When will games get the ad $$ they deserve?

One day Sony says they have no online service whatsoever, and the next they say they can take down Xbox Live no problem?

Sorry, I just don't buy it. I'd say unless Sony comes up with some hard evidence that they've got something really big and cool coming, other than just trying to rip-off their competitors attempts, I'm gonna say Xbox Live takes it, followed closely by Nintendo's Wi-Fi Connection.

I would be very surprised if the number of people on the PS3's online service surpassed Xbox Live, as I am certain it will have a lot of issues at launch. Xbox Live as I recall had roughly a year of testing before it became a pay service, if Sony wants to match Xbox Live, they have to catch up A LOT.

FOR THE HORDE!!!

"because PlayStation partisans on Joystiq have been quick to cite Sony's early announcements as proof that Sony is going to dominate in the online space"

Are you new here Vlad?! You just can't SAY that kind of thing out loud!!! ;-)

Haha @ all comments getting routed to this post...

The gullible fall for anything everytime it seems.

Well it will be free to play games online, and im assuming Nintendo's online service will be free also so this will be some serious competition for xbox live, I have a gold membership but if the same scenario plays out like in this generation where you can buy the same game on all 3 platforms then im opting for the PS3 version and may just cancel the xbox live account...
Guezs we have to wait and see first though

I suppose this would be consistant with Sony overselling everything else about the system. Unless the PS3 will be actually able play guitar better than Hendrix, tell the future, bake the most delicious cake in the world, score more goals than Wayne Gretzky and dance better than Barishnikov.

I'm sorry but sony's online offerings are far from "live killers" thus far. Without central servers and a deticated backbone like MS has, sony is going to rely on individual game companies to set up their own servers, and anyone who has played a recent EA game on xbox/360 can confirm what a horrible gaming experience this leads to. I personally own fight night on 360 and can't stand the online because EA uses their own servers instead of Live's servers, and there is nothing but lag and disconnects, where as games like GRAW have no lag with 16 players. Most likely sony isn't lying when they say they won't charge for multiplayer but I'm sure that won't stop individual game companies from charging to use their servers. I don't mind paying for Live when I have such an enjoyable and lag free experience.

Not a bad read, but really makes no solid conclusions, other than don't think of the future or push the envelope and you will do fine just like EA.

I really wish I had paid closer attention to the PS2 announcements back in the day, but it is very interesting that the overall composition of Sony's on-line speech hasn't changed that much.

I thought their consumer/retailer conversation was pretty real world. Very few consumers would have any idea of what quesions to ask, to end up with the right product for them and their needs/wants, be it the 360 or the PS3.

Now to sit back and watch the flame war begin again.

Despite focusing way too much on the PS3 (even though details are sketchy on its online plans) and not even mentioning Nintendo's, I found this sentence interesting:

"How much has changed from March 2000 to March 2006? Time Warner’s market value is about one-fourth of what it was back in 2000, Sony’s stock about one-third. In this race Microsoft really looks like a champ, the company has only lost about half of its market value over the past six years. Meanwhile, despite finishing third in the last console race, Nintendo who focused on current profits over market share, has only lost about 10% of market value."

Am I detecting a bit of sarcasm towards MS there...

Anyways, thought I'd fufill my due dilligence and point out that Nintendo has been right (according to this article and some other's I've seen in the past several months) about the market sliding or stagnating recently. We all know investors are big movers and shakers, but they're also good indicators for a market's health. Now of course MS and Sony are involved with many other ventures and industries (more than Nintendo), but I do wonder if these numbers have some validity in judging the video game market futures for those companies as well.

And it would also seem, if these percentages are correct, that Nintendo's focus on profits and cost efficiency may give them an edge in the new generation...

Sony is still going to rely on developers/publishers to provide their own servers. Essentially, it will be taking the PS2 online except with only one user name and a friends list. It's not surprising that they could pull that off at all. What it means is LOW effort on their part.

A friends list and single user name will be great, but I'm still highly doubting its performance. Playstation Online is really horrible. Try SOCOM or Splinter Cell...it's a waste of time. I still want them to refund me for the worthless network adapter on my old PS2.

Good article. I was thinking along the same lines as the author.

"Leaving AOL aside."

Definitely. AOL should disolve; they have nothing to offer anymore.

"How much has changed from March 2000 to March 2006?"

Not much. Sony is still full of it, everyone still hates Microsoft, and Nintendo is supposedly still for kids (Because RE4, Splinter Cell, and Mortal Kombat are totally for kids! *sarcasm*).

There is one piece of advertising in games that I would LOVE to see. In whatever the next NFL game is, they need to include the Burger King as a playable character, with comething like perfect stats.

Everytime I see one of those commercials, I keep thinking how awesome it would be to have him make a cameo in Madden.