Let me illustratate a point. This is an example of what I am talking about with Xbox Live.

No, When you buy Apple you are buying an image. Apple products are grossly overpriced, but people still buy them. 

Xbox Live is the image of American online gaming. When you think of it that way, it creates a similar image, just towards the gaming industry and people will believe its worth a damn regardless of the true costs of the product. You're buying a lifestyle. I've studied that when you put a high price on an item and give it a nice look people take to its appeal much greater to that of the competition without flash and flare. AT&T+ Apple= Hell, but my family still paid for the phones until the contract for exclusivity of the brand with AT&T was up.

The IPhone has been threatened by Samsung technologically, so now people are being forced to look at them both based on their merits next time their two year plan is up though. The image of what a cellphone is, is being challenged in America. Its like waking people out of a deep sleep. Tech nerds everywhere must he happy for that as well, because they've been boasting the superiority of Android for a while now. 

PSN has caught up with Xbox Live, now when people buy the new consoles they will buy them off of their true merits rather than the image for online. They will have to read the box, even though the bias is still there for a certain product. If PSN Plus grows it could be taking gaming in a grossly better direction than Xbox Live which is milking people who game and could be getting more for their money. 

XBox Live isnt the only American brand that does this:

Apple

Panera Bread

Starbucks  

P.F. Changs

Its genius really, you create a ride and pay to ride COD, Halo  and Gears ahead of time at their theme park they put out a carrot for you there, then when people follow it they realize theres a second gate to enter a whole theme park with a fee. Can't ride what you paid for even after you pay for it.

That's funny, Sony put a high price on the PS3 and made it look nice and the result was 3rd place.

SMH. Again, they go off topic to argue for the sake of arguing. This is when you see that this is psychological. Sony never sold an image to people, but thats another story. Sony did not become a true commercially grand marketing image until 2009 with the "It Only Does Everything" campaigns and the redesigns of the PS3. Second of all, Sony knew they were going to take a hit on the PS3, but they also knew people would buy it. Blu Ray is the new booming image of disc based multimedia and I doubt even Microsoft at this point can hold back from getting Blu Ray now as much as they fought and preached against it. Its shown its value in home movies and its amazing amount of content that can be put on it. I will no longer respond to this argument after this, its off topic.

Actually, Sony clearly they their image was much stronger. They thought their hardware was gonna fly off the shelves at $600. It didn't, so MS and Nintendo got the marketshare Sony chased away.

The redesigns and marketing didn't help PS3 sales nearly as much as the price cuts. It was getting $100 price cuts year after year.

Sony obviously knew there would be losses early on, but no fucking way did they anticipate losing billions. If Sony could do it all over again they would have probably stuck with DVD.

Last I checked Bluray was struggling to maintain a 50 percent market share for physical movie sales. Worst of all, that's a shrinking market thanks to piracy, cheap rentals, and streaming video services. I don't think that was anticipated in 2006. Bluray will never be as big as DVD was in its prime, the market has changed.

I wouldn't be surprised if the next Xbox has Bluray, nor does it matter. Its clear developers are struggling with the limited space of DVDs. However, Sony never proved Bluray was necessary for this gen. All Bluray has done is keep games on a single disc and make FMVs sharper. The sad truth is the average gamer doesn't give a shit about that. Which is why PS3 is still trailing behind Wii and 360.

It should be noted that Sony actually helped MS by using Bluray. It made the PS3 too expensive and allowed MS to take a big chunk of their market share.

What.. so Sony released a $600 console with no image to sell it? They simply depended on the good heart of the buying public to give them a chance?

Sony has had an image for decades in electronics and since the mid 90's in gaming in general. And don't try to tell me Sony did not try to create an image with the PS3. You're correct when you say Live has an image. EVERY PRODUCT DOES. That's what good companies do. It's hilarious watching you move the goal posts around for MS with some of these posts all so you can make a pedestal to put Sony on though.

Argue this with me in on my page. I said that was the last time I would respond to the topic being thrown off.

So, no one addressed my point? Am I to assume that means you agree that Live is extortion? Wonderful. That took entirely too long.

No it is not. To put it as simple as I can, LIVE makes console gaming seamless.To get to where you want to go, to find what you need, to see what your friends are doing in all respects, seamlessly invite people into your game or drop into theirs.

Live just makes everything simple and fast. Cross game chat and custom soundtracks (not LIVE but something PSN doesnt have) are nice too.

PSN, even now, makes you jump through a obstacle course to do what Live has done since 2005. Sony covers that up by giving you free old games. And wow......you guys love em for that, when it doesnt cost them a thing and you pay them $50.

I pay $0 to enjoy multiplayer on my PS3. I think I realize the issue here.

Live isn't extortion, it has features you guys appreciate and are perfectly pleased with paying for - XGC, XBLA, etc.

But is MS model of forcing you to pay for Live to unlock the multiplayer content of your game extortion? You buy a game with multiplayer and are locked out of using it on Xbox360 unless you pay for Live. This is what I have a problem with.

You pay for the best (console) or you get nothing. The others offer baseline multiplayer with no bells and whistles. That is not for me.

Gamers should inherently opt for the best. In a VERY online centric generation, this matters. If you dont want the best, then your welcome to play PSN.