Top
300°

Xbox 3D Virtual World necessary to compete with Playstation Home?

Sony Playstation Home will launch some when in 2008. If Sony does everything right it will be huge for the Sony PS3. I4U actually thinks Microsoft cannot afford to not launch a similar 3D virtual world for the Xbox 360.

The story is too old to be commented.
xsteinbachx3345d ago

better make a HDD standard then.

gamesR4fun3345d ago

ya Home is gonna b huge ms really needs to step it up to compete. Hopefully they'll at least start giving gold lvl access 4 free...

Feihc Retsam3345d ago (Edited 3345d ago )

About HOME?
I know it could be cool, but I never got into Second Life, or any of the MMORPGs out there.
If I wanted a virtual world experience, I would have done that on PC already.
So, I feel like console owners aren't going to buy into the whole HOME thing very much.
Even people with XBox Live don't all utilize all of the features available.
People who just want to play games online will be fine with what Xbox Live and PSN have right now. I look at home as nothing more than a game.

moparful993345d ago

You're passing judgement on something based on a totally different service. Second life is a pay to play style game, where as home is a free interactive online experience. To call home a game is a mistake. Home is designed to intergrate gaming into a virtual online community where you actually see the people you play, communicate, spend time with every day. Think of the popularity of myspace and facebook. Instead of having a profile you have a virtual house that displays photos, decorating tastes, trophies and so on. Its essentially a new more immersive way to interact. Home, in my opinion, is a very innovative and genius move by sony...

Joey Gladstone3345d ago

Microsoft will launch their own version, this is a very basic business motto in that you see what the competition is doing right, and you "borrow" or clone your own version and attempt to make it better in some way......but they would be wise to release it soon after Home, because this Free Home Service is sure to have an effect on the 360's sales numbers..
..
....
....."The JOEY has Spoken"

Covenant3345d ago

"you see what the competition is doing right, and you "borrow" or clone your own version and attempt to make it better in some way..."

Like Trophies?

Companies rip each other off all the time...it won't be that last time that Sony/MS/Nintendo copy each other in some capacity.

Guwapo773345d ago

To think Microsoft hasn't dabbled or even actually started with a virtual world yet would be retarded. The top companies borrow whats successful from the other company and try to improve upon it, ie. achievements - accomplishments.

The question is not IF there will be a virtual world on Live but WHEN.

Feihc Retsam3345d ago

All of this talk about MICROSOFT "H4S 2 MAKE ITZ PWN VIRTUAL WORLD!!!" is very presumptious.
If HOME is a big flop, I don't see Microsoft rushing to dump money into their own version.

I'm still not sold on the whole concept of HOME yet. I"m just glad SONY improved the PSN to a point where it's actually somewhat convenient to connect and play games online.

Silellak3345d ago (Edited 3345d ago )

I really could care less about having Second Life built into the online functionality of my console, but whatever.

I realize I'm not everyone though, and some people certainly do care. I just think XBox Live has most of the functionality I'd want it an online service already, and I don't care what sort 3D window dressing they give it.

And yes, I know Home is a bit more than that, and it's awesome that it's free, it's just something I don't think I need for the 360. Maybe some people want it, though.

Sigh. And cue the endless screen of "disgrees" with people who can't stand to see anyone say something remotely negative about anything Sony related. Because Sony is the One Lord and Savior of Gaming and everything they do is perfection.

It's my opinion that I could care less if something like Home came to the 360. If it did, great! Do I personally think the 360 needs it? No, I think the functionality it already has is very solid. What's wrong with that?

beavis4play3345d ago

i really could care less about having to PAY for the online functionality of my console, but whatever.

home is going to be huge.

Silellak3345d ago

I've explained it before, and I'll explain it again -

When you pay for XBox Live, you are essentially funding the development of future multiplayer games for the 360. You aren't just paying to play online. You're paying to support the entire online framework that developers can take into when they make games for the 360.

That's why nearly every game for the 360 - from intern-written XBLA games to huge multi-million dollar blockbusters - have some sort of online component, be it full multiplayer functionality or some sort of online leaderboard. Microsoft has made it incredibly easy for developers to tap into this system, because Live handles all of the things like matchmaking, skill ranking, etc. Developers no longer have to implement that system themselves, which saves them both time and money.

Now, you may not care, which is fine. If you just want to play a few games online, then the PSN has everything you probably want.

But me, I love feeling like almost every 360 game I play is, in some way, shape, or form, a community experience - and it's that way because it's *so easy* to add online functionality to a 360 game. As a programmer myself, I see the power behind that and am more than willing to pay $50 a year to support that sort of system.

Like it or not, PSN is nowhere near XBox Live in that capacity.

Brixxer6003345d ago

You should get plenty agree's aswell, i agree with everything you said, well done.

3345d ago
Guwapo773345d ago

LevDog this needs to go =====>>>>

This is the area for intelligent discussion. Save the RROD BS for a when another thread is posted about it. This ain't it.

Silellak3345d ago

I probably shouldn't even reply to this fanboy droll, since it's in the wrong zone, but it's a slow day at work.

"Paying for Online framework.. So your paying for Live to crash???"

Live didn't "crash". It had a month or so of instability due to an influx of new users. Should Microsoft have seen it coming? Sure, but they've hardly proved to be a bastion of foresight.

"Or your paying yearly for a console to RROD on you.. Or paying for the Crap Customer service.."

What does this thread have to do with RRoD? Oh right - nothing. When the console RRoDs, you get a month free of Live to make up for the month you missed. But you probably didn't know that, because it's not posted on the Sony Defense Force website.

"Your Paying for Nothing.. You cant watch HD movies.."

Really? I guess those HD movies I can download won't actually play? That sucks! I didn't know that.

"Your Paying for an Outdated system that cant even fit Extra content on their disc anymore.. Your paying for Old Technology.. The Roof has been reached.. Your paying for a system that has been maxed out.. You mite get slightly Better games.. but not drastic.. Come on man.. Ps3 games are on par with 360 and its in its first year and All Devs said its only at 20% potential reached.."

Welcome to: off-topic theatre. This has nothing to do with XBox Live or Home. It's also incredibly inaccurate, but that's beside the point.

"and We ps3 owners dont pay for this soo called "online frame work".. Come on man use your Head"

And that's my entire point. Sony doesn't have an "online framework" the same way Live does. And from what I've read about Home, it isn't providing this online framework, either. It's adding some of the FEATURES of the famework, with a shiny 3D finish, but it's not actually adding the sort of technological multiplayer backbone I described before.

Keowrath3345d ago

Silellak, I respect your opinion and totally agree that as it stands XBL is miles above the PSN. Home however is a fresh idea of the whole network thing, I guess it's just a much more complex GUI.

I don't really know if Microsoft need to have their own version, XBL is pretty damn solid at the end of the day from what I've observed. I personally don't agree that you should pay for it but we'll have to agree to disagree there.

I've played a few MMO's in my time (NOT WARCRAFT!!!... sorry =) ) and I love the idea of starting games up with friends by meeting their virtual representation, the idea of trophies is cool too (Although I'm severly gutted that I doubt Ninja Gaiden will allow me to show off completed MNM trophy HARUMPH!)

It's down to your own tastes. I imagine a lot of PS3 users are looking forward to it due to how plain the PSN has been (I've always had a good service but we're not exactly flooded with options) If Home is everything it's said to be it'll be vastly different from what we've had up till now. You've always had a good service from Live so I can understand why you're not bothered about changing.

SeNiLe9113345d ago (Edited 3345d ago )

Home is cool and all especially for free but you wouldn't find me anywhere near it. I like playing games with action and adventure, not playing in a second life.

If M$ should copy anything or any company, it should be the Nintendo Wii. They have come out with something very innovated that could work nicely with the Xbox 360 or the PS3 for that matter. That is something that would grab not only the attention of casual gamers but hardcore gamers as well.

If M$ or Sony steal that idea, whoever does and soon will beat out Nintendo and be the winner of this gens console War. The the thing Nintendo is missing this gen is the graphics and the games to grab hardcore gamers.

Lord Vader3345d ago (Edited 3345d ago )

Another agree for Silellak...

Home/Sony Sims doesnt do anything for me. I dont want to invite ppl to my virtual apartment to start a game ? How long is that going to take ? Never was a Sims fan either...

I wish Sony would streamline navigation of their current hud menu, my 360's is so much more functional.

Everyone has an opinion, Home is cool b/c it is free atm, but I could care less about virtual sims-like worlds. Yet another non-gaming feature in my book.... I wish they would spend more money on game stuff like GTA content....

kornbeaner3345d ago

I do see how you would want to support a service like live. But I really don't think the consumer should be asked to pay $50 for part of the games development. Having played on Live as well as PSN, I would have to give the edge to Live. The functionality and ease of use really streamlines what can be clunky on the same game on PC. But for PSN being a free service, it is not that far behind. The only problem I see with PSN is there is not that one uniform standard that makes Live that much easier to use. But thats also part of the charm. Games like Warhawk and Resistance are by far the best functioning games on PSN, thanks to dedicated servers and the developers for these games being so close to Sony. Also, by not having a uniform standard it has allowed Epic to allow PC mods to be crated for PS3 use without a backlash from Sony. Something that MS just does not allow with a service that a gamer pays money for. That is MY main issue with MS. If somebody is gonna pay for a service there should be more openess to the service. It's like paying the mortgage on your home and not being able to cut your own grass.

For better reference lets look at CoD4. The game performs on par with each other between the 2 consoles, the only difference being that Live allows for a better community thanks to the service. But the game itself performs that same between the 2.

Also you talk about $50 to support the community, which I can respect, which is one of the reasons I try my hardest to buy games new and not used, but in the end there are ways in which Microsoft is already able to support that community with the pricing of there points.

Example 2000 MS points are sold for $25. Thats not even a penny a point. So for every 2000 points MS sells they have already made $5 before you go and spend those points. Now lets say you buy an arcade game, the prices for those games reflect everything, cost of development, ad, and also MS share for the licensing, which can very from .50-$2 (more in some cases) depending on the game. So I think doing the math its safe to say out of every 2000 points you buy from MS there is about $6 - $8 (maybe more) that MS puts in its pocket or into the community. Multiply that by only a million and thats 6 to 8 million. And you know that is a low number considering the amount of digital product MS moves. Again I can respect you for supporting the MS online community, but please don't be fooled into thinking the $50 a year is the only way MS can keep the Live service going because its not. All the accessories are made by MS, Wifi connectors, controllers, HDD, battery packs, ETC. There are plenty of products MS has out for the system that I feel it is unjust for them to ask the consumer to pay another $50 a year to help them make developers life easier. Games have already gone up in price by $10 so where is that money going?

In the end Live provides better functionality then PSN, but PSN is not lacking as much as most make it seem, and with Home on the horizon it seems that Sony will rectify most of the lacking areas and improve on many others.

Exhaust3345d ago

Do you people think we'd have universal in game voice chat on PSN by now if we were paying for it?

Absolutely. We would. Paying $4 a month has its ups and downs.

The fans that are already predicting Home will be huge should put the word "hope" in their sentence. You all "hope" it will be huge... I for one "hope" its a fun product before I "hope" it will be huge because I'm in this for a fun console experience more than forum bragging rights.

I'll get a ton of disagrees because I dared to say anything bad about the PS3 but thats fine. You guys can brag all you want about the FREE PSN service when it matches what XBL already provides.

I like my PS3 and PSN for its original games but not being able to private chat with my friend playing another game SUX!

SeNiLe9113345d ago

so I thought I might as well throw out a deal for it to make it that much more sweet.

Buy.com has it for $38.75, use Google checkout for your first time and save $10.00, $28.75 http://www.buy.com/retail/p...

That makes it $2.40 a month, oh wait theres a month free as well bringing it down to $2.21 a month. not bad!

Cupid_Viper_33345d ago

"i don't think I need something like home on the 360"

my friend, that's exactly why it's not on the 360. no one said that 360 owners wanted something like home.

I seriously don't understand what is it you guys and the notion of "options" and ã "can do it all device". HOME Is going to be ã free optional service, do you understand that, its free. what the hell is wrong you all?

SeNiLe9113345d ago (Edited 3345d ago )

I got my first ignore from one of the two post I posted above. I could see if I hung out in the Open Zone next door ----> getting ignores could be had pretty easily but in here is a little strange for comments that where pretty mild if you ask me.

Well sorry for stepping on someone's toes.

moparful993345d ago

silellak I'm trying my best to respect your opinion but to say that xbl is far superior to psn is the reason I cant respect your opinion. If you weigh the pros and cons of both services then let someone else make their decision instead of pushing your opinion into this site then I could respect it more.
Ok xbox live has a smooth and seamless interface, universal voice chat allowing cross game private chats, in game dashboard, larger community. Psn is free, open service allowing developers to determine content and server support, voice text and video chat for up to 6 people simultaneously, free web browser. So both services have alot to offer. But on the other hand they both have issues xbl requires a subscription fee, have to buy microsoft points, closed service. Psn is slightly more complex, no in game xmb, no cross game chatting, have to exit game to read text messages... Of course neither service is perfect. Alot of people prefer live and alot prefer psn, it all depends on what you want out of your service. For people that just want to play games and arent worried about bells and whistles then yea psn is the way but if you want a deeper community with better member support the live is a good choice... I think the biggest determining factor is the price.... Now others here keep reffering to home as a game. It is not a game and I dont know how many times it has to be said. You dont have to go to your house to launch a game, its an optional service that happens to be free, and its just an attempt to advance the way we use our consoles and play our games. If you arent interested then why do you have to come on here and comment on it? Its this simple, you only set yourself appart as someone who doesnt appreciate innovation.

player9113344d ago

Last I checked at my local Gamestop, a $20 Card was 2400 points.

I do have mixed feelings about Games being able to develop their own mods and such like UT.
-Love: Because UT has always brought in some sweet mods that keep the game new and refreshed. The lack of this feature made me change my mind buying it for the 360. But thats how the system works. Poor sales will make them re-think it next time.
-Hate: Because I'm an IT Administrator (network administrator) and I know that like anything popular... eventually you'll gets viruses. I'm actually surprised it hasn't happened yet, but I'll give it some time.

Keeping everything closed kinda sucks but the 360 gets updated material as well. Halo 3 gets new types of play just like Guitar Hero 3 gets new songs. The 360 just makes sure the source is legit and error free before distributing.

As far as home is concerned... I'm glad it's free. If I had a PS3 I would prolly put it on my system, check it out, then leave it alone. I can't really see myself using a service like this. Its a game console... I turn it on, jump in a game, and start voice chatting. When I'm done playing I turn it off. The only time I want to play my 360 is to play games. Sure I could IM, voicechat, download movies, etc... but I bought it to play games.

My wife would prolly like Home. Most girls like Myspace/Sims.

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 3344d ago
zane5473345d ago

"Microsoft's Xbox 360 is loosing more and more coolness points."

"Playstation Home could just put Sony even further ahead"

The sense of biasedness just makes this article a bit... uninteresting.

InYourMom3345d ago

Nevermind that this article is biased dribble. MS don't fall into this trap about 3D virtual worlds. This is an attempt to try and "one up" XBL but no worry because PSN lacks a lot of the basic features that make multplayer easy and connected. Sony thinks it can put out a cheezy online network and sprinkle HOME on top and it will somehow be better.

And people say Wii is a fad?!?!#?

Just get me into my games quickly, because again it is about games. Leave the PSN to their virtual worlds for the droids who have no real life and still live in mom's basement so they need a virtual place to feel like a big boy.

gEnKiE3345d ago

Ok, I would actually like to see Sony release Home first!