Sony polling for PlayStation Home ideas

By Robert Purchese Published 2 July, 2009

Fancy some stand-up comedy?

Sony is testing the water on various ideas for PlayStation Home, in a survey that asks, among other things, whether you would like to see stand-up comedy as a type of streaming media for the theatre area.

There's talk of the PlayStation Home space within PlayStation Home and what should be there, which hurts our brain, plus priority ratings for content like video sharing, music sharing and viewable Trophy collections - features PS Home was built around.

A full roundup of features can be found on Triplechat (pointed out by Joystiq)

Some of the more interesting ideas are game-launching and full-length feature films, as well as collectable statues and figurines.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (59) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • zedzee #1 3 years ago

    The only comedy for Sony is the price of their console.

  • Law07 #2 3 years ago

    Fuck off Zedzee

    This is good I'd vote for trophy collection viewing

  • SEVQA #3 3 years ago

    Eyetoy integration and features that use it in fun and interactive way with maybe making a hub to encourage developers and more importantly the attach rate for consumers! Theirs no reason why some of the quirks witnessed in the E3 Milo video are not implemented in Home using the already available camera. Some amount of decent collision detection would also be nice as the world feels a bit plastic at present.
    Edited by 1 at 02/07/09 @ 14:35

  • TopKatt #4 3 years ago

    The ability to let users create their own content would be good.

  • onyxbox #5 3 years ago

    roman coliseum, gladiator costumes and the abilty to fight in them :-D (or watch)

  • ps3owner #6 3 years ago

    A lap dancing club of course. Maybe even with a webcam link to a real lap dancing club, or amateur lap dancers... that way the attach rate would rocket. not sure how it works re parenting control and all, but who cares.

  • zedzee #7 3 years ago

    @ Law07:

    Now there's no need to be so nasty. You have your opinion and I have mine...unfortunately, we do not agree.

    I'm more of the persuasion that Sony is desperately attempting to claw back the lead it has lost to both Nintendo and Microsoft, any way it can. Unfortunately for them, some of their early on strategy for the PS3 (such as extortionate console pricing, no backwards compatibility and late launch) have all backfired and made them look like the fools of the industry and lost them a great deal of credibility.

    In fact, they find themselves where they are today, with the likes of you having to 'defend' them, exactly because of their launch strategy.

  • chubster2010 #8 3 years ago

    @ zedzee
    ...In what way are your comments relevant to Home?

  • George-Roper #9 3 years ago

    What a disaster.

    Just close it down, already.

  • Evolution #10 3 years ago

    How about a purpose?

  • laudy #11 3 years ago


    @ zedzee

    Canvasing opinion hardly smacks of desperation now does it? Are games developers "desperate" when they release betas for the end user to pick apart, and therefore help improve the experience for said users? Can you also tell me why my launch model ps3 has the ability to play both psone and ps2 games from the original discs as well as downloads? Extortion depends on your point of view doesn't it?

    As you can see (i have also been a victim), smart mouth comments get short shrift these days, hence the need for you to defend yourself.

    Oh, and don't use phrases like "In fact" when you have absolutely nothing to back it up with. Good job Sony weren't so desperate as to release shoddy hardware that's needed at least three revisions and countless user repairs to get right.

    There's a clear difference between opinion and goading folk into a response which is what you were after with your one-liner wasn't it?

  • KayJay #12 3 years ago

    I'm with Law07 on this one. Fuck off ZedZee. You opinions are shite. :-)

    I cant remember how many millions of people have purchased the PS3 but there are quite a few (23 Million I think).
    So 23 million people didnt have a problem with the price, 23 million people didn't have a problem with the no BC and guess what 23 million people didnt have a problem with the late Launch.

    Its just idiotic "Fanboyesq" remarks like yours that sometimes makes these comments threads unbearable sometimes. Just leave it for the playground.

  • BadByte #13 3 years ago

    Still waiting for cross game chat and quick&easy mute of those with hyper sensitive mics that picks up all the sounds in the house
    Edited by 1 at 02/07/09 @ 15:26

  • chanandler #14 3 years ago

    I've got an idea, how about Sony Europe and Sony America pretend that they are the same company for a minute and release updates for Home in all the regions at the same time! Now call me picky but this regional release crap that they insist on sticking to is really beginning to piss me off, especially as in Europe we get the short end of the stick, all the time!

  • DrDamn #15 3 years ago

    @donnie080208
    Like the very good quality and well priced wireless mic that Sony make?

  • SEVQA #16 3 years ago

    How about some weather and environmental touches such as wind to give the world some life. maybe using the PS3 clock and weather feed to change accordingly. Also I know it sounds sad but I did watch the sun rise and set in GTA4. (not in the same sitting mind). A big for me is just the static nature of Home where nothing seems alive!!!

  • GamesConnoisseur #17 3 years ago

    I m one of PS3 owner and I have problem with lack of bc and hence why I m delighted to get 60 gb model and have PS3 40 gb owning mates who regrets lack of PS2 bc n please don't assume all are of such a view! I think home need to be more radically quick to access and to use for a lot more interest from wider PS3 owners. I accept there are plenty who enjoys Home as it is today... But I can't help but be put off the loadings in of areas and avatars however would be willing to put up if there are plenty reasons to go back to Home for.

  • Artemus #18 3 years ago

    Just give me a gun so I can murder all of the twats trying to pull the 'women' in there.

  • SEVQA #19 3 years ago

    As much as I hate Second Life, being able to fly away when someone was boring you with their "where are you from?" questions was funny. And it would be nice to fly normally other than throwing your sofa over the balcony to do so!

    Home needs Neo!

  • gaselite #20 3 years ago

    Sony is testing the water on various ideas for PlayStation Home, in a survey that asks, among other things, whether you would like to see stand-up comedy as a type of streaming media for the theatre area.

    Content not provided by the users, I hope, given that gamers are habitually unfunny.

  • El-Dev #21 3 years ago

    @DrDamn,

    Or quite possibly every blu tooth headset that works with the PS3.

    Free games that I can play online without having to wait and more Checkers boards!

  • Vanmunt #22 3 years ago

    I wasn't in the 'home hate' camp, but to be honest when I turned it on the other week and there was yet another update without any content I just turned it off.. it seems its every week you have to keep downloading the same bloody areas... oh and you should be able to smack somebody in the gob on it.

  • Khanivor #23 3 years ago

    Maybe Sony should have thought of what they wanted to use Home for before they started development, not months after it's been released.

  • Mr-Bozzey #24 3 years ago

    sounds good but i'd like a number of other updates put in.

    - weather being added rain,snow, wind, cloudy,mixtures all that stuff
    - updated spaces being add all the spaces that U.S and JP home has already !
    - Lower prices not for all stuff but mainly stuff like home flats maybe £1 each £1.50 at most.
    - New arcade machines to be added maybe classic games like pong or pac man

    That would make me happy tbh when i 1st booted home up i wasnt dissapointed anyways people expected it to be full of everything alreadyshed loads of spaces game launching and that, instead of understanding it was to start very basic and grow over months !

    A select few still dont like home like that zedzee fella up to them but you cant deny you go on there now and its WAY WAY better than when it 1st came out and more to do aswell.

  • collateral89 #25 3 years ago

    a good idea 4 home would be..... to be able to get a wage each week automaticaly like say 5quid every day but only if u go on home this wud b fun and at the same time it would make ppl go on it more often . but u can get more money by completing diffrent challenges each week eg. like winning games at bowling or getting the high score on the arcade machines something along the lines of that. and then with the money u earn u could put it in a bank and let the interest build or go blow it on house appliances or a car or go to the cinemas to watch movie clips or sport/music vids or new game trailers. something like this should be put on home in my oppinion because it would make me go on it more.

  • Uncle_Fishboy #26 3 years ago

    uninstall it

  • George-Roper #27 3 years ago

    LOL! I can't believe for a second that anyone seriously considers Home anything even approaching a success! -17 for my first post?!?

    Fucking hell, take the rose-tinted fanboi gigs off and look at it for what it actually is. A micro-transaction sodden failure. Full stop.

  • Goffee #28 3 years ago

    Release it for PSP, like now!

  • Spryte #29 3 years ago

    I'd like to see more emphasis on community, and less on buying pointless tat. Sony should make Home feel like an integral part of the PS3 experience, a place you can log into for some friendly videogame banter if you've got a few minutes to kill, or meet up with friends, decide what to play, boot the game and still be able to chat with the two guys who decided to have a head to head on something else instead.

  • EuroStalker #30 3 years ago

    Hi All,

    Home should be seamless without loading stuff constantly and the ability to start games which I think was promised. It's amazing how people are prepared to overlook lack of functionality if things work quickly and smoothly. Home feels, for the lack of a better word, bulky.

    There are some nice things about it. It definitely needs sponsored competitions where people can win stuff. Give away an Audi TT here and a real house there.

  • Sunyavadin #31 3 years ago

    As many before me have stated, the most important thing they need is a POINT to Home.

  • smelly #32 3 years ago

    Does anyone here actually USE home?

    i tried it for 5 minutes before uninstalling it...

  • zedzee #33 3 years ago

    @ chubster2010:

    Home was so late, by the time it was released, it was a bit of an anti-climax and let's face it, if it wasn't here today, no one would notice it was missing. It's just not been the success that Sony thought would set the world on fire and hence why there's very little emphasis on it and hence Sony's goalless search for new ideas.

    @ laudy:

    Developers usually have a product that they want you to test. Sony...well, I don't know why...Perhaps because Home has been a flop so far?

    Can you also tell me why later models did not have backwards compatibility, when it was originally made available (although the compatibility list of games is no longer being expanded)?

    £425 is extortionate for a games console, no matter how you want to look at it, I'm sorry.

    I'm not praising Microsoft in my post - I think their hardware record is dire - but Sony is trailing precisely because of the reasons I listed. And those are undeniable facts. They are THIRD afterall and I've stated nothing but industry facts and history in my post, which are common knowledge and require no proof at all - unless you've been burying your head somewhere lately.

    Hardly a one-liner and I'm here to state my opinion, just as everyone else is, however painful the truth may be to others.

    @ kj66246:

    I think you (and the other fickle 23 million) should reconsider your blind loyalty somewhat more carefully. Think about what you are saying: You were happy to wait for a late product - despite the vendor promising a worldwide simultaneous release and then stiffing their favourite territory yet again; happy to pay the highest price ever for a games console (and still is); happy to accept the confusion/frustration/scramble caused early on by a company that could not make up its mind about whether it should 'allow' backwards compatibility to its loyal customers or not; happy to accept the outright lies about the DualShock being so yesterday's technology.

    So, by that token, you'd be happy to be stiffed in a similar way the very next time then...Hmm, I'd call that "idiotic".

    Swearing and calling names is a good example of a small mind that cannot hold an intelligent, legible and open debate. Now who's using playground tactics...?

  • ps3owner #34 3 years ago

    so zedzee, how much was your Xbox then and how much have you spend on the yearly sub fee to play online? Let me break that down for you. Let's say you bought it back in (nov) 2005, launch version, that's close to 4 years now then * £40 per year?
    launch price, £280 + £160 = £440

    So that compares to my launch model PS3 price of... £425 and no online sub fee.

    oh, one other thing. Home is free. who gives a shit what they do with it or whether you enjoy it or not. I am sure there are at least 6 million ppl who do enjoy logging on at least once to check it out ;).

    I rest my case.

  • George-Roper #35 3 years ago

    so zedzee, how much was your Xbox then and how much have you spend on the yearly sub fee to play online? Let me break that down for you. Let's say you bought it back in (nov) 2005, launch version, that's close to 4 years now then * £40 per year?
    launch price, £280 + £160 = £440

    So that compares to my launch model PS3 price of... £425 and no online sub fee.

    oh, one other thing. Home is free. who gives a shit what they do with it or whether you enjoy it or not. I am sure there are at least 6 million ppl who do enjoy logging on at least once to check it out ;).

    I rest my case.

    Oh, where to begin...

    1) How about we say that he bought his 360 last month? Kinda invalidates your entire 4-year Live cost doesn't it?

    2) You make an assumption that the Live service performs and provides the same level of access as the PSN, when we both know that Live is a country mile ahead of the PSN in every single way. Also, where did you get £40 per year from? The last time I paid for Gold access it cost me £30+change. See, if the service is good and the content is great, an access fee is fine. As i'm sure millions of other people using Live can attest to, rather than being stuck with the shonky download speed and late content in the PSN.

    3) Home is free. Yep, I can agree with that. Yet to get the most out of it, the entire point of it being avatars you need to pay to buy new stuff like clothes and furniture. Reel punters in with big words like 'FREE', then sting em for 90% of the stuff available via micro-transactions.

    4) You might have rested your case but your Lawyers 4 U representation is about to get your ass sent to jail for 10 years.

  • ps3owner #36 3 years ago

    George... oh man.

    1. the PS3 costs 280 now? there about? how much is the elite? ah right, sorry. I assume you will compare it to the arcade version of course.

    2. well, I paid £40, but that was back in the Xbox days. I guess £30 it is then?! no idea. that's still £120 over 4 years though ;). re service. I don't care what service I have as long as I can play online for free. that works rather well on the PS3.

    3. I haven't even mentioned micro transactions. You are not forced to spend any money on home. I know that in order for you to have a point you need to mention the micro transactions, but what I am saying is that I can log into home and wander about and play chess or whatever for free.

    4. how so?!

    bottom line is. I haven't spend a single penny on PSN or Home. So I can assure you that I have spend less money on my PS3 than you have on your Xbox 360.

    at the end of the day it's down to the end user anyway on what the average monthly costs are. It's a bit like a mobile phone, you either get it for free with a 24 month contract and some crazy monthly bill, or you purchase it up front and go the pay as you go route. I think that the PS3 is the pay as you go option. Which does mean that you do need to have a few quit spare in order to fork out for the upfront costs.

    have fun in your Xbox 360 4 U experience.

    Re Trebell, you are right. it's got nothing to do with this thread. I'll just keep enjoying my free stuff ;)
    Edited by 1 at 03/07/09 @ 11:06

  • WinterSnowblind #37 3 years ago

    Again, I think you have to take into account that PSN wouldn't even be around if it weren't for Xbox Live. Almost every single feature on PSN has simply been taken from what Xbox Live is already doing, yes, it's free, but that's for competition sake.. It's pretty safe to say that you'd still be paying monthly for the majority of PS3 games, if it weren't for Xbox Live.

    Home is the exception though of course, the Xbox doesn't really have anything like that.. although you could argue that it doesn't need anything like that. I've messed around with it a few times and just never found it at all appealing. I prefer the friends/communcations methods of Xbox Live still, if I want to talk to some friends, I have messenger, and if we need to set up a game, you can quickly set up a party. Home isn't beneficial to making PSN more community friendly, it feels more like Second Life, something always hereadled as having a massive amount of potiential but when it comes down to it, it's just not very interesting or worthwhile.

    And since your ragging on Xbox fee's, I think it's worth pointing out that there is a LOT of content - very boring content that you have to pay for on Home, including basic t-shirts and other clothes that serve no purpose, while Microsoft continues to offer free gear for their avatars.

  • George-Roper #38 3 years ago

    re service. I don't care what service I have as long as I can play online for free. that works rather well on the PS3

    See this is where your entire argument falls flat on its arse. You're implying that the services, Live and PSN are equal when nothing could be further from the truth.

    Also, where does Sony Qore sit in all this? I mean, you're arguing that Gold Live access is a cost that isn't required and yet Sony have implemented Qore with associated $24.99 annual subscription that's giving PSN Qore subbers early access to stuff, over non PSN Qore subbers...

    Bottom line is that a Live subscription comes in at about £2.50/month. Half what I probably spend, each day on my lunch. That this is somehow being used as a reason why 'PSN is better' is completely laughable.
    Edited by 1 at 03/07/09 @ 11:58

  • ps3owner #39 3 years ago

    What part of "bottom line is. I haven't spend a single penny on PSN or Home." didn't you understand? Btw, I've never even heard of "Qore". I am sure that I won't spend anything on that either.

    I still don't care what additional services you have on Live. I can play online for free, that's all that matters to me! Once Sony decides that it is time to start charging, I'll stop playing online. as simple as that.

  • George-Roper #40 3 years ago

    I still don't care what additional services you have on Live. I can play online for free, that's all that matters to me!

    Fine and dandy but that's not what you were saying a few posts back. You were implying that the PSN offers a better service than Live because it is free.

    Also, I own all three current consoles so my 'loyalty' doesn't lay with just one. As it clearly does with you. I just find it really funny that someone can flat-out state that the PSN is better than Live because its free. That you've now changed your story to being able to play online for free, and thats now the reason is even funnier.

    Its like the typical fanboi, stepping back through their points when each one is catagorically stripped down and thrown away, until there's just one left. And boy, you'll stand by that last point to the last, won't you.

  • ps3owner #41 3 years ago

    hehe. I haven't said the service is better. I have said it's free :). you can spin it any way you want of course but feel free to check my other posts on that. I am also not an avid fanboy, which you should have noticed when I mentioned that I'd ditch online gaming if Sony would start charging... I assume as a proper fanboy, which you are (even though you claim not to be) I'd start paying for it, as well as Qorb and all the other fancy dress stuff that nobody needs.

    at the end of the day it's all about bang for the buck and personally I get a better deal with the PS3. that's it. oh yes, it's about gaming as well of course, but considering that pretty much everything is available on all platforms it doesn't matter which one you have.

  • George-Roper #42 3 years ago

    I mentioned that I'd ditch online gaming if Sony would start charging...

    Everything already discussed aside, I find this to be a very odd statement.

    Even if Sony were to start charging for access, would it really be such a terrible thing to pay £2.50 (assuming same cost as Live) every month for a better, more reliable service? I'd snap this up from Sony, if they can guarantee a certain level of network performance and provide benefits the same as Gold Live subscription.

  • El-Dev #43 3 years ago

    " they can guarantee a certain level of network performance and provide benefits the same as Gold Live subscription."

    From what I can gather on Live, PSN provides everyone the same benefits as a Gold subscription, which I foolishly bought for 3 months.

  • ps3owner #44 3 years ago

    Yes it would be a deal breaker. Reason being that I've experienced this before already. Back in the day I bought the first xbox and also signed up to the live service. I quit it after a few years for the simple reason that I hardly played online back then. You see, I am from a PC background. paying for the Xbox online stuff was not really what I wanted, but I got talked into it by a mate, he also managed to talk me into buying the console on day 1, could have been the halo effect as well... good game. Anyway. cut a long story short. I'd stop playing online and would stick to offline gaming and blu ray/entertainment system. that's it.

    I am a "casual gamer" now (mind you not the Wii type)... not hardcore anymore. Casual as in, I play when I feel like it. could be once a week, twice or once every 2 weeks... and then the whole idea of paying for something you hardly use sounds less appealing.

  • laudy #45 3 years ago

    @ zedzee

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but it still says "beta" on the version of Home that I've got and I believe that I have downloaded all the updates, so to say a beta has been a flop so far may well be correct. I personally think it's a pile of junk and was curious to see what had developed since I last bothered to log in...in fact, nothing has changed in my eyes so they're asking for ideas from people who actually think there's some useful application for this thing.

    "some of their early on strategy for the PS3 (such as extortionate console pricing, no backwards compatibility and late launch)"

    In order to answer your question, i need to know how "early" their "early on strategy" is to you? My apologies but I made the assumption that you were referring to launch models when you said no backwards compatibility. I couldn't care less about how late the launch was so I didn't comment on it.

    If you want to know why backwards compatibility was removed from later models, you'd better ask Sony, I'm not going to pass opinion off as fact.

    I want to look at the price of the console from this viewpoint. I could comfortably afford it, so apology accepted although why you'd want to apolgise is anyone's guess...

    I didn't say you were praising Microsoft so don't be so defensive, I was stating a fact. Just like your facts about the industry standard. Why you needed to put "third" in caps is quite beyond me, i don't see it as a pissing contest otherwise I'd hijack my wife's Wii.

    Last, but by no means least, take a look at the first comment on this thread and make more than one line out of it.

  • George-Roper #46 3 years ago

    From what I can gather on Live, PSN provides everyone the same benefits as a Gold subscription, which I foolishly bought for 3 months

    It all depends on what you class as a benefit. Getting demos earlier is a nice little benefit but the main reason that I pay for Gold Live access is that it helps to pay for a solid network for my MP gaming.

    Sony are clearly starting to get their act together, with in-game XMB access for example but they're still trailing Live in numerous areas. That's what you get when you don't have a revenue associated with the service. Its the old saying of "You get what you pay for".

  • George-Roper #47 3 years ago

    I am a "casual gamer" now (mind you not the Wii type)... not hardcore anymore. Casual as in, I play when I feel like it. could be once a week, twice or once every 2 weeks... and then the whole idea of paying for something you hardly use sounds less appealing.

    Then don't buy 12 months, buy 3 months. Granted, its not granular enough to cope with 1 or 2 weeks but at least you won't blow £30 for an entire year and then not use 9 months of it.

    I've stocked up on 3 month Gold access codes via last years Zavvi sell off. Got 5 ready to be used as and when.

    But even after saying this I still don't think anyone, in this day and age and being someone who can afford games consoles/games can complain about £2.50/month for access to a dedicated, maintained service. It's barmy.

  • ps3owner #48 3 years ago

    I know I sound a bit nuts, but I just get angry when I have to pay for something that I can have for free. maybe not even angry, but annoyed. I can not be arsed to "micro manage" my online gaming either... even if they would introduce a pay as you go online service I wouldn't do it.

    I just want to switch my PS3 on, start playing COD4 online and be done with it. (or any other game). I'll spend the money on some beers instead, at least I get a good return on it 4-5%, what more can you ask for in this economy ;)

  • El-Dev #49 3 years ago

    3 months Gold cost me £14.99, which is a blatant rip off, didn't want to pay for the year cause I won't use it anywhere near enough to warrant it. Considering the game I have the played the most online is Fifa09 and that's only been about 130 games I think I'll continue to get those types of games on PS3 partially because of the free online.

    Having different standards of subscription cheesed me off a bit, one of the good things with PSN is that everyone gets the same treatment.

    As for trailing live in numerous areas, not in my opinion.

  • zedzee #50 3 years ago

    @ ps3owner:

    Although that is a very tired argument you're mentioning, I will say for the record that I do not own any of the current gen consoles. In the past, I'd always been a loyal Sony PlayStation fan (got a PS1, PS2 and PSP) but when Sony decided to stiff UK/Euroland one more time with a delayed launch and all the decisional debacles that followed, it put me right off Sony and anything to do with this generation.

    As for your tired argument, well, nobody is asking anyone to get on-line or buy a HDD, in order to be able to play a game. Of course, if one wanted to do that, they would have to pay up more for the privilege; either with Sony (upfront) or Microsoft (later). But the point is that the initial cost to play games was much cheaper at launch - with both Microsoft and Nintendo - and continues to be so, versus Sony's.

    On-line gaming, afterall, is not a prerequisite to play games. Paying £425 for the PS3 at launch, however, was - if one wanted to invest in Sony's product.

    @ laudy:

    Home was 'properly' released late last year, I believe. Someone corrected me on here a while back and pointed me to the Eurogamer news item about it being 'sneaked out' by Sony to little if no fanfare. So, it's been 'live' for some time now.

    "I didn't say you were praising Microsoft" - that's a relief. It makes me feel so much better to know that you know that.

    "In order to answer your question" - no one is asking you to.

    "I'm not going to pass opinion off as fact." - that's always a good idea and no one is asking you to.

    "Why you needed to put "third" in caps" - because I wanted to emphasise the point that Sony are, evidently, THIRD.

    "i don't see it as a pissing contest" - no, I don't suppose you do see it as such, either. So don't worry about it if you don't get it.

    "make more than one line out of it." - I think by the debate I've sparked since, I've been very successful at doing just that.

    "My apologies but I made the assumption that you were referring to launch models" - "apology accepted although why you'd want to apolgise [sic] is anyone's guess... "
    Edited by 2 at 03/07/09 @ 14:25

  • laudy #51 3 years ago

    @ zedzee

    thanks for clearing up the live home issue for me, when my version stops saying "beta" then I might give what you say some credence.

    "no one is asking you to"

    what is this, if it is not a question:

    "Can you also tell me why later models did not have backwards compatibility, when it was originally made available (although the compatibility list of games is no longer being expanded)?"

    since there's a question mark after your statement, i thought you wanted it answering...evidently not. Rhetorical questions are supposed to have the answer written down as well.

    "I didn't say you were praising Microsoft" - that's a relief. It makes me feel so much better to know that you know that.

    good.

    "I'm not going to pass opinion off as fact." - that's always a good idea and no one is asking you to.

    nope...can't be bothered with that one...I CAN actually tell when I'm being asked a question.

    "Why you needed to put "third" in caps" - because I wanted to emphasise the point that Sony are, evidently, THIRD.

    cheers.

    "i don't see it as a pissing contest" - no, I don't suppose you do see it as such, either. So don't worry about it if you don't get it.

    what's "it"? apart from Pennywise the Clown.

    "make more than one line out of it." - I think by the debate I've sparked since, I've been very successful at doing just that.

    no...no you didn't...and here's why: the debate was about Sony asking for ideas for the so far uninteresting, frankly pointless Home application, and not the price of the console, so..."The only comedy for Sony is the price of their console" is still only one line. I can only give it -1 once, but i didn't even do that so 53 (and counting) other commenters see it for what it is: cheap.

    "My apologies but I made the assumption that you were referring to launch models" - "apology accepted although why you'd want to apolgise [sic] is anyone's guess... "

    hmm...clever but the clue is actually in the line...read it again..."i made an assumption", and since assumption can be the mother of all f*ck ups, i was apologising because you were misinterpreted...or were you? That was quite weak to be honest, but hey, i'm having a conversation with someone who doesn't even own the console so their first meaningful contribution had absolutely nothing to do with the article in question.

    we could go on cutting and pasting all afternoon

  • Bravestinsane #52 3 years ago

    I dont get all this arguments about pricing, Xbox live for less than £30 a YEAR, would cost me that for 3 months of a MMO game.

    Im a student, i have no money but even to me thats fuck all money really.

    Don't own a PS3 can't say i need one no point offers nothing new to me. Although when i watched the Home trailer before it was released i thought it looked great, obviously by the comments it didnt turn out that way.

  • zedzee #53 3 years ago

    @ laudy:

    Home is now definitely 'live':

    [link url=http://blog.us.playstation.com/2008/12/11 /playstation-home-is-now-live/
    ]http://bl og.us.playstation.com/2008/12/1...[/link]
    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/playstation- home-now-open-to-all
    ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/articles/playst...[/link]

    I could go on cut'n'pasting all weekend, actually...

  • laudy #54 3 years ago

    I don't care

    you wasted your time looking for those links

  • cherryuk #55 3 years ago

    It's cobblers only for people who have no life or social skills - they need an old skool section of games in the arcade

  • ps3owner #56 3 years ago

    whoa.... I just found another piece of free gold.... oh yes. VIDZONE... omg...

  • zedzee #57 3 years ago

    @ laudy:

    Actually, it was rather simple. I remember that they sneaked it out very late last year, so it was easy to find the articles again.

    So, it's never a waste of time proving a point, especially when you know for certain that the counterpoint is completely and utterly wrong and was seemingly plucked out of thin air, with no basis whatsoever.

    Over & Out.



    Edited by 1 at 05/07/09 @ 11:39

  • laudy #58 3 years ago

    good for you, you make me very proud

  • zedzee #59 3 years ago

    @ laudy:

    Always a pleasure to prove you wrong.

    By the way, nice 180 you've done there: [link url=http://w ww.eurogamer.net/articles/Repeat-Home-users-total-25-30-per- cent-of-PSN-account-holders/comments
    ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/articles/Repeat...[/link]

    Over & Out. No really.
    Edited by 1 at 16/07/09 @ 11:17