I don't think you can read Jim, no where does it say that a Monthly fee would be for PSN, it would be for "items/content". Even then it says it could remain per item, as it is now. So in other words in simple, still free. There would just be alternatives for per month costs if you wanted to take advantage of certain things, like themes/avatars for a monthly fee. It's sort of like Qore.

As long as online play remains free and we don't have to subscribe in order to purchase PSN games... I don't care.

I say good chap. duel wielding and riding a horse is rather amazing!

Well if they decide to add something new on top of what the PSN offers and then add a yearly sub on top of that I would be ok. Take away my free online play and all that jazz, not ok.

I'm going to have a PS3 in ten days. If Sony started charging for PSN within that time then I'd be really fucking pissed.

Saw this coming

PSN needs a service worth paying for first.

Well, The PS3 has what? Three MMOs slated for this year? I think those three are obvious points of subscriptions and items/contents.

That horse is so fucked.

What Queasy said - a subscription MMO or three is a no-brainer.

Jim, I'm having a terrible day at work. Thank you for posting that picture and cheering me up.

Really, either the people at Sony just can't use their brains properly or are easily swayed by greed. For the first time in 3 years they are starting to see the light and it happened mostly due to the recent price cut and a decent year of games and now barely 2 months after they want to kill that momentum by charging for an online service that's not yet on par with the competitor? do they really enjoy being 3rd or something? or like Sterling said they just have the insane need to counter their every good point with a stupid decision?. Well considering this comes from the same people that released the PSPGo i can't say i'm that shocked, still, you'd think they'd learn from their mistakes by now, right?.

The PSN experience is so empty and shallow that I dont see how they can start charging for it unless they do a major makeover first. And judging from the last several updates, I dont see that happening any time soon. I know I wont pay for the subscription... I just dont use my PS3 enough.

As I understand it, the monthly fees go towards premium services. That is, beyond what they're offering already, which would remain free.

To which I say go for it. I want Sony to do well and if they can supply a good service for a modest price, more power to them. And money, too. They sorta need it seeing how they've taken it in the keister for so long with the manufacturing cost of their console.

Yeah, this is ON TOP of all the free shit we get now, like the all important online gaming.

I'm guessing MMO's, all they're saying is "we can charge a monthly fee for MMO's"

Stop trying to throw fuel on the fire man.

But it all hinges on what they choose to offer at a price: if online play is still free, what more could they offer to extend that core functionality, and will it actually be worth the coinage?

For all of the fanboy bile-spewing on both sides of their respective fences, I still say that PSN needs to become a stronger service across all areas in order to charge a monthly fee for ANYTHING. No cross-game chat has been a thorn in PSN's side since the launch of the service, and being asked to pay just for that seems beyond asinine.

If they want my ever-lightening dollar, they'd better make the service shine like the fucking sun.

it was gonna happen some day.. sony wanna make money just like everybody else

"you people!"

So that's how it's gonna be...

Well, they already charge for some clothes in home.

And they also plan to charge for club houses in home.

Home is a major source of change for the ps3. If you don't believe me, go to home, and see how many wonderful people are buying digital clothes.

I just have to say, PSN better not fuck up like Live did two years ago after chrsitmas. Its going to be large.

lets put this to bed shall we.

Jim: you wrote: "PSN subscription fee subject rears ugly head again" in the title. Its implied. You know what you do, you are a writer. So don't come back with "oh so I DIDN'T NOT say you would pay.... etc etc." You know how to write. It was done on purpose. If you would change the title to "Sony Exec. says "We will continue to sell content and services." None of this would happen. Of course you won't change it, because then you wouldn't get all the bawwwchilds in here.

Everyone else: Don't pay attention to the title. There. Everything is ok.

Just trying to help you out. But you know what you are doing. So... whatever.

@Jim

Not to sound rude, but you pretty much asked for people to respond this way. This isnt the first time you've written something "misleading" in order to attract attention, yet you complain when people become outraged and call you out on it. The fact that in the article you try and clarify (briefly) to save face doesnt change the fact that your headline is innacurate.

All I can say is no dice. I actually use Xbox Live a lot more, so Sony will not be getting money from me. Granted they are one time fees, but I don't actually play that much.

The problem is Jim, you aren't comprehending the quotes you're using, much like most people on the Web. A translation of the article for Jim:

"We expect to see considerable growth in digital content, such as game download services, avatar items and the like. We can also accept payment in a growing number of ways.

They see a growth in DLC. You currently pay for DLC with a single purchase price, but they see other ways of paying for digital content other than just flat fees for individual DLC items.

"In addition to single-payment packaged software, there are also schemes like monthly fees or per-item charges.

As an example of how they could price out DLC, they could have a subscription fee for access to a certain number or type of DLC, including all older DLC and anything that comes out with new games. They could also break up what one digital game or similar application offers into smaller bits and only sell what you would want for that application, such as selling co-op, multiplayer, and single-player options separately for those who don't want to pay for all 3.

This doesn't change that you'd still have the option to buy the game as it currently is, a single flat price for the full package.

I think this variety of payment methods will bring about a diverse range of playing methods, too."

He thinks doing it this way may result in offering more play options for various games based on what people are willing to pay for. Perhaps letting players cookie-cutter build the game they want to play rather than having all of it forced on them.

====

Now, Jim, based on what you wrote above all you seemed to really read was "monthly fees" rather than actually seeing the context of his comment. Then you blogged it here using the typical FUD crap methodology and finished it off with "... what the Hell could Sony offer that would be worth paying a subscription fee over?"

Seriously Jim? It's the same thing you can currently buy on the PSN, aka DLC. They're not talking about charging a fee for new PSN services, they're just talking about alternative methods of paying for the same content we already pay for.

With Free Realms, DC Online, and The Agency coming to the PS3 this year supposedly, it's kind of obvious why they're talking more about this. Will DC Online have an option to pay a monthly subscription fee with access to all content, including all costume pieces, new content, and the such? Or, will they sell everything by piece? Or, will they have both options.

That kind of concept is already used in MMOs as it is, so it's kind of hard to not see how you couldn't draw the same conclusion with digital content in general. But, instead, you did the usual Jim blog post with the ever so catchy title.

I'm interested in seeing what extra content they're looking at pushing out that will be subscription based. I'm kinda hoping that, with the MMO's coming out for the system over the next year, part of that subscription fee will cover the MMO fee's or at least part of them. That'd be enough incentive to get them for the PS3 instead of the PC. If its more stuff like qore though, meh.

@JimSterling: wow... i thought the article was really clearly written. The other commenter's must not have read the article or must have been out sick when critical thinking was being taught in school.

From what I remember reading long ago, the subscription fee was going to be applied in a kind of netflicks way where you pay like $20 a month to be able to play as many of the PSN titles as you want. Something along those lines.