This topic is locked from further discussion.
PSN always has been open to developers? I doubt this has anything to do with the hacking of PSN if thats what you're referring to.Yeah but look what happened to PSN when it "opened up".
Steameffekt
[QUOTE="Steameffekt"]I doubt this has anything to do with the hacking of PSN if thats what you're referring to. Yes I am referring to that.Yeah but look what happened to PSN when it "opened up".
Crossel777
[QUOTE="Crossel777"][QUOTE="Steameffekt"]PSN always has been open to developers? I doubt this has anything to do with the hacking of PSN if thats what you're referring to. Just what kind of "open" are we talking about? Maybe the stringent 'rules' and limitations in place are what keep people safe? We don't know unless either side goes into specifics. Well being more "open" to developers doesn't mean the security is full of holes. Thats a different kind of open.Yeah but look what happened to PSN when it "opened up".
AncientDozer
i thought people loved steam? is it really that bad i tryed it once and my account got bugged so i couldnt play any games Sounds like user error, I know no one who has ever had that problem. Steam is a great service.[QUOTE="Jelley0"]
I'm so sick of Valve. Steam is a terrible service. Though I have no idea what the effect would be XboxLive.
coltgames
[QUOTE="coltgames"]i thought people loved steam? is it really that bad i tryed it once and my account got bugged so i couldnt play any games Sounds like user error, I know no one who has ever had that problem. Steam is a great service. ill try it again seemed like a pretty cool service , i really liked torchlight from what i played , not really into dd so ill prob just buy arcade stuff from it not retail or ill just buy pc exclusives from it i really want to play witcher 2 just havent gotten around to it[QUOTE="Jelley0"]
I'm so sick of Valve. Steam is a terrible service. Though I have no idea what the effect would be XboxLive.
DragonfireXZ95
Steam is a store as far as I'm concerned. As a "service," I don't really see anything all that impressive about it.
Live and PSN are both too closed, but that isn't likely going to change anytime soon. At least Sony has the foresight ot allow some freedom to developers.
[QUOTE="Crossel777"][QUOTE="Steameffekt"]PSN always has been open to developers? I doubt this has anything to do with the hacking of PSN if thats what you're referring to. Just what kind of "open" are we talking about? Maybe the stringent 'rules' and limitations in place are what keep people safe? We don't know unless either side goes into specifics. No he actually mean that MS controls everything,if they want to give free content MS block it,MS doesn't like free content on xbox live and is only allow as they see fit,they also have a say in all prices on the market as well. Been more open has nothing to do with the PSN hack,and more with been more flexible with what developers want to do,in fact he is talking about all the free content the PS3 version of Portal 2 will get while that same content on 360 most carry a price to see the light of the day. In the end the person who get a win win from this is you,that don't have to pay $15 dollar for a portal DLC while the PS3 version get it for free.Yeah but look what happened to PSN when it "opened up".
AncientDozer
Valve makes great games, steam isnt terrible service because i am sure a crap ton of pc gamers would disagree and read the first post it will give you an idea of how it would effect liveI'm so sick of Valve. Steam is a terrible service. Though I have no idea what the effect would be XboxLive.
Jelley0
[QUOTE="Crossel777"][QUOTE="Steameffekt"]I doubt this has anything to do with the hacking of PSN if thats what you're referring to. Yes I am referring to that.Are you actually saying that you think that PSN being down was because of them being more open?Yeah but look what happened to PSN when it "opened up".
Steameffekt
I hope that Microsoft allows Valve to do what they want, but I doubt that they will.
Steam is a store as far as I'm concerned. As a "service," I don't really see anything all that impressive about it.
Live and PSN are both too closed, but that isn't likely going to change anytime soon. At least Sony has the foresight ot allow some freedom to developers.
Pug-Nasty
You must not play any multiplayer games or have any friends on Steam, because in terms of friends/multiplayer, it's a hell of a lot better than Xbox Live or PSN.
[QUOTE="coltgames"]i thought people loved steam? is it really that bad i tryed it once and my account got bugged so i couldnt play any games Sounds like user error, I know no one who has ever had that problem. Steam is a great service.[QUOTE="Jelley0"]
I'm so sick of Valve. Steam is a terrible service. Though I have no idea what the effect would be XboxLive.
DragonfireXZ95
Steam is a great service if you like being forced to use it to play a PC game and enjoy the fact that you don't own any of the games you buy and like how Valve can remove games you payed for from your account if you break a rule or something. OH BUT ATLEAST IT HAS TEH SALES!!!!121! Steam is like drugs, it makes you feel like you're in control. But yeah I guess it's a great service if you were a fan of the Soviet Union or something similar.
Sounds like user error, I know no one who has ever had that problem. Steam is a great service.[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="coltgames"] i thought people loved steam? is it really that bad i tryed it once and my account got bugged so i couldnt play any games
Jelley0
Steam is a great service if you like being forced to use it to play a PC game and enjoy the fact that you don't own any of the games you buy and like how Valve can remove games you payed for from your account if you break a rule or something. OH BUT ATLEAST IT HAS TEH SALES!!!!121! Steam is like drugs, it makes you feel like you're in control. But yeah I guess it's a great service if you were a fan of the Soviet Union or something similar.
Right... Kind of like games you download from Xbox Live or PSN, right? :roll: You don't own the games, they are just on your account.If it plays anything like CS/CSS PS3 users are going to get destroyed by PC users (unless the PS3 version supports KB/M). I agree MS should allow steamworks on xbla as this would prevent the online community from dying out (as easily). They seem to be taking some pointers from Apple when it comes to the Xbox.
Translations is:We need to see all profit going to us from any thing we release on XBLA as well all costs need to be passed onto microsoft not us or the consumer...
Translations is:We need to see all profit going to us from any thing we release on XBLA as well all costs need to be passed onto microsoft not us or the consumer...
WilliamRLBaker
This is pretty much it. MS has had control of XBL from day 1, and they have built an awesome online experience from it. Why would they all of the sudden open it up to developer control because Gabe Newell says so?
Profit from what? All of Valve's DLC and updates are all free on PC. They want that on consoles as well...Translations is:We need to see all profit going to us from any thing we release on XBLA as well all costs need to be passed onto microsoft not us or the consumer...
WilliamRLBaker
Translations is:We need to see all profit going to us from any thing we release on XBLA as well all costs need to be passed onto microsoft not us or the consumer...
WilliamRLBaker
Yeah, that greedy Gabe, releasing free DLC and cheating MS out of their money.
[QUOTE="Jelley0"][QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"] Sounds like user error, I know no one who has ever had that problem. Steam is a great service.DragonfireXZ95
Steam is a great service if you like being forced to use it to play a PC game and enjoy the fact that you don't own any of the games you buy and like how Valve can remove games you payed for from your account if you break a rule or something. OH BUT ATLEAST IT HAS TEH SALES!!!!121! Steam is like drugs, it makes you feel like you're in control. But yeah I guess it's a great service if you were a fan of the Soviet Union or something similar.
Right... Kind of like games you download from Xbox Live or PSN, right? :roll: You don't own the games, they are just on your account.Did you even read all of what I said? And no, that isn't the same thing because Microsoft and Sony don't take away the games you bought :roll:
Just a thought: what if this results in no Xbox 360 version of Counterstrike: GO?Translations is:We need to see all profit going to us from any thing we release on XBLA as well all costs need to be passed onto microsoft not us or the consumer...
WilliamRLBaker
Yeah but look what happened to PSN when it "opened up".
Steameffekt
You do realise the kind of "opened up" he's talking about had nothing to do with the PSN hack.
They were talking about Free content so how much Valve wins for something that is given free.?Translations is:We need to see all profit going to us from any thing we release on XBLA as well all costs need to be passed onto microsoft not us or the consumer...
WilliamRLBaker
This is pretty much it. MS has had control of XBL from day 1, and they have built an awesome online experience from it. Why would they all of the sudden open it up to developer control because Gabe Newell says so?tempest91Actually EA say so and MS allowed why else do you think EA kill their games when they want and they run their own servers.? Developers can push MS EA already did it,is simple it only took several versions of EA games been online on PS2 alone and not xbox to make MS reconsider and take EA seriously.
the only opening i want to see is cross platform play between consoles. i don want anything to do with pc. cross platform play with pc is a very bad idea pc gamers are proz at multiplayer games and with mouse and keyboard they will literaly rape console gamers. but cross platform play with ps3 and 360 will be great and could actualy be alot of fun. but there is no chance m$ will allow cross platform play with ps3 since it charges for its service.:?
wait so xbox live doesnt get that portal 2 dlc for free?!?! what a rip off yoiu pay for live and on top of that, dlc thats suppose to be free costs money? man im glad i got it for ps3 but if i would have got it on my xbox i would be extremely ticked about thisTH1Sx1SxSPARTAUnless something has changed both PS3 and Xbox 360 versions of Portal 2 will be getting the DLC for free. I remember reading an article about it a while ago.
[QUOTE="TH1Sx1SxSPARTA"]wait so xbox live doesnt get that portal 2 dlc for free?!?! what a rip off yoiu pay for live and on top of that, dlc thats suppose to be free costs money? man im glad i got it for ps3 but if i would have got it on my xbox i would be extremely ticked about thisCAlNlACUnless something has changed both PS3 and Xbox 360 versions of Portal 2 will be getting the DLC for free. I remember reading an article about it a while ago. The first DLC is, because Microsoft allows for the first DLC to be free, but after that, Microsoft's going to be charging.
"Other developers on the PS3 are starting to benefit from Sony's more open approach. Hopefully that will help Microsoft see that's a good strategy for making customers happy..."
lol That's a funny part because of what's been happening lately. We all know, MS is all about making the customers happy as they have numerously stated. But talk is, well talk. :)
[QUOTE="CAlNlAC"][QUOTE="TH1Sx1SxSPARTA"]wait so xbox live doesnt get that portal 2 dlc for free?!?! what a rip off yoiu pay for live and on top of that, dlc thats suppose to be free costs money? man im glad i got it for ps3 but if i would have got it on my xbox i would be extremely ticked about thisNintendonlyUnless something has changed both PS3 and Xbox 360 versions of Portal 2 will be getting the DLC for free. I remember reading an article about it a while ago. The first DLC is, because Microsoft allows for the first DLC to be free, but after that, Microsoft's going to be charging. Yeah most likely thats is what will happen. Anyway it won't bother me though as I got the PS3 version.
this is a horrible translation, they want to give us patching and free dlc, along with cross platform play. What profits are you talking about?Translations is:We need to see all profit going to us from any thing we release on XBLA as well all costs need to be passed onto microsoft not us or the consumer...
WilliamRLBaker
One simply has to look at it logically.
Xbox live has been closed since the begining.
Psn has been open since the begining.
Newell treated XBL as a god send up till 2 or so years ago then he did a 180 and started ******* Sony's **** There has to be a reason outside of xbox live being a closed network, and with their recent attitude towards EA...
One plays lets say X amount of dollars for internet in their house PC player, Ps3 player, and 360 player are all playing counter strike together online. the 360 player has to pay X dollars and the LIVE fees to play online when ps3 and pc don't have to make any additional payments. That is the only reason I see MS blocking this--If people are playing the same game together why does one person have to pay more for the same thing, it would make MS look badthere has to be a reason outside of xbox live being a closed network.
WilliamRLBaker
Isn't it odd that steamworks is somehow now a requirement to receive updates and dlc for valve games? One would think that the robust xbox live would be sufficient at offering that free dlc and those updates without a problem..Why is steamworks all of a sudden a requirement? could it be a giant hypocracy where Valve wants to control all updates, servers and dlc they are under instead of any moneygoing to Microsoft for testing, bandwidth, or server space?
Seems like its the same thing it always was.
Valve: hey we got this game we have this dlc too we are requiring you Microsoft to pay for its testing, bandwidth, and server space or we wont release it on xbox 360.
Microsoft: sorry we've had the same stance forever if you want it free you pay for the testing, bandwidth and server space and we'd be happy to offer that dlc for free to the consumers but if you wont pay then we will pass that cost onto the consumer.
Valve: then I guess we wont be releasing that dlc on xbox 360.
Its logically simple really and is actually a fact that Microsoft has had that stance since the begining when it came to dlc the developer or publisher paid for the dlc for it to free to the users otherwise Microsoft passed the cost onto the consumer.
Not everything sony or MS does is good or great for the industry i start with that. MS force developer to charge for content,when they want to give it free is not secret they also have a say on price which we learn from super meat ball developer,but that was rumored ages ago. Not every one is fine with what MS does with xbox live,even since last gen and the first to stand against it was EA,the only difference is that EA was huge incredibly huge,and did no lower its head to what MS has to say about live,they did a simple strategy you don't allow us to run our own servers,we don't make games online on xbox live,and they did EA did not play they deliver Madden online and well as several other EA games online on PS2 but not on xbox. And by the next year EA games were back online on xbox and EA ran their games on their severs,now the move EA did is not in favor of us back them it was on its favor because it allows them to kill games when they want so you move to the next version. Were ever is for the wrong or right reason you can stand to MS,EA already did but that imply actually sabotaging one of your own games on the process,EA did not care back then online wasn't as big as it is now,and the PS2 version would out sold the xbox version silly either way. What MS is doing is not good for use William no matter how you slice it,is bad when a developer want to reward you with a free download for your supporting them with your money,MS should not stand in the way.One simply has to look at it logically.
WilliamRLBaker
Xbox live has been closed since the begining.
Psn has been open since the begining.
Newell treated XBL as a god send up till 2 or so years ago then he did a 180 and started ******* Sony's **** There has to be a reason outside of xbox live being a closed network, and with their recent attitude towards EA...
[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]One plays lets say X amount of dollars for internet in their house PC player, Ps3 player, and 360 player are all playing counter strike together online. the 360 player has to pay X dollars and the LIVE fees to play online when ps3 and pc don't have to make any additional payments. That is the only reason I see MS blocking this--If people are playing the same game together why does one person have to pay more for the same thing, it would make MS look bad From what I understand MS doesn't have a problem with cross platform play between Xbox 360 and PC as there are a few examples of games out there that use the feature. Its just cross platform play between Xbox 360 and PS3 that MS doesn't seem to want. It might be because of the additional fee thing but more likely its for other reasons we will never know about.there has to be a reason outside of xbox live being a closed network.
Diviniuz
[QUOTE="tempest91"]This is pretty much it. MS has had control of XBL from day 1, and they have built an awesome online experience from it. Why would they all of the sudden open it up to developer control because Gabe Newell says so?tormentosActually EA say so and MS allowed why else do you think EA kill their games when they want and they run their own servers.? Developers can push MS EA already did it,is simple it only took several versions of EA games been online on PS2 alone and not xbox to make MS reconsider and take EA seriously.
I really don't know what you are saying about EA, but starting this gen, MS has had a firm control on XBL and it has worked well for them. To give up control is really not going to happen at this point. Especially to Valve, who Microsoft has been in Direct competition with when it comes to game services (GFWL). Yes they failed with it, and that is all the more reason to reject this sentiment of judgement from valve. MS is fine without them.
And you really believe that.? And what are those $60 a year for aren't those for servers and faster downloads already.? Wait did MS pass you they bill for online play already.? Come on dude MS charge your $60 a year for online play,that is the maximum level of passing the cost of everything to you,so wait they charge you for live with the excuse that is for severs and they charger developers are well for the same if developers want to give anything free.? And some how this is good for us or the industry.? Wow just wow..Isn't it odd that steamworks is somehow now a requirement to receive updates and dlc for valve games? One would think that the robust xbox live would be sufficient at offering that free dlc and those updates without a problem..Why is steamworks all of a sudden a requirement? could it be a giant hypocracy where Valve wants to control all updates, servers and dlc they are under instead of any moneygoing to Microsoft for testing, bandwidth, or server space?
WilliamRLBaker
Seems like its the same thing it always was.
Valve: hey we got this game we have this dlc too we are requiring you Microsoft to pay for its testing, bandwidth, and server space or we wont release it on xbox 360.
Microsoft: sorry we've had the same stance forever if you want it free you pay for the testing, bandwidth and server space and we'd be happy to offer that dlc for free to the consumers but if you wont pay then we will pass that cost onto the consumer.
Valve: then I guess we wont be releasing that dlc on xbox 360.
Its logically simple really and is actually a fact that Microsoft has had that stance since the begining when it came to dlc the developer or publisher paid for the dlc for it to free to the users otherwise Microsoft passed the cost onto the consumer.
I really don't know what you are saying about EA, but starting this gen, MS has had a firm control on XBL and it has worked well for them. To give up control is really not going to happen at this point. Especially to Valve, who Microsoft has been in Direct competition with when it comes to game services (GFWL). Yes they failed with it, and that is all the more reason to reject this sentiment of judgement from valve. MS is fine without them.tempest91Simple EA boycott xbox live,and make online games only on PS2,what many tough would be a fierce battle actually ended quickly with EA winning and MS allowing EA games to run on their severs. Electronic Arts votes for Sony, tells Microsoft to push off Microsoft demanded too much control BIG GAMES firm Electronic Arts will put one of its top games online on Tuesday but only for the Playstation 2 and not for the Xbox. That, according to a report in today's Wall Street Journal is a deliberate snub to Microsoft which has tried to persuade EA to push its games for the Xbox Live. http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1008467/electronic-arts-votes-for-sony-tells-microsoft-to-push-off#ixzz1W5Orr0nn Not to mention EA wanted a piece of the money MS was bagging from the subscription.
[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]One plays lets say X amount of dollars for internet in their house PC player, Ps3 player, and 360 player are all playing counter strike together online. the 360 player has to pay X dollars and the LIVE fees to play online when ps3 and pc don't have to make any additional payments. That is the only reason I see MS blocking this--If people are playing the same game together why does one person have to pay more for the same thing, it would make MS look badthere has to be a reason outside of xbox live being a closed network.
Diviniuz
you pay for bandwidth, you don't pay to use the Internet
because of MS system, you pay to get access all of that, on the internet
[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]And you really believe that.? And what are those $60 a year for aren't those for servers and faster downloads already.? Wait did MS pass you they bill for online play already.? Come on dude MS charge your $60 a year for online play,that is the maximum level of passing the cost of everything to you,so wait they charge you for live with the excuse that is for severs and they charger developers are well for the same if developers want to give anything free.? And some how this is good for us or the industry.? Wow just wow.. He does plenty of Microsoft **** riding to know it's not even worth debating. Just bring up another question and have a laugh.Isn't it odd that steamworks is somehow now a requirement to receive updates and dlc for valve games? One would think that the robust xbox live would be sufficient at offering that free dlc and those updates without a problem..Why is steamworks all of a sudden a requirement? could it be a giant hypocracy where Valve wants to control all updates, servers and dlc they are under instead of any moneygoing to Microsoft for testing, bandwidth, or server space?
tormentos
Seems like its the same thing it always was.
Valve: hey we got this game we have this dlc too we are requiring you Microsoft to pay for its testing, bandwidth, and server space or we wont release it on xbox 360.
Microsoft: sorry we've had the same stance forever if you want it free you pay for the testing, bandwidth and server space and we'd be happy to offer that dlc for free to the consumers but if you wont pay then we will pass that cost onto the consumer.
Valve: then I guess we wont be releasing that dlc on xbox 360.
Its logically simple really and is actually a fact that Microsoft has had that stance since the begining when it came to dlc the developer or publisher paid for the dlc for it to free to the users otherwise Microsoft passed the cost onto the consumer.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment