
computerandvideogames.com
Kran4633d ago

No. If it didnt years ago when all this started, it won't now.

Nitrowolf24633d ago (Edited 4633d ago )

Nope. Unless you buy new it's still free. Plus not all games use it yet. Also doesn't the xbox 360 have online passes to?
http://www.ea.com/1/ds2-onl...

Online passes are still a terrible idea.

jaosobno4633d ago (Edited 4633d ago )

Well I hope it remains free. I don't wanna pay 50-60$ for online play and then additional 50$ for some type of premium service like COD Elite (like X360 owners do).

It's just too much, so keep online play free Sony!

PRHB HYBRiiD4633d ago

cod elite is free i think but the premium elite cost like 50 bucks but u can play online with the free one.

CynicalVision4633d ago

'Online passes are still a terrible idea.'

I disagree, if you worked as a developer you'd be thinking differently. Why is it okay for consumers to pay less than half for a used game but still have access to everything that people who pay $60 have?

Surely you agree that it's unfair considering these people spend years developing a game, spending millions of dollars and having to pay for the upkeep of servers.

They have to make they money back somehow, it's only fair for them to implement an online pass. Otherwise what's the incentive to keep making games?

Eromu4633d ago

"Why is it okay for consumers to pay less than half for a used game but still have access to everything that people who pay $60 have? "

Why is it okay for consumers to pay less than half for a used car but still have access to everything that people who pay $20k+ have?

LightofDarkness4633d ago

Sorry, CynicalVision, one cannot be so flippant when considering the repercussions that services and restrictions like these have on the entire concept of ownership.

xer04633d ago

Well both iTunes and Valves Steam is free - so, do I think free access to online markets is dead... that's a big fat NO.

BrutallyBlunt4633d ago

@jaosobno
PSN will remain free. The basic services will not change. Sony may put the focus now on Plus with any new services but the core ability to play online will continue to be free on the Playstation 3. Sony will toy with the idea of keeping that core experience free on the Playstation 4 so it will be interesting if it remains free. Right now there is a shift happening testing the market with things like the Elite service for Call of Duty, online passes and other revenue based services like Plus.

@Eromu
Bad analogy. A car depreciates over time and costs money to keep up the maintenance. So in my view it is only right for those hosting the online services to be funded some way and buying used means no money is going to the publishers who run the matchmaking services and everything else needed to host the games online.

PirateThom4633d ago

Here's the problem with ownership of software. Quite simply, you don't. You own a licence to use the software, which the publisher can revoke at any time (in fact if your account is blocked on PSN, XBox Live or Steam you lose access to any downloaded content and the only reason this wouldn't hold true for a disc is because it's physical, doesn't mean they can't block access to portions of it though).

I, honestly, have no real issue with it, because I only buy games new HOWEVER and this is the big problem, this needs to extend to cover more than one system and user account because I have no doubt there's people with multiple PS3s and PS3 users in the same household it should be like PSN content, ability to activate on 5 systems, covers all users on that system.

DragonKnight4633d ago

@CynicalVision: Why should developers get paid twice for the same game they already got paid for?

They sell all their copies to a retailer, thus get paid for each and every copy. Why then should they get paid again because someone decides to return a copy that the RETAILER paid for (and sold to the consumer) and decides to resell? The developer relinquishes their right to additional profit once they sell the physical copy to the retailer. It would be different if their game was DL only but that isn't the case.

If I sell someone a tv, I don't have the right to demand that they give me the full value cost of the tv if they decide to then sell it to someone else.

badz1494633d ago

the basis of PSN is free online play which the 360 doesn't have! online pass and such has nothing to do with free PSN. it's just a way devs recouping profit from 2nd hand markets. what Sony is and will be doing for PS+ is totally up to them as they have to keep they paying gamers happy by adding more stuff to the service. but as long as the online play stays free, why complaint? want more services? pay for PS+, end of story!

Nitrowolf24633d ago (Edited 4633d ago )

@CynicalVision

Technically Retailers bought the games. We are not buying games directly from them (Devs) unless of course it's their own shop.

And are you guys forgetting something? This isn't just for online. RAGE will be having an online pass for single player content. So the matter for running matchmaking and such isn't even a reason why they do it.

I understand developers want more money, but if they are going to start charging for Online then at least do this. Offer a trail before you make anyone purchase the dam thing. Like what Homefront does where you can only reach a certain level and then you can't progress anymore. If they are going to offer and online pass then give me a reason to buy it instead of having me go in blind without knowing whether I want the online or not.

Also why should they be charging for the game online? As much as I like dislike COD for being the same at least they aren't making you pay online. Why? Because the support is there. You know whats even worse? the fact that most developers today has paid DLC on launch day of games. If I am going to pay for Online pass at least have the game packed with all this content cause DLC isn't a thing they make in a day and in most cases is thought up before the game is even released.

DirtyLary4633d ago

They are a great idea. Gamestop and used sales are to blame. Devs and Publishers now get a piece of used games sales.

Tanir4633d ago

if 360 still has online passes........thats just reaaaaaaally bad.

in regards to online passes i believe that the online pass should register to your serial number on the ps3, not just the username, but at the same time should register to your username aswell incase you have another ps3.

its the most logical and fair thing to do

Pixel_Pusher4632d ago

fear mongering at it's worst.

SonyStyled4632d ago

EA, THQ, Disney Interactive, Sony and Ubisoft are the publishers that i know of that implement the online pass. Ubisoft being the latest about a month or so ago

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 4632d ago
Hisiru4633d ago (Edited 4633d ago )

I don't think online pass is a bad idea because it's good against pre-owned games. What is really bad is DRM.

And how can online pass go against free psn? If you buy new games you won't have any problems.

mixelon4633d ago

I too think online passes are a good idea. Everyone saying it screws with the idea of ownership is missing the point I think.

Pre-owned games do nothing to pay for the upkeep of the multiplayer infrastructure, matchmaking servers etc. If you want to play on their systems using their bandwidth it's fair you pay a little. You don't *own* online functionality.

Philoctetes4633d ago

Agreed. Online passes don't have anything to do with "free PSN." These are just a way for developers to recoup some revenue from the used game market. Those of us who are buying our games new still aren't paying a penny for online play.

LightofDarkness4633d ago

Technically, online passes are DRM. It's "Digital Rights Management", and by definition it's simply a term to describe access control technologies. Online passes ARE access control technology.

FACTUAL evidence4633d ago

@CynicalVision

I see where you;re coming from, but let's be real. When you buy a used game, you're not paying less than half of what the game was shipped for....let's say gamestop for an example, if you buy a used game that's a month old, you'd have to pay 53$ still. That's not even including the tax.

iamnsuperman4633d ago

That is Gamestop's problem. n used games nothing goes back to the developer. Gamestop gets all $53. They are protecting their investment of a game they made and stopping gamestop from making a major profit. It has nothing to do with paying less than half. Its about them making money of games that cost millions to make. I think I am one of few who actually sees what the online pass is. It may not be good for us but what is £5 here or there. If you want to support gamestop and not the developer fine but then do not play online which has running costs

DragonKnight4633d ago

Again, the developer got all the support they technically deserve when they sold the game to retailers. Why should developers get that $53 when a second disk isn't being sold? It's the same disk that was originally bought. It's the same disk that the devs sold to the retailer and were paid for. So why should they get paid twice, thrice, or 4 times for the same copy? They didn't put any effort into putting the game on the damn disk too did they? There isn't any new content being added to a used game is there? So explain it to me?

iamnsuperman4632d ago (Edited 4632d ago )

@dragonknight. Its not just that. Why should gamestop get hude profit from a game they could have originaly sold. It is very profitable the re sale market for places like gamestop. With online, which cost money and man power to run expanding a game people are enjoying the on line experience without paying to the developers. This is more of a problem with online games being improved

DragonKnight4632d ago

You're not understanding something here. Used game sales DO NOT impact online because there is NOT an additional user, it is merely a transference. If I traded my game in to gamestop, they have my copy. They then sell that copy to another person. I can't use that copy anymore, but someone is in my place. This has no burden on the online infrastructure as no additional member has been added, and the developer has already been paid for the game with their original sale to gamestop.

This is purely based on greed. Developers want to be paid more than once for one copy of a game. Used game sales in no way hurt them in any arena. Not additional users, not loss of revenue, nothing.

Hicken4632d ago

Well said, Dragon Knight. Bubbles up.

I've been trying to explain that to people since I joined this site; they just can't seem to wrap their heads around it, though. They want to believe it hurts developers, but what it REALLY does it hurt ownership rights: no matter what you paid, you only own HALF the game until you pay the developers. Even though they've already been paid for the copy of the game you own- including the half they won't let you play- you have to pay them again to play the whole thing. And at any time, they can choose to no longer support that game, thus meaning your payment grants you nothing.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4632d ago
KingPin4633d ago

agreed.

or they will be sued again.

because when they advertised the console it was with free online play. now they taking away an advertised feature which is why most of ps3 gamers went with sonys console.

i think even sony know this.

iamnsuperman4633d ago (Edited 4633d ago )

I really do not get what this article is trying to say. Surely extra paid services is a plus for the PSN because unlike its competitor the user doesn't all ready have to pay for a subscription. The PSN has that option to play free online which is always attractive to a consumer I can see a tier system in the future. Basic online free option extra cost money

One-X4633d ago

Believe it or not, Sony has a premium-tier service too... Plus I don't know many that'd take a premium paying service over a free one that works just as well.

Free, well to me, is attractive. If I looked at PS3 and knew I had to pay so much every year just to talk to my friends or play games I want, then I wouldn't be so happy with the service.

Ocean4633d ago

Next Gen who knows...but not this consoles lifecycle

Show all comments (67)
150°

Sony Patents To Prevent You From In-Game Harassment By Reading Your Emotions

A new patent recently published by Sony wants to gather biometric data of gamers to track whether one is being harassed using AI tools.

Profchaos20d ago (Edited 20d ago )

I hope this is one of those patents that never comes to fruition.

I already dislike the fact you can pay a significant amount for a online service buy associated games and content on said service and get banned from that service over potentially a misunderstanding the bans are already handed out for flimsy reasons

I'd rather see money invested in a ban that simply removes the offensive players ability to communicate with unknown players allow them to continue party chats with friends but not with Joe blow on cod.

exputers19d ago

Agreed. Blizzard recently banned a college Overwatch 2 player who's dependent for saying "shit." Pretty harsh.

Profchaos19d ago (Edited 19d ago )

How rediculas really. You can't say a word that's allowed in most PG films and prime time TV but the game is based around killing the enemy team using guns, explosives etc.

It's just backwards.

just_looken19d ago

What your talking about is called block list

In 2006 a spaceship dropped of the playstation 3/xbox 360 i say that that generation was the last great gen with game functions/tech that has yet to comeback

Anyhow the playstation 3 if you block listed a id they could not talk to you in chatroom with either text or voice. But that was pre mind fucked 2018 when people were more human than sheep.

But hey gta 6 is coming out billion dollar budget without a single player custom character creator and without singeplayer coop off/online something saints row 1-3 had on the xbox 360.

z2g19d ago

Take my social security and bank account numbers too! Here’s a picture of my wife and our address.

phoenixwing19d ago

Cmon where's the pictures of your children. Don't hold out on them.

H919d ago

At this rate I feel Sony will eventually sell a room to play games in it where they can monitor your every breath

jambola19d ago

I genuinely get a bit worried sometimes when a friend says something that could be offensive In a party
Because I have no trouble believing some bans would happen when in a private party for saying something wrong

SegaSaturn66919d ago

I want them to censor erotic content by measuring my groin temperature so i dont get too distracted while playing black ops 2.

Popsicle19d ago

Terrible idea. Not only do I not consent to providing my biometric data, the potential for mishandling biometric data is almost a certainty. Positive stress and negative stress can produce similar changes in biometrics. Interpreting the precise emotion a person is feeling is not only invasive but could be easily misconstrued. I hope this never comes to fruition.

Show all comments (14)
130°

Sony Could Increase Your Game's Difficulty If It Sees You Complain About It

Sony has recently published a new patent that wants to dynamically handle the games' difficulty and gameplay based on the player's emotions.

jznrpg20d ago

This is something I might use. Sometimes I play some good games but they don’t have difficulty option and are a little too easy.

Profchaos20d ago

Souls games will be like that players struggling make it harder

PassNextquestion20d ago (Edited 20d ago )

I think if used correctly it could work well

jambola20d ago

cool idea
cool idea for horror games especially
the way it's explained here sounds like it could never be forced hopefully, so that's ok with me

Show all comments (8)
280°

Sony Taps Bungie's Head of Revenue to Lead Live-Service Games

Sony has recruited Bungie's head of revenue Jaremy Rich to head up its live-service gaming division, Rich has announced on social media.

Read Full Story >>
techraptor.net
ChasterMies40d ago

Please do not put Destiny’s monetization into Sony’s first party games. The monetization is what’s driving players away from Destiny.

just_looken40d ago

The new temp boss is the sony cfo bean counter so i can see this being a thing get every penny.

Cacabunga40d ago

PlayStation officially losing it.. fans will never support gaas games

just_looken40d ago

@car

The new boss did a interview in japan he wants to tap into the mobile market like nintendio so he give 0 fucks about gamers/fans

https://www.pushsquare.com/...

Redemption-6440d ago

@Cacabunga
You only speak for you and those who think like you, but most fans will support what they want. Playstation and PC fans are literally supporting Helldivers 2 and that is a gaas. Maybe you wouldn't, but many more would if they like it.

Huey_My_D_Long40d ago

@Redemption-64
Look, Im not making any judgement calls about this guy, but I will say that Helldivers 2 GaaS model is unique to Helldivers, and legit the only other game I can think of thats similiar was the Avengers game except HD2 pass is still better.
The fact that you can earn in game currency in a way that doesnt make you feel like you have to grind forever, as well you being able work on that pass that you bought...on your own time without a time limit...that right there is fucking huge to me, and I can't name any game other than avengers that avoided trapping players with FOMO logic...I think GaaS on HD2 shouldn't be compared to the rest of the industry...it should be copied.

Einhander197240d ago

Cacabunga

Helldivers 2...

Redemption-64

In Europe it's a 60 40 split favoring PC.
In the US its a 60 40 split favoring PS5.

So PlayStation owners supported the game just fine, it's not getting carried by PC or anything like that.

FinalFantasyFanatic40d ago

@just_looken,
I'm perfectly fine with the way Nintendo entered the mobile market, I never touched their mobile games, meanwhile, the console/handheld stayed the way it is. As for being a bean counter, he's probably going to reel in these massive budgets that Sony's studios have had lately, I haven't played Spiderman 2, but I cannot see how they almost tripled the budget for that game.

@Redemption-64,
That's an exception to the rule, I'm expecting a lot of these GAAS games from Sony to fail, to be fair, they only need a few to succeed, but I would have preferred that they put more of their resources into other types of games.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 40d ago
DivineHand12540d ago

True their monetization is driving players away and at the same time, their decision to chop out content and convoluted systems is keeping new players away from the game.

Joe91340d ago

I don't think that will happen based on how things worked out at Naughty Dog now that we know what we do, seems they had the option to fully commit to live service games or stay making single player experences so they gave up on their live service game. We are not sure how things came about with Bend making a live service game but I hope that was not a forced situation. Sony doesnt seem like they are forcing studios to switch up but we will see, Sony's bread and butter is single player games it is how they dominated the console market.

Obscure_Observer40d ago

Yeah, I though Sony learned something from all their failures in the LS segment under Bungie´s disastrous leadership and supervision which led to games been cancelled, studios closed and all the people laid off.

Looks like Bungie still plays a major role in Sony´s LS initiative and Sony is not backtracking on their GaaS plans.

S2Killinit40d ago (Edited 40d ago )

Are we forgetting that Destiny is also a highly successful franchise? I feel like that definitely deserves mention here.

Besides, there is no reason why a person cant learn from past experiences.

Joe91339d ago

I agree, people act as if Destiny flopped when it came out lol it took 9 to 10 years for the numbers to fall yet people are still playing it add the success of Helldivers 2 no wonder Sony is going forward down this path.

S2Killinit39d ago

Personally, I see no problem with Sony also having service games as long as they make good ones, and more importantly they deliver the AAA story driven games that they are known for. So yeah, I agree 100% with you.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 39d ago
Christopher40d ago

I mean, this person made some pretty bad decisions at Bungie. I hope they've learned from them because I definitely don't see those type of ideas as good for PlaySation in general.

CrimsonWing6939d ago (Edited 39d ago )

Honestly, what’s to learn from? How to make people happily continuously dump money into a single game over its life-time? Buy season passes continuously for several years with a smile on our faces?

GaaS is a design decision that is everything wrong with this industry. The fact that Helldivers 2 did so well and people defend the monetization because it was $40 and is a fun game, scares the sh*t out of me to see that the door is open and all shift will probably be to replicate that in future games. We already know the ROI for traditional game dev cost isn’t doing it for them.

I thought with Jimbo leaving we’d see a change for the better… I’m not so sure now.

S2Killinit39d ago

Service games are being offered by everyone. Sony cannot afford to only create single player AAA games. No one can. They already said they will be doing both.

Abnor_Mal40d ago (Edited 40d ago )

Ps5 gamers in 2023 seemed to play more live service types of games, so regardless to how people feel about them, numbers don’t lie and Sony is going where the money is. I mean look at the excitement around Helldivers2, people are showing that they want live service games.

Christopher40d ago

They play long-time existing live service games like CoD, Fortnite, Apex Legends, Destiny 2, and the like. Mass majority of new live service games are considered failures and aren't moving gamers away from older games.

just_looken40d ago

Yep the huge issue with live service is they need paid players along with a reason to play them.

You forgot mobile market that also taps into that player base as well as the eve online style games there is only a certain amount of krakens/whales blind supporters compared to the amount of live service games we have its not sustainable math wise.

700 restaurants making food for every seat for 1000-3000 eaters just does not work out

Einhander197240d ago (Edited 40d ago )

Christopher

I am not a big live service fan and literally own zero of the games you listed, but that is not true, unless you call games that aren't the top games to be failures.

There are tons of live service games that are profitable.

Games don't have to be the biggest game ever they just need to make more than they cost.

I challenge you to show professionally prepared data that shows that more live service games fail than make enough to keep going.

Because all the data that I have seen shows that live service is less of a gamble than making a big AAA budget game which needs to survive off retail sales.

FinalFantasyFanatic40d ago

I sometimes wonder if we're at saturation point, where it's hard for a new game to join those ranks unless it's particularly exceptional, people only have so much time and money to devote to these types of games.

romulus2340d ago

Correction, they have no issue playing good live service games

shinoff218340d ago

Lol it's not even a quarter of the ps5s sold. Helldivers may have been a hit but let's not say most are enjoying it because truth is most(the real most ) don't care about it.

S2Killinit39d ago (Edited 39d ago )

I play what is fun. If a live service game is good I’ll play it as long as its not a money scheme which Helldivers is not.

And Im a single player gamer.

mastershredder40d ago

How do you kill a franchise that already been killed?
Destiny’s grind, cash-in-on-playbass-cha-Ching, and pop-culture-insertion mainstream-me-too bs totally killed any rep Bungie had. Sony/Bungie, if you are doing this to ward-off players, it’s already working.

crazyCoconuts40d ago

Headline truncated:
"... off a cliff"

Show all comments (43)