Sony is creating amazing value for PlayStation gamers

PSU writes: "As the inevitable arrival of next generation game consoles draws ever nearer, Sony is positioning the PS3 to offer greater value than ever to customers via a number of cool initiatives. Here are some of the ways that Sony is giving you more bang for your buck."

The story is too old to be commented.
remanutd551819d ago

Hopefully playstation plus vita support is as good as the ps3 offering.

Silver-Hawk1819d ago

Ps3 offers the best value when it comes to quality content or software.

ABizzel11819d ago

God of War Master's Collection comes out Friday with all 5 games.

sikbeta1819d ago

I just want to know if the PS4 will be backward compatible with PS3 and all the stuff owned via PS+ and PSN games, DLC, themes, avatars downloaded over the years will be transferred to the new console.

sobekflakmonkey1819d ago (Edited 1819d ago )


Pretty sure it won't be, you have to remember Sony is probably gonna wanna move some current gen consoles even though the next gen has started, they did it with the PS2 and PS1, you know, the whole 10 year life cycle thing?

So yeah, I doubt it, I'm guessing it will have ps1 and ps2 compatibility though, that of which is not so bad in my opinion.

As for stuff bought from the PSN, that stuff was made for the PS3, and I'm guessing the hardware being used for the next PS is going to be different, so I don't see that working, unless those 3rd party devs and indie devs wanna make those game's all over again.

zeeshan1819d ago

sobekflakmonkey: Yes, if PS4 does indeed use a different architecture then backward compatibility could be an issue on hardware level but I believe the SONY has already secured solution to this, namely, GAIKAI. All PS3 games could run on Gaikai thus allowing you to play your games on PS4. Of course you'll need to have internet connection for this, and may I add, it should be a good one but the solution is there for Sony. It's Sony's game to lose to be honest. I think they are positioning themselves pretty well regarding the future.

_-EDMIX-_1819d ago (Edited 1819d ago )

@sikbeta- I own a PS3 60GB version (with a 350 HDD now but i name it for SKU alone)

and i find no reason to add BC. Why? Cause there are 160 million PS2s.....if you have a huge library of PS2 games (which i do) i question how one doesn't have a PS2? On top of that, why should they add BC? Its something that forces them to use the same type of architecture, makes the system cost more money, and is only for those which own a whole lot of PS3 games (something that would suggest owning a PS3 IN THE FIRST PLACE) there is no reason for BC other then greedy people. Period.

Now on the PS4, i would be fine with one that didn't have BC, if they changed it up a bit and spent the money for a more powerful GPU or more ram etc it would make more sense.

For those asking for BC...kindly buy the damn system used off Amazon, or Ebay, or Gamestop...or better yet DON"T SELL IT IN THE FIRST PLACE! Even if one wants to state "oh it died" a used one. Sony is the first to really bring gamers to this BC thing on console and i'm not really surprised they took it out. It was not something that EVERY game system had at the time, even the Wii took GC BC out so...

The whole (they are forcing us to buy our games again) argument is so damn stupid its not even funny. I've never actually bought a PS2 game on PSN that i actually owned on PS2. Right now Persona 3 is cheaper on PSN then as the disk version so clearly i will get the digital version. No one is forcing anyone to do anything, your PS3's will STILL play PS3 games so...

As for what Sony needs to do with PS4 to make it a great system....repeat what they did this gen.

Great industry pushing hardware, larger format, 4K resolution, release great games and thats it. Sony has done a great job imho EVERY gen, people can talk sales all they want, but as a PS1-PS3 and PSP and soon to be PSV owner, Sony has NEVER let me down in terms of games published, so i have no problem buying a PS4 with not even a single ip that was released last gen JUST based on how many great new ips they've released every gen.

Not knocking Nintendo or MS, but with them you pretty much know what to expect off the bat, 2D Mario, 3D Mario, Zelda, Mario Kart, Animal Crossing 2, etc and Halo, Fable, Forza etc. With Sony...really all you can expect is a new IP EVERY GEN! and not just a Luigi's Mansion once over or a Crackdown once over etc, actual new ips they BACK! 3 Uncharteds, soon to be 3 InFamous's, more then 3 Motorstorms, more then 3 LBP's etc. This is the type of publisher i will buy a system from sight unseen.

But why? Because i don't need to judge it off of a "Halo" or a "Mario" ie an IP in which i'm actually GAUGING MY WHOLE GEN ON! We all have our favorites of franchises and lets be real, if we didn't like a certain version of a game...we might not even own the system to get it later. ie I loved Mario 64, hated Sunshine, like Mario Galaxy 1 and 2 etc. LOVED Halo 1 (for PC, GearBox where are you!!!!!???) like Halo 2, hated Halo 3 and skipped the rest. But with a Sony system, you may like GOW1, hate GOW2 and hate GOW III, but your whole purchase is not rested on JUST those ips, for example, i may hate them but like Uncharted, InFamous, LBP, etc. This is why owning a PS system is so easy every gen, i don't really have a IP to rest on in terms of purchasing the system.

Mocat1819d ago

I think they are just trying to squize everything out of playstation before going next gen

tokugawa1818d ago

all three consoles offer great value. they all have great back catalogues, and loads of games to play...

but, i cant help but get the feeling that sony are bringing new ips this late, because they are NOT ready to launch a new console next year!

if that is the case, and nintendo launch in 2012 and ms in 2013. imo it would be a catastrophe for sony if they dont launch until 2014.

time will tel

capcock1818d ago

no it doesn't. PS+ is 40$/year and its discounts are shitty only like 10 bucks saving and the games u get for free u don't own. U can only access them as long as you're a ps+ member.

for 40$ on steam however u can get a shit ton of games via their amazing discounts and u will own those games forever and have access to them from any PC not to mention superior graphics sound etc.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 1818d ago
SmokingMonkey1819d ago

This isn't news, Sony has been doing this for 15 years now.

jeseth1819d ago

Took the words out of my mouth. Well said Sir!

moparful991819d ago

Yes sir.. This is why I have owned every iteration of a playstation product with the exception of the PspGo...

rezzah1819d ago

No point in owning the PSPGo when you have the original that works like brand new.

moparful991819d ago

I agree my God of War: Ghost of Sparta psp 3000 is still running great plus I have a vita now so no go for me.. No pun intended

Dac2u1818d ago

SmokingMonkey: I love the avatar, RIP #24.... one of my favorite characters in the series.

Megaton1819d ago

Need to shake up their talking points. Hearing Sony talk about the "amazing value of the PlayStation" is like hearing a politician talk about "job creators" or "paying their fair share". It's repetitive to the point of irritation.

Gridloc1819d ago

So are you saying the Xbox has good value? Last I checked they don't give games away for free to play with paid membership. They make you pay just to access multiplayer that is free to play everywhere else.

Megaton1819d ago

I didn't mention the Xbox.

nukeitall1819d ago

Usually the one that has less demand is the one that provides more features at a lower cost to attract buyers.

Value is defined as "features consumers want relative to price" and *NOT* just features regardless of desire!

Clearly MS is providing some value because the demand is still strong when the competition is at a lower price point.

fabod861819d ago

"...when the competition is at a lower price point". uhu? oO
are you kidding me?

Edward751819d ago

The value is great and awesome and all, but they aren't making money! This way of running a business is killing them... If things don't change... Sony will be running out of business!

3-4-51819d ago

There is a difference between Free online and pay for online....The main being that Xbox Live is BY FAR the best online gaming service for console's this generation.

It's night and day playing Cod on xbox360 vs PS3..

But yea, having free internet is nice....Nintendo is really good about that too.

The thing with xbox, is that more of it's good games rely on that online service, so it HAS to be top notch, otherwise COD , Halo, and anything else that plays online just wouldn't be as good.

Nintendo and Sony are better at giving a Great Single player experience than Xbox is, and Xbox is the best at bringing gamers together from around the country / world, and Nintendo is the best as making games that you want to still play 10+ years later because they are that quality.

edgeofsins1819d ago


By far? No. Top notch because you pay for it? Not at all. It uses peer to peer for most games. Sony has more dedicated servers in their games then XBox and dedicated servers are far more reliable and can hold more people on them at once. MAG can do 256 players for instance no problem. The only problem is your connection. On most XBox games including exclusives they don't put any of that subscription money into "top notch" online. They just make it peer to peer where the players host the game. So if the host disconnects or has a bad connection you are screwed. If you have a bad connection you are either screwed or in some games you have leverage over others because on their screen you skip all over the place. Dedicated servers don't have that problem. If you have a bad connection it normally isn't a big deal. I used to play Warhawk with a 30% wireless connection on standard internet years ago. I didn't lag at all and saw no lag on other players. Only when your internet gets really bad does it really matter. If I played CoD however I would be skipping all over the place. Either on my screen or there screen. One of my friends had TERRIBLE internet and we played on a close quarters map. None of us could kill him because he was the host and he ended up with over 150 kills in a few minutes and the second place person had 20 kills. Peer to peer is what XBox uses for most games. None of that subscription money really goes towards online experience.

zeeshan1819d ago

Edward: Even if after all the expenses, they are making $1/PSN subscription, they'll be making good money. Suppose that out of 60 million users, they have, for example, 10 million PS Plus subscribers, they are making additional $10 mil every month. That's just pure profit and $10 mil by no means is a small sum. Should be able to help them secure exclusive software, PSN expenditures, employee payments and what not.

1819d ago
YodaCracker1819d ago

"They make you pay just to access multiplayer"

That is a blatant lie. There are dozens upon dozens of features that come with an Xbox LIVE Gold membership, many of which are not available on any other console. If someone is paying just for multiplayer and not taking advantage of any other features, then that is their loss.

XabiDaChosenOne1819d ago

@Yodacracker oh yea like YouTube, Netflix cross game chat an... Oh yea those are free on other devices like The PS3 and PSVita also. Huh, would you look at that.

DigitalRaptor1819d ago

Oh would you look at that. .. another shortsighted Xbox fanboy.

YodaCracker, when people say that, of course they don't mean that it only offers you access to multiplayer. What is meant is that Microsoft continue to have the audacity to charge for the most simple ability to even begin playing half the game you've already bought, on the console you've already bought.

We've been saying for years that Microsoft should let people connect and play for free, with advanced features being the ones that are charged for. A P2P connection is not advanced nowadays, and charging for that and insultingly making you pay to access otherwise free services like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube is never going to be worth it to the logical man. Netflix even, a subscription within a subscription is beyond ridiculous. Even the fact that it costs you to access an app every single year should be ringing alarm bells. Apple doesn't do that, Google doesn't, Sony doesn't, BBC doesn't. Most normal, consumer-minded companies don't.

This comment is not to proclaim that Microsoft don't have a good service. The gripe (and I've spoken to several Xbox players who agree with me so don't even try and play the fanboy card) is that they charge for things that should be fundamentally free, to insulting levels. The fact that people try and justify it is even more insulting.