Sony Claims More than 30 Million PS3s Connected to PSN

[Danpascooch]

WOW! Good job Sony! This means that while Xbox Live only earns about (25,000,000 * 5) 125 million a year, and leads in active players, PSN Earns a whopping "negative whatever it costs to upkeep" in profits!

Keep it up Sony!

Yes, it's great that they allow 30+ million people to access their online service for absolutely no charge while still potentially retaining a loss, while it's competition is increasing [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103114-Microsoft-Ups-Price-For-Xbox-Live-Subscription] the cost of it's service.

...and the consumer started caring about a company's loss for a free service.......when?

I care when they start using their "number of accounts created" figures to say they are more successful than the competition, when of COURSE more people have signed on at least once, IT'S FREE!

I applaud PSN being free, but I do NOT approve of them making a sub par online service (sorry to PSN fans, but that's my opinion) and then using these numbers to say "we're doing just fine, we don't need to improve!"

As far as I'm concerned, something free is always going to be tried more times than something that costs money, I signed up for PSN because it was free, but I've never really used it at all, and now I'm part of that large number that Sony is using to settle for mediocrity. My point is simply that this is NOT a valid comparison in any way, and Sony should not use it as an indicator that PSN is healthy.

 

[LeonLethality]

WOW! Good job Sony! This means that while Xbox Live only earns about (25,000,000 * 5) 125 million a year, and leads in active players, PSN Earns a whopping "negative whatever it costs to upkeep" in profits!

Keep it up Sony!

I'm sure they are making a profit somehow, I don't think any company would do something to make them lose money without making a profit in any way.

Also, please stay out of news involving Sony, for so long I have seen you doing nothing but insult them in ways sure to start a flame war one way or another and I'm sure you could spend the time making negative posts like this doing something more productive.

So your saying I shouldn't express my opinions when they're negative? Sorry, but no.

I'm allowed to not like Sony, I am allowed to express my opinion of dislike for them, and as long as I don't do it in a way that is groundlessly inflammatory I am allowed to do it on this forum. I know my posts can be inflammatory, but they are not groundless, I'm not posting things like "Everyone who buys a PS3 sucks d---s" or something like that, I always have a reason.

In short, I apologize if my posts bother you, but I am well within the rules, and none of what I said is "sure to start a flamewar" In fact, I've never actually started a single flamewar regarding Sony v. Microsoft in any way shape or form, and if I post in one (I very rarely do) It's often telling people to calm down.

I'm asking you to quit while you are ahead, you are constantly saying things much worse than others and it's going to start a flame war sooner or later, you are allowed to say negative things but you could also just try to be a little more discreet. I COULD go in to a valve or bioware thread and flame them as much as I want but I don't from decency. I don't want to start arguments and you should be trying either.

 

[Citrus]

So your saying I shouldn't express my opinions when they're negative? Sorry, but no.

I'm allowed to not like Sony, I am allowed to express my opinion of dislike for them, and as long as I don't do it in a way that is groundlessly inflammatory I am allowed to do it on this forum. I know my posts can be inflammatory, but they are not groundless, I'm not posting things like "Everyone who buys a PS3 sucks d---s" or something like that, I always have a reason.

In short, I apologize if my posts bother you, but I am well within the rules, and none of what I said is "sure to start a flamewar" In fact, I've never actually started a single flamewar regarding Sony v. Microsoft in any way shape or form, and if I post in one (I very rarely do) It's often telling people to calm down.

I'm asking you to quit while you are ahead, you are constantly saying things much worse than others and it's going to start a flame war sooner or later, you are allowed to say negative things but you could also just try to be a little more discreet. I COULD go in to a valve or bioware thread and flame them as much as I want but I don't from decency. I don't want to start arguments and you should be trying either.

From an outside perspective: his comment was perfectly valid, and if anything, you appear to be picking an argument with him. Trying to police an internet forum, especially without any sort of authority over it, is just dumb; it's asking for trouble. Especially with comments like "please stay out of news involving Sony".

OT: This is just normal advertising mumbo jumbo on Sony's part. The PS3's profits would be coming from the PSN store, the DLC, etc, but Xbox LIVE already makes a ton of money off the people subscribed to it in addition to DLC, so I'd say their service is still the more successful one. That said, I'd take PSN over it any day. $60 for a bunch of features I'd never use, no thanks.

 

[Jumplion]

I care when they start using their "number of accounts created" figures to say they are more successful than the competition, when of COURSE more people have signed on at least once, IT'S FREE!

*shrug* it's just like how WoW has over "11 million 'registered' players" and yet only 30% make it to level 10 [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.174642-Only-30-Percent-of-WoW-Players-Get-Past-Level-10?page=1].

I applaud PSN being free, but I do NOT approve of them making a sub par online service (sorry to PSN fans, but that's my opinion) and then using these numbers to say "we're doing just fine, we don't need to improve!"

I still don't see why PSN is considered the "inferior" online service, it works just fine for me and it has many of the features that LIVE touts for even more free. And that's a silly assumption to make for Sony, when Microsoft would be more likely to go "we're doing fine, so let's gouge some more! [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103114-Microsoft-Ups-Price-For-Xbox-Live-Subscription]"

As far as I'm concerned, something free is always going to be tried more times than something that costs money, I signed up for PSN because it was free, but I've never really used it at all, and now I'm part of that large number that Sony is using to settle for mediocrity. My point is simply that this is NOT a valid comparison in any way, and Sony should not use it as an indicator that PSN is healthy.

Again, what makes PSN so "inferior"? PSN has almost all the features that LIVE has, all for free, while giving you dedicated servers instead of limited P2P servers. I, and my other Ps3 owning friends, rarely had any problems with the service, while my 360 owning friends get frequently disconnected and shouted at by 12-year-olds. That's my experience, not the whole, so take that how you will.

But overall, it's really nothing to get your nickers in a twist. So a company manipulates some numbers to get the best result, big deal, wanna fight about it? 30+ million is still impressive, however you spin it, and I'm satisfied with the service that I'm getting with PSN. Maybe you're happy with your LIVE service, and that's okay. Let bygones be whateverthehell bygones are, and move on.

 

[LeonLethality]

From an outside perspective: his comment was perfectly valid, and if anything, you appear to be picking an argument with him. Trying to police an internet forum, especially without any sort of authority over it, is just dumb; it's asking for trouble. Especially with comments like "please stay out of news involving Sony".

This was one of his lesser ones, if you go back to other Sony news threads he does shit like this all the time and it's getting old, he has clearly gotten his point across that he hates Sony and now he is just making flame bait. He could easily avoid these threads or stop posting on them as sooner or later a flame war will start and someone will get in trouble.

 

[Danpascooch]

I care when they start using their "number of accounts created" figures to say they are more successful than the competition, when of COURSE more people have signed on at least once, IT'S FREE!

*shrug* it's just like how WoW has over "11 million 'registered' players" and yet only 30% make it to level 10 [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.174642-Only-30-Percent-of-WoW-Players-Get-Past-Level-10?page=1].

I applaud PSN being free, but I do NOT approve of them making a sub par online service (sorry to PSN fans, but that's my opinion) and then using these numbers to say "we're doing just fine, we don't need to improve!"

I still don't see why PSN is considered the "inferior" online service, it works just fine for me and it has many of the features that LIVE touts for even more free. And that's a silly assumption to make for Sony, when Microsoft would be more likely to go "we're doing fine, so let's gouge some more! [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103114-Microsoft-Ups-Price-For-Xbox-Live-Subscription]"

As far as I'm concerned, something free is always going to be tried more times than something that costs money, I signed up for PSN because it was free, but I've never really used it at all, and now I'm part of that large number that Sony is using to settle for mediocrity. My point is simply that this is NOT a valid comparison in any way, and Sony should not use it as an indicator that PSN is healthy.

Again, what makes PSN so "inferior"? PSN has almost all the features that LIVE has, all for free, while giving you dedicated servers instead of limited P2P servers. I, and my other Ps3 owning friends, rarely had any problems with the service, while my 360 owning friends get frequently disconnected and shouted at by 12-year-olds. That's my experience, not the whole, so take that how you will.

But overall, it's really nothing to get your nickers in a twist. So a company manipulates some numbers to get the best result, big deal, wanna fight about it? 30+ million is still impressive, however you spin it, and I'm satisfied with the service that I'm getting with PSN. Maybe you're happy with your LIVE service, and that's okay. Let bygones be whateverthehell bygones are, and move on.

I'm not fighting about it, I'm talking about my opinion on it on a forum.......which is what the forum is for

 

[Danpascooch]

WOW! Good job Sony! This means that while Xbox Live only earns about (25,000,000 * 5) 125 million a year, and leads in active players, PSN Earns a whopping "negative whatever it costs to upkeep" in profits!

Keep it up Sony!

I'm sure they are making a profit somehow, I don't think any company would do something to make them lose money without making a profit in any way.

Also, please stay out of news involving Sony, for so long I have seen you doing nothing but insult them in ways sure to start a flame war one way or another and I'm sure you could spend the time making negative posts like this doing something more productive.

So your saying I shouldn't express my opinions when they're negative? Sorry, but no.

I'm allowed to not like Sony, I am allowed to express my opinion of dislike for them, and as long as I don't do it in a way that is groundlessly inflammatory I am allowed to do it on this forum. I know my posts can be inflammatory, but they are not groundless, I'm not posting things like "Everyone who buys a PS3 sucks d---s" or something like that, I always have a reason.

In short, I apologize if my posts bother you, but I am well within the rules, and none of what I said is "sure to start a flamewar" In fact, I've never actually started a single flamewar regarding Sony v. Microsoft in any way shape or form, and if I post in one (I very rarely do) It's often telling people to calm down.

I'm asking you to quit while you are ahead, you are constantly saying things much worse than others and it's going to start a flame war sooner or later, you are allowed to say negative things but you could also just try to be a little more discreet. I COULD go in to a valve or bioware thread and flame them as much as I want but I don't from decency. I don't want to start arguments and you should be trying either.

I may be wrong, but it sounds like your saying I shouldn't express my opinion because my opinion is not popular. I'm not going to do that.

I didn't enter a random "the PS3 is great" thread and yell "NO IT'S NOT" this is a news story, and I'm commenting on the news. I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm trying to express my opinion which is just as valid as everyone else's

 

[LeonLethality]

I may be wrong, but it sounds like your saying I shouldn't express my opinion because my opinion is not popular. I'm not going to do that.

I didn't enter a random "the PS3 is great" thread and yell "NO IT'S NOT" this is a news story, and I'm commenting on the news. I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm trying to express my opinion which is just as valid as everyone else's

I understand what you mean, I really hate this forum's "You can have an opinion, but only if your opinion is the same as ours" bullshit and I am not asking you to not let your opinion out, what I am asking of you is to please put it in a way not to be begging for a flame war and if you can't do that then to just stop. My annoyance at you had me put it in a rather rude way and I am sorry for that but I just don't want any huge flamewars caused by rather extreme comments. I've said something to this effect to another user some time ago who went out of his way to every JRPG thread to express his hatred in the most flame baitingly way possible.

tl;dr: Please try and word your posts in a way that will not be seen as flame bait before you accidentally start a flame war.

 

[Jumplion]

I'm not fighting about it, I'm talking about my opinion on it on a forum.......which is what the forum is for

*coughcoughstrawmancoughcough* I never said that you couldn't, I'm doing the exact same thing...

I honestly want to know what makes LIVE so much better than PSN, I honestly do. Because from my experiences with it, it's consistently been a pretty lousy service for me and my friends, but apparantly I'm missing some mystical Shangri-La in LIVE.

 

[-Samurai-]

I care when they start using their "number of accounts created" figures to say they are more successful than the competition, when of COURSE more people have signed on at least once, IT'S FREE!

Kinda like how Microsoft likes to throw around how many Xbox 360s they've sold, knowing that more than half of them were bought by people replacing their dead one?

I applaud PSN being free, but I do NOT approve of them making a sub par online service (sorry to PSN fans, but that's my opinion) and then using these numbers to say "we're doing just fine, we don't need to improve!"

As far as I'm concerned, something free is always going to be tried more times than something that costs money, I signed up for PSN because it was free, but I've never really used it at all, and now I'm part of that large number that Sony is using to settle for mediocrity. My point is simply that this is NOT a valid comparison in any way, and Sony should not use it as an indicator that PSN is healthy.

I don't think this is about the amount of users PSN has. I think it's about the number of consoles that are connected. Huge difference.

Having an 80% connection rate out of all the consoles they've sold is impressive when you consider how many launch 360s still even work.

If it was about the number of PSN users, you'd be right. Of course they'd have more. It's a free service. One person can have as many names as they want and that will always lead to more "users" than a paid service where you get just one name.

 

[mad825]

Well Sony does have an equally sized dick when it comes to consoles and this just proves it because "mine is bigger than yours" argument is old.

Sony does need to brag about something just like MS.

 

[Danpascooch]

I care when they start using their "number of accounts created" figures to say they are more successful than the competition, when of COURSE more people have signed on at least once, IT'S FREE!

Kinda like how Microsoft likes to throw around how many Xbox 360s they've sold, knowing that more than half of them were bought by people replacing their dead one?

I applaud PSN being free, but I do NOT approve of them making a sub par online service (sorry to PSN fans, but that's my opinion) and then using these numbers to say "we're doing just fine, we don't need to improve!"

As far as I'm concerned, something free is always going to be tried more times than something that costs money, I signed up for PSN because it was free, but I've never really used it at all, and now I'm part of that large number that Sony is using to settle for mediocrity. My point is simply that this is NOT a valid comparison in any way, and Sony should not use it as an indicator that PSN is healthy.

I don't think this is about the amount of users PSN has. I think it's about the number of consoles that are connected. Huge difference.

Having an 80% connection rate out of all the consoles they've sold is impressive when you consider how many launch 360s still even work.

If it was about the number of PSN users, you'd be right. Of course they'd have more. It's a free service. One person can have as many names as they want and that will always lead to more "users" than a paid service where you get just one name.

I think it's the number of PS3 users, and personally I don't care if Microsoft did what you say they did, I don't think that's any better, both are wrong, I don't pick one company to love and one to hate, I judge them event by event.

 

[Danpascooch]

I may be wrong, but it sounds like your saying I shouldn't express my opinion because my opinion is not popular. I'm not going to do that.

I didn't enter a random "the PS3 is great" thread and yell "NO IT'S NOT" this is a news story, and I'm commenting on the news. I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm trying to express my opinion which is just as valid as everyone else's

I understand what you mean, I really hate this forum's "You can have an opinion, but only if your opinion is the same as ours" bullshit and I am not asking you to not let your opinion out, what I am asking of you is to please put it in a way not to be begging for a flame war and if you can't do that then to just stop. My annoyance at you had me put it in a rather rude way and I am sorry for that but I just don't want any huge flamewars caused by rather extreme comments. I've said something to this effect to another user some time ago who went out of his way to every JRPG thread to express his hatred in the most flame baitingly way possible.

tl;dr: Please try and word your posts in a way that will not be seen as flame bait before you accidentally start a flame war.

I get what you're saying, but I am over 3000 posts deep and not only have I never started a war, I've never even received a complaint like yours, so I honestly don't think what I'm doing is problematic

 

[-Samurai-]

I care when they start using their "number of accounts created" figures to say they are more successful than the competition, when of COURSE more people have signed on at least once, IT'S FREE!

Kinda like how Microsoft likes to throw around how many Xbox 360s they've sold, knowing that more than half of them were bought by people replacing their dead one?

I applaud PSN being free, but I do NOT approve of them making a sub par online service (sorry to PSN fans, but that's my opinion) and then using these numbers to say "we're doing just fine, we don't need to improve!"

As far as I'm concerned, something free is always going to be tried more times than something that costs money, I signed up for PSN because it was free, but I've never really used it at all, and now I'm part of that large number that Sony is using to settle for mediocrity. My point is simply that this is NOT a valid comparison in any way, and Sony should not use it as an indicator that PSN is healthy.

I don't think this is about the amount of users PSN has. I think it's about the number of consoles that are connected. Huge difference.

Having an 80% connection rate out of all the consoles they've sold is impressive when you consider how many launch 360s still even work.

If it was about the number of PSN users, you'd be right. Of course they'd have more. It's a free service. One person can have as many names as they want and that will always lead to more "users" than a paid service where you get just one name.

I think it's the number of PS3 users, and personally I don't care if Microsoft did what you say they did, I don't think that's any better, both are wrong, I don't pick one company to love and one to hate, I judge them event by event.

I dunno. I think if it was about number of registered users, they would have given a number of accounts, in stead of a percentage of consoles that have connected to PSN.