This is a topic that is often hotly debated and often no conclusion is made. It is important to note for all those who are pro-free and say "Why Should I pay for Xbox Live when PSN is free?" the answer to that question is difficult. People who argue that now the PSN is almost identical to Xbox Live are mistaken. Xbox Live has a much more robust system, adding friends, parties and chatting is all much more seem-less and seems to be built better into the Operating System and network. Playstation has long suffered catching up to the level of social interactivity that Xbox has had which could be a major reason for the share button in their new console.
It’s true that the PlayStation Network is free and that you’ll need to pay to access online features with Xbox Live. But the old adage remains true: you pay for what you get. Xbox Live remains a more secure platform than the PSN, subject to far fewer hacks and other problems. And while the paid PlayStation Plus service is certainly a great value, the fact remains that if you have security concerns the Xbox 360 is the better of the two. No network is going to be perfectly secure, of course, but Xbox Live has never seen a month-long hack in which tens of millions of users were affected. Live is a great deal for third parties then, but less so for gamers. On the plus side, it means Microsoft get the lion’s share of online-enabled games, with even the most low-rent of independent developers able to support online matchmaking in their games. Meaning, overall, it makes online play in multi-format titles far more likely on the 360.
In the future we are probably going to see even more levels of membership for paid online subscription like so:
1 Free -You can access online but can't play multiplayer.
2 Small Yearly Fee - Access online and play multiplayer on all titles.
3 Mid priced Yearly Fee - All previous perks and free games monthly and bonus content, plus more deals.
4 High priced Yearly Fee - All previous perks and also will pay for entertainment content like TV shows and movies. This will try to be your entertainment hub.
THE TRUTH
The best asset of a paid subscription fee is that it allows even small developers to support online play - the value of which can’t possibly be denied. Without it, we’d never see online play in small-budget XBLA titles or even marginalised full-price games. The question to ask is whether or not that’s worth the precious money from your pocket, on rotation, every 12 months. From the player’s end experience, Live is the leader, but it’s hardly a full fifty bucks/forty-quid ahead of its competition. The market has changed since 2002 and so long as the PlayStation Network and Steam Community threaten to match Live feature-for-feature, Live needs to be obviously better in some other way, especially Australia where it costs a whole $30 more for a yearly subscription than the $50 cost over in the U.S. At some point in the coming months, PSN will rob Live’s Friends List, completing its mimicry of Microsoft’s system. It’s at that point where questions must start to be asked of Live. It’s certainly easier for developers, but as gamers, perhaps we should rightly expect just a little more from our Gold subscription. So if more isn't doesn't to improve the premium service gamers will start to question whether the extra money is worth it but for security reasons and the support of developers premium services must continue on Consoles if they are going to exist into the financially demanding future of gaming.
No comments:
Post a Comment