I paid for xbox live because it was required to stream netflix. The plan was to move the roku to my bedroom and then use the xbox netflix streaming downstairs. It didn't work out for a number of reasons:

1) Getting signed into xbox live was a nightmare on at least a weekly basis. It would kick us out for no reason, prevent sign on's due to "network error" and was generally unstable. This is on a wired connection and I have 10 megabit cable connection so don't try to blame my network. And yes, I realize all you fanboys "never have problems" and it "always works" for you, but when I posted a thread on here complaining about it, numerous people reported the same experiences (whether you like it or not).

2) My wife was frustrated with using the xbox controller to try to watch movies. The xbox user interface sucks.

So we ended up leaving the roku in the family room and the xbox live subscription was worthless. My stepson played a few games online a few times, but the games he tried were full of cheaters/morons (WWE) or screaming stupid kids who whined, cursed, and disconnected when they lost (halo 3), so even he gave up after a while.

Netflix streaming is *really* free on PS3, so that is what we use now. And no, we never have a problem getting online on the PS3.

Actually, I looked at the thread you were referring to, and everyone said they had none of the problems you experienced except at the time you posted, because it was right at Christmas, where XBL experienced over 3x its normal traffic, so much that XBL was essentially DDOSed. If you're still having issues, it's your network, plain and simple. I've NEVER been booted off of XBL because of XBL, it's always been my network dying.

Also, I assume you tried using the remote instead of the xbox controller?

Using "the remote" ? You mean the one that didn't come with the xbox? You honestly think I'm going to give them *more* money?

So anyway, please diagnose my network problems. Explain to me why everything I do online works perfectly except xbox live. Explain it to me, please.

The Playstation didn't come with a remote either...

Also, I would have no idea, that's what tech support calls are for. For all I know you have a routing issue.

Bwa bwa bwa. When I found out that the ps3 dvd player, blu ray player, and netflix player all worked fine, then I bought a ps3 remote. That sort of makes sense to me.

A routing problem? Bwa bwa bwa.

Yeah, I don't think I've ever lost connection to XBL in the 4ish years I've used it that wasn't due to something like my router rebooting or my internet connection going out.

Look Brian, just because you have some weird unexplained network issue doesn't mean everyone will or does. I'm sure it's some huge continuation of the usual Microsoft conspiracy to make your life miserable.

Also, I don't care why you bought the remote, you used the x-box controller as an excuse, so I gave a solution. Obviously the same problem exists on the PS3, which is why you bought their remote. It's hardly fair to make such a comparison when you really have the same complaint about both.

A while back, I built a new PC from scratch around 2003 for about $1200 US, monitor, inputs, and the like included. I haven't had to upgrade in seven years for a piece of electronics that has uses from free time to work, money that I would have to spend to function in modern society anyway.

I can play TF2 and L4D just fine, as well as a slew of RTSes like DoW, company of heroes, with things like RPGs such as Titan's quest and Sacred thrown in, etc. I have a laundry list of games that I play with my friends on the PC, combined with multiplayer emulators like zsnes and MAME. Long story short, my leisure time is soaked up by a PC I built way back when.

Anyway, I loath Xbox live because it's paying for a system that on the PC and other consoles that is effectively free. What does MS provide that justifies a monthly fee? MS is insidiously instituting XBL in newer PC games (such as DoW:II and Red Faction: Guerrilla), and I'm afraid that soon I'll have to pay for what I've done for free for 15 years, because of saps with disposable incomes. These are similar to the saps that make $5 DLC hats and nicknacks a viable option for developers, instead of them trying to actually generate new content. Also, the same saps that bought L4D2 at full price for what boils down to an expansion pack that should have cost $20.

tl;dr: My hobby is becoming more expensive because my compatriots are spendthrifts.

No, I don't have the same complaint about the ps3 -- it actually works, and I didn't have to pay extra to stream netflix. You're a bigger microsoft fanboy than I am a microsoft hater -- I've already admitted I like the xbox more for gaming than the ps3 (because of the controller and the games). However, I'm *not* the only person having problems with xbox live. Just run a search and you'll find that there were major outages in december 2008 / january 2009 (right when I paid for it), again in march, again in june, another one in july, and more in october. And those are only the major, nationwide outages. No service is perfect, I don't expect it to be, but when it works sometimes (for weeks or sometimes months), and then randomly starts disconnecting me for a period of weeks, while all my other internet activities are running smoothly and perfectly, it's not an issue with my network.

I made a short list of problems that made me not like to stream netflix on the xbox. You gave a solution to one of them. But there would be no point to me buying a remote to watch netflix streaming on the xbox when a) I am not going to buy more xbox live this month when it runs out (because it doesn't work right, and it's not worth the money even when it is working right), and b) streaming is cheaper/easier on the ps3.

You can argue with me all you want and accuse me of being a microsoft hater. I do dislike microsoft, but I did buy their xbox and I do enjoy playing games on it. (I also regularly buy Microsoft software, despite disliking the company and their products, in general.) However, as you've demonstrated in this thread (and others), you're a complete microsoft/xbox fanboy and thus, any negative opinion anyone has about ms, xbox, or their service is "wrong" to you and you are unable to step back and see it from any point of view other than your own (as usual).

I see and understand your point -- you don't have problems with xbox live, you don't mind paying for it, it's worth it to you. But you are unable or unwilling to see that other people have different experiences and have different ideas of what's valuable or "worth it" to pay for. Clearly I'm not the only one on this forum who doesn't like paying for xbox live (esp. when it doesn't work right). Clearly you're not the only one on this forum who doesn't mind paying for xbox live (even if it goes down every once in a while).

Feel free to argue all you want, but I've said my piece and I will not continue this completely moronic, stupid argument about your opinion vs. my opinion.

They already tried charging for Windows Live, it failed. The reason is that XBL offers way more than Windows Live does. There's no real need for communications and party systems on the PC.

I am a simple man, so bear with me. Here is a question:

How much does it cost MS to implement these features? Voice chat should not cost them money. Party systems should not either. Where do the costs that they charge the consumer come from, and what do they go to?

http://www.google.com/search?q=playstation+network+problems

Look, I can use Google to prove nothing too!



In your opinion. I find the need to stick a disk in my system every time I want to use Netflix, combined with the relatively poor performance of such to be a downside.



I don't mind paying for a service which I find to offer much more stability, features and functionality than the free PSN does, yes. I know it's worth it /to me/, the whole point here is that just because /you/ had problems with it doesn't mean everyone does.

However, the things I bring up are not debatable. PSN DOES lack features XBL offers.



Almost all voice communication is not done peer to peer, so yes it does cost them money. And the party system requires a lot of server load to keep everyone in the same games, something I've yet to see happen on any other system.

Forgive my ignorance, but what prevents them from having a user setting up something like ventrilo?

Also:



From the article you posted:


Doesn't steam tell you when your friends come online? Or are playing a game?

Well besides the fact that Ventrilo costs money (a better suggestion would be Teamspeak):

1. That would require everyone you talk to to use Ventrilo.
2. It would also require them to have a PC.
3. It would require them to have said PC near their xbox.
4. It would require them to set up said mess every time they wanted to get on.
5. It would require them to introduce someone to this mess everytime you wanted to talk to someone new, really annoying when it's just a random person.
6. In general, complete lack of integration with your friends and people you play with on the xbox.

Edit: Also, I never posted an article?

Anyway, yes Steam tells you when your friends come online and what game they're playing if it's in Steam. But that's it. It makes no effort to keep a group together as they play different games, or join different servers (important on the console when you don't play the same dedicated server every time).

Not to mention XBL subscriptions pay for the things like storage and bandwidth usage of DLC, demos, etc. Sony actually forces publishers to pay for the bandwidth their demos and DLC use up on PSN. That's another one of the major reasons PSN is free and XBL is not. Sony's making the publishers pay for stuff, MS is making the users pay for it. That difference comes into play when publishers decide that paying for Sony's bandwidth isn't worth it to them, and they don't even release demos and DLC on PSN.

No it doesn't.

Or at least, the version I have isn't?

Addendum:

http://www.ventrilo.com/download.php

What are you *talking* about?



First, I mean a ventrilo-like solution. In other words, you just host the server, through software provided by MS.

But Skype is also free though, and you host diddly.



Demos used to be free, as hey, if a person tries our game and likes it, then they buy it and we make money! Also, DLC is the same: just throw the price of bandwidth into the DLC. Whatever.

Also, most DLC is ****.



Sorry, I'm on crack. I looked it up myself, but I thought you posted what I looked up. Hurr durr.

The client doesn't, the server does. You have to have something to connect to.






So is teamspeak, but that doesn't invalidate the other 5 reasons I posted. Also, it's called reliability and quality. Yes, you could just do peer chatting all the time, but then quality would suffer for people with poor connections.



I believe demos still are free, you just get them a week later.

Yes, some DLC is crap. How is this the fault of XBL?

If you want to make legitimate complaints about XBL and DLC, use this:

Microsoft forced Valve to charge for its DLC on the 360 (like for L4D). Valve wanted to release it for free.

Of course, the playstation doesn't even get said DLC so who wins there I don't know.

I can host a server.

It costs me my internet connection?

Do you want me to host a server for free to prove it to you?

I still don't understand you. You can download the server materials, for free.

You can run a server on your PC, for free.

You can have friends connect to the server you set up, for free.



Never had problems, with either skype, teamspeak, or ventrilo, so I cannot relate. Back in the day I used 56k with Starcraft and Ventrilo just fine.




Just that paying for XBL to have access to said crap is not a reason for me to get XBL.




Fair enough. But I'm a PC guy, so the PStriple can suck it.

You guys are sure not making any compelling arguments foe your purchases. It's all sort of vagueness and not "I have this functionality that is clearly superior to the free alternatives".

You're right, as long as it's 8 people or less.



People have trouble nowadays even with broadband. I have no clue how you managed on 56k, it must have sounded god-awful with the codec you were using.



You can still download off the Marketplace on a Silver account.

Edit: Anyway Kuat, you're missing the point. You're using PC examples but this is not a PC platform. Treating it as one is not going to work.

.

Also, steam games have chat supported, to get around the limited number of ventrilo.

But more than 8 people talking? Yeech.



I'll take your words for it, I guess.



Ok, my bad.



I would concede, if it just weren't for the fact that consoles are becoming more similar to PCs. Even if you disagree with that, I see no reason for these functionalities to not be implemented for free. It bothers me on principle.

And finally, THE ONLY reason I care is that I know this bull**** will eventually find its way to my beloved PC gaming because you guys paved the road. It would be criminal not to, as shareholders etc will say "well gee, this system is so profitable here, why aren't you implementing it on this other platform", and y'all will roll over and take it.

*shrug* most of the vent servers I've been on have had upwards of 20 people on at once.

Also, yes, Steam games do, some of them. It's really not comparable to the 360 though. Have you used it before, out of curiosity?

No I have not.

I know it's vastly superior in XBL according to my friends, but since I just use ventrilo and mute everyone else, I don't really notice.

I game with about six people. I care not to play with larger groups, nor listen to their chatter. When I play with strangers online they are effectively bots to me, to be honest. This is why all the community features of XBL are null to me. I call my buddies up, we pick a game, and we play it.

Party System is cool I suppose, but I would never play with friends because:

1. All of my 360 friends are 4 years younger than me (my brothers age) and are stupid lemmings that live in their basements on their 360.
2. All of my friends have a PS3.
3. Partying up with random people online doesn't interest me.
4. XBL has a nasty rep of having a vast number of 12 year olds run freely. They like to yell at you.

Those features are good but they wouldn't do much for me. I'd be paying for nothing really.

I'd also like to note that I do enjoy the 360 controllers layout more, but the PS3 hands down has better thumbsticks. There's just more range and allows for more accurate aim instead of snapping me back and fourth between moving and not moving.

Also, anyone notice how square the Halo 3 look controls are? In Killzone 2 I look in a large circle when spinning my thumbstick, but in Halo 3 it moves in a very awkward square motion. I haven't been able to find the X/Y sensitivity settings (like Halo 2), only the regular sensitivity. Any help would be hot

Yeah except those kids are everywhere. Even in TF2 servers on PC.

And yeah I guess party system would suck if, you know, you had no one to party with. But then again, why even play online?



Obviously opinion but I cannot stand the Playstation sticks. It's the one thing I hate about it. I think they're way, way too loose.



Never noticed because I never played Halo 3 more than a few weeks. Just enough to beat SP and a little MP.

I hate to open a completely different can of worms here, but I've played TF2 when you've had a mic setup and you were more annoying than the average 12 year old.

Not my fault the team sucked

The team sucking doesn't mean that you need to start trying to tell everyone what to do.

Honestly it's what I do there because that's why my server does in general. We try to tell each other what we see needs doing, as no one person can get it done, and no one is ever completely aware of what is going on overall. I'm usually not the only one doing it

poor performance? slightly slower and i can't hold down a shoulder button on the controller to make it go really fast... where it actually matters (the streaming) the performance of PS3 netflix is just fine

PS3's Netflix implementation has a huge flaw in that it forces the PS3 to change its resolution to the resolution of the video being played. So playing HD content forces your PS3 to output 720p, playing SD content forces your PS3 to output 480p. The 360 will upscale everything up to 1080p, and it generally looks better. You don't notice it much with the HD content obviously, but it makes a world of difference with the SD content.

B....beacause that's all the MP they have

Seriously. What happened to split-screen? >.>

On another note: I play online just to play online. As with many people, we don't make that many friends online. They never speak with you again even if they're on your friend list, so it's pointless. Sure you could party up with the one guy in the game (after playing 5 other games) so that you guys can rock out all night, but after that you never speak again.

Pretty useless if you ask me.

I personally miss a JK style lobby where clans and people could interact without having to be in a game or turning to the friends list. But since this is consoles that's probably impossible because of the lack of keyboard+mouse.

Also: I have come across a small handful (6 at most) of young players in Counter-Strike, only half of them being annoying. While playing Halo 3 with my bro, at least 1/2 of the players were young, and every single one of them was annoying. I guess it's really game-dependent, but from what I can gather it happens a lot in CoD and a few other games as well. Regardless, I probably don't hear them that much on my PS3 because not everyone has a mic, whereas on the 360 most people have a mic so they just don't shut up. >.<

... makes me feel like crap for playing JK while I was a kid in Nar, I was probably really annoying..


Anyway, you should change your name to Gabe Newell.

I have a number of "online" friends on my 360 now. Actually about 5 or 6 of them are friends in real life.

But I can't stand playing MW2 without a party of my friends. I can't stand playing a lot of games without my friends because it just makes it that much more fun

I haven't noticed anything odd in this respect. Although, since I got my ps3 hooked up for streaming, I generally look at HD stuff. I will try a movie later that isn't HD and see what happens. I think the picture quality of the stuff I've watched is generally much better on PS3 than on the roku (even in HD, the HD on the PS3 seems better -- which I don't quite understand because they should be getting the same stream right? And they are both connected using HDMI, and I think the max output of the roku is 720p and the max resolution of the netflix streams are 720p - Weird).

I never had any picture quality problems with the xbox.