XBL Pricing Revealed

Vince said:
I think Sony realized thats it's wiser to wait 2 years so they can outclass MS's network solution with a pervasive cell-based solution than force the end-user to buy a NA and HDD for short-term usage and further splinter the userbase.

It's hard to imagine they couldn't have fought their way out of your so called box (eg. don't wait so long to release NA/HDD), but it wouldn't have made good buisness sence.

Of course, given the limitations of the PS2 hardware, Sony is smart to suffer the short term consequences of having no DLC and hope they can get everyone onboard for PS3.

Besides Vince, you know that in the long run if MS gets anywhere near the mindshare that Sony has (and they're half way there with new users in NA and a third of the way their in EU), that it then becomes a money battle which Sony can't hope to win.

Vince said:
Again, how can anyone argue with pure conjecture? In the long-run if my own console brand can get anywhere near the mindshare of PS2...

And lets look at this: Live! and the NA launched around the same time. And even with the Sony sponcered shortages, there are over 2X the amount of NA's moved in the same time as XBox live. How is this in anyway good for MS?

It's like saying, "we're only getting outsold by 200%, and this rate of change is < the Hardware Gap - thus we're winning!" Give me a break.

I didn't say that MS was winning the short term battle for online users, but in the long run they have gained 500,000 paying subscribers. Sony has taken a loss strategy for online in order to get impressive numbers. It's not a bad short term strategy, but it might hurt them long term when all those users aren't used to paying for the service.

Please don't put any words in my mouth. I'm strictly taking about Xbox Live versus Sony Online strategy. I think that it's pretty obvious that Sony will adopt the Xbox Live approach when they have the technology to do so. The PS2 lacks a hard drive and this precludes them going to an Xbox Live strategy at this time in any meaningful way.

As for mindshare, I didn't say that MS could get it, just that if they managed to do so it would be big trouble for Sony. Try not to read too much into it beyond that simple fact. I'm well aware of the fact that MS has a long way to go before Xbox is as well known and respected as Playstation. If they get there though, Sony will have a money fight on their hands that they can't hope to win on their own.

I agree that a lot will depend on content, but keep one thing in mind: Xbox Live is compelling enough for people buy an Xbox. The same can't really be said for PS2 online. Sure, existing PS2 owners are shelling out $40 for the network adapter and playing some SOCOM, but many people bought an Xbox just for Xbox Live. That says a lot about how good the Xbox Live strategy is - it moves hardware.

Vince said:
HAHAH! This is unbelievable. Let me sum it up:

-PS2 Online is NOT compelling but has outsold Live!
-Live! IS compelling, but isn't outselling PS2O despite equal launch windows.

-PS2O users shelled out $100 to play "some" SOCOM, to play a game.
-Live! users bought an XBox for Live!, obviously not to play a game, just the service.

I just don't think that PS2 online is actually moving hardware for Sony. MS has moved hardware due to Xbox Live and its games. I know too many online-only Xbox users for this not to be true (anecdotal I know, but I still think it's too coincidental not to be true in the broader sense).

I'm not arguing that SOCOM isn't compelling. Just that it is mainly only compelling to existing PS2 owners.

Besides, I'm betting that Halo 2 will be more important than GT4.

Vince said:
Hehe, I'm saving this statement.

Don't take it out of context though. I'm speaking from the perspective of online strategy, not overall marketplace impact.

Another point to consider - unskilled Halo 2 players will still have fun playing online due to the game's team-based nature, whereas unskilled GT4 players will just get frustrated.

Vince said:
Definatly, since GT4 can't possibly have other unskilled players or keep a running win/loss ratio per player like every other damn game! Who would have thought to have rooms/games based on skill or win/loss? It's an astounding advance you just thought up.

I suppose the plan to have a rating system is one of those groundbreaking gameplay advances that MS put into the XBox's hardware... so thats what that nasty green blob is... :rolleyes:

Johnney... an excersise in extreme bias. It all sounds so good in your head, didn't it? heh.

Rating systems don't grab people the way team-based gaming will. GT4 online play is going to be one of those "that's cool, I can play online with some buddies" experiences. Halo 2 online is going to be far more engrossing. Contrast the number of Halo LAN-parties versus GT3 LAN-parties. There's really no comparison. Halo 2 will be a more important online game than GT4.

It's easy to paint me as extreme when you take my remarks out of context. I admit a bias against PS2 online and in favor of Xbox Live. I wouldn't be arguing if I didn't think MS had the superior strategy this generation.

I'm not suggesting that MS is going to beat the pants off Sony this generation or anything of the sort. Just merely that Sony has currently lost the initiative on the online front. They're hoping to flood the market with loss-leading online gaming in order to stop the popularity of Xbox Live from growing too great this generation. Then, they'll adopt the Xbox Live model with PS3. It's a smart short term strategy for them, but it won't be the model they use long-term.
 
Team based online gaming is often just a mess.
Most online players play these games like a Quake fragfest.
A well scripted AI team is more enjoyable to play with, than a group of people who really have no idea of teamplay.

It works only if you play with people that are at same skill level as you.

Same can be said about online racing games...

I don't see how Halo 2 has an advantage over GT4 here.
 
Deepak said:
But online gamers are a tiny fraction of total gamers even in place like Canada (am I right?) And this scene is not going to change soon...

Nope, online gaming is huge here.. everyone and their mother has cable or DSL, half the people I meet online, whether its XBL or even back in the Quake days were from Canada. I guess we're sort of like the equiv to Europe's Finland/Norway ;)
 
Back
Top