Zechs Merquise Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 Resistance is good but nothing compared to gears of war I've not played Gears of War yet, but the 360 has somewhat of a hold over me simply because it will be getting Halo 3
c0Zm1c Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 Playing on Live it is blatantly obvious why it costs £40 a year. Microsoft actually do recycle a fair bit of that money back into it Live is already leagues ahed of the competition and with additions like IPTV and XNA due its just going to get further and further ahed. As this topic is comparing the 360 to the Wii though the question is really: Would i like to pay £40 a year for the worlds best online service or pay nothing and get, well, nothing? If it was my decision i'd pick the 360. Theres a lot of mis-informed people in this thread calling it 'more expensive'. In a way they are right, but look at bundles + the price of available games and the 360 is a much better buy. Gamestation had a deal recently where you could get: Xbox 360 Premium Gears Of War Crackdown Smackdown vs Raw 2007 Project Gotham Racing 3 Xbox Live Arcade Extra Official Wireless Controller All for £304.99 Theres a large selection of good titles on the net that are available for less than £20 and extra Wireless Pads (official ones) can be picked up for £20 at Shopto.net Considering I come from a PC online gaming background, it really isn't blatantly obvious to me why Live costs £40 a year! I mean come on, they don't even provide dedicated servers for the majority of games, if any! I know this topic may originally have been about just the 360 and the Wii, but now that the PS3 has been launched you'd be silly to overlook what it has to offer. And, although early days yet, from my own experience, Sony's online service seems really rather good. If Microsoft continue to charge a subscription fee for their online gaming service whilst Sony (and eventually Nintendo) can let us have it for free, I'll tell you what is blatantly obvious - that, in the long run, Microsoft's current strategy for online gaming seems doomed.
DCK Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 Doesn't make sense to me. Maybe it's due to the price, but Xbox owners seem to appreciate their unified online service more.
AshMat Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 If Microsoft continue to charge a subscription fee for their online gaming service whilst Sony (and eventually Nintendo) can let us have it for free, I'll tell you what is blatantly obvious - that, in the long run, Microsoft's current strategy for online gaming seems doomed. Snorting blocks much? Doomed? Have you seen how well Live is doing? The majority of 360 owners have live. Online play is incredible on the 360, and you just know that it will be better than the Wii's. 360&PS3 online > Wii online Nintendo just don't seem to see how big online gaming is/has become.
c0Zm1c Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 The majority of 360 owners have live. I don't doubt that, seeing as Live's Silver membership is free.
Zechs Merquise Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Snorting blocks much? Doomed? Have you seen how well Live is doing? The majority of 360 owners have live. Online play is incredible on the 360, and you just know that it will be better than the Wii's. 360&PS3 online > Wii online Nintendo just don't seem to see how big online gaming is/has become. I think Nintendo got it right with the VC, it's just a shame they neglected online gaming.
McPhee Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Considering I come from a PC online gaming background, it really isn't blatantly obvious to me why Live costs £40 a year! I mean come on, they don't even provide dedicated servers for the majority of games, if any! You've ended you're point right there. Xbox Live beats PC online because its far more convenient. On the PC you need Ventrillo, Teamspeak and X-Fire all installed and configured to get voice chat and friends lists in every game. Its inconvenient and fiddly. Live integrates all this into itself seamlesly and adds more functionality besides. What does all this cost? £2.70 a month Infact, Gamespy's Roger Wilco costs about the same as a Live sub! Live might have to change to fight the PS3 online service, we'll see. For now though Live is still the best format for Online Gaming (as 90% of people who own a 360 would agree)
c0Zm1c Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Since I'm not completely challenged when it comes to using a computer, I don't need to waste £40 on convenience. I do actually have a Live subscription though, but I rarely ever play Xbox games online. I simply prefer PC online gaming. In most cases that's more to do with the platform itself, being that (in my opinion) the games better suit it (FPS's play best with keyboard and mouse, for example). The last game I played on Xbox Live was Test Drive Unlimited, but since the PC version is out now I don't play that much any more. That being because I prefer playing racing games with a good quality joystick over anything else. By the way, the basic version of Roger Wilco is free.
Colin Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Read the first page and I'm not going to read the other three which are bound to be just going over choices. And I agreed with Conzer's comment, shit thread. If you're a real gamer you will go buy both, and if you can't make your mind up yourself then I pity you. Go back to playing brain academy or something.
McPhee Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 I do actually have a Live subscription though, but I rarely ever play Xbox games online. I simply prefer PC online gaming. In most cases that's more to do with the platform itself, being that (in my opinion) the games better suit it (FPS's play best with keyboard and mouse, for example). The last game I played on Xbox Live was Test Drive Unlimited, but since the PC version is out now I don't play that much any more. That being because I prefer playing racing games with a good quality joystick over anything else. Fair do's. Im with you there tbh, PC > 360 i just cheaped out for this gen lol Only thing i ever had against PC gaming was all the time spent installing, uninstalling and configuring games and utilities to get the whole thing working just right. And the price of a decent gaming rig of course For me, being able to throw all that out the window and have things just work is great, hence why i like Live
AshMat Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 I don't doubt that, seeing as Live's Silver membership is free. GOLD LIVE 100100
Owen Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 I may have already posted in this thread, don't know... Anyway, it was a awfully hard choice, but for now i would say 360. Although, you'll be missing quite a few 'greats' shall we say come Autumn/Winter on the Wii. What a hard decision....
c0Zm1c Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 GOLD LIVE Let's have a link to a source that confirms all Xbox 360 Live members have a Gold account then. In fact, let's have a link to a source that confirms all six million Live members have a 360.
AshMat Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 Let's have a link to a source that confirms all Xbox 360 Live members have a Gold account then. In fact, let's have a link to a source that confirms all six million Live members have a 360. Lets point back to earlier where i said "The majority of 360 owners will have lvie", and by this i mean they will have paid for live. And if you're such a pc gamer, why are you in this thread? This is 360 or Wii, not 360 or PC.
Beano Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 I have both and love both. They complement each other brilliantly.
blender Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 I had a cat called pussy. Then he dies. I wast too upset as it was old age. At 19 years old you he did better than the average bear.
c0Zm1c Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 Lets point back to earlier where i said "The majority of 360 owners will have lvie", and by this i mean they will have paid for live. And by that you're just assuming the majority of Xbox 360 owners pay for Live. Since Microsoft refuse to give us any further details other than that their "Xbox Live has hit the six million mark", it is all just assumption. But because there is more than one means of having a Live subscription (original Xbox, free Silver account, and premium Gold account) I'm willing to assume that the majority of the 10 million plus 360 user-base doesn't pay for Live. It may even be that the majority of that user-base doesn't have Live at all. And if you're such a pc gamer, why are you in this thread? This is 360 or Wii, not 360 or PC. I never even mentioned the PC in my last post, I'm talking about the 360. I only mentioned the PC previously in this thread because, well, look back through my replies to this thread to see why.
Haver Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 Both, if that's a possibility for you. Or get an Xbox 1 and Half Life 2 and you're set.
Recommended Posts