Icyedge said:
heruamon said:
Icyedge said:
heruamon said:
Something will be worked out...UK is M$ strongest foothold in Europe, and they are going to find a way. M$'s goal is to get as many people as possible on Gold, and I can't fault them, because they are responsible for maintianing the cost of upkeep for the service, whereas I can't say what the model is for Wii and PS3. |
Sony wanna make money by selling things they specialize in (entertainment), but not with PSN itself, sony is a pretty righteous company. They have just enough ads and publisher that pay per gb of download to maintain PSN without loosing money. Microsoft wanna makes money all the way they can, which is normal for an american company. Im not saying that one is better than the other because you can have different views on that depending on your position. Something sure is that its rare to have a righteous company in america, the only one I know is the one I work for and Costco.
On topic, microsoft are consequent, it wouldnt be fair for other service like netflix to offer BBC i player in the silver subscription. I back Microsoft and BBC also.
|
"Microsoft wanna makes money all the way they can, which is normal for an american company"
Not sure I understand that comment, but I think you're right about how Sony views PSN vs. M$, but rather than simply looking at it on a greed vs. free model, it's how both consoles were constructed. What people don't understand is that M$ made Xbox Live a core of the Xbox 360...whereas Sony had PSN as an accessory. Sure, they have since reconsidered the importance of service, as we now see them looking at some services to provide on a premium subscription model, but it seems like a testament to how M$ got it right, and how Sony got it wrong. They thought bluray would lead the way, and THAT was suppose to be the core.
|
Im sorry you did not understand what I meant, english is not my primary language. I meant to say that most american company (administrators) doesnt care for their customer nor their employees and at the end they dont really care about the product they offer either as long as they can earn money with it.
Your right with how the companies saw the online, its pretty apparent that Sony didnt think it was a really important factor when they released the PS3.
|
I won't even touch the first part of your reply...yikes!
as for Sony's online strategy, it's been evolving and morphing...somewhat for the better, but it's funny that they missed the boat initially as they did, considering that they had the Station for years. Of course, that is not to say that M$ has been completely on their game...errr...RROD...but they have been very proactive on many front. From the continuing improvements to XBL (Avatars were ragged as being Mii copies...lol...that discussion has be shelved) , to the integration of more and more services into XBL, M$ is trying, and succeeding at making the console into an appliance, thereby making it interchangeable with far greater ease. The reason this is SO important is because it will make adoption and migration to Nexbox an easy transition for both the consumer and developer/publisher. If you look at the escalating cost of games development cost of console games from last generation to this one…the primary reason was because the last gen was so alien to this one. M$ is a software company, so they are of course going to try and get the iterative gaming refresh cycle in the mode of PCs.
"...You can't kill ideas with a sword, and you can't sink belief structures with a broadside. You defeat them by making them change..."
- From By Schism Rent Asunder
