Sony Now Charging Publishers For PS3 Downloadable Content, An Unpopular Policy Shift

[xtop]

i didn't see it posted

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2009/...dable-content/

Publishing sources told us that Sony’s previously un-reported new “PlayStation Network Bandwidth Fee” is forcing them to think twice about what content they offer to PS3 gamers for download.

***

Until October 1 2008, video game publishers who wanted to offer downloadable content on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 didn’t have to worry about getting a bill from Microsoft and Sony.

The million-plus downloads that a popular demo or map pack might receive could delight gamers, but rack up some expensive bandwidth costs. No problem: the publishers, who already pay a licensing fee to get their games on the two big platforms, could count on the platform holders — Microsoft and Sony — to pay the cost of piping that digital content to gamers.

That situation changed with the PS3 on October 1 of last year, when Sony implemented a 16 cents per Gigabyte fee to publishers for paid and free downloadable content, according to publishing sources familiar with Sony’s policy.

Game publishers are not happy about it.

MTV Multiplayer has verified that a letter sent to publishers last fall detailed the policy. It applies a 16-cent charge to every Gigabyte of content downloaded from the PS3’s PSN online store. For free content, like demos, those charges apply only during the first 60 days of the content’s release. For paid content, like map packs, the charges rack up in perpetuity, or until that content is removed from the PlayStation 3’s online store.

This “PlayStation Network Bandwidth” fee has been unpopular with game companies, according to at least three publishing and development sources who spoke to MTV Multiplayer about the policy on the condition of anonymity so as not to get their companies on Sony’s bad side.

“It definitely makes us think about how we view the distribution of content related to our games when it is free for us to do it on the web, on Xbox Live, or any other way — including broadcast — than on Sony’s platform,” one publishing source said. “It’s a new thing we have to budget. It’s not cool. It sucks.”

Publishers already pay costs for creating a demo, a process that can run six figures. Sony’s fees add a new expense. For a demo that is sized at exactly 1GB and is downloaded one million times, that would add an extra $160,000 that Sony is now charging and that, according to publishing sources, Microsoft isn’t. That’s what could scare publishers from placing content on the PS3.

The cost estimate is relevant because demos can be that big and that popular. Demos typically run at close to 1GB, with Ubisoft’s “Hawx” demo weighing in at 834MB, “Resident Evil 5” at 942MB and the demo for the upcoming “Legend of Wrestlemania” at 1003MB, which is just over 1GB. On the Xbox 360, the “Halo Wars” demo has exceeded two million downloads. The “Resident Evil 5″ demo, across the Xbox 360 and PS3, was downloaded more than four million times by late February.

Sony declined to comment on why the new policy was put in effect, how the 16 cents figure was determined or what kind of feedback it’s dealing with from publishers. But the company did address what might be the most pressing concern for gamers regarding this matter: whether the new charges will scare publishers from placing content on the PS3 online store: “Appreciate the opportunity to jump in here, but we respect the confidentiality of our business agreements with our publishing partners,” Sony Computer Entertainment of America spokesman Patrick Seybold said in an e-mailed statement to MTV. “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.”

So far, the content on the PS3’s PSN store supports Sony’s claim that publishers aren’t pulling material. MTV Multiplayer found that eight of the most recent demos from games ranging from Atari’s “Wheelman” to Namco’s “Afro Samurai” and Take 2’s “MLB 2K9” are available on the PS3 and Xbox 360 online store. One of the only major pieces of free content not on the PS3 is the recently-released “Call of Duty: World at War” demo from Activision, which is on the Xbox 360. Activision reps did not respond to repeated requests for comment for this story. It is possible that it is too soon for Sony’s policy to cut into the number of demos and extra content available on the PSN store — or that publishers, despite their complaints, can and will stomach the charges.

One publishing source who has worked with Sony in the past year said the new policy is an unwanted burden. The source is concerned that the Network Fee will be a turn-off to publishers. One problem, he said, is that publishers will be caught by surprise at what the charges are going to be, as they do not have up-to-the-second data on how much of their content is being downloaded. “It’s like leaving your phone off the hook for a long distance call,” the source said. “The meter is still running.”

While Microsoft’s policy of not charging publishers for downloadable content might sit well with game-makers, it does suggest that Sony is simply tapping a different source to generate money to help pay for the downloading of popular content. Sony is asking publishers to foot the bill, but the content remains free for gamers who own PS3s. Microsoft, however, charges users an annual $50 fee for Xbox Live Gold membership and has been delaying access to some of its downloadable content to non-paying Silver members in favor of those Gold subscribers.

Without further comment from Sony, it is impossible to determine what the new policy means for the free PSN service. The new charges could be the price of keeping the service free to users. But it could have nothing to do with that and instead reflect general financial woes at Sony as a whole.

What gamers will want to be most concerned about — and watchful of — is the range of content available on the PS3’s online store. If the variety of demos, map-packs, wallpapers, trailers and other DLC offerings for multi-platform games on the PS3 store begins to fall behind the offerings on the Xbox 360, gamers will have at least one 16-cent guess as to why.

16 cents a gig. eesh

[Sussudio]

makes sense tho based on the argument that 360 charges for online multiplayer whereas ps3 does not

[ThePhantomOak]

Yeah, it was posted.

Dont forget that it was started about 6 months ago and we are just now hearing about it (when PS3 is getting some huge games)...

[xtop]

Originally Posted by ThePhantomOak

Yeah, it was posted.

Dont forget that it was started about 6 months ago and we are just now hearing about it (when PS3 is getting some huge games)...

got a link so i can smack myself?

edit: i see it now. mod needs to change the title of the other one. generic titles with no details ftl

[ThePhantomOak]

Originally Posted by xtop

got a link so i can smack myself?

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=91924


Personally, I think that thread should be merged at the end of yours, because you took the effort to post the text, not just throw up a link and say "WTF guys?!"

Anyway, no big deal, I doubt you would have been able to find it without a silly hard search... waste of time when the title of the thread is "OMG SONY WTF PDQ XYZ!"

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Here is where the interesting debate between free PS3 online play and paid CrapBox3FixMe online play gets heated.

With this new information it becomes clear that somebody has to pay for the PS3 online play service. Question becomes, who has to pay for it? Now, my bet is that the bottom line will be gamers. If the publishers are paying for this now, they will tack these bits of operational costs onto the price of games. Or, even onto the cost of the DLC.

However, this also raises another interesting idea. One that I am fairly fond of given Capcom's latest debaucle with their Resident Evil 5 multiplayer add-on. Perhaps publishers will start to change the trend of adding content via paid DLC that has been incorporated into initial game releases for many years.

I still see it as being an added charge for the consumer in a roundabout way.

[Terjyn]

Of course it's unpopular...with DLC developers.

Anyone else? Why should they care? The media(read: bloggers with the Anti-Sony crusade) makes this seem like a big deal, like the end user should give a damn. Why should I care? Even if this cost gets passed on to me it's STILL way cheaper than...say...50$/year.

[Xerios]

hate to be a deleloper of DLC in these times... but like its been stated, this has been going on for 6 months or so, we just havent heard it until now

[SkantDragon]

Everything I think about it is better said by this response article from PSX Extreme:

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/4806.html

They can no longer claim the PlayStation 3 "has no games." They can no longer question whether or not Blu-Ray will become the accepted high-definition medium. They can no longer say that the PlayStation Network "has a long way to go." But no matter how many hurdles the PS3 clears, the media always wants to place more in its path.

This isn't a promotional push for the PS3; this is merely a counter to the extraordinarily negative backlash regarding Sony's latest move: according to the MTV Multiplayer blog, Sony will now be charging publishers a bandwidth fee when PSN users download content. This "PlayStation Network Bandwidth Fee" will cost publishers 16 cents per gigabyte of content downloaded and although this does apply to free and paid content, publishers are only charged for the free stuff for the first 60 days of Network availability. Many game journalists have leaped all over this, as if a starving child had finally found another anti-Sony tidbit to snack on. They were running out of ammunition, but now they've found another bullet.

A popular article out there is this one at SF Video Game Examiner, and it essentially labels this new development as a crucial blow, and Sony fans should be "livid." It says "you'll be sorry you don't own an Xbox 360," and that it's a "no-win situation for publishers." The argument is that 1 million downloads of a 1GB demo will cost a publisher $160,000, and one source has already said- "It definitely makes us think about how we view the distribution of content related to our games when it is free for us to do it on the web, on Xbox Live, or any other way including broadcast than on Sonys platform." The final conclusion basically tells consumers to avoid the PS3 for this very reason. We don't know about you, but this is an absurd sentiment.

There isn't a single solitary gamer on Mother Earth who would count this as a catalyst one way or the other when considering a console purchase. The Network remains free. 1 million downloads of a 1GB demo? ...when the hell is that going to happen? How often has it happened? Arguing that there are 20 million+ PSN accounts allows you to say that 1 million might be believable, but the previous number was between 17 and 18 million, and Sony has freely admitted that includes PlayStation accounts made on the PSP and PC, and it likely includes multiple accounts as well. Taking this into account, and the fact that a grand total of maybe two or three demos per year would reach the aforementioned 1 million plateau, and I seriously doubt smaller publishers will even care. Most content isn't 1GB in size, anyway! Are we really going to say to someone, "oh, you shouldn't buy the PS3 because such-and-such publisher might not put such-and-such demo up on the PSN?" You've got to be kidding me.

Here's the bottom line- the Network is still free. The vast majority of gamers go online to play games. All they know is that it's free on the Network and it isn't free on Live. Nobody lists demos as a major priority when selecting a console to buy, and if you evaluate the numbers correctly, this fee won't smash publishers as hard as some people would like to claim. My favorite part of the article is where it says that "Sony has, in one fell swoop, effectively guaranteed that you'll be making your demos, trailers, and hefty add-on content exclusive to Xbox Live." I also suppose that every last consumer on earth is choosing between the PS3 and 360...not a one already has the 360 at home and is merely considering a PS3 purchase. Oh wait...in our estimation and from what we've seen, there are a whole lot more members of the latter group. How exactly does this stop them - or really, anyone - from buying a PS3? Man, why not just stand outside Sony HQ with picket signs saying-"

"We don't know what you're going to do next concerning the PS3, but we're sure it's bad and we won't stand for it any longer!"

'rolls eyes'

3/22/2009 Ben Dutka

I very much agree with Ben. They're really grasping at straws now.

This is the same media that writes huge headlines when the US president accidentally drops his cell phone on the ground and picks it up again. When the media hates you, it sure isn't subtle.

[Septimus Prime]

MTV Games is not a source. And MTV Games's source is anonymous. Hmm. HMM.

[TheTenth]

doesn't bother Epic to give a 550 Mb patch for free ...

[pmac]

TO: DLC providers
RE: Your cost to give me free DLC

Please feel free to charge me an extra 5-10 cents for any paid DLC you put on to the PSN Store. Its a small price to pay for the next demo you release.

Regards,
Paul

[Marine Mike]

Man, why not just stand outside Sony HQ with picket signs saying-"

"We don't know what you're going to do next concerning the PS3, but we're sure it's bad and we won't stand for it any longer!"

That is too good. I completely agree with this article as how this will not change the consumer at all and its all up to the publishers to worry about.

[pmac]

Originally Posted by TheTenth

doesn't bother Epic to give a 550 Mb patch for free ...

I wonder if mandatory patches are included in this? Because a company could make a mandatory patch if it doesn't get charged, and then put up DLC that is simply 1MB to unlock the content in the patch. I am sure Media Molecule does this already, because all of their downloads are 1066K or so.

[Septimus Prime]

Patches don't count as DLC, although they do have a one-time fee of their own to deploy.

[saprano]

This happend in november, this has been posted already, and why is this all over the web? damn people love reporting bullshit.

They can no longer claim the PlayStation 3 "has no games." They can no longer question whether or not Blu-Ray will become the accepted high-definition medium. They can no longer say that the PlayStation Network "has a long way to go." But no matter how many hurdles the PS3 clears, the media always wants to place more in its path

That pretty much sums up everything.

[Branden]

for the last 6 months developers have been getting charged $0.16/GB and PSN hasn't run dry of content/demos, so obviously this article's dire predictions are BS.

Sony doesn't want to pay for bandwidth, developers don't want to pay for bandwidth, gamers don't want to pay for bandwidth, but bandwidth must be paid and sony isn't willing to foot the bill anymore. understandable.
i'm sure sony and developers could find a solution to minimize these costs. why not allow developers to host their own downloads if they can do so cheaper? or why not distribute content using a torrent-like peer swarm?

[Maximus]

Rather them than us. If publishers want to add the cost to DLC or other paid content that's fine, larger DLC could easily come with a "bandwidth surcharge" of $.20 and you don't see many demos that tip the 1GB scales.

It's a complete non-event, PSN is still free for the end user, publishers would be stupid to complain about $160,000 (1m downloads, 1GB) for what is effectively the best form of advertising they will ever get. I mean $160k wouldn't even pay for a 1 week run on daytime TV, or a decent set of magazine/print ads. I think the issue is that demos are seen as a service by most gamers when they are actually marketing by the publisher. Demos are one big advert to try and get you to buy the game, and Sony have been letting them do it for free over PSN where before it used to cost them x amount for a disc and magazine fees (depending on the demo). $160k is cheap, $.16 per GB is cheap.

[reiella]

Originally Posted by Septimus Prime

MTV Games is not a source. And MTV Games's source is anonymous. Hmm. HMM.

MTV Games source wanted to remain annonymous so as not to get MTV Multiplayer in trouble. Which kinda defeats the purpose, although most likly the source wanted to keep self out of trouble, and perhaps the company, just didn't 'clarify the level of anonymity'. *shrug*

The big thing that is 'hurt' are the demos 'and other free stuff'. Which is free solely for marketing sake. Although to be honest, I'm one of those folks who doesn't like the demo marketing, it tends to misrepresent the product [good or bad] due to being developed in a different manner.