View Full Version : Sony decides not to compete with Xbox 360
Is this sony's down fall?
"It had been assumed that Sony would offer up their own unified online service with the PS3 in an attempt to compete with Microsoft’s Xbox Live. Now, it appears that is not the case.
Instead of a central service, the online experience will be left completely up to the developer. This will require you to register for each game you play, and you will have no common identity from game to game. The quality of service could also suffer.
My only thought is… WHAT?! What is Sony thinking? Here we are, going into the next-gen, and Sony will once again lack a current-gen feature. Xbox Live already has so much momentum. Imagine it after another entire generation… I dont see how Sony could possibly compete with it then."
9mmCensor
11-06-05, 03:53 PM
again. You CANT link to comics that arn't PG.
Rather than just pointing this fact out, why not actually take action, like PMing a Games mod? -- Oni :sn:
Alucard
11-06-05, 04:01 PM
Edited the link - Oni :sn:
lol :clap:, as far as sony not including online gaming I think its a very dumb move.
Man, even the big N has a unified online model ready to launch with the Revolution. Sony could seriously be dropping the ball on this one.
First, their console will run about $700 CAD merely 'cause of Cell and Blu-Ray, now they don't have a proper unified online model. They need to rethink their stance on at the very least their online model, or they could very well end up losing not only the North American market, but the Japanese market as well (the Japanese market being their strongest).
telexen
11-06-05, 04:09 PM
Dumbest...move...ever
I swear I don't know how Sony stays in business...yeah they're a huge business but they make the dumbest choices a company could possibly make.
consumers are dumber
and i like the socom3 online system much better than xbox live
maxio098ui
11-06-05, 04:49 PM
i am a sony fanboy on the edge of buying a xbox 1 reason i dont know anything about the new ps3 and microsoft has let us play and spectate theve showed and explained
sony is just like in the old days a teenage soldier the feeling of invincebility
xTrEmEoVrClOcKr
11-06-05, 04:59 PM
Dumb move ...
for such a multinational corp constantly trying to combine all their services/products this seems like a crazy stance from sony... why create an 'all in one home entertainment unit' (as they like to call it) and then seriously limit its appeal and potential sales?
And CAD comics are great...I read em every day they go up :D
Scott9027
11-06-05, 07:50 PM
Removing the link -- Oni :sn:
ps3 will compete with 360 without an xbox live type service. a lot of people dont like xbox live especially considering it has a subscription fee and ps2 never has.
3DFlyer
11-06-05, 08:51 PM
Sony may very well be in legal trouble after all th destruction their backdoor trojan caused people. Let's all hope so! :)
PWatterson
11-06-05, 10:26 PM
I swear Sony doesn't have the sharpest tools in the shed. Why wouldn't you include one unified online gaming service? I mean come on, that is where all the fun in gaming is. Sure there is single player, but what happens when you beat it or get bored of it. With multiplayer, the same thing never happens twice.
maxio098ui
11-07-05, 12:35 AM
it might be cause even tho xbox live was subscript and sonys wasnt xbox live had more success so sony didnt bother ooooooodddd theyre just to damn lasy
again. You CANT link to comics that arn't PG.
If it really isnt PG then you shouldn't have quoted the link ;)
Well, if you KNEW it wasn't PG, you shouldn't have posted it in the first place. -- Oni:sn:
Blackmage
11-07-05, 03:44 AM
i don't mind if i want to game online i do it on my PC.
xbox had a subscription but imo you got more from the service than anything sony offered for free....
fuzzba11
11-07-05, 05:09 AM
i don't mind if i want to game online i do it on my PC.
Exactly...and Sony already has online games on the PC to deal with (Final Fantasy)
Today on [H]'s front page there is a link to an article claiming sony won't release the PS3 till end of 2006.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001393147
telexen
11-07-05, 12:11 PM
Today on [H]'s front page there is a link to an article claiming sony won't release the PS3 till end of 2006.
I thought we heard that rumor like two months ago
I hope it doesn't delay Halo 3 :(
I'll buy an Xbox 360 when Halo 3 comes out.
Today on [H]'s front page there is a link to an article claiming sony won't release the PS3 till end of 2006.
I swear, Sony is pulling a Sega on this one. The actions they've taken with this new console alone will throw them right out of not only the North American Market, but the Asian market as well. A hugely expensive console, no proper online model (look at how well XBL! does. And even Nintendo's proposed online model will allow players to download and play any game, from any Nintendo console except for the Gamecube), and now a release date of 4Q 2k6. They're not going to be able to compete as effectively as they should.
everclock
11-07-05, 12:29 PM
Where is an article that proves this?
I found it @ IGN:
In a question regarding controller types
Q: What makes the controller so revolutionary then?
A: At E3 2005, Nintendo's executive of vice president of sales and marketing, Reginald Fils-Aime, offered a hint.
"We announced the ability to download and play the best NES games, S-NES games, N64 games, in addition to Revolution games and GameCube games," he said in an IGN/G4 interview. "If you put those controllers all lined up together, they're all very different. So think about what kind of device is going to allow you to play all those different types of games. It's pretty interesting."
I'll keep searching for something more difinitive.
edit: More difinitive, from the same article:
Q: Will Revolution owners be able to connect online and download classic Nintendo games?
A: Yes. Nintendo announced at E3 2005 that Revolution would be able to go online wirelessly and download classic Nintendo games. Nintendo has not yet announced what titles will be available for download. However, it has confirmed that Revolution owners could theoretically download every NES, Super-NES and Nintendo 64 game ever made. The publisher is reportedly already working with third party publisher to ensure that popular third party games are also available to download.
The article is from September 12, 2005, so it's not exactly old ;)
I think it's a big mistake by Sony, too.
Sure, there'll be a couple specific games where their developers will include good online service, but most will be lame or non-existant.
Online functionality will continue to become a bigger and bigger part of console gaming. It's definitely a lot bigger deal in regard to the success of the console than blue-ray is.
The subscription fee of Live is not a big deal to console gamers, either. It comes out to just over $4 a month...or about the cost of one new game a year. It's far and away well worth the cost to anyone who uses the console a significant amount of time.
I'm starting to wonder if maybe Nintendo might have a chance of overtaking Sony...at least in Japan.
Seven7Thirty30
11-07-05, 12:48 PM
Sounds like a smart move to me. By allowing game developers to create and manage servers and networks for their own games, the gamer will have more benefits that tailor to a game's specific needs and options. If monthly fees are involved, they could be cheaper. In any case, I don't think it'll hurt Sony at all. The PS3 will sell itself.
Live already tailors and caters specifically to each game. I don't know of anything gamers would want that a developer would do in running their own system that they can't do in Live.
A unified online system does not at all mean that every game gets the same treatment and features.
Consoles don't sell themselves....games sell consoles. History is littered with technologically superior consoles that flopped in face of lesser machines that had more fun games.
telexen
11-07-05, 01:18 PM
Consoles don't sell themselves....games sell consoles. History is littered with technologically superior consoles that flopped in face of lesser machines that had more fun games.
Yup
How else could the PS2 outsell the Xbox? It was released a year later, but the Xbox was a vastly superior system.
Gabbiani
11-07-05, 01:36 PM
This makes me happy. Sony has been the only one to hold on to the things that I enjoy in console gaming. If I want a first person shooter (Halo sucks) I will play it on the pc anyways. If I want to play an RPG, survival horror,action, puzzle game I want it to be on the couch and I want the multiplayer to be with ther person next to me on the couch. I want to be able to do whatever I want with my hardware without the manufacturer scanning it and blocking my box because I added functionallity they should have in the first place.
Others will dissagree, but I couldn't imagine playing Contra with someone half way around the world.
** Edit ** Everything I have heard about M$ and big N with their online crap is that its more of a marketplace than a meeting place anyways.
Seven7Thirty30
11-07-05, 04:16 PM
Live already tailors and caters specifically to each game. I don't know of anything gamers would want that a developer would do in running their own system that they can't do in Live.
Consoles don't sell themselves....games sell consoles. History is littered with technologically superior consoles that flopped in face of lesser machines that had more fun games.
If you have to be technical about it. When I say PS3 I mean the console, the games, the accessories, and all merchandise associated with it. No one said that Live doesn't cater to each game. I just think that the quality of the network will improve through a competitive market. Game developers will not only have to sell their software, but their network as well.
A unified online system does not at all mean that every game gets the same treatment and features.
?......................that's what LIVE is.
YellowDart
11-07-05, 04:19 PM
I think Sony may be shooting themselves in the foot on this one. Developers can be lazy too. Sure, some developers will make some good online functionality (Socom3 being mentioned above), but most will probably not. At least with XBL, the developer is more inclined to add the online functionality because a lot of the legwork is already done for them. They don't have to write their netcode from the ground up. They don't have to host their own servers (all game hosting on XBL is done client-side anyway). So, from this perspective, developers may be more likely to include online play, and publishers may be willing to shell out the extra money for the developer to add it, since it'll be less work than creating everything from scratch.
Seven7Thirty30
11-07-05, 04:22 PM
Suffice to say, it'll be interesting to see where it all goes. There's nothing that says Sony can't develop a network similar to XBL later. We still have a year left.
DarkPurity
11-07-05, 06:23 PM
Sony's taking a dive this time, hardcore. First, Halo 3 is scheduled for release on the same day as the PS3 release, and now this???
Gates gots him another market.
Aidenswarrior
11-07-05, 09:19 PM
Yup
How else could the PS2 outsell the Xbox? It was released a year later, but the Xbox was a vastly superior system.
playstation had better games. The only reason xbox was considered a good system was because of halo and halo2. Halo, compared to alot of first person shooters, was not that great and wasnt innovative at all. It was like tribes on steroids. And i find it funny that KOTOR or KOTOR II, cant remember which one, outsold halo on the xbox. so yea. that is my opinion.
I dont really care about online play on consoles. That is what pcs for. I wont be buying an Xbox360. Played it at compusa and it was more like Xbox 1.5. Sony and nintendo will be receiving my paychecks.
Seven7Thirty30
11-08-05, 07:30 AM
I second that. I'll buy the Nintendo so that I can reminisce my adolescent years playing games like Guerilla Wars, Contra, Marble Madness, Bubble Bobble, etc. I'll also buy the PS3 because it's going to be one mean motha.
twEEkerAreUs
11-08-05, 08:14 AM
Sony not releaseing a built in game matching making service similar to Xbox Live is reason enough for people NOT TO BUY IT. A good chunk of people all say the same thing "PS3 won't have decent setup similar to Live". Developers depending on the game, usually do a pretty crappy job especially if it isn't a hyped game when it comes to this. This pretty much will make me not buy a PS3 if it is the case, but then again consoles are not #1 for gaming to me either.
o0OBruceLeeO0o
11-08-05, 09:28 AM
I think both systems will be fun to play. :)
?......................that's what LIVE is.
As far as I can tell, Xbox developers have trememdous leeway in their interaction with Live.
For example, look at Mechassault 1....pretty much your standard PC style "setup a game and wait for people to join" situation. Along with an area for content download. All in Mechassault game menus.
Then look at Halo 2... Automated matchmaking for an array of gametypes and a full blown ranking system. Choice of ranked or unranked game types. Or, you can create a party and create your own games just like a LAN party. Also with content download and in Halo 2's game menues. It also interacts with Bungie's website where you can check stats, play lists on game types, and some other stuff.
Socom 3 has been mentioned as being really good for Playstation in this regard....I haven't seen its online functions. Is there anything it does that couldn't be done on Live?
Generally, I'm the type of person that's all for competition in the market place. But, there's some things that are better accomplished with a centralized system. A Live type system is one of them. It's cheaper to execute than dozens/hundreds of seperate systems. Friend lists and communication bridge across the game titles. Games can get to market faster. A more consistent level of quality. More games with online support. More people are equipped with voice communication.
I don't begrudge anyone who's desires and priorities in their gaming leads them to use whatever platform regardless of its popularity or whatever... If a person wants the nostalgia of old games from the 80's and 90's, Nintendo will probably be a great choice. If a person doesn't care about multiplayer and PS3 has the single player games that they like...then the PS3 is a great choice for that person.
But, looking in terms of the majority of console gamers, I think online multiplayer is playing a large and growing role in their gaming experience. Sony's choice here probably isn't going to be a profitable one even though there are certainly some people who don't mind.
snyper1982
11-08-05, 11:29 AM
All the arguing is lame. Just buy all of them, I know I am going to. Out of all the current gen consoles, my xbox got more use by far. Only games I played on ps2 was gta series, and ffx. other thn that my ps2 just collect dust. my gc wa even worse. probably have about 25-30 total gameplay hours on it.
Yup
How else could the PS2 outsell the Xbox? It was released a year later, but the Xbox was a vastly superior system.
It certainly wasn't because the PS2 had vastly superior games. It had FAR more to do with name recognition from the PS1 and ignorant consumers.
It certainly wasn't because the PS2 had vastly superior games. It had FAR more to do with name recognition from the PS1 and ignorant consumers.
Interestingly, MS execs have mentioned that they viewed Xbox 1 as them "buying a ticket" into the console business rather than an attempt to make profit with the system. They planned to try to make money with the next gen after they were an established figure. It will be interesting to see how the name recognition part works out this time around.
Archer36
11-08-05, 01:44 PM
Well I really didn't mind the way we had PS2 online games, I have Socom and Socom II and love em both online is great. I have a few others but they don't get played as much. As mentioned sony still has a year a lot could happen in a month let alone year. The only thing that buged me about the PS3 is the screwed controller.
Oh and Oni looks like they had your work cut out for you in this thread ;)
as far as sony not including online gaming I think its a very dumb move.
IMO alot of average users wouldnt know where to start with online gaming, personally, if i wanted to game online, i'd play on my pc.
Go Sony for wanting to be different :)
DarkPurity
11-08-05, 01:55 PM
To add to the carnage, SONY was so focused on this system that they didn't notice till too late that MS bought Square-Enix and Capcom contracts right out from under them.
The first Resident Evil and FF games will be released on the Xbox 360 out of the next gen. Survival horror and RPGs have always been Sony's bastion. Those, combined with how rediculous it will be when the 360 drops in price to sell incredible volumes the day that the PS3 and Halo 3 are released, will push MS in the lead.
A bit of trivia: More copies of Halo 2 have sold worldwide than the entire Super Mario franchise has sold in gaming history.
snyper1982
11-08-05, 02:33 PM
Dfferent is not always a good thing, but yes lets cheer sony because they can do no wrong.
deathman20
11-08-05, 04:04 PM
Sony's taking a dive this time, hardcore. First, Halo 3 is scheduled for release on the same day as the PS3 release, and now this???
Gates gots him another market.
So what Halo 3 is getting push back to late 06 now also?
Overall I could care less if Sony competes for it or not. But since they arn't at least it leaves them more programers/coders for developing better games and such.
They bought squares contract? Wow the PS3 really is doomed. Squaresoft and FF7 is one of the reasons the PS1 did so well. Hell I bought a N64 because I thought Square was going to be making the FF series on that console, boy was I mad when I found that they weren't
While I can see why a lot of people favor an xbox live approach I stand by Sony's decision. I like the way they did multiplayer in the past. Plus, it's not like this is counting them out of the competition.
Blackmage
11-08-05, 05:13 PM
i can see some mayjor fanboy action in this thread i have owned all consoles XBOX GC PS2 and i like the Ps2 best, why beacuse it suits my style of gaming more as some people are best suited with an xbox or gc. and beacuse i no what i like im going to buy it so im getting a ps3 like some people like xbox so they will buy a 360.
are all you fanboys ok now :)
snyper1982
11-08-05, 05:20 PM
i can see some mayjor fanboy action in this thread i have owned all consoles XBOX GC PS2 and i like the Ps2 best, why beacuse it suits my style of gaming more as some people are best suited with an xbox or gc. and beacuse i no what i like im going to buy it so im getting a ps3 like some people like xbox so they will buy a 360.
are all you fanboys ok now :)
You see the fanboy'ism too? Haha. See I owned them all too, but I liked the xbox better, most of the good games come out on either system so it doesnt matter that much. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
I don't care what consoles you own or have owned.
I don't care how many games you own on these consoles.
I don't care if you've gamed until your eyes bleed on every one.
The fanboy fighting stops. Now. This is not an option. Further arguing and flaming will result in warnings and bans. I've already cleaned this thread up once, I will not do it again.
-- Oni :sn:
deathman20
11-08-05, 05:27 PM
I owned both PS2 and Xbox, and at the same time. They had both ups and downs, in the start I prefered PS2, but now I prefer Xbox.
YellowDart
11-08-05, 08:53 PM
I'd also be curious to see what MS decides to do with Halo 3. It was initially supposed to be launched the same day as PS3 to "steal their thunder"... but with the PS3 being pushed back, it's hard to say. By purchasing the Square Enix and Capcom contracts, MS has stolen a good amount of thunder already. Halo 3 was kind of the "ace up MS's sleeve" so to speak. I'd be interested to see if Bungie takes the extra time to add more features and polish to the game... not that any of us have any idea of what wonderous things Bungie holds in store for us... :p
Polish Fury
11-08-05, 09:04 PM
After Halo 2 was released many of the original Bungie people left either for Wideload or elsewhere. The Bungie that is making Halo 3 is a completely diffrent animal, this isn't the developer we knew and loved from the Marathon days, and I am very curious to see what they do with the series.
Scott9027
11-08-05, 09:25 PM
that scares me badly
Wow it is getting hot and heavy in here LOL!
OC Noob
11-09-05, 02:18 AM
To add to the carnage, SONY was so focused on this system that they didn't notice till too late that MS bought Square-Enix and Capcom contracts right out from under them.
The first Resident Evil and FF games will be released on the Xbox 360 out of the next gen. Survival horror and RPGs have always been Sony's bastion. Those, combined with how rediculous it will be when the 360 drops in price to sell incredible volumes the day that the PS3 and Halo 3 are released, will push MS in the lead.
A bit of trivia: More copies of Halo 2 have sold worldwide than the entire Super Mario franchise has sold in gaming history.
I'd be pretty hard pressed to believe that bit of trivia. Where did you hear that?
Super Mario Bros games have sold/distributed well over 100 million copies including the originals distributed with NES systems (over 40 million alone).
A good demonstration of how a unified online system can be more than just multiplayer gaming is demonstrated in the "Kiosk sticky controllers, annoying kids" video here:
http://www.gametrailers.com/e3_2k5_xb360.php
Its like the 5th video from the bottom at this point.
ps if anyone would like to discuss my previous (oops) comments about the power of the Xbox 360 vs the Xbox, the number of copies of games sold I can provide links and more information via PMs (yes it will be civil and free of the term ignorant). Anyway, if you disagree and want to discuss it I can provide you with more information and feel free to do the same for me via PMs.
deathBOB
11-09-05, 02:10 PM
I may not get a PS3 because of all the Sony DRM bull****. Not the I like Microsoft a whole lot better.
I really can't justify upgrading my comp with consoles this nice.
jadakada
11-09-05, 02:11 PM
doesn't mario games make up like 4 of the top 10 selling games of all time? How does Halo 2... 1 game outsell the entire franchise? Any real proof? I have a hard time believing it. Maybee Halo 2 passed every mario game in the all time list, but it didnt pass them all combined.
I have an xbox and a GC and love both. I have los of friends with PS2 so I think I've got a pretty wide experience base.
The PS2 online capabilities are good on ertain games but what I realy loved about live was the ability to talk to people playing completly different games and meet up with them without waiting for them to appear on the right game. This standardisation is worth the money for me because of this. The idea that all the online UIs are the same is not true. Halo2 has an awesome system while mechassault wasn't to my taste at all and now I only use LAN to do multiplayer on it. Having the seperate services of the PS2 can be good but it dumps a load more work on the devs.
The 360 comes with free silver membership anyway so you can still talk to your friends, download new content and get a feel for it before paying anything. £40 a year isn't much to pay considering the service although I would prefer it if they took a wider range of payment options or had some kind of time card system where you could get it for a week to play with friends or maybe buy access to a tournament where you can only play tourney matches if that was all you were interested in.
My major gripe with the PS2 that stopped me from buying one myself, was the controller. Despite the complaints about the (admittedly massive) xbox controller the official PS2 controller is incredibly uncomfortable and the shoulder buttons hard to get to. Then again I have big hands which is why I still use the original xbox controller. The GC has the best controller in my opinion due to its simple design.
YellowDart
11-09-05, 07:32 PM
My major gripe with the PS2 that stopped me from buying one myself, was the controller. Despite the complaints about the (admittedly massive) xbox controller the official PS2 controller is incredibly uncomfortable and the shoulder buttons hard to get to. Then again I have big hands which is why I still use the original xbox controller. The GC has the best controller in my opinion due to its simple design.
I agree w/ ya there. The controllers for the PS2 are tiny. As huge as the original XB controllers were, they were SOOOOOOOOOOOOO much more comfortable for me. Again, I have bigger hands... so it was a natural fit. My wife hated the big controllers. To this day, I still use the big fugly original controllers b/c they're the most comfortable. I hope they offer the big controllers w/ the XB360.
DarkPurity
11-10-05, 07:31 AM
I played a demo XBOX360 at the Wal Mart in Oak Ridge, TN. Certain bit of satisfaction, seeing better graphics on my PC.....but still very impressive. Call of Duty Demo was playing, and the rendering was spectacular for a console.
Sorry, man. They come stock with a controller that is actually slightly smaller than the small controller that was released with the late-gen Xboxes.
snyper1982
11-10-05, 09:22 AM
I don't have a problem with controllers for any of the consoles really, except the damned small ones for xbox. The buttons are layed out in like the exact opposite direction of the large controllers. I got so used to the big ones, that using a small one really messes me up. Haha. God I can't wait for these new consoles. Hopefully the 360 has as good of a modder base as the original xbox. Gotta love coppying your games to the hard drive and not having to mess with the disks again.
TheGreySpectre
11-10-05, 09:25 AM
I know a number of people who bought a PS2 for the sole reason of the FF series, it should be interesting to watch what happens in the console market, to me personally it looks like sony is making bad decisions, but I don't what what sony's plan is
personally the latest console I own is an n64. I prefer PC gaming, although I do have an xbox controller to plug into my PC
From what I have played on the Xbox and PS2 I would say neither actually has better games tey just both have different exclusive games
sagitta85
11-10-05, 05:45 PM
I wouldn't be surprise if they canned it. During E3 2005, they briefly touched on the "PlayStation Network". Also, they only showed two slides of it:
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/6013/liesofsony6lt.jpg
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/4592/liesofsony22yf.jpg
I agree w/ ya there. The controllers for the PS2 are tiny. As huge as the original XB controllers were, they were SOOOOOOOOOOOOO much more comfortable for me. Again, I have bigger hands... so it was a natural fit. My wife hated the big controllers. To this day, I still use the big fugly original controllers b/c they're the most comfortable. I hope they offer the big controllers w/ the XB360.
I think us 3 and Mike Salmon (worked for OXM) are the only ones that liked the Dukes best.
Polish Fury
11-10-05, 07:12 PM
I will take the dukes over the smaller ones anyday. I have very long fingers and the small ones are not very comfortable for me.
ScarfaceFX
11-14-05, 08:52 PM
what if sony is purposely trying to kill PS3 because they know it will be too expensive to produce them ,and they know that the average gaming system on launch day goes for $300 .if you all remember what happened to SEGA CD,it was a system ahead of its time selling for $400 and it died super fast cause of Playstation 1. im only guessing on this one,not saying it will happen ,cause i want a PS3 really bad my self
Dracknem
11-14-05, 09:47 PM
They wouldn't purposefully try to kill a system that they have put so much money into. Sony has some good things up its sleeve for PS3, like the close ties they have with Epic games and Unreal 3. . .we'll just see if this copy protection thing is implemented.
I'll end up with both consoles anyways so i really dont care in the end. The thing is i'm not much of a gamer anyways, i have 3 xbox's though. All run xbox media center and are fantastic for streaming high defition rips to all of the tv's in the house from my server. The only reason i am going to camp out for the first generation console is so that when they finally crack it and hopefully some type of media center is released my xbox/playstation will be the first to be compatible with it :)
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.