|
Microsoft likely to raise Xbox Live price, says Pachter
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 19 October, 2009
Wedbush Morgan videogame industry analyst Michael Pachter has made some more interesting comments this week on GameTrailer's Bonus Round, stating that Microsoft is ready to move on from PC gaming, and that the company will eventually raise the price of Xbox Live Gold subscriptions.
"Microsoft wants you to never play a game again on your PC and play everything on your 360," says Pachter. ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
20. October 2009 @ 14:14 |
Link to this message
|
You Can join as a group and launch a game from Home = Party Mode
Killzone 2 friend invite was quickly fixed. Developers fault, not PSN.
One game? Flashpoint, you have to type. Holy crap.
Voice messaging = Text message (PSN people can read)
You can stream Netflix via PC
So you want to give someone a bad reputation but not block them?
We just get Demo?s of the good stuff. JK
Wow, I wish I knew he only had 17 minutes to go. This is a deal breaker
How many games have you developed and how much money have you made? I?ll leave this to the real developers.
Two gamer tags at once. That?s a benefit. Not $50 worth
Inside Xbox and Qore = Not worth reading
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 20. October 2009 @ 14:22
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
jookycola
Member
|
20. October 2009 @ 14:21 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Now you're shifting the goalposts because you know that you can't respond to the facts I've posted. Instead of continuing to argue that email is the same as cross-game chat etc., lol, you are now trying to ask what benefits these features actually have in order to try and write them all of. It's a classic fanboy tactic, but I've already said more than enough to prove you wrong, so just accept that and move on. :)
Um, i've NEVER switched my question. Reading owns you. I've asked the same question from the get go. You've posted childish insults and character stabs. I'm not a child so i won't respond to you.
If I ask you what makes the online "game play" experience better for $50?
Would that be simple enough for you to understand? Or would you like to go to the top and re-read all the way down at how many times i asked that exact same question in one form or another for clarification?
|
|
jookycola
Member
|
20. October 2009 @ 14:27 |
Link to this message
|
Here let's try this just one more time, since you seem to be avoiding answering this question like the plague. (I've only asked you to answer this 3 times now) This is after all been my question the whole time.
Originally posted by jookycola:
So when I play Call of Duty: World at War on my PS3 online. How does the lack of:
8 player co-op
NXE
voicemail messaging
cross-game chat
Make my online game experience worse than if i had paid $50 to play it on my 360?
|
Senior Member
|
20. October 2009 @ 14:35 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by glassd:
You Can join as a group and launch a game from Home = Party Mode
OK, let's compare how these two things work: -
Live - You can join a party by pushing one button. You then remain in that party when you move from game to game, or even if someone is playing a different game to you. You can leave the party or rejoin it when you like. You can switch between the party chat, the game chat, or one of the 3 private chat channels whenever you feel like it.
PSN - You have to go into HOME and meet up with people to launch a game. Only the handful of titles that support game launching from within HOME are supported. When you are actually in the game, it's no different from launching it the regular way and just inviting your friends. You cannot leave the party or rejoin it when you like. You cannot move from game to game as a group or play a different game but still be in the group and you do not have party-specific voice chat in the game, or the option of switching to the game's regular voice chat or any of the private chat channels (cos PSN doesn't have them).
They're absolutely nothing like each other. The Live system makes it easy to get together with friends, chat as a group, and stay together. The PSN system is a convoluted way of launching games, but once you're out of HOME, you have none of the added benefits that the Live party system offers.
Quote:
Killzone 2 friend invite was quickly fixed. Developers fault, not PSN.
One game? Flashpoint, you have to type. Holy crap.
This is an example of PSN's inconsistency. Those were just examples that I used. It shouldn't be like that. The invite/join system should be as universally well implemented as Live's.
Quote:
Voice messaging = Text message (PSN people can read)
This is another "email is the same as cross-game chat!" type thing. You can send text messages on Live too, but if you want to send a voicemail message, you can. You can't on PSN.
Quote:
You can stream Netflix via PC
But you can't on PSN. How many people have their TVs hooked up to a huge LCD or Plasma? Not many. Most people hook their games console up in their living room though.
Quote:
So you want to give someone a bad reputation but not block them?
On Live, when you give someone bad reputation you can choose from a number of categories on why you're giving them that bad rep. This affects their overall rep rating and their rep percentage. In their profile, then can also see a breakdown on why they've received bad rep. Also, if you give someone bad rep, you're less likely to be matched up with them in any game, but if you give someone positive rep, you're more likely to be matched up with them in future games so it affects matchmaking. PSN has nothing like this. You are just shifting the goalposts yet again.
Quote:
We just get Demo’s of the good stuff
Yeah, except when you don't. There's no demo of Trine. There was no demo of Fat Princess for weeks. Lots of good downloadable games don't have a demo. Again though, this is just goalpost shifting. I say Live has demos of every downloadable game, you then try and write this off by saying PSN only has demos of the good stuff, even though that's complete nonsense. lol.
Quote:
Wow, I wish I knew he only had 17 minutes to go. This is a deal breaker
PSN doesn't have it though does it? When I see that a mate has 17 minutes to go in a multiplayer match, I won't send him a chat invite or game invite and disturb them. I can see when the game is just about to end, so I can send the invite then. PSN doesn't have this of course, so you're going to write it off as not useful regardless! lol.
Quote:
How many games have you developed and how much money have you made? I’ll leave this to the real developers.
But you would build levels in LittleBigPlanet I'm sure? ;) What is a "real developer"? The Dishwasher: Dead Samurai was an indie game that ended up being uprated to full Xbox Live Arcade status. The fact that anyone with a little coding knowledge can download XNA and make a game, with a chance of getting their creation on Live for other people to play is great. PSN doesn't have this though, which is why you can't see any good in it!
Quote:
Two gamer tags at once. That’s a benefit. Not $50 worth
Up to 4 gamertags at once actually. 4 is more useful for local 4 player co-op games than online though. If you were only paying $50 a year for that feature, then it wouldn't be worth it, but obviously that's not all you're paying for.
Quote:
Inside Xbox and Qore = Not worth reading
I watch vids on Inside Xbox all the time. SentUAMessage is great, cos you can send messages to their gamertag and they'll answer your questions. The developer interviews and game previews are also very good. On Xbox Live you get those for free of course and you get new stuff almost every day. The videos stream too. You don't have to pay a fee to watch a show that only comes out once a month, like you do with Qore.
Anything else? You're sounding a bit desperate now to be fair.
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
20. October 2009 @ 14:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
this thread needs to be closed.
|
Senior Member
|
20. October 2009 @ 14:44 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by jookycola:
Um, i've NEVER switched my question. Reading owns you. I've asked the same question from the get go. You've posted childish insults and character stabs. I'm not a child so i won't respond to you.
If I ask you what makes the online "game play" experience better for $50?
Would that be simple enough for you to understand? Or would you like to go to the top and re-read all the way down at how many times i asked that exact same question in one form or another for clarification?
Reading owns me? How old are you mate? 12? I've addressed all of your points in a comprehensive way. You asked why Live is better and I told you. You have no response to that (no response that has a factual basis anyway), so now you're asking what makes the online gameplay experience better. It's easier to get people together playing games on Live than it is on PSN (with its inconsistent invite/join system) and Live has far more communication options, so if you want to chat just to your mates and not disturb other players (or have other players disturbing your conversation), then you can. You don't even have to be playing the same games to do that on Live, in fact. If if you've got any friends and one of them comes over, you can both log in with your own gamertags at the same time and both play online while chatting to other people. You don't have to leave your mate sitting there without a headset on either, like you do on PSN as it only supports 1. Live does everything PSN does, only better, and it does more besides. You should buy an Xbox 360, then you might see the difference for yourself. ;)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 20. October 2009 @ 14:45
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
20. October 2009 @ 14:44 |
Link to this message
|
Not desperite, just logical.
DXR88 = +1
Funk, we can agree to disagree.
later
|
Senior Member
|
20. October 2009 @ 14:47 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by glassd:
Not desperite, just logical.
There was nothing logical about your posts. If I said I had a car, you'd come along and say "who cares about a car? I've got a pair of roller blades and it's just the same thing!". That's the level you're at right now. LOL. There is no logical response to the list of features I've posted, other than to say "OK, I agree that PSN has none of those", because IT DOESN'T. lol. Like I said, if you find PSN acceptable for your needs, then there's nothing wrong with that. Arguing that it's just as good as Live in every way is utterly pointless though, because it simply isn't. You've already overstepped the desperation line with comments like "PSN only has demos of the good stuff". Surely even you can see that? Haha.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 20. October 2009 @ 14:49
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
20. October 2009 @ 14:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
free
|
Senior Member
|
20. October 2009 @ 15:01 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by glassd:
free
So that's it is it? Live costs 50p a week - about as much as a can of Coca Cola, yet you think that PSN being free makes up for its inferiority and lack of features? It may well do for you, but it doesn't for me and lots of my friends who also own all of the current gen consoles. My PS3 is strictly for exclusives, because if you've got a 360, cross-platform games perform better most of the time, there's no forced installs (but you can install any game you like in full) and you get to play them all on an online system that's far better and all for just 50 pence per week.
Besides, as I said, if I'd downloaded the same games and DLC on PSN that I have on Live, it would have cost me more money as the same content is often more expensive on PSN.
|
|
xnmalletx
Member
|
20. October 2009 @ 15:15 |
Link to this message
|
xbox live needs to cost money. IT CAN'T BE FREE. simply because of the fact that you can just make as many accounts on a game such as halo and boost yourself. It costs money so that is what makes it harder for people to cheat. That is one reason xbox live is superior.
Because the network is much better than PS3, and you only need to pay if you're planning on playing against other people online. they used to just charge u for getting online period so they're getting better. With the PS Network getting better. If you can do something good, never do it for free. Microsoft's xbox live has millions of members and excellent match making so they really don't have any reasons not to keep charging cause they're still growing. I own both and must say that play station network is improving but still way behind xbox live. And who are we kidding people, xbox live has WAY more gamers on it that PlayStation network.
|
|
xnmalletx
Member
|
20. October 2009 @ 15:26 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by jookycola:
Here let's try this just one more time, since you seem to be avoiding answering this question like the plague. (I've only asked you to answer this 3 times now) This is after all been my question the whole time.
Originally posted by jookycola:
So when I play Call of Duty: World at War on my PS3 online. How does the lack of:
8 player co-op
NXE
voicemail messaging
cross-game chat
Make my online game experience worse than if i had paid $50 to play it on my 360?
There is a lot more people playing on xbox live COD WAW than PlayStation network WAW. When i play on the PlayStation the whole game gets lag sometimes but my internet connection works flawlessly on my xbox, hmmm I'm not sure but i think that that is a better experience. And a very high rank person might just decide to start over so because it is free he says what the hell and makes a new account and dominates the rookies. The xbox live would discourage that.
|
Senior Member
|
20. October 2009 @ 15:35 |
Link to this message
|
On COD:WAW on the 360 you also have extra options for searching for games that do not exist on the PS3. You can pick from the following settings: -
Worldwide (matches you up with players from anywhere)
Locale first (looks for local players first before extending the search)
Locale only (only looks for local players)
Also, the after action reports didn't work for ages on PSN, but they've always worked fine on Live because of the data that Live makes available to devs. They don't have to patch these features into the game, which all comes down to the inconsistency of PSN again.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
20. October 2009 @ 20:02 |
Link to this message
|
|
pc gaming online > all other
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
20. October 2009 @ 21:22 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by shaffaaf:
pc gaming online > all other
Free and you can do whatever the hell you want.
For everyone complaining about PSN having less features than XBL, XBL is about 3 years older than PSN.
|
Member
|
20. October 2009 @ 22:59 |
Link to this message
|
no i think they're going to up the price so they can cover the cost of replacing all the RROD
|
|
chris4160
Suspended permanently
|
21. October 2009 @ 06:09 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by core2kid:
For everyone complaining about PSN having less features than XBL, XBL is about 3 years older than PSN.
It's not microsoft's fault sony did not create the idea to bring online gaming to consoles. Without xbox live psn may not have existed.
|
Moderator
|
21. October 2009 @ 07:59 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by DXR88:
this thread needs to be closed.
That'd be up to Andre, it's his article.
jookycola / funksoulb - hopefully you've both finished now ?.
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules *** |
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
21. October 2009 @ 11:07 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by chris4160:
Originally posted by core2kid:
For everyone complaining about PSN having less features than XBL, XBL is about 3 years older than PSN.
It's not microsoft's fault sony did not create the idea to bring online gaming to consoles. Without xbox live psn may not have existed.
I'm sure it would have been, Dreamcast had online but the fact is that PS2 didn't really have the online games like Xbox. They had online but it was supported by the developers of the game, not XBL so the game developers essentially had to do more for the PS2 than the Xbox.
|
Staff Member
4 product reviews
|
22. October 2009 @ 02:06 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by DXR88:
this thread needs to be closed.
That'd be up to Andre, it's his article.
jookycola / funksoulb - hopefully you've both finished now ?.
Why are we closing this? lol
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
22. October 2009 @ 10:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
Fanboy-ism
|
|
Gnawnivek
Member
|
22. October 2009 @ 11:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
Come on now, $50 vs Free, of course paying services are better, otherwise there would be millions of idiots out there. It all comes down to personal taste really.
Well, sucks that Live fee is going up :(
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
22. October 2009 @ 11:33 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Gnawnivek:
of course paying services are better, otherwise there would be millions of idiots out there.
I disagree. For example, when you buy a Honda vs Acura. They are made by the same people but you are paying more for the Acura because of brand name. For Tylenol vs a generic pain killer. Both have the same exact ingredients but you are paying more for the brand name.
|
|
Gnawnivek
Member
|
22. October 2009 @ 12:25 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Gnawnivek:
of course paying services are better, otherwise there would be millions of idiots out there.
I disagree. For example, when you buy a Honda vs Acura. They are made by the same people but you are paying more for the Acura because of brand name. For Tylenol vs a generic pain killer. Both have the same exact ingredients but you are paying more for the brand name.
Okay, good point there, you got me :)
I was just talking about $50 Live vs. Free PSN. In this case, $50 Live is a better service than free PSN. I'm not saying it's entirely $50 value-wise better, but it's better in general (hell, it's much older than PSN, so it has a lot of roots in that area). Again, value comparison is subjective. For me, i prefer free PSN, because i don't use cross game chats and gamer profiles (forget about Netflix streaming, pointless).
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
icfshop01
Suspended permanently
|
22. October 2009 @ 23:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
spam edited by ddp
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. October 2009 @ 23:39
|
