I didn't read the article but saw AT&T in there. Therefore, it sucks because they are the shittiest ISP ever created.

I just have read the end of ur post Fanatical111,

so I will only allow me to make a little comment :

for this gen, ONLINE IS NOT CRITICAL,

if online was critical people would buy Xbox360 over PS3
all u need is GOOD game and actually, in the console world :

good offline multiplayer > good online multiplayer

so what is the most important game for 2008 ?

==> GTA4 !!!!!!!!

GTA4 + low price = that is the only way for them to stay second ...

I don't know why people are so down about PSN. It hosts games of up to 40 players (RFOM) or 32 players (Warhawk) with lag only when people's own internet connection suck or others have lag switches.

@Chrono:
You're missing out a little by not taking Burnout online. ;)

@Dog's rule xD Yeah I've been told that soo many times :3 I might just have to try it :P I'm not very far in burnout though, all my roomates are farther than me and I bought the damn game xD

I completely disagree with you.  Online is critical for this gen.  Your right all you need is a good game, but what classifies a good game?  For me a big part is online play.  Why is COD4/Halo 3 better then BioShock?  Doesnt BioShock have a longer and more extended single player experiance, better graphics, better story, better sound?

 Why is Co-Op play something that holds so much significance in console gaming?  Would GTA4 be as good of a game without online play?

A flaw with that though Fanatic is the Wii's success. The Wii is selling insanely fast and it's online experience is almost non-existent. Bogged down with goofy details like friend codes and Wifi-only. Online certainly plays it's part currently, but it's not quite the hook just yet, they are definitely helpful in giving a game lasting appeal, but the developers care more about the first time purchase than the extended play. Microsoft wants you to believe otherwise.

I don't know why, but I have the strong urge to troll this post and say:

"Online gaming is gay gay gay!"

However, I won't do so. Instead I will comment:

I prefer a hefty single player experience over an online component any day, however online gaming can be really fun in the proper context. I myself have 2 level 70's in World of Warcraft, which I no longer play.

That said, I've had enough online shooting when I played counterstrike for 2 years. Halo 2 kinda freshened it up for me, but meh, really.

At this point, the prospect of "online gaming" isn't selling me a damn thing. Games better have the bread and butter where it counts, in my sadomasachistic ramblings during my in-room lockage, and harsh criticisms of how games should and should not be designed.

That's why a lot of games are overrated, imo. "Online modes" still appearing as a fresh and progressive concept.

When it all comes to pass, online games will start taking queues from single player campaigns, and we'll stop having to sacrafice content in the form of story, and gamplay in our online modes, to accomidate for limitations due to latency and developer time spent in a broadening world, and the nature of the online team-mate, to leave at a moments notice because his mom wants him to take out the trash, not to mention the general ignorance of an online audience, and the audacity, offensiveness, and lack of depth or focus in their general conversations. These things are basic ruinations of our current online experiences.

Online gaming now, sucks, with a few exceptions, and usually boils down to time sinks, instead of any really interesting.

Example?

What if SMG's boards were online worlds and people were trying to complete them at the same time, bouncing around, with a single player boss killing oriented goal in mind, and you could play through the game like that if you wanted too, or not.

Voice chat would ruin the experience for me, but in some games its great. I use vent all the time for gaming/conversing.

I would like to add though that I LOVE the direction Sony's going with they're online service. Home will still be free for it's users and it will generate income via advertisement. I personally prefer that much more than paying $60 a year :x

I agree with tha 100%. The 360's only chance is drop the price, have Sony not drop the price, and own GTA. They still need to convince people that the 360>PS3. Currently people only know that its cheaper, and that if you play for online you get to have a friends list and in game messages.

Even if online was critical, THE PS3 WILL HAVE IN GAME XMB BY SUMMER!  Its not all of Xbox Live that makes it better, its the fact you have a cross game friends list, in game messaging, and in cross game invites.  Sony will have that in a matter of months, then what? How does the Xbox360 recover its WIDELY KNOWN reliability issues, counter Blu-Ray, and counter the fact that the PS3 has FREE ONLINE! With MORE FEATURES!

I disagree that the direction of consoles is Online gaming, i mean there are many many games that are great to play that don't need an online aspect! Personally the only game i ever play online is Warhawk, and its fun, but thats it!

I hate the idea of online gaming, mainly because of the amount of idiots that play on them, and also the people that take it too far! This is where Live comes into 1st also, with an increased amount of bullying and hate online... I'm rather glad i don't have to put up with that!