Support NeoGAF

[Quake1028]

I've had a 360 for a few years now. I let my sub lapse around 8 months ago as well. Just haven't found a need for it when I buy all my multi platform stuff on PSN and it's free. I just actually got it back after letting my brother borrow it for a few months.

 

[NIGHT-]

Xbox Live is so awesome...I don't how anyone with a 360 can go without it. Seriously. My PS3 and gaming PC collect dust these days due to my recent 360 obsession. All my buds are on live...not to mention Netflix, last.fm, Facebook, twitter, etc.

I'm in the same boat. Before this gen most of my online gaming was dedicated to playing PC games online( mainly Quake 3) But XBL is just amazing.

 

[brain_stew]

And to say XBL hasn't evolved is just beyond a joke. You either didn't use it in 2005 or don't use it now.

In terms of actual online gaming, it really hasn't. Its still the same old pay to play P2P shit it always was. Now I get barraged with a bunch of ads, and developers aren't allowed to distrubute free content anymore but hey, you can access Facebook.....

The point is, this is a gaming console, my PC does all of that other shit a 1000 times better anyway and I don't have to sign up for a subscription to get access to it either. The core gaming features have remained stagnant whilst competitors have upped their game all whilst never charging, that's the problem.

 

[Vyer]

What is it exactly that PSN lacks that makes it so poor? Genuine question.

This 'genuine question' gets asked in every single one of these threads, and the answers are promptly ignored and dismissed by the crowd that asks. People talk about the integration, or the userbase, or how most of their friends are on 360 online games, etc. etc. and it really doesn't matter.

Considering your post prior to this was that Live hasn't 'evolved since the start of the generation', :lol I have a feeling it won't matter here either.

 

[BeeDog]

My gold account runs out at the end of January and I don't plan to renew. I don't play games online anymore and use my 360 as a Rock Band and Trials HD box.

Sorta off topic, but does PSN bombard you with advertisements? (I don't own a PS3). I find it annoying that people play 50 dollars a year and are still forced to live with a flood of ads on the dashboard.

There is a "What's New?" app in one of the menu's subsections that show a couple of the latest additions to the PSN store (and of course small game adds on the sides when you browse around in the store), but other than that, there ain't anything else thankfully (other than a small ticker at the top right that scrolls some updates [not in Europe/Sweden though lololol]). And as a side note, that "What's New?" thing was recently added via a firmware update.

 

[D4Danger]

I just keep thinking about how expensive it must be for MS and Sony for that manner to run the servers that keep their services afloat. MS costs must be far more as there are more consoles out there and likely more people playing online at any moment. $60 tops is worth it for the infrastructure that is pretty damn stable.

Don't companies have to pay for their own servers on PSN?

When MW2 went down on the PS3 just after launch it was something to do with the company IW use.

(I could be totally wrong)

 

[CoG]

Translation: Gold is not worth the money, especially because they're trying to add value to it. :lol :lol :lol

Twitter and Facebook do not add value. They only highlight the fact that Live is a false premium. Netflix was a feature worth getting Gold for, but now that it's on pretty much every platform, I can't see paying extra (over the $60 pricetag of the game) for the "privilege" of gaming online.

 

[Haunted]

Sorta off topic, but does PSN bombard you with advertisements? (I don't own a PS3). I find it annoying that people play 50 dollars a year and are still forced to live with a flood of ads on the dashboard.

Not on the dashboard, but the PSN store certainly does.

 

[Arpharmd B]

1 month free trial is what you get when you buy the console and sign up for silver. Every owner of a new 360 gets it.

Honestly did not know this.


Anyway to answer the OP, of course I pay. I find it hard to believe that 360 owners don't have some kind of online addiction to feed. I have at least 4, currently: SF4, Gears 2, MW2, and I have had a recent Halo 3 relapse (it happens every once in a while).

 

[Mrbob]

Sorta off topic, but does PSN bombard you with advertisements? (I don't own a PS3). I find it annoying that people play 50 dollars a year and are still forced to live with a flood of ads on the dashboard.

It doesn't. The PS3 XMB is pretty clean compared to the 360 dash. Some people like the look better, some don't. The fact that the Live dashboard has become more ad intensive over the years and the price has stayed the same is extremely annoying. A gold member should be able to opt out from seeing the ads.

I'm not happy about paying for Live, but whatever. I never buy it at full price anyway. I always find it for around 30 to 35 dollars for a yearly sub. Would I be happier if it were free? Heck yeah, it should be free for what is offered. But I can't participate in the madden league or a couple other games without it.

 

[Archie]

There is a "What's New?" app in one of the menu's subsections that show a couple of the latest additions to the PSN store (and of course small game adds on the sides when you browse around in the store), but other than that, there ain't anything else thankfully (other than a small ticker at the top right that scrolls some updates [not in Europe/Sweden though lololol]). And as a side note, that "What's New?" thing was recently added via a firmware update.

Not on the dashboard, but the PSN store certainly does.

Thanks for the answers. I don't mind ads and commercials when I'm shopping, but it gets annoying when I just wanna play some games.

 

[elrechazado]

The only sad people in this thread are the ones bitching and calling other posters names because they dared to mention that they don't want to renew their Live accounts.

yeah, clearly :lol

 

[brain_stew]

I just keep thinking about how expensive it must be for MS and Sony for that manner to run the servers that keep their services afloat. MS costs must be far more as there are more consoles out there and likely more people playing online at any moment. $60 tops is worth it for the infrastructure that is pretty damn stable.

You use your own connection to host the games, its a matchmaking service you're paying for, nothing else. Something like Steam has a much bigger featurset and much more reliable infrastructure and remains completely free. Its costs are subsidised by you buying games on the platform, just as they are on PSN, and Valve haven't exactly been struggling financially.

If anything, there should be more motivation for Valve to charge as they let you use their service for titles bought outside of the platform where none of the money goes to them. Retail copies of MW2 don't provide any cash to Valve but they still deliver free matchmaking, friends lists, chat and unlimited redownloads of the full game to you and still manage to make a very healthy profit from the service.

This 'genuine question' gets asked in every single one of these threads, and the answers are promptly ignored and dismissed by the crowd that asks. People talk about the integration, or the userbase, or how most of their friends are on 360 online games, etc. etc. and it really doesn't matter.

Considering your post prior to this was that Live hasn't 'evolved since the start of the generation', :lol I have a feeling it won't matter here either.

So the platform itself doesn't actually offer anything above and beyond PSN but its the fact that its the market leader that makes it more compelling. Is that your answer?

 

[Lagspike_exe]

Sorta off topic, but does PSN bombard you with advertisements? (I don't own a PS3). I find it annoying that people play 50 dollars a year and are still forced to live with a flood of ads on the dashboard.

There is the commercial segment of the XMB, but it can be shut down.
Basically, it's consisted of 12 squares, out of 3 are the 3 games you played the most recently (you can boot it up immediately if you have the disk in the PS3, or if it's an instaled PSN game), with the remaining 9 being all sorts of advertisements, either for new hardware (PSPGo, PS3 slim etc.) or for the new games (it links you to the PS Store if it's available there, or it's the DLC, or it links you to the official website if it's a retail game).

 

[hikarutilmitt]

There is the commercial segment of the XMB, but it can be shut down.
Basically, it's consisted of 12 squares, out of 3 are the 3 games you played the most recently (you can boot it up immediately if you have the disk in the PS3, or if it's an instaled PSN game), with the remaining 9 being all sorts of advertisements, either for new hardware (PSPGo, PS3 slim etc.) or for the new games (it links you to the PS Store if it's available there, or it's the DLC, or it links you to the official website if it's a retail game).

The best part about the What's New section is that it's fairly tucked away and you can set your PS3 to immediately display it when you log in or have it go to the game/disc option instead. You pretty much never have to see WN unless you want to.

 

[brain_stew]

I think he's talking about general 'mood' around 360 on the boards, not just Live. Or apparent general mood. I wouldn't say there's a general negative tone but it has risen to the fore in a number of threads in the last while.

But these things are cyclical. Ask any 'PS3 fan' circa 2006/2007.

I think he's right though about value/percieved value fueling any poor sentiment. It sure as heck fuelled poor sentiment around PS3 for a very long time. Was often used and recognised as justification for practically any negativity or trolling.

That's basically it, the PS3 was a hard purchase to justify in the wake of the 360's competition but now it just so happens that the opposite seems to be true. I've no doubt that this could be reversed within as little as another 6 months but the way it stands Sony (and Valve for that matter) are just delivering more and cutting costs whilst Microsoft remain stagnant and refuse to change their pricing policy.

It was inevitable really, but if anything it just highlights why competition is so great and necessary, I doubt the PS3 would be as good a deal as it is today if not for the 360 delivering so well at launch and Steam wouldn't have been firing on all cylinders if Impulse didn't light a fire up their arse with their weekend deals.

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

Yikes it's one of these threads again.

 

[TheOddOne]

What i love about the frequency of these kind of 360 threads and this must be the 4-5th in the last few days, is the same characters pop up again and again to tell us for the hundredth time why playing on Live or Xbox isn't for them.

Pretty much.

These threads keep getting bigger and bigger, but this has been discussed time and time again. No new arguments are really brought to the table. Most arguments are valid but people go out of there way to tell is its wrong to pay for Xbox live. You don't like it? Then move on to the alternative, no harm no foul.

 

[Woo-Fu]

Its still the same old pay to play P2P shit it always was.

Is it? Unless you've worked with the backend code yourself I don't know how you'd be able to determine this.

My experience with netcode is that as soon as the netcode gets a bit better the designers use that improvement to add more entities/players. To the player it will continue to feel like the "same old" netcode, but there will be more going on than before.

I haven't run any numbers or anything but it has been my personal experience that 360 games have larger player limits than in the past, more entities, more things going on, etc., than ever before. Without advances in the backend networking I have to wonder how they'd manage that?

Sounds like just because the only "advances" you see are the value adds MS is doing to try to differentiate Gold from Silver you're assuming that they're the only advances.

 

[dorkimoe]

I don't have it. It's about $50 too expensive.

your selling an arcade stick for $160 dollars and you think live is to expensive?

 

[Lagspike_exe]

Is it? Unless you've worked with the backend code yourself I don't know how you'd be able to determine this.

My experience with netcode is that as soon as the netcode gets a bit better the designers use that improvement to add more entities/players. To the player it will continue to feel like the "same old" netcode, but there will be more going on than before.

I haven't run any numbers or anything but it has been my personal experience that 360 games have larger player limits than in the past, more entities, more things going on, etc., than ever before. Without advances in the backend networking I have to wonder how they'd manage that?

Isn't the netcode written for each individual game, with Xbox Live just doing the matchmaking and some other things, which aren't related to the actual gameplay?

 

[Dead Man]

This 'genuine question' gets asked in every single one of these threads, and the answers are promptly ignored and dismissed by the crowd that asks. People talk about the integration, or the userbase, or how most of their friends are on 360 online games, etc. etc. and it really doesn't matter.

Considering your post prior to this was that Live hasn't 'evolved since the start of the generation', :lol I have a feeling it won't matter here either.

So.... it has more people? I don't own a 360, freely admit that, and am not looking to buy one due to budget restrictions at the moment, (commence trolling accusations ) but when someone like me who is not familiar with the platform asks a question like that your answer is 'It has more people'?.

 

[Woo-Fu]

Isn't the netcode written for each individual game, with Xbox Live just doing the matchmaking and some other things, which aren't related to the actual gameplay?

I don't know, but I don't think that changes my point. Just because he feels that whatever it is that Live is providing behind the scenes hasn't advanced doesn't mean it hasn't advanced unless he's actually seen what has and has not changed.

If he wants to complain about Microsoft's marketing department not doing a good job marketing any of that behind-the-scenes activity, fine, but don't just assume it doesn't exist.

 

[Arpharmd B]

Isn't the netcode written for each individual game, with Xbox Live just doing the matchmaking and some other things, which aren't related to the actual gameplay?

Yes.

From my experience, though, certain games have better play on XBL than PSN. Street Fighter 4 is the example I have of this, and it wasn't just my experience plenty of people have echoed the same sentiments. Both games and platforms use P2P and one would assume the same netcode, so why this is so remains a mystery.

My theory is that it has something to do with the wired vs. wireless standard, but there are opposing viewpoints on that. For whatever reason, though, that was my experience after extensive play and comparison between both. Another explanation, though, could be as simple as PS3 being more popular on the west coast? (after all testing was here on the east).

 

[learnedhand]

IMO, those who really appreciate and get the most out of Live have a lot of friends that they game with online. They are probably younger, maybe live in a college setting, and it's very convenient to have instant access to all of your buddies.

If you are like me, a bit older, not many real life friends online, and only a casual online gamer, you can get the same experience on PSN for free.

Since I can get Netflix on my PS3 now (and my media center PC), I was thinking of letting the gold account lapse. But one question: Can you still access the game and video stores with just a silver account?

 

[Piper Az]

I can see both sides of the argument, but I think Xbox Live is a good and money worth service. I just think PSN, while not as good, can be priced too ($20-30/yr?) - free doesn't make much financial sense for the companies that run and maintain the servers and services.

 

[shouamabane]

I could use an xbox for shadow complex and mass effect. I'd probably wait for a deal on a live gold sub.

 

[Tiduz]

i still have it, bought a year in august and used it zero times.

first time ill make use of it is to download the splinter cell demo early :lol

 

[MrPliskin]

I'm more curious as to why Mod's often times make the problem worse with thread title changes that obviously rub people the wrong way. You would think they might want to stop people from getting retarded like this...

 

[Woo-Fu]

IMO, those who really appreciate and get the most out of Live have a lot of friends that they game with online. They are probably younger, maybe live in a college setting, and it's very convenient to have instant access to all of your buddies.

If you are like me, a bit older, not many real life friends online, and only a casual online gamer, you can get the same experience on PSN for free.

Not really true, both types can(and do) exist on either platform. Nothing preventing either sort of community from forming on either platform, at least nothing technical.

You are more likely to find such groups on 360 because they started forming with the xbox and because of

Spoiler

$599

.

 

[Arpharmd B]

So.... it has more people? I don't own a 360, freely admit that, and am not looking to buy one due to budget restrictions at the moment, (commence trolling accusations ) but when someone like me who is not familiar with the platform asks a question like that your answer is 'It has more people'?.

The answer is, better integration (cross game chat), better community (party chat, more people with mics), better features (Last.FM, 1 v 100 and whatnot), and whatever else. It's not just "more people".

That said, I think most people could live without these features, but between these perks and the fact that I need my Gears/Halo/VO:OT, the service is justified for me. I think people need to examine their gaming hobby and figure out the best value for themselves. It's different on a case to case basis.

 

[shintoki]

I'm more curious as to why Mod's often times make the problem worse with thread title changes that obviously rub people the wrong way. You would think they might want to stop people from getting retarded like this...

Because we wouldn't have got the next 5 pages out of it of people having to "Prove" they own a 360. :lol

 

[Woo-Fu]

I just think PSN, while not as good, can be priced too ($20-30/yr?) - free doesn't make much financial sense for the companies that run and maintain the servers and services.

Sure it does, you just cover the expense elsewhere like any other ongoing platform expense like marketing, for example.

In the case of Live and PSN, I think both of them should have added cost premium services. I think that multiplayer gaming itself should not be one of those added cost services.

 

[Dead Man]

The answer is, better integration (cross game chat), better community (party chat, more people with mics), better features (Last.FM, 1 v 100 and whatnot), and whatever else. It's not just "more people".

That said, I think most people could live without these features, but between these perks and the fact that I need my Gears/Halo/VO:OT, the service is justified for me. I think people need to examine their gaming hobby and figure out the best value for themselves. It's different on a case to case basis.

See, this is the first I have heard of Last.FM integration, that's pretty cool, not sure it is a system seller Thanks though. Also, a bit OT, but what do people mean when they say 'better integration'. Is it that much better for someone who only plays online very casually, or does that just mean cross game chat?

 

[clashfan]

I still can't believe all these people with emo avatars own a 360...

 

[faridmon]

what is going on?

i don't own a 360 nor do i own a PS3, what does that mean in context to this thread?

 

[Archie]

I still can't believe all these people with emo avatars own a 360...

What emo avatars? Do you even know what emo is?

 

[-viper-]

XBL is pretty fucking awesome. I will gladly pay $40 dollars a year for it if the alternative is PSN.

yes because playing online on the PS3 is such a terrible experience compared with paying to play online on the 360.

 

[nli10]

I got 13 months for £28 (UK) - that is £2.15 a month, which in my current job takes less than 10 mins to earn.

I use live whenever I'm on the 360, mostly for chat & co-op, but occasionally I play the Vs games. In the current promotion I've bought two discount titles - Castle Crashers & Maw.

I think I get my money's worth.


Would I prefer it to be free but less reliable? Not really. I play when I want to & it's not all that often so if it wasn't there & wasn't a good speed it'd annoy me. That said I know people on slow connections that have real XBL troubles.

Free for the same service? Of course that would be better! Unlikely to happen though.

 

[sublime085]

I have both consoles, completely prefer the Sony brand through out though wouldn't use the term fanboy, too level headed. However this is what I use/used (don't turn it on much anymore) my 360 for:

At first, a decent party chat. However since getting my PSP GO, we all simply Skype. Much easier. So I can securely take that one off of the list.

As a Biohazard fan, DEAD RISING hit home and seeing as it never came to the PS3 (or any console in a good form), it gave the system some worth.

Until now, finally... the 360 was home to all of the RPG's I wanted to play. Luckily that trend is now dying, but it still has some points for ToV in my book.

Fighters. Yes, the controller sucks, but I have two arcade sticks and never play fighters on a controller anyway. The net coding seems better, I encounter less drops/lag and some of the games (MvC2) came out earlier and run better. Being a big fighter fan, this at least makes me turn on the console. Also, the only Virtua Fighter we have online. Version C or not...

PGR4. Was a huge PGR2 fan, PGR3 was decent and PGR4 brought it home again. For me at least.

Left4Dead series. Plain and simp, though I could play it on PC...

BIOHAZARD 5, it's superior on the 360 if I like it or not and Biohazard is my middle name. Not to mention there was a Biohazard LE console (US), so it won a few brownie points from me there.

I suppose I can list HALO 2 (played Halo 3 a bit, hated the MP. Inferior in every way to H2). While it was still popular I played it through B/C, though now I play on Vista.

Backwards Compatability. Mainly the Fatal Frame gams, the look and run fantastic on the 360. I'd own the console just for this.

So those are my reasons to turn on the console, however I have a ton more for the PS3, the 360 proves to have some worth in my collection. Ironically it's not for the typical games that people buy a 360 for, but that just shows their direction is little more broad now.

This is a weird post.

You seem unhappy that there are games you like to play on 360.

Anyway, I've got all the consoles and a decent gaming pc, and I pay for Live. It's a good service.

 

[learnedhand]

Not really true, both types can(and do) exist on either platform. Nothing preventing either sort of community from forming on either platform, at least nothing technical.

You are more likely to find such groups on 360 because they started forming with the xbox and because of

Spoiler

$599

.

Of course you are correct. The price (being more affordable to younger gamers) is a huge reason why the 360 demographics tend to trend younger (at least I think I read that somewhere). That seems to enforce my point that the 360, in general, appeals to younger gamers that are more likely to have friends online, and are more likely to have time to game online. They will certainly get more out of Live than someone with no friends, and only a passing interest in online games.

I'm only speaking in generalities, as I'm sure there are pockets of hard-core online gamers on PSN also.

Now, sorry for the stupid question, but can I access the 360 stores with only a Silver account?

 

[Chrange]

See, this is the first I have heard of Last.FM integration, that's pretty cool, not sure it is a system seller Thanks though. Also, a bit OT, but what do people mean when they say 'better integration'. Is it that much better for someone who only plays online very casually, or does that just mean cross game chat?

Standards. Every game has voice chat, for example.

 

[Keikoku]

Quickly read the thread, new thread title fits pretty nice :lol

Anyway :

 

[gofreak]

Without making reference to any specific console services...why would the service being free make it 'less reliable'?

XBL is the only premium gaming service of its kind I can think of but it's certainly not the only reliable one.

I'd also say with reference to Arpharmd B's post...'better features' is a matter of taste here I think. There's plenty of different 'nice' features of the type you mention available on other services too, of similar technical and financial burden to their providers. Indeed, I dislike when people bring up third party things like LastFM (or Twitter or Facebook) to justify platform holder charges - these features may be an added-value, but the folks who are actually paying to provide them (API traffic costs lastfm/twitter/fb, not MS or Sony) aren't the ones charging you, aren't the ones getting your money for it.

 

[MechDX]

I'm more curious as to why Mod's often times make the problem worse with thread title changes that obviously rub people the wrong way. You would think they might want to stop people from getting retarded like this...

This thread was redundant and retarded when the "Post Topic" button was pressed.

 

[Tiduz]

oh i did it wrong, here proof:

<iframe src="http://gamercard.xbox.com/Ichig0KuroSaki" scrolling="no" frameBorder="0" height="140" width="204">Ichig0KuroSaki</iframe>

edit: well that didnt work either :lol

 

[Speevy]

I don't have Xbox Live. It's not that I don't want to play some games over Live, but I can live without the fee.

 

[rollingstart]

What is it exactly that PSN lacks that makes it so poor? Genuine question. I had no issues in my short experience with it, for all intents and purposes it was basically the same thing as Xbox Live at a fundamental level, maybe missing some extra fluff. Actually come to think of it, there was a real commitment to dedicated server support for first party titles, so if anything the core experience was better.

Xbox Live stomps PSN in terms of community features. You can see a friend playing a game and join them, chat with a friend playing a game while you play a different game, the party support, (arguable) better voice communication because of standard headsets, etc.

If you're into all that stuff and have a group of real or online friends you regularly play with, the community features basically keep you addicted and paying that fee. PSN isn't that different in terms of "I want to play this game online" but the community features can't compare [I'm sure people feel differently and am talking from my personal experience]. I remember early in the 360 life they compared the community to a herd because they would move from game to game and that happened because people would see friends playing a game then buy it to join in. That said, if all those community features don't interest you, then the value of Gold would seem like the basic "I'm paying to pay online".

Personally, I don't care much for community features, but I understand the appeal; I can even understand why someone would buy an Xbox 360 version of a game over a PC version because they want to play onilne with people on their friends list. As I said earlier in this thread, I do play most games on my PC these days and it would be getting harder to justify the Gold price if you couldn't get such a discount for the cards. I feel the same way about PSN too in that I don't play my PS3 online much either.

Oh, and fuck that shit where you can only play co-op with people on your friends list. I don't know if it happens on PSN also, but Halo 3, ODST, and Modern Warfare 2 (on steam no less) only let you play with people on your friends list. I think I have 60-some people on my Live friend list and around the same on Steam, and I can count the number of times I managed to pull off a co-op session on one hand. Again, I'm sure people who are into that community aspect don't worry about it, but for us anti-social loner people playing online it sucks.

 

[Misterinenja]

Not paying for Live until some must-play online exclusive comes around. And Microsoft actually trying to get even half of the features that they have established in States over to the Europe.

Still love my 360 for its library.

 

[Dead Man]

Standards. Every game has voice chat, for example.

Thanks. And to those fighting the good console fight (either side) you shine on you crazy diamonds! I'm off to bed, I expect 15 pages when I check in next.