Xbox Live Doesn’t “Have Competition,” Says Microsoft
By Chris on Monday, November 19th, 2007 at 2:37 PM PST In Computer, Game Companies, Game Consoles, Game Platforms, Microsoft, Microsoft, Sony, Sony
Microsoft is certainly very proud of Xbox Live, to the point where Robbie Bach believes that they don’t even have any competition – a comment aimed directly at Sony’s PlayStation Network. With 8 million users it’s hard to argue, although I do believe Bach is being rather muleheaded in outright dismissing PSN.
Speaking with the LA Times he said, “It’s fair to say that Xbox Live is clearly head and shoulders above anything anyone else has tried to do. We don’t have competition.”
“Sony has done some things online, but nothing that can be called a service. We have a big advantage and we’re going to keep pressing that advantage.”
He went on to cite that the strong userbase is what has made Xbox Live what it is, and that it isn’t an easy task to garner such a large number of users.”Perhaps the most important thing we have is over 8 million passionate members who create and define what Xbox Live is. It’s a tough thing to create, and we’re going to continue to nurture it.”
I can just imagine Sony’s response would be something focusing on the fact that PSN is free to all of its users and is rapidly improving and how Home will be huge. And how Microsoft sucks, or something like that.
Their words, not mine. Sorta.
Yes, MS is proud of live, and justifiably so. However, they forget that the base appeal of their online service is that it was the only one around for a good while. PSN is making some nice inroads with their offerings, Everyday Shooter being head and shoulders above anything I’ve seen original on XBL.
On top of that, there’s no asinine subscription fees. I’m sure you’ve all seen my posts or heard my podcast rants on the XBox Live Gold service. Gold is the reason that XBox lost my Rock Band purchase. Gold is the reason that I will continue to buy the majority of my online games for PS3.
The game that started all this was Guitar Hero 3. Not only did you need XBL Gold to play the game online (no worries there), but you need Gold to even take a peek at the leaderboards and see where you rank. Thanks loads, Neversoft, for charging for something Harmonix gave away for free in GH2.
Is Live on top of the heap now? Absolutely. Will it stay there with this type of attitude from its MS masters? I highly doubt it.
I agree with MS and Ron, but where I differ from Ron is that I don’t think PSN will ever over-take it with Live’s short-comings. I think the best PSN can hope to aim for is a straight-out drag-fight of a situation. The example I can think of is , how long has it taken WoW to get up to the amount of subscribers it has now? If Live is roughly the same, PSN has a LOT of catching up to do, along with the smaller install base at the mo (although christmas could shake it up a little).
That’s not to say I don’t have my irks with Gold, what with having to pay for it, but I do know when I’m paying for it, I’m paying for a service that is actually pretty damn good and better than even some PC equivalents.
Yeah, WoW took about 3 years to get to where it is now. However, there is no comparable free alternative to WoW. IF (big if) PSN can bring its service to the point where they are comparable to Live, then we can see what happens. I think a knock-down drag-out fight would be a victory for PSN at this point.
*sigh*
Yes, it’s true, Sony’s online service is improving….now all they need to do is focus on actually selling systems or it’s rather moot, yes?
Microsoft has a good online service for the 360, but why do people insist on patting them on the back for it? Microsoft damn well better have a good online service, they’ve been in the industry long enough to know better.
Sony’s online service won’t reach the scale of Xbox live, i would rather pay for a service that’s solid as opposed to getting a free service that will -eventually- offer services i have no intention of really using in the first place.
Xbox live has 8 million registered users including people who registered with the original Xbox who might not even own a 360. For some reason Microsoft always miss that fact out to try and give people the impression that there are far more 360 owners are using it online than actually are. The majority of users are silver with way less than 3m Gold members playing online. Its taken them 5 years to get to that point.
In 1 year Sony already have over 3m people registered (I believe it took Microsoft 3 years to reach that amount) who have downloaded content and all of them are able to play online. PS3 online gaming will be centered very much around Home which hasn’t even been released yet so comparisons are a bit premature but it seems that achievements will be available and in game pictures and video from can also be saved and shared. Its more than likely that PSN will have more people playing online than the 360 by early 2008 and will have more registered users than the 360 by the end of next year.
LittleBigPlanet with its user generated and uploaded content is launched in early 2008 and I’m sure that will be a huge success. There are also going to be online elements added for the first time to 2 of the biggest gaming franchises. Gran Tursimo and Metal Gear Solid. There is also the very popular SingStar series which is not only having downloadable content added for the first time but will also have the ability to upload performance videos to share. Those games will probably get millions of people playing online who have never done so before.
Whether the PSN experience will ever provide hardcore ‘leet speaking’ gamers with the same experience as live is another matter but those gamers are nothing in the grand scheme of things. There is absolutely no reason at all why Sony couldn’t just knock up a live rip off that’s every bit as good but that’s only appealing to a minority. Sony are aiming at building an online community for every PS3 owner which means gamers of every type and that’s why PSN will eventually absolutely dwarf Live in popularity.
I disagree. Sony at the moment are aiming to get -something- up there to compete with Live. It won’t be until Home is established that they can really then go “right, step one out of the way, step two ‘global domination commmence’.
I also think Sony are creating an online community that a lot of people are going to be frustrated with. I’m not saying that Live is fandabulous (thanks Yahtzee) but it’s clear-cut and gets to the point quickly. With Home’s second-life approach, I think people may get annoyed at how much longer it will take to actually -do- stuff in it.
This is of course all speculation. Until Home is actually operable (late ‘08, right?) then we can’t really no for sure. The thing is, if they keep delaying the damn thing, Microsoft really WILL have no competition.
I’ve love it if Nintendo came in suddenly and announced “hey, we like the internet too!” but…no, I think Brawl is the closest Wii owners are getting to something that could be even remotely like Live or Home and even then it’s obscure.
Uptake for PSN is already far faster than Live was and it will overtake Live next year no matter what Home turns out like. You wont have to walk around like in Second Life to play games.
Given that every one of the 3m registered PSN users can play online its actually possible there are more people playing online on there right now than on Live. Its highly doubtful but it is possible and that’s just 1 year after the service was launched.
That’s true. But here’s a question:
Why have Home when PSN is already active? Home just seems like an extra point to try and sell the system, but nothing that hasn’t really been done before, bar adding a few pics and stats.
Home won’t overtake anything if sales on the system doesn’t improve over this years Christmas rush, so far investors have speculated that the sales for the PS3 will remain the same, to say that it will overtake any online service is premature and arrogant without facts to back it up.
In my opinion Home is going to be a gimmick, my reason behind that is that from what we’ve seen of it so far looks like a gimmick.
Sony has been in the online gaming industry for years and the opinion of Sony’s online services is a mixed-bag of opinions.
@Averre: PS3 sales are already way up since the release of the 40GB system. We’ve covered that here on GT recently, I believe.
Yeah personally Home seems a bit gimmicky to me. Doing a comparison of my Xbox and my PS3 (sorry these holidays just seem to be a good excuse to burn money and get both!), i think Live has a lot of nice features, namely the in-game support. Now i do feel its a bit harder to navigate, although that may be due to the previous familiarity with the PSN, so take that as you will. I do feel however that PSN is reliable and free, too major plusses. Though that isn’t to say i have had any problems with live just yet, just a bit of confusion and a disliking of the layout.
I think Sony are intending Home to be a Myspace, YouTube, Second Life and Live all rolled into one and that has definitely not been done before.
I just like the idea that you can view a gamers Home and see their achievements, pics and videos or maybe play the LittlBigPlanet level they made.
There will also be company’s and promotions in Home like in Second Life. I know there will be a link up between Top gear and Gran Turismo so there is every possibility that Top Gear will have an area where you can visit and watch vids or look at vids of the best laps around their track by Gran Turismo racers. I can really see game companies making big use out of the ability to create a whole area to promote a new game or be the game HQ.
@ Averre
There are facts to back it up, you are just ignoring them.
It took Live 5 years and 2 consoles to get 8m registered users yet PSN has 3m in just 1 year and that’s with no huge Halo online game boosting the service.
@ Norbit: Since Halo 3 is for Xbox 360 only (possibly for PC as well, but thats not the point), shouldn’t it technically add to Live, and detract from PSN?
@Norbit 3 million in one year is fine, but that is hardly evidence that their online service will overtake anything…all that shows is exactly what you have, that 3 million customers use PSN.
To add to it you said that it will “overtake Live within a year no matter what Home turns out like” i’m sorry but that is a wild speculation on your part with no evidence to support.
YES, there is no Competition now. PSN is playing catch up. I dont even have to justify it. Read the Article.
Sure of courses its better, its been around longer and you pay for it, so you would expect a better service…But PSN is more than surfiecent for my needs…plus i went on XBox live at my friends house and man are they a bunch of babies sumtimes…
At the end of the day no matter how good PSN gets Microsoft will never admit its any good for the simple reason that its free.
free is the great thing about the PSN, but don’t expect it to be free forever.
Free
Fun
Quality
You may only pick 2 of the above to describe PSN.
William said: “free is the great thing about the PSN, but don’t expect it to be free forever.”
@ Dragon
You have obviously never played Warhawk either
At the end of the day its not only Microsoft who want PSN to be bad. There are a few million Gold subscribers who really dont want the PS3 to have a good free online service when they are having to pay for theirs.
@Dragon
Let me see; free, fun, and I have absolutely no problems playing online games with PSN. That is all the quality I need…so I pick D. all of the above.
@ NORBIT
“Xbox live has 8 million registered users including people who registered with the original Xbox who might not even own a 360. For some reason Microsoft always miss that fact out to try and give people the impression that there are far more 360 owners are using it online than actually are. The majority of users are silver with way less than 3m Gold members playing online. Its taken them 5 years to get to that point.”
Look at when microsoft started five years ago. A lot less people had a good online ISP. XBOX live has no competitors. Playstation wanna be live is a joke. People can plug in their P.O.S. ps3s to the internet and register. To have people that are willing to pay for a service and spend ms points is totally different. You probably own a ps3 and are fighting for it to look good. Its impossible. That thing is junk. WHAT GOOD GAMES DOES IT HAVE??? ….. the answer is 1 and it is called resistance. The xbox has 1 HALO 3 2 BIOSHCOK 3 GEARS OF WAR 4 PLUS THE LAST 2 COD GAMES. Your just mad because the ps3 is outgunned by the 360 in every category.
I don’t know Jason, I really enjoyed RainbowSix: Vegas(was really hooked), Ratchet and Clank, Assassin’s Creed and COD4. These are games that came out this year for the PS3 and since your list doesnt contain only exclusives then neither does mine. Stop hidding behind the “no games” argument because you’re about to get rocked really soon.
Like you said before, people are willing to pay for XBoxLive but in the past it was the only option so people we’re kinda forced to pay.
The world around is changing, you gotta face that fact.
@Peter
There also coming out for the 360 as well, and that is something that PS3 owners tend to overlook…that the majority of the games that the PS3 are receiving are multi-platform or will be eventually.
Your right, the PS3 has games…but telling somebody not to use the ” no games” while you use the same one PS3 owners have been using since launch is hypocritical.
the PS3 has been out for one year, it has released it’s first AAA title, and with all that it’s barely made a ripple…so how much longer does one have to wait before the PS3 starts “rocking”?…Haze? MGS4?…the WII and 360 have proven themselves..the PS3 is still playing catch-up.