xbl is amazing, it has so many features it's amazing. It's not that ps3's isn't good or going to be good, it's as someone else said, how much can you add and keep it free?

While it may not cost you yet, you'll get hit in some way. Sony won't be keeping the servers running out of the goodness of their heart. Now, if you want Sony's network, great--have at it. I don't mind paying $50 to have a great overall experience. I stream my music from my PC (or my iPod or the 360 hard drive), while chatting with someone (or the in-game folks) and kicking some major a$$ on Gears (though not as much as I'd like). gCM

$4 a month is worth it to me. I've paid $15/month to play MMORPG's on a PC. XBL gives me the same benefits for gaming that an MMORPG has and has the advantage of being alot less in cost, and cross multiple games giving it the ability to maintain interest at all times.

Sony will likely copy most of the XBL ideas. Its just a matter of time. They may try to find a way to make it free, but it seems unlikely that will last.

Xbox Live vs Sony's No-Use-for-a-Name-Online-Netwo rk.

Sony really dropped the ball with their online. They had 5 years to copy microsoft and still took the position of max profit greater than customer satisfaction.

XBL is an excellent service, in this day and age, its one of the few things you'll pay for and feel you got your money's worth.

Something that people are expecting or were expecting Sony to do is have most of the great features of xbox live. The writer of this article writes:

"PNP is just missing all those little features we have come to take for granted everyday with XBOX Live. These being voice messaging, private chats and customizing your own profile. Not to mention the absence of a unified friends list. Of course, Sony is probably hacking away at these issues somewhere, but that fact that these were absent out of the box is dissapointing.

lthough, the XBOX Live Marketplace has full TV shows and Movies for rent. You can probably expect something similiar from Sony(maybe even music) , due to the fact that they own several movie studios and record labels. "

How is Sony suppost to find money to Subsidize the cost of deploying and maintaining all the servers required keep something of this magnitude up and running? It's simply not logical; only to maintain a global friends list for millions a huge number of servers and bandwidth is required; and I'm 100% that 3rd party developer will not be looking forward to be the ones subsidizing the cost. The fact that 3rd party games developed in the 360 and the PS3 are proving this to be a fact; since only the 360 versions has online features.
The equation for Sony's service is simple; if 3rd party developer do not want to pay or can't pay for online features, users are not paying, and sony does not want or have the money to pay then you will not have online features; it's as simple as that. Unless Sony comes up with a way to cover the cost of the service (like charging users) don't expect it to match xbox live.
Also, let's not forget that while Sony it's playing catch up and trying to figure out how to leave the service free, microsoft's engineers are brainstorming what new features will be added to xbox live on the next update.

lets face it, if sony ever managed in the first place with the ps2 to have a very competent online service, the xbox would have been way out of sonys league, but xbox live is excellent, i dont care if you have to pay, i know for what i pay i am getting a very good console online service and never had any problems with it.

to help finance the online network instead of taking an upfront fee and then doing the same (Xbox Live style). Microsoft's way of doing things is a lot safer, but also a lot more limiting in terms of how many people it can reach. No matter how you cut it down, the phrase "$50 a year for online multiplayer" just doesn't sound appealing. Out of close to 50 million Xbox and Xbox 360 owners, only 6 million have Live Accounts? Microsoft refuses to disclose how many of those are on Silver (free, no multiplayer) and how many are on paid Gold membership.

With Sony's network, anyone with a broadband connection can sign in and play. No UPFRONT fees equals more customers trying out the service and possibly buying not only additional game content, but downloadable games as well. And you can bet your ass that there's going to be significant advertising from music, movie, and game studios.

I'm going to be optimistic and assume that around 2/3 of Xbox Live subscribers pay the upfront fee. That equals only 8% of Xbox owners paying for the service. What Sony is trying out though is a service where nearly every Playstation 3 owner signs up for the online experience, and spends as much money as they want on optional content.

As far as I know, Xbox Live Silver still lets you purchase content. But without the ability to use that content in an online multiplayer fashion, there isn't that much incentive to buy it. The reason I purchased the Halo 2 Expansion pack is because I already had a Live account (technically it was my roommate's, but we shared). Without online, the purchase would have been kind of worthless. Point is, that expansion pack did amazingly well and I'm glad Bungie put it out. Based on the slides that were put out, Sony is taking a big hint from what Bungie was doing. Forget the Xbox Live service; Bungie is an example of how all games on that service should be treated and expanded upon.

And this is where the numbers kick in again. If Sony makes their service robust enough and developers make enough compelling content, the Playstation Network has the potential reel in a hell of a lot of money. It's one thing to have 4 million paying customers, and another to attract 40 million paying customers.

The risk factor is that not all of them would be paying the same amount of money consistently every month, but at the same time it would harder for them to keep track of their yearly expenses on online content. It's not unfeasable that the average PNP customers would be spending over $40~50 a year on online content. And even if they only spend $10~20 on average, overall it's still 5 times more revenue. Add the amount of money people pay for their purchased titles ($60) and there's plenty of funding for an online network. It's basically the Walmart strategy. It's risky, but if they can pull it off it might force Microsoft to do away with their annual fees. Sony has already pressured them to set up a free version of their service (albeit, without the most important component). I agree that while the network does need improvement, it's important to remember that Xbox Live wasn't even up and running until several months after the system launch. Even to this day, the Live service is being upgraded and improved, so expect Sony to do the same with their service.

I always enjoy reading your posts when im in a bad mood.

No one cares if they have to spend $50 a year people are buying 5-6 games on average like i said people loose $50 in change in their sofa's a year.

Quote: basically the Walmart strategy". It's the Walmart Fan base mass that makes up the bulk of any winning companies fanbase and they're the consumer's Sony will have trouble with in the first place, $600 bucks may be a deal but it doesn't change the fact much of past sucesses came from the poor.

"to help finance the online network instead of taking an upfront fee and then doing the same (Xbox Live style). Microsoft's way of doing things is a lot safer, but also a lot more limiting in terms of how many people it can reach. No matter how you cut it down, the phrase "$50 a year for online multiplayer" just doesn't sound appealing. Out of close to 50 million Xbox and Xbox 360 owners, only 6 million have Live Accounts? Microsoft refuses to disclose how many of those are on Silver (free, no multiplayer) and how many are on paid Gold membership. "

After Reading this Paragraph it become clearly evident That in the for case Freedom of speech it should Limited on a ID requirement basis.

Ok Let Not get it twisted with these numbers, 6 Million People on xbox live is a huge number period. Including the Fact that alot young Kids own xbox's and the parents ain't ready for them to go online much less have the internet access so do the math Son. 6 million people is more than enough to have online in the first place and prove its a success. I wanna see Sonee Make up 6 years worth of work in a month. If gaming is and my hobby then why not pay 4$ a Month in advance to Preserve my hobby and Expand it? Get Lost with that bullsh1t logic of how Sonee IS equal with online service. Tell that to a 13 year old gamer with no knowledge of anything live.
" I agree that while the network does need improvement, it's important to remember that Xbox Live wasn't even up and running until several months after the system launch. Even to this day, the Live service is being upgraded and improved, so expect Sony to do the same with their service. "
Yeah? and with what money? Sonee ain't made sh1t if they giving it away for free. I love the Fact i know my 39.99 Went to updating servers and Maitenence. Thanks Microsoft.

Xbox 360, Get Down or Lay Down.

The PNP HAS only been up and running for a month whereas live has been up for vastly longer. There is also alot more sony can give with their movie, music and gaming background. And the fact that it does what it sets out to achieve, which is allow a good online multiplayer service, is pretty good considering its completely free.

I think people expected the PNP to be as bad as the PS2 online. But its not. I wish people would wake up and smell the coffee because its actually a good system sony has here, its got plenty of time to improve on what its got and OF COURSE it will get better over time and minus the non-essential extra downloads, its completely free. It may not have the added titbits that live has but everything that needs to be there is there and no should complain since they're getting this thing for free, jeez, look at the bright side for a change

There is no comparisson right now honestly speaking. Xbox Live is better PERIOD. I pay 300 dollars a year for 6 xbox live accounts. And I get priceless value from it week after week with family and friends playing games together at my house on Live. I never have a problem paying for quality and the best. And thats what xbox live is clearly. With that said...I can't complain about the Playstation network...its Free...and it works. But when you compare...xbox live is unriveled.

you can count on sony delivering movies on there network, games an music but not movies!! doing HD downloads would really hurt there blueray sales.before you say that Ms is hurting its HD-DVD sales, MS dont OWN hd-dvd so they could really care less.unlike sony on the other hand, sony OWNS blue ray, so they would be hurting themselves!!

an another reason why I dont think sony will deliver HD-movies on there network is because the bandwith needed to do so!! they would have to set up ,run ,an maintain servers which is something they dont want to do with there main money maker an thats there games!!

never tried PNP so I can't comment on the service! Xboxlive is great though and I've been on since day 1!

and I'm wondering. Where can I get a 12 month Live Membership for the lowest price? I'm using XB Connect at the moment, but I'm hoping to play against my friends and some of you guys in Halo 2...eventually.

comparison? how can you compare an integrated online service to a website? i mean really, sony took ps2 online and added a website to download trailers and demos. woohoo.

But is it true the console has no wi-fi? Wires are a thing of the past people, go watch an aol advert.

Lol.Very succinct, if a little harsh. I could have saved myself a bubble if you had posted earlier.

Nobody has wireless? ffs they give them away free when you buy broadband and even if you didn't get one they're not very expensive.

And you high pingers should be shot.

I don't think EITHER are up to my standards yet... The only thing i've enjoyed off either of them is Medieval (the PS1 game for my psp), the motorstorm demo, and the Lost Planet demo.

As far as gameplay goes...it's up to the developers...R:FOM has a GREAT online service, but so does Halo2 and GOW.

I think people will go wherever the games are...which is why SOCOM 3 is currently the reigning champion (Unreal 04' in a close second) for online gaming. We ALL know the PS2 has a TERRIBLE online service, but people love Socom...

I personally wouldn't pay for online whatsoever. That's why i don't own Warcraft...

Live is NOT worth it. Thank your heartless parents that are scrapping up pennies so you can trash-talk some guy in Kansas just to earn your affection that you'll never give them...

scarping pennies? seriously dude? you talk like you have a ps3 and 360 and then talk about scraping pennies for $50 a year. its 2006. $50 isnt a lot of money. the average person makes that in 2 hours worth of work or less. and SOCOM the top online game? are you f*cking kidding me? have you ever heard of Halo 2? put it this way, when halo 2 released the company i was workin at at the time (a real estate office, not exactly full of gamers), couldnt get over it. for 3 months all you heard about was last nights halo 2 live tournament. i think a few million other people agreed with them, too. SOCOM on the other hand? didnt even know it existed.

Jesus wept, It's like online gaming is the 'Be-all' and 'End-all'

Get some friends and play!

That's like comparing a cassette deck (Sony) to an MP3 player (MS).

And anyone who doesn't have XBL but has the capabilty to have it at this point is like refusing to give up your cassette tapes for an ipod.

Go for something creative (Nintendo)

Check out the Creative Zen V. That owns any ipod IMO. Also you're obviously one of those posers who only cares about looking cool, I doubt you even care about music.

Now that Jim Ryan is gone just need to remove Herman Hulst from his position! And maybe give Shuhei the position he deserved.

This gen hasn't been the best for games, last gen consoles are still out there and now there's been talk of the PS6 and Xbox Two for a year or so. Many games this gen will be ported to next gen and the cycle will continue. The re-release of the Neo Geo AES+, games on cartridge for £70 ($95), gaming is going back in time. Gaming has gone pricing mad with the high cost of games, consoles and controllers. The men and women at the top are clueless.

It’s always interesting to hear behind-the-scenes stories like this, especially involving veterans like Shuhei Yoshida and leadership figures like Jim Ryan. That said, there are usually multiple sides to decisions at that level. It could be less about not “listening” and more about differences in long-term vision for PlayStation. Yoshida played a huge role in shaping the brand, so whatever the reason, his impact is undeniable.

If true, and I'm inclined to believe it is, it goes to show that Sony lost their way when they became more western/didn't respect the PlayStation origin story. Andrew House and Jack Tretton did great work, but they also didn't try to fundamentally change the PlayStation DNA. Ryan oversaw the death of Japan Studio and a live service direction.

I already figured this, good lord imagine if Shuhei took over instead, would've been a platinum era 😩

I miss the first three generations of PlayStation. The way they turned PS3 around, we knew they meant business. We were all worried for a bit there around launch. Eventually from 2008 they started shifting slowly. But since Yoshida was fired, it's never been the same. Still enjoy my PS5 daily. I got a backlog dating back to PS2 lol So I'm fine but new games aren't as appealing anymore.

It seems like we were thrown on to the worst timeline possible where everything is too expensive and the wrong people were put in positions that makes the world a shitty place. We could have had Shu as the head of PS but we got the shitty alternative. Same goes for everyone in power around the world. Doesn’t matter the company or country the majority of us got the shitty picks and the world is declining like never before. I do think PS can come out of this because of their studios, talent and IP but they need someone more in touch with gamers leading things like Shu was. They’re still the best place for console gaming imo but it could be much better than it is especially without the massive live service failures. The rest of the world I have a lot less hope for right now. Hopefully the pendulum swings back towards the good ole days but I’m preparing for the worst.

There goes illuminati distraction story

So now there's certifiable proof that Ryan was in fact "fired", as opposed to when it was first announced that he "retired", in order to save face.

There's another guy who recently "retired" as CEO of another large gaming company, after doing a dismantling job as lead for well over a decade.

seems legit, the business man, fires the one who has ideas to move the business forward.

Jim Ryan is the reason why we are entering year 6 since the PS5 launch and many of us don't feel like the PS5 has gotten started as yet.

I hope going forward, we will see a return to form.