Domcorleone
Member
Keep online gaming/chat free and I dont care what they hell they do wit te online features.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Kotaku Rumor: PS4 out in November, control with your phone/tablet, maybe $429/529
- Thread starter Wario64
- Start date
If it's replacing PS+ I would think it wouldn't affect too many people on here anyway since + is so popular. I just hope the price doesn't go up on it.
I hope it's more that some extra additions require the subscription and, at worst, you can still watch Netflix and stuff without a subscription. It'd seriously be bullshit if they take one of Microsoft's worst policies and slap it on, when every other fucking device lets me do it for free. I could see however them keeping premium, don't-need-another-subscription services to PS World while the ones that DO require a subscription can go without.
PuppetMaster
Member
They will likely charge for the EXTRA online services like video sharing, cloud storage etc
Standard MP features ala PS3 should remain free
Standard MP features ala PS3 should remain free
Maleficence
Member
As long as they're not charging for online play it's all ok by me.
Yeahh I mean, if that were the case I wouldn't purchase both a PS4 and next Xbox. I have a hard enough time paying for Xbox live (principle). I'd probably choose one over the other if this happens to be the case.
dark_prinny
Banned
November 2013...
NO.
NO.
grimshawish
Banned
Yeah it could be to make the subscription Plus model sustainable.
If we all gain stuff together? Am okay with it.
My main reason I'm against Live now is I found out the hard way; if you let your subscription slide, your talking paying another £40 on top of any new game purchases. Its a big ask.
This would at least bring other gains.
I won't be happy not playing something cause their paying for Vita content; sorry Vita gaf but if its not by choice, I think you can see my point.
Yeah, it looks like it's really shapely; like it fits in your hands better as the 360 pad does.
Live Free or Die
Banned
Lol Kotaku. People actually believe this?
That would be like PS+, though. So not really following Microsoft.
I'd be okay with that, i don't care about most of that stuff anyway.
Sounds perfectly reasonable. I pay for PS+ because I love the free shit, but I would be pretty angry if they made it required for normal online play. Non-essential features through PS+ is fine with me.
rainking187
Member
Hope this is all bullshit, none of that sounds appealing.
-Pyromaniac-
Member
does it really matter though? You'd assume PS+ features would be free? Because PS world wounds like PS+ plus even more stuff.
As long as you can play online for free which it sounds like you'll still be able to do with no problems, it's reasonable.
December if were lucky im thinking.
Castle Doctrine
Member
Hopefully they give away tons of games and stuff with Playstation World, and not charge for online play (which I'm thinking they won't).
See, this sounds perfectly fine, but a lot of people are going to read it and automatically assume online play be cost money.
grimshawish
Banned
Cyborg
Member
This
1: Paying for online would stop me from buying the ps4 on day 1. Sony always said online would be free.
2. Triggers look the samep, fck that. Not much improved
Well, we'll find out soon enough.
I highly doubt MP will be behind a paywall like XBL, it is one of PSN's defining features against XBL across platforms, if they were going to charge for MP they would have done it with Vita. Any feature that they do want you to pay for will no doubt just be part of PS+.
Vyse The Legend
Member
There are plenty of people claiming that $400 will be the max for next-gen consoles, not the entry point.
You must filter out those posts somehow; they're everywhere, "brah."
How can you seriously claim that a rumour, which contains no information beyond the suggestion that you might have to pay for something, be horrible? Sony charge for plus and nobody complains about that.
Let's wait for the facts before issuing judgement.
Yep that is what I expect.
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
Dev leaking dev kits and specs I trust. Things that are either not decided or privy to only top exec are generally not really common leaks. Of course it could be material leaked in advance of tomorrow by someone who saw talking point.
XBL makes Microsoft a ton of money. Sony would be silly to not get in on the action from Day 1. For every person who doesn't buy one due to it, there's another who will pay $40-$60 a year for 5-7 years and help balance out the lost sale.
Baconsammy
Banned
February 2014 if you're lucky.
GANGSTERKILLER
Member
It is not cheap, agree. But I'll have to buy it because I always want the "complete" version of everything. Fuck myself.
twinturbo2
butthurt Heat fan
Come on, Sony can't be that stupid, are they?
$400 at most, and you guys can quote me on that.
$400 at most, and you guys can quote me on that.
Well if that's true what do they mean by most then? Yeah this isn't going to work for me, 429 will probably end up 449. and a sub for online. Yeah no. Hopefully the price changes.
Relax, no need to act like you were ever going to buy one.
I do hope that pricing isn't true, and I dislike the idea of pay-for-online-play when PS3 owners have lived without that. But the backlash against Microsoft's online pay structure was muted at best. And PS Plus could easily be considered their way to test the waters for monetizing more of the experience down the road. If Sony actually charges for online play, or for related functions that are really important to online play, then where are consumers going to go? Sure, there are personal computers and the Wii U, but for consumers intent on buying a high-end new console, there would be no alternative. And Sony would be foolish to forgo the extra revenue without considering the pros and cons of that kind of change first.
That said, I find charging for any of this stuff a little ridiculous. Consumers are going to adopt devices that offer some of the Gold plan's functions, but don't offer after-the-fact charges in return for accessing them. Smart TVs, Roku boxes and Apple TVs don't charge some extra fee for the right to use Netflix, and they don't cost a lot in the latter two cases. A lot of standalone BD players have this function. I think some of the consumers most likely to consider such a system at launch are already spoken for because of those devices, and some of those who aren't into it may react coldly to the idea of paying for it on the PS4.
And as for the hardware pricing scheme that Kotaku is talking about, I'd rather that didn't happen, of course. Beyond $399, it seems a little exorbitant for what is ultimately a recreational device in a sluggish global economy. And the PS4 will have a lot of competition for the added features beyond gaming, so charging some premium for that is hard to swallow. All of that said, what matters more is what those two trims offer. If the $529 rumored box offers an ingot of gold and every accessory and some incredible pack-in software, so be it. But if the $429 model is fairly equipped without offering every bell and whistle, that's far better than what happened last time. The 20GB PS3 and the 'tard' 360 were awful in this respect. So the $429 model comes with a less massive hard drive, but is otherwise 'fully functional' as far as the ecosystem is concerned. That might be less difficult for consumers to accept.
That said, I find charging for any of this stuff a little ridiculous. Consumers are going to adopt devices that offer some of the Gold plan's functions, but don't offer after-the-fact charges in return for accessing them. Smart TVs, Roku boxes and Apple TVs don't charge some extra fee for the right to use Netflix, and they don't cost a lot in the latter two cases. A lot of standalone BD players have this function. I think some of the consumers most likely to consider such a system at launch are already spoken for because of those devices, and some of those who aren't into it may react coldly to the idea of paying for it on the PS4.
And as for the hardware pricing scheme that Kotaku is talking about, I'd rather that didn't happen, of course. Beyond $399, it seems a little exorbitant for what is ultimately a recreational device in a sluggish global economy. And the PS4 will have a lot of competition for the added features beyond gaming, so charging some premium for that is hard to swallow. All of that said, what matters more is what those two trims offer. If the $529 rumored box offers an ingot of gold and every accessory and some incredible pack-in software, so be it. But if the $429 model is fairly equipped without offering every bell and whistle, that's far better than what happened last time. The 20GB PS3 and the 'tard' 360 were awful in this respect. So the $429 model comes with a less massive hard drive, but is otherwise 'fully functional' as far as the ecosystem is concerned. That might be less difficult for consumers to accept.
Hope so, paying for p2p online is fucking bullshit any which way you slice it. If it's just a bunch of percieved bells and whistle in a subscription format (control your PS4 downloads with your fridge for a low low price of...) perhaps with plus bolted on, then I could imagine worst things, current XBL being one of them.
If online play is straight up pay walled/subbed no way around it then ya don goofed Kaz.
TheJollyCorner
Member
people melting down over a Kotaku 'source'?
Have they been accurate lately, because Kotaku is normally ridiculed constantly on GAF?
Have they been accurate lately, because Kotaku is normally ridiculed constantly on GAF?
Colonel Nasty
Member
They'll charge and we'll all pay. Me included.
Mr_Pooriya
Member
People need to calm down! It's just a rumor and the bloke said "most" not "all".
Probably just like PS+ is today but with Gaikai and cross-chat added to it.
Probably just like PS+ is today but with Gaikai and cross-chat added to it.