PS3 Online Discussion Thread [Archive]

-Liquid-

12-28-2003, 09:11 PM

Ok so we know PS3 will have a network adapter either built in or add-on as it goes, this was assumed. What we might have overlooked was Sonys plan for PS3 online. Will the PS3 charge people monthly or yearly subscriptions like Xbox Live or will it remain free like the PS2 and developers charge for there game? We have to keep in mind that its possible that alot of PS3s games could be online, I think "Most" would be a better word to describe what is still possible here. If that happens than Sony could either be A: At a loss from all that money it could have made if they charged subscriptions and therefore may not have the money or resources it requires to make accessories for the PS3 or PSP or B: Losing a good deal of Sonys userbase that it has with its free online use console, PS2. So my question to you is would you be willing to pay for PS3 online and all of its glory?

Omega Blue

12-28-2003, 09:46 PM

im voting what im hoping and that is that Sony will not charge for a subsciption. i know people say X-Box live is all great and dandy but if thats means i have to pay i'd rather just stay with Sony since it gives me what i want, able to play online with other people free.

GodZeRo

12-28-2003, 10:35 PM

I hope the PS3 has an adjustable hosting cap so you can define how hard it works your internet connection when you're not playing / idle. If the ps3 is used for hosting when you're not using it, online games will be free... or atleast most of them.

SumDeus

12-29-2003, 01:16 AM

I voted yes; BUT only if Sony provides XBox Live quality feature or better.

-Liquid-

12-29-2003, 03:06 AM

I'm pretty sure Xbox Live won't be able to touch PS3 Online. I mean the eye toy is out now for PS2, I wonder what kinda nifty gadgets PS3 will have.

Dreamcastmagic

01-01-2004, 04:23 PM

You know I really like Xbox and PS2 alot, Xbox has so many more games and huge mic support. But I really hate the monthy cost for Xbox Live. If they make the PS3 have one it better be a flat rate to play all games (like Live 10 a month and you can play anything). But paying a fee per game is nut and ill get the Xbox 2 just to have that, it really adds up. Still I think it should be free we already pay $50 for a cd and case that costs 50 cents to make. Xbox Live not even touching PS3 ... well when they get a new system it will, already has a rep as the online console.

Marjoh

01-03-2004, 02:46 PM

Would I pay for a monthly/yearly subscription for PS3 online? Hell yeah! Because that way, it would mean better online gaming. I mean look at Xbox Live for example, a lot of people might had thought PS2 would lead the console online gaming because it's free, but Xbox Live's great quality proves them wrong. Think about it, the only way Sony could bring such quality or better (talking in next-next-gen lips) to PS3 [online] gamers is by charging people. But of course, I would prefer annually, like Xbox Live, $50 a year instead of $10 a month. And to answer the original poster's question, no one can answer that, as always time will tell.

AND

I don't think it cost them only 50 cents for the CD and packaging. And we don't [100%] actually pay for how much it cost them so, but how much work and money they spend to make the game itself.

ibrooklyn

01-03-2004, 03:48 PM

im pretty sure that with the ps3 out we will have to PAY for internet play, i mean the games are gonna be amazing with some hot graphix and huge worlds and youll need good servers to back that up, not to mention add MIC support so yea im pretty sure we will have to pay for it but i wouldnt mind tho, as long as the games are good

Hatchman

01-05-2004, 04:53 PM

ibrooklyn

01-05-2004, 07:21 PM

Look guys, the main reason for being charged for services such as Xbox Live and a few PS2 games is mostly for the upkeeping of the servers. I mean, if Xbox Live is to support every Xbox Live-enabled game online, with little to no lag within a game, and mics for everyones' use at the same time, i think it is pretty much worth either the monthly or annual charge. Games like SOCOM does indeed suffer lag quite often, and that's only ONE game on that particular server!

yea BUT socom is working on its own server, xbox live has one huge ass server which supports all games while ps2 online games have their own free servers built by game developers and since its free they use the cheapest servers they can find so thats why u experience lag while playing ps2 online

kevin197

01-06-2004, 12:55 PM

of course i will pay for the online gaming but it should cost reasonably.what do you think the sony will charge for annual subscription?

Althalus

01-14-2004, 02:05 AM

I'm holding back on my vote because i have to see what ps2 online is like. until then I can't make an opinion.

martel

01-14-2004, 10:58 AM

I hope they do charge, and I hope the console itself goes for $400 or so.

Why, because the more money Sony charge us the more they can invest in the console and its applications. The fact that we are on a forum, talking/reading about PS3, 2 years or so from its release means we all must think that it's release is a big deal.

If it lives up to our expectations (1 teraflop, online services, blu-ray, etc), which it can only do with alot of funding, it will be more then worth it in my opinion.

Gexv8

01-22-2004, 03:11 AM

I would but, that all depends on if it works. I've had trouble out of xbox live and ps2 online. I got a network adapter for my ps2 and it worked for 6 months. Then one day I accidentally deleted my registration data thinking it was some everquest file. I tried to get it back but when I tried to load up the network adapter disc it would freeze up during the loading screen. Now if I put my adapter on the back of it, my ps2 ejects the disc and turns off. But, maybe the only reason it stopped working is because its a old piece of crap. I mean I did get mine back near when ps2 first came out, so yes I think it would work and I would pay a yearly or monthly subscription. I think yearly would be better though. Maybe like $50 a year or something.

Omega Blue

01-22-2004, 07:30 AM

i just rememeber that given the Ps3's Broadband heavy engine, im sure that the Ps3 can act way better as a game host then the Ps2 and since it will be Broadband only and given im sure the advancements everywhere with Broadband connections that lag will be very minimized. also since the Ps3 can ask other Ps3's for extra power (which would prolly never be needed) each consoles will be almost directly connected more so then just thru a internet connection like it is now. im not really worried about lag with the Ps3 to tell you the truth. im sure your Ps3 itself could act as a dedicated server for online play even if you only have a semi decent DSL line

migo

08-15-2004, 01:32 PM

Nah, there's no lag with good PCs being used as servers, if the PS3 is designed with that in mind they'll hardly need any servers. The only thing worth paying for would be a MMORPG, and that would cost extra anyway. PSO costs an extra $8.95 on top of Xbox Live.

Pumster

08-15-2004, 06:56 PM

Despite the individual sign-ups and occasional lag, I've had a great time with PS2's online features. Personally, if online services were offered with a reasonable charge, I'd definitely go for it. After all, it would simplify these server issues with Sony as well as provide the benefits X-Box Live is known for.

oxygenuk

08-15-2004, 07:28 PM

i wouldnt mind paying about £40 - 60 p/yr for playing online with the ps3 :)

imported_The_One

08-15-2004, 09:41 PM

Okay, I gotta admit, I'm a cheap bum, actually, a cheap university student. So no, if PS3's online charged for money, I'd simply stick to my PS2 for online gaming.

games_ fan

08-16-2004, 10:10 AM

If you have to pay to play online i'd only consider it if it wasn't much.

The Undertaker

08-31-2004, 03:45 AM

im to cheap to pay-to-play online. thats why i wont get xbox live.

draco04

09-02-2004, 05:19 PM

well hopfully they will just do the ps3 like the ps2 and have it free to be online which is what i love about the ps2 and games like socom is that they are free. although some games do charge to keep a server but final fantasy 11 is the only one that i know of that does.

Kiosko

09-15-2004, 07:05 PM

Well i read that hdd article and it said a na will be included, so i think they should do like XBox Live and make us pay to play online games for 60 a year.

richjwild

09-15-2004, 09:42 PM

http://img31.exs.cx/img31/1214/omgwtflolbbq.jpg

:shock: :shock: :shock:

Newboi

09-19-2004, 05:46 PM

PSPFanatic

09-25-2004, 04:59 PM

i replied yes but i want to change that to no. i will only use ps3 online if they come up with something like x box live where u just buy a three month subscripsion card

NickSCFC

09-25-2004, 05:02 PM

http://img31.exs.cx/img31/1214/omgwtflolbbq.jpg

:shock: :shock: :shock:
Great stuff, I hope Sony are watching

Kiosko

09-26-2004, 01:59 AM

Yup. This would be fortunate if A sony rep was watching our threads.

Borko522

10-28-2004, 06:02 PM

I wouldnt be willling to pay....even though in my opinion ps2 online is a shit load better than x box live.......if thats the case i will be dusting off my beautiful socom2 game and ps2 :roll: 8) :twisted: :evil:

Xcalibur

11-25-2004, 03:56 AM

I said "No"..I would not pay to play some games online..If the PS3 has online updates, then yes its understandable, but if its like the PS2 with no online updates (except for Final Fantasy XI) I don't see the point in paying..Im getting Xbox Live but I'm getting it with those subscription cards, im gonna get one every year..To avoid paying..

Voodoo

11-25-2004, 03:00 PM

I voted yes. If its better then xbox live, I will. I mean, you can communicate to players that are on a different game, have built in stats and clan tags (like for shooters), all open mic, send messages to people who will recieve it when they log in. Its all great.

DappaDizzle

12-02-2004, 06:03 PM

shoot... im hopeing for it to be free the only thing i would pay for is mmorpg games

threepac3

12-14-2004, 04:04 PM

shoot... im hopeing for it to be free the only thing i would pay for is mmorpg games

same here... If the cell processor is anything like was said in many official statments, Ps3 won't need much server attention becuase each ps3 will act as part of a gigantic server.

Rallyracr420

12-19-2004, 08:47 PM

I would love to see a central repository for online playstation gaming. I just realized the other day that since I got my PSTwo, I can now play SSX3 online. So I went to see what was up, and there were like 6 people online. I think if the online community were more centralized there would still be ppl available to play these awesome games.

bobo_200814

12-21-2004, 10:08 PM

i hope theres an opition where u can either pick dial-up or broudband/dsl b/c i have dial-up and i want to be able to get online weith my ps2 and play games with other people with out them sayin crap about your connection!

but then agaion i need to make sum money to get dsl! im poor :!:

:idea: Get a Job :idea: o wait i do but it pays crappy! :!:

Xeno

12-27-2004, 02:36 AM

Did you all see the E3 press conference. Sony said that in the future, online options would be left up to the developers, so if you were charged to play an online game then it would be because of the developers decision.

I also think I heard that online games will be run on the console, so developers won't have to pay for dedicated servers. That means that online billing will not be much of an issue.

Yea Kuturagi said that but he also said 'online gaming will not always be free' or something along the lines...

Personally I think it's bullshit having to pay 2 play a la Live!. My reasons are mainly because internet connections are very expensive especially Cable, 45$ canadian a month for 6MB, and because we pay about 50-60$ for a new game.

Now if publishers and gaming companies were smart about this they would add about 5 dollars to the price of each online enabled game which would in turn go to the company responsible for Server/Community support. This really is a good idea because people wouldn't be bothered with credit cards and online gaming subscriptions and having to update them every 6 months.

example:

:idea:

Socom 2 sold roughly 3 million units worldwide if each unit had an additional 5 dollar fee for the online portion that would be 15 million dollars accorded for the Community/Server support...We would be seeing a drastict difference in online gaming for the Socom 2 community and that 15 million could last for quite sometime :wink:

Rallyracr420

12-27-2004, 04:56 AM

Everyone assumes if you have an XBox and you want to play online, you have to go through XBoxLive. This is not true. You don't need to give MS any money to play the XBox online. But if you want a fantasticly super easy way to connect, XBoxLive is only $4.17 a month. Shit I pay $5 a month just to watch TV on SaltWaterChimp.com

PS3 online's biggest feature will be Sony's vision of mini-transactions. You're going to be able to buy additional content for whatever it is you have for a dollar or so (yes I'm completely guestimating here). You buy enough addins and all of a sudden Sony has a whole new revenue source.

12-27-2004, 10:19 AM

I didn’t vote because I feel, if we want to play online, we don’t have a choice. The good news is that PSM confirmed that Sony is working on a central hub to gather al of those online ‘islands’ under one roof. I don’t know if that will make a subscription fee, or they will leave it up to publishers to decide. All I know is ‘FREE’ is extremely attractive. A lot of people that are not into online gaming for one reason or another won’t bother trying it if they had to pay. But when it is free, they say ”what the heck, we got nothing to lose. No harm in trying.” And most people that try online gaming are immediately addicted to it. Hey, look at me. I am crippled by dial-up and still striving on online!!

put in mind that Sony's online ambitions are extremely high, they won't do anything to ruin their plans. and that doesn't stop on PS3!