The choices of online gaming...

[Shevek]

I apologise if this particular subject has been covered before, but I have had a few thoughts which I would like to add to this.

I have been an ardent supporter of consoles with online capabilities for a somewhat bizarre length of time and to the extent where I have had consoles modified to play online as well.

So the more recent addition of broadband/networkable consoles is very interesting. Especially that of the Xbox Live service.

In all honesty, whilst it is an easy service to use, I have not found it all that comprehensive and actually rather restrictive to the user.

At least with the Dreamcast, Gamecube and PlayStation 2 you can configure the nature of the connection itself and, unlike the Xbox, none of the above consoles automatically connect the moment they are turned on.

I can see that many people prefer the inclusive nature of the Xbox Live service, but it is setting a worrying precedent. The user who pays for the Xbox Live service cannot actively control how it is connected (with the setup they are expected to use that is). Considering Microsoft's very chequered history when it comes to networking and its consequent security, I hope that I am not the only one that has raised the odd eyebrow in concern over the current flagship of online gaming?

[JRMacumber]

In all honesty, whilst it is an easy service to use, I have not found it all that comprehensive and actually rather restrictive to the user.

At least with the Dreamcast, Gamecube and PlayStation 2 you can configure the nature of the connection itself and, unlike the Xbox, none of the above consoles automatically connect the moment they are turned on.

Can you be a bit more clear on this? I've personally found Xbox Live to be an absolute breeze to work and play with, and I can't imagine wanting it any other way. It configured itself automatically, it logs in effortlessly, and the integration withint games is getting more and more seamless. If PGR2 is any indication, I think Xbox Live will continue to be THE online service to have.

[Shevek]

Can you be a bit more clear on this? I've personally found Xbox Live to be an absolute breeze to work and play with, and I can't imagine wanting it any other way. It configured itself automatically, it logs in effortlessly, and the integration withint games is getting more and more seamless. If PGR2 is any indication, I think Xbox Live will continue to be THE online service to have.

That's the problem you see, whilst Xbox Live is a wondrously inclusive service it is more than a tad insidious on how it takes advantage of the end user. I am not arguing that Xbox Live is inadequate for facilitating online play, but that the end user has no real control over the nature of the service's connection.

[JRMacumber]

Insidious, you say?

* looks around quickly. nervously... *

Wow, they really are out to get me! Thanks for the heads=up.







Seriously, I don't need to the need for alarm, but if you do I won't try to dissuade you.

[Shevek]

Insidious, you say?

* looks around quickly. nervously... *

Wow, they really are out to get me! Thanks for the heads=up.







Seriously, I don't need to the need for alarm, but if you do I won't try to dissuade you.

It isn't so much a case of paranoia but more one that sets a precedent (if left unchecked). If Xbox Live is allowed to continue in such an ubiquitous fashion, as in always online and no user control over the actual connection, I don't see how that is beneficial to the industry as a whole. Many developers and publishers have vetoed their support of Xbox Live as well, so I am hardly alone in my concern over the infrastructure of Xbox Live.

[Brats]

There is an option for Live not to connect as soon as the user switch on the XBox. FYI the feature to connect automatically was added to Live 2.0 at the request of Live users who thought it would be useful to see which friends are currently using their XBox so they could message them for a game, not just those actually playing online.

I have mine connected all the time. Even if MS were using the XBox as some kind of sinister monitoring service, what on earth could they learn? That I've been playing PGR2 all night long? Whoopee .

Live is great, but it still has some way to go to be perfect imo. What I'd like to say would be the way to arrange online tournaments for all games a bit like XSN. Also, the ability to send text messages would be very useful. If someone sends you an invite for a game, there is no way at the moment to say "Give me ten minutes to finish this game and I'll be there". You either have to accept, decline or ignore it.

There seem to be quite a few developers supporting Live atm. For example, Nagoshi-san chose XBox to host Spike Out Extreme because of the online service and Ubisoft have been major supporters.

The one big exception of course is EA. There are various rumours about the reasons for this. Some say it is because EA don't like the structure of Live. Others say it is because EA intend to turn of online support for their current crop of sports titles by the end of 2004, forcing people to upgrade to the 2005 versions, but MS won't let them do this. Make your own mind up about which seems more likely.

[Brats]

What's also interesting is that Sony are launching a service similar in some ways to Live called Central Station. Exact details aren't known yet, but the idea is that developers will have the option of allowing their online games to go through CS or not. It'll be interesting to see how many opt to be a part of it.