Sony states obvious when saying consumers can save money with their online gaming

Is it just me or has Sony been stirring up the whole console war thing a bit more recently. I guess they need to do something to reverse the general perception that they suck, but doesn’t talking smack just make them look even more evil? Sony has come forward to remind us all that we still have to pay for Xbox Live, which we will agree is bull-mother-f*cking-shit (sorry just started playing Overkill), but that no one has to pay for PSN. Perhaps we might want to buy games instead of subscribing to Live.

Here’s what Sony suggests you do with the 50 bucks that you save when you don’t subscribe to live. “Rather than paying a $50 subscription fee that competitors charge for on-line services, PlayStation Network users could put that money towards a variety of content.” Sony then listed a variety of content that could be purchased. A true and valid argument.

I understand the argument here, that the 360 is in fact eventually more expensive than the PS3, but we live in a world dominated by the “now” not the “three years down the road” and seeing the difference between $400 and $200 on a store shelf is a far more persuasive argument than anything Sony can really throw out there to the average consumer. Of course I’ve got two words that seem to make no one care about that $50 a year: Halo and Gears. Hit us up with some multiplayer as popular and well done as that Sony and maybe you’ll have an argument people will listen to.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE: