PSN Charging Publishers for Bandwidth

[Lnin0]

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2009/03/20/sony-now-charging-publishers-for-ps3-downloadable-content/

Pretty interesting read. At first I didn't see the point. Publisher are going to have to pay for some sort of distribution method if the didn't have PSN. $0.16/GB is probably a lot cheaper than pressing CDs or running their own online servers/bandwidth.

But further down in the article you start to see how it unfolds more. What about demos ? Demos are free as of right now, so as a publisher with a 1GB demo that is a lot of cost to weigh. Is that demo going to help sales so much they want to spend upwards of $160,000 to pass out a million free demos? Could this be the end of free demos on the PSN?

So while the SDF can boast PSN is free, in reality is isn't. Everyone knew that back end - servers/bandwidth - was costing someone money. It is just a question of who it is costing now that the days of Sony footing the bill for everyone are over.

While Microsoft’s policy of not charging publishers for downloadable content might sit well with game-makers, it does suggest that Sony is simply tapping a different source to generate money to help pay for the downloading of popular content. Sony is asking publishers to foot the bill, but the content remains free for gamers who own PS3s. Microsoft, however, charges users an annual $50 fee for Xbox Live Gold membership and has been delaying access to some of its downloadable content to non-paying Silver members in favor of those Gold subscribers.

[Nut_Man]

Is this why PSN games dont have demos?

[Lord Moon]

Probably part of the reason. Free content will cost the devs more now, while Sony scrapes the "download tax" off. Also Sony is getting paid twice on paid content now too. Their initial cut from sales and now 16 cents per GB downloaded. Looks like Sony figured out how to make money on PSN besides selling virtual clothing in Home.

Bet we'll see a lot less free theme and wallpapers and more "premium" themes........oh wait

[GameGuru]

It'll probably drive more developers away or allow them to increase the cost of PSN games over XBLA games while blaming Sony for it.

[J0HN-666-McCLANE]

Seems like its a juggle between pay to play or go with less demos and play for free.
I choose play for free. Call me crazy. Rarely demos are any good.
Games really worth playing don't usually need demos anyway.

[Sully907]

I don't like this much at all wtf Sony. Do we know the percentage cuts Sony takes on DLC as opposed to Microsoft?

[Lnin0]

The demo thing is what sucks for publishers - especially the smaller publishers.

The RE5s of the world will sell regardless .... you could argue not having a demo actually helps those publishers. I bet there were more people who decided not to get RE5 after playing the demo than did.

But the little guy, who cannot rely on marketing hype, is crippled by this. The one thing they had to help spread positive word of mouth just got put out of their price range. So for them this spells bad news.

Sure, publishers could sell their demos but how many people are going to shell out cash to try a game that hasn't been force feed down their throats by the publisher's PR firm? It only benefits large publisher - because now their hype machine is profiting from a demo as well.

As a gamer 'free' sounds great right now but the long term implications mean small publishers are more likely to struggle and large publishers will monopolizing even more of the industry.

So if that sounds good to you, then go right ahead and keep looking forward to your Call of Duty 17's and Resident Evil 12's and all those wonderful "movie to game" titles because innovation, creativity and niche are soon to be extinct. They are already on the endangered species list.

[J0HN-666-McCLANE]

The demo thing is what sucks for publishers - especially the smaller publishers.

The RE5s of the world will sell regardless .... you could argue not having a demo actually helps those publishers. I bet there were more people who decided not to get RE5 after playing the demo than did.

But the little guy, who cannot rely on marketing hype, is crippled by this. The one thing they had to help spread positive word of mouth just got put out of their price range. So for them this spells bad news.

Sure, publishers could sell their demos but how many people are going to shell out cash to try a game that hasn't been force feed down their throats by the publisher's PR firm? It only benefits large publisher - because now their hype machine is profiting from a demo as well.

As a gamer 'free' sounds great right now but the long term implications mean small publishers are more likely to struggle and large publishers will monopolizing even more of the industry.

So if that sounds good to you, then go right ahead and keep looking forward to your Call of Duty 17's and Resident Evil 12's and all those wonderful "movie to game" titles because innovation, creativity and niche are soon to be extinct. They are already on the endangered species list.

think you are being a little over dramatic?

[quashpdarkman]

think you are being a little over dramatic?

i think he's spot on.

xbl costs for a reason; it's downright superior to psn. say what you will about the xbl community (i hate it too), but it's the only way to do online console gaming. the only thing that's really terrible about it is that it forces you to use a shitty microsoft/third party mic instead your own (something i do love the ps3 for is it's general kickassness when it comes to hardware compatibility).

i don't see where people can get off screaming "50 DOLLARS A YEAR LOL" when they spent $500 on a console and hundreds more on games and peripherals. i've spent $250 on my 360 and all four games i have for it. i don't have a mic or a hard drive because i don't care to have either one of those right now, and yet i'm enjoying xbl as much as i enjoyed dreamcast's online capabilities back in the day. at this rate, i will gladly fork over $50 for another year of xbl (really, $50 a year is nothing; and at least with xbl, i see where the money's going).

i said it before and i'll say it again; 360 is the best overall value this generation. nothing comes close to it, period. i like the ps3 too, but i can't justify spending $500 for a few good exclusives and a blu ray player i'm never going to use. i see where you ps3 owners are coming from, but i'm simply not going to bother with it until it's competitively priced.

[Lnin0]

think you are being a little over dramatic?It always seems over dramatic at first...and the next thing you know we are knee deep in melted ice caps and buried under a constant cloud of acid rain asking how this shit happened.

So yeah. I was being over dramatic but it was to make a point - nothing is free.

I am not saying Sony's way is wrong or MS is right. I am just saying while 'free' sounds great, you have to realize someone is paying. Previously it was Sony picking up the tab for gamers but now it will be the little devs/publishers who pay the biggest price and, to me, that is unfortunate.