Tuesday, April 20th 2021

Sony Backtracks on PS3 & PS Vita PlayStation Store Closure

Sony had previously announced plans to shut down the PlayStation digital store for PS3 and PS Vita devices later this year but after the public backlash they have decided to reverse this decision and now plan to keep the store open on these devices for the "foreseeable future". Sony stated that their decision to shut down the store was a mistake and that they were inspired by the passionate gamers who wanted the store to remain live. This move will help to preserve the digital-only games released on the platforms. Sony still intends to retire PSP commerce functionality on July 2nd as planned, the full announcement can be found below.
Jim Ryan
Recently, we notified players that PlayStation Store for PS3 and PS Vita devices was planned to end this summer.

Upon further reflection, however, it's clear that we made the wrong decision here. So today I'm happy to say that we will be keeping the PlayStation Store operational for PS3 and PS Vita devices. PSP commerce functionality will retire on July 2, 2021 as planned.

When we initially came to the decision to end purchasing support for PS3 and PS Vita, it was born out of a number of factors, including commerce support challenges for older devices and the ability for us to focus more of our resources on newer devices where a majority of our gamers are playing on. We see now that many of you are incredibly passionate about being able to continue purchasing classic games on PS3 and PS Vita for the foreseeable future, so I'm glad we were able to find a solution to continue operations.

I'm glad that we can keep this piece of our history alive for gamers to enjoy, while we continue to create cutting-edge new game worlds for PS4, PS5, and the next generation of VR.

Thank you for sharing your feedback with us - we're always listening and appreciate the support from our PlayStation community.
Source: Sony
Add your own comment

14 Comments on Sony Backtracks on PS3 & PS Vita PlayStation Store Closure

#1
ZoneDymo
Honestly we are past the point where laws need to be introduced about stuff like this.

Personally I am ok with a developer stopping to work on an online game, but I feel they should be obligated to then make the game open so players can host the game themselves on personal servers or their own computer.

More on topic though, I dont even get why Sony needs to shut this down....they have playstation network still up and running and will continue to do so for the Playstation 5, is it really that much work to have the ps3 just hitchhike along, is that really that much more work and stress on the servers they are already employing?
Posted on Reply
#2
R00kie
Backpedalling at its finest.
Posted on Reply
#3
1d10t
PS3 sold around 87 million units, and is considered half of it are jailbreakers, it is still quite a lot of players.
ZoneDymo
More on topic though, I dont even get why Sony needs to shut this down....they have playstation network still up and running and will continue to do so for the Playstation 5, is it really that much work to have the ps3 just hitchhike along, is that really that much more work and stress on the servers they are already employing?
Simple, money. They planned obsolete on PS3 platform are to boost sales on " soon to be phasing out" PS4 platform. Since the two were still able to cross-play, Sony had to shut down one for "forced upgrade".
Posted on Reply
#4
TheinsanegamerN
ZoneDymo
Honestly we are past the point where laws need to be introduced about stuff like this.

Personally I am ok with a developer stopping to work on an online game, but I feel they should be obligated to then make the game open so players can host the game themselves on personal servers or their own computer.

More on topic though, I dont even get why Sony needs to shut this down....they have playstation network still up and running and will continue to do so for the Playstation 5, is it really that much work to have the ps3 just hitchhike along, is that really that much more work and stress on the servers they are already employing?
We've been warning you for decades about this, how digital distribution removes ownership of your games from your hands and puts you at the mercy of the gaming industry, full of money grubbing sociopaths.

But no, digital purchases are just SOOO convenient that said, youll never have to worry about it they said.
Posted on Reply
#5
FreedomEclipse
~Technological Technocrat~
TheinsanegamerN
We've been warning you for decades about this, how digital distribution removes ownership of your games from your hands and puts you at the mercy of the gaming industry
+1 -- Pretty much this. But at the same time services like X-cloud will be a godsend for folks who cant afford to be forking out $80 two or three times a year everytime a new game drops so $10-15 a month for access to tonnes of games will make a lot of sense to some people. Its bad because its digital but its also good because it means that less well off families can get in on the action and have something to entertain their kids that shouldnt break the bank.
Posted on Reply
#6
lZKoce
TheinsanegamerN
We've been warning you for decades about this, how digital distribution removes ownership of your games from your hands and puts you at the mercy of the gaming industry, full of money grubbing sociopaths.

But no, digital purchases are just SOOO convenient that said, youll never have to worry about it they said.
I was kind of indifferent until EA took Dead Space off Google app store. I paid so much money for it and now I can't even go back to it...why?...it wasn't compatible with newer versions of Android....they said....let me decide it people! And it was exactly then, when I realized how not awesome the situation was.
Posted on Reply
#7
TheinsanegamerN
FreedomEclipse
+1 -- Pretty much this. But at the same time services like X-cloud will be a godsend for folks who cant afford to be forking out $80 two or three times a year everytime a new game drops so $10-15 a month for access to tonnes of games will make a lot of sense to some people. Its bad because its digital but its also good because it means that less well off families can get in on the action and have something to entertain their kids that shouldnt break the bank.
I still dont think its a good deal, when I was growing up we didnt have much money, I bought all my games used, on physical disk, for $10-15 a year or two after they came out, and managed to build up a 150 game library over 8 years. Of course thats a completely different topic.

I dont really consider the likes of X-cloud to be in the same boat, after all that is sold as a subscription service and doesnt try to bill itself as you "owning" anything. Like I'm not of the illusion that anything I rent from amazon prime will stay there forever, but digital purchases cost as much as physical while being technically rentals, even worse they've nromalized the spending of 70+ on games, its much harder to spend $85 for a collectors edition when you have to do it in person.
Posted on Reply
#8
Octavean
The backlash that Sony is facing likely has something to do with the fact that their customers are now aware of the fact that cmos battery failure on the PS4 and the PS5 will effectively brick these consoles if the Sony servers are no longer operational. The optics are just really bad and they know it.

Simple fix, keep the Sony servers up until the last PlayStation / Vita device is in that great landfill in the sky.

Sony is a multi billion $$$ conglomerate they can take the hit on this one and keep the servers up. This is like Microsoft keeping Activation servers up for Windows XP, Windows 7, Office and other products long after they are no longer supported. It’s an obligation that they created for themselves.
Posted on Reply
#9
FreedomEclipse
~Technological Technocrat~
TheinsanegamerN
I still dont think its a good deal, when I was growing up we didnt have much money, I bought all my games used, on physical disk, for $10-15 a year or two after they came out, and managed to build up a 150 game library over 8 years. Of course thats a completely different topic.

I dont really consider the likes of X-cloud to be in the same boat, after all that is sold as a subscription service and doesnt try to bill itself as you "owning" anything. Like I'm not of the illusion that anything I rent from amazon prime will stay there forever, but digital purchases cost as much as physical while being technically rentals, even worse they've nromalized the spending of 70+ on games, its much harder to spend $85 for a collectors edition when you have to do it in person.
I personally think its a great deal but it depends on the mindset you approach it from. If paying $10-15 a month gets you access to thousands of games and even blockbuster titles then that is one hell of a deal. Obviously the issue is game ownership. Once you stop paying your subscription or it lapses -- Everything is gone.

For a lot of people something like X-cloud ticks a lot of boxes, Not just for low-income families but for casual players or even hardcore players who like the ability to try a load of games out first before buying it in the shop.

Imagine if you only had a 2 or 3 hrs a week that you could sit and game. forking out $60-80 for ONE or even TWO games can be seen as bad value where as $10-15 can get you so much more and youre not stuck to playing those one or two games that you purchased.

There are many ways to spin a service like X-Cloud, It just depends how Microsoft implements it at the end of the day.

It might not work for you. It might not tick your boxes but it will for a lot of other people. Nobody said you had to buy into it if you think its a bad deal, Just like stadia.
Posted on Reply
#10
TheinsanegamerN
FreedomEclipse
I personally think its a great deal but it depends on the mindset you approach it from. If paying $10-15 a month gets you access to thousands of games and even blockbuster titles then that is one hell of a deal. Obviously the issue is game ownership. Once you stop paying your subscription or it lapses -- Everything is gone.

For a lot of people something like X-cloud ticks a lot of boxes, Not just for low-income families but for casual players or even hardcore players who like the ability to try a load of games out first before buying it in the shop.

Imagine if you only had a 2 or 3 hrs a week that you could sit and game. forking out $60-80 for ONE or even TWO games can be seen as bad value where as $10-15 can get you so much more and youre not stuck to playing those one or two games that you purchased.

There are many ways to spin a service like X-Cloud, It just depends how Microsoft implements it at the end of the day.

It might not work for you. It might not tick your boxes but it will for a lot of other people. Nobody said you had to buy into it if you think its a bad deal, Just like stadia.
I mean this might work if you were really into multiplayer games and didnt mind jumping to new games every week or two. When I buy a game, I play it for long periods of time. I bought project wingman and have sunk over 30 hours into it, finally staring to get bored of it. That's a relatively short indie game that only cost $25. I fit the description you have, someone who only has a handful of hours to game any particular week, and even then I'd spend much more on a $15 subscription then I would on just buying the handful of games I want per year on sale.

On console it may make more sense where games are $60, but on PC where sales are common and you have competition (not to mention a 30+ year backlog of older games for under $10, like fallout NV, the OG mass effect, star wars battlefront, supereme commander, old NFS and burnout paradise games, ece) the price honestly makes little to no sense unless you want to constantly swap games. I know people like that, but they are the type to dedicate 4-5 hours a day to gaming on weeknights and 10+ hours on weekends, and can complete entire games in less then a week. I cant think of anyone with limited time on their hands to game who also want to jump between titles constantly, you'd never be able to get into a particular title.

Most of the people I know who enjoy games but have limited time to play them usually stick to 1-3 games over the course of a few years, like skyrim and halo, or fallout and forza, or something like that, because what is the point of having hundreds of games at your disposal if you never get the chance to get into them?
Posted on Reply
#11
FreedomEclipse
~Technological Technocrat~
TheinsanegamerN
I mean this might work if you were really into multiplayer games and didnt mind jumping to new games every week or two. When I buy a game, I play it for long periods of time. I bought project wingman and have sunk over 30 hours into it, finally staring to get bored of it. That's a relatively short indie game that only cost $25. I fit the description you have, someone who only has a handful of hours to game any particular week, and even then I'd spend much more on a $15 subscription then I would on just buying the handful of games I want per year on sale.

On console it may make more sense where games are $60, but on PC where sales are common and you have competition (not to mention a 30+ year backlog of older games for under $10, like fallout NV, the OG mass effect, star wars battlefront, supereme commander, old NFS and burnout paradise games, ece) the price honestly makes little to no sense unless you want to constantly swap games. I know people like that, but they are the type to dedicate 4-5 hours a day to gaming on weeknights and 10+ hours on weekends, and can complete entire games in less then a week. I cant think of anyone with limited time on their hands to game who also want to jump between titles constantly, you'd never be able to get into a particular title.

Most of the people I know who enjoy games but have limited time to play them usually stick to 1-3 games over the course of a few years, like skyrim and halo, or fallout and forza, or something like that, because what is the point of having hundreds of games at your disposal if you never get the chance to get into them?
Choice is the spice of life friend. Why force yourself to stay in a cage when the door is open and there is an entire world to explore outside? There are so many different game genres out there and the great thing about this service is if theres a game you dont like then there are thousands of others to try so long as its available on the service and your subscription is all payed up.

How about this way. What if youre a parent with two or three kids that all like something different. Are you going to buy each of them a $60-80 game? Again thats where the convenience comes in. You keep pushing your point like no-one else exists in this world but you and just because you think its a bad deal then its bad deal for everyone.

Its easily a one size fits all approach. I dont know if there will be 'family' accounts but even if you pay $20-30 a month and have access to games that the entire family can play thats a win win situation.

if you dont think the service is a good deal. Dont subscribe to it. Keep buying your games one at a time digitally or physically.

If sure if you introduced your friends who stick to one or two games because of limited time and money to a service like x-cloud, They would probably enjoy it more because they arent locked to the games they paid for.

Trust. I know what i would choose, And Microsoft has been buying up a lot of studios so there will be tonnes more content available.
Posted on Reply
#12
Turmania
People still buy consoles? :)
Posted on Reply
#13
RealKGB
Sad that they're shutting down the PSP store - I have a Silver PSP-2001 and there's a few games that are hard to find for a reasonable price.
I guess my disc games will be worth more now, though.
Posted on Reply
#14
ratirt
And yet I rushed to the store for some last time purchases :P
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment