-
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.
Playstation Vue (Streaming TV Service) Launches Today Starting at $49.99
- Thread starter RedAssedApe
- Start date
Americanmushroom
Banned
So now you dont use internet?
wanderjahr
Banned
That pricing is laughable.
Marty Chinn
Member
Sling has way less channels and way less features.
TheAbsolution
Member
And Thusly are targeting two entirely different markets.
Not talking to specifically you Marty but,
There's room for the both of them here guys.
The more options for viewing content over the Internet, the better.
Quick question for the users as one thing is slightly confusing.
They mention the "cloud" recording (that "only" keeps your shows for 28 days), but sometime a "DVR" function is also mentioned.
Can we DVR locally as well, of is 28 days the longest a show will be kept?
If so, the service is not for me as I DVR stuff like whole seasons of TV shows or bunch of cartoons for kids, that I keep for months.
They mention the "cloud" recording (that "only" keeps your shows for 28 days), but sometime a "DVR" function is also mentioned.
Can we DVR locally as well, of is 28 days the longest a show will be kept?
If so, the service is not for me as I DVR stuff like whole seasons of TV shows or bunch of cartoons for kids, that I keep for months.
Hes saying he can add a cheaper basic cable package with probably more channels for less. If you package internet and cable together it is cheaper then if you had them separately. Vue would have been good at 20 bucks a month. 50 is too steep. I pay 70 for internet and no cable, just netflix and hulu. This would out me at 120 bucks a month. If i got a basic cable package through my provider it would be no more than 100 bucks a month with many more channels. Playstation vue is not a good deal, unless they provided internet for you.
TheAbsolution
Member
You can DVR as much as you want to, just can't save it past 28 days.
Sling has channels people actually want. ESPN family, CNN, TNT, AMC, Cartoon Network, Disney
For $20, you can't beat that with a stick
DOWN
Banned
I disagree a little. I want a Netflix scenario where the brand gets huge and smashes them all and theres only like 2 kinda Amazon/Hulu competitors who keep things fair.
I don't want every platform and company to offer access to cable via web and apps. I want an obvious king to emerge that we can all love.
thiscoldblack
Unconfirmed Member
I'm using the 7-day trial.
Service seems impressive considering it being at an early stage. The UI is okay (for the most part) and there is a decent list of channels, however, it's too expensive for what it offers at the moment. Service should start at $29, where I think it would take off immediately. Honestly, I don't see Sony making a groundbreaking number of subscribers at the current price/offering. Good luck to them.
Service seems impressive considering it being at an early stage. The UI is okay (for the most part) and there is a decent list of channels, however, it's too expensive for what it offers at the moment. Service should start at $29, where I think it would take off immediately. Honestly, I don't see Sony making a groundbreaking number of subscribers at the current price/offering. Good luck to them.
Marty Chinn
Member
I and other people watch more than just those channels.
there isnt really a DVR... you "like" (favourite) the show and it auto gives you every episode of that show shown on any network in past 28 days.
There should also be integration of on-demand services which could give you more content but not sure if that made it in or not.
True but at $50, you're basically paying the same price as cable.
TheAbsolution
Member
They confirmed that you can authenticate on the various websites so there you go.
And that's perfectly fine.
However, many thinking about cutting cable want to do so because they only watch a handful of networks that are on cable (with ESPN usually being one of them).
Yes, but it also has some severe holes.
No local channels, 1 stream per account, no recording, lacking a whole bunch of rather basic channels (Animal Planet, Discovery, USA, FX, Syfy, Science, Comedy Central...)
There's just no perfect solution yet for cord cutters it seems...
Now if Vue was $10-$20 cheaper, was as "a la carte" as Sling TV, and allowed for local DVR recording (no limit on time kept) and included the Disney channels (ABC, ESPN, Disney ch for kids)...
We'd be closer imo.
Same here. See no point in this.
Many times my internet went down and my tv signal was fine also. If I am paying the same as cable and have that con then this is just not worth it.
nikos
Member
Been using this for about six hours now. No real complaints so far. Interface and features are nice and image quality is good, better than competing services I've tried.
I don't watch much TV, and most of the shows I do watch are on networks that aren't yet available on Vue, but I may still go for it.
I don't watch much TV, and most of the shows I do watch are on networks that aren't yet available on Vue, but I may still go for it.
Yep. For me, cord-cutting was about reduced costs and less filler. Paying anything close to cable prices defeats the purpose.
Sling is as close to a la carte as you can get right now while still delivering essentials. That plus Netflix and HD local channels with an antenna has been a great combo for me
Lol wtf at that price so expensive for such little channels . Sony should if offered this for $29.99 . whats the point of cutting cable if the vue service is just as expensive .
As someone who doesn't care for sports. Sorry only into movies and cartoons. Vue could of been really good. offering up nick and cartoon network but man that price suxks
As someone who doesn't care for sports. Sorry only into movies and cartoons. Vue could of been really good. offering up nick and cartoon network but man that price suxks
Monster Zero
Junior Member
$50 and no ESPN is dead on arrival
- You can use a bunny-ears antenna to get local channels in HD. I get all mine (12 or so) that way.
- 1 stream per account is very fair for $20
- There's no recording but a few of the channels let you finish shows you were watching within 2 days or so.
- I feel the channel lineup is adequate for the price but they seem to be adding more at a good clip
I'm glad Sony and Apple are entering the fray but very few people are going to drop cable to pay similar prices for less channels. Sling has the right formula. Essentials at a bargain price
This so hard. Many folks would pay $10 a month just for ESPN alone. I don't understand how Dish/Sling is offering it for $20 in a package
Depends on what someone wants.
My 75 mpbs internet + Hulu + Sling + Netflix + Amazon + Antenna combo pretty much gives me all the channels/channel content that I want.
Channels/channel content I get with that combo:
NBC, CBS, CW, ABC, Fox, PBS, two (local) retro TV Networks, ABC Family, AMC, Nickelodeon, MTV, MTV2, VH1, BET, Comedy Central, TV Land, Spike, Bravo, CNN, Cartoon Network, ESPN, ESPN 2, ESPN 3, Disney, FX/FXX, Food Network, Discovery, HBO Classics, Galavision, HGTV, IFC, TBS, TNT, Travel Channel, (and soon A&E, History, H2, and Lifetime).
There's really no other channel that I would like to have that's outside of that combo except for GSN (but I could easily see GSN coming to Sling TV soon since it's a low budget network).
75 mbps internet + a cable or satellite TV service would be $50 more per month for me in comparison and I would mostly watch the same channels/content with it. It just doesn't make sense for me to go with that option.
RedAssedApe
Banned
perfect solution is to let your friends subscribe to the paid services and mooch off them lol
NoSkillz187
Member
For now, Netflix + Hulu + HBO Now(next month) + HD Antenna is all the TV I ever need. Only thing missing for me is ESPN. One day I'm sure ESPN will be offered as a standalone service. It makes too much sense not to do it.
That's the ideal situation but I don't see it happening anytime soon. The best we can hope for is that the cable companies will start offering better rates due to competition.
Espn insider. Its computer based but it is
wumster3000
Member
Edit: misread the statement. Thought it was an argument against the base package.
IMO Sling has a much better selection. ESPN, ESPN 2, Food Network and the Travel Channel are all I need. As stated by many in this thread, no ESPN no sell.
But no recorder is deal breaker imo.
Isn't Google fiber for $130 and you get
Why would you pay $60 for the Vue? It is the same price but with a lot more with Google fiber.
MiketheBSG
Member
People don't seem to realize this, but it costs money for TV providers to rebroadcast free local channels. These charges of course are passed down to the customer as fees. I like Sling's approach of keeping local channels off. I have an antenna and use the Tablo app on my Roku and iPhone to watch local channels for free (after you buy the equipment). Tablo + Sling gets me pretty much everything I watch, for $20. There's alternatives to Tablo too, like Simple.tv. The most efficient approach to cutting the cable cord and have access to TV anywhere is Sling + Tablo.
In my situation, my cable+Internet is now $75, not $175 as it used to be. I'm liking that bill.
hodayathink
Member
Are you willing to pay $20 for the ESPN Family of Networks? Because if it ever happened, that's what I see it looking like.
The prices ive seen for nashville were 150 a month with a 2 year contract.
No contract and for months im on the rode i dont have to pay for vue like November and December
Its not perfect but those savings and no taxes could save me quite a bit
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
I mean, let's be real. With all the stuff THAT Sony is providing, how can some of you guys think that it would cost the same as what's out there. As it is now...
$50 for DVR, and all those channels without Disney and Espn is still a better deal with multiple devices and one account that serves 3 extra boxes without any additional fees.
Like I don't understand why people aren't seeing the extreme value in this price and what goes into it. Strip vue of the DVR, cloud function and half the channels, it well cost the same as sling. But it has more than that plus the DVR function alone that in some ways reasonably justifies the price. I really don't see the problem.
This is not a case of paying more for less. You are paying more for more of everything except two networks? How is that a loss especially compared to isp bundles?
$50 for DVR, and all those channels without Disney and Espn is still a better deal with multiple devices and one account that serves 3 extra boxes without any additional fees.
Like I don't understand why people aren't seeing the extreme value in this price and what goes into it. Strip vue of the DVR, cloud function and half the channels, it well cost the same as sling. But it has more than that plus the DVR function alone that in some ways reasonably justifies the price. I really don't see the problem.
This is not a case of paying more for less. You are paying more for more of everything except two networks? How is that a loss especially compared to isp bundles?
MrBenchmark
Member
I have slingtv for 19.99 get espn tnt amc and more plus 7.99 netflix and ota hd that's plenty. Between espn and tnt get my nba fix sony is friggin high i got there email in chicago test market they can kiss it for 50 bucks
arya's prayer
Neo Member
Overcharging? I think some people need to step away from the computer and into the real world.
Why not make it optional? Not everyone cares about DVR or watching on multiple devices or cloud functions. Give those channels without those additional features for $20. They aren't making it optional. They are forcing that stuff on you which is what Comcasts of the world are already doing. Not to mention a bunch of channels people don't care about. And you need a Playstaion to watch it. Playstations aren't free.
You save $360 a year by going with Sling over Vue and you get espn. $20 a month is harmless territory. $50-70 a month for anything cable television related is a rip off.
hodayathink
Member
You don't really think that if ESPN offered a service, that they'd just do ESPN and ESPN2, do you? You'd be getting everything like ESPNews, the SEC Network, ESPNU, and every other channel that ESPN creates in the process, and probably access to their 30 for 30 movies as well. And with live sports becoming more and more valuable to networks as the thing that people keep cable for, I can easily see ESPN charging $20 a month and getting away with it (I mean, if HBO is about to charge $15 a month for its original programming and many people are fine with it, I don't see how you can make an argument that ESPN shouldn't charge $20).
MrBenchmark
Member
Cap'n Cook
Member
You could make your own study just by reading a lot of these posts on this thread and lets be honest, when it comes to sport fans gaffers doesn't necessarily come to mind. I remember watching a video back during CES that polled people on why they still haven't cut the cord and if I remember correctly 40% said because of ESPN. You can't deny how popular ESPN is, here's some proof http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/ratings-espn-tops-cable-for-year-own-hallmark-we-tv-among-few-gainers-1201391036/
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
Because we live in the 20st century where people don't really have time to catch the TV shows they like. I mean, isn't that what future proofing your product so people can always catch the shows they missed... Wait..... Isn't that primarily the POINT of Internet TV?
Either way, this is a test. Obviously this isn't a full roll out but a way to test the major markets. It's why it isn't nationwide and why there's a 7 day trial attached to it.
I don't understand how someone could not care about DVR but want to watch ESPN as if you aren't going miss anything on there if you aren't watching it in time. DVR in itself is a huge feature that you don't get to pay $50 for anywhere. I don't even know where your math is coming from.