@Cypress131 @spectreSE7EN whether there are dedicated servers or not is based on the game, not the service provider. BF3 for example uses dedicated servers where COD uses peer-peer.
$14/mo. for XBL? The only people who pay that price are the fools who bought a $99 xbox/ with 2 year subscription. They get the box cheaper because they are locked into a 2 year contract. The rest of us who aren't that foolish got our consoles in the $199 range and get our subscription through an online retailer. I recently renewed my subscription for a year and it was $32. The most I've ever paid is $42/ year. A little more than $2.50/mo. is worth the price to me. 1. the interface is better, much easier to use. 2. The party system is better, 3. VOIP doesn't fail as it does in the PS3 in so many cases. 4. I didn't get my ID stolen through XBL like I did with Sony.
I play games on both networks so I'm speaking from personal experience. XBL is far less frustrating to use and I'll pay 32-42 bucks per year for a better experience. It is worth it to me. Anything free is free for a reason because you're usually losing out elsewhere...features, support, improvements, etc.
@leandrro They will be expensive out of the gate, I'm sure. New console launches are always expensive because at the time of release the technology used to make them is newer. As the technology ages, it becomes more affordable to produce over time. I'm guessing the top models for both consoles will be no cheaper than $499 and might even hit close to $600. I'm sure there will be budget models that are cheaper but they'll always strip features that will make you want to fork out the extra $100-200
@Mar_Sama I have both consoles. XBL is worth the price and having played on both networks extensively, PSN is free for a reason because it would be criminal to charge for it. Besides, the cost of XBL is greatly overexaggerated by people who don't even own an xbox. Amazon and other online retailers are always running 1 year subscriptions to XBL for as cheap as $32/year, which only nets out to a little more than $2.50/mo. Only a fool would pay M$ directly for a $60/year subscription or buy a subsidized xbox for $99 and be forced to pay MS $14/mo. for 2 years. But obviously there are plenty of fools out there or they wouldn't offer ridiculous things like this.
@Cypress131 I don't feel bad for them. I'm not a M$ fan, but I do own both a PS3 and a 360 and I do more gaming on my 360 because that's where most of my friends are, and I do think the subscription XBL is worth the price over the clunky PSN. That's just my opinion having used both extensively. Again, this is not a M$ fanboy talking. I do like both consoles. However, if M$ screws themselves by proving the rumors to be true, then it is their own fault and I don't feel bad one bit and hope they fail. I've supported the xbox since the original launched in 2002, but if they are going to slap dedicated gamers in the face by blocking used games, requiring an active connection to play games, etc. then that is their own doing.
However, if it is all rumor and speculation, they have plenty of time to boost their image before launch. If MS does what everything thinks they're gonna do, then Sony will win the next gen war. I'm really hoping Sony improves on their dashboard interface and their PSN service for the PS4 because as it is now, there's a reason it is free.
@awhite33 sounds like both consoles will have multiple price offerings to make it affordable. I thought I read something about the xbox720 having a cheaper subscription based console, and then one that will be more expensive. Everytime a new console comes out, it is usually priced higher because they cost more to produce in the early phases. As usual, a year after launch we'll see both companies make a price drop of $50-$100. They know the hardcore fans/gamers will pay a premium price to get their hands on it first. The others who are still using the previous gen consoles will be enticed by the price drop in 2014, conveniently timed around the Holiday Season.
@thehorror2 @spectreSE7EN @awhite33 If they go this route, I'm pretty sure they've accounted for this growth and will be ready. Keep in mind, there are still a lot of people out there who are happy with the 360 and the PS3 and are willing to wait a while before they jump on the next gen bandwagon. Your theory sounds like you're expecting everyone who owns a 360 to instantly upgrade to to the 720 and will clog the network. There will be a transition period where many are on the old platform's network and over the next 2-3 years those people who aren't as anxious to invest in the new consoles will make the transition. They'll be able to handle the growth as needed. It is M$. They have more than enough $$ to support this kind of growth.
@slayerSS-3 @H0RSE again, Sim City server issues are the problem with the game. A little different than needing to be connected to XBL. People need to stop comparing a software game having issues connecting to their servers to XBL which has always been a very stable gaming network. Each game isn't going to be required that you be logged into their network...the games will check if you are on XBL, which is much better than a game like Diablo III requiring that you be logged into their servers.
@awhite33 People need to stop comparing an XBOX being always on vs. A specific game like Diablo and SIm City requiring that you be logged onto their servers. These games have issues because the server support by Blizzard and Sim CIty has been spotty. That's on their end. Can you name one occasion when XBL went down? The online requirement is not going to be a server side issue for each individual game. It will be whether you are connected to XBL or not. Anytime I've had issues connecting to XBL it is because my connection had issues, not because of XBL server issues. Their network is rock solid, has been since it launched on the original XBOX and I don't see that ever being a major issue. The issue comes into play when people have bad internet connections. From the sound of people on these comments, you would think half of the gamers here are on dial-up.
Let's be realistic. Most of us core gamers are always connected to the internet when we play games regardless of platform. Even when we are playing single player, we're usually logged into PSN or XBL. I would say that is true for most people who call themselves gamers. The issue with Diablo III and Sim CIty requiring online connections is that everything is dependent on whether the Diablo or Sim City servers are functioning. I seriously doubt the "always on" requirement will be handled this way. It will be more based on being connected to XBL. I can't think of one time, even going back to the original xbox, that XBL wasn't up and running. If I failed to connect, it was always an issue on my end with my ISP. I can only think of 2-3 times in the last 5 years that my ISP has failed to provide me with internet. When it does, the problem is usually fixed with in a couple of hours at the most.
This article uses Diablo III and Sim City's required internet connection as an example, but that's not how it will work. As long as you can connect to XBL, you'll be able to play. From my experience XBL has always been very stable and rock solid and I can't remember it ever going completely down.
The bigger issue to me is whether they will block used games. Not sure how they will do this unless every game will require a unique online pass.
Still all of this is rumor until M$ makes an official announcement. To my knowledge all info we are getting on this has come from "insider sources" and leaked information. No one from M$ has come out and publicly stated that this is the way it is going to be officially. I'll wait for that before getting too excited over rumors and speculation.
spectreSE7EN's comments