Home Time

I think that's probably the main reason why the apartments and club houses are so popular - because that removes the random factor to the instancing. It's a double-edged sword really, because while it gives an intimacy to an area while you're in it, it does mean that in a popular area the chances of you randomly bumping into somebody you know are fairly slim.

That's also why we're looking to develop ways to make it easier for the user to avoid the total random nature of things. I can't talk much about that, but it's an area of emphasis for us, to allow users to connect with their friends more frequently - and in a more controlled way.

It's something the community is very keen on, and something we've recognised for some time. It's an important thing, but not a minor piece of development.

That's a tricky one to answer, because on the one hand, yes - Home is an ambitious platform and has been in development for some time, so obviously that's a lot of money. But it is a platform, it's not a single software product. We do have a profit and loss on Home, and obviously revenue is an important part of it, just like with anything else.

But our belief is that if you make the community happy, and get good content on to the platform, if you get a platform that people want to keep coming back to, then the monetisation aspect of it will almost take care of itself. It's certainly not something that should be the driving force, not something that's the driving priority at this stage of development. We have to focus on making sure we're giving the community what they want, and making sure the platform itself is sufficiently capable and robust, and that the content is there. That's definitely our priority.

That's not to say that we don't want to monetise the platform, and that we don't have plans to do so, but it's definitely a kind of consequence of getting all the other factors right, rather than being a driving force. We're not in it to make a quick buck from Home, and then move onto the next thing - Home is a strategic platform for PlayStation, and as such we're developing it.

It is, and again, it's nice to see that what you believed to be the case is borne out with what's happening. You look at the Korean market and micro-transactions are where it's at - there are millions and millions of dollars being passed around on a daily basis.

But a couple of years ago when you talked about micro-transactions over here [in the UK], particularly with respect to virtual clothing items, the vast majority of people would have responded to you that they weren't interested and would never contemplate paying for that.

But we're seeing people that are prepared to pay for that - like any market you don't expect all of your users to pay for virtual items or whatever the goods are, but it doesn't require everybody to do so. If only a small percentage of the community is paying for items that still amounts to a lot of money.

From a third party's perspective it makes it worthwhile to produce those items in the first place. I can't give you any specific figures on how much has been sold - that's obviously a matter for our licensees - but there are plenty of items being made that are making money.

I think there's enough content being given away for free on the Home platform that people don't feel forced into buying stuff, and the fact that they are buying things shows there's a market for it and that people like it.

What's really interesting is that in some cases we're actually finding that the paid-for items are shifting more than the free items, and what that points to is that there's a value in the perceived exclusivity of an item - users can say they've paid for it and it gives them the opportunity to show their individuality a little more.

If the majority of people don't see the value in that, but a minority do, then that's fine.