I sort of agree with you in the sense that I would prefer to have PSN go down than lose my 360 to RROD.
Sure, but sadly the PS3 hasn't exactly been immune to hardware failure.
I sort of agree with you in the sense that I would prefer to have PSN go down than lose my 360 to RROD.
An extra 30 days of Gold Membership is given. Typical turn-around is about half that, plus they pay for shipping & handling. Considering the warranty is 3 years, it's hardly a loss on the part of the user.
I think that since PSN users is given much more value/content for their loss of online-functionality, and they still had much less loss of functions as for when the machine break down.
A new standard has been set, in this digital age.
So I think that maybe Microsoft (and the other hardware manufacturers) should concider to atleast include some games/value aswell in the future - for the loss of the machine during breakdown, to remain competitvie.
Whether it's free or not is irrelevant. They failed to provide a service that is promised on the box of the product, the challenge friends online on psn part let alone affecting netflix and other services. This means the ps3 box is either false advertising, or they owe people compensation because the product did not perform as advertised for a large period of time. Compensation generally speaking should compensate everyone, but the compensation they have provided does not compensate a large swath of people as the titles provided are ancient and of zero interest to many. Hence why some people are irked.
I'm pretty certain that any company offering such or similar service has somewhere within the terms of agreement a clause that explicitly states that online time is a 'best effort' only. There is no guarantee that PSN will be online 24/7/365. To suggest that they failed to provide a service that was advertised is... daft.
You think best effort (concerning a 26 day outage) would fly in a US court?
Of course, but the happiness rating would go up from, say, 80% to 97%, and with the vocal Internet users siding much more with Sony. In the cost:benefits balance, shifting a much better happy medium could have been reached.Seriouisly tho I think if they offered from 10 there would be the same arguement (just replace the number 5 with 10) and people would say 'why not 5 half-decent games instead of 10 really old ones' (etc).
Is there going to be much market for Infamous and LBP when pretty much everyone can get them free? There'll be those without PSN accounts, which is a lot, but then the market is also going to be flooded with used copies, surely. Best get in quick!I only benefit as I own InFamous, but I was aiming to play and sell on...
How many games does Sony throw in when your ps3 fails?
Stop trying to compare the 2 issues (hardware failure and online service failure).
Sadly typical false connections being drawn with this. 1) Consoles die all the time. 2) Demanding games will stress hardware more and generate more failures. 3) Newly released and well reviewed games will get more play. These points would suggest any major game release like LA Noire will have associate hardware failure. Now add in the mix a FW that just happens to be released at the same time, and suddenly it's assumed the FW causes this, instead of all the other points. Unless someone has figures on average failure rates for AAA games, figures for these pre-3.61, and noticeably elevated figures for post-3.61, it's impossible to conclude that FW 3.61 causes system failure. And when you consider it's a network patch, logic tells us this isn't anything other then poor reasoning on the part of those suffering a mild coincidence of events.
Hmm, how many days of service with Live have people lost due to having 360s in for RROD service? Look it sucks that PSN is down but its a bit disingenuous to act like Sony is the only company with mistakes this generation. Further as I mentioned to you once before what Sony is dealing with is an unprecedented assault on their IT backbone by Geohots cahorts, a little context here helps. I doubt your beloved MS would fair much better under similar sustained pressure.
I'm pretty certain that any company offering such or similar service has somewhere within the terms of agreement a clause that explicitly states that online time is a 'best effort' only. There is no guarantee that PSN will be online 24/7/365. To suggest that they failed to provide a service that was advertised is... daft.
How many games does Sony throw in when your ps3 fails?
Stop trying to compare the 2 issues (hardware failure and online service failure).
That may be deemed acceptable for those who seem thrilled and/or grateful that psn is even up at all and/or are satisfied with whatever online scraps are thrown their way due to psn being free, but don't be surprised when others think they have been treated poorly.
If we are discussing compensating for the loss of service there is a valid argument in those that didn´t get to play for weeks because they had RROD´s. RROD´s came purely from Microsoft failure.
The failure of 360´s and PS3´s of today should be within normal standards.
Some sony users have been unable to go online for a month and sony's make good offer is pretty poor for many users.
Many? you got something to back that up?
Sonys system failures have been met with the consumer footing the bill.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/many
Its a word in the English Language ?
Remember Many does not mean the Majority
Sadly typical false connections being drawn with this. 1) Consoles die all the time. 2) Demanding games will stress hardware more and generate more failures. 3) Newly released and well reviewed games will get more play. These points would suggest any major game release like LA Noire will have associate hardware failure. Now add in the mix a FW that just happens to be released at the same time, and suddenly it's assumed the FW causes this, instead of all the other points. Unless someone has figures on average failure rates for AAA games, figures for these pre-3.61, and noticeably elevated figures for post-3.61, it's impossible to conclude that FW 3.61 causes system failure. And when you consider it's a network patch, logic tells us this isn't anything other then poor reasoning on the part of those suffering a mild coincidence of events.
As Al says, every FW there's a load of people claiming it's bricking consoles.
I think you're being too harsh. The games are good games, and Sony can only really offer their own published titles due to costs. It's not fair to compare Sony's PR gift-giving to MS's as MS has a nigh limitless warchest with which to pay for good feeling, funded by twenty years of 'MS Tax' from their OS domination. Basically whatever you get off MS in terms of free Live! content has been paid for a hundred times over in profits on their products and services. Sony aren't making such high profits from their consumer sales, so they have less of the buyers money to give back to them by way of freebie sweeteners.They already look like a bunch of goofballs from the security breach, but now additionally they just look like they don't give a damn by offering ancient titles as "compensation". That may be deemed acceptable for those who seem thrilled and/or grateful that psn is even up at all and/or are satisfied with whatever online scraps are thrown their way due to psn being free, but don't be surprised when others think they have been treated poorly.