Talk:PlayStation Network

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

2014 outages[edit]

In 2014, there has been more than one PSN outage. The most recent being Christmas. That is now listed.

I propose this information goes in a single article devoted to the central topic of these ongoing attacks. Something like 2014 gaming industry DDoS attacks. This group has targeted numerous services over a period of months. Activision, Blizzard Entertainment, Electronic Arts, PlayStation Network, Riot Games, Steam, Twitch and Xbox Live have all suffered downtime. We can then summarise the main article here and elsewhere. But for the moment, because the attacks are ongoing, the History section is the wrong place. — TPX 11:18, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Removing it isn't the right thing to do. That's what the talk page is for. For everything that is Sony, this is contextually the most correct place for now. Mnemnoch (talk) 16:48, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Sony is still reporting this as a live issue. Please do not remove the current tag until this issue is over. Mnemnoch (talk) 16:53, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Because this event is still unfolding, I have removed detail of the outage from our section detailing the history of the PlayStaton Network. The information has not been deleted but rather moved elsewhere on the same page (just below the section detailing PSN's availability). In one sense, everything by definition can be regarded as history. The introduction of a new service, once launched, can be regarded as history. I don't see why you are so keen to promote this material to the history section so rapidly, only here on this article, and no place else. — TPX 17:12, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
The History section lists the 2011 Attack and Outage. If you move this section, that section needs to be moved as well. But, as you can see, it's been where it's been for quite some time. Mnemnoch (talk) 17:09, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Personally, I would prefer to see all internet downtime removed from the history section. Similar incidents have occurred before and are likely to happen again. Are we to document every such occurrence under history as soon as they happen? It would be nice to hear what other editors have to say on this issue. — TPX 17:30, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
I agree. I'd like to get consensus as the occurrence of an outage is frequent. This outage, however, is the longest outage in 2014 if memory serves correct. Mnemnoch (talk) 18:55, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Go blog about it, not add it here. The previous attacks leaked information and lasted for a long period. A DDoS attack isn't either of these.--Vaypertrail (talk) 20:10, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

My sentiments exactly. Dbrodbeck (talk) 22:18, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
I disagree. I mean how many DDoS attacks can you think of that made national headlines? This story was all over the news. Anything with that much media attention needs to be here. It's part of PSN's notability. Sarujo (talk) 04:24, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Will it be important in a couple of months? Dbrodbeck (talk) 04:27, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Day 3 begins. Please explain why this isn't a current event. By this time in the 2011 attacks, there was already an entire page. Mnemnoch (talk) 05:29, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

I remain curious to know why some editors seem less interested in collaborating to create a central article describing these industry-wide attacks than they are in only adding information about them to a single page (i.e. PlayStation Network). Nobody seems to be in a rush to expand Xbox Live or Steam with the same news. Observe how Xbox Live coverers the disastrous 2007 Xmas disruption, when Microsoft's service was interrupted for over a week [1] consequently facing lawsuits from angry customers. [2] That outage is described in less than 100 words with no special subheadings or separate article. I'm in favour of mentioning the most recent service disruption, because the attacks are notable, but I think our starting point should be a separate article that we can summarise and link to. My view is that matters should be treated contextually and equally for all affected services. We have a new article on Lizard Squad that is in very poor shape at the moment. That could do with more eyes. — TPX 13:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)


I think it would be a good idea to include this logo in the History section. --JDC808 23:58, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

PlayStation Plus, 2010-2015[edit]

Your edit surprised me ViperSnake because, for all the effort you have spent improving our Xbox One article (amending the flow of text through concision) it seems peculiar that you would essentially copy the same sentence twice, in the same paragraph a short space apart, emphasizing that PlayStation 4 requires PlayStation Plus to access multiplayer. Presumably your intent was to underscore this requirement above all else, more than once. After I removed this repetitious line of text, you responded by marking the section with a {{advert|section}} tag, without providing any explanation as to where we might be going wrong. This creates the impression that you are less concerned about the quality of our article than shoehorning paid subscription information to a prominent position in the article. So let's take a step back and examine how we currently describe PlayStation Plus:

{{quotation|PlayStation Plus is a paid PlayStation Network subscription service that provides users with access to premium features. These extras include the ability to have game patches and system software updates download automatically to the console, early or exclusive access to some betas and demos, full game trials, and regular store discounts. As part of the subscription, members are given six games every month—typically two for each platform—and 3 GB of internet storage space for up to 1,000 saved game files. Users may choose a monthly, three-month or annual subscription. In 2013, Sony announced that PlayStation 4 online multiplayer will require a subscription to PlayStation Plus.

It's important to remember that the PlayStation Network caters for multiple systems. Premium features are listed in temporal order, commencing in 2010 with the PlayStation 3 and ending with Sony's latest platform PlayStation 4. Cloud saves, background patches, discounts and complimentary games were announced at inception. The most recent deviation (PS4 online multiplayer) is described thusly: "In 2013, Sony announced that PlayStation 4 online multiplayer will require a subscription to PlayStation Plus." If there is a persuasive reason to tag this section as some kind of advertisement, you have yet to make it. — TPX 18:52, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Instrument of terror[edit]

Moving the favorite console of terrorists discussion over here as suggested at PlayStation 4.

So add a major section with step-by-step instructions showing how to securely plot the slaughter of innocents here? Hcobb (talk) 15:10, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

The above source contains factual errors. Contrary to what Aaron Brown of The Express writes, Belgian interior minister Jan Jambon did not say the PlayStation 4 was used to plot the attacks. Nor does there appear to be any credible evidence linking PS4 to recent events. See here and hereTPX 16:05, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
From the above linked article; "there is no hard evidence the ISIS terrorists used the Playstation 4 Network". So end of discussion at this point. Unless we're going to add details about speculative terrorist use of every other email, chat and phone service? And let's not stop there; I'm sure there a few articles on armaments that could get a section on this. And cars, footwear, rucksacks, fast food outlet ... --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:05, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Promotional language[edit]

Sony expressed their intent to build upon the functionality of its predecessor by creating a new interconnected service that keeps users constantly in touch with a "PlayStation World" network, "fundamentally based on community, communication, commerce and content."

This language is inherently promotional and unencyclopedic, and should be rewritten. For example, everything after "service" could (and should) be removed and the encyclopedic fact that is being described would still be perfectly understood without the unnecessary public relations pablum. Other editors have reverted my removal of this language, as well as maintenance tags; so I am bringing the discussion to the talk page. --Regards, James(talk/contribs) 19:51, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Could it not be argued that a direct quote from Sony is acceptable providing (1) it helps to elucidate the fundamental purpose of the network (2) it is properly attributed? Sony said "the PlayStation Network is the best thing since sliced bread" is obviously excessive and important to avoid. Our sentence is positively limp by comparison. I trimmed it down, in any case, but left the part referring to a constant "PlayStation World" network because that helps to define PSN from what Sony operated before with its old dial-up meshwork. — TPX 23:03, 9 January 2016 (UTC)