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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Microsoft respond to PS3 Netflix Announcement

People who have and use Live Gold regularly understand why it is a paid service. It really is leagues ahead of the comp in the online service. If it wasn't people wouldn't pay.



Around the Network
slowmo said:
dsgrue3 said:

slowmo said:
It's always fun to hear from so many Sony fans concerned for the wallets of the poor 360 consumer. Free would indeed be better than a paid service if they were the same, but they're not so it isn't.

By the way, my USB wireless keyboard plugged into my 360 makes typing anything easy anyway for the guy so concerned about typing a status update.

Plugging my USB keyboard into my PS3 also allows me the same thing. Moot point sir.


Zlejedi said:
Microsoft failed at math classes again as everyone knows X/0 >>> Y/4 ;)

 You cannot divide by zero...unless you're a PS3, cause it only does EVERYTHING.


Anyway, back on topic. Anyone that pays for Live feels it is worth it and that's fine. PSN is catching up to Live, this cannot be denied, and a service close to Live which is Free is a much better value than a slightly better service for 50 bucks a year.


PSN is catching up with Live but why has it taken over 3 years?  A service thats not equivalent cannot be better value in any way other than subjectively for each individual user, the fact so many people pay $50 a year to experience Gold access suggests your statement is false for a significant number of gamers.  Taking away feature lists and considering the experiences as a whole PSN is still a way off being the fully integrated service Live is and thats where many see the value of the service.  You're welcome to your opinion that PSN is a better value propostition for yourself but owning both consoles myself I still prefer Live and don't mind the fee for the service I receive.

Because the "advantages" that LIVE has is not anything special... At least me and all my friends don't care about it. And the 2 people I know with a 360 praise it all the time, but they never use it... I would never pay $50 a year for voice chat... lol


selnor said:
People who have and use Live Gold regularly understand why it is a paid service. It really is leagues ahead of the comp in the online service. If it wasn't people wouldn't pay.

No it is not.. and yes, people would pay, because people are stupid.



akuseru said:
slowmo said:
dsgrue3 said:

slowmo said:
It's always fun to hear from so many Sony fans concerned for the wallets of the poor 360 consumer. Free would indeed be better than a paid service if they were the same, but they're not so it isn't.

By the way, my USB wireless keyboard plugged into my 360 makes typing anything easy anyway for the guy so concerned about typing a status update.

Plugging my USB keyboard into my PS3 also allows me the same thing. Moot point sir.

 

Zlejedi said:
Microsoft failed at math classes again as everyone knows X/0 >>> Y/4 ;)

 You cannot divide by zero...unless you're a PS3, cause it only does EVERYTHING.

 

Anyway, back on topic. Anyone that pays for Live feels it is worth it and that's fine. PSN is catching up to Live, this cannot be denied, and a service close to Live which is Free is a much better value than a slightly better service for 50 bucks a year.


PSN is catching up with Live but why has it taken over 3 years?  A service thats not equivalent cannot be better value in any way other than subjectively for each individual user, the fact so many people pay $50 a year to experience Gold access suggests your statement is false for a significant number of gamers.  Taking away feature lists and considering the experiences as a whole PSN is still a way off being the fully integrated service Live is and thats where many see the value of the service.  You're welcome to your opinion that PSN is a better value propostition for yourself but owning both consoles myself I still prefer Live and don't mind the fee for the service I receive.

Because the "advantages" that LIVE has is not anything special... At least me and all my friends don't care about it. And the 2 people I know with a 360 praise it all the time, but they never use it... I would never pay $50 a year for voice chat... lol

 

selnor said:
People who have and use Live Gold regularly understand why it is a paid service. It really is leagues ahead of the comp in the online service. If it wasn't people wouldn't pay.

No it is not.. and yes, people would pay, because people are stupid.

Umm yes it is. Facebook on the PS3 for example is a chore. Wheras M4 saw the benefit of a proper console service for Live. Thats the difference M$ are a software company. They understood the benefits of making a specific console version. This is just one example.



selnor said:
Umm yes it is. Facebook on the PS3 for example is a chore. Wheras M4 saw the benefit of a proper console service for Live. Thats the difference M$ are a software company. They understood the benefits of making a specific console version. This is just one example.

Umm, NO it is NOT... Yeah, facebook on PS3 is such a chore! Just like writing on these forums is a chore, or doing a search on google is a chore! Man I wish Sony / MS implemented a specific console version of all websites! Then I wouldn't have to open up a web browser (in MS case you can't even do that... lol) and write a couple of characters. You know what, having only facebook and NOT a web browser is actually fucking stupid. I can't believe that a system with so many "incredible" online functions that are apparently worth $50 a year does not even have a web browser and have to justify the price by making specific console versions of websites. I'll save my $50 and stop caring about voice chat and statistics on my gamer-friends!

"Oh man, look here! PwnGuy22 is playing ODST and he killed 60 enemies! He also played Halo 3 for 12 hours yesterday!! I really should pay $50 a year to get important and useful information like this! This is an amazing feat the other consoles do not have!" If you're into this, then I guess:  Jump In... More power to you!

Yeah, the difference is that MS is a software company. You don't have to look any further than the solid manufacturing of the 360 to understand that... They should just stick to doing software which is just as flawed as their hardware anyway.. So what do they actually do well? Marketing aaaaaaand... Tricking people into buying their flawed products. I stopped being tricked after Windows ME crashed several times a day some years back.



akuseru said:
selnor said:
Umm yes it is. Facebook on the PS3 for example is a chore. Wheras M4 saw the benefit of a proper console service for Live. Thats the difference M$ are a software company. They understood the benefits of making a specific console version. This is just one example.

Umm, NO it is NOT... Yeah, facebook on PS3 is such a chore! Just like writing on these forums is a chore, or doing a search on google is a chore! Man I wish Sony / MS implemented a specific console version of all websites! Then I wouldn't have to open up a web browser (in MS case you can't even do that... lol) and write a couple of characters. You know what, having only facebook and NOT a web browser is actually fucking stupid. I can't believe that a system with so many "incredible" online functions that are apparently worth $50 a year does not even have a web browser and have to justify the price by making specific console versions of websites. I'll save my $50 and stop caring about voice chat and statistics on my gamer-friends!

"Oh man, look here! PwnGuy22 is playing ODST and he killed 60 enemies! He also played Halo 3 for 12 hours yesterday!! I really should pay $50 a year to get important and useful information like this! This is an amazing feat the other consoles do not have!" If you're into this, then I guess:  Jump In... More power to you!

Yeah, the difference is that MS is a software company. You don't have to look any further than the solid manufacturing of the 360 to understand that... They should just stick to doing software which is just as flawed as their hardware anyway.. So what do they actually do well? Marketing aaaaaaand... Tricking people into buying their flawed products. I stopped being tricked after Windows ME crashed several times a day some years back.

bravo ^ I like everything in that and it couldnt have been said better



Around the Network
akuseru said:
selnor said:
Umm yes it is. Facebook on the PS3 for example is a chore. Wheras M4 saw the benefit of a proper console service for Live. Thats the difference M$ are a software company. They understood the benefits of making a specific console version. This is just one example.

Umm, NO it is NOT... Yeah, facebook on PS3 is such a chore! Just like writing on these forums is a chore, or doing a search on google is a chore! Man I wish Sony / MS implemented a specific console version of all websites! Then I wouldn't have to open up a web browser (in MS case you can't even do that... lol) and write a couple of characters. You know what, having only facebook and NOT a web browser is actually fucking stupid. I can't believe that a system with so many "incredible" online functions that are apparently worth $50 a year does not even have a web browser and have to justify the price by making specific console versions of websites. I'll save my $50 and stop caring about voice chat and statistics on my gamer-friends!

"Oh man, look here! PwnGuy22 is playing ODST and he killed 60 enemies! He also played Halo 3 for 12 hours yesterday!! I really should pay $50 a year to get important and useful information like this! This is an amazing feat the other consoles do not have!" If you're into this, then I guess:  Jump In... More power to you!

Yeah, the difference is that MS is a software company. You don't have to look any further than the solid manufacturing of the 360 to understand that... They should just stick to doing software which is just as flawed as their hardware anyway.. So what do they actually do well? Marketing aaaaaaand... Tricking people into buying their flawed products. I stopped being tricked after Windows ME crashed several times a day some years back.

Ok. If I wanted to use the internet I'd use my laptop. PS3's browser is wqorse than using windows Vista. That says alot. No offence but I know loads of people who hate the PS3 browser, and many on VGchartz have said the same. Facebook and Twitter etc are social sites. They have been adapted to intergrate your Gamercard together. So they actually give you more than normal Facebook. Even better solcial networking than the normal sites. Thats the difference. One tried and easy route which turned out poor. One knew what they were targeting and beat the existing service.



Value is relative.



selnor said:
People who have and use Live Gold regularly understand why it is a paid service. It really is leagues ahead of the comp in the online service. If it wasn't people wouldn't pay.

Fallacious, because it has no real competition. Real competition would be an alternative set of online services allowing you similar results, among them playing online your 360 games.

If you love Halo 3 and want to play online you have no choice, but pay for live gold. So its intrinsic value might as well come from the fact that it unlocks the most beloved feature (network multiplayer) for the most beloved games on the platform.

If MS offered a live silver that included multiplayer, how much value would live gold have for most owners? A very reduced one, I suspect. Thus its value is mostly "borrowed" from the value of the software itself: unless you pay up each year, the software you bought is crippled in a variable degree, sometimes substantially.

This doesn't happen on other platforms, and as such it doesn't make sense to say that it's the quality of the online service that is selling it to the customers. It's simply a lock-in.



"All you need in life is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure." - Mark Twain

"..." - Gordon Freeman

WereKitten said:
selnor said:
People who have and use Live Gold regularly understand why it is a paid service. It really is leagues ahead of the comp in the online service. If it wasn't people wouldn't pay.

Fallacious, because it has no real competition. Real competition would be an alternative set of online services allowing you similar results, among them playing online your 360 games.

If you love Halo 3 and want to play online you have no choice, but pay for live gold. So its intrinsic value might as well come from the fact that it unlocks the most beloved feature (network multiplayer) for the most beloved games on the platform.

If MS offered a live silver that included multiplayer, how much value would live gold have for most owners? A very reduced one, I suspect. Thus its value is mostly "borrowed" from the value of the software itself: unless you pay up each year, the software you bought is crippled in a variable degree, sometimes substantially.

This doesn't happen on other platforms, and as such it doesn't make sense to say that it's the quality of the online service that is selling it to the customers. It's simply a lock-in.


For some who only play online yes I agree. But certainly the stability of playing online with Live shows over PSN. At least from my experience with the same connection disconnections on PSN are very frequent, but the same house with same speed can go hors with no loss on Live.



You know, after reading this thread, I've had a revelation. Why should I keep paying for Sirius Satellite Radio? Normal radio has all of the same features for free. Pay for internet? There's a free hotspot at my hospital! And, why do I have DirecTV? Free TV has all of the same features! Why am I paying prostitutes? My girlfriend has free vagina!! It's just as good.

Isn't it?

Also, while not paying for any of the previously mentioned services, I'm going to ridicule and condemn anyone who does pay.