By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - SONY: Don't Pay For XBL, Pay For Designer Stuff Instead

ZenfoldorVGI on 14 February 2009

What kind of ignorant creature has to exist in this world, that could actually read this and say "yes, yes they are right."



I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.

NO NO, NO NO NO.

Around the Network
Staude on 14 February 2009
badgenome said:
perpride said:
AS a multi-console owner, there is absolutely no fucking way I would ever pay for Xbox Live.

Fair enough. As a multi-console owner, I would abso-fucking-lutely pay for PSN to have cross-game voice chat and download speeds as fast as Live's (I seem to live in one of those geographical dead zones for PSN).

 

How fast do you need it ? i have 20mbit and it downloads at full speed with me. Took me like 5 mins to get the kz2 demo.



Check out my game about moles ^

ChichiriMuyo on 14 February 2009
ZenfoldorVGI said:
What kind of ignorant creature has to exist in this world, that could actually read this and say "yes, yes they are right."

 

The kind that are ignorant of the misery of paying money for a very small smattering of features that can't otherwise be gotten for free*.  And the funny part is that, albeit slowly, Sony's service just keeps getting closer to MS's.  The more they convince people to buy their games, the closer they get to reaching a parallel, and Sony's customers are going to end up a lot better for it in the long run when they have several more dlc games/expansions/etc than 360 owners but a nearly identical (dare I say outright copied) service.

*Except that they, you know, can.  Sony's just slow about implementing some of those things.  They don't even need a centralized system for the games to make it happen, either, since the abundance of not necessarily used spus allows the system to easily parallelize a voice-chat program that is independent of the games' matchmaking services.



You do not have the right to never be offended.

City17 on 14 February 2009

I think that it is rediculous to scrutinize every little thing that sony's people say so harshly. Does it really piss you off so much that you are getting reamed by the master of mutherfuckers Gates himself! Get a fucking life!



badgenome on 14 February 2009
Staude said:
badgenome said:
perpride said:
AS a multi-console owner, there is absolutely no fucking way I would ever pay for Xbox Live.

Fair enough. As a multi-console owner, I would abso-fucking-lutely pay for PSN to have cross-game voice chat and download speeds as fast as Live's (I seem to live in one of those geographical dead zones for PSN).

 

How fast do you need it ? i have 20mbit and it downloads at full speed with me. Took me like 5 mins to get the kz2 demo.

Well, like I said, I think I live in a geographical dead spot for PSN. Like this guy seems to. It's impossibly slow. Took me many hours just to download Pain. I did a speed test using the PS3 browser, and it came up fine. Faster than what I got on my computer, even.

 



Around the Network
The Fury on 14 February 2009

this is actually one bit of PR I like. It points out a great thing. that being, don't waste your money of being able to play online, just buy games, which is what the whole industry is meant to be about.



Hmm, pie.

BMaker11 on 14 February 2009
badgenome said:
Phoenix_Wiight said:
theyve got a point. still, it wont do much. i dont like when they try to say "we're better than ____ because"

I'd prefer if they came out and said it like that, actually. To say "U CAN BUY A CHARE FOR UR HOME!" just sounds lame. "$50/year for online? LOL" would make a better marketing pitch.

I wish more companies would be as awesomely blunt as Sega was.

This is exactly what papflesje was pointing out as a "cherrypick". There's like one or two things for Home in those lists....and then the rest are GAMES and MOVIES....yet you only focus on the (minimal) Home items.

@picture

And that's why the Dreamcast failed.....

 



BMaker11 on 14 February 2009
Garnett said:
Screw something you can ACTUALLY USE,Get a fake chair and sit all day long in HOME!

Yeah....don't worry about Burnout, Wipeout, LBP stuff, movies, etc.....only focus on a chair for your $50, because that's all PSN offers.

 



BMaker11 on 14 February 2009
papflesje said:
Procrastinato said:

Yeah! If Sony started a premium service that cost like $5.00/month and gave you $5.00 worth of Playstation Store credit, I would clearly never buy it, because it doesn't have the word "Live!" on the end, and I don't go for studio recordings -- I want the real thing.

Even worse is that the current system is like an optional premium service, where you don't pay if you don't want anything from the store that month. I like to plan ahead with my bills -- if I am playing online for 5 years (you know, typical console lifespan), I want to schedule my $250 worth of payments and get... well that "Live!" word, and I like to pretend that its less laggy too so there's that. ...and no of course I have never compared the two directly... why would I use something other than Live!?

Live! only costs me just one month out of the year if I get the annual subscription too -- so that's 11 of 12 months for free!  Just the same as PSN, almost.


Live! for da w1n!

 

Made no sense.  AT ALL.

I think he was using sarcasm lol

 



BMaker11 on 14 February 2009
mrstickball said:
Isn't this the same developer that said that people will work extra hours to buy a PS3? And that the PS3 could sell units without any games based on brand name alone?

Yeah Sony. You can keep your free, inferior, service. Even non-paying X360 owners that go online get more content than PS3 owners by a massive long shot.

Can they play in online multiplayer matches? If not, your post = fail