The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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:
There have been no replies to this thread yet.
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: