![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Sony NOT to have centralized online for the PS3!
- Thread starter steviep
- Start date
DragonMasterAlex
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2005
- Messages
- 2,993
steviep said:
Definitely a mistake. PS2 doesn't have a *tenth* the online support that Xbox does. If this is indeed true, MS and Nintendo will be the new kings of the market. Rock on.
Jason
RoffleCopter
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2005
- Messages
- 1,910
wow gg sony big mistake but i guess it would be "hard" to find money for a centralized online service since most of their assets would be towards building a system with really expensive parts thats going to sell for more than the x360, not have a hard drive, AND make up for a declining demand for their electronics
In the end, people buy systems for games. I don't play my PS2 online, I play it for its games. It has some good games. A lot of mediocre ones as well, but enough good ones for me to purchase it. Luckily I'm one of the few people who didn't have to purchase a second PS2 due to shoddy lasers/drivetrays, but I think it's on the verge of dying...
Regardless, this isn't a thread-crap toward the PS2 or the PS3. I posted it so that people here know that with the PS3's online capability, they can expect "more of the same" as this gen. Wheras the other 2 companies are more focused on a centralized service.
Regardless, this isn't a thread-crap toward the PS2 or the PS3. I posted it so that people here know that with the PS3's online capability, they can expect "more of the same" as this gen. Wheras the other 2 companies are more focused on a centralized service.
Wow, the PS3 has taken some cuts in the past few months. I now officially, have no interest in a PS3. If Nintendo does decide to add HD support in the Revolution, I will re-convert into a !!!!!! faster than you can say Super Smash Brothers Online! The X360 I would anticipate more if it were released later, it feels like a rushed product with no real incentive to buy (at least in 05/ early 06). I am all for centralization, more orderly that way.
Isaac, I'm not even sure why Nintendo even said "no HD" in the first place. The system IS powerful enough (hell, Xbox 1 has enough power for 720p) and it will have component out, as well as I THINK VGA out (it was previously commented by Iwata that you'd be able to hook it up to a computer monitor, not sure if that still stands). To be honest, I don't see why they'd say it, unless they plan on removing the VGA out for cost reasons. Either way, they are certainly re-considering their statement since they said it, from the rumblings coming both out of IBM and ATI.
As for the PS3, isn't it too early to rag on the system? After all, it likely won't be seen until E3, and won't be out until 2nd half '06, like the Revolution. What kind of 'cuts' are you talking about?
As for the PS3, isn't it too early to rag on the system? After all, it likely won't be seen until E3, and won't be out until 2nd half '06, like the Revolution. What kind of 'cuts' are you talking about?
steviep said:
Werd. On the first part of your reply.
As far as cuts, I guess I should not have used that word. I kinda typed it out without re-reading it. I was more referring to the wanning Blueray support and all the developers beyaching about the pain in developing for the PS3. The lack of a standard harddrive and the absence of a central online community kind of added to the mis-use of the word "cut." I guess I am very surprised that I am not excited for all 3 systems, I'm only interested in one for right now.
Next years E3 is going to PWN!
Maybe they'll put flash memory instead of an HD like the Revolution?
I understand what you're saying, though... there have been quite a bit of negatives on both the PS3 and the X360... and the Revolution without HD is bad for 15% of the population.
I understand what you're saying, though... there have been quite a bit of negatives on both the PS3 and the X360... and the Revolution without HD is bad for 15% of the population.
Naldo said:
PC gaming has been semi-centralized since the development of the master servers that tell applications like Gamespy, ASE, etc where you can go play whatever game you play. It's been a very, very long time since PC gaming has required calling your friends, or hanging out in IRC, to get servers going and play together. But even chat programs help centralize PC gaming too.
But you are right, you dont really "need" an XBox Live type of system. If we did, the PC centralized services like Heat.net, Dwango, Mplayer, Ten, etc would still be thriving today.
Im not sure how PS2 online gaming works, but I dont think the reason for so little participation has anything to do with not having a centralized service.. Its because the damn console wasnt released with a built in NIC, and Sony made it clear a long time ago online play wasnt their focus.
Erasmus354
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 9,450
Sony is not interested in what would make a better gaming experience. Microsofts attitude towards the Xbox360 and their gaming program in general is very consumer-centric. I applaud Microsoft for the attitude they have taken towards creating a rewarding experience. They not only are providing a great service in Xbox Live, but they are working with direct competitors like Apple to make sure that consumer electronic devices work with the X360.
Sony on the other hand gets convicted of price fixing and fined millions of dollars (Music division), installs root kits on your computer that cause instability and open you up to possible attacks. Now they decide that they dont care how inconvenient not having a centralized online system is. Sony simply is not interested in anything but our money. The PS3 to me reeks of Sony sitting in their chairs saying "Those stupid Americans will buy anything that has the Playstation name on it."
This is not to bash the PS3, I am sure it will be a powerful system and have great games. This is a rant against Sony.
EDIT : About the price fixing...at least I got my 7 dollars from Sony lol!!
Sony on the other hand gets convicted of price fixing and fined millions of dollars (Music division), installs root kits on your computer that cause instability and open you up to possible attacks. Now they decide that they dont care how inconvenient not having a centralized online system is. Sony simply is not interested in anything but our money. The PS3 to me reeks of Sony sitting in their chairs saying "Those stupid Americans will buy anything that has the Playstation name on it."
This is not to bash the PS3, I am sure it will be a powerful system and have great games. This is a rant against Sony.
EDIT : About the price fixing...at least I got my 7 dollars from Sony lol!!
Erasmus354 said:
I feel the exact same way.
Oh, and their Music division isn;t the only part of Sony that gets fined for that crap. Remember they were ordered to pay $90 million in damages for ripping off the dualshock controller technology. Then again so was MS, but they atleast fessed up and made good on it.
I have been saying it for a LONG time, Sony is not out to cater to ANY of us, they are out to tout their proprietary hardware and software so they can fix prices and make the most money they can.
I'd like to know the context of the original report. Was this another "unnamed sources inside Sony" story? If so, I'm automatically discounting it. "Unnamed sources" said that the PS3 would cost almost 50,000 yen. Then, a few days later, it was 40,000 yen. Sony leaving internet play to their third parties is certainly true of the PS2, but that's due to its networking never really taking off in the way Sony had wanted.
Sorry, I'll wait for an official announcement, thanks. I'm expecting one November 20, 21, or 22.
Sorry, I'll wait for an official announcement, thanks. I'm expecting one November 20, 21, or 22.
steviep said:
That depends; can you? The article starts off as such:
"The Official Playstation Magazine reported that Sony has elected not to use a central online gaming service for its upcoming PS3 console. Instead of using a unified system like Microsoft's Xbox Live or Nintendo's soon-to-be-launched Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection, Sony is taking the same path as it did with the PS2."
Note that nothing is said as to the context of OPM's original story. It's simply said that OPM reported this. It does not say what OPM's source was. Given that there isn't an official quote or a named official at SCE, I'm inclined to think this is another "unnamed source." This automatically makes the report questionable in my eyes.
Now, the question for you is, since when were you so bitter and sarcastic? Talk about mood swings compared to prior threads.
Sorry, Terpfen. I'm normally quite mannered and well-reasoned, but I thought you SOMEHOW missed the many times they said "Official Playstation Magazine" - and usually when something comes from the official magazine of the system, you'd assume that it wasn't made up 
steviep said:Sorry, Terpfen. I'm normally quite mannered and well-reasoned, but I thought you SOMEHOW missed the many times they said "Official Playstation Magazine" - and usually when something comes from the official magazine of the system, you'd assume that it wasn't made up
OPM is published by Ziff-Davis, not Sony. "Official" is just a name. OPM can publish what they want; Sony isn't bound to it just because of the magazine's title.
steviep said:
I think its just a hunch. Take some steam away from the 360's launch.
But most people have already made up their mind as to if they will get it on launch day and if rumors are holding true the xbox 360 is going to be sold out. So in the end it may end up taking little if any steam away from the launch.
steviep said:
The Xbox 360 launches on November 22. Historically, competitors to a new product will announce details of their offering near the new product's launch, in order to cut off as much pre-launch hype as possible.
Dragon Quest VIII was originally going to be released on November 22, meaning it would've been Sony and Square's big-name title to distract from the X360's launch, just as Final Fantasy VIII was released on the same day as the Dreamcast. But since Square moved the release date up to November 15, it's more likely Sony will make some sort of major PS3 announcement to head off the X360.
DarkSeraphim
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2005
- Messages
- 279
If this is true, it is a huge mistake.
Broadband becomes more and more popular every single day. It isn't some secluded option anymore...it's a part of everyday life for millions of people. Gamers are going to want to be able to go online and have an experience that is rewarding and easy to use. Without a centralized service, it becomes hard to implement standards like voice chat or communication across multiple games. A friend's list is hard to keep as well (And that is one of my favorite parts of XBL, as simple as it is.)
It's just a bad move all around.
Broadband becomes more and more popular every single day. It isn't some secluded option anymore...it's a part of everyday life for millions of people. Gamers are going to want to be able to go online and have an experience that is rewarding and easy to use. Without a centralized service, it becomes hard to implement standards like voice chat or communication across multiple games. A friend's list is hard to keep as well (And that is one of my favorite parts of XBL, as simple as it is.)
It's just a bad move all around.
I have to agree.
I want to have a friends list across multiple games and not limit it to each game. Xbox live is very good at how it implemented friends lists but could still use some improvements such as adding comments to each friend.
And yes I would like to see mics in every game and without a system similar to xbox live we might not see that.
I find it funny how a lot of people didnt really care to much about xbox live untill well into its launch and now its such a big deal. I remember getting very angry when EGM would rave about PS2's online and then not talk about xbox live at all.
Howevor I am not sure that this peice of news is legit. I cant understand why sony would do this. I will wait for an official announcement.
There could be some advantages to not having centralizes online though.
I want to have a friends list across multiple games and not limit it to each game. Xbox live is very good at how it implemented friends lists but could still use some improvements such as adding comments to each friend.
And yes I would like to see mics in every game and without a system similar to xbox live we might not see that.
I find it funny how a lot of people didnt really care to much about xbox live untill well into its launch and now its such a big deal. I remember getting very angry when EGM would rave about PS2's online and then not talk about xbox live at all.
Howevor I am not sure that this peice of news is legit. I cant understand why sony would do this. I will wait for an official announcement.
There could be some advantages to not having centralizes online though.
morpheus6d9
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2005
- Messages
- 1,230
i would have thought that ps3 would have central online too bad
DarkSeraphim
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2005
- Messages
- 279
erorr404 said:
Popular PC titles have a huge backing by people who buy/rent custom servers and extreme broadband solutions. If this news is true, developers are going to have to pay the cost of bandwith (Which means most of them will either be cheap or just not bother at all). Regular people like you and I could host games, but it would be running straight off of the PS3 hardware and would also be limited by the fact that most home broadband connections wouldn't be able to support a game with a decent amount of players in it.
DarkSeraphim
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2005
- Messages
- 279
The fact that a first-entry console is even competing in the Playstation era is a testament in and of itself. Your ignorant sarcasm is amusing, but it doesn't change the fact that Microsoft has sold over twenty million Xbox units.
XBL is a huge selling point. Whether or not you are intelligent enough to recognize it as such isn't really relevant.
XBL is a huge selling point. Whether or not you are intelligent enough to recognize it as such isn't really relevant.
barely 10% of all xbox users signed up for live, and it cost millions of dollars for microsoft. (yeah, yeah, they got trillions more)
pretty much a failure
look at the top 3 games on live
halo, ranbow six, and counterstrike
why is a console online service dominated by FPS's?
certainly cant be the controller
opened the door for xbox 360 live maybe?
doubtful, if it only gets the same 10%
online console gaming is generally just a pathetic wasteland of 12 year olds looking to swear at you and feel tough.
and what ever happened to the "marketplace" they hyped where players could buy faster cars or a better quarterback for a few dollars and use in multiplayer?
guess that guy got fired.
pretty much a failure
look at the top 3 games on live
halo, ranbow six, and counterstrike
why is a console online service dominated by FPS's?
certainly cant be the controller
opened the door for xbox 360 live maybe?
doubtful, if it only gets the same 10%
online console gaming is generally just a pathetic wasteland of 12 year olds looking to swear at you and feel tough.
and what ever happened to the "marketplace" they hyped where players could buy faster cars or a better quarterback for a few dollars and use in multiplayer?
guess that guy got fired.
dopefishzzz
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 20, 2005
- Messages
- 269
PS3 as no online support.
Revolution as no HDTV support.
The console war is over for me.
I'm getting a 360.
Revolution as no HDTV support.
The console war is over for me.
I'm getting a 360.
Erasmus354
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 9,450
michealo said:
Microsoft losing money on XBL is exactly what I was talking about in my earlier post. Microsoft is TRYING to make a BETTER gaming experience. They are willing to take a hit now because they believe in the long term it will make gaming better, and they are probably correct. Now this isn't to say that Microsofts goals aren't making money, but at least they believe the way to do that is not only to make a good console...but to make a good gaming experience.
Also, the marketplace is for XBL 2 (for the 360) so of course you haven't seen it yet...the damn console isn't out yet...
DarkSeraphim said:
The GameCube sold 20 million units as well, without a hint of centralized online support.
XBL is a huge plus for the Xbox. That does not necessarily translate into mass-market sales. Is it so difficult to believe that most gamers do NOT care about multiplayer games? This is true of the PC market as well.
Kevin Lowe
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2004
- Messages
- 766
erorr404 said:
Suppose you want to play against one of your old friends from back home. Do you want to call them up, set up a time, sign in to the previously agreed-upon title, wait until they call or IM you to let you know they're online, choose a server from the browser, both sign into it, and hope there's two open slots? What about if someone else wants to join you - do you take the call/IM while you're playing? Go to the console/menu to find the server IP to give them?
Or would you prefer to just call them up, set up a time, sign in to any Live-aware title you want, play until Live notifies you that they're online, swap games, and accept the party invite they've probably already sent you? That's it - from then on, it keeps your group together, provides voice chat in the game and the lobby, sets up matches so you don't have to look for a server that's not crowded or empty, and handles all the details of letting more of your friends join your group.
I love PC gaming, but Live is just massively easier. (On top of that, more of my friends have Xboxes than high-end gaming PCs, so it's easier to get them in on a game, especially since they can just hop on as split-screen guests, something PC games don't support very often).
DarkSeraphim
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2005
- Messages
- 279
michealo said:
So a subscription service unlike any other in the console industry having over two-million subscribers is a failure? That's news to me.
FTR, mind backing up your claims that they're losing money on it?
Terpfen said:
...Nintendo has been around slightly longer than Microsoft
They have a userbase that is twenty years in the making. Microsoft just started and they've already got a comparable level of consumer support overall. The Xbox also has a wide-variety of worthwhile third-party support. Nintendo still seems to believe that they can do it on their own...which is obviously wrong, considering that their Fall line-up is absolutely pathetic.erorr404 said:
In order to host the game, the server would have to be able to recognize the code that the game is made of, correct? I doubt that there is a PC on the market that could host a PS3 title because of its unique architecture.