• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

I completely forgot you have to pay to play online on consoles

The ๖ۜBronx;249559248 said:
Where? You misunderstood my post and are being needlessly aggressive for some bizarre reason.

- -

To reiterate this was said:

Which implies that Valve take their store cut but doesn't feel a need to find other, more shady, avenues to go down. To which I said:

As I see Valve as the opposite of a paragon for the argument that a company should use profits to better their service. I was then asked for examples, so I said this:


To think me wrong would be to suggest that Valve doesn't look for alternative profits other than the cut they take from the store, and they have persistently bettered their service with the money they've accrued.

Yes, you are completely wrong because Valve doesn't look for alternative profits through shady avenues and they have persistently bettered their service with the money they've accrued. The position you are taking is based literally on nothing.
 
Yes, you are completely wrong because Valve doesn't look for alternative profits through shady avenues and they have persistently bettered their service with the money they've accrued. The position you are taking is based literally on nothing.
Yeh, the horse is a quivering pool on the floor by now but again - ok. I personally felt like Steam hasn't bettered their service relative to the growth Valve has seen and disliked said avenues.

It was made abundantly clear to me during the last page that this is an incorrect take on the matter, which is why when it concluded and was brought back to the topic at hand I said that Steam was far better than PSN with regard to the topic at large.

So after an entire page of discussion resolving that, thanks for bumping it to the top of a new one to add nothing more to the discussion other than "you're wrong".
 
The ๖ۜBronx;249631962 said:
Yeh, the horse is a quivering pool on the floor by now but again - ok. I personally felt like Steam hasn't bettered their service relative to the growth Valve has seen and disliked said avenues.

It was made abundantly clear to me during the last page that this is an incorrect take on the matter, which is why when it concluded and was brought back to the topic at hand I said that Steam was far better than PSN with regard to the topic at large.

So after an entire page of discussion resolving that, thanks for bumping it to the top of a new one to add nothing more to the discussion other than "you're wrong".

Do you understand why your take is incorrect though? You say that PSN is far worse than Steam, you understand that Sony as a company has many more avenues than Valve to make profit but you think that Valve hasn't bettered their service relative to its growth? It doesn't make sense to me. Did PSN improve more relative to its growth? Did Xbox Live? What metric are you using to decide that Steam hasn't improved enough? I'm not being sarcastic, I really want to know what you are basing your opinion on.
 
Do you understand why your take is incorrect though? What metric are you using to decide that Steam hasn't improved enough? I'm not being sarcastic, I really want to know what you are basing your opinion on.
My experience of Steam.

Personally, I don't think the support is where it should be relative to their success - outside of the refund policy the actual support is among the worst I've experienced for any major online store. I think their moderation is extremely lacklustre on the whole and based on an unwillingness to do anything in that respect. I never understood why as they got more successful they moved further away from the quality community and player focused events they held. I see modern day Valve as being something that begrudges having to do anything to tend to the larger community or userbase they've fostered, outside of whichever game they're currently getting the most money from.

Again though, I've been told numerous times that this is incorrect and though I appreciate the willingness to have a discussion on it I'm genuinely exhausted from the experience of the last one. I'd rather just admit my point was wrong and leave that one to the dust.
 

ArtHands

Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
The ๖ۜBronx;249523905 said:
Except it's colloquially referred to as that. The only explanation for nitpicking is to make you feel better having found some small crevice to pick at that's largely irrelevant to the discussion.

I really doubt they are colloquially referred to. Those people genuinely think they are free.
 

prag16

Banned
The ๖ۜBronx;249632625 said:
Personally, I don't think the support is where it should be relative to their success

This point at least is very hard to argue with. I haven't had to deal with them much, but yeah, all indications point to horrendous support relative to what I would expect given their stature and success level.
 

Armaros

Member
For most of its life Steam didn't offer that refund policy, there's definitely an argument for the console makers to put some effort into developing that functionality, but it's still a pretty recent thing. The way people talk sometimes is as though if's been there forever. You can get refunds on other services, but it's more of a pain. Much like it used to be on Steam (dealing with Steam support). Automating that kind of process is always a good idea and would save the console makers money in the long run. I assume there's a contractual element as well as to when developers receive payment. But it definitely makes a good extra bullet point at the moment.

And? None of the console holders still have A systemic refund system much less one as generous as Steams. Sony is legendary for how they don't want to allow refunds unless PR has overtaken them. And Microsoft the origin of paid online is just getting to Refunds and it still isn't ready.

Have we gotten so far down the goalposts that they have moved into another country?
 
Top Bottom