Sony has been charging publishers for content downloadable from PlayStation Network since October, according to one report.
The report, published by MTV Multiplayer, says that it has been told by several anonymous publishing sources that Sony is now charging $0.16 per gigabyte of information downloaded. The fee was apparently instigated on October 31st, but has only just come to light.
The charge on paid-for DLC carries on indefinitely, while on free content, such as demos, it drops off after 60 days. Remember that publishers already give a cut of their profits for paid-for DLC to Sony.
A comment obtained from SCEA spokesman, Patrick Seybold, seems to bear out the report. Asked whether the new charges will scare publishers away from placing content on the PSN, Seybold said, “Appreciate the opportunity to jump in here, but we respect the confidentiality of our business agreements with our publishing partners." Quite why Seybold couldn't answer in broader terms, without naming specific publishers, is unclear.
"Of course we work closely with them to bring their amazing content to our growing audience, and we are focused on ensuring we, and our publishing partners, have a viable platform for digital distribution. We foresee no change in the high quality or quantity of demos and games available on PSN”, he went on.
So, imagine you're Rockstar. You're developing GTA IV and you go to Microsoft, which says, "Hey! We'll give you $50 million for your DLC that'll be loved and adored by many happy gamers, make us lots of money and maybe sell consoles!" Then you go to Sony, which says, "Sure, you can put it up. It'll cost you around $320,000."
One of the sources quoted made another point - he pointed out that the charge is difficult to budget for on free content, since you don't know how many times it will be downloaded. “It’s like leaving your phone off the hook for a long distance call”, he said. A publisher would effectively be financially penalised for having a successful demo.
On the flipside, Microsoft covers the cost for providing and running its online service by charging users. You could argue that Sony has a right to recoup its costs elsewhere. Give us your take in the Forum.
Source: MTV Multiplayer
The report, published by MTV Multiplayer, says that it has been told by several anonymous publishing sources that Sony is now charging $0.16 per gigabyte of information downloaded. The fee was apparently instigated on October 31st, but has only just come to light.
The charge on paid-for DLC carries on indefinitely, while on free content, such as demos, it drops off after 60 days. Remember that publishers already give a cut of their profits for paid-for DLC to Sony.
A comment obtained from SCEA spokesman, Patrick Seybold, seems to bear out the report. Asked whether the new charges will scare publishers away from placing content on the PSN, Seybold said, “Appreciate the opportunity to jump in here, but we respect the confidentiality of our business agreements with our publishing partners." Quite why Seybold couldn't answer in broader terms, without naming specific publishers, is unclear.
"Of course we work closely with them to bring their amazing content to our growing audience, and we are focused on ensuring we, and our publishing partners, have a viable platform for digital distribution. We foresee no change in the high quality or quantity of demos and games available on PSN”, he went on.
So, imagine you're Rockstar. You're developing GTA IV and you go to Microsoft, which says, "Hey! We'll give you $50 million for your DLC that'll be loved and adored by many happy gamers, make us lots of money and maybe sell consoles!" Then you go to Sony, which says, "Sure, you can put it up. It'll cost you around $320,000."
One of the sources quoted made another point - he pointed out that the charge is difficult to budget for on free content, since you don't know how many times it will be downloaded. “It’s like leaving your phone off the hook for a long distance call”, he said. A publisher would effectively be financially penalised for having a successful demo.
On the flipside, Microsoft covers the cost for providing and running its online service by charging users. You could argue that Sony has a right to recoup its costs elsewhere. Give us your take in the Forum.
Source: MTV Multiplayer
Companies:
Sony
Read More Like This
Comments
deleted 20 Mar 2009 20:18
1/8
Sony has one hell of a business plan for the PS brand.
DoctorDee 21 Mar 2009 08:34
2/8
OK, Microsoft's chargin for on-line has been the ONE thing that has stopped me buying a 360. That and the fact that I have access to one in the office of course.
But Sony's approach seems more likely damage PSN than to help it. I appreciate that Sony may need to cover their PSN bandwidth costs... but it may be better to ask users to pay $0.16 per gig for demos and freebies than publishers. After all, if I want to get demos on a disc, I have to pay what? £5.99 AND put up with the re-written press releases masquerading as news and corporate fawning that is official PlayStation Mag.
But Sony's approach seems more likely damage PSN than to help it. I appreciate that Sony may need to cover their PSN bandwidth costs... but it may be better to ask users to pay $0.16 per gig for demos and freebies than publishers. After all, if I want to get demos on a disc, I have to pay what? £5.99 AND put up with the re-written press releases masquerading as news and corporate fawning that is official PlayStation Mag.
more comments below our sponsor's message
rmorcos 21 Mar 2009 21:08
3/8
I have a PS3 and a 360, and for a while after I got the PS, the 360 wasn't really used much (Blu Ray 'n all). But to be honest after I got a Jasper 360, I can appreciate how good live is, the facility to have chats, no matter whether you're on the dashboard and a friend's in a game, on the PS you leave the chatroom, that's it, chat's over. That's just one example of why users are prepared to pay for Live. It's reflected in the service. You can see how things have panned out, that the two companies play to their strengths, Sony, (a hardware company) Hardware nice and refined, but PSN sucks, MS (a software company), Hardware, initially not reliable or refined, but Live is robust, user friendly etc. This isn't a fanboy speaking, after all I have nothing to lose, having both systems, it's just how I see it.
deleted 22 Mar 2009 00:02
4/8
rmorcos wrote:
I have a PS3 and a 360, and for a while after I got the PS, the 360 wasn't really used much (Blu Ray 'n all). But to be honest after I got a Jasper 360, I can appreciate how good live is, the facility to have chats, no matter whether you're on the dashboard and a friend's in a game, on the PS you leave the chatroom, that's it, chat's over. That's just one example of why users are prepared to pay for Live. It's reflected in the service. You can see how things have panned out, that the two companies play to their strengths, Sony, (a hardware company) Hardware nice and refined, but PSN sucks, MS (a software company), Hardware, initially not reliable or refined, but Live is robust, user friendly etc. This isn't a fanboy speaking, after all I have nothing to lose, having both systems, it's just how I see it.
sorry but i dont see how a jasper 360 increases enjoyment of live, but i agree on all other aspects.
Roblc 22 Mar 2009 06:13
5/8
In other words, companies are either going to presssure Sony into charging for PSN(which may make them in turn make it better for their fanbase), or the DLC may not be as attractive as XBLive's. Maybe this is the exact reason MS has DLC for GTA4, and Sony doesn't. In any case, it will hurt them if they don't start charging eventually. But I kind of find extra DLC a waste of time with a benefit of a behemoth 25 & 50 gb BluRay disc. I am sure they have tons of space for extra content
Was p 22 Mar 2009 11:56
6/8
DoctorDee wrote:
OK, Microsoft's chargin for on-line has been the ONE thing that has stopped me buying a 360. That and the fact that I have access to one in the office of course.
But Sony's approach seems more likely damage PSN than to help it. I appreciate that Sony may need to cover their PSN bandwidth costs... but it may be better to ask users to pay $0.16 per gig for demos and freebies than publishers. After all, if I want to get demos on a disc, I have to pay what? £5.99 AND put up with the re-written press releases masquerading as news and corporate fawning that is official PlayStation Mag.
But Sony's approach seems more likely damage PSN than to help it. I appreciate that Sony may need to cover their PSN bandwidth costs... but it may be better to ask users to pay $0.16 per gig for demos and freebies than publishers. After all, if I want to get demos on a disc, I have to pay what? £5.99 AND put up with the re-written press releases masquerading as news and corporate fawning that is official PlayStation Mag.
When I finally got on-line with the 360, I stopped my subscription to OXM and that covers the cost of XB Live Gold.
Maybe the best thing Live has over PSN is that everything has a demo, even the home brew stuff. With PSN you rarely get a chance to try before you buy a down load game, and they could be a damn sight clearer when something is an old PS1 game.
Was p 22 Mar 2009 12:13
7/8
DoctorDee wrote:
OK, Microsoft's chargin for on-line has been the ONE thing that has stopped me buying a 360. That and the fact that I have access to one in the office of course.
But Sony's approach seems more likely damage PSN than to help it. I appreciate that Sony may need to cover their PSN bandwidth costs... but it may be better to ask users to pay $0.16 per gig for demos and freebies than publishers. After all, if I want to get demos on a disc, I have to pay what? £5.99 AND put up with the re-written press releases masquerading as news and corporate fawning that is official PlayStation Mag.
But Sony's approach seems more likely damage PSN than to help it. I appreciate that Sony may need to cover their PSN bandwidth costs... but it may be better to ask users to pay $0.16 per gig for demos and freebies than publishers. After all, if I want to get demos on a disc, I have to pay what? £5.99 AND put up with the re-written press releases masquerading as news and corporate fawning that is official PlayStation Mag.
When I finally got on-line with the 360, I stopped my subscription to OXM and that covers the cost of XB Live Gold, which is a big improvement on a sycophantic mag. that went missing in the post so often, I gave up asking them to resend the missing months as the reissues would often go missing as well, and waiting on a subscription phone line to ask them to try and resend a three month old magazine yet again isn’t my idea of fun.(damn edit time out)
Maybe the best thing Live has over PSN is that everything has a demo, even the home brew stuff. With PSN you rarely get a chance to try before you buy a down load game, and they could be a damn sight clearer when something is an old PS1 game.
OptimusP 23 Mar 2009 11:19
8/8
Everyone should remember, Sony has gone into survive-mode. Which means making profit as fast as possible.
