To me M$ hasn’t proven that they are consumer savvy. They’ve proved that they knew they were on the verge of tanking and had to make changes or else. They wont make any changes that favor the consumer unless business is threatened. I really doubt there will be a big uproar (no bigger than its been for several years) when it comes to XBL golds “premium” features being behind a paywall.
Yeah, I don’t want to come in here and be a downer but there really is nothing to talk about when it comes to Xbox One other than “what ifs” and such. But I still want to talk about it, even if it is negative, because im very interested in the next gen of systems. And just because I say negative stuff doesn’t mean I hate Xbox One or want it to fail, its just my honest opinion. Thats all. I would love all of Xbox One’s features to be free to access. Do I think that will happen? No.
Edit - Really, this is the first generation where im not like “Fuck that im getting both/all, I just dont care”, or some shit like that. It makes me kinda sad.
Again, it’s up to the consumers to be angry about it like they were about the DRM. If they’re not angry, that means it’s not a big enough problem to a majority of people that are buying the system. You’re right…we’re probably not going to see a big uproar about things being locked behind the paywall because as long as people need to buy PSN+ or Xbox Live to play their AAA title online…they’re not going to bitch.
People will mind less paying for PSN+, I would assume, as you get “free” games for multiple systems, decent discounts and online play. Everything else you can access without PSN+
On the Xbox One you pay for XBL Gold and you get access to all the features of it. If you don’t pay you have no access to any of its features.
Im assuming all the cool new features are a huge selling point of both systems. Even if you don’t realize it more people are actually lookin’ into this kinda shit and see no value in XBL gold over PSN+. These are the people that wont complain anymore…because they just decided to go PS4 this time.
Yeah that will be an issue for launch, but a year or two from now I don’t see it being much of an issue. Mostly because if Xbox customers are mad enough about it, they’ll make it vocal and things will change. If not, it won’t matter because once games start coming out it will come back to being about the games like it was in the last gen.
It could also just work out that Microsoft comes out of left field with new stuff that surpasses some of things that PSN even offers. This is just a new era of gaming where you have to get the head start based on press conferences at a video game convention. Yet like the last gen, I don’t really see much more than one system being ahead of the other and then things evening out as a year and 2 years go by.
There’s a lot of stuff that both systems will be offering that we won’t know about till we know about them. I just know that Xbox One is providing a lot of stuff that I’m interested in (some that’s also on PS4, some that’s exclusive to the One) and the race will get closer. A lot closer. Just like last gen, it’s just another battle of the people who have money to throw around at launch. There’s a lot of people not getting a PS4 or a Xbox One or a Wii at launch or for considerably longer. There’s a lot of room for things to change as those people migrate in with price falls, new features, new games/exclusives etc.
I kind of hope that’s the case. I feel when a console manufacturer has the upper-hand for a console generation or 2, there needs to be some kind equalizer in terms of competition to make sure no one-sided terms or standards are set in stone.
Sony was that top-dog in the PS1 and PS2 era, and MS with the 360 ended up in the leading position for the most part. That’s why I waited for Sony to start being competitive with the PS3 around 2008, and they eventually did. The PS3 ended up being difficult to program for developers with its architecture, but they doubled their efforts into their development tools and shown what the PS3 can do with knowledge of how its system works. They went from a flawed online strategy with security issues (XBL had similar issues too) and limited features to an vastly improved online service with each year, and they now have the sales to prove how far they have came.
The 360, while doing a lot for DLC and building an online gaming platform, was also cheaper than the PS3 and had a system that easier to develop for. Those 2 factors are what primarily gave it the momentum to overcome the Wii and keep the PS3 at bay sales-wise for years. MS is coming from a place of strength in this generation going into the next, and that makes it their chance to lose marketshare.
The PS4 is not the PS3, and saying it is just a PS3.5 or whatever is doing a disservice to it as a product. The people who were in charge of Sony’s PS3 days aren’t around anymore. PSN will continue to improve and limitations in hardware architecture aren’t as drastic between both rival consoles. Even saying it is just a games console while knowing that Sony has its hands in movies and music is a foolhardy point of view. The PS3 has a wealth of entertainment options right now, so it’s not crazy to expect the PS4 to expand on that functionality as well.
Anybody with enough reading comprehension knows Sony is targeting gamers first since those are the first to spend $400 or more early in the console’s lifecycle. That doesn’t mean the PS4 is weaker from a casual user standpoint or that options for what the console can do will stay the same, it means that offer a variety of options for everyone.
For those who argue that “XBLG offers free games too!”: The free games deal is limited to the 360 only and the deal will expire when XB1 is released, even then the games being offered are years old. It’s a limited-time and small consolation for years of Gold on the 360, not an actual new standard feature being brought to Gold as a service.
Itll be sad that the only time Killer Instinct was on the main stage at Evo was when it was being booed to hell while being live demoed. Oh wait, no its not.
@Bigdewey, it’s also not farfetched to say that the Xbox One will pull a PS3 and jump into a close race with the PS4 as time goes on. Like you said, lots of improvement for PS4, same with Xbox One. Systems don’t die anymore like the Dreamcast and Jaguar days. There’s just the one that starts slower.
@OrochiDemon, they were booing Microsoft, not the game and people generally liked watching the game and a lot of people were in line to play it at Evo.
Seriously guys, you’re complaining about XBL Live? You can get one for like $32 for a whole year if you shop around…That’s like $2.60 a month…That would be 9cents a day…Or if you decide to go retail like a dope that would only cost you $5 a month or 17cents a day…
But…then the whole run around with the free stuff you get. Most of the games being stuff I probably wouldn’t even wanna play any way. I’m good with just buying what I like.
Cost really isnt the issue, its the principal. I dont want to pay for a service on one console when I have the option not to on another but still get all but one feature. Plus, you know, one acually gives you shit, the other does not. XBL gold could be 10 dollars a year and I still wouldn’t pay for it.
No matter how much you try to downplay the “free” games on plus, that alone makes Plus the more friendly service.
P.S. I paid for XBL for like a decade or something. Its not till I got a PC and started to actually use my PS3 that I started to really dislike xbl.
The problem isn’t necessarily the price of XBLG, it’s the terms and restrictions that come with it. Paying for it and still placing restrictions at the third party apps-level is ridiculous, and it’s something I get that MS does out of precedent. But it’s a precedent of so many people having to pay it without question once they’ve gotten comfortable with the service in its early days, and pay little attention to the alternatives that may better suit their needs.
I wouldn’t have a problem with the Gold requirement if it was limited to multiplayer, or if the cost covered third party apps as a one-time bundle payment option. But as it is now, it’s the worst of both worlds (needing to pay for app-access twice on top of online multiplayer). It is taking the worst parts of the cable subscription model and carrying it onto the digital services on the console.
I get it and understand it, there will be people who will buy and support the XB1 no matter what. It be could something as small as achievements and gamerscores, or something bigger like a new Halo or Forza. Even time-exclusive content for new multiplatform titles can be a big draw, regardless of the extra 100 bucks cost compared to other console.
It has more to do with an online ecosystem’s psychological affect on a consumer than actual value (or ‘perceived value’ as it is often called). PS+ for the PS3 has become more of a console-standard version of a gaming rental service.
PS4’s multiplayer being behind PS+ is somewhat upsetting, but the terms and exceptions for it are reasonable. F2P and MMOs (publisher’s choice), voice/party-chat, TV/Movie apps, asynchronous online gameplay, and loose online options are exempt from Plus.
If XBLG had similar rules and exceptions, I wouldn’t mind paying for Gold at all.
Its like you guys want a console that just caters to gaming & nothing else, yet you’re complaining about Netflix…Its been like that since the old xbox, they started adding apps to improve the experience & add more value to “live” experience…
Sure it sucks to pay since PS3 was doing everything for free but this time around you have to pay to do multi-player for the PS4 right?
PC gaming isn’t free either. If it wasn’t for a few companies and mostly ballin’ enthusiasts, there would be some kind of fee going as well.
MS does need to step it up with the policies for it, even though the features were years ahead of PSN.
The media/fanboy hype leading up to E3 had the PS4 hailed as the 2nd coming, but it was pretty lack luster. Maybe it was expectations, but the Xbone got me hyped (KI being the main culprit) and Crimson Dragon looks cool. I’m still going to wait it out, but so far the Sony isn’t selling me on anything they have. It’ll be into the 2nd gen that both consoles will hit their stride anyways. They both still lack W101 and Bayo2 though. Not sure how either of them didn’t foot the bill for Bayo2, especially Sony, seeing as they “…are there for the core gamer…”
Ugh…do you guys even know the difference between XBL and PS+ right now…there really isn’t. Like I said earlier - the only reason ONLY reason people try to champion PS+ is the free game(s) - that again not only are worth like 10-20 bux, but XBL is doing the same thing now. M$ has sales as well. So I’m sorry, you can say ‘item X is behind the paywall’, but ultimately - let’s really cut the crap, because this has grown annoying and descended into going back and forth instead of being an XBOne thread.
If you’re getting a new console, there is a 90%+ chance you are planning on getting the online service. So being behind a paywall is a completely moot point. why do you think so few people complained about it before now?
There is NO difference between XBL and PS+ except tada dedicated servers and better security on the side of XBL. The Pricing is moot, the same sales that help you get low priced PS+ net you low priced XBL. PS+ extends into portables, but its not like it mounts to anything - they’ve kept pretty much the same games up for ‘free’ on the Vita, minus some arcade style games or PSP games, and cross-play has been a joke, I spent fucking $90 to have Dragon Crown on both console and vita. Yeah, money saver. Yay a discount on SFxT…the game flopped, its too little too late, and the DLC is still 10x too expensive to consider.
Limited to 360 only…uhm OK…that’s the only console out right now. And the games being offered now are NO DIFFERENT then what’s on PS+. I can’t lie, I just got onto PS+ a few months ago because everyone kept talking about how good a value it is, yet after I buy I’m told “it was only good if you got it when it first started”. I’m not impressed with getting Hitman, or an old Battlefield. that’s like M$ putting up MW2…and that shit can be had for like $5. It would be different if we were talking “Yeah the game this month on PS+ is the newest GoW!” WHOLE nother level at that point, but right now, hell being 100 about it NEITHER service gives much in the way of games that are going to get rotation, they are true freebees.
It just is what it is. Instead of ‘hey that’s cool or hey I like what Sony is doing with this’, it’s “these are excuses why I can’t like this console”. If you don’t want the console why the fuck are you even in the thread?
*I’m just honestly irritated, I’ve got zero parts fan boy in me, I want both consoles to do well, I want to get both consoles, and want to talk about cool things, new things, etc on the consoles, but it always devolves to useless mudslinging, if you don’t like the shit, go elsewhere, this thread wasn’t stickied or anything. And what’s worse about it - when people want to throw dirt, they don’t have the decency to be real about it, everyone wants to turn a blind eye to what they want. Even with a price drop, Vita + Vita TV + PS4? Do you realize how much money that is? People want to bitch about $100 Kinect, yet are open to $100 ‘SuperGameBoy’? Come on fam! People want to act like timed exclusives don’t mean anything…they obviously haven’t seen sales of Batman AA on the Wii U. The User interface for the PS3 is complete ASS in a digital box, and I doubt the PS4 is going to be any better. M$ has shown us the gizzards of their system and there are even some in the wild. Sony has a much smaller footprint with an ‘even more powerful system’ apparently…well that power comes form somewhere and that power generates heat, and that heat will destroy a system - see the early 360s AND PS3s - if it can’t disipate, so unless the PS4 is in itself a copper heatsink, I’m actually worried about it overheating. So let’s seriously just stop it. Let’s throw dirt on the Wii U - its got no library, its exclusives are dying, games it would rock out on, it can’t get (Tomb Raider, Madden), it’s storage capacity is ass, the Nintnedo network would be faster to just mail shit to you, the user interface is somehow WORSE than the PS3s, and the system performance is 5 years old. It’s out the system, none of the consoles are perfect, lets move on.
No offense intended, but… You really don’t seem to know a whole lot about the games that have been on offer for PS+. Let’s fix that: http://www.gamerevolution.com/news/year-one-of-playstation-plus-value-in-free-games-185486-20143 (ignore the prices listed - this is supposed to be a fair assessment, and when a lot of the games became available, they were no longer priced that high.)
That’s within the first year only, and is missing quite a few games (the one in particular that stands out is Awesomenauts, which was free on launch day). That brings me to this: there are games that were actually free on PS+ on launch day, which goes completely against what you’re saying. There are certainly old games that are made available for free on PS+, but it’s not fair to say that it compares to the level of “me-too”, tacked-on quality of the games offered on XBL.
The only other real “nitpicking” is when you refer to BF3 as “an old Battlefield”, since this is more than a little misleading, seeing as it is the most current revision of the game, with a huge community that is extremely active. It’s a 2011 game, sure, but there are expansions available with fresh content from March of this year. It’s hardly fair to call this an old game relative to the competition, who are offering things like Assassin’s Creed 2 and Rainbow Six Vegas (as in, the first one, from 2006.)
RE: Dedicated servers: Where? 99% of console multiplayer gaming runs on P2P. The few pieces of software that don’t run on P2P have dedicated servers on PS3 as well (funnily enough, Battlefield 3 is one such example.)
You’ve got points with what you’re saying, but your view of PS+ is wayyyy skewed, to the point of coming across extremely biased.
You’re right on the pricing though. They’re roughly the same price, assuming you’re catching them on sale (and why wouldn’t you?). The difference is what you’re getting for your money, and MS makes it seem like you’re getting more by limiting the stuff that is already free on PS to Gold members only. Is it really adding value to a service when everyone else in the world offers it for free?
There’s nothing wrong with Live as a service. It’s a good service. When I get my XB1 later on (probably before the end of next year), I’m sure I’ll end up subscribing again (I cancelled my 360 sub 'cuz I don’t use my 360 much anymore). I just can’t pretend that because I pay for it that it actually runs that third party, free-to-use-everywhere-else software any better.
Sorry for the long post, and hopefully it didn’t just come across as “WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!” so much as “here are the reasons why I disagree.”
Principal is nice, but in the end these are gaming consoles…not votes for president. It’s going to come down to what they offer down the road and things will sway people very quickly. A lot of people buying these next gen systems day one are obviously people who are bit better well off. These are the same people that will pick up another system also once they see something they like. If the Xbox One’s exclusive line up or any of its other features start to catch on for people, that could change things.
People can bring up what PS+ is offering them on the PS3, which is above what Xbox Live offers considerably ATM. Yet, we don’t know what’s going to happen for the new consoles. If Microsoft comes out of left field and starts offering stuff and doing things that we’re not even thinking about, the game can change right there. Especially as they start pushing extra exclusives that will push people to buy the system and forget what they’re getting for free as long as they are getting “THAT GAME”.
Again, the launch isn’t really going to dictate a whole lot since a LOT of people are not getting any of these systems on launch. There’s a lot of room to work with and both Sony and Microsoft know that. Microsoft is going to have something and I think people may be surprised without how good it actually is. If the value of what Microsoft is offering goes beyond what Sony is offering with its free games, it could very easily be different.
Especially if things like the Kinect, Smart Glass, External Hard Drive, Dedicated Servers and TV features really catch on for people on top of the exclusives. I know FPS players still much prefer the Xbox controller for their games/tournaments also.
My only input on the ms vs Sony thing. The same game on Xbox played on psn plays far better thru xbl than thru psn. I have both systems, and games on psn are so bad in comparison.
Maybe it’s my locale (I’m international - Caribbean) but my experience has been equal on either platform. I will say that matchmaking occurs faster on Live in some games (specifically, CoD), but once in-game I have equal issues on either. Then again, @boel revealed the fact that my internet is connected by silver thatch palm and coconuts, sooo…
This generation, I definitely don’t feel like there’s any “wrong” decision. Go with whichever system has the exclusives that appeal to you, or arguably more importantly, the one that all of your friends are going to be playing on. I don’t think anybody will really regret their purchases this time around, and with such low relative pricing, by probably the middle of the systems’ life cycles the price drops will allow many people will be able to afford both.
edit: Is it awful that I refer to this generation’s consoles as “both” instead of “all three”? I keep forgetting Wii U is a thing… I’m really hoping they give me a reason to own one next year.
