Game Trailer Roundtable with industry figures *

[scooby_dooby]

Not in a lot of homes my friend. Lots of people just have one computer hooked to a broadband connection. At least now some people next year when they get a PS3 they will have another means of getting on the internet.

The situation won't change much, there's a few big drawbacks to surfing the net on the TV in the lviing room, mainly you need a big HDTV, and you have to have a KB and mouse setup in a comfortable position, 99% of the living rooms I've ever been in have a coffee table which is far too low for a KB/Mouse.

I don't see a console browser making any signifigant impact in internet usage in your average house.

 

[Tap In]

Fair enough, but that's not necessarily structurally different from the PS3 or even the PSP ...

then I'm surprised that we are reading of devs having to code for friends lists and messaging features and the like specifically tailored to their games and that the features are not universal with other games (again reminiscent of XBL 1)

If it were structurally the same as 360, there would be no need for additional custom layers within the game. Just hooks into the universal software system on the machine as is done with 360.

 

[Bad_Boy]

The situation won't change much, there's a few big drawbacks to surfing the net on the TV in the lviing room, mainly you need a big HDTV, and you have to have a KB and mouse setup in a comfortable position, 99% of the living rooms I've ever been in have a coffee table which is far too low for a KB/Mouse.

I wouldnt say thats 100% accurate, I've seen plenty HTPC's hooked up to smaller sized HDTV's, it really depends on the text/font scaling the browser can do. Hell, I used to have a dual setup with my PC, one monitor being the pc screen and the other being a regular SDTV (sold the PC so I dont have it anymore). M & KB position is kinda subjective, with pretty much all mouses being laser or already optical means you dont really need a perfectly flat surface to move around with. I dont see any problem with having a wireless mouse next to you on a sofa surface (if thats not your cup of tea you could always use the controller with or without a keyboard combination). Also, resting a keyboard on your lap is hardly anything uncomfortable from my experience typing into online console games on the couch.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Is it now a fact that all Sony games online will have seperate friends list that will need to be updated for every game? I thought that was just for Resistence and that was mostly do to it being a launch game.

We know R:FoM is said to not have it because the libraries weren't available. Thus we expect later games to have a more unified service. However, that needs to actually materialize, and it's down to personal preference whether anyone thinks that's likely or unlikely for Sony. There's the possibility that where Sony are intending a global friends list, it doesn't actually happen, at least for a couple of years. Of course the odds I'd give that of happening will be different to the odds you or Scooby would give it. We can only say we don't know for sure, and at the moment it's not happening, though is penciled in to change at some point.

 

[RobertR1]

The bigger issue I see is letting companies like EA make a mess out of their online service. Anyone who has played BF2 knows what I'm talking about.

Steam, sadly the best of the bunch in PC land, can't hold a candle to live either. Sony certainly has work cut out for them and that's really what the guy in the green shirt was hinting at.

 

[mckmas8808]

We know R:FoM is said to not have it because the libraries weren't available. Thus we expect later games to have a more unified service. However, that needs to actually materialize, and it's down to personal preference whether anyone thinks that's likely or unlikely for Sony. There's the possibility that where Sony are intending a global friends list, it doesn't actually happen, at least for a couple of years. Of course the odds I'd give that of happening will be different to the odds you or Scooby would give it. We can only say we don't know for sure, and at the moment it's not happening, though is penciled in to change at some point.

Great post.

Steam, sadly the best of the bunch in PC land, can't hold a candle to live either. Sony certainly has work cut out for them and that's really what the guy in the green shirt was hinting at.

Another good post. But at the sametime it's not like LIVE is just going to sit still and not try to get better. Sony has a lot of work to prove that their blueprints actually materialze into something real, BUT Microsoft will (and I know for a fact that they will) work their butts off to make LIVE the best thing that they can make it.

MS can't afford to slack on LIVE, because at the end of the day PSN is free and if Sony just does their job 80% right most people will be happy.

 

[Arwin]

then I'm surprised that we are reading of devs having to code for friends lists and messaging features and the like specifically tailored to their games and that the features are not universal with other games (again reminiscent of XBL 1)

Well, the point I wanted to make was that the PS3, as the PSP, has an updateable GameOS on flash memory. This GameOS is always available to any running software on the system, and embedded in the hardware. Some games will actually already require a FirmWare upgrade on day one, like Ridge Racer.

So, Shifty already partly answered that question. Not all libraries (embedded in firmware) have been available early enough. They may be available now, but games that are going to ship at launch, like Resistance, decided not to wait for Sony and go all out on the online front themselves. A game like Resistance actually included so many features that even if they got access at the last minute, there wasn't enough time to integrate these features. Insomniac actually has already commented on this, and indicated that they are now investigating whether they can actually patch Resistance so that it includes support for the universal friends list.

If it were structurally the same as 360, there would be no need for additional custom layers within the game. Just hooks into the universal software system on the machine as is done with 360.

So my basic point is, you're blending different levels of play. The structure of how the GameOS provides online (and other) functionality to games is the same on the 360 and the PS3. But what they expose, and when, is different. The PS3 already indicated that they aren't going to do achievements, so games can't upload gamerpoints/achievements to Microsofts central database. At the same time, keeping track of stats, rankings, and building achievements is something the games producers have to do themselves for their own game, and for matchmaking that generally is sufficient.

But seeing who on your friend's list is playing what, for instance, is already in there, and universal buddy lists are supported. And structurally, they work the same way, as do the two OSes in general. One difference however, I think, is that the PS3's GameOS also allows for loading and creating libraries in runtime (at least that's what it's like on the PSP), for all sorts of levels of hardware and software, where this seems to be harder on the 360 - if, for instance, the OS doesn't support a Force Feedback wheel, then a game can't support a Force Feedback wheel, as you cannot load a driver in any other way than through Firmware (DirectX) support. At least, that's what I'm guessing - maybe someone who is more 'in the know' can correct me, but if it wasn't like this, then I'd have expected games to support USB peripherals like FF wheels a long time ago and we wouldn't have to wait for Microsoft to finally (how long does the Xbox exist now?) come up with the tech (just when it releases it's own wireless wheel, coincidentally ).

Anyway, my point is: structurally there is no difference. Just in implementation. But in terms of online support, when you say it is "built into the hardware" of the 360, that's not different from how it works on the PS3.

 

[patsu]

The reason they say Sony might never catch up to MS with XBLive is that MS will never stop moving forward, and they already have a 5 year headstart, I don't see what's so unreasonable about that. Do you expect MS to stand still while Sony plays catch up?

* Sony can compete effectively with MS if they partner with/buy the right companies offering game community services for years. They don't have to start from ground zero.

* It can also make up for lost ground using more effective marketing strategies such as free. This should also take some heat from a point-to-point comparison.

Not really, it's still vaporware. How will this identity be used across all games? Will there be a universal freinds list? Will each game have it's own buddy list? Isn't resistance doing this right now???

As far as I know these are all unanswered questions, and there are many many more..

On a side note, XBLive still pisses me off daily, I tried to get in a game of SplinterCell multiplayer last night, spent 30minutes trying to find a match, everysingle match was closed by the host before the game started, except one, in which all teh spies dropped out, and then the host ended the match. What a load of crap!! Tried everything from cutom match, to quick match, to hosting my own...no luck at all, have hard is it to play a fuckin game!?

Talk about a huge pain in the ass, and this is supposedly the 'seamless' XBLive, makes me a little apprehensive about how Sony's 1.0 attempt will work...

* Many people seem to think technically better means better for consumers. Perhaps because Xbox Live tries to be so seamless that it has much higher operational requirements, synchronization and concurrency control overhead ? So it's more likely to choke in real use. Simple can be better sometimes. Of course this depends on Sony's actual implementations.

* As for universal friend list, I prefer multiple ids for different games but still identifiable by the system as 1 person behind the scene (e.g., "villageidiot" in the Sims, and "CobraKing" in Diablo). According to reports, this is what PNP provides. Companies will start to implement PNP integration once the dev libraries are widely available. Otherwise, they'll lose points during reviews.

Plain and simple sony's online abilities are nothing but vaporware at this point.

* Yes depending on your stomach for such things, it is vaporware like PS3 is. Both are not launched yet (despite demos). You have about 2 weeks left

It's like Picasso says, good artists create, great artists steal!

I think the same goes for software design...

* Even if it matches Live exactly, it will not have amazing take-up rate... if Live's track record is any indication. There is not much incentive for Sony to copy since Live is really not that "industry leading" from that perspective.

Besides you already highlighted one of Live's problems above ? So why not keep it simple ? Many people argue for Live's community, but a vibrant community is more about people + relationships instead of technologies (see Craig's List, B3D forums).

The situation won't change much, there's a few big drawbacks to surfing the net on the TV in the lviing room, mainly you need a big HDTV, and you have to have a KB and mouse setup in a comfortable position, 99% of the living rooms I've ever been in have a coffee table which is far too low for a KB/Mouse.

I don't see a console browser making any signifigant impact in internet usage in your average house.

Everyone knows about Microsoft WebTV's failure but this does not mean there is zero interest in a web browser for a game console. I am glad Sony implemented a browser because they don't have to reinvent-the-wheel for navigating, finding and presenting multimedia info. Heck, if the users can view YouTube videos on it as rumored, more powers to them.

The bigger issue I see is letting companies like EA make a mess out of their online service. Anyone who has played BF2 knows what I'm talking about.

Steam, sadly the best of the bunch in PC land, can't hold a candle to live either. Sony certainly has work cut out for them and that's really what the guy in the green shirt was hinting at.

It seems that you're saying...
For a few lousy online titles, we forbid anyone else except MS from innovating ? Relatively few people take up online gaming last gen, so it's no wonder that companies like EA don't focus on it. We should expect more innovation as online catches on. There will be occassional bombs but those are parts and parcels of growth.

Personally, I believe Sony's number one challenge will be in simplifying the user experiences. Things are too scattered (unprioritized, confusing) in XMB. Frequently used items are as inaccessible as rarely used ones. There seem to be many system configuration options (for geeks), but I don't see important user options such as font size.

I think they may not have thought through user workflows carefully. We may see many complains about usability after PS3 is launched. OTOH, if they can fix this problem, they should have a great little system on their hands.

Just my 2 cents worth.

 

[scooby_dooby]

I have no idea where you are getting all that from Patsu. You should pay a little more attention to what I've actually said, instead of what you think I'm saying.

There's nothing wrong with being skeptical with a company who has shown an inability to execute their online initiatives properly in the past. Ya, I'm skeptical, so what?

For the record, I want the PS3 online network to be excellent, because I think there needs to be signifigant improvement to the XBLive service, such as dedicated hosts, and the only way that will happen is if Sony can push a strong viable competitor. Just cause I want something to happen, doesn't mean I think it will.

As for PS3 and PSN both being vaporware, sure, but the difference is Sony has proven they will pull off the HW aspect, there is absolutely no reason to be skeptical at all of theit abilities there. The SW is a completely different story.

 

[Arwin]

Minor nitpick:

good artists borrow, great artists steal

 

[patsu]

scooby_dooby... I had the opening question in mind after reading through the whole thread, and listed all the points I would like to respond to. It just happens that many of them are made by you. It's not my intention to target you.

I have removed the opening question to avoid further misinterpretations. I enjoy your criticism of PS3 as many of them are constructive. Please don't take offense, I don't have any evil intentions.

 

[mckmas8808]

Insomniac actually has already commented on this, and indicated that they are now investigating whether they can actually patch Resistance so that it includes support for the universal friends list.
.

I'm sorry but can you link me to that quote where Insominac says that they might patch Resistence? Thanks.

 

[mckmas8808]

Heck, if the users can view YouTube videos on it as rumored, more powers to them[/B]. .

There is no "ifs" about this. They have already demostrated this to people. We have (at least I did and many others on gaming forums) already seen Youtube playing on the PS3.

 

[one]

The situation won't change much, there's a few big drawbacks to surfing the net on the TV in the lviing room, mainly you need a big HDTV, and you have to have a KB and mouse setup in a comfortable position, 99% of the living rooms I've ever been in have a coffee table which is far too low for a KB/Mouse.

I don't see a console browser making any signifigant impact in internet usage in your average house.

At least PS3 does make more sense in that regard than Media Center PC, then.

 

[Arwin]

I'm sorry but can you link me to that quote where Insominac says that they might patch Resistence? Thanks.

This is one place where I saw it. Not sure if I saw it somewhere else:

http://threespeech.com/blog/2006/11/02/ted-price-resistance-fall-of-man/

Re the web-tv - in those days, we didn't have HD yet. That makes a rather big difference. Certainly together with now the vast majority of households being connected to the internet via broadband, versus a minority through dial-up back then.

 

[scooby_dooby]

At least PS3 does make more sense in that regard than Media Center PC, then.

What are you talking about? Media Centre PC uses a media extender(like 360) to integrate the functionality into the living room, needing no more than a simple remote control to use.

This has nothing to do with the issue of whether people want to use an internet browser w/ keyboard and mouse in their living room. Look, I'm all for a web browser in a console, lets just not talk about it as if it's some revolutionary feature that people will fall in love with, it will be useful for a little teeny segment of the consumers.

 

[one]

What are you talking about? Media Centre PC uses a media extender(like 360) to integrate the functionality into the living room, needing no more than a simple remote control to use.

You sound like a media extender and WiFi connection are freebies

 

[lauris71]

This has nothing to do with the issue of whether people want to use an internet browser w/ keyboard and mouse in their living room.

Multimedia is moving to the Web, so you better have full functional webrowser in your living room. YouTube is great example, then there are places like Jamendo and 1000s others.

 

[scooby_dooby]

You sound like a media extender and WiFi connection are freebies

I'm not sure what your point is, so how about you drop the one liners and explain it a little bit.

People will continue to use their PC's to browse the internet, as using it in the living room is completely uncomfortable for the majority of people. None of this has anything to do with MC PC.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Multimedia is moving to the Web,

What is this, 1998?

Like I said I'm not against a web browser in any way, but people who think this is going to be a system selling feature, or even something that most people care about, should give their head a shake. It's a nice bulletpoint, but you'll never get past the fundamental user interface issues which make it ill suited for the living room.