VC&WiiWare vs. XBLA vs. PSN

[Mahlzeit]

Why the PSN fails and how to improve it

If you believe what you read on most forums and mainstream game media, the Playstation Network is touted as the best model for online console gaming. The reasons are many - the marketplace is easy to navigate, the content is priced properly, there’s a wide open space to interact with other gamers, and so on. Most of these justifications are perfectly sound and completely valid. I’ve enjoyed dancing in a line in the middle of the PSN Home movie theater with the best of them.


But when those arguments are broken down and filtered out, the real reason for its support is loud and clear. The PSN is free for all. But everyone should know by now that free doesn’t necessarily equal good. When a service is free it is accountable to noone but the people who are offering it. And in this case, where Sony is concerned, free equals a dubious amount of investment in the wrong areas and ignoring the core, fundamental faults as to why PSN is at serious disadvantage when compared to Xbox Live.

When the PS3 was in its initial stages of hype and development, Sony touted that the PSN would be everything that Xbox Live was, but without the price tag. Free downloadable content, matchmaking, message services and the like. Big glossy beta images promised a killer online experience. But what we got in the original launch stages was woeful. No XMB in games. Shoddy slow marketplace. No rewards system. Sony was already taking the hit for having a prohibitively expensive system, so touting a free but substandard online experience wasn’t really on anyone’s features list.

Over time, Sony did begin to come good on its promises. You could access messages from players in game, trophies were introduced, matchmaking improved and so on. But something substantial was still missing. PSN didn’t feel like a community. You can’t dump an online service on gamers and expect them to welcome it with open arms. The soul of PSN had been lost in its rush to be created as a competitor. It was still difficult to feel like the online component encompassed the console like XBL did for the 360. The whole interface came alive when you connected, where the PS3, well, it had a news ticker.

Sony needed something big, it needed a place where gamers could congregate before and after games. It developed Home.

To me, Home is the perfect example of an already dubious concept gone completely wrong. It was as if a team of executives found a way to make meeting in a virtual space even more boring and plastic, by making everyone look the same and providing distractions from the fact that you were essentially trapped in an online box with a thousand other people all as confused and bored as yourself. You’ve got restrictions on everything. How many people can use the bowling alley, the arcade, where they can explore, even how many can join a club or group.

In all, PSN fails because it’s not natural. Here’s a few of my ideas on how Sony can turn it around.

Dump Home

Home was a bad idea from the start. Pumping millions of dollars into a system where people actually feel enclosed in a virtual space was a feat even I thought was impossible. Even if it was opened up and players could shape it, Sony would lose the ability to control the experience. It’s a lose/lose situation, and removing it now before it becomes its own expensive quagmire would allow them to push resources in other directions. Sony are pretty good at cutting their losses, but judging from the comments from the upper eclelon, its unlikely this will happen in the next decade.

Wrap the console with the online experience

The 360’s NGE may have its critics but what it does well is provide an avenue for gamers to push themselves into online. Activating a broadband connection tells you everything that’s going on as soon as you boot up - who’s online, what they are doing, what’s new in the marketplace, what events are coming up, what games have released and so on. If you haven’t been on in a while, you can see at a glance what’s happening. It’s easy to join in on any game in progress or join a group of buddies as they do a pub-crawl of gaming.

PSN needs this. It’s far too clumsy to access the separate parts of the network on the system, and the friends list function is appalling. Home doesn’t solve this problem like it was promised to. Sony needs to take advantage of the overwhelming amount of free visual space on the UI and pull the gamer in.

Develop localized regional communities/matchmaking

Outside of the US, one of the major problems for gamers is lag. You only need to hit a few forums to see the compaints about latency spoiling the whole experience for gamers. Sony needs to take the initiative and start prioritizing gamers according to their location. The hype (or hyperbole) of a global community of players has taken second stage to an underwhelming experience of being tossed out of games or suffering through slide-show play time after time. In this case, it’s a problem for both PSN and XBL, but XBL’s system is probably more likely to match you to a local, since it uses its own central servers then relying on the developer’s. Which leads me to my next point.

Create a central system

PSN relies heavily on using servers provided by the developers to host games. Because of this, its impossible to change games on the fly or keep track of what’s going on across all titles. Again, Home was supposed to be the savior of this particular conundrum, but it’s far too chunky, slow and laboured to appeal to fickle gamers. If Home must stay, then allow both a 2D and 3D (if you must) experience for those gamers who just want to PLAY, rather then wander around from box to box, hunting for a “lounge” to “discuss the possibility” of playing Killzone 2. This isn’t World of Warcraft, and this isn’t a raid. I’d just like to be able to jump from Resistance to LBP thanks.

The good news, really, is that Sony is learning, and it is improving. But it’s not fast enough. With every update that Sony catches up to Microsoft, they make yet another step ahead. And if they want to make PSN the console gamer’s true choice, they need to make some tough decisions. Because just being flashy and free doesn’t equate to holding the crown on the online King. The rising numbers of paying XBL users shows this.

So what do you guys think? How can PSN be improved?

http://gamerlimit.com/2009/03/why-the-psn-fails-and-how-to-improve-it/

 

[Cortana]

IMO wird sich nicht grosses ändern, wie auch bei der Xbox360.

Die PS4 und Xbox3 müssen ja auch was bieten

 

[wsippel]

Könnte passen:

Nintendo akzeptiert Flash als offizielle Middleware für die WiiWare-Entwicklung

Zumindest wurde das laut Nicalis (Cave Story, Night Game) auf der diesjährigen DICE bekanntgegeben. Details gibt es noch nicht, es ist also nicht bekannt, welche Version von Flash unterstützt wird, und ob es sich dabei um die normale vom PC bekannte Variante oder eine spezielle "Wii-Edition" handelt. Die Vermutung liegt natürlich nahe, dass es eine spezielle Version sein wird, die mit der absoluten Positionierung des Pointers und den Accelleromterdaten der Wiimote umgehen kann. Ungeachtet der Antwort auf diese Frage liegt möglicherweise nahe, dass dieser Flash-Support quasi Nintendos "Antwort" auf die XBLA Community Games sein wird - denn da Flash selbst eine VM ist, würden angehende Entwickler weder ein Wii-Devkit noch das SDK benötigen, und müssten auch keine Einsicht in die Dokumentation nehmen können. Man entwickelt schließlich für die VM, nicht für die Hardware selbst. Nintendo käme dabei zu Gute, dass Flash extrem weit verbreitet und inzwischen außerordentlich mächtig ist, und gerne für Prototyping-Zwecke verwendet wird.

Grundsätzlich denkbar wäre eine solche Kooperation zwischen Adobe und Nintendo schon deshalb, weil die Adobe Labs vor einer Weile eine ausgesprochen eindrucksvolle Demonstration entwickelt haben, die auf einer Flash-Applikation mit Wiimote-Eingabe basierte, damals allerdings auf einem PC lief. Allerdings wurde nie bekanntgegeben, ob und inwiefern Nintendo an dem Projekt beteiligt war. Zudem wäre Flash ein interessantes und ausgesprochen mächtiges Equivalent zu Nintendos eigenem ES-Projekt, einer Flash-Alternative im weitesten Sinne, die auf einer virtuellen Maschine mit Unterstützung für SVG und ECMA-Skript setzte, aber im Gegensatz zu modernen Flash-Versionen keine 3D-Pipeline hatte. Dieses Projekt wurde kurz nach der angesprochenen Adobe-Präsentation aufgegeben - ein Zusammenhang wäre also durchaus denkbar.

 

[Darji]

Editorial: Downloadable Content Gone Wild


A lack of standard pricing is ruining the value of Xbox Live Marketplace.

US, March 13, 2009 - Downloadable content is becoming a vital part of gaming's economic structure. While PC publishers long ago mastered ways to keep gamers glued to a specific title (and continuing to invest money), this is new territory for console gaming. Downloadable games satisfy the modern consumer's demand for instantaneous satisfaction, which has already overtaken the music industry, where downloaded songs have made retail music chains obsolete. You see something that looks interesting on Xbox Live Marketplace and you can have it within minutes, ready to play.

Publishers love add-on content because it has the potential to greatly increase a gamer's loyalty to a franchise. The promise of downloadable content is likely to keep a gamer from finishing a title and instantly turning it in to their local game store for trade credit. It also allows publishers to make a little bit of cash between development cycles. And, of course, Microsoft loves DLC because it's an added source of revenue that doesn't put a strain on its resources.

But downloadable content is a bit like the Wild West. Pricing of both downloadable games and add-on content are disproportionate from one title to the next. Both Watchmen: The End is Nigh and GTA IV: The Lost and Damned are episodic content, one offering a new game with additive sequels in the future and the other providing a new campaign as a companion piece to a previously released retail game. Both cost $20, but the value gap is immense. Watchmen is a three-hour offline experience with no replay value. The Lost and Damned is a 12-hour campaign with a meaty multiplayer mode. Does that make Watchmen a rip-off or The Lost and Damned an incredible deal? Many gamers (and editors at IGN) struggle with this question. The answer lies somewhere in the middle.

Lost and Damned set a new standard for DLC.
​

The Lost and Damned has enough content to have been a full-priced retail release. Even though $20 is on the high end for DLC, it's still a bargain. Watchmen's lessened value is, in many ways, a result of bad game design. Though its feature set is weaker than many downloadable games half its price, the visual quality and excellent presentation exceed just about every download to date. Though it's probably not worth $20, the price is not that far off the proper mark.

Much of the problem is that in order to entice early adopters, XBLA games released within the first year of each system's launch were competitively priced. It became accepted that $10 was the standard price for new games and that $5 games were often quick ports of old titles or a bargain price for new titles. The top-end for high-quality games seems to be around $15, with XBLA's Braid being the most notable example. Above that and gamers begin to grumble. But it's important that the quality merits the price. No one complained about Braid's cost once they played the game. Everyone knew a $15 charge for Death Tank was a rip-off.

As far as add-on content goes, it tends to be based less on quality and more on additive value. A handful of maps or a new game mode or bonus character is seen as a $5 value by most. Even short campaign add-ons, such as Mass Effect's Bring Down the Sky, come in at just five bucks. Add a bit more to the package--significant campaign additions and extra multiplayer options--and folks are willing to pay $10. Few games offer more than this, though Rockstar may start a trend with The Lost and Damned. If so, then the standard has been set at $20.

The trouble both for downloadable games and add-on content is that far too many games break the accepted standard pricing. When Prince of Persia adds less than two hours to the campaign and no other significant elements, the expectation is a $5 price point. Instead, Ubisoft charges $10 for Prince of Persia: Epilogue. Bethesda charged $5 to put armor on your horse in Edler Scrolls IV: Oblivion, a microtransaction that had no worthwhile in-game value. Namco may be the worst offender of consumer price-gouging with an endless stream of Ace Combat 6 add-ons (more than 70 in total) clocking in at 12700 MSP (almost $160).

Is a new coat of paint worth a few extra bucks?
​

There are no hard standards set by Microsoft, merely expectations on the consumer end. This is antithetical to retail games, which are almost uniformly priced at $59.99. Only games with required peripherals (guitars, drums, vomit bucket) tend to cost more, with some priced-at-a-bargain titles clocking in at a lower price point. While there may be occasional variations, Microsoft and publishers have an understanding that retail games cost $60. Something similar needs to come for downloadable content. Something that is easy for customers to understand. What qualifies as an expansion as opposed to a map pack? What is the standard price for three maps? What determines the final pricing for an XBLA title?

It's unfair to gamers to have a pricing structure that makes no sense. It's impossible to know what $5 or $10 or $20 buys you for any given download. It's a blind jump, most of the time. Microsoft needs to step up and get control of pricing before it begins turning people off of DLC. It can only be the future of gaming if gamers want to invest in it.

http://uk.xboxlive.ign.com/articles/961/961670p1.html

 

[Sasuke]

Was heult IGN so rum, müssen die Kunden selbst entscheiden ob ihnen ein Produkt den speziellen Preis wert ist oder nicht. Als ob das Problem nur Xbox Live betreffen würde

 

[Darji]

Was heult IGN so rum, müssen die Kunden selbst entscheiden ob ihnen ein Produkt den speziellen Preis wert ist oder nicht. Als ob das Problem nur Xbox Live betreffen würde

Sie "heulen" rum, weil der Marketplace mit ihrem Point und no rules system viel zu undurchsichtig ist und du eigentlich immer die Katze im Sack kaufst^^

 

[Sasuke]

Sie "heulen" rum, weil der Marketplace mit ihrem Point und no rules system viel zu undurchsichtig ist und du eigentlich immer die Katze im Sack kaufst^^

Man kann sich also vorher nicht Online oder in Mags über die im Marketplace angebotenen Games und Add-Ons informieren und basierend darauf eine Entscheidung treffen ob man den Preis für gerechtfertigt sieht ? O rly ?

Einfach nur Unsinn, zumal die meisten 360 User eh Ahnung haben wenns um XBL geht - wer sich Poits holt und online Geld für Spiele ausgibt, von denen er Null Plan hat der hat halt Pech. Ist wie bei allen Dingen, wer keine Ahnung hat der zahlt mehr.

 

[Darji]

Man kann sich also vorher nicht Online oder in Mags über die im Marketplace angebotenen Games und Add-Ons informieren und basierend darauf eine Entscheidung treffen ob man den Preis für gerechtfertigt sieht ? O rly ?

Einfach nur Unsinn, zumal die meisten 360 User eh Ahnung haben wenns um XBL geht - wer sich Poits holt und online Geld für Spiele ausgibt, von denen er Null Plan hat der hat halt Pech. Ist wie bei allen Dingen, wer keine Ahnung hat der zahlt mehr.

Du oder auch ich würden das sicherlich tun ja. Aber wir wissen auch immer mehr als andere

Es geht hier halt um die casual fraktion und nciht um die informierten gamer^^

 

[Sasuke]

Es geht hier halt um die casual fraktion und nciht um die informierten gamer^^

Wieviele Casuals kaufe sich über XBL irgendwelche Add-Ons ?
Im Retail Markt geben Casuals auch zig Mrd im Jahr für irgend nen Schrott aus - heult deswegen jemand rum ? Nein, weil es ihre Entscheidung ist. MS kann den Publishern ja net irgendwelche Preise aufzwingen.

 

[Hellfrog]

hmm also die meisten gamerpics oder themes kann man sich online anschauen. die preise sind im PSN genauso hoch für den gleichen DLC und für spiele gibts eben ne demo, wer das spiel geil findet kaufts, wer net lässt es.

ich war zb von Crystal Defenders nach der demo enttäuscht und hols vllt als DotW. ich find das rumgeheule auch lächerlich.
GTA DLC ist sicherlich sein geld wert, kenn keinen der sich bis jetzt darüber beschwert hat.

 

[Mahlzeit]

Sony Now Charging Publishers For PS3 Downloadable Content, An Unpopular Policy Shift

Publishing sources told us that Sony’s previously un-reported new “PlayStation Network Bandwidth Fee” is forcing them to think twice about what content they offer to PS3 gamers for download.

Until October 1 2008, video game publishers who wanted to offer downloadable content on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 didn’t have to worry about getting a bill from Microsoft and Sony.

The million-plus downloads that a popular demo or map pack might receive could delight gamers, but rack up some expensive bandwidth costs. No problem: the publishers, who already pay a licensing fee to get their games on the two big platforms, could count on the platform holders — Microsoft and Sony — to pay the cost of piping that digital content to gamers.

That situation changed with the PS3 on October 1 of last year, when Sony implemented a 16 cents per Gigabyte fee to publishers for paid and free downloadable content, according to publishing sources familiar with Sony’s policy.

Game publishers are not happy about it.

MTV Multiplayer has verified that a letter sent to publishers last fall detailed the policy. It applies a 16-cent charge to every Gigabyte of content downloaded from the PS3’s PSN online store. For free content, like demos, those charges apply only during the first 60 days of the content’s release. For paid content, like map packs, the charges rack up in perpetuity, or until that content is removed from the PlayStation 3’s online store.

Publishing source: “It’s a new thing we have to budget. It’s not cool. It sucks.”

This “PlayStation Network Bandwidth” fee has been unpopular with game companies, according to at least three publishing and development sources who spoke to MTV Multiplayer about the policy on the condition of anonymity so as not to get their companies on Sony’s bad side.

“It definitely makes us think about how we view the distribution of content related to our games when it is free for us to do it on the web, on Xbox Live, or any other way — including broadcast — than on Sony’s platform,” one publishing source said. “It’s a new thing we have to budget. It’s not cool. It sucks.”

Publishers already pay costs for creating a demo, a process that can run six figures. Sony’s fees add a new expense. For a demo that is sized at exactly 1GB and is downloaded one million times, that would add an extra $160,000 that Sony is now charging and that, according to publishing sources, Microsoft isn’t. That’s what could scare publishers from placing content on the PS3.

The cost estimate is relevant because demos can be that big and that popular. Demos typically run at close to 1GB, with Ubisoft’s “Hawx” demo weighing in at 834MB, “Resident Evil 5” at 942MB and the demo for the upcoming “Legend of Wrestlemania” at 1003MB, which is just over 1GB. On the Xbox 360, the “Halo Wars” demo has exceeded two million downloads. The “Resident Evil 5″ demo, across the Xbox 360 and PS3, was downloaded more than four million times by late February.

Sony: “We foresee no change in the high quality or quantity of demos and games available on PSN.”

Sony declined to comment on why the new policy was put in effect, how the 16 cents figure was determined or what kind of feedback it’s dealing with from publishers. But the company did address what might be the most pressing concern for gamers regarding this matter: whether the new charges will scare publishers from placing content on the PS3 online store: “Appreciate the opportunity to jump in here, but we respect the confidentiality of our business agreements with our publishing partners,” Sony Computer Entertainment of America spokesman Patrick Seybold said in an e-mailed statement to MTV. “Of course we work closely with them to bring their amazing content to our growing audience, and we are focused on ensuring we, and our publishing partners, have a viable platform for digital distribution. We foresee no change in the high quality or quantity of demos and games available on PSN.”

So far, the content on the PS3’s PSN store supports Sony’s claim that publishers aren’t pulling material. MTV Multiplayer found that eight of the most recent demos from games ranging from Atari’s “Wheelman” to Namco’s “Afro Samurai” and Take 2’s “MLB 2K9” are available on the PS3 and Xbox 360 online store. One of the only major pieces of free content not on the PS3 is the recently-released “Call of Duty: World at War” demo from Activision, which is on the Xbox 360. Activision reps did not respond to repeated requests for comment for this story. It is possible that it is too soon for Sony’s policy to cut into the number of demos and extra content available on the PSN store — or that publishers, despite their complaints, can and will stomach the charges.

One publishing source who has worked with Sony in the past year said the new policy is an unwanted burden. The source is concerned that the Network Fee will be a turn-off to publishers. One problem, he said, is that publishers will be caught by surprise at what the charges are going to be, as they do not have up-to-the-second data on how much of their content is being downloaded. “It’s like leaving your phone off the hook for a long distance call,” the source said. “The meter is still running.”

While Microsoft’s policy of not charging publishers for downloadable content might sit well with game-makers, it does suggest that Sony is simply tapping a different source to generate money to help pay for the downloading of popular content. Sony is asking publishers to foot the bill, but the content remains free for gamers who own PS3s. Microsoft, however, charges users an annual $50 fee for Xbox Live Gold membership and has been delaying access to some of its downloadable content to non-paying Silver members in favor of those Gold subscribers.

Without further comment from Sony, it is impossible to determine what the new policy means for the free PSN service. The new charges could be the price of keeping the service free to users. But it could have nothing to do with that and instead reflect general financial woes at Sony as a whole.

What gamers will want to be most concerned about — and watchful of — is the range of content available on the PS3’s online store. If the variety of demos, map-packs, wallpapers, trailers and other DLC offerings for multi-platform games on the PS3 store begins to fall behind the offerings on the Xbox 360, gamers will have at least one 16-cent guess as to why.

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2009/03/20/sony-now-charging-publishers-for-ps3-downloadable-content/

 

[tRpii]

Irgendwie muss ja Sony Geld einnehmen. Ist aber gut für XBL, so kann MS noch mehr Entwickler gewinnen. Da braucht man sich auch nicht beschweren, wenn immer mehr DLCs XBOX360-Exklusiv bleiben.

 

[Sasuke]

Irgendwie muss ja Sony Geld einnehmen. Ist aber gut für XBL, so kann MS noch mehr Entwickler gewinnen.

"Mehr" ist gut - es entwickelt ja eh schon jeder wichtige Dev für die 360 und XBLA. Aber schon en bissel doof von Sony, die 3rds so weiter zubelasten.

 

[JD2106]

"Mehr" ist gut - es entwickelt ja eh schon jeder wichtige Dev für die 360 und XBLA. Aber schon en bissel doof von Sony, die 3rds so weiter zubelasten.

Dafür gibt es im PSN keinerlei Beschränkungen wie sie bei XBL allgegenwärtig sind. Wenn ein Publisher 50GB Content im PSN veröffentlichen will kann er das machen, muss halt nur dafür zahlen. Bei XBL wäre sowas unmöglich, da hier nur im MB-Bereich gearbeitet wird.
Und mir persönlich ist auch lieber wenn die Publisher zahlen und nicht ich.

 

[Sasuke]

Und mir persönlich ist auch lieber wenn die Publisher zahlen und nicht ich.

An wen glaubste werden die Publisher diese Kosten weiterreichen ? An den Endverbraucher natürlich - wie immer.

 

[tRpii]

Dafür gibt es im PSN keinerlei Beschränkungen wie sie bei XBL allgegenwärtig sind. Wenn ein Publisher 50GB Content im PSN veröffentlichen will kann er das machen, muss halt nur dafür zahlen. Bei XBL wäre sowas unmöglich, da hier nur im MB-Bereich gearbeitet wird.
Und mir persönlich ist auch lieber wenn die Publisher zahlen und nicht ich.

Informier dich mal besser, das wurde schon geändert. Selektive Wahrnehmung lässt grüßen.

Watchman z.B. ist 1.2 GB groß

 

[Darji]

"Mehr" ist gut - es entwickelt ja eh schon jeder wichtige Dev für die 360 und XBLA. Aber schon en bissel doof von Sony, die 3rds so weiter zubelasten.

Naja dafür muss jeder Publisher bei Spielen mit mehr als 1 DVD an M$ bezahlen. Gut ist das sicherlich auch nicht^^

 

[tRpii]

Naja dafür muss jeder Publisher bei Spielen mit mehr als 1 DVD an M$ bezahlen. Gut ist das sicherlich auch nicht^^

Wieviel müssen sie denn bezahlen?

 

[Darji]

Wieviel müssen sie denn bezahlen?

keine Ahnung aber sicherlich nicht wenig wenn sich ein Carmack darüber schonmal beschwert hat.^^

 

[Sasuke]

Naja dafür muss jeder Publisher bei Spielen mit mehr als 1 DVD an M$ bezahlen. Gut ist das sicherlich auch nicht^^

Unterschied ist das es nur ne handvoll 360 Games gibt die mehr als eine DVD benötigen -diese Sony Aktion betrifft aber sämtlichen DLC.