Sony Takes Aim at Xbox Live 287
Joystiq and the site ComputerandVideoGames are reporting on the first real action in the next-gen war. Sony is apparently readying a strong online service that will meet or exceed the features of Xbox Live. With no firm PS3 launch date yet released, the 360 still has the advantage, but if Sony is rolling out an online matching and media service with their (reportedly) more powerful console things could look bad for Microsoft's new system. From the article: "This story, together with the recent survey Sony conducted, should remove any doubts about Sony's online ambitions. Is it possible that Sony could create a network the size and scale of Xbox Live in such a short time. It has cost Microsoft, the world's largest software company, billions and taken years just to lay the framework for the current Live service. Sony is know for their hyperbolic marketing: the PS2's Emotion Engine, the PSP as iPod-killer; it seems unlikely they could take the crown from Microsoft on their first try, but any attempt is a huge relief. It was beginning to look like Sony didn't think the Live service was a valuable addition to console gaming, or a serious competitor to their hegemony. "
Right (Score:5, Insightful)
And the Emotion Engine is powering my workstation, Cell will dominate all electronics on the planet, the PSP will kick Nintendo out of the handheld market and beat the iPod in one fell swoop. Yada yada yada. Oh and something about incredible real-time CGI. When it all falls flat on it's face it's going to be whoever bought it's fault for not understanding the awe-inspiring vision that is exuded by the Sony corporation.
Put on your waders boys and girls, stand very still and brace yourself, the Sony people are talking and you wouldn't want to be killed by the bullshit.
Response to Microsoft - or Nintendo? (Score:4, Insightful)
Sony might have decided that if even Nintendo was doing an online route, they didn't want to be the last ones to the party. My guess is that they'll tell developers "You can still have the setup you want" (so if someone like EA wants to run thier own lobby/interface with ad revenue, they can), "... or you can use ours" (so publishers won't have to put all of thier resources into hosting servers - let Sony do it).
If so, I think it would be a good thing for Sony, if for no other reason than not look like the odd duck out.
Jaded about online console games... (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually when I heard you had to PAY to change the skins, I backed off completely. Where are the days when you paid for a product and just enjoyed it without a constantly being nibbled to death by Credit Card Ducks?
No sir, I will still to my "alternatives", as offline as they may appear to MS, Sony or Nintendo until one day one of these companies gets a clue stick and sets up their system to be more P2P in nature then B2B.
GIMME MY FREE MULTIPLAYER ONLINE! (not like the game, the console the internet connection cost me anything eh?
Yo Grark
Infrastructure (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yeah Right (Score:2, Insightful)
Value of online play (Score:2, Insightful)
Your average Playstation gamer has GTA, a couple sports/wrestling games, and plays with a few buddies huddled around the TV. They have no interest in challenging anonymous strangers, nor to continue paying usage fees for a console they've already shelled out a mint for.
Sorry for replying to myself (Score:5, Insightful)
Duh me.
When I finished reading how downloading games aren't just for pirates [1up.com], and the use of Steam and MS Live for purchasing games, it became a "duh" moment as to why Sony wants their own online service:
Selling games. You can buy games off of Steam and Xbox Live for around $10 to $20 apiece, which brings us to a kind of "long tail" theory: not everybody wants to buy a game for $50, but there are probably plenty who will buy one for $15 or $10 if it's fun.
Sony can use that, and if they're making a good chunk of 25% off of each game sold, that's more revenue. Nintendo already stated they wanted to have independants on their online network, Microsoft has that now (see the success of "Geometry Wars" - and Sony sees those dollars.
I should have realized that first. I wasn't thinking greedy enough. I'm sorry.
Re:HOW is this news? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm guessing the fact that Nintendo revealed they were working on something similar (and you can already see some of the progress with wireless DS functionality in Mario Kart DS), really pushed Sony to do a complete 180 and claim they're going to have Live features, "AND MORE!!!!".
Personally, I'm doubtful they can really pull it off that quickly, if they truly intend on releasing this year. I'm guessing they'll just have some basic functionality, maybe an interesting feature or two that no one has yet (which I'm sure will be hyped plenty), but then miss a lot of the other stuff that Live does have. That will be "version 2", due out in 2007. Even if Sony is able to pull off the implementation (and yes, they DO have some online experience, thanks to Everquest and Star Wars: Galaxies), it's still a lot to expect from 3rd party companies to suddenly comply with whatever online API that they hack together in the next few months.
That said, it would be nice to have some online feature parity across all the consoles. It just drives more competition and (hopefully) good innovation.
Re:Yeah Right (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Well, Good and Bad (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Right (Score:3, Insightful)
maybe you should, in fact, wait till you see it.
Re:Interesting Juxtaposition (Score:4, Insightful)
It's just that firmly entrenched means something totally different to Microsoft than Sony. The number of Live subscribers almost reached 0.4% of the number of PS2 owners in the last generation. No wonder Sony didn't try too hard to go after those customers...
Dispite all the hype, online gaming just isn't that big yet compared to the overall gaming market.
Chances are, even without an online service, if the PS3 doesn't win big this generation it won't be because of Microsoft. It'll be because of the PSP. The system that wins is the one with the big name games, and no developer is going to bet against Sony right now.
Re:Right (Score:3, Insightful)
There's no need for prejudice.
Can Sony beat out Microsoft this round? (Score:4, Insightful)
The fact is, Sony's constant "we don't need a Live service to compete with MS" has been shown to be as last-gen-thinking as the PS2's graphics currently are. Sony NEEDS to compete on this front (XBox Live/Arcade is fantastic) and isn't currently in any position to do it...at least if they launch in '06. MS is already on iteration 2 of their service for god's sake.
Re:Right (Score:3, Insightful)
SONY:Free.. and support PS2/PSP (Score:3, Insightful)
DEAR SONY:
- Please make the network adapter on the PS2 more useful.
- Please release a *FREE* or very low cost. Linux distribution. Your Linux kit was too expensive, impossible to buy separately, and quickly went obsolete.
- Please provide some sort of appliance-like web browser for the PS2
Set Linux on the PS2 free! With so many PS2s out there, I see a giant missed opportunity to turn the PS2 into so much more than it currently is and to give it a longer usable lifespan as a set top box or multipurpose computer. Just look at xbox and XBMC.
How sad is it that my tiny little router is a more usable computer than my PS2?
Re:Right (Score:3, Insightful)
Sony is the worst offender when it comes to pre-launch hype. It's to the point where I don't believe anything they say anymore until it's in my hands at a store.
Neither Nintendo nor Microsoft have pushed it *that* far.
Live (Score:2, Insightful)
Xbox Live is cool. Everyone says you'd be a sucker to pay, only the hardcore, it's for nerds blah blah blah. It's only a 5 bucks a month. How much do you spend on your cable bill? Xbox Live is a service that costs money to run and should make money too. Why else would they run servers? To spread joy and goodwill througout the world?
Consider the free service Battle.net. It sucks. There are routine disconects, the clunky interface, and the unregulated spam. Look how great that free service is. I much prefer to pay a few bucks for quality than endure second rate service. If you show the developers that you're not willing to pay they will look to other sources of revenue.
If you recall every week or so there's an article on Slashdot about the insidous rise of advertisments in video games. Then everyone says "Ads suck! I'll never buy!" Well if you're not willing to pay for online service what do you think will happen? You'll get spammed every time you logon.
I for one welcome Sony's effort. Even if it sucks (because it's free) at least it's another market choice. Truly the main reason I bought live was to play Project Gotham 2. If Sony's service were to compete it'd need a killer app.
Just to clarify something... (Score:2, Insightful)
Slashdot Humor (Score:4, Insightful)
Never gets old does it? Boy, the laughs never stop here at Slashdot!
Re:I love xbox but... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:HOW is this news? (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a reason for that. It's not the Live service itself; that's fine. It's not the technology; that's mature and stable. It's not the prerequisite ADSL; that's a sunken cost already. It's not even the subscription cost; that's so minor compared to the cost of hardware and ADSL and games that it barely registers on the credit card.
The problem with Live is the 2 million users... they're all asshats. Campers and twerps and abusers and nidjits and teasers and lamers but never a decent person worth playing a game with. It's all "ph0ck j00 l@mer i ph0cked j00r mom" and damn it to hell if I'm going to pay $29.95 per month to listen to that crap. The microphone headset was the stupidest thing Microsoft ever did; reading that abuse is bad enough but there's no way that I want to listen to some mouth-breathing 14 year old cursing in his pre-pubescent squeaky voice whenever I waste his talentless avatar.
Online games are ruined by the average gamer. No thanks. I'll play games with people I know, in the same room, so that the anonymity of Live can't tempt them into acting like an asshat.
Re:Interesting Juxtaposition (Score:4, Insightful)
Wha... what?!? It was the EXACT OPPOSITE my friend. The Dreamcast has been known to have one of the best libraries available, even if it didn't quite match the PS2 on the hardware level (though still held its own). In fact, the PS2 had one of the most terribly launch titles available - the really good stuff took awhile to come down the pipeline. Meanwhile, Sega was experiencing a creative zenith at the time (which, was unfortunately overshadowed by PS2 hype). I love my PS2, but don't try and pretend it killed the DC on games at the beginning.