I brought up these points (that strangely enough get buried all the time) because I'm tired of MS being portrayed as the anti-consumerist Devil and Sony the gaming Messiah that loves us. Both companies have done and continue to do their share of greedy BS...a thing you seem to agree with so why not mention them just to keep things down to the ground and realistic? people seem to forget all the time anything bad related to the PS3.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Interesting tweets from Tom Warren regarding Xbox Arcade/Live
- Thread starter Tomcat
- Start date
- Status
I brought up these points (that strangely enough get buried all the time) because I'm tired of MS being portrayed as the anti-consumerist Devil and Sony the gaming Messiah that loves us. Both companies have done and continue to do their share of greedy BS...a thing you seem to agree with so why not mention them just to keep things down to the ground and realistic? people seem to forget all the time anything bad related to the PS3.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Microsoft has been much more anti-consumer this gen in terms of gaming than Sony, especially the last few years. Much more greedy.
How so?
Fucking This Right Here
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Sony not charging for online
Sony allowing people to share accounts
Sony and PS+
Sony being better with indies the last few years. Shoot, why do you think Valve went with the PS3 for Portal 2 exclusive Steam like features and not Microsoft?
statham
Member
devonraynor
Member
second account also getting gold = still paying for online
hope Sony can keep up their current gen setup
hope Sony can keep up their current gen setup
They've charged for Xbox Live since last gen though.
Sharing accounts? What exactly do you mean? I know that if I bring my account over to a friend's 360, I can play all of their games as long as that's the original 360 they downloaded them on.
Playstation Plus is a better deal for a paid serivce, but I don't see how that makes it pro-consumer. Sony hasn't charged for online, so they found a way to still get additional revenue. It's definitely a great thing for consumers, but I don't think it makes Gold inherently more anti-consumer.
The indies thing doesn't really affect the consumer directly, and with that said I'm not sure how much of that is a narrative and how much is truth. We've definitely been seeing a lot of "indies don't like MS" from various developers lately though, that much is true.
WrenchNinja
Member
Take your own advice.
More evidence of gold becoming a family thing? That makes sense IMO. That sounds like a lock now that we've heard it from two sources.
XBLA being rebranded probably has to do with the Windows 8 store and how the portal will work to provide less of a distinction between arcade/indie/big(I.e. GoD) developers. I would like them to roll it all into XBLA because I love the name but a rebranding could go either way.
XBLA being rebranded probably has to do with the Windows 8 store and how the portal will work to provide less of a distinction between arcade/indie/big(I.e. GoD) developers. I would like them to roll it all into XBLA because I love the name but a rebranding could go either way.
Online pass sucks but it only affects few used games. Buy a new game on any system only x360 holds 50% of the content hostage. Paying twice for the content you've just spend $60 bucks on. Imagine that.
You know the verge will have an article about this so I save you the trouble and post it now ;p
You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.
It's not the existence of a paid tier that offends people. It's the fact that basic services are squirreled away behind that pay wall. It's just weirdly backwards, now more than ever. I don't subscribe to either PS+ or XBL Gold, but I can a least understand why someone would pay for PS+.
seventynine
Member
Depending on a given game, one half to two thirds of the content* on disc is locked out if you don't pay the sub. That same game on other platforms grants you all the content at no additional charge.
*content defined as Single player. Multiplayer. Online co-op.
Ingueferroque
Banned
Imagine if Live was free (ad supported?) and we only paid for content.
Imagine if Live had a Gold option which simply removed ads. Imagine that.
Imagine if Live had a Gold option which simply removed ads. Imagine that.
NemesisPrime
Banned
People saying Sony doesnt make you pay for Online and then recommend buying PS+, at which point does Live's clearly superior online service and ecosystem/support become worth it just as much as PS+ is? did Sony employ a million fanboys to invade neogaf or something because it is really tiresome now :/
To be fair...
Sony implemented online passes for their games.
Sony didn't offer a free extended warranty for the PS3's YLoD issue.
Sony removed disc-based PS2 BC and now charges for it on a per-game basis.
Sony removed the Vita's ability to switch between multiple PSN accounts with a single memory card without having to format the card first.
Str0ngStyle
Member
Nobody wants PS4 to charge for online play but look at the facts. If Sony felt that free online was so important to their brand, why even bring a subscription to the table in the first place? Or more importantly, nobody gave a shit about PS+ until the free games came into the picture. We know the system is not backwards compatible and it is stupid to give away launch titles for free. If there are no free games, what's the hook to get subs?
I get the gut reaction to not wanting to pay for online but if you think the discussion to have pay to play online for the next playstation has not/is not occurred inside Sony corporate, you're crazy
LowEndTorque
Member
There has been an attempt recently here on gaf to create this narrative of MS victimology, where poor little Microsoft is the unfair victim being bullied and picked on by the rabid hordes and minions of anti-MS fanboys that have taken over gaf and rule it with an iron fist. It's a nonsense narrative and nobody buys it other than those trying create it. Its starting to get really annoying.
Every company gets shit on when they start to suck.
The PS3 was consistently shit on and ridiculed for years because of "haz no gaems", shitty ports, $599 etc. And these were all legitimate reasons to shit on Sony - because they did suck for the first few years of the PS3. The ridicule and negativity only stopped after they started righting their wrongs and turning things around. Wii was shit on for legitimate reasons and WiiU and Vita are being shit on every day for legitimate reasons as well. And right now its MS's turn to get shit on because of their recent focus on kinect, anti-consumer business practices and people recognizing that live is a ripoff, etc. The negativity isn't the product of some irrational witch hunt where one poor company (who also happens to be the most powerful) is exclusively being picked on and bullied for no reason other than their name. It can be hard for a person to recognize that fact if they are constantly in a defensive mindset and believe that their favorite company is perfect and can do no wrong.
Every company gets shit on when they start to suck.
The PS3 was consistently shit on and ridiculed for years because of "haz no gaems", shitty ports, $599 etc. And these were all legitimate reasons to shit on Sony - because they did suck for the first few years of the PS3. The ridicule and negativity only stopped after they started righting their wrongs and turning things around. Wii was shit on for legitimate reasons and WiiU and Vita are being shit on every day for legitimate reasons as well. And right now its MS's turn to get shit on because of their recent focus on kinect, anti-consumer business practices and people recognizing that live is a ripoff, etc. The negativity isn't the product of some irrational witch hunt where one poor company (who also happens to be the most powerful) is exclusively being picked on and bullied for no reason other than their name. It can be hard for a person to recognize that fact if they are constantly in a defensive mindset and believe that their favorite company is perfect and can do no wrong.
Pretty much this. But that brings up issues of multi consoles in the home (one in each kids room) instead of a license granted.
Really, people are going to try to get the best deal possible to them, so dropping the whole "family" pack was stupid on MS' part due to cheapasses.
Also I really hope Microsoft doesn't drop the XBLA name. It's basically a "brand" for their titles on the digital service that ARE NOT retail games which are Games on Demand. Folding it into the same name or service just confuses the two.
Sounds like it, but the implications are bigger for developers and consumers.
If they would rebrand, it'd be to consolidate XBLIG, XBLA and GoD and allow for flexible price points like the Windows Store.
Okay, but comparing it to PS + doesn't make it more anti-consumer. It's the same policy as the original Xbox forward.
Fixed.
gutter_trash
Banned
a name change means little to me.
Sony has been using this weird name ''Sony Entertainment Network'' lately to encompass all that is Sony but to me it is still Playstation Network.
if MS changes the name of Xbox Live to something that encompensases all other MS stuff in it, it still will be XBL to me
Sony has been using this weird name ''Sony Entertainment Network'' lately to encompass all that is Sony but to me it is still Playstation Network.
if MS changes the name of Xbox Live to something that encompensases all other MS stuff in it, it still will be XBL to me
Miles Quaritch
Member
Wait, some really believe Sony might be giving away launch title/s through plus at launch?
Oh boy, sounds like some have been drinking from the 'secret sauce' cup. Reign in those expectations and quick, it's never going to happen.
Oh boy, sounds like some have been drinking from the 'secret sauce' cup. Reign in those expectations and quick, it's never going to happen.
Tom Warren is not technically a Microsoft employee.
I loved XBLA as far as what it initially brought to the table and all the incredible games it has brought us...but now that almost everything good is being ported to PC, the only thing that really sticks out are things like the terrible patching policy, lack of advertising, nightmarish cert/release process, and how they basically buried the releases menus upon menus deep.
Hopefully MS rethinks these policies going forward in a rebranding, but if almost everything continues to hit the PC anyway, I don't even know if I care at this point.
Hopefully MS rethinks these policies going forward in a rebranding, but if almost everything continues to hit the PC anyway, I don't even know if I care at this point.
Imagine if Xbox live gold didn't exist so you didn't have to pay for online.
YLoD isn't even close to being on the same level as RRoD. It shouldn't be surprising that they wouldn't offer the same free extended warranty as MS did.
I agree with the other points though.
YLoD isn't even close to being on the same level as RRoD. It shouldn't be surprising that they wouldn't offer the same free extended warranty as MS did.
I agree with the other points though.
R3TRO
Member
Deja-Vu?
NullPointer
Member
InvestorGAF and ConsumerGAF don't mix so well - not usually, anyway. For my part I have zero interest in any service that hides multiplayer behind a pay wall. If Sony wants to follow MS down that hole, I've still got a PC.
Its 2013 and you have to pay a fee to use the browser on your own console. The paid structure of Xbox Live is far from a dead horse and more than deserves a good beating every chance it gets.
Comparing it to the competition always makes sense, no matter the date they started charging.
Pyramid head
Banned
To be fair, there's really no comparison between on-line passes and the Xbox Live fee.
If you buy a PS3 game which uses an on-line pass, you can play on-line.
If you buy an Xbox 360 which uses an on-line pass, you still can't play on-line without paying Microsoft their little cut.
ChosenPredator
Banned
whenever i see anything xbox related i know it's going to be bombarded.
PaulExcellent
Member
First tweet would suck.
Second tweet is A-OK.
Second tweet is A-OK.
Sony at least it's not interested to build console specs with win 8/kinect 2.0 in mind. It wins hands down just for that. This generation at least.
Just because it makes sense to compare the two services doesn't mean it makes it more anti-consumer.
Gold is anti-consumer in that it charges people for online multiplayer access while Sony doesn't; Sony adding a service that gives free games and features doesn't make Gold any more anti-consumer than it initially was.
alexandros
Banned
Yay!
Dr.Palutena
Member
I'm really hoping more services begin to understand some people live in these things called families and offer shared services amongst multiple profiles/accounts.
Emperor Bohe
Member
BibiMaghoo
Member
That second tweet would save my household a fair few quid every year. That would be real nice of them.
Probably never happen.
Probably never happen.
Napalm_Frank
Member
Imagine if us EU peasants got something worthwhile for the subscription fee. Imagine that.
You get to unlock the other half of the game you've just paid full price for. Achievement unlocked!
What advice of my own don't I take? Assuming you know the post you're responding to?
Monumental
Banned
RISE FROM THE GRAVE
My my my, look what we have here. Let's see where we were to see where we've come to.
This little conversation is the best though...
My my my, look what we have here. Let's see where we were to see where we've come to.
This little conversation is the best though...
Gemüsepizza;55766176 said:
Satchel, who's typically labelled as an Xbox-fanboy is freaking nostradamus up in here. Had it down to a tee, and people were still calling him out. I wonder how stances have changed...
- Status