Details have fluttered site to site today as the oh-so-long rumoured but often avoided topic of a subscription based model for the Playstation Network (PSN), have been detailed by an “unnamed” source at VG247. To cut the long story short, Sony are suspected to officially announce specifically what the service will afford us gamers at E3 this June, although the source at VG247 has indicated that the monetizing of PSN will not hinder any online functionality that is currently available for free and will not discount any further improvements that are expected to the service, such as cross-game voice chat.
What is expected to be included within the subscription model (of “less than £50 a year”) is a choice and download of one of the pre-picked PSN titles available for that month (“two to four”), along with the ability to stream music straight from Sony's music library to play in or out of games.
We'll have to wait until E3 to get a broader sense of what the package really provides, although I like the idea of streaming music seamlessly whether in-game or on the XMB. The Xbox 'LastFM' app, in contrast (and to its detriment, in my opinion) could only be run by itself, so it's nice to see the integration in place that could raise its quality. Whether it's worth the expected value of £50 per annum is another matter entirely and could come down to the quality of PSN titles that are made available month to month. I'd love to see a mix of indie titles and bigger downloadable titles offered every other month which would give indie developers as much exposure as some of the big boys and could be a 'win-win' situation for all involved. Nevertheless, it has been coming for quite some time and I wish Sony the best in competing with XBL.
When the PS5 and the Xbox Series X/S first launched all the way back in 2020, console sales were not what either platform manufacturer wanted them to be. The pandemic slowed things down more than ever before, even though in the case of each next-gen console, all the units that were manufactured, sold.
Of course that didn’t last, and soon manufacturing limitations on the consoles were a thing of the past, and sales started to leap forward. For one next-gen console platform, at least.
I can see why Microsoft is putting their games on PlayStation with these numbers
Imagine how many copies of future games like Elder Scrolls VI, Blade, Indiana Jones and more they could sell if they went fully multiplatform.
while I see your point, i'm one of those people that dont really want to see a M$ logo, when I boot up, however good the game is, unless truly exceptional, I've got enough games from Sony and enough coming down the pipeline, plus the 2 free smaller games on ps+, why do I need to give Microsoft anymore money,
I usually play just GT7 and cod, you've got Gran Theft Auto coming, its over for microsoft, they shot themselves in the foot, and now have to hobble away, to the losers corner, sit there, and repent.,!!! hahaha
@Purple101 At this point, Microsoft just wants to be the American Tencent, but also just happen to have a console available for those who want it.
I hate what they're doing to the industry, but I would play the next Elder Scrolls on PS5 or PS6 even if I had to look at a MS logo at the beginning. At this point, I'm just invested in the series. I didn't feel this way about Starfield, which is why I've skipped it. Worst case scenario, I'd pick Elder Scrolls up on PC if it didn't come to PS, but I've stayed true to my word - I have not, and will not buy another Microsoft console after 3 red ringed 360s. They've killed my console support for life. They showed how scummy they can be by knowingly rushing out a product before it was ready, just to try and capture a 1 year headstart.
If a MS logo shows up at the beginning of the next Elder Scrolls on a Playstation console, so what? That means Sony won and MS is just another publisher. Many of the large publishers are quite dirty, so it fits them well. I wouldn't mind seeing their console die off though and them solely take up this publisher role.
Yeah, I never bought another Xbox console after the 360. But at the same time you shouldn't find yourself captive to Elder Scrolls if the company behind it is very scummy. I dropped COD after Ghosts and I don't regret it the company has only become worse and I'm glad I never was part of funding that.
Replies(1)Replies(1)
Sony would probably be selling more if they stopped sending mixed signals about their future. Putting games on PC because you are taking data analytic advice from Microsoft about the future of consoles is folly and has limited their potential sales. Microsoft want Sony and the world to believe that consoles are done as a business so companies like Sony and Nintendo etc can end up serving Microsoft's platform. Remember when it comes to Microsoft "It is us or no one and the three E's" Don't fall for it.
Sucker Punch’s massive samurai adventure Ghost of Tsushima has come under fire because of the PSN requirement. However, unlike Helldivers 2, things are a lot different and more logical this time.
"Sony has made it clear long before its release that the PSN requirement is strictly for the online multi-player Legends mode in Ghost of Tsushima and the PlayStation overlay. Online connection or PSN is not applied to the single-player campaign, which is honestly what the game is all about."
Legends clearly was based around using the pan they hardly want to have to design a whole new account structure just to play it, that's alot of effort and work. Ultimately people kicked up a fuss despite there being workarounds in most of those territories that people with a ps console have used over there for literally like 15/16 years. This is the consequence of that, be careful what you wish for or demand because you don't necessarily get to pick the method by which you get it.
CG writes: In this video we take a look at the full game of HAMMER95’s Mullet MadJack on PC in 4K. This is a rather cool rogue-like first-person shooter where you have to survive for 10 seconds by increasing your timer for each kill. Not the most original of ideas, but works wonders in context of the 80/90s aesthetic. Game releases May 15th.
£50 is a bit much for Party chat don't you thing? Who knows maybe they'll throw in a Facebook and Twitter app, and the odd premium deal of the week.
I've always said if Sony wants to compete with the online that Xbox 360 has they need to improve there's and start charging. PSN is a joke to competitive gamers and in the industry. A cross party chat for PSN would sound awful, just awful IMO. Because there chat servers make everyone sound like the drive through guy at Burger King.
Sony see's that MS gets about 75 million a month in XBL revenue and that starts looking good to a company that loses almost 1 billion a year. They want to start making money. I think overall it will fail to attract though, either that or there is a lot of hypocrites out there in Sony land. Because I've heard it time and time again how they wont pay for online. So I guess we'll see. I do know that the online service if paid better be 100x better then that slop they have now.
I have to disagree with you crapgamer. I'm not convinced you fully understand what you are commenting on. Owning and using both systems PS3/X360 I see very little difference in quality of gameplay and voice chat between the two. Sure cross game chat is a great feature, but personally I don’t use it as often as others do so the lack of it on PSN is not that big of a deal. Then you further bash what you probably don’t know by stating that PSN is currently “slop.” Now it may be where you live but in the USA the PSN service provides just as good quality and speed as XBL. Maybe you live in a mud cave and the twisted pair cables don’t provide enough speed to communicate with servers that are not located by your cave. Or maybe you just like to contort information to make it sound like you know what you are talking about. To prove my point… You state the reason Sony is launching a paid service is because they are losing 1 billion dollars a year and that they wish they could be like MS and since they earn 75 million a month by convincing simple minded people they are the best. This comparison alone shows you are mixing apples with oranges. Sony, might have lost more revenue but it is because they produce more items than MS. The only hardware that MS produces is the Xbox360, and the Zune, everything else is software and services. Sony on the other hand produces, TV’s, cameras, radios, computers, headsets, cell phones, etc. Physical items cost more to produce, shelve, ship sell etc.
That being said I do agree that Sony would like to make more money on the PSN. Currently they are earning over 1 million a month in items sold through PS Home. Not that bad for a FREE service. If you feel that the PSN is that bad… I encourage you to stick with XBL and stay away from Sony. Just don’t try to force your fanboy opinions on me… After all I love the games… not the systems they are played on.
bubbles + panther, you earned it.
I dont see what all the blah blah is about psn vs xbl. i am a multiconsole gamers and the last time i checked with friends, psn is better because it is free, has a web browser and allows you to send pictures without a camera peripheral. sure xbl has the cool twitter and facebook apps, but where is the contest when ps3 has a browser and you can just browse to facebook, twitter, last(another cool xbl feature) or wherever the hell else you want to go. also, i love being able to transfer pics to my ps3 and send them to friends and family. MS told me to buy a camera for the same functionality on xbl. the bottom line is, both are great services and to me, neither really loses to much when stacked beside the other. what makes these sour grapes though, is one of these services is free and the other is not.