The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
We'll take your average RPG game, Phantasy Star Online I and II as an example for this.
Using XBox Live, you pay £40 a year for the service plus £5.99 a month to play PSO. That's £111.88 a year just to play one game.
Using Gamecube, it's just £5.99 a month. That's £71.88 a year just to play one game.
It's not being released for the PS2 but the same would apply as Sony don't have a standing charge for their Networking service.
For your extra £40 a year on XBox live you do get some extras, like a consistent Gamer Tag and the ability to page others over the network no matter what game they're in (not sure if this will apply to PSO though because I think payments are made direct to Sega for the gametime). Is that £40 a year worth it when you consider that Sony and Nintendo still offer free online gaming for most of their titles?
Microsoft also take a large cut from game developers for allowing them to run games on their Live network, whereas the Sony and Nintendo network models give developers the choice of whether or not to support online service themselves.
In short, did Microsoft make a huge error on their choice of financial model for supporting their network?
Using XBox Live, you pay £40 a year for the service plus £5.99 a month to play PSO. That's £111.88 a year just to play one game.
Using Gamecube, it's just £5.99 a month. That's £71.88 a year just to play one game.
It's not being released for the PS2 but the same would apply as Sony don't have a standing charge for their Networking service.
For your extra £40 a year on XBox live you do get some extras, like a consistent Gamer Tag and the ability to page others over the network no matter what game they're in (not sure if this will apply to PSO though because I think payments are made direct to Sega for the gametime). Is that £40 a year worth it when you consider that Sony and Nintendo still offer free online gaming for most of their titles?
Microsoft also take a large cut from game developers for allowing them to run games on their Live network, whereas the Sony and Nintendo network models give developers the choice of whether or not to support online service themselves.
In short, did Microsoft make a huge error on their choice of financial model for supporting their network?
Page:
For UC microsoft have uk and europe servers, but ghost recon is peere to peer servers again.With Tides of war to follow
UC lets you play 4 player split screen, but the framerate suffers big time.
Moto Gp lets 4 players split screens as well
UC lets you play 4 player split screen, but the framerate suffers big time.
Moto Gp lets 4 players split screens as well
Strafex wrote:
> Someone answer!
Answer what?
> Someone answer!
Answer what?
Too High A Price?
-
Got it in one,550 quid a year,no way!
-
Got it in one,550 quid a year,no way!
The only one I definitely know works is Mech Assault.
Someone answer!
Back to the main topic of he prices...
Broadband isn't worth getting for Xbox live alone, but when you consider the fast download speed for your normal PC, it probably becomes worthwhile.
The £40 a year subscription is fine because it comes with the headset, demo's and service, and is only £5 more than the Gamecube Adaptor anyway.
Only the games that require their own servers (I'm assuming that PSO runs on Sega's servers) will charge extra. Any games that run on MS servers should be included in the £40...
Talking about Servers, didn't they say they were building a base in either the UK or Europe for Xbox live servers?
Perhaps they've not finished it yet and are making do with hosting on the Xbox or US servers...
Anyways, now you're all familiar with Xbox live, which online games allow you to play Splitscreen + online at the same time?
And is Halo 2 likely to work this way?
I've always wanted to work with a team of 3 friends...
It's easier to co-ordinate an attack plan when they're all in the same room as you, and it's more fun too.
Broadband isn't worth getting for Xbox live alone, but when you consider the fast download speed for your normal PC, it probably becomes worthwhile.
The £40 a year subscription is fine because it comes with the headset, demo's and service, and is only £5 more than the Gamecube Adaptor anyway.
Only the games that require their own servers (I'm assuming that PSO runs on Sega's servers) will charge extra. Any games that run on MS servers should be included in the £40...
Talking about Servers, didn't they say they were building a base in either the UK or Europe for Xbox live servers?
Perhaps they've not finished it yet and are making do with hosting on the Xbox or US servers...
Anyways, now you're all familiar with Xbox live, which online games allow you to play Splitscreen + online at the same time?
And is Halo 2 likely to work this way?
I've always wanted to work with a team of 3 friends...
It's easier to co-ordinate an attack plan when they're all in the same room as you, and it's more fun too.
I've been immersed into MotoGP, there's osmething about it...
I'd be happy to pay £40 for 1 year of MotoGP 1 and 2 alone. I love them.
I'd be happy to pay £40 for 1 year of MotoGP 1 and 2 alone. I love them.
Star Fury wrote:
> If this is what Ghost Recon is like patched then I dread to think what
> happened before then...
I played it before the patch and I found it ok. Played quite a few games and experience no lag. Actually along with MechAssault it was the best game for no lag. Unreal is a major ,laggy game. I find Unreal ok if I host a 8 player game, and most people in the game dont suffer lag.
I installed a patch a few months ago for Ghost Recon, has there been another one recently? Or have you only just started online with the game?
I have to log on soon and update all games and check out any new content if anys out.
> If this is what Ghost Recon is like patched then I dread to think what
> happened before then...
I played it before the patch and I found it ok. Played quite a few games and experience no lag. Actually along with MechAssault it was the best game for no lag. Unreal is a major ,laggy game. I find Unreal ok if I host a 8 player game, and most people in the game dont suffer lag.
I installed a patch a few months ago for Ghost Recon, has there been another one recently? Or have you only just started online with the game?
I have to log on soon and update all games and check out any new content if anys out.
Have just had the absolute worst time on Xbox Live, and have now given up for tonight.
Been playing Ghost Recon, team games, 4 a side, a guy in the UK hosting, on siege. Total utter crap. At one point our side had placed sensors and we saw on the map all four of the other guys showed up, running straight towards our position, naturally we all readied up and there they were, we opened fire, only to find - thanks to lag - that we were shooting at them with no effect.
This was followed by five other games in succession, with different people, all had lag or drop out or sudden crashes. In short it sucks big time and I'm seriously thinking about whether it's worth getting RTCW for the Live side of things.
If this is what Ghost Recon is like patched then I dread to think what happened before then...
Been playing Ghost Recon, team games, 4 a side, a guy in the UK hosting, on siege. Total utter crap. At one point our side had placed sensors and we saw on the map all four of the other guys showed up, running straight towards our position, naturally we all readied up and there they were, we opened fire, only to find - thanks to lag - that we were shooting at them with no effect.
This was followed by five other games in succession, with different people, all had lag or drop out or sudden crashes. In short it sucks big time and I'm seriously thinking about whether it's worth getting RTCW for the Live side of things.
If this is what Ghost Recon is like patched then I dread to think what happened before then...
Mantis wrote:
> Do MS not host games? Why not? That gives much better speeds doesn't
> it?
Well they did with Unreal but still I found 16 plyaer games laggy even on 512K. I went on Sunday and had a look and found no MS dedicated servers.
MS should do dedicated servers for all games, and have all types of modes for the games. Also if they havent done it they should introduce a European XBox Live server as I have said my ping of 160-180ms is not good.
What pings do everyone else get? Go to XBox Live network settings and do a network test, the one where it goes through 4 steps. When its finished connecting press Y. You should see some numbers one of which is Latency(ping).
> Do MS not host games? Why not? That gives much better speeds doesn't
> it?
Well they did with Unreal but still I found 16 plyaer games laggy even on 512K. I went on Sunday and had a look and found no MS dedicated servers.
MS should do dedicated servers for all games, and have all types of modes for the games. Also if they havent done it they should introduce a European XBox Live server as I have said my ping of 160-180ms is not good.
What pings do everyone else get? Go to XBox Live network settings and do a network test, the one where it goes through 4 steps. When its finished connecting press Y. You should see some numbers one of which is Latency(ping).
Page: