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

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS3 Does Not Have "A Rich Online System Like Xbox Live" Says Yamauchi

From a dev perspective, it's probably true, although in some cases, with a creative developer, they can come up with costumized stuff that Live makes very difficult to do.

But PSN itself is fine, although Live is still better. Drives me crazy that very few PSN games have trials, I refuse to buy a game with no trial, and there are no "game pages", an easy access to every download, screenshot, and info on each game, like Live has.



Around the Network

How would he know? did he ever developed 360 game?



My respect for this guy went up.



Odd. Future. Wolf. Gang. Kill. Em. All. OFWGKTA Don't give a fuck!

Fuck Steve Harvey. FREE EARL!

Final Fantasy Versus XIII will be the GREATEST game EVER made!!!

I'd take a bullet for Square-Enix! 

 

Why is everything this man says put into a thread of its own. All that which has been posted the last couple of days are from the same interview! AAAAARRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!



he might playing FORZA 3 online!! /sarcasm



Around the Network

Reading the full thing he's clearly saying:

PSN
Pros - developers allowed freedom to determine online service provided
Cons - requires more developer effort to build up what they want to deliver

Live
Pros - more developed infrastructure and toolset
Cons - more restrictive on developers on what they can offer

He doesn't seem to be talking from a user perspective at all but a developer one, and from what I understand of each his comments sound pretty accurate to me.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Reasonable said:
Reading the full thing he's clearly saying:

PSN
Pros - developers allowed freedom to determine online service provided
Cons - requires more developer effort to build up what they want to deliver

Live
Pros - more developed infrastructure and toolset
Cons - more restrictive on developers on what they can offer

He doesn't seem to be talking from a user perspective at all but a developer one, and from what I understand of each his comments sound pretty accurate to me.

This is what he's trying to say.



BladeOfGod said:
How would he know? did he ever developed 360 game?

You don't need to have a published game on 360 to know that. He's a developer with a lot of resources, and even though he is first party, i'm sure they know 360 features perfectly and have the system studied, if nothing else, to learn what the competition does and how they do it. I wouldn't be surprised if they had a 360 devkit there as well, it's not an uncommon thing to do, judging from my experience at studios.



BladeOfGod said:
How would he know? did he ever developed 360 game?

No. However, I'm sure he can find 500 dollars for a 360, a couple of games and a year of live and experience it for himself.

OT: The man speaks the truth. PSN doesn't force basic features on dev's but the ability for dev's to implement such features are there, aswell as the option to implementing features that live doesn't offer. It's extra work on the dev's end though.



4 ≈ One

TheTruthHurts! said:
While Live is the superior service (IMO), PSN offers a wealth of content (free of charge) to it's customers.

I give him props for commenting (honestly) concerning his thoughts regarding Live and what it offers. I have a lot of respect for that.

he didn't mean it in that way, he mean it because each title have to built their own online infractucture instead of using console defaults.

but also an advance because they can try stuff using a infracture would be  prohibited.

in the end, the user experience could be even better.