+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted February 27, 2008 Author Subscriber² Share Posted February 27, 2008 I want HOME to change the future, in the sense that I would prefer free online play, because personally I don't believe in paying ?50 a year (or whatever it is) to play online.Also saying that, I know very little about XBL, socan someone please outline what features you get from Gold that you do not get from Silver?> Actually being able to play online. Silver users cannot play multiplayer games. Oh and Silver users need to wait a an extra week to get access to demos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magik Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Yea, I don't understand the people that will want to buy virtual furniture for their 'Home'. Much like I don't understand people that purchase themes and gamerpics on Xbox Live. Although, if I had to chose one, I'd probably pick the virtual furniture as being more "worth it", but still a waste of money IMO. :) Anyway, like I've said, here's hoping Home is a success and Microsoft/Nintendo fire back! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randomnut Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 right...thanks for that, but you have no idea at all what you are talking about.In case you didn't notice free online gaming has been going on forever on the pc. does that suck? No, not at all. You don't need to pay a premium to get quality online gaming. But paying so that you can track your achievement points so everyone can see them is totally useless in reality. Geez you can really tell what sub-forum this is in, typical shooting their mouths off before thinking about their response. Yes, PC gaming has been free. Why is that? it's a completely decentralised network. Very very little is run by one company, therefore they *cannot* charge to play on a PC. The games companies themselves don't charge to play on live, MS do, because it's their network and their infrastructure. Theyre the ones that have to invest in it, theyre the ones that have to maintain it, theyre the ones making the network as good is it is. Live is a closed network unlike the wide open one of the PC, therefore they can charge and you can definitely see the difference. The reason it doesn't suck is because you have all these seperate people maintaining their seperate parts of the internet. On a console you don't get this, almost everything has to be run by the one company. Guess it's too much effort to think before posting, as you clearly have no idea what you're on about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huleboeren Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 blah blah blah Steam is a bigger network than LIVE, yet they charge no monthly fee to "maintain it, invest in it or keep it as good as it is" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acies Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Steam is a bigger network than LIVE, yet they charge no monthly fee to "maintain it, invest in it or keep it as good as it is" mmm I don't think that's quite the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huleboeren Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 mmm I don't think that's quite the same thing. What is the difference? Theyre both gateways to an online gaming world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Horizons Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 lol @ people whining about paying for Live. The only argument against paying so far is that PSN will be better someday, but nobody really knows if it will be better or not. Why not save all the whining for when Home actually comes out, IF it turns out to be better? I mean, this discussion crops up every week on Neowin. I honestly don't care that much about paying at this point. Live is NOT expensive unless you're unemployed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huleboeren Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 lol @ people whining about paying for Live. The only argument against paying so far is that PSN will be better someday, but nobody really knows if it will be better or not. Why not save all the whining for when Home actually comes out, IF it turns out to be better? I mean, this discussion crops up every week on Neowin.I honestly don't care that much about paying at this point. Live is NOT expensive unless you're unemployed. THE argument is that youre paying a fee for something they dont offer :/ (game servers) Ye LIVE itself is not expensive - but add on top of that the games you have to buy, the console, controllers, other accessories If you were not paying for LIVE gold you could be buying one more game every year Its a win-win situation :p MS gets a higher attachment rate, more royalty fees, a larger in-game advertising userbase Consumer gets to play online as it was meant to be, for free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnzoFX Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Wow, some people on here are pretty damn pessimistic. I mean, starting with statements such as, "Live killer", and accusing people of stating that Home will be, " better than live." This thread isn't a comparison between the 2, sheesh. Also, some people want sony to just deliver some features, instead of having this 3d world. Well Home is ONE WAY for them to deliver those damn features you guys keep crying on about. Don't be quick to judge their approach. Lastly, The poll makes perfect sense. IF Home is a success, then EVERYONE will be impacted. You don't need to constantly hate on the sims aspect of it. You DON'T need to have a pimped out 3d Apartment. That feature will appeal to some, not all. But there are some features in there that WILL appeal to you. I think that's the hardest part for people to understand. If Home is a success, it'll also change/grow the industry. MS will take notice, and adapt if necessary. So you 360 fanboys (defined as ppl who want Home to FAIL), even you guys have something to gain. IMO, MS charges because they can, there's no competition. I contest that there's nothing that the XBL service can offer me, that can be done by "decentralized" networks, etc. etc. "more bs." If Home is a success, it will have just as much, if not more funding than XBL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randomnut Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Steam is a bigger network than LIVE, yet they charge no monthly fee to "maintain it, invest in it or keep it as good as it is" Again, think before mindlessly posting. Steam is a content delivery system, completely different to Live. Valve earn vast sums of money selling games through the network (which is it's primary purpose), therefore there is no need to charge users for the ability to purchase games from them, that would be silly and no one would use it. Again, think before you make posts like that, you just look stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huleboeren Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Again, think before mindlessly posting. Steam is a content delivery system, completely different to Live. Valve earn vast sums of money selling games through the network (which is it's primary purpose), therefore there is no need to charge users for the ability to purchase games from them, that would be silly and no one would use it.Again, think before you make posts like that, you just look stupid. Yeah, I look stupid - and you look great.. apparently knows everything about the fancy infrastructure behind both LIVE and PSN "My sixth sense tells me LIVE has a better infrastructure, I can just tell" Dont tell me LIVE doesnt earn vast sums of money by selling gamerpics/themes, DLC for games, arcade games and whatnot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozan_03 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 i think what hes trying to say here is that if LIVE wasn't a paid service, it would be just like Steam, seeing as XBL sells games, music and videos does it not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huleboeren Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 i think what hes trying to say here is that if LIVE wasn't a paid service, it would be just like Steam, seeing as XBL sells games, music and videos does it not? If youre thinking of me then yes They offer the same But one is free, the other is not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozan_03 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 lol yea, i was talking about you.... plus Valve are constantly saying nowadays that Steam isnt just a content delivery system anymore, they're moving away from that. Soon they'll even have all that matchmaking and what not that XBL offers, i read it somwhere, but im far too lazy to find it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveoc64 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 MS doesn't provide dedicated servers because they'd completely go against how the service is designed. You play with people, you don't connect to servers. Games are identified by the player that is hosting them and matchmaking means that in most cases a dedicated server system would not work well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magik Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Steam = In House Games. That is a major difference that should certainly not be overlooked. And, on top of all that, it is still a PC multiplayer platform, really no different than any other PC multiplayer platforms available. What do they offer that is different? A direct method of purchasing content, digitally from them which in turn is completely their profit since the vast majority is in-house. It's their incentive to provide the infrastructure for free, if they didn't, Steam would have failed long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPyro Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 How Resistance: Fall of Man makes Home really, really cool @ Kotaku How Uncharted: Drake's Fortune makes Home really, really cool" @ Kotaku How Warhawk makes Home really, really cool @ Kotaku Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magik Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Yes, I saw those earlier today, and if they pan out, kudos to Sony! Hopefully it is as cool as it sounds... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozan_03 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Steam = In House Games. That is a major difference that should certainly not be overlooked. And, on top of all that, it is still a PC multiplayer platform, really no different than any other PC multiplayer platforms available. What do they offer that is different? A direct method of purchasing content, digitally from them which in turn is completely their profit since the vast majority is in-house. It's their incentive to provide the infrastructure for free, if they didn't, Steam would have failed long ago. uhh, im pretty sure most of the content on steam today is not in house, all they have is CS, DOD, TF2 and HL2 plus their sequels/remakes and so on. There is a HUGE library of third party titles there.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randomnut Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Dont tell me LIVE doesnt earn vast sums of money by selling gamerpics/themes, DLC for games, arcade games and whatnot They may make some money from selling that stuff, but it's not the primary purpose of Live. Live isn't set up to recoup it's operating costs from selling dlc, where as Steam is designed to make all it's cash from directly selling games. I'm not sure how many different ways I can say that so it's understood, it's like talking to a 5 year old... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matrix XII Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I don't have too much hope for Home, but it could take off. As others have said in this thread, Live is a better service, but you get what you pay for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vortex566 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I don't see how people would want HOME to fail. If it delivers what it says it is going to then kudos to Sony. I don't see a huge problem paying for live. I mean it's like what ?4.00 a month ? I hate how this thread has been turned into a Live Vs PSN issue. I don't think Audioboxer started it because of that. My feelings are that we are all gamers here of course we like different games/consoles. Seeing HOME succeed as a free service could lead to better things for all gamers not just PS3 owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rookas Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I'm still a little skeptical that home will be anything other than a gimmick, but I truly hope it becomes a useful feature. Honestly though, I just want the Live features like voice chat (in and out of games like the 360), voice messaging, in game xmb options, and some way to keep the little sh**s on PSN from acting like little sh**s. I know that last one is a lost cause, but that's the benefit of a pay to play service like live, it helps people behave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnzoFX Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 ^^ Seriously. I think some people, ahem, won't name names, are simply grasping at straws. Doesn't F'n matter how "different" steam is to Live, they both accomplish the same things, bring the right feature set. But steam is free. Enough said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted February 28, 2008 Author Subscriber² Share Posted February 28, 2008 I'm still a little skeptical that home will be anything other than a gimmick, but I truly hope it becomes a useful feature. Honestly though, I just want the Live features like voice chat (in and out of games like the 360), voice messaging, in game xmb options, and some way to keep the little sh**s on PSN from acting like little sh**s. I know that last one is a lost cause, but that's the benefit of a pay to play service like live, it helps people behave. You gotta be joking right? People who are ######, act like ######. I've played in numerous games of Halo with cursing, racism, and mudslinging. It will always exist as long as immature people get to play on consoles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts