Sony polling for PlayStation Home ideas Comments by Robert Purchese

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.

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 ;)

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.

@ 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... "

@ 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

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.

@ laudy:

Home is now definitely 'live':

http://blog.us.playstation.com/2008/12/1...
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/playst...

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

I don't care

you wasted your time looking for those links

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

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

@ 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.

good for you, you make me very proud

@ laudy:

Always a pleasure to prove you wrong.

By the way, nice 180 you've done there: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/Repeat...

Over & Out. No really.