@BrianK

Quote:

The sales ratio of Moves to consoles is much worse in the US than in Europe

Wasn't that expected? As stated mass marketing usually has more effect in the states, probably the upcoming holiday season the US will perform similar to Europe.

Quote:

Not completely. World of Warcraft, for example one of the most popular games on the market, is $15/month

But that's a specific game, nobody has influence on that except for the publishers/game creator. If you don't like the scheme blame the publishers. Don't buy it then, the game is well known for this.

Quote:

As Lou explained Facetime, aka video chat, requires not only a monthly subscription for a data plan but access to Wifi

Video chat is a standard feature of the PS3 (free). It also doesn't require extra subsciption costs on the PC. Isn't it a standard feature on the XBox?

Quote:

And this looses to the console experience. I now have a small 4" screen instead of a 50" screen to see the other person.

I provided several options. For example I have 3 laptops in my home, every single one of them I can use in the living room to chat (including video chat). The advantage is of course to you have a seperate dedicated screen, so it doesn't bug you on the ingame screen if you decide to chat with people who aren't playing the game you are playing or even playing a game at all or have their console turned on. Also you get a quick to use keyboard, mouse/touchpad control and lots of other stuff not available on consoles.

Quote:

Unfortunately your idea is more costly, not as easy to use, lacks features, and doesn't guarantee I can talk to the person at the other end.

No guarantee with a phone and you do get guarantee on for this on the XBox? Personally I think it's more likely the phone is always turned on than a XBox, I also think it likely when the console is on the user is playing a game, I think video chat doesn't work when a silver user is playing a game? Never tried this, so I'm not sure.

@MikeB

Quote:

But that's a specific game,

None the less PC gaming, which we're talking about gaming here, is not free under all circumstances.

Quote:

Isn't it a standard feature on the XBox?

I believe video chat is a standard feature of Live Gold.

Quote:

The advantage is of course to you have a seperate dedicated screen

The disadvantages are exta power supplies, extra cables, extra cost, coordinating two devices, and looking at a 2nd screen means you take your eye off the game (oops you're dead). And all that stuff about chatting with non-game players the 360 chat doesn't prevent you from using your method so you can still do it. Assuming those others aren't using Live Messenger on their PC or phone because if they are you can chat with those non-game members by using the Xbox.

Quote:

No guarantee with a phone and you do get guarantee on for this on the XBox

On the Xbox you are guaranteed the end user is using the same equipment as you, the 360. This means their chat client will work with yours guaranteed.

Quote:

Personally I think it's more likely the phone is always turned on than a XBox,

If you are chatting and your console is off the question is different. You are simply trying to find a good solution to chat. Whereas I'm trying to find a good solution to game and to chat. In my question one would need their console powered up as a base requirement. Having it off fails my requirement.

@BrianK

Is voice-chat across games worth the £40/year? I don't know.

I tend to play single-player, so PS3 would probably suit me better, although I appreciate the service. If I was playing on-line all the time, I would want the best experience possible. That's on XBox and isn't terribly expensive. So I absolutely think it comes down to the type of gamer you are.

The big problem for those gamers: Conversation take place with more than 2 people. If non-integrated two-person chat is asking for problems, then the hassle increases exponentially when you add more players. You will have people ducking in and out of games, and added to that, you might not always want to exclude strangers from your chat. Xbox allowed you to allow/deny that easily. A non-integrated solution utterly fails at it.

Also, let's talk Move. I'm not sure I'd want to be carrying an iPhone in my pocket as I'm jumping round the living room. I certainly wouldn't be using wired earphones! I also like how integrated chat can tweak volume levels dynamically so you can hear the chat over the explosions, or apply effects to the voice to create mood. We may see a bit more of that with the better audio codec.

Then there's Kinect. Same problem, plus the fact that you want chat to be integrated with the voice features in Kinect and the potential for integration goes beyond simply making sure they play nicely together. Of course, Kinect is made by Microsoft so has been total junk since before they even started work on it.

Bottom line - if I have a few hours a week to get together with my friends to play online, I want chat to be instant and hassle-free. £40/year is nothing for giving me more time with my mates. Sorry Mike, I don't care what brand of console gives me that.

If I were buying a console today, I would strongly consider a PS3 instead, because I'm not someone who plays on-line that much anyway. It's up to users to decide whether they're the type of gamer that would benefit from it and whether it's worth £40/year. For many it's a sound choice, for others PS3 would be.

Chris

_________________
AROS - verb (Welsh) - To wait, to await, to stay, to abide.
- Clebin Games - www.clebin.co.uk -

@clebin

Quote:

Bottom line - if I have a few hours a week to get together with my friends to play online, I want chat to be instant and hassle-free. £40/year is nothing for giving me more time with my mates.. It's up to users to decide whether they're the type of gamer that would benefit from it and whether it's worth £40/year. For many it's a sound choice, for others PS3 would be.

Thanks Clebin and I agree if a user is more casual about playing online and as you are someone who games alone then these online features are much less important. Probably to the point that users are unwilling to pay for them.

Interesting that Microsoft recently raised the price of Live Gold. I know some saw this as a slap in the face to the users. Personally, I think the statement was more against the competition. Microsoft said we make money here, you don't, and we're able to do it in such a way that we can make evern more money here, and you can't.

I suspect Microsoft will make even more money off Gold next year. Along with the price hike is coming a $100 for a family of 4 subscription. My kid, like you, rarely gets on line, not worth paying for him. Same with my wife. But, now I can add both for $25/head instead. I'm in. And I'm sure others will be too.


@MikeB

Thinking about your description and the more I think about it I've come to consider that we are coming from different places. You want the iPhone because you want your chat portable. Ease of use within gaming is less important. I want the best gaming chat experience. Non-integration fails this. There's an answer here, but I think you'll not like it.

Take the portablity of the iPhone and bring it to device portability and you have ... Microsoft Live Messenger. Microsoft Live Messenger allows different devices to chat to each other. Not only does the Windows Phone but Android, iPhone, and Blackberry. Not only do the WindowsOS run it but so can Linux. And of course the 360. (The Wii and PS3 could too, I think, if you jailbreak it to run Linux). This solution gives users the portability you asked for in chat. It also gives the intergrated experience I demand with a gaming console. A win in both columns. However, the only gaming console with a built in integration is the 360.

Netflix apps launched for Wii and PS3 today!

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/10/18/netflix-native-app-for-wii-available-now/

Good times!

@BrianK

Quote:

None the less PC gaming, which we're talking about gaming here, is not free under all circumstances.

Of course not, nobody is dictating game publishers on the PC in such ways. If you want people to pay 100 bucks a day, month or year to use your app or game you are free to do so, as it should be free to do so for specifc apps/games. Don't want it, don't buy it. For example I prefer to use AGV instead of Norton as a virus checker because of this, but competition in all levels for specific apps/games makes for a more competitive market.

Now if such scheme would be standard, I think that's bad.

Quote:

I believe video chat is a standard feature of Live Gold.

Video chat, ingame chat and cross game messaging are standard features on the PS3, free to use for anyone with a PS3 unlike for XBox users.

Quote:

The disadvantages are exta power supplies, extra cables, extra cost, coordinating two devices

I thought you like Dual screen on the PC, that involves 2 extra cable (power supply and video cable). With a seperate laptop that's not per se required (internal battery, Wi-Fi for internet, Bluetooth for wireless headset, integrated screen, etc).

Quote:

looking at a 2nd screen means you take your eye off the game (oops you're dead).

For voice chat you don't have to look at the screen. Does the XBox support cross game video chat? To perform video chat (conference) on a seperate laptop screen, you could put it just below your HDTV (there are some tiny laptops out there, but I prefer a little bigger than standard screens).

Talking about distractions? That's the reason why I am not interested in cross game chat at all. When playing a game I am much less interested in what people are playing that isn't the same game I am playing. I even have cross game messaging turned off on my PS3.

Quote:

On the Xbox you are guaranteed the end user is using the same equipment as you, the 360. This means their chat client will work with yours guaranteed.

Just above this you state you can chat with Windows mobile phone users, so make up your mind.

I prefer a laptop, because I have 3 of them which I can have in seperate rooms. Various chat clients I can freely download and use worldwide (also PS3 games are region free, XBox games are not), other clients allow me to call foreign countries very cheaply (for example my Wife's parents are not very comfortable with computers, so we call them through voip to a normal phone), even chat with those on Amigas, etc.

Of course you will pretend I'm talking rubbish here as you usually do, but I think you know what I am saying here.

Quote:

Whereas I'm trying to find a good solution to game and to chat.

I already have this, ingame chat and cross game messaging if needed. If I were interested in cross game chat IMO there are much better options available through for example laptops and other internet connected devices (and usually free to use).

I would say the existance of XBox Live Gold does not really contribute to a "do it all" XBox, it rather makes you feel far too limited when you (or any of your gaming buddies) cannot game online with your/their silver account, I think that's the main reason to subscribe and trying to sell Gold accounts to your friends (free marketing for Microsoft).

Last edited by MikeB on 19-Oct-2010 at 09:30 AM.

@MikeB

Quote:

I already have this, ingame chat and cross game messaging if needed. If I were interested in cross game chat IMO there are much better options available through for example laptops and other internet connected devices (and usually free to use)..

So if the PS3 introduces cross-game chat you will carry on using something else?

Chris

_________________
AROS - verb (Welsh) - To wait, to await, to stay, to abide.
- Clebin Games - www.clebin.co.uk -

@MikeB

Quote:

Of course not, nobody is dictating game publishers on the PC

MikeB you told us PC gaming is free. 'Online gaming is free on the PC.. ' Whether your support or don't support PC gaming being free really isn't the point. The issue here is in various ways PC gaming is not free. That statement in post #279 was not true.

Quote:

With a seperate laptop that's not per se required (internal battery, Wi-Fi for internet, Bluetooth for wireless headset, integrated screen, etc).

You stated you didn't like all the extra cables with the 360. Even if you have a laptop and headset that runn off batteries each needs to be charged at some point and thus a power cable is introduced. So the total cable count is the same if not greater for the non-integrated solution. You're being inconsistent.

Quote:

For voice chat you don't have to look at the screen.

Not quite true as you need to look to select the party to talk to. Other chats such as text and video require much more looking at the screen. Another untruth.

Quote:

To perform video chat (conference) on a seperate laptop screen, you could put it just below your HDTV

You've repeated stated how huge things are such as power bricks and the Kinect and that's unacceptable in your stand. This introduces a device larger than either a brick or the Kinect. Again inconsistent.

Quote:

Just above this you state you can chat with Windows mobile phone users, so make up your mind

Nice try but a fail. The problem is your understanding.

The model I support is a unified model where chat is built into devices. The 360 chats to the 360 at the other end. You recommended instead using a non-integrated model where instead of a console one uses an iPhone. With video chat the iPhone only talks to another iPhone. There is no guarantee the console owner at the other end uses an iPhone. What your non-integrated solution introduces is a number of console owners which you're unable to chat with because they didn't buy an iPhone in addition to their console.

There's a way around this. Use a chat software that has multiple targets. Live Messenger is one product that has multiple desktops, multiple cell phones, and a console. There is no other console related chat product that can do this. With the 360 you can do console to console chat for gaming and support your requirements to chat to non-gaming devices. Again nothing inconsitent here, I hope the education served you to understand where the differences exist.

Quote:

If I were interested in cross game chat IMO there are much better options available through for example laptops and other internet connected devices (and usually free to use).

Again I disagree they are better because one must have the same chat client on each end. Chatting on a console to a console, which after all is where the game is, guarantees that the gamers can talk to each other. In the non-integrated model you cannot guarantee me that the person on the other end has choosen the same chat client and can communicate with me. Again one way to get around this is using the same chat model. Live Messenger, again, is a good example as it runs on multiple desktops, multiple smartphones, and a console. Though not the PS3.

Also the cost is not free. Laptops and Phones are an additional expense. If a consoles dropped chat everyone who wanted chat would need to buy one of these other devices. In the case of a phone, at least here in the US, it's a very costly option as one is looking in the area of $800/year for voice and data plans.

Last edited by BrianK on 19-Oct-2010 at 02:31 PM.

@clebin

Quote:

So if the PS3 introduces cross-game chat you will carry on using something else?

You misread. I don't think I will make use of such a feature at all. I am only interested in in-game chat.

@BrianK

Quote:

The issue here is in various ways PC gaming is not free. That statement in post #279 was not true.

The all games for which you have to pay on the XBox are free to play online on a PC or PS3.

You try to make things overly complex by dragging in gaming experiences or games not found on the XBox, trying to score points. But IMO you fail miserably. You want everyone discussing with you to highlight all irrelevant and theoretical exceptions? I think not a nice way to discuss things.

Quote:

You stated you didn't like all the extra cables with the 360.

Of course, I keep my PS3 under my HDTV. It's a very slick black open TV desk, it's full of Blu-Ray discs, a sat receiver and a surround sound system. I like to keep my living room tidy and slick. My living room laptop I put away when I'm not using it.

Quote:

You're being inconsistent.

Not really, read above.

@BrianK

Quote:

Not quite true as you need to look to select the party to talk to. Other chats such as text and video require much more looking at the screen. Another untruth.

Untruth blah blah, do you understand what that makes you sound like?

Not per se needed, you can set things up before starting your match. I think you try to invent problems for the same reason as above (trying to score points, but failing).

@BrianK

Quote:

You've repeated stated how huge things are such as power bricks and the Kinect and that's unacceptable in your stand. This introduces a device larger than either a brick or the Kinect. Again inconsistent.

It would be repetitive to restate my above comments.

Quote:

The model I support is a unified model where chat is built into devices. The 360 chats to the 360 at the other end. You recommended instead using a non-integrated model where instead of a console one uses an iPhone.

The idea of smartphones is integration, being able to use amongst many other integrated features anywhere you want (thus including in your living room). I prefer to use a laptop for this (I have a wireless internet dongle for internet if needed) and my wife prefers her iPhone.

I am also for the integration of features into a console (like a DVR/receiver such as PlayTV/Thorne built-in) or HDTV (like with built-in 2 cameras for 3D video chat), I don't mind Sony integrating cross game chat, but I most likely will never make use of this apart from testing. This because I already have options available to me which I consider to be vastly superior.

IMO ideally you would have a PS3 with PlayTV and 3DTV with cameras all built into one device. So you put in the Blu-Ray disc in the side of your TV and such, wireless communication with Move/DS3, etc.

Last edited by MikeB on 20-Oct-2010 at 09:44 AM.

@MikeB

Quote:

The all games for which you have to pay on the XBox are free to play online on a PC or PS3. You try to make things overly complex by dragging in gaming experiences or games not found on the XBox, trying to score points

Thanks for trying to blame me.

Here's what I see. Your original statement did not include the phrase 'games not found on the Xbox' when it related to PC gaming. It stated that Online gaming was free on the PC and on the PS3. Without qualifying that by using the term Gaming you don't mean any game but a limited subset YOU caused undo confusion to YOUR readers. Because YOU failed to clearly communicate what you truly meant.

Quote:

The idea of smartphones is integration,

Console discussion is the primary reason for this thread. Today smartphones (aka Facetime) do not integrate with consoles for chat. If you want a solution that does it's the 360 and Live to your iPhone. (I know it hurts.)

Quote:

don't mind Sony integrating cross game chat, but I most likely will never make use of this apart from testing. This because I already have options available to me which I consider to be vastly superior

And your 'vastly superior' option vastly fails in this scenario. Because you are unable to cross game chat with every PS3 user. You're afraid of Silver / Gold seperation however your 'vastly superior' chat has now created just such a seperation.

Last edited by BrianK on 19-Oct-2010 at 06:00 PM.
Last edited by BrianK on 19-Oct-2010 at 05:59 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

This because I already have options available to me which I consider to be vastly superior

Superior at being a mobile phone, superior at being a laptop. Not superior at cross-game chat. I gave you a good list of reasons why a non-integrated approach is inferior. Anyway, as Brian said, the only system that gives you chat across console, laptop AND phone is the 360.

I'm willing to concede that PS3's online service would suit me better as a gamer. You could say right now "yes, the Xbox Live service is better for some gamers, but not for me". Would that really hurt so much?

Chris

_________________
AROS - verb (Welsh) - To wait, to await, to stay, to abide.
- Clebin Games - www.clebin.co.uk -

@BrianK

Quote:

Here's what I see. Your original statement did not include 'games not found on the Xbox' when it related to PC gaming.

OK, for the bulk of PC games and for all the games available on both PC/XBox online gaming is free.

The point remains the same though.

Quote:

Console discussion is the primary reason for this thread. Today smartphones (aka Facetime) do not integrate with consoles for chat. If you want a solution that does it's the 360 and Live to your iPhone. (I know it hurts.)

It's simple, for me in-game chat on the PS3 is enough. For the games I am not playing it better be important or interesting enough to distract me from my gaming experience.

This by default means a real life friend wants to contact me. All my friends own laptops and smartphones connected to the internet. Smartphones have no problems communicating with the services I use on my laptop. If it's very important people can always contact me on my cellphone.

Quote:

Because you are unable to cross game chat with every PS3 user.

You are unable to cross game chat with every XBox 360 user. Sorry, the facts must hurt considering your responses...

@clebin

Quote:

Anyway, as Brian said, the only system that gives you chat across console, laptop AND phone is the 360.

Not useful for me like I clarified many times and only for Windows phones I believe.

On the other hand PS3 Remote Play is supported on Sony PSP, Sony Laptop and Sony phones, something the 360 can't do. It's also free to use for any PS3 owner.

@MikeB

Quote:

Not useful for me like I clarified many times and only for Windows phones I believe.

I don't need it, but others may find it useful and a selling point of the 360 over the PS3. Well done on this good feature, Microsoft.

Quote:

On the other hand PS3 Remote Play is supported on Sony PSP, Sony Laptop and Sony phones, something the 360 can't do. It's also free to use for any PS3 owner.

I don't need it, but others may find it useful and a selling point of the PS3 over the 360. Well done on this good feature, Sony.

See, being impartial isn't difficult if you try to be adult about these things.

Chris

_________________
AROS - verb (Welsh) - To wait, to await, to stay, to abide.
- Clebin Games - www.clebin.co.uk -

@clebin

Quote:

See, being impartial isn't difficult if you try to be adult about these things.

That last sentence makes you look stupid. If you read all these threads you will have noticed the people I am discussing with have repeatably claimed XBox Live to be superior to the PSN as a indisputable fact. Personally I don't agree with this and thus combated such fanboyism with reasoning as:

- I like not to worry about my friends (nor myself) being subscribed to a 'premium' service to be able to play games online with my friends. Not for online functionality which has always been free and still is free on the PC/PS3. For BrianK, I never played World of Warcraft and thus don't care about it being subscription based. Must be good, but I don't care, lack the time for that sort of game anyhow.

- More games on the PS3 enjoy dedicated servers and the PSN is more flexible to developers. This often translates into many first party games running lag free on the PS3 with often many more simultaneous online players (compare this to laggy small scale Gears of War battles for which you have to pay!). Also a game like LittleBigPlanet 2 or Modnation racers couldn't be done in the same way with XBox Live. It's also a reason why Valve suddenly states the PS3 is superior for their upcoming games (they in the past were prime naysayers with regard to the PS3, from which many fanboys seemed to draw inspiration for their FUD, so noteworthy).

- Many features and downloadable features not found on XBox Live. Like Playstation Home virtual world, Playstation Live, inclusion of a webbrowser (for example includes youtube and facebook adapted specificly for the PS3), free music video streaming, streaming TV channels, etc all included for free!

Conclusion: You don't need remote play nor cross game chat. Neither do I and many other people!

If we can all agree on this then I have made my point. XBox Live is NOT superior as a fact. Both PSN and XBox Live can be superior depending on personal preferences and I have certainly provided solid reasoning why for me the PSN is miles and miles ahead of XBox Live.

Understand now, Chris? If so, wasn't that hard or was it?

Last edited by MikeB on 20-Oct-2010 at 07:26 AM.

@clebin

The two other hyped features BrianK and others put forward are of course integrated music selection and in the past better Netflix support on the XBox 360. Both of which are irrelevant to me, also due to reasons given in this and previous threads.

Custom music selection is now an integrated feature on the PS3 as well, easy for developers to implement if so desired. I haven't even tested it, if I wanted to make use of this my home audio/cinema setup easily supports outputting music from a seperate source simultaneously, but I don't find any desire for this, neither in the 80s when I could do the same during playing my Amiga games! (I rarely did this, usually I think the ingame music is far more suitable)

Netflix support was better on the XBox due to an exclusive agreement with Microsoft. It is irrelevant to me as my PS3 plays Blu-Ray discs with far superior features and playback quality (much higher bitrates). I also prefer to own top movies on disc and also Netflix isn't even supported in Europe!

However meanwhile this exclusive agreement has timed out and Netflix is now better supported on the PS3 with 1080p max output instead of 720p max output and now supports surround audio instead of just stereo audio. Also Europe is now getting a similar service called Lovefilm, which makes it a little more relevant to me.

So now only cross game chat is the only feature hyped by XBox fanboys for why many still promote to everyone to pay extra for XBox Live Gold. I very much doubt that for the bulk of people this really is such a crucial feature, like it isn't for me and you. Personally I think not being able to play games online with your friends pushes the bulk of people to pay extra for XBox Live Gold or to promote this to their friends as just a sliver account for yourself and all your friends feels far too limited compared to modern standards.

It would be nice if the PSN in the future adds free cross game chat to the PSN, not because it is really usefull to myself. Just for fun to see how the fanboys react to such a situation (losing their last straw for promoting XBox Live, performing Microsoft's otherwise hard to market job)!

Last edited by MikeB on 20-Oct-2010 at 09:30 AM.
Last edited by MikeB on 20-Oct-2010 at 08:20 AM.

@BrianK

Earlier I highlighted how the much cheaper and smaller Playstation Eye operates much faster than Kinect (60 or 120 FPS vs only 30 FPS and faster processing of data), how the Playstation Eye operates with a much higher resolution and how the Playstation Eye operates with a much wider range of view.

Regarding the last point, this is from the Kinect manual:

“The sensor can see you when you are approximately 6 feet (2 meters) from the sensor. For two people, you should play approximately 8 feet (2.5 meters) from the sensor.”

2 or 2.5 meters distance would mean I have to re-arange my living room to make room for Kinect, provided I actually wanted this (IMO piece of sh*t). My table / foot couch would be in te way, meaning I would have to move my huge living room couch significantly, something I would never do as my viewing distance for playing games with a gamepad and watching movies on my couch is optimal for me.

Another reason why I think Kinect will fail in Europe (less hype sensitive in general) and especially Japan with their often very small living rooms. I think Kinect will sell a lot in the states, but like with the Wii will be left mostly unused for many people with regard to gaming after playing some games.