Kutaragi: PS3 online will be free, digital distribution is the future [update 1]
Speaking to Japanese site PC Impress Watch, Sony's original smack talker (not that one) Ken Kutaragi has confirmed that the PlayStation 3's online service will be free. Indeed, Kutaragi believes the revenue will come from digital downloads provided to the PS3. "We really wanted to do this with the PS2," said Kutaragi, "but now Apple has realised a successful e-distribution program, it's about time we made our move, too."In the same interview, Kutaragi predicts that consumers will embrace digital downloads within one to two years. Eventually, he believes, optical drives will be obsolete, and later all disk storage. "I expect even the hard disk to disappear eventually," notes Kutaragi. "If you have all the data on servers, you probably no longer need disk drives ... but to do this, the server is crucial. It's a difficult problem."
[Thanks, Ethan]
[update 1: fixed the title; also, as many have pointed out, it should be noted that what is considered "online" by Kutaragi is rather vague -- it could be that multiplayer gaming is free, or it could mean that connecting to a central hub is free. Also, within one to two years, he is hoping users will embrace digital downloads -- not use them exclusively. Thus, the Blu-ray will still be a viable format for Sony.]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Belcho @ Jun 12th 2006 3:00PM
So, if Kutaragi believes that digital distrubtion is the future, then why is he gouging us all with this "great" next-gen optical drive?
Ethan @ Jun 12th 2006 3:01PM
your welcome.
chad herrella @ Jun 12th 2006 3:02PM
so in one or two years blu-ray drives will b obsolete?
then dont include it with the ps3 so you can drop the price!
KingOfGods @ Jun 12th 2006 3:03PM
So you are saying forget about free extra content
striderhayasa @ Jun 12th 2006 3:03PM
WTH? if optical media is going to phase out in a few years (like that guy Bill Gates suggested), then why push BluRay down our throats? Look, I may be against bluray and hd-dvd in general but one thing I know for certain is people are going to still need a way to archive their data. That's where bluray and hd-dvd can shine or flash memory or mini HDDs. But working from a server without a means to backup is like high flying without a net or speeding without brakes or a seat belt. Sorry Ken, I ain't completely buying that jargon.
Smellslikepie @ Jun 12th 2006 3:07PM
He claims that in one or two years disk drives will be rendered useless because of digital distribution? If I was him I'd be much more concerned about pushing the Blu-Ray Disc player that's embedded in the PS3 (pushing up the price) instead of claiming it won't be of much use in 1 - 2 years.
One of the main arguments for the Blu-Ray player was that it could hold around 25 or 50 GB of data. For content this size to be distribute electronically there will have to be much better broadband connections. I live in the UK and the fastest I can get in my are is 2Mb although 8Mb has been promised for over a year. As I have said before I don't see TRUE digital distribution coming into effect until after the next wave of consoles come out (after the 360 and PS3 and Wii).
I'm quite interested in watching how the free PS3 Online works out, and how it differs to Xbox Live. Will PS3 owners get the same abilities offered by the Xbox Live? and will it be as reliable? These are both questions that I want to hear answered as I've not heard but about it, so if anyone has links to OFFICIAL comments on the online aspect of PS3's can you post it for me? Thanks
Scott @ Jun 12th 2006 3:07PM
So will actual online gaming be free? or just the ability to d/l content? Its still unclear to me. My guess.... if it was to be free he would say: "PS3 online gaming will be free! Everyone rejoyce, except Microsoft" and not just give a runaround everytime. "You can't charge money for network matching and other basic services. These things are just taken for granted on the PC." does nework matching mean games??
Thomas Werewolf @ Jun 12th 2006 3:07PM
Sony is working really hard to collapse the PlayStation brand. Forward-thinking and future-proofing to the best of your ability is becoming more and more important as costs rise, but I think Sony is starting to lose touch with their consumer base and what they/we really want from our game consoles. Can they say, just once, "We're going to make some really great games," instead of, "It will tie your shoes, too!"
thegrey @ Jun 12th 2006 3:09PM
i'll wait for the do your taxes version.
KawF @ Jun 12th 2006 3:11PM
BluRay is relevant because you will NOT be able to download games in the size of 50GB over the internet or any game download service for at least ten years.
Thusly, what you CAN get by online distribution is games on the size of a CD or two. And those are getting fewer by the day. Unless you prefer games that are an hour or two with "next-gen" graphics, or such games as what you can get through live-arcade, or PS2/PS1 back catalouge.
DBX00 @ Jun 12th 2006 3:11PM
Gosh...The guy said "eventually" and that could mean 10-15 years in business terms. I can't imagine being able to stream that amount of data across a network consistently in the next couple years. Give me a break, online gaming still lags and you don't have to stream nearly as much information. People always want to start complaining about every little comment. It's a CEO's job to think where the market will be in the next 10-15 years. Just because he's stating where the market will go, doesn't mean that there isn't a number of steps to get there.
BklynKid @ Jun 12th 2006 3:14PM
Riiiiiidge Raaceeeerrrr!!!!
Clint @ Jun 12th 2006 3:16PM
Maybe a later version of the PS3 will include a blu-ray disk burner. That way you could burn your downloaded games for backup.
Eric @ Jun 12th 2006 3:16PM
I'm not even sure anyone at Sony even knows what they are selling anymore. They can't seem to figure out a way to sell the PS3 idea to anyone without sounding like complete hypocritical morons that can't concretely justify anything under the PS3's hood.
flit @ Jun 12th 2006 3:17PM
Did anybody actually read the interview. All he talks about is how "basic services" will be free. He never says a word about actual gaming online. Microsoft offers "basic services" online. The "distribution style of apple" could mean that you pay $.99 for every month you play for every game you own. No new information. Just ken showing how much of a nutjob he is.
DG @ Jun 12th 2006 3:18PM
Oh man...
I don't plan on buying a PS3 ever, but the thought of downloading a 10 gig game makes me woozy. Who wants to wait that long? Who wants to leave their system on all the time downloading stuff? Not me.
However, this is great: "...but now Apple has realised a successful e-distribution program, it's about time we made our move, too."
Surely he's forgetting Sony's amazingly successful Connect service? What a dork.
that guy @ Jun 12th 2006 3:21PM
'Distribution' is spelled wrong in the headline.
That is all.
Jeremy Wright @ Jun 12th 2006 3:22PM
We won't need a hard drive? So we're not... downloading content... We're gonna stream PS3 games straight from servers?
Yeah, cause you thought paying for an online service like Live was expensive before. Imagine if every game was actually *running* on the servers?
Riiight, is all I gotta say.
32_Footsteps @ Jun 12th 2006 3:22PM
Short, elegant, and precise - Belcho made me laugh with that comment. I can only echo it; he already said it best.
Just remember - the console would be $300 cheaper according to Merrill Lynch projections if they swapped the Blu-Ray player for DVD - and you could still hot-swap DVDs.
So if I'm to understand this, we're just talking to actually connect the console to the 'net being free, correct? I could see Sony taking off with this, provided a) they can get alot of content that people will want and b) they can somehow convince people that a $500-$600 console is worth it.
KawF @ Jun 12th 2006 3:25PM
I guess it just doesn't matter how many times sony says it will be free, there'll still be people refusing to believe it. The only company cheap enough to actually charge for online gaming that I've seen, is Microsoft. Do you know that PC thing, that gray box you are sitting in front of? That thing can contain, AND play games. For free. Over the internet. Using free services. Somehow, this is possible, without anyone charging an arm and a leg every year for that "service".
Scott @ Jun 12th 2006 3:27PM
You guys don't remember that "we don't need a pc either...." What the hell is with Sony? They seem to be trying everything to screw this generation up. I guarentee that if the ps2 turned out to be half as good as the xbox360 and the same price, they would still outsell the 360 based on fanbase. Why make outrageous claims? Why make any claims at all... just show GAMES!!!!!!!!!!! (I still haven't seen one run on the ps3)
Alex K. @ Jun 12th 2006 3:29PM
"but now Apple has realised a successful e-distribution program, it's about time we made our move, too."
translation to english:
"we usually wait until someone else does something successfully, such as video game consoles, analog sticks, motion sensitivity, online play, and now e-distribution. Now, we will unveil our own version, except with buggy software and bad content (akin to our Sony Connect servic!)"
and so since e-distribution is the future (like what microsoft said - that eventually format wars wouldn't matter), then why is sony including an expensive blu-ray drive?
honestly, Sony makes Microsoft look like Mother Theresa
Scott @ Jun 12th 2006 3:30PM
"I guess it just doesn't matter how many times sony says it will be free, there'll still be people refusing to believe it. The only company cheap enough to actually charge for online gaming that I've seen, is Microsoft. Do you know that PC thing, that gray box you are sitting in front of? That thing can contain, AND play games. For free. Over the internet. Using free services. Somehow, this is possible, without anyone charging an arm and a leg every year for that "service"."
Please provide a link or translate an atricle where it explicitly states that PS3s ONLINE GAMING will be free... I have not found one yet. Thanks
striderhayasa @ Jun 12th 2006 3:33PM
@ footsteps....word! I read about that (merrill Lynch report) and was ready to kick my PS2. A PS3 for 300 is VERY attractive especially with VF5 exclusive. I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I also heard that the basic service was going to be free and whenever anyone (at e3) asked about gaming being free as well, all of a sudden, you'd hear static and all the sony reps sounded like adults from Charlie Brown cartoons. "Wah Wah WahaWah"
SuperChuck @ Jun 12th 2006 3:34PM
If they wanted to do this with the PS2, why did it take almost 2 years to release a network adaptor for the PS2?
chazz @ Jun 12th 2006 3:36PM
Well...
I know gamespot and EB games aren't very happy with that statement. If you make all games E-distrabution, then these companies will have nothing to look forward to. They can't survive by selling pokemon cards and game controllers.
pennywise969 @ Jun 12th 2006 3:37PM
Weve all seen free online gaming from Sony. You pay for what you get.
flit @ Jun 12th 2006 3:38PM
@ Scott. W3rd.
Mark D. @ Jun 12th 2006 3:39PM
The weekly What-the-f*ck-did-Ken-Kutaragi-just-say came early this week. Might we get TWO????
KawF @ Jun 12th 2006 3:40PM
@Scott#20:
Did you somehow miss E3? Were you locked up in some basement somewhere with some crazy nutter lowering skincare products down by rope and bucket to you every day?
Amazingly, at E3, the main point of the Sony presence was to show PS3 games, running on guess what... the PS3. (and please don't claim any bullcrap about it not being a PS3 because it wasn't in the final casing)
@Scott#22
About PS3 online gaming, just look at the sony e3 press conference. At least in my opinion, the chart they showed, clearly states that every aspect of online will be free, excluding of course such things as mmorpgs (which are free on no platform, except for a rare few such games).
Just because Microsoft chooses to be so freaking stingy about online gaming, and so restrictive as not to allow any other servers than their own to host these, why should other companies such as Sony be so stupid as to take care of the hosting themselves (unless they offer such a service to game companies so they don't have to take care of it).
Online gaming with servers set up by fans, ISPs, clans, and organisations, work, and have worked quite well on PC for over 10-20 years. And those aren't charged for.
Imagine the uproar if EA started charging for you to play BF2 on your own clan's server. Or on your ISP's server.
Now imagine a network, that uses the Internet to it's fullest, imagine... the Playstation Network. A network where game companies can hook up their own servers, and services. Getting from sony such things as unified login, and other nice things. Things which bloody well, no one else but microsoft has demended money for. (If you want to know more, read up on the 2006 Game Developers Conference on gamasutra.com etc. and E3 2006)
Jim @ Jun 12th 2006 3:40PM
"digital distrubtion is the future"
O,RLY? "distrubtion" is a very cool word. what does it mean?
Stewart T @ Jun 12th 2006 3:46PM
Reply to 19. "I guess it just doesn't matter how many times sony says it will be free, there'll still be people refusing to believe it. The only company cheap enough to actually charge for online gaming that I've seen, is Microsoft. Do you know that PC thing, that gray box you are sitting in front of? That thing can contain, AND play games. For free. Over the internet. Using free services. Somehow, this is possible, without anyone charging an arm and a leg every year for that "service"."
So your running a 64 man COD2 server on ur home pc yer? Yer im sure, clans pay loads of money each month to have there own servers running! Our clan pays $150/month for afew cod2 servers! Yes maybe you can play on them for free but somewere someone is paying for the server! And in this case the small fee of £40 a YEAR is cheap and im sure helps run LIVE servers. Remember LIVE is one service, and im sure Sony Online will be same as PS2 Online were u have a different account/gamertag for each game!
Just my little comment there! Dont all try to beat me up all at once sony fanboys :p HeHe
Jeff @ Jun 12th 2006 3:47PM
""I expect even the hard disk to disappear eventually," notes Kutaragi. "If you have all the data on servers, you probably no longer need disk drives"
He just blew my mind with that one. So... you don't need disk drives because all data will be networked. And once all the data is on servers, they'll all be networked too, so I guess they won't need disk drives either! So all this data will just exist in the air, I guess, and we'll all just wirelessly transmit all this stuff all over the place without actually storing it anywhere.
It's like Plato, man. He's the one that said every idea already exists, and all we do is pluck them out of the air. That Kutaragi, he's a true philosopher.
Anyway, Kutaragi's not the only guy with this hackneyed theory - Bill Gates subscribes to the same thing. It's all bullshit. I mean the Plato original is one thing, but that doesn't translate to digital data. It's basically going back to the mainframe model, which is exactly the opposite of the natural evolution of any network. The whole "dumb terminal" idea that's been discredited thousands of times over.
The evolution of networks and computers and even game consoles has been decentralizing the network and putting more power in the hands of the clients. It makes for a safer, more robust, more feature-rich network (the internet itself couldn't exist without this design), vs. having just a static network that eminates from a central server and is only upgraded when the controller of the central server wants it to be upgraded.
I mean there are cases where networked storage works fine; people store their photos online or whatever, for example. But you're not going to be storing game components or whole games online; that's ridiculous. So every time I want to play a game, I need to download 50GB (a blu-ray disc's worth) of data to my drive-less console? What kind of moron thinks that's a good idea?
I think Kutaragi and Gates just sit around coming up with these pie-in-the-sky ideas all the time and they don't really think through the practical implications. And this is why it's not a good idea to surround yourself with yes-men, either - there need to be people that tell them that these things just aren't going to work.
The ZeroCorpse @ Jun 12th 2006 3:47PM
I think Kutaragi must just be Sony's wacky mascot... You know, like The Burger King, or Ronald McDonald, or Sonny the Cuckoo Bird, or Trix Rabbit... He's just some crazy guy who is out there to get you to pay attention to Sony's wacky antics, but he's not actually "in the know" at all.
If this were the case, then all this Kutaragi wackiness might make sense.
I'm fully expecting to see a picture of Ken Kutaragi dangling a baby from a balcony, ala Michael Jackson...
Or perhaps he IS Michael Jackson... Hmmmm...
Korexz @ Jun 12th 2006 3:48PM
This is no good either:
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/06/12/1524206&from=rss
Scott @ Jun 12th 2006 3:50PM
I did not catch much of the E3 stuff. I saw a few trailers, but I thought they weren't running on the final build of the system. That one fighting game looks cool (the one in the arena).
Why don't they just come out and say it once and for all in plain terms "You will not have to pay for online gaming, only online content." instead of using marketing speak? From the statements I have seen, Sony could still charge for online gaming (or have publishers charge like socom) and not break any promises they have already made regarding "free online".
KawF @ Jun 12th 2006 3:51PM
@Jeff#28
Fully networked data and storage will become a reality.
But not quite yet. Perhaps in 10-20 years will we have the technology and acceptance for it. That timeframe is of course just my estimation. Some simpler forms of it is available already today, and some more advanced forms will be available "tomorrow".
KawF @ Jun 12th 2006 3:56PM
@Scott#31
My guess on why they just don't come out and say: "Online gaming is free forever, rejoice!" is because they assume that people understand it from what they have presented. To them it might seem obvious, to others, not so much I guess.
@Stewart T#28
Of course, someone somewhere ends up paying for it. I pay for online gaming on my ISP's servers though my bill. But I bloody refuse to pay for something which I can get on the PC for "free". And yes, I've run wuite a few different game servers on my machines at home. Works quite well. I usually keep my "antiquated" machines around for a few years until they start cluttering up the house. Then I just get rid of the oldest ones. The others, I use as servers and as space heaters.
the_game_master @ Jun 12th 2006 3:56PM
PoS3 lol
the_insider @ Jun 12th 2006 3:57PM
The SERVICE will be for free. Pricing for online play will depend on the title, in a similar sort of fashion as the PS2 Online services.
-------------------------------------------------
the_insider
crono141 @ Jun 12th 2006 3:59PM
KawF must be employed by Sony...
Dude, do you realize that everything is says is absolutely true. What sony wants is a microcosm Sony branded Internet, where only people who own sony products can use it, Sony provides ALL the content, connections, and services. That is EXACTLY sony's goal.
Apparently, Kawf thinks this is a good thing, whilst everyone else in there right mind realizes that this is akin to communizing the internet.
BAD SONY!! How DARE you try and rule the internet!
Thats MS's job...
Scott @ Jun 12th 2006 4:00PM
I'm going to laugh my nuts off if you buy a PS3 then have to pay for online gaming KawF. I'm only half joking.
Don't mind me, I'm only defensive because I feel like a Dreamcast owner!
LOL PoS3!
Rich @ Jun 12th 2006 4:00PM
Reply to #27
Your facts are wrong. Microsoft is allowing external parties to have their own servers hooked up to the back end of xbox live.
When you see what sony offers for free, how it works and how unreliable it is, you will know why xbox live isnt free.
Siraris @ Jun 12th 2006 4:00PM
It's pretty clear that every aspect of online for the PS3 will be free, except for downloading content.
I think perhaps what Kutaragi is trying to say in this article is that Polyphony will have a server with let's say... 2 or 3 cell processors on it. You will connect to this server and it will use everyone who is connected to distribute the load to not only Polyphony's servers, but also to the people who are connected and playing the game. It was announced at or around E3 that you would be able to host your own games on your PS3, so this isn't that far fetched. Perhaps Sony built in a platform with which the games online workload will be distributed amonghst everyone who is actually playing the game instead of having the developers host a dozen different servers.
Jdoki @ Jun 12th 2006 4:04PM
The one thing Sony are failing to talk about is the games, or more specifically gameplay - it's all 'revenue streams', 'graphics', 'Blu-Ray', '1080p'.
When Sony start talking about the gameplay this (supposed) behemoth console will deliver, I might consider buying one - and until then I don't care if their online service is free - or, as is more likely, they'll push the responsibility on to the publishers and just cream of a %.
At least Microsoft (who are no less of a corporate monster) talk about their games and what their services mean to us gamers.
riffgod @ Jun 12th 2006 4:06PM
If optical drives are soon to be obsolete, they why am I supposed to pay $600 or more for a blu-ray or blu-ray compatible opitical media device?
The headline was good news, but the body always ends up making Sony look stupid. I am very close to being finished with Sony all together.
striderhayasa @ Jun 12th 2006 4:08PM
@ jeff, I think Bill Gates put it a bit differently though. I thought Bill Gates said that optical media is a moot point because in a few years mini high density HDD is going to be the standard. You would download the data from the network but store it on the mini HDD. THAT I can see. 64GB flash drives were just featured on engadget last week for laptops. They'd set you back $2000 but in a few years when they become cheaper (a lot cheaper)...the possibilities. We already have mass storage in Ipods, flash memory, even cell phones are coming with a gig or two of storage. (all featured on Engadget)
But working direct from a server is stupid, we're in agreement there. The transfer for 20 to 50 GBs would have to be within 30 seconds or less. The time it would normally take to start a game. Who has the bandwidth for that?
Crazy Ken Kutaragi...you gotta love him, the ultimate fanboy.
Andir @ Jun 12th 2006 4:08PM
This is for all you commenting about the drive elimination:
#1 He says eventually, not 2 years. The 2 years was referring to "embraced" digital download capabilities.
#2 He never placed a date on the hard drive removal, but technically, he could be right. Hard drive technology is slowly slipping to RAM based media. Flash drives and whatnot. So hard disk drives very well could "go away". Though I don't think we will see that in the life of the PS3.
In truth, I assume this is one of those "lost in translation" posts again and your all pining over one small fraction of the interview. Some people just can't be happy at all.
Karen @ Jun 12th 2006 4:10PM
It sounds to me like Ken is describing the perfect Anti-Piracy system and anti used game system. You buy the games but don't get any physical media to copy or sell. I can accept downloading games The part about no hard drive in the future sounds like a very distance future. I can already picture Buffering screen instead of a Loading screen...
flit @ Jun 12th 2006 4:11PM
All of you need to look at the e3 conference again. There isn't a single word on any slide of their conference that states that PLAYING GAMES is free. They tout the friends lists and "network synchronization" and garbage like that. I agree. Show me a statement where sony says all online GAMES will be free, then i'll believe it.