What can Live do that PSN and STEAM can't for free?

  • 172 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for dachase
dachase

808

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#151 dachase
Member since 2005 • 808 Posts

[QUOTE="dachase"]

Steam is a bigger service than Live

Microsoft has alot more money than Valve

Why the fee for Live then?

DroidPhysX

Private business wants to make money?

Soooooo.... valve dont want money is what your trying to say? or is it just pure MS greed, like the 360 Wifi adapter or the fact you can only buy expensive 360 branded hard drives?

Ill go with the greed, it can be done for free but MS dont want to. Agree?

Avatar image for dachase
dachase

808

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#152 dachase
Member since 2005 • 808 Posts

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

People pay for Xbox live because its the only way to play the games they bought online. That's the reason people pay for it at the end of the day. And since its very well known you have to pay to play that is realistically going to be the most common reason for people paying. Its a simple concept really.

Brownesque

It's not the only way to play games online. Enter Steam, PSN, and Wii.

Remove Wii and that lists fine, even the Dreamcast had a more stable online than Wii

Avatar image for DroidPhysX
DroidPhysX

17098

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#153 DroidPhysX
Member since 2010 • 17098 Posts

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="dachase"]

Steam is a bigger service than Live

Microsoft has alot more money than Valve

Why the fee for Live then?

dachase

Private business wants to make money?

Soooooo.... valve dont want money is what your trying to say? or is it just pure MS greed, like the 360 Wifi adapter or the fact you can only buy expensive 360 branded hard drives?

Ill go with the greed, it can be done for free but MS dont want to. Agree?

Again, private business wants to make money? MS just brings it in by the truckloads. Valve wants to make money, but MS casually doesnt give a crap how.

Avatar image for deactivated-5e7be39d87e0b
deactivated-5e7be39d87e0b

4624

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#154 deactivated-5e7be39d87e0b
Member since 2005 • 4624 Posts

It all boils down to mentality. Microsoft isn't willing to invest money into anything or run any division with a yearly loss.
Sony just lost losts of money on PS3's high manufacturing costs and just recently there are making a profit. Sony loses money on PSN but they still keep PSN running and apply updates to it. So an online service can actually be done by even having a fiscal loss on it every year. Sony, the equivalent/competitor of XBL on consoles, shows it can be done without charging customers. Why can't Microsoft do this? It's due to Microsoft mentality.
This is going to hurt them next-gen, they didn't take any risks with acquiring new IP's or studios, they mismanaged a lot of studios and just dropped them and they angered lots of fan by going casual/Kinect crap.
Byebye microsoft :) you will be forgotten like without any legacy.

Locutus_Picard

How do you know what's going to hurt them next-gen? Better yet, how do you know what anyone will do next gen? No one knows. You went from speaking logically at the beginning to letting your inner fanboy take over the rant.

Avatar image for Riverwolf007
Riverwolf007

26023

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#155 Riverwolf007
Member since 2005 • 26023 Posts

btw, i find it funny that steam gets dragged into this whole mess.

most people think gears is the most popular cover based game this gen but actually it's dudes hiding behind pc in sw.

Avatar image for deactivated-5e7be39d87e0b
deactivated-5e7be39d87e0b

4624

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#156 deactivated-5e7be39d87e0b
Member since 2005 • 4624 Posts

btw, i find it funny that steam gets dragged into this whole mess.

most people think gears is the most popular cover based game this gen but actually it's dudes hiding behind pc in sw.

Riverwolf007

Personally, I find it comforting that people are so concerned about how and what I spend my money on.....

I mean, if I shot Heroin in my veins day in or day out "Meh, it's your life, die slow, junkie."

But if I spend $60 a year (4 hours of 1 workday for me btw) on XBL "What are you doing to yourself man!!!! Intervention!!! Intervention!!!"

What I eat shouldn't make you run to the toilet, amirite? If I'm good with it, you should be great with it, right?

I've sucked it up a long time ago that if I want to play online on XBL, I have to pay the annual cost. It's the way it is, I'm not gonna start a grass roots campaign to take down the man, I just wanna be able to play online ffs. Way more epic **** in the world going on than this.

Avatar image for Locutus_Picard
Locutus_Picard

4166

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#157 Locutus_Picard
Member since 2004 • 4166 Posts

[QUOTE="Locutus_Picard"]

It all boils down to mentality. Microsoft isn't willing to invest money into anything or run any division with a yearly loss.
Sony just lost losts of money on PS3's high manufacturing costs and just recently there are making a profit. Sony loses money on PSN but they still keep PSN running and apply updates to it. So an online service can actually be done by even having a fiscal loss on it every year. Sony, the equivalent/competitor of XBL on consoles, shows it can be done without charging customers. Why can't Microsoft do this? It's due to Microsoft mentality.
This is going to hurt them next-gen, they didn't take any risks with acquiring new IP's or studios, they mismanaged a lot of studios and just dropped them and they angered lots of fan by going casual/Kinect crap.
Byebye microsoft :) you will be forgotten like without any legacy.

bez2083

How do you know what's going to hurt them next-gen? Better yet, how do you know what anyone will do next gen? No one knows. You went from speaking logically at the beginning to letting your inner fanboy take over the rant.

Pretty much this gen is at 75%. Developers are already complaining about hardware limitations on the consoles. Both Sony and Microsoft are at the beginning phases of development of a new console. Looking at how the fundaments of this gen was laid, Sony was going for new IP's in favour of old ones, Microsoft had a multi-player centered focus this gen and Nintendo was going for the largest install base and making and reviving old IP's afterwards. All different approaches but Microsoft's is the most lacking, they didn't push the game library as forward as the other companies did it. And now they're focussing back on PC. What's up with that? Looks like an desperation act.

Avatar image for deactivated-5e7be39d87e0b
deactivated-5e7be39d87e0b

4624

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#158 deactivated-5e7be39d87e0b
Member since 2005 • 4624 Posts

[QUOTE="bez2083"]

[QUOTE="Locutus_Picard"]

It all boils down to mentality. Microsoft isn't willing to invest money into anything or run any division with a yearly loss.
Sony just lost losts of money on PS3's high manufacturing costs and just recently there are making a profit. Sony loses money on PSN but they still keep PSN running and apply updates to it. So an online service can actually be done by even having a fiscal loss on it every year. Sony, the equivalent/competitor of XBL on consoles, shows it can be done without charging customers. Why can't Microsoft do this? It's due to Microsoft mentality.
This is going to hurt them next-gen, they didn't take any risks with acquiring new IP's or studios, they mismanaged a lot of studios and just dropped them and they angered lots of fan by going casual/Kinect crap.
Byebye microsoft :) you will be forgotten like without any legacy.

Locutus_Picard

How do you know what's going to hurt them next-gen? Better yet, how do you know what anyone will do next gen? No one knows. You went from speaking logically at the beginning to letting your inner fanboy take over the rant.

Pretty much this gen is at 75%. Developers are already complaining about hardware limitations on the consoles. Both Sony and Microsoft are at the beginning phases of development of a new console. Looking at how the fundaments of this gen was laid, Sony was going for new IP's in favour of old ones, Microsoft had a multi-player centered focus this gen and Nintendo was going for the largest install base and making and reviving old IP's afterwards. All different approaches but Microsoft's is the most lacking, they didn't push the game library as forward as the other companies did it. And now they're focussing back on PC. What's up with that? Looks like an desperation act.

Somewhat agreee with that, their focus on 1st party is sad, and it is alarming from a GAMER standpoint that they are relying on 3rd party games and timed DLC to coast through the gen. But from a business standpoint it is working in their favor. The success of XBL augments this. Do you think that Valve or Sony hasn't or isn't kicking themselves at the fact that they didn't think of the pay to play idea first? Hell yeah, but that's part of the reason MS is villified and revered.

Avatar image for Locutus_Picard
Locutus_Picard

4166

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#159 Locutus_Picard
Member since 2004 • 4166 Posts

[QUOTE="Locutus_Picard"]

[QUOTE="bez2083"]

How do you know what's going to hurt them next-gen? Better yet, how do you know what anyone will do next gen? No one knows. You went from speaking logically at the beginning to letting your inner fanboy take over the rant.

bez2083

Pretty much this gen is at 75%. Developers are already complaining about hardware limitations on the consoles. Both Sony and Microsoft are at the beginning phases of development of a new console. Looking at how the fundaments of this gen was laid, Sony was going for new IP's in favour of old ones, Microsoft had a multi-player centered focus this gen and Nintendo was going for the largest install base and making and reviving old IP's afterwards. All different approaches but Microsoft's is the most lacking, they didn't push the game library as forward as the other companies did it. And now they're focussing back on PC. What's up with that? Looks like an desperation act.

Somewhat agreee with that, their focus on 1st party is sad, and it is alarming from a GAMER standpoint that they are relying on 3rd party games and timed DLC to coast through the gen. But I want to pose a question. Do you think that Valve or Sony hasn't or isn't kicking themselves at the fact that they didn't think of the pay to play idea first?

Probably yes. But then again, advertising your own service as ''FREE" and making more profit off of download services and microtransactions is the smarter choice. Look at the free MMORPG's that have microtransactions. BattleField Heroes yielded big enough profits to continue it with BattleField Free2Play. And Sony could have charged with PS3 since xbox1 with XBL was sooner, but they still didn't. They decided to reap some money with PSN+. Still not the same. So there must be some legal stuff preventing them from such a thing or they genuinely don't want to charge. I don't think the japanese market would ever accept that. Did you know that Sony had to advert the PS3 as an multi-media machine to circumvent import taxes that apply on game-consoles? That some wierd legal stuff only Sony has to deal with.
Avatar image for ActicEdge
ActicEdge

24492

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#160 ActicEdge
Member since 2008 • 24492 Posts

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

People pay for Xbox live because its the only way to play the games they bought online. That's the reason people pay for it at the end of the day. And since its very well known you have to pay to play that is realistically going to be the most common reason for people paying. Its a simple concept really.

Brownesque

It's not the only way to play games online. Enter Steam, PSN, and Wii.

You know I was talking about the 360 :P

Avatar image for illmatic87
illmatic87

17935

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 564

User Lists: 0

#161 illmatic87
Member since 2008 • 17935 Posts
It can charge for online BLAP!
Avatar image for yellosnolvr
yellosnolvr

19302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#162 yellosnolvr
Member since 2005 • 19302 Posts
i payed $50 for a chance to play with some friends and to play halo/gears of war on xbox live this year. but im not going to be paying $60 for another year of this crap. i remember when it was 40 bucks back in og xbox days.

[QUOTE="tricksta189"]

[QUOTE="gamer620"] I love steam, but it hardly does it the same way the 360 does especially considering you cant party chat on steamgamer620

I think Steam realizes most people use Ventrilo and it doesn't really need it's own chat system.

I don't disagree, however the fact that it is a third party source makes STEAM inferior int hat regard

This thread is about STEAM, not PC ONLINE.

the thing about steam is, that its on a pc. if it wasnt on pc, it would have those features. this is extremely advantageous to steam because its on a platform with an infinite amount of options in terms of communication between people.
Avatar image for gamer-adam1
gamer-adam1

4188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#163 gamer-adam1
Member since 2008 • 4188 Posts

[QUOTE="Locutus_Picard"][QUOTE="gamer-adam1"]

I do use steam

and whats does it have to do? because I know that once I play BC2 steam does nothing, I don't play off steam servers, for most games the people I play with don't all have Steam, I know that if I have a problem connecting to a server it would have nothing to do with steam, If Steam is down, the games are still up and runing and people outside of steam can still play online

ShadowMoses900

There are also games that are hosted on Valve servers, like Valve games. And Steam-only games with MP obviously run also use Steam for Steam also stores your savedata online, i.e. Steam Cloud, it stores your configuration online etc. Steam is a platform to run games on. It's a digital service. Valve is a huge service that has huge bandwidth costs...but still it cost 0$ to make an account for Steam. You only pay for the games, not for usage of steam. Quite peculiar that we still have people defending the $60 tag that XBL has because of these so-called huge bandwidth costs. How is Steam able to run this kind of service without ANY subscription costs, and mind you Steam is at least 10 times bigger than XBL. And still XBL manages to charge it's people. So what we can conclude, services bigger than XBL manage to make a profit despite having no subscription costs. There is no reason for XBL to charge if big-time services like Steam can do it for free and a smaller service like PSN that is running no profit at all also do it for free. Steam and PSN is funding its own free online service. YOU fund the online service on XBL while the funding isn't even neccessary. Microsoft wants to make extra profit on XBL and YOU help them make profits, even if they already have enough money to flood all of New Orleans with 100$ bills. YOU fund THEIR GREED. YOU are part of the problem.

Well said sir/miss, finally SOMEBODY knows what their talking about.

I swear I think that alot of people are just lying when they say they use Steam, or for that matter PSN. Like the guy you quoted, it was blatanlty clear that he had never used it before, I just wish they would come clean instead of trying to hide it. I wonder why people have to lie like that.

Also keep in mind that there are ads on xbox Livefor everything from cars to deodarant. Take into account how many people are xbox Live users and that alone is more than enough to cover EVERYTHING without charge. Something interesting to notice is the fact that both Valve and Sony do not even come close to the amount of money that Microsoft makes after a fiscal year (hell mabey even a fiscal month) due to PC's as well. So why is it that both of these companies can offer the SAME (or better in Steams case) for free while Microsft charges?

http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198020275793

I love steam,

Valve Servers are not Steam servers, Xbox 360 and PS3 both use Valve Servers. and NO Steam only MP games run off gamer rented servers. saving data is not like Onlive, if it was you wouldnt need to install the game. Steam is a online store, and pretty much nothing more

Steam can be free because Valve Doesnt need to worry about every servers that gamers play on, from what im reading up, Steam also makes money on publishers that are paying steam to have there content, also get money from games

that was fail

Avatar image for Riverwolf007
Riverwolf007

26023

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#164 Riverwolf007
Member since 2005 • 26023 Posts

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

btw, i find it funny that steam gets dragged into this whole mess.

most people think gears is the most popular cover based game this gen but actually it's dudes hiding behind pc in sw.

bez2083

Personally, I find it comforting that people are so concerned about how and what I spend my money on.....

I mean, if I shot Heroin in my veins day in or day out "Meh, it's your life, die slow, junkie."

But if I spend $60 a year (4 hours of 1 workday for me btw) on XBL "What are you doing to yourself man!!!! Intervention!!! Intervention!!!"

What I eat shouldn't make you run to the toilet, amirite? If I'm good with it, you should be great with it, right?

I've sucked it up a long time ago that if I want to play online on XBL, I have to pay the annual cost. It's the way it is, I'm not gonna start a grass roots campaign to take down the man, I just wanna be able to play online ffs. Way more epic **** in the world going on than this.

i've argued about this in here for 5 years now and i will tell you why it is that i just make jokes about the subject at this point.

number one, it's not about money, if it was about money or being a ripoff then me paying $110 to upgrade my sixaxis to ds3's or mass effect 2 and oblivion being triple the cost of the 360 versions when they came out would be basically the same thing, that you can pay less for a product that is almost the same.

and

number two, what this actually is about is that xbl is better than psn and it is an observation that is in no way subjective or opinion but is something that can be shown to be superior and that is xbl's biggest sin in fanboy eyes.

how do you attack something that is better? by price because that is all you really have.

maybe some drivel about the principal of the thing but that just goes back to the first point.

is it a rip off? yeah it prolly is but big deal i bought name brand sodas today when the cheap alternative was right there next to them so y'know whatever it's a drop in the bucket as far as ripoffs go.

are they right about getting locked out of multiplayer unless you come up with money? yeah they are but i knew that going in and i was promised the best online experence on console and that is exactly what was delivered.

what i mostly think about the whole thing now is that the xbl argument for me has turned into the classic legal precident of let the baby have it's bottle and just agree that it's a rip off whiletelling people about being glad that there is a bare bones free experence on psn and also an upgraded experence on xbl.

Avatar image for Locutus_Picard
Locutus_Picard

4166

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#165 Locutus_Picard
Member since 2004 • 4166 Posts

I like how you keep spelling Valve wrong. :P

Avatar image for gamer-adam1
gamer-adam1

4188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#166 gamer-adam1
Member since 2008 • 4188 Posts

I like how you keep spelling Valve wrong. :P

Locutus_Picard

yes it is fail, and now im gonna set up a PSN account, because I also own that :)

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
DragonfireXZ95

26712

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#167 DragonfireXZ95
Member since 2005 • 26712 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="Locutus_Picard"] There are also games that are hosted on Valve servers, like Valve games. And Steam-only games with MP obviously run also use Steam for Steam also stores your savedata online, i.e. Steam Cloud, it stores your configuration online etc. Steam is a platform to run games on. It's a digital service. Valve is a huge service that has huge bandwidth costs...but still it cost 0$ to make an account for Steam. You only pay for the games, not for usage of steam. Quite peculiar that we still have people defending the $60 tag that XBL has because of these so-called huge bandwidth costs. How is Steam able to run this kind of service without ANY subscription costs, and mind you Steam is at least 10 times bigger than XBL. And still XBL manages to charge it's people. So what we can conclude, services bigger than XBL manage to make a profit despite having no subscription costs. There is no reason for XBL to charge if big-time services like Steam can do it for free and a smaller service like PSN that is running no profit at all also do it for free. Steam and PSN is funding its own free online service. YOU fund the online service on XBL while the funding isn't even neccessary. Microsoft wants to make extra profit on XBL and YOU help them make profits, even if they already have enough money to flood all of New Orleans with 100$ bills. YOU fund THEIR GREED. YOU are part of the problem.gamer-adam1

Well said sir/miss, finally SOMEBODY knows what their talking about.

I swear I think that alot of people are just lying when they say they use Steam, or for that matter PSN. Like the guy you quoted, it was blatanlty clear that he had never used it before, I just wish they would come clean instead of trying to hide it. I wonder why people have to lie like that.

Also keep in mind that there are ads on xbox Livefor everything from cars to deodarant. Take into account how many people are xbox Live users and that alone is more than enough to cover EVERYTHING without charge. Something interesting to notice is the fact that both Valve and Sony do not even come close to the amount of money that Microsoft makes after a fiscal year (hell mabey even a fiscal month) due to PC's as well. So why is it that both of these companies can offer the SAME (or better in Steams case) for free while Microsft charges?

http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198020275793

I love steam,

Valve Servers are not Steam servers, Xbox 360 and PS3 both use Valve Servers. and NO Steam only MP games run off gamer rented servers. saving data is not like Onlive, if it was you wouldnt need to install the game. Steam is a online store, and pretty much nothing more

Steam can be free because Valve Doesnt need to worry about every servers that gamers play on, from what im reading up, Steam also makes money on publishers that are paying steam to have there content, also get money from games

that was fail

You do realize that you have to download the games off of Steam servers. So even if you aren't using Steam servers in the game, you are still using Valve's bandwidth to actually acquire the game.
Avatar image for skrat_01
skrat_01

33767

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#168 skrat_01
Member since 2007 • 33767 Posts
Because Microsoft enjoys milking its user base, and the user base that pays does it on a regular enough basis. Their own worst enemy, and Microsoft is keen to exploit it.
Avatar image for channtheman1
channtheman1

1176

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#169 channtheman1
Member since 2007 • 1176 Posts
Ahh, it appears by quite a few of the early responses to this topic that Lemmings alike have FINALLY stopped defending paying for Xbox Live and have settled on the sensible "we pay for it because we have to" instead of the "IT IS WORTH IT!!11!" response.
Avatar image for abuabed
abuabed

6606

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#170 abuabed
Member since 2005 • 6606 Posts
LIVE can make you pay for something you're getting elsewhere for free.
Avatar image for Pug-Nasty
Pug-Nasty

8508

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#171 Pug-Nasty
Member since 2009 • 8508 Posts

[QUOTE="tormentos"] Well is not like running warhawk or mag is free,more games on ps3 support servers and they are not free of cost for sony,not only that live has more adds than psn which is a free service,for every single add ms get money. Is not like running games online cost money only to ms,live was charge to play since last gen,whend it was pretty much featureless just friend list and,voice chat in all games.VoodooHak

It's not like games like Gears of War or Halo are suffering from being P2P. It's not like either of them are doing anything extraordingary to draw in more players. In fact, I do believe there are more players in Halo games than there are in Warhawk and Mag. The benefit of dedicated serviers is moot, all things considered.

In terms of ads, if Sony knew how to place ads on the xmb, I'm sure they would, but as it stands, it seems less a choice and more a circumstance of them not knowing how to do it. Luckily, they have a half-hearted attempt at drawing ad revenue from PlayStation Home with whole areas dedicated to their advertising partners, not to mention the billboards and video screens. In both cases, it's really a non-issue.

Last gen, XBL was worth it since Sony had much less in terms of features and third party support. Again, a non-issue when you consider the context in which the services existed from 2002-2005.

Where does that leave us today? XBL still with more features and a level of integration that obviously, people care about, myself included.

I totally understand why people don't place value in those features, but that's ok. There are options for online play, so they're free to leave XBL behind for soemthing else. Me? I'll stick with XBL gold until the feature-to-cost ratio begins to bother me. For now, I find that it's A-ok for my needs.

The amount of people playing a game is no indicator of the online quality of that game. See CoD for proof. Dedicated servers have an enormous benefit to those playing the game, but you can believe something that isn't true if you want to.

And, Sony doesn't know how to place ads? Bwahahahahahahahahahaha.... hahaha.

Avatar image for Gue1
Gue1

12171

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#172 Gue1
Member since 2004 • 12171 Posts

Cross game chat and universal party invites.