Sony Admits To Being Late To The Online Party
Everyone knows the PlayStation Network had to play catch-up in the online services battle with Microsoft's Xbox Live, and Sony has admitted they were a little late to the party.
If you check out the latest issue of Edge magazine, you will find an interview with Sony Computer Entertainment's president of worldwide studios, Shuhei Yoshida. It's where he says the company was "late to offer platform-level support, to make the online functionality work at that level." Perhaps the primary difference between the PSN and Live is that Microsoft attacked the concept right from the start, essentially pushing it hard in every aspect of their machine. The Network sorta started with more of a whimper than a bang and really needed the PS3 to make the necessary strides (which have occurred). Said Yoshida:
"We made the prior decision that you do not introduce the common centralised network names into every experience, so publishers made their own. That was fine at the start, but as more and more games have online functionality you need a unified approach. So Microsoft took that approach in the last generation, and maybe that's where people see the difference when they compare Xbox Live and PSN."
The debate over which online service is better at this point rages, but that's a good sign...several years ago, there was no debate. Now, with arguably better exclusives, thousands of movies and TV shows, solid stability, and the fact that it's FREE, the PSN has finally made its move. Yoshida went on to talk about incorporating other social networking aspects like Facebook: "Something like 300 million people already have accounts on Facebook. Why should we ignore that?" Sony is really into bringing the PS3 into as many homes as possible - hardcore and casual gamers alike - so who knows what you might see in the near future...
9/3/2009 10:22:49 AM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (49 posts)
Jawknee
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 10:56:51 AM
Highlander
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 11:04:30 AM
Next up, Twitter titter as tweeting twits totter into the twilight....Twitter is a live micro blogging service and I've yet to see a reason for it. If you follow it closely, you have to REALLY FOLLOW it, if not, you really fall behind it. So why bother?
Facebook is/was a fad, and it's beginning to fade, Twitter will be next, just as MySpace and others before have fallen away, the same will happen again and again. The Net is so transient.
At least services like PSN/Home and XBL are based on something - online multi-player gaming and e-commerce retailing of games/music/movies/TV.
You know, I do think Sony is missing an opportunity with Home, and it's a big one. Massive revenue potential, and would make a seriously positive change to Home and people's reasons for going there.
I'll reveal my thoughts in another post - perhaps.
Imagi
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 11:18:28 AM
Highlander is right, Sony should just concentrate on Home, and further develop PSN.
Let the browser handle the rest.
Highlander
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 11:33:16 AM
Years ago I visited a large tech company's R&D facility in the UK. They had an ecommerce solution that operated like a virtual store. You could pickup a product and look at it from all angles in a virtual shopping environment.
Today's online retailing is more or less a universal implementation of that. However, there is a difference. The system I saw was like a virtual shop. Not simply an interactive catalog and ordering system such as we have today.
I'm wondering how long it will take for someone like Amazon to put up a store front in PlayStation Home and give us a more interactive online retailing experience. Let's say the Diesel decided to sell real clothing through their Home store. You purchase the item, get the Home version, and a few days later then actual shirt arrives via FedEx or whatever other delivery service.
In other words, marry up the Home mall with real retail. You buy a Movie from Amazon in Home, and it's available for you to watch via download, and your BD is delivered a few days later. You buy a new outfit, and you get the version in Home to try out, and again days later, the real outfit arrives at your door. The same could be done with many different products. Of course it's not going to work for everything, but for games, movies, music, clothes, furniture, art, etc... it's certainly possible.
Linking real retailers with Home would make online shopping a real 'virtual experience'.
I don't know, perhaps I'm on a caffeine high, but this seems like it would work, and be very popular. Of course, it may already be in the works.
Naga
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 11:33:27 AM
Charger7302
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 12:07:12 PM
jaybiv
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 12:22:11 PM
Swim_Irr
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 1:39:53 PM
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 2:15:04 PM
LowKey
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 2:24:22 PM
Gregory Freeman
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 3:32:57 PM
Imagi
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 6:01:39 PM
Button Masher
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 10:54:53 AM
Reply
Jawknee
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 10:56:16 AM
Reply
kevinater321
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 11:08:35 AM
Highlander
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 11:16:42 AM
"We made the prior decision that you do not introduce the common centralised network names into every experience, so publishers made their own. "
He's referring to the PS2 network implementation. Remember that the PS2 was in fact Sony's first foray into networking/online gaming. PSN was also very basic when it arrived - as you say. But PSN provided the platform support that publishers needed.
To some extent the same is true of PSN today sine there are no central came servers for PSN except those for Sony in-house games and Home. However that is both an advantage and disadvantage. Publishers have to setup game servers specific to a given game for PSN, but they are not forced to share space with other games on common servers. The game servers are entirely under the developer/publisher's control. So the developer can make changes to the server side of the game without Sony's involvement.
This approach is more costly for a developer, yes. But, the flexibility is much greater, and the fact that you aren't sharing servers with other games means that you don't have to worry about being swamped by major game launches such as MW2 when it arrives.
I think Sony has the balance right now. They provide a solid platform for online gaming, and at the same time leave some flexibility open to the game developer.
It's a different approach compared to XBL, but I think that in the end the two are now very close functionally, and of course PSN is free. I'm not sure that cross game chat is worth $50 a year...I'll stick to PSN.
Jawknee
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 12:05:47 PM
LimitedVertigo
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 2:02:52 PM
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 2:17:05 PM
johnld
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 3:05:41 PM
Jawknee
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 3:07:21 PM
Imagi
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 6:09:16 PM
BeezleDrop
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 11:21:37 AM
Reply
I never had any complaints about the PSN, I mean it's free and they have gone about and beyond the, well you know. If it's only going to get better count me in! I don't believe playing catch up is necessary just keep up the great work Sony!
LimitedVertigo
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 2:03:39 PM
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 2:18:05 PM
johnld
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 3:07:57 PM
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 9:29:35 PM
Blink182Fan99
Friday, September 04, 2009 @ 9:43:54 AM
Bandit King
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 12:11:00 PM
Reply
Last edited by Bandit King on 9/3/2009 12:13:57 PM
Fane1024
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 7:20:49 PM
Imagi
Friday, September 04, 2009 @ 10:31:46 AM
Xzer0
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 12:29:32 PM
Reply
P.S Do not forget if it will happen xbox360 network thing will die, because MS cant afford those contracts becasue their networks is not free and because they ARE MS which is hated by those compnaies because of IE(internet explorer).
Imagi
Friday, September 04, 2009 @ 10:27:50 AM
Sony has a task to make the browser functional while protecting your PS3 against any malicious attacks that the web may throw at it. Any body needing a real browser experience on the PS3 and has a fat PS3 should just put Linux on it.
Last edited by Imagi on 9/4/2009 10:33:06 AM
Robochic
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 1:00:08 PM
Reply
maxpontiac
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 1:38:40 PM
Reply
Each of my family members has PSN account (my wife, 2 kids, and myself) and if we were to do that on the 360, it would cost us 200 dollars a year! Can any 360 backer rightfully defend that? Please, I am begging you!!
I'll stick with my PS3 and my PSN, thank you very much!!
Last edited by maxpontiac on 9/3/2009 1:43:42 PM
johnld
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 3:13:04 PM
whooka
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 1:58:07 PM
Reply
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 2:18:55 PM
Reply
johnld
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 3:16:56 PM
Qwarktast1c
Friday, September 04, 2009 @ 1:33:10 AM
Reply
the fact that you can't own the HD stuff, just rent it
i want to own it!! like xam'd for instance..... 1080p rental is like $4.99!!! if you want all 26 episodes, then you're gonna end up shelling out over $100!!!!
if i'm gonna spend that much, then it better be mine forever... not for just a few watches

See Full Image









Imagi
Reply
Thursday, September 03, 2009 @ 10:44:32 AM