Support NeoGAF

[alabtrosMyster]

I'll give them a 20$ bill for it.

 

[EDMIX]

I'm not shocked. I think they were just late to the game. If this released like 10 years ago, I think it would have been pretty big. I just have no interest in using something like it. Its just too expensive for what it is. My current set up of Hulu, Netflix and Amazon Prime just gives me a wealth of options.

 

[EDMIX]

too many commercials.

This 100000000%. Why pay MORE MONEY to then NOT WATCH stuff and be stuck with commercials? No one got time for that. Be like "pay here to watch less please" lol

 

[Cert.in.Death]

They're likely a year or two late, seeing the massive push from production studios and other tech giants. No longer the same level of oxygen there once was. But I haven't any idea what the install base is, it may warrant being absorbed by a competitor to strengthen the subscriber base before the streaming wars erupt.

 

[Fnord]

Sony wasn't particularly late to the party with Vue. They were one of the first legitimate contenders for a IP cable alternative. And their offering was on par with or noticeably better than the competition when it launched. What Sony did wrong was marketing. While I can see why they'd want to hitch Vue's success to the massive success of the PlayStation 4, it also firmly planted the notion in peoples' minds that in order to use it, you needed a PlayStation. And Joe/Jane Sixpack that are simply looking to get out from under the thumb of Comcast probably aren't interested in a gaming console. In addition to not being gamers (and the controller being a barrier to entry), the up front cost is in the stratosphere compared to a Chromecast or Roku or Fire Stick. Sony was too late in discovering their error and pushing advertising that explained that you can use PS Vue on those devices as well. Even worse, they stuck with the PlayStation Vue name.

Early on, they should have realized that in order for Vue to be a success, they had to reach well outside of the gamer market. They should have changed the name to Sony Vue (gamers, pretty much the only people that had paid any attention to Vue at all, would understand the name change, so it's not like they'd lose those users). Sony Vue can be more easily sold to the average cable TV viewer. Ditch the PlayStation branding and the PlayStation color scheme and sell it as what it actually is - a cable alternative for anyone that has an Internet connection.

 

[EDMIX]

Sony wasn't particularly late to the party with Vue. They were one of the first legitimate contenders for a IP cable alternative. And their offering was on par with or noticeably better than the competition when it launched. What Sony did wrong was marketing. While I can see why they'd want to hitch Vue's success to the massive success of the PlayStation 4, it also firmly planted the notion in peoples' minds that in order to use it, you needed a PlayStation. And Joe/Jane Sixpack that are simply looking to get out from under the thumb of Comcast probably aren't interested in a gaming console. In addition to not being gamers (and the controller being a barrier to entry), the up front cost is in the stratosphere compared to a Chromecast or Roku or Fire Stick. Sony was too late in discovering their error and pushing advertising that explained that you can use PS Vue on those devices as well. Even worse, they stuck with the PlayStation Vue name.

Early on, they should have realized that in order for Vue to be a success, they had to reach well outside of the gamer market. They should have changed the name to Sony Vue (gamers, pretty much the only people that had paid any attention to Vue at all, would understand the name change, so it's not like they'd lose those users). Sony Vue can be more easily sold to the average cable TV viewer. Ditch the PlayStation branding and the PlayStation color scheme and sell it as what it actually is - a cable alternative for anyone that has an Internet connection.

Agreed. If they can make it with zero commercials, now that is something I'd pay for lol

 

[Dural]

Paying for TV with commercials just doesn't make sense today, and honestly never made sense. Eventually, these networks are going to have to go to the free to stream with commercials or subscription for none model. $60/month is just insane, you could subscribe to Disney+ ESPN and Hulu bundle, Netflix, Prime, and YouTube Premium and still be less.

 

[Fnord]

Agreed. If they can make it with zero commercials, now that is something I'd pay for lol

I don't quite get the call for having it with no commercials. It's not a premium TV service with original programming like, say, HBO. It is literally Cable TV over the Internet. They really don't have any control over content, and thus, commercials. They're providing access to the content providers, not providing content itself. And even if they could somehow make that happen, the subscription fee would be astronomical.

 

[EDMIX]

I don't quite get the call for having it with no commercials. It's not a premium TV service with original programming like, say, HBO. It is literally Cable TV over the Internet. They really don't have any control over content, and thus, commercials. They're providing access to the content providers, not providing content itself. And even if they could somehow make that happen, the subscription fee would be astronomical.

Yet Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Prime manage all with cheaper prices. This concept of needing commercials is a myth. Netflix proved that well. Think about it, premium TV service is $14 bucks a month? You sure? Yet that is how much I pay for Netflix and how much I pay for Hulu with ZERO commercials. I personally don't think the market has room for such services as companies are basically asking for more money to have MORE commercials.

From a consumer perspective, a company asking for $14 a month, original exclusive content and zero commercials is amazing, to then be like "Guess what? Pay DOUBLE the price FOR COMMERCIALS and less exclusive content, great deal right bro?" That is one of the biggest reasons I never got Vue. Its asking for more common content, no exclusive stuff, more money like double to even triple and then commercials.

"They're providing access to the content providers, not providing content itself." Not disagreeing with this, simply that its clear those days are over and on life support at this point.

 

[Fox Mulder]

People don't even know what it is. It's called PlayStation Vue and people think it's like Netflix or something. It is a great internet live television service, but the price is a turn off for people that cut cable.

I tried Sling and Vue for live sports, but Spectrum gave me a small bundle of channels for free with my internet that I can watch on a Spectrum TV app just like cable. Was good enough for me and nothing Sony does can match the leverage a company like Spectrum has to do that.

 

[mejin]

Sony is reportedly looking to sell its PlayStation Vue streaming service

Sources claim the service is losing money, despite price increases

Sony is currently looking for a buyer of its PlayStation Vue TV streaming service, according to a new report published by The Information. The company has reportedly already approached one potential buyer, the sports-focused streaming service FuboTV, with a sale that would include the service's approximately 500,000-strong subscriber base, alongside its underlying technology. That customer tally is substantially less than other subscription TV services, despite PlayStation Vue being one of the first such services to launch.

The Information's report claims that Sony's streaming service is continuing to lose money, despite several subscription price hikes, most recently a $5 increase in July of this year. Sony is struggling with the rising cost of programming, which is thought to be hitting the company harder than its competitors. Unlike, say, Hulu, Sony doesn't have as big of a content library of its own, which leaves it with less leverage in its negotiations. The Information notes that it's unclear whether Sony's programming contracts would transfer to PlayStation Vue's new owner after a sale.

From a technology standpoint, PlayStation Vue offers some unique features. If you're using the service on an Apple TV, for example, you can currently watch as many as four streams simultaneously on a single screen. On a PlayStation 4, this limit drops to three, but the PlayStation Vue has the advantage of being the only internet TV service available. Sony has so far refused to allow competitors like Sling TV, YouTube TV, and Hulu's live TV service onto the platform. Should Vue be sold to an outside company, that could potentially change.

Sony may have picked a good time to get out of the streaming business, as the market will soon become a lot more crowded with a host of new players. Disney+ and Apple TV Plus are both coming next month, AT&T's HBO Max is due next year, and NBCUniversal is readying its Peacock service as well. With each of these companies investing heavily in exclusive content — and with Vue already trailing other internet TV providers — Sony's challenges aren't going anywhere.

Source: The Verge

 

[JCK75]

It seemed a good idea until most of us realized we didn't cut cable for the price, we cut it because it's just not how we want to consume content.

 

[Miyazaki’s Slave]

Sorry for the post...didn't see the new thread someone posted about the closure.


Whelp....guess they are selling it....maybe?

Got an email today that on January 30th the service will stop functioning.

 

[lingpanda]

So I guess for those of us that appreciated VUE will need to switch to YouTube TV? Don't see anything comparable. Need my simultaneous streams and local stations.