Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Next-Gen Online Services Get More Goods

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the three-little-consoles-all-in-a-row dept.

XBox (Games) 51

Now that all three consoles are competing in the online market, regular news about the three systems is beginning to be regularly released, as Virtual Console tries to top Xbox Live which in turn tries to overshadow e-Distribution. Sony's online offering is still being finalized now that the console is on the market, and limits on the system are still being decided upon. 500 MB is apparently going to be the cap for downloadable content via the service (much larger than Live's 50 MB limit). The company has also confirmed they'll be offering new version of retro games, to compete directly with Microsoft's service. Speaking of which, Double Dragon will be joining the other classic games on Xbox Live sometime in the future. This week's update was a patch for Texas Hold Em' , while the week before saw the much-anticipated (and well reviewed) Small Arms released to fans. Related to Microsoft's service, the much rumoured Xbox Live Arcade joystick was formally announced by MadCatz this week. Not to be left out, Nintendo's Virtual Console grew by three titles this week; gamers can now download Super Star Soldier, Golden Axe, and Genesis classic Ecco the Dolphin. Like Microsoft, Nintendo has plans to release new content every week for the forseeable future.

cancel ×

51 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Fuck that. (3, Insightful)

Spazntwich (208070) | more than 7 years ago | (#17039390)

First thing Microsoft needs to do is include the wireless adapter with premium systems.

No, believe it or not Microsoft, my router is not within 20 feet of my gaming console, and I don't feel like dropping $100 on your official wireless addon which places your console in striking distance of Sony, and way ahead of the Wii.

Re:Fuck that. (2, Informative)

Hubbell (850646) | more than 7 years ago | (#17039548)

I don't see your problem. My friend's 360 is in his basement, and we ran a 50+foot cord from the router to his 360. I have a 30footer in my own house from the router to the hub in my room with my comp/xbox off of that.

Re:Fuck that. (1)

Spazntwich (208070) | more than 7 years ago | (#17039606)

And throw off the feng shui of our apartment? Not likely.

Re:Fuck that. (1)

Thraxen (455388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17039726)

Then don't. My router is upstairs and I ran a network cable through the wall down to the entertainment center. Not an option for everyone, but is the best option IMO if you are fairly handy with household projects or know someone who is. Or you could spend like $40 on a wireless access point. No reason why you have have to buy the official adapter.

Re:Fuck that. (1)

MooseMuffin (799896) | more than 7 years ago | (#17039730)

I just ran a cable. Considering that you probably want good latency for online gaming, as well as high speed for downloads and streaming media from your PC, I'd be using wired even if it were wireless. Not everyone is going to use the wireless, which is why its an optional accessory. Cheaper, 3rd party wireless options work just fine from what I understand.

Re:Fuck that. (1)

twistedsymphony (956982) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040284)

yeah I also ran a cable... one thing that bothers me about the Wii is that it's WIRELESS ONLY and you have to buy a USB adapter if you want a wired connection... which seems rather messed up to me.

and while I do agree that the official USB WiFi adapter MS sells is a rip-off, nothings stopping you from using a cheap wireless bridge if you're unable to wire a solid connection to your router.

Wireless works fine (1)

spideyct (250045) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041144)

XBox Live was designed and tested to work with wireless.
I use a wireless connection ($40 WAP turned into a bridge using DD-WRT) and have never had any latency issues. I play online multiplayer with voice chat, download large demos, and regularly watch streaming movies from my PC.

Apartment, you insensitive clod (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041328)

I just ran a cable.

Can you give a range of how much it might cost to get the landlord to allow this for typical rented residences in various regions of the United States?

Re:Fuck that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17039756)

Striking distance?

100 bucks for the stupid wireless addon
55 bucks a year for the online service - 200-250 bucks add to the price of the 360
And then there is the seemingly mandatory extended warranty, the overpriced peripherals...

With the PS3 you can use your own wireless router on the 499/20gig model and you can use any store bought harddrive(which you can't even do with the 360)

It shouldn't be surprising to anyone that the 360 is selling worse than the first Xbox and even the Dreamcast after one year on the market. Microsoft still hasn't given any numbers for the number of people paying for the Gold service. The number of people willing to pay 399 + 200-250 bucks for a 360 to play online has to be tiny.

Re:Fuck that. (1)

BIZKeT (636677) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040220)

Yea... Tiny...

Anyway, back here in reality land...

I had a problem with my wired connection. I had about 80' of Cat 5e (Xbox 360 in the basement, router is upstairs) and kept getting MTU errors. I tried the three different usb wireless 'cards' I had and nothing worked. I finally just dropped the $86 on the official wireless adapter (found it on sale in my town) and I got connected. Problem is it was a crappy connection that would drop every coupld of hours. Then I realized that I was connected to someones router that was almost two blocks away. I set the SSID properly and now I have a solid connection to the router in the house. It may be a spendy peripheral, but I feel it was worth it. Especially knowing that even living across the street from a power station and all the high energy wires over head that I can still connect to a neighbor down the street if I need too :)

Re:Fuck that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040412)

>Yea... Tiny...

The number of people paying for Microsoft's 50 dollar a year service is_____.

Please fill in the blank, because Microsoft sure isn't. Instead they are playing word games in press releases trying to give the impression that anyone who hooks up their 360 is a paying subscriber. Event though the numbers were obviously bogus when Microsoft gave paying subscriber numbers for the first Xbox, at least they gave some number. Microsoft is keeping silent about 360 subscription numbers.

Perhaps the number is so large Microsoft is too modest to talk about it in public. You think?

Tiny? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040676)

The number of people paying for Microsoft's 50 dollar a year service is_____.
Greater than the number of PS3s that will be sold by the end of the year.

Then don't? (1)

*weasel (174362) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040230)

Just buy a $30 wireless bridge and plug it into the ethernet port.
I've got a wireless bridge feeding my xbox, tivo and 360 - it works like a champ.
And when I upgrade to 802.11n or powerline, or god-knows-what-else - everything shares the benefit.

the official add-on is definitely a shameless cash-grab, but it ain't required. and thankfully it's not built-in cost.
I have no idea why anyone would want a device-specific wireless adapter at this stage of the game.

Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17039456)

You have got to get yourself into these 40 player Resistance matches. And Motorstorm online is just a few months away. And it is all free for the life of the console. And dedicated servers - Resistance is lag free even with huge numbers of players.

Microsoft better get a fucking clue. 50 dollars a year just for the privilege of playing games online? I don't think so. That adds up to 250 dollars over five years! And no dedicated servers? They expect people to pay money to NOT GET what Sony is providing for free? I don't think so. And Microsoft expects people to pay for weak online games like Gears of War - 8 player max. WTF is up with that??? Lame.

Microsoft needs to either drop the stupid 50 dollar a year charge. Now. 8 player 'bumpy shiny normal mapped space marine matches' ain't going to cut it.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (3, Insightful)

fistfullast33l (819270) | more than 7 years ago | (#17039758)

I agree. Obviously the 360 has a better library than the PS3 right now but there's no way they can overcome a free service. If Sony can keep the pressure on with good online support then I think they have the advantage. I also heard you can plug a USB keyboard into the console? That would basically convert your PS3 to a computer. If you could chat using the keyboard and play with the controller you'll have a really nice combo that's hard to match.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

truspector (929868) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040054)

Sony's online service is no match for Microsofts, that is why it is free. It boils down to that old saying, "you get what you pay for." Sony will pass the cost of online gaming onto developers and we all know how well that worked for the ps2.

"I also heard you can plug a USB keyboard into the console? That would basically convert your PS3 to a computer. If you could chat using the keyboard and play with the controller you'll have a really nice combo that's hard to match."

The 360 has been able to do this since day 1.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (3, Insightful)

FatherOfONe (515801) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041076)

Ok, tell me why Microsofts service is so much better than Sony.

I don't want to start a console war here, but I am curious why you believe Sony can't match or exceed Microsofts online service.

I do want to say that I own a PS3 and here is what I like about the online experience so far.
1. No points. I hate points and want everything in $$$.
2. Parent account. I love that I can limit my son to what he does.
3. Downloadable trailers. This is somewhat cool, and I love the 1080P stuff.
4. Downloadable demos and games.

Now I haven't tried the wireless headsets yet, nor have I tried RFOM to see what it is like, but I hope to try Marvel Ultimate Alliance soon via online play.

I will say that I didn't like the following:
1. Password restrictions - They suck and Sony is aware of it.
2. Login account id issue. In short there is a bug with their wizard, again they are aware.
3. Registration process - Man it takes a while without keyboard.
4. Wireless setup message. There is an error message that is actually a success. They are aware.
5. Can't do anything while downloading - Again they are aware.
6. Large demo downloads of stuff. A HD in every system is nice.
7. 1080i/720p issue. They are aware, but it isn't clear if a solution will be developed.

From the forums I visit it appears that the RFOM online experience is very good and without a doubt Sony is playing catchup to Microsoft, but I am curious why you don't believe they won't catch up. From where I sit it appears that Sony has done a fair job of its online service at this point and it looks like they are working hard on making it even better.

As you can tell from my post I am not about to sugar coat my experience with the PS3, but I will say that I do like the machine a lot and so far my family has loved the machine.

Have you worked with both the 360 and PS3 online? If so what functionality is missing from the PS3 that can't be fixed with a code update?

Also, how much does XBOX live gold/platinum (whatever) cost per year? If it is something like $5 to $10 then this isn't that big of an issue either, but if it is like $50 or $100 then I can see this being a larger issue for Microsoft.

Either way, I will say the 360 games this year look very good and happy gaming. It looks like March will be the killer month for the PS3, in that a ton of great games come out that month... I just hope our tax check is good and that 1080P TV's keep falling in price.

 

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

truspector (929868) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041540)

"I do want to say that I own a PS3 and here is what I like about the online experience so far.
1. No points. I hate points and want everything in $$$.
2. Parent account. I love that I can limit my son to what he does.
3. Downloadable trailers. This is somewhat cool, and I love the 1080P stuff.
4. Downloadable demos and games"

Microsoft has had 2, 3, and 4 for over a year now. Points aren't hard to figure out either, but I'll give you that one.

Now for what it doesn't have. I stole this from Saige because I didn't want to retype it.

Yeah, Sony really provides the same thing as Microsoft does, and does it for free.

The PS3 has one friends list throughout all of the games right? With detailed presence information about what those friends are doing? How about being able to send text, voice, and images all in a message to a friend? And send and receive those in the middle of a game? What about game invites - can you be playing Resistance, and then get informed that a friend has just invited you to play Motorstorm? And when you get an invite, can you have it take you right into the game with that friend? Can you voice chat with a friend, while playing different games, and then continue the conversation while you change games and your friend starts watching a movie?

And how about your game profile? Can you see what various games your friends have played, and when they last played them? How about being able to see that information from the web?

Oh, that's right, the PS3 does NONE of that. You get a friends list that only works in some games, while other games have their own list. You can only read and send messages while you're not in a game, and you can't even see a game invite unless you're already in the same game - and even then, you still have to find that game.

What the PS3 offers for free now is inferior to what the original Xbox offered years ago in terms of online service. Of course they're giving it away, since there's nothing there worth paying for.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

Saige (53303) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041566)

From the forums I visit it appears that the RFOM online experience is very good and without a doubt Sony is playing catchup to Microsoft, but I am curious why you don't believe they won't catch up. From where I sit it appears that Sony has done a fair job of its online service at this point and it looks like they are working hard on making it even better.
There's no doubt the PS3's online experience will improve with time, as they're able to add things. But as to "catching up" to Xbox Live? Remember, the Xbox Live team isn't going to be sitting there watching, but adding more functionality and improving what's already there. So Sony's attempt at catching up means hitting a moving target - and don't forget, there's all sorts of internal work that will undoubtedly have to be done for both systems to for increasing capacity, etc.

By the time that the PS3's online feature set matches what Xbox Live has now, there will be plenty more features on the latter - and the PS3 will have to complete against that feature set and deal with the consequences. Notice that the PS3 is getting dinged for the fact that you can't do background downloads and the 360 can. That wasn't something the 360 did at launch, but it does now, and what can be done NOW is what matters to people.
Also, how much does XBOX live gold/platinum (whatever) cost per year? If it is something like $5 to $10 then this isn't that big of an issue either, but if it is like $50 or $100 then I can see this being a larger issue for Microsoft.
Xbox Live gold accounts are $50 a year(or a little more if you pay per month or per 3 months). No, it's not free - but it's only the cost of a single game, less than $5 a month. Honestly, that's not much money at all - skip Starbucks for a day or two, or eat ramen noodles instead of making a trip out for fast food twice a month, and you've more than made up for it.

Cost of PS3 online development on developers (1)

cgenman (325138) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043854)

The main problem with Sony's service is that it isn't really a service. It's a gateway. With Xbox Live, as a developer you can make a couple of system calls, add one or two icons, and you have an achievements system. Sony "lets" developers handle achievements any way they want to, which means developers have to implement and debug whatever title-specific system they want. All of the matchmaking intelligence is handled server-side by Microsoft. All of the multiplayer server stuff is managed and handled by Microsoft. Leaderboards... Basically everything that makes up the Xbox Live experience is uniform because Microsoft handles all of the ugly, complicated bits.

Sony, by comparison, has taken a hands-off approach. If you want to run a server for a game, you run your own server farm and pay through the nose. If you want an achievements system, create your own. Feel like having friends stuff in your game? Integrate 3rd party API's as well as you can. On the one hand, this gives more freedom to the developer. EA convinced MS to create a teired level of live suport specifically for companies that want to run their own server farms. But on the other hand, this shifts a lot of the burden of development and maintenence onto the developers. Most of the small-to-midsize developers out there don't have the resources to both create a fully polished game and flesh out the details of an online community.

And don't get me started about the rumor of Sony passing their demo download costs onto the developers. I wouldn't be at all suprised if this happened, as people are wondering how Sony plans to support their service. Eat their cut of game sales? Unlikely. Pass costs onto developers? Now you're talking.

BTW, don't bother with 1080P. Go 720P. While all of the systems claim to support 1080P, they pretty much all just render to 720P and up-rez the rest. Plus the quality difference is basically indistinguishable between a native 720P screen running in 720p and a native 1080p screen running in 1080p. Some PS3 games, like Resistance, ask you to down-rez back to 720P, which looks worse on a 1080 screen than it would on a native 720p one. Save your cash for some more games.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040806)

More then that you can run liunx on it.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (3, Insightful)

Thraxen (455388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17039818)

Yeah, we'll see how long that free service lasts. And, sure, it may be lag free now, but that's because there are hardly any systems actually being played... low supply, thousands on Ebay, and many being held back for Christmas gifts. BTW, lots of people love GoW, not every game needs to be a 40 man riot to be fun.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (3, Insightful)

HappySqurriel (1010623) | more than 7 years ago | (#17039820)

Microsoft better get a fucking clue. 50 dollars a year just for the privilege of playing games online? I don't think so. That adds up to 250 dollars over five years

I'm no Microsoft fan but $50 per year works out to about $4.75 per month, if you compare that to a single game that Millions of people pay to play (WoW) I don't think that is too much to charge. I think that it all comes down to what services they're offering for the money; something as simple as having a uniform interface with the same services offered is worth a lot of money for some people.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040120)

Gee, let me make a wild guess that you don't sit around in the PS3 articles posting about how the $499 PS3 is only a few dollars more a year compared to the $399 which is a great deal since you get so much more for those few dollars every month...

The inane fifty dollar a year charge from Microsoft adds around 250 dollars to the price of the console and exists for no other reason than to try to keep the 360 from generating the same massive losses as the first Xbox. That puts the 360 at 650 dollars just for a console that you can play online with. No one but diehard Xbox fans are dumb enough to spend that much money on the 360.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

HappySqurriel (1010623) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040592)

Gee, let me make a wild guess that you don't sit around in the PS3 articles posting about how the $499 PS3 is only a few dollars more a year compared to the $399 which is a great deal since you get so much more for those few dollars every month...

No ... mainly because the PS3 XBox 360 are products which (in my opinion) are both overpriced; even if I considered them to be reasonably priced I would still say that your comparison is flawed because a per month charge only makes sense if you're talking about a service.

XBox Live is a service which you have the choice of paying for and can quit the service at any time; certainly you get charged in chunks but what you're paying for is something which only has value over time.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

Thraxen (455388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040700)

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. The charge has nothing to do with keeping the 360 from losing as much money as the Xbox. Live wasn't free on the first Xbox and there weren't even free Silver acounts for the first Xbox. The charge pays for lots of features that Live offers which Sony's service does not (see Saige's post). Also, Sony has already stated that they don't know if the service will remain free forever.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040850)

It not too much in tell you are paying that + monthly fee that you need to play a game
Also $4.75 is too much when the same games on the pc have free on line play.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

Thraxen (455388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040926)

Then buy them on the PC, I've got nothing against PC games. But the PC versions have have achievements, a global friend's list, ranking ladders, match making based on rank, ability to send invites, etc, etc... That's what sets Live apart. You are getting something for your $50 bucks a year

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (5, Informative)

Saige (53303) | more than 7 years ago | (#17039866)

Yeah, Sony really provides the same thing as Microsoft does, and does it for free.

The PS3 has one friends list throughout all of the games right? With detailed presence information about what those friends are doing? How about being able to send text, voice, and images all in a message to a friend? And send and receive those in the middle of a game? What about game invites - can you be playing Resistance, and then get informed that a friend has just invited you to play Motorstorm? And when you get an invite, can you have it take you right into the game with that friend? Can you voice chat with a friend, while playing different games, and then continue the conversation while you change games and your friend starts watching a movie?

And how about your game profile? Can you see what various games your friends have played, and when they last played them? How about being able to see that information from the web?

Oh, that's right, the PS3 does NONE of that. You get a friends list that only works in some games, while other games have their own list. You can only read and send messages while you're not in a game, and you can't even see a game invite unless you're already in the same game - and even then, you still have to find that game.

What the PS3 offers for free now is inferior to what the original Xbox offered years ago in terms of online service. Of course they're giving it away, since there's nothing there worth paying for.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

Thraxen (455388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17039972)

Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 29, @03:49PM (#17039456) = pwned

Great post. Live has some very useful features. Just a couple of nights ago I was in the mood for some GoW co-op and was going to invite one of my friends to play, but then I noticed that their profile said they were "Watching a movie". So I didn't send the invite because I didn't want to disturb them. Little stuff like that makes the $50 yearly charge well worth it.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

Saige (53303) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040080)

The 360 dash now has an option that will allow you to have notifications turned off while watching a movie. Meaning that people can't disturb you anymore if you don't want them to.

So if you want to play with a friend, invite away!

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

Thraxen (455388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040100)

Cool. Didn't know that. I haven't changed any of my settings in a long time.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

JFMulder (59706) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040332)

Acutally... I have a 360, and while I hope the PS3 fails because of price and shoving Blu-Ray down our throat, your post is far from being impartial. You seem to like your Xbox quite a lot.

EVERYTHING you are mentionning is available for free with XBox Live Silver. You can chat with your friend who's playing online for free even tough you are not Gold, you just won't be able to play the game with him/her. The ONLY advantages of the Gold account are

1) early access to some content (multiplayer demos, betas and some trailers and movies)
2) online multiplayer
3) receive online game invites for multiplayer gaming

Everything else is free. As a silver member, I can see what you are doing, where, what you've played, everything. I just can't play it with you online.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

Saige (53303) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040548)

Pictures in messages also require a gold account - though that's just a minor item.

You're right though - most of the Xbox Live capabilities are available through a free silver account. I don't think it's wrong, however, to include them in a comparison between the PS3's free online play and the Xbox Live $50 a year online play, since you do get them - and if online play is what you're after, a silver account isn't really part of the picture.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

JFMulder (59706) | more than 7 years ago | (#17044986)

I agree that the complete experience if waaaaaaayyy better on the 360, the online portion is really well executed on the 360, but if you are comparing them and trying to justify the 50$ tag, the comparison needs to be made on what that 50$ gets you. But hey, that's just me.

Anyway, in the end, anyone with 250$ and a 360 wins over a PS3 with free online play. 250$ over five years is nothing in online fees. My high-speed cable Internet access costs almost 40CAN$ a month (20 gigs download, 10 upload, 500kiloBytes/sec downstream, 80k/sec upstream). That extra 6$ is not that much more.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

Thraxen (455388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040600)

Did it occur to you that the fees paid by the Gold members might also be going to cover the costs of the features enjoyed by the Silver accounts too?

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

JFMulder (59706) | more than 7 years ago | (#17044904)

Maybe. Doesn't change the fact that his comparison was unfair. He should compared the the Silver membership to what Sony offers or in other words, compare MS's free offering to Sony's free offering. Sony has free online play, and MS has better integration between games and friend lists. I've only had a Gold account for a month now (got it a week or so before GoW came out), but so far free online play would rank higher for me than a buddy list. I can always call my friend on the phone and ask him if he wants to play a game. But at least with MS, you know that every single multiplayer game is going to have invites and voice chat. That's something to consider.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17048490)

When you say "Sony has free online play" I think that's a bit misleading. Sony's approach is to be laissez-faire regarding the online expereince ... just like it was with the PS2. Each game developer sets up and maintains their own "matchmaking" servers. That leads you into a situation where one game may have a killer online component (i.e. Socom with its friends/clans/rank) while other, agruably better games may be crippled by their online component (Killzone ... with well, next to nothing). With Live, the online compnent can almost be an afterthought, since all they have to do is plug it into what is already built and maintained for them. GoW didn't do anything special online (i.e. Socom's clan system) but they didn't have to.

The only thing Sony did this time was give you free access to stuff other people are paying for (i.e. Zipper with Socom) and give you free access TO THEIR STORE.

I was huge into Socom on PS2 because of its online component. I was nothing but dissapointed with anything else that I played online on the PS2 because it lacked the intuitive friend/clan list interface. On a whim I decided to try the 360 out and I've been nothing but impressed with Live. It makes everything's online expereince consistently good. I can always find my friends and we have a great time. Since finding good games online is such an afterthought on the 360, it makes me wonder how we ever had "fun" before.

Disclaimer: I've got a 360 (and PS2 and Wii) and have no plans on getting a PS3 as I don't see any added benefit (other than MGS4).

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041384)

Love the bitterness.

That comes from someone dumb enough to blow 50? 100? 200? How much have you wasted paying Microsoft to help them stem the losses from the inability to make console hardware without massive losses over the past five years?

Gonna love the reaction from the sad fucks like you when Sony starts putting out numbers for total number of people playing just Resistance alone over the next few months. And the dimwits up in Redmond sitting there in silence because just Resistance alone will have more total players itself than all of Microsoft's shitty rip-off of an online service.

Hey fanboy, how's it paying 50 dollars extra a year for no dedicated servers. Suckers!

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

Thraxen (455388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041510)

Clueless troll.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

Saige (53303) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041756)

Yep. I post a list of things the 360 does and the PS3 doesn't do, and the response is vitriol and garbage and claims that's I'm the fanboy? (At least it should have been fanGIRL)

Bah, I'm not wasting my time on that AC anymore...

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

ironwill96 (736883) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042396)

Hey if I would have had mod points I would have modded you up! You posted exactly what I was thinking, everyone raves about how the PS3 has a "free" service but free != useable or fun. I am very happy with paying $50/yr for the 360 live service. Microsoft may have made a lot of stumbles in the hardware area in their console attempts, but they are a software company first and foremost, and Xbox Live is all about software - something they generally know something about, so i'm impressed by the way it works from a software standpoint. I can't stress enough how useful the feature of "I host a game and invite my friends to it, they are in and ready to play in a few seconds with none of this searching for a match crap". That feature alone is enough to sing Xbox Live's praises. It totally simplifies an annoying aspect of multiplayer gaming - finding and getting into the same game with your friends.

Re:Microsoft Better Scramble To Keep Up (1)

justchris (802302) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043516)

You realize that's not even possible right? Currently there are more people playing Gears of War online than there are people who actually own a PS3. That's not an exaggeration, it's a simple fact. Even over the next few months, its unlikely Resistance will hit more total players online than Xbox gold members for a while, March at the absolute earliest.

I'll admit, it's suspicious that Microsoft refuses to give a number for people who are actually paying for Gold service, and only state the number of consoles that have gone online at all, but they give numbers for how many people are playing specific games online occasionally (like when Gears of War surpassed Halo 2) and those numbers are decent...and higher than the total number of people with a PS3, at least for now.

Wii + DS = ? (3, Interesting)

ShadowsHawk (916454) | more than 7 years ago | (#17039530)

I'm still waiting to see what Nintendo does with the DS connectivity. Also, why aren't we getting more demo download offers? That's one area where the PC is still beating the snot out of any console/handheld.

Mmm... (1)

MeanderingMind (884641) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040370)

Golden Axe makes me all warm inside. I can't wait for the sequels to become availible. Even more importantly, Toejam and Earl is listed on the official Virtual Console website but hasn't been released yet! Give me my precious childhood memories! I demand nostalgia!

Of course, people still look at me funny when I tell them I can play Genesis games on my Wii.

Re:Mmm... (1)

satoshi1 (794000) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041638)

I hooked up my Wii in my dormitory's lounge last night to play some Super Smash Brothers Melee (we have no cube to call our own, have been borrowing one before several of us got Wiis). When I booted it up, one of the guys saw that I had Sonic, and he was terribly surprised. It was neat. And everyone looks at me funny when I tell them that I'm not playing the NES Bomberman, but the Turbografx Bomberman. No one even knows what it is =P

Limits on the system (1)

spideyct (250045) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041018)

There is no limit to the size of downloadable content on XBox Live - at least none that I have seen. I've downloaded some game demos that were well over 1GB.

The 50MB limit that is mentioned only applies to Live Arcade - the section with retro and "party" games.

I'm not sure how that compares to Sony's 500MB limit - does Sony's limit apply to ALL downloadable content?

Re:Limits on the system (1)

cgenman (325138) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043062)

Live Arcade doesn't just limit "retro and party" games to 50MB... Live Arcade is the game download service for Xbox 360, which is why they're all retro and party games. This has the effect of allowing anyone with a memory card to download and play games... which is kind of dumb, considering it would take a full 50 dollar memory card to store one 10 dollar downloadable game.

Sony is allowing things beyond "retro and party" games by allowing for larger download sizes. This will probably make games more expensive (more development budget, more bandwidth) but hopefully better looking and better fleshed out. Remember, of course, this STILL is 1/10th the size of a modern DVD, and about 1/40th the size of a blu-ray disk... so you're still looking at something about the size of a PS1 game. But at least it will be big enough to hold more than one music track.

On the other hand, this is an artificial software limit and not a hardware one. If Microsoft or Sony thought it was important to raise this limit, they could do it in one software update. One development cycle later, they could be 1 GB, or 4 GB, or 40 GB.

Re:Limits on the system (1)

Loadmaster (720754) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043458)

MS needs to up the XBLA limit to 650MB (CD size) or 1 GB. That way the PC games that fit on a CD can be put on the market. Limiting the DL size to 50MB will hamstring the amount of content. They're handing a bunch of games that can be easily ported to Sony.

And I want the original UT on there damn it!

Swi

Re:Limits on the system (1)

spideyct (250045) | more than 7 years ago | (#17045934)

Correct, Live Arcade is the download service for complete games. I said there was no limit on "downloadable content" -- the term used by the parent post. Personally, I download and play game demos more than I play XBLA games. That is the best feature of the XBox360 - the ability to get hands on experience with new release games without having to buy it or rent it.
I agree that the limit for both will be increased as soon as it becomes prohibitive.

Sony's Online Service *Really* Free? (1)

Frostclaw (1006995) | more than 7 years ago | (#17047942)

I can't believe that there aren't some hidden costs to Sony's online service. SOMEONE has to be paying for the infrastructure -- be it Sony or the software companies. In the end though, the consumer will be paying in one form or another -- either by increases in software costs or through other means. Nothing is free and Sony is in certainly no position to be giving any services away when they are already bleeding all over the place from console costs.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>