Rumour – Cross-game chat for PSN a “subscribers” feature

It was an option on that survey Sony did some time ago on what people would be willing to pay for. Thats most likely OPMs source for this rumour.

Ugh. I don’t care about it, because I personally believe most gamers online are vile creatures that should be kept silent and unseen, until their anonymity is removed. However, this has ‘backlash’ and ‘flame on’ written all over it, between the people who do want it and the trolls. This isn’t going to be pretty at all.

Most of the time if you’re doing cross-game chat its with people you know/are on your friends list. Unless you’ve buddied a load of tossers i dont think there’ll be to much trouble with vile people.

I guess Sony have to justify charging for something.

Seems a little desperate though, imo.

Am I the only person who thought this was obvious? It would be unworkable to have gamers host their own party chat given the bandwidth requirements, thus as with the XBox 360, Sony have to invest in further hardware for voice just like PC’s with Ventrilo and Teamspeak etc.

@Galactic_Barret
“I don’t care about it, because I personally believe most gamers online are vile creatures that should be kept silent and unseen, until their anonymity is removed.”

This is what Party chat is all about eliminating – so you should care about it – though maybe what you are saying is that you have no friends?

The main use for me of Party chat on the 360 is to create a Party of friends who are all playing the *same* game and have our own dedicated chat channel. I.e. so we don’t have to speak to those “vile creatures” and they are kept silent.

I get that Geki, but I may be an anomoly: I only friend request some of the more tolerable posters on 1UP, and one person who was a good team player in W@W; The rest invite me and I just can’t be mean enough to not accept. The only reason I would pick up a mic is to bark orders, anyway. The internet has convinced me that 9/10 seemingly normal people lose all of their cooth once they are granted anonymity. Most gamers, some of my friends included, are just disgusting.

DD, this is about CGC, right? If we aren’t playing the same game, I assume we would just be chatting, something I don’t do online; The wife and friends do that for me, and having a civil conversation is difficult online; There is little respect paid when you have nothing to lose, so to speak. I think I’m more of a text type of guy, anyway. Its easier to be passive aggressive with trolls that way, I find. Again, while CGC isn’t for me, I think charging for it isn’t a good move.

Yes it is CGC – but a consequence of supporting CGC is that you can have private parties within a specific game too.

I don’t see PSN subscriptions being a big hit anyways.

Who is going to play for something they can still get for free? As long as playing the games online remains free, this stuff won’t fly.

If they reduce your bandwidth or make you Que on your online games unless you subscribe very few people will go for this.

Right now most people believe that LIVE beats PSN righ tnow. Even given the fact that one has fees and one doesn’t. If they both have fees…Sony might wanna reconsider that move.

If this is OS-dependant and not game-dependant, then it could alleviate the problems of some games having terrible /no support for ingame chat themselves. Hmm.

And yes, CGC is very useful for chatting with friends who don’t necessarily want to play the same games but want to catch up with things, give advice about what to get as DLC / PSN games, or even tech support

I’ve used CGC on 360 to do all those things and I wouldn’t give it up.

Ironically CGC is free for everyone on Live, but Parties aren’t – although parties are more for acting like their own private lobbies, anyway.

@10 Live does beat PSN. It’s a better service, a unified service thats the whole point. PSN is good no doubt and is free but for me its lacking in a community vibe and needs a relift.

remember the “Playstation World” rumour, the service that was going to knock Live down a peg or two, what happened to that?

It goes without saying, but PSN is a much better service then it was nearly three years ago.

Better then Live? Of course not. But still a better service.

I can’t really see how this can work. It’s going to end up never being used (and thus not being worth paying for) if you can only use it to talk with other subscribers.

I guess Sony have to justify charging for something.

Seems a little desperate though, imo.

^^^^^ THIS!

^^^^^ Desperate? No.. sure its always about money.. but look at Microsoft, Voice cross chat, you pay for gold anyways, so no reason PS3 can be paid for as well..

But Xbox Live you only pay 50 bucks or not… with PSN Payable, at least you have more choices to pay, so for most users it will be FREE and still be able to play online, some other users will pay the cheapest monthly for x-chat, some people will pay as much as xbox live, and I think there was one more for around 75 bucks or 60 bucks that you have every feature.

So PSN really imprvoed over Xbox live, you still play for free, and you dont need to pay full price for the features you don’t need

I just renewed my LIVE 12 month. Cost me 39.99usd. Either wait till your current golfd runs out, convert to silver, and they will give you a “special” offer OR goto Walmart Online and they offer you the same deal.

And so far as I know Gold is Gold. There is no level based subscriptions. Either you have Gold or Silver(free – no online gameplay/netflix/facebook/etc). So Gold is everything – 40usd, and Silver is litle or nothing, free.

If Sony prices PSN in any other fashoin they are asking to split the community and setting themself up for Fail. 40usd/year = less then 4usd/month. Reasonable for a regular online gamer.

I hope Sony doesn’t make it too complecated.

This is a joke if its true. I don’t even care bout the feature anymore. As long as I can still play with my friends online for free XMB in game text messaging is ok with me.