NJ5 said:
Jereel Hunter said:
So many people say things like "I don't pay for PC online gaming, why should I pay for it on my console?":
To those I say: Really? Subscription based games comprise the bulk of PC Gaming revenue these days - a single game costing 3-4x an Xbox Live membership on top of the initial game sale. (and periodic expansions)
Not to mention, how much did your PC cost? Did you buy a $200 or $300 gaming PC? I doubt it. Console makers lose money on millions of consoles, and make it up elsewhere. Whoever you bought your PC from made a profit on it. There's a difference.
For those who claim it's a waste vs PSN:
Maybe Live is only a few extra bells and whistles over PSN right now, but for YEARS there was nothing like it on consoles, and until the past year or so it was leaps and bounds better than PSN. The overall gaming experience is still superior, and for someone in the US like me, about 1/2 to 1/3 of my friends have 360's and X-box Live, whereas I know only a few people with PS3s. Also, I use netflix streaming quite a bit, and not having to swap in a disc is nice.
And I totally don't understand how $30 a year (which you can get live for, noone has to pay $50) is a big deal to gamers who buy 10-20 games a year. Pretty much anything i buy, if there's an even slightly better version available for 2-3% more, I'll gladly spend the tiny bit extra. But for people spending $1000+ a year on games, $30 is a deal breaker? I'm primarily a PC gamer, and for just the few games a year I buy on console, Live is easily worth such a pittance.
|
Subscription gaming also exists on consoles, that's an entirely different matter. In that case you're paying for dedicated servers with storage, continued development of a game that you don't have another way to play. In XBL's case you're paying for none of that, just the puny matchmaking servers.
If I convert currencies, my gaming PC cost about $520 before tax... but I do much more with it than play games.
I agree with you that XBL has the advantage of a big userbase, of course that's important. Netflix, doesn't the PS3 also have it?
As for your last paragraph, see WiiStation360's post, that I agree with.
|
I didn't realize Xbox live was developed without cost and wasnt' hosted on servers. Or wait no... that is what you're paying for. Sony chooses to offer it for free. And anyone who saved that money is just not getting availability to netflix and cross game chat. and recently began having multiplayer reliability on par with the 360. These are things I, and more than a dozen of my friends have used for a while. The online offerings of PSN have pretty much caught up recently, but those who stick with Xbox live are effectively paying an "early adopter" fee. We've had it all for years longer, and yes, we paid more for it.
As for Netflix, yes, the PS3 has it, but it requires a disc in the machine for use, and, I believe it also can't use MS's silverlight streaming technology (it's made a big, positive difference since it was implemented, IMO). But it's one of the areas Live keeps a leg-up.
