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?
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.
Originally Posted by Viper
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.
I voted yes; BUT only if Sony provides XBox Live quality feature or better.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Signature is for the weak.
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
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!
This space sponsored by:
"U Kill'em, We Chill'em!"
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 onlineOriginally Posted by Hatchman
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?
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.
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.
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.
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
Originally Posted by Viper
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.
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.
i wouldnt mind paying about £40 - 60 p/yr for playing online with the ps3
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.
"Please understand that in cases where the OS itself is acting in an unstable fashion, this software could behave in unpredictable ways. Unfortunately, this happens to be the case at all times with Microsoft OS's." - Japanese PC game disclaimers!
If you have to pay to play online i'd only consider it if it wasn't much.
I've finaly got a PSTwo! About bloody time too.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)