+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted January 28, 2008 Subscriber² Share Posted January 28, 2008 Home was originally due out in October 2007 but has since slipped to March, as Sony puts the finishing touches to its online virtual world. Meanwhile, Xbox Live continues to look more dated by the month. You probably know that Home is some kind of virtual world for socializing and whatnot, but what else has it going on?1) Community-friendly Home is a community-based application for the PS Network that allows you to create your own avatar, give it its own apartment and decorate it with items you unlock for all your achievements. 2) Constantly updated Once the launch of Home has all kicked off and everyone has settled in, Sony plans to introduce a slew of new additions, including a range of clothes for you avatar and household pets. 3) Size matters At the moment, word is that Sony reckons the entire application will weigh in at around 500MB when it launches, so downloading won?t be a chore. 4) Lounge lizards When you first enter Home you?ll end up in a huge lounge with a bunch of other gamers. Once in there you can take on other players in various minigames like billiards or bowling. 5) Visit the Hall of Fame There will also be a Hall of Fame, which includes a Trophy Room where users can show off their gaming prowess. The more trophies you?ve got, the more skilled a gamer you are (or the less of a life you have). 6) Stay in touch Communicating with your friends or other users through Home should be an easy affair. You?ll be able to use the virtual keyboard, a regular keyboard, a USB/Bluetooth headset or e-motions (gestures like waving at people or dancing). 7) Download demos Sony is also planning on creating theaters within Home so you can watch and download new game trailers that are making their debut on the network. 8) Exclusive events Sony and other publishers and developers will organize huge events like exclusive previews of new games, interviews with developers, and first-looks at forthcoming PS3 crackers. 9) Movies and sports Rumour has it that live sporting events will also be broadcast on Home alongside concerts, so this could also mean that we?re going to get the chance to watch movies too. 10) Virtual PSP The look of your avatar, your apartment decorations, where you want to travel and all the settings will be controlled by way of a virtual PSP. Clever interface, or shameless advertizing gimmick? Source: http://www.gamesradar.com/us/ps3/game/feat...128103021638086 Simple details, but still good to read for a (Y)resher (Y) Can anyone in the beta tell us what size Home is to download just now? I doubt the NDA covers :laugh:ze :laugh: Roll on GDC, and let us hope we don't get frustrating news (more delays) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corris Veteran Posted January 28, 2008 Veteran Share Posted January 28, 2008 Can anyone in the beta tell us what size Home is to download just now? I doubt the NDA covers file size :laugh: You know, it probably does, some companies cover all the bases, lol. But I'm all for finding out, especially if anyone would like to slip us some news. :D Roll on GDC, and let us hope we don't get frustrating news (more delays) Indeed, GDC better have some news, or at least an open beta of some kind, I would like to get my hands on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CloudEngineer Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 i wouldn't be surprised if its just over the 500mb mark now, if that number in point 3 is actually from sony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randomnut Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 Wow, that article is complete arse. 'Constantly updated'? They said that about the playstation store, and the things pretty bare, and how long has the thing been out? Xbox live looking more dated by the month? Damn, that comment is so silly it's not even worth going into. Live has so many features PSN doesn't it's unbelieveable. Integrated friends list, etc etc etc. I feel like i've dropped 10 IQ points reading that drivel. And hard to believe as it may be, i'm not a fanboy, I own both consoles. Live is just the better experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted January 29, 2008 Author Subscriber² Share Posted January 29, 2008 Wow, that article is complete arse.'Constantly updated'? They said that about the playstation store, and the things pretty bare, and how long has the thing been out? Xbox live looking more dated by the month? Damn, that comment is so silly it's not even worth going into. Live has so many features PSN doesn't it's unbelieveable. Integrated friends list, etc etc etc. I feel like i've dropped 10 IQ points reading that drivel. And hard to believe as it may be, i'm not a fanboy, I own both consoles. Live is just the better experience. Fair enough for having those views due to the way things are, but if you don't think Home will be constantly updated you're a little naive. An update for Home could be anyone of these things - New furniture - New clothes - New ways to share content on your PS3 hard drive with others in Home - New accessories - New Home layouts - New Trailers/Movies in theatre - New minigames - New posters - New areas - New emotes - New chat functions - New events - New exclusive game developer talks/content - New live broadcasts of sports events/gigs/worldwide news & more. Updating Home is a lot different than updating PSN. One could argue PSN is pretty lame due to a lot of resources going into Home just now - Eg the belief that once Home hits, everything is refreshed, in-game xmb, integrated friends list, new store, ect. Wishful thinking but not unrealistic thinking. Give Sony some time to properly challenge live (Y) (and yes im waiting for everyone to come in and say they've had a year!!! all you do is wait, so what I really mean is wait until their flagship application which is Home, comes out) As ive said GDC will no doubt give us release dates. PSN can't challenge Live just now all that well, its decent at what it does for free, but one day it may be more of a challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabian- Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 Meanwhile, Xbox Live continues to look more dated by the month. Right...... :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted January 29, 2008 Author Subscriber² Share Posted January 29, 2008 Right...... :p Whether or not you believe it Live will look dated from a technology stand point. As in Home will be the first application to bring the 3D world of communicating/socialising to a console, and obviously wrap that around the backbone of gaming - As in Home isn't just for running around talking to people, you launch games, create clans, view game trailers/exclusive interviews/previews in Home. Live is a 2D/text enviroment. Being outdated does not equal being worse, that's what you guys are clearly out to defend. By saying outdated you are immediately associating that with being outclassed/not as good/worse/ect. Some people say 2D platformers > 3D platformers. Which is outdated? Clearly a 2D platformer from 1996 is outdated in comparison to a 3D platformer from 2008 on technical terms.... but on gameplay terms? One could argue the 2D platformer is much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windam Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 Whether or not you believe it Live will look dated from a technology stand point. I can see that as a 360 owner. But let not home compensate for the lack of good games (which I know they will come with time) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabian- Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 @Audioboxer: It depends on your preferences, running around a 3D world doesn't appeal to me, having to go to a "virtual theater" to watch a movie/game trailer doesn't make a lot of sense to me at least, I just don't see the whole idea very functional. Live is just fine for me as it is....again, personal preferences ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted January 29, 2008 Author Subscriber² Share Posted January 29, 2008 @Audioboxer:It depends on your preferences, running around a 3D world doesn't appeal to me, having to go to a "virtual theater" to watch a movie/game trailer doesn't make a lot of sense to me at least, I just don't see the whole idea very functional. Live is just fine for me as it is....again, personal preferences ;) I'm not debating personal preferences at all, im debating what will be classed as outdated. Live from a technical stand point will be outdated in comparison to Home. You can prefer whatever one you want, that wasn't my argument ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy0 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 Personally I can see Home being a big hit as plenty of people are into the whole social networking thing. And if Home can deliver all they have said, then it will be a great thing for the PS3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeta_immersion Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 i would think people will spend more time playing than actually "surfing" home or live .... none the less you do go download, chat or whatever you do but when it comes down you play more ... so i don't see why doing updates for the sake of doing updates, a new skin or layout might be cool but you want usability ... live has a purpose as does home, to get people together, as long as both accomplish that then there is no problem ... hell if it were me i would put a big **** on the screen and have tags, the higher you go on the spiral the less stuff you get, the deal is at the bottom ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randomnut Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 From a technology standpoint? No way. You can *really* tell why you pay for live and why PSN is free. Fair enough you shouldn't complain if it's free, and im not, but comparing it to Live is just a no-no. Everythings just so integrated and smooth in Live, even the back end is better so you get much better download speeds and a dropout free connection. Sony engineered their network to be as low cost as possible due to trying to out-do Live by being free, but that's been it's downfall, you can really tell by the quality of almost everything to do with live. Saying that, it's free, so it's all good. But please don't compare the experience to live which just has so many more features to name. Home is just an app, an add on for people to communicate. The back end infrastructure is still too poor to compete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted January 29, 2008 Author Subscriber² Share Posted January 29, 2008 From a technology standpoint? No way. You can *really* tell why you pay for live and why PSN is free. Fair enough you shouldn't complain if it's free, and im not, but comparing it to Live is just a no-no.Everythings just so integrated and smooth in Live, even the back end is better so you get much better download speeds and a dropout free connection. Sony engineered their network to be as low cost as possible due to trying to out-do Live by being free, but that's been it's downfall, you can really tell by the quality of almost everything to do with live. Saying that, it's free, so it's all good. But please don't compare the experience to live which just has so many more features to name. Home is just an app, an add on for people to communicate. The back end infrastructure is still too poor to compete. Did you even read my analogy of 2D -> 3D. Live will look like the 2D "game", Home the 3D "game". Why do people have to start the whole features vs features, content vs content argument. I'm not discussing that. I'm discussing the technical merits in the same way you would compare super mario 3 to super mario galaxy. One might argue the 2D gameplay is better, which is fine, but no one is going to argue which one "looks better" or has achieved more impressive technical feats. Home is just an app, an add on for people to communicate. That's the only thing I'll call you out on, from what we've seen/heard about Home it's not just that. Sony will be basing their whole service around Home, so it's not just going to be an addon. Yes in-game XMB access is going to be there for those who want to skip Home, but the way Sony will be going, they will be focusing on Home and probably think most of their install base will as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huleboeren Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 From a technology standpoint? No way. You can *really* tell why you pay for live and why PSN is free. Fair enough you shouldn't complain if it's free, and im not, but comparing it to Live is just a no-no.Everythings just so integrated and smooth in Live, even the back end is better so you get much better download speeds and a dropout free connection. snip I think that depends where you live - in europe the speeds on XBL are crap compared to EU-PSN.. Atleast on my end And are you experiencing dropouts on PSN? Ive had 1 or 2 since I got my PS3 march '07 :/ The reasons you list are not enough for a monthly charge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 I almost thought this was second life for a moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 Whether or not you believe it Live will look dated from a technology stand point. your argument holds no water. Basically your argument is that 2D is old and dated, 3D is new and fresh. Fact is that this just isn't true. For games 3D is the new and fresh yes, even "2D" platformers are better if they are done in 3D (NSMB). when it comes to interfacs 3D can be good, but usually it is not. For most interfaces 2D is just better, there's a reason why 3D websites came and went fast, VRML died faster than you could say the acronym. And home is a fancy 3D versions of a limited selection of the XBL features, Live allready does everything they are making Home to do, except Live doesit in a 2D interface allowing you to quickly and easily move betwen the features. whenever you enter to play an arcade game, there you meet players, and instead of first meeting players and then finding out if they want to play the same game as you, you choose the game, and then you meet players, in addition you have the huge list of players you have played with last. Trophies are allready done in XBL, only again in ore accessible and with a much better overview than a 3D "house" interface can give. Really when I compare 3D "house" like interfaces where you have to walk around to places to do stuff and control and do stuff with a clumsy gimmicky PSP lookalike device to sleek 2D itnerfaces like XBL, the 3D one looks dates. compare to newer games wich have done this PGR3->PGR4 Now you have to move around in your garage to replace yrou cars, instead of the nice PGR3 "map" interface allowing you to instantly place your owned cars wher eyou wanted them in the garage. NFS underground and up: How often did you actually drive around the map to get to every spot instead of using the map. Burnout Paradise: How much trash didn't it get for scrappign the map and goign all live city, with NO map where you can instantly port to the interesction you want to run, no matterhow much you like paradise, don't tell me you aren't anoyed every time you know you're loosing the race and you can't restart or go to the map and restart. Sure you can go to the next nearest intersection, but it's just not the same, you where doing THAT race, and you want to finish THAT Race. Basically Home is essentially the PGR3/PGR4 garage, it's got trophies and arcade machines, but how often did you actually walk aound the garage? no you where online driving talkgin witht he peopel you where driving with. So being 2D versus being 3D certainly doesn't make it look dated, in fact the opposite is more likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huleboeren Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 snip I think you misunderstood the whole purpose of Home :p And no, LIVE does not already do what home wants to do.. You cant chill and just have fun talking and meeting with others on LIVE - you have to play a game These social crap thingys have proven very popular If theyre not your thing, thats fine - youre not forced to go through Home - XMB will be available too I cant imagine downloading a demo of a new highly anticipated game while Im talking to many, many others in Home who are just as excited as me.. The possibilities are endless :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randomnut Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 Did you even read my analogy of 2D -> 3D.Live will look like the 2D "game", Home the 3D "game". Why do people have to start the whole features vs features, content vs content argument. I'm not discussing that. I'm discussing the technical merits in the same way you would compare super mario 3 to super mario galaxy. One might argue the 2D gameplay is better, which is fine, but no one is going to argue which one "looks better" or has achieved more impressive technical feats. That's the only thing I'll call you out on, from what we've seen/heard about Home it's not just that. Sony will be basing their whole service around Home, so it's not just going to be an addon. Yes in-game XMB access is going to be there for those who want to skip Home, but the way Sony will be going, they will be focusing on Home and probably think most of their install base will as well. It's not that at all. Basically, home is a second-life representation of the Xbox achievements system, except it'll be crowded with 12year old screaming american fanboys, like a game of halo. Despite the fact that the PSN infrastructure needs MAJOR investment, it's just not capable of holding more users, download speeds are complete arse and the drop outs are horrible (at least in the UK, and i'm not the only one who thinks so). I can well imagine Home being a laggy drop out fest that serves no other purpost but giving another reason to moan about sony. I'm not bashing PSN here, because for a free service it's pretty good, but Live is just technically superior the experience much smoother. I can see Home becoming nothing more than a gimmick after their track record of updating things comes once again into play :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted January 29, 2008 Author Subscriber² Share Posted January 29, 2008 (edited) Aw man im not even going to reply to any of those comments. All of you seem to think im somehow "attacking" Live's integrity, saying it will be worse than Home or something that makes your brain tick off and need to defend Live. I AM NOT saying Home will be better than Live, all im saying is on technical feats, on a console, something like Home has never been done and it will make Live "look" outdated. Do you remember the PS2 online service? Im sure Live made that look dated.... FF7, looks dated by todays standards but is still regarded one of the best games ever. FF13 may come out and people will say FF7 is better - The fact is it is still dated in someway (mostly gfx) in comparison to the new iterations of FF. Hawkman for christs sakes, was there any need for that huge ramble? A few posts ago, Why do people have to start the whole features vs features, content vs content argument. I'm not discussing that. I don't care if you guys want to go off on a feature/content showdown, but please don't reply to me with one, it was the main thing I was trying to avoid as it usually ends up ugly - Mainly as when comparing to Home all you can do is speculate till we actually have Home out on the PS3, and know what we can and can't do for real. Sorry, but I have gotten a little riled up, as my comparison was fruitless in the sense that it wasn't suppose to put one service up on the pedestal, and the other on the ground - It was just to show what the author said in the article could mean, or at least what I thought he/she was saying. I explained myself many times, and said I was not saying what I said makes Home better, yet you all still come guns blazing with the Live > Home banter? How many times do I need to say being "outdated" on some merits doesn't mean you're worse off. :argh: Sorry, but I really need to strongly clarify what im saying so some of you don't go away with the usual twisted view on my posts... it's frustrating. Edited January 29, 2008 by Audioboxer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huleboeren Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 ...Despite the fact that the PSN infrastructure needs MAJOR investment, it's just not capable of holding more users, download speeds are complete arse and the drop outs are horrible (at least in the UK, and i'm not the only one who thinks so). I can well imagine Home being a laggy drop out fest that serves no other purpost but giving another reason to moan about sony. ... Despite the fact that PSN infrastructure is fine, its capable of holding many many more users, download speeds are great and the dropouts are non-existent (at least in Denmark, and im not the only one who thinks so). I can imagine home being a wonderful lagfree service that serves a great purpose thus actually giving a reason to praise Sony for once. Now, where did that get us? Thats my experience and thats your experience :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnzoFX Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 poor audioboxer, people don't seem to understand what your saying, I do, makes perfect sense, whether this newer technical feat works out is debatable, and that's what some of you are arguing, audioboxer simply isn't. I won't argue this point either, we will simply have to see. Don't be quick to judge something you haven't tried. For the person saying the backend on home is lousy? how in the hell would you know that? just because PSN is free? So sony must have used the cheapest components? Well then I must ask for sources. And for example (prob a bad example), lets say they get the cheapest network cards, as opposed to some glitzy fancy card Microsoft is using (I seriously doubt it!), so? A network card is just a network card, a server, is just a server. I don't mean to downplay the complexity of the kind of work that goes into projects like these, but surely its not something that requires state of the art hardware/software. I guess some people think Microsoft is running some Future-Proof servers, from space! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waylander Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 (edited) From a technology standpoint? No way. You can *really* tell why you pay for live and why PSN is free. Fair enough you shouldn't complain if it's free, and im not, but comparing it to Live is just a no-no.Everythings just so integrated and smooth in Live, even the back end is better so you get much better download speeds and a dropout free connection. Sony engineered their network to be as low cost as possible due to trying to out-do Live by being free, but that's been it's downfall, you can really tell by the quality of almost everything to do with live. Saying that, it's free, so it's all good. But please don't compare the experience to live which just has so many more features to name. Home is just an app, an add on for people to communicate. The back end infrastructure is still too poor to compete. i dont see why live is worth money (although i do pay for it) when psn is free, maybe if there were dedicated servers for games rather than just user hosted it would be worth it but as it is now it has just been a cash cow for microsoft for the last 5 years. and "better download speeds and a dropout free connection" is only true if you download when there are no new demo's out Edited January 30, 2008 by Waylander Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danrarbc Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 A network card is just a network card, a server, is just a server. I can't believe I just read that. but surely its not something that requires state of the art hardware/software. I guess some people think Microsoft is running some Future-Proof servers, from space! When you have millions of users connecting to run their online experience yes, you do need state of the art hardware. And after the problems Xbox Live had the week after Christmas I doubt anyone actually thinks they've got future-proof servers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundayx Veteran Posted January 30, 2008 Veteran Share Posted January 30, 2008 Rather than huge mansions, can I just buy a small place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts