-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
So Sony World is Xbox Live
- Thread starter Shapingo
- Start date
SolidSnakex
Member
Wollan said:
Pretty good for 'worst looking title' I would say.
And most importantly, it actually animates well. Which is a hurdle that the majority of developers can't seem to get over.
Agent X
Member
Wollan said:
Has EyeToy: Chat been released in Europe yet?
I agree that having to insert a disc each time could be cumbersome when all you really want to do is switch on the system and page your buddy for a quick video chat. But, limitations of the PS2 design from six years ago mean that it has to be done this way, while with the PS3 they have the opportunity to integrate the functionality into the operating system right from the get-go. It's analagous to how X-Box Live Arcade was implemented on the original X-Box system (booting up a disc so you could log on), compared to the X-Box 360 implementation where it's integrated into the OS at a tighter level.
Anyway, I just dug up some screens of EyeToy: Chat as a point of reference. By PS2 standards, it looks good and has a full range of features. I'd bet that PS3 would have at least a comparable level of online communication functionality built into the system from the start.
TekunoRobby
Tag of Excellence
If true then fucking awesome! Then again even if these rumors are unsubstantiated Sony knows full well in advance that they require a basic set of online fundamentals for every game to work with. At the very least it we should expect basic original Xbox Live functionality for the PS3. Well IÂ’m expecting that anyways, I would love to be pleasantly surprised to have their iTunes-like service up and running at launch.
Pedigree Chum
Banned
One more thing Sony needs to do is make ALL games headset compatible.
And allow me to use my Bluetooth headset, fuck wires.
And allow me to use my Bluetooth headset, fuck wires.
It doesn't cost money on Xbox Live either.
It's a tough argument.
On the one hand, you can say "I don't want to pay just to play. Everything else is free."
But Xbox Live is an outstanding service. That marketplace is the gateway to your hard drive, which allows you to download movies, music, some pictures, and game demos absolutely free.
Then there's premium versions of the above content, full versions of arcade games, and other things.
Then there's stuff like trueskill matchmaking, spectator mode, and gamercards which you ignore. These are just some of the fantastic offerings.
So should you be charged for these things? Well, yeah, but you're really not. You're charged for playing online. In exchange, MS has made sure that darn near 100% of all Xbox 360 games are playable online. Is this fair? That's up to you. But MS has put up a service that is tough to beat.
With the number of free Live subscription giveaways with games last generation, I'd say it's possible to spend a great deal of time not paying for this service.
How long do you usually play a game? For me, it's just a few months, even with long RPG's. I don't like to get backlogged. This means that I could realistically buy an Xbox Live game, get a free subscription, and be finished playing the game by the time the free subscription is up. At that point, I could decide whether I want to keep paying.
And guess what? Xbox Live also offers incredible subscription plans. 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, a year. Whatever you think it's worth for the time being. It's flexible.
People like to paint Xbox Live as some money pit but I haven't spent more than 6.95 since I received my Xbox Live subscription. For that I paid for an Xbox Live arcade game and some great online multiplayer. Worth it? Absolutely.
And here's a secret. All scoreboard competition is ABSOLUTELY FREE. That means you can outscore people around the world on Geometry Wars or whatever without paying for the service.
There are so many ways to get into Live that don't involve money, and yet the service itself is so well-developed that it's hard for me to imagine someone saying it's not worth it.
Wax Free Vanilla
Member
Agent X said:
Yep:
for nearly two years I think
Guy LeDouche
Banned
hahaha, it's like a latenight X360 infomercial. BUT THAT'S NOT ALL! IT ALSO MAKES JULIAN FRIES!Speevy said:
monkeymagic
Banned
Guy LeDouche said:
:lol
Anyway I guess if you spend hours online each day playing games then those extra features start to matter.
Me, I just want to play my games offline and if the urge arises jump online, find someone to play and have a lag-free game.
That's the reason I cancelled my XBL account - couldn't get a lag-free PES4 game.
Lag free >>>> any online feature you can think of
Guy LeDouche
Banned
Live is great, its just the way he presents it. Even Allard would be saying, "Dude, c'mon. You're laying it on a little thick, don't you think?"HokieJoe said:
Pedigree Chum
Banned
Yes, I don't want to pay to connect up to others to play online games. Its free everywhere else, why shouldn't if be free here.
You get that all free with Silver. Silver ftw.
This is Silver too.
This shit either sucks or is useless. Just give me a fucking server list for godsakes, I hate how ALL of my XBL experiences are total crapshoots. Fuck you MS, I want to handpick my games...fuck your optimatch bullshit. You know what's optimal? Letting me choose my own matches.
You don't think that if Sony include basic Live features that they'd get many online games for their console? If a developer makes a lobby system for an XBL game, there isn't any reason why they couldn't port that over to Sony online and make it work with PS3's (supposed) friends list and universal login.
the cards don't work on X360 and as far as I can see, there isn't any free Live trials packaged with X360 games.
You know what's more flexible? Free, I wouldn't have to worry about renewing shit. I also wouldn't feel pressured to play online to get the most out of my subscription.
Most of the cool features are Silver. For me the only advantage of Gold is to be able to P2P play with people, something that shouldn't carry a charge. If Sony can offer a basic version of XBL (cutting out all the extras) for free I'm just going to stick with that and use Silver for all the downloadable stuff and XBLA.
Speevy, here's a tip for you:
Just beacuse ONE company offers a service and demands money for it doesn't mean another company will also demand money for a similiar service.
I know it's hard to grasp for you but that's called: competition. I'm 100% certain that marketing tools like you know about it.
Neither you nor I know SHIT about Sony World yet you act like IT WILL COST MONEY and I act like IT WILL BE FREE.
Just beacuse ONE company offers a service and demands money for it doesn't mean another company will also demand money for a similiar service.
I know it's hard to grasp for you but that's called: competition. I'm 100% certain that marketing tools like you know about it.
Neither you nor I know SHIT about Sony World yet you act like IT WILL COST MONEY and I act like IT WILL BE FREE.
Hey Borys, here's a tip.
Read my posts before responding.
I clarified very clearly that I was talking about specific aspects of a hypothetically and competitively matched service. In other words, I was already giving Sony credit for matching Xbox Live in every respect.
All I'm saying is that I can't imagine going through all that effort (as MS has) and not charging for some aspects, such as content or special clubs, etc.
Read my posts before responding.
I clarified very clearly that I was talking about specific aspects of a hypothetically and competitively matched service. In other words, I was already giving Sony credit for matching Xbox Live in every respect.
All I'm saying is that I can't imagine going through all that effort (as MS has) and not charging for some aspects, such as content or special clubs, etc.
SolidSnakex
Member
Who knows if it'll be free. Kaz has just gone on record of saying that they know most people aren't interested in paying to play games online. But they also recognize that some are, and they're trying to figure out what they can do to solve both problems.
Sirolf said:
...
...
...
Ok, I'll try my best from now.
Speevy:
Alright, I get your point now. I am really in no position to talk about a hypothetical service that may or may not meet Xbox Live!, which is really impressive BTW and I respect MS for that one part of Xbox experience. Yes, most of it (not all) is available on PCs for free but in no way synchronized between all games and users as Live is.
Will Sony World offer comparable services as Live!?
We don't know. I would love it but I can't see it happening with SW 1.0 version.
Will it be free?
We don't know. I would love it but common sense says: no.
Will Sony World even exist?
Hell, we don't know even that!
But it's fun speculating, especially between different brand fan
boy
monkeymagic
Banned
SolidSnakex said:
Console content isn't compelling enough to pay for online play yet especially since multiplayer with people in the same room offers the same kind of experience - arguably a better experience since it's much more fun.
It's not like WoW where online multiplayer is a neccessity (unless someone can work the idea of a few million people playing in the same room
).Maybe when we hit PS5 and X1440 more people will think the persistant and lifelike cyberworlds created then are worth their wallet.
Pedigree Chum
Banned
Speevy said:
Uh...everything he just said is bullshit. Thank you.
Don't mind me, I'm just a cheapass. That's what it boils down to, I won't deny it
I just want something in between Sony's online plan for PS2 and XBL for free. Is that too much to ask!? Is it?
DCharlie
And even i am moderately surprised
i used to host a Halo night every 2-3 weeks and i must admit i find Halo 2 online much less fun.
However, the frequency went up - we could play whenever we wanted to rather than having to sort out a day, arrange when everyone was free ,etc...
whilst it's much more fun with everyone in one house, online play is still compelling in its own right due to the lesser requirements, the fact that everyone can have their own TV per player, can sit playing in their pants, play longer hours, etc etc..
I dunno - i just get the feeling that a lot of people naysaying console gaming online are doing so without having tried it yet. Not aiming at you, i just get the feeling.
SolidSnakex
Member
monkeymagic said:
I think its compelling, just not to most people. Sony knows that they have a market that MS doesn't have (the gamers that aren't interested in paying), but MS also has a market they don't have, and that's the one they're looking to tap into with the PS3's online features.
monkeymagic
Banned
DCharlie said:
Perhaps it's the games I play but playing WE/PES (or any other sports game) with friends/competitors in the same room is just waaaaaay more fun than when I played it online with Live.
In fact, online PES4 was the reason I got Live and apart from the annoying lag I quickly found that I missed the
- goading
- constant replays rubbing it in
- disputing and 'discussing' every decision
The satisfaction just isn't there over a mic
Also Winning Eleven is one of those games where multiplayer across one screen is exactly the same as multiplayer across many screens.
monkeymagic
Banned
westical said:
There's so few of them about I'd be inclined to think that too :lol
Dr_Cogent said:
Considering the PS2 online came out AFTER the PS2 was released it wasn't like they had much choice... a unified interface would have meant that there needed to be permanent data stored on your side and since the HDD wasn't out that would have meant having to take over even more of your memory card something I'm not sure folks would have been real happy with... they screwed the pooch on it basically... will they screw it up again.... who can tell but we sure haven't seen anything to show us a unified service is coming besides the occasional lip service...
soundwave05
Member
How hard is a freaking unified service anyway?
You pick a username as soon as you boot up your PS3.
That name/"ID" sticks with any game you play online.
There's a central hub that has things like friends list and matchmaking options.
I mean c'mon this stuff has been around on PC games for a decade, now suddenly Sony has to spend bazillions of dollars and huge resources to do it?
Oh yeah that's right XBox Live also has downloadable demos/trailers and old retro games. Well that just makes it impossible to copy I guess.
I bet Sony could have a comparable unified service very close to XBox Live for minimal investment.
You pick a username as soon as you boot up your PS3.
That name/"ID" sticks with any game you play online.
There's a central hub that has things like friends list and matchmaking options.
I mean c'mon this stuff has been around on PC games for a decade, now suddenly Sony has to spend bazillions of dollars and huge resources to do it?
Oh yeah that's right XBox Live also has downloadable demos/trailers and old retro games. Well that just makes it impossible to copy I guess.
I bet Sony could have a comparable unified service very close to XBox Live for minimal investment.
monkeymagic
Banned
Dr_Cogent said:
I call it focusing on your core and not wasting time, money and effort on peripheral services that at most only 10% of your userbase will care about.
soundwave05 said:
I wouldn't trivialize it at all though. It take significant work and significant resources to put something like this into service. Don't underestimate how much work is involved, you sound like marketing here where I work.
Oh, that's easy!
monkeymagic said:
My experience online with the PS2 was really shitty for the most part as a result. If Sony cares about online, they will model their stuff after MS who did it right.
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
choplifter said:
Thank you. You guys really need to stop sucking off Sony after every hint of something that MIGHT happen.
soundwave05
Member
Dr_Cogent said:
It should be easy. Stuff like this has been done since the mid-90s if not earlier.
A corporation the size of Sony and with the massive resources that Sony has could do this easily.
I think the real reason the PS2 did not have a unified service is because the PS2 has no internal memory storage standard unless you count the 32MB memory card. They should ship at least a 1 GB memory stick with the PS3 for basic online data saving or just go the full route an include a HDD.
Hell, I bet eventually Nintendo will also have a unified service with background themes/desktops based on their character franchises.
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
Gran Turismo 5 with tons of cars online. That would be impossible to resist.
soundwave05
Member
Dr_Cogent said:
In relative terms its easy for a corporation the size of Sony to do it.
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
soundwave05 said:
Precisely why I wonder they have not done it already.
soundwave05
Member
DenogginizerOS said:
I think it could be because of internal politics -- perhaps the movie and music divisions of Sony want to be involved and SCEA just said "fuck it" and let third-parties deal with it on the PS2.
Memory storage could have also been a problem with the PS2 as the HDD wasn't standard and memory cards were only 32MB.
soundwave05
Member
A "Playstation Network" with a potential userbase of 100 million+ could actually be a huge revune earner for Sony and offer them a way to also do things with their movies, music, television, etc. content ... but I think this is where Sony is a bit dysfunctional compared to a company like Apple that just gets shit done.
soundwave05 said:
And Apple doesn't have multiple divisions basically working as separate entities that they'd need to get to cooperate to offer different types of content... one of Stringers tasks though is to straighten that kinda shit out.
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
Dr_Cogent said:
Doing this will hurt them. No doubt.
Pedigree Chum
Banned
DenogginizerOS said:
Why? Unless they get all 3rd parties to adopt their universal login/friends system.