Xbox Live Arcade: One year later
Over a year since the relaunch of Microsoft's Xbox Live Arcade for the 360, Gamepro assesses how the online service stacks up as Wii and PS3 attempt to get into the online game. They affirm what the masses already expect: Xbox Live is the precedent Nintendo and Sony should strive for. From the article: "While Xbox Marketplace and Xbox Live Arcade aren't perfect, few things are. Microsoft is definitely leading the next-gen pack with these compelling online offerings. Great cheap games, bonus content, free demos, dozens of movies and TV shows... Marketplace and Arcade are a crucial part of the full 360 experience."Imperfections cited in the article include shoddy control of some games (think SF II), what can be an ugly graphical transition of older games optimized for SD to that of HD, and "high price" controversy of certain microtransactions. The corporation slow to embrace the online value of the web in the mid 90s sure has come a long way in leveraging the intertubes for console video games.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Wanker @ Dec 13th 2006 4:14AM
Shoddy.
Neil @ Dec 13th 2006 4:18AM
Precedent.
Random Comment Guy @ Dec 13th 2006 4:40AM
Jerkfaces.
Franky Digital @ Dec 13th 2006 4:40AM
It's 4AM... give the guy a break. >
Kendrick @ Dec 13th 2006 5:44AM
It gets worse. :) You can't strive for a precedent, but you can strive to match or to exceed a precedent. By definition, a precedent has already occurred and one can only make comparisons to it.
icruise @ Dec 13th 2006 6:49AM
LOL, you guys beat me to it.
Ed @ Dec 13th 2006 7:30AM
I will actually comment on the story, thank you. XBLM and XBLA are two facets of the next gen of gaming that SONY has seemingly overlooked completely. You can call the the 360 experience "clunky," but if that's true, I'm not sure what one would call SONY's online marketplace. A disaster?
Andy S. @ Dec 13th 2006 7:54AM
And there's more.
"Shoty"? Try "shoddy".
I'd love to comment on the actual story, but the preponderance of invented or misused words makes it rather difficult to understand what the author is trying to say.
It's almost as if language has to be used correctly in order to be effective. Hmmmmmm.
failure @ Dec 13th 2006 8:06AM
Was this even copy edited before it went out? I agree with #8. It is tough to decipher what the author means at times.
crushthemall @ Dec 13th 2006 8:51AM
Spelchek spelchek spelchek
JJ @ Dec 13th 2006 9:03AM
Well XBL is at the moment the best service hands down... as they should be.
But once PS3 and Wii get their legs, it could be close. With sony saying their going to be offering the equivalent of XBL Video Marketplace with on demand HD shows and movie int he future and they're starting to slowly trickle out new d/l games too, and nintendo will be blowing out its old catalog of games, both could very well Rival was XBL can do, and if they can do it for free, all the better i say.
Austin @ Dec 13th 2006 9:03AM
your all a bunch of homophones
Austin @ Dec 13th 2006 9:04AM
MS is succeeding because they do what we ask for. People can wine all they want about the micro transactions but in previous generations we were forced to purchase a pack of retro games at a full price just to play two that we acutally wanted. If your hung up about the controls go spend the money on a cabinet and see how your wallet feels.
Yes the typos are intentional for all you journalists versed in AP style lets see how many you can find.
unit @ Dec 13th 2006 9:35AM
Why is it that everyone forgets you have to PAY for xbl?! so what if it's $50 a year, that still doesn't change the fact that your paying for the service so there for you should get all that content! And as much as they have "content" on xbl alot of it is bullsh!t. the only stuff people care about are the ability to play other people,some arcade games and demoes. all that other stuff(artist of the month,kameo uno?!..pleaes) we can do with out. Ps3 and wii's online is free give it some time it'll grow and it'll still be free!!
Keef @ Dec 13th 2006 9:54AM
unit............ do you even know that you DONT have to pay for Live? all that paying for live gives you is Online play, everything else can be downloaded by non paying XBL people...
demos are free, no paying for XBL needed.
and the stuff that you can pay for...... are NOT needed, so if u dont like them or th their price............. dont pissin get it then u idiot....
and XBL is well worth the money for online play.... you ever play on the PS2 online..... that was some funny shiz.... damn it sucked...
Pip @ Dec 13th 2006 10:10AM
All I know is that I can chat with friends between two different games, and invite people from any game I have and am currently playing.
Until the PS3 and Wii can do this, it's not worth using their service.
Bill Gates @ Dec 13th 2006 10:20AM
Well, XBLA is certainly the leader in this area, but that's mostly due to lack of competition. As someone who owns a 360 and has next to no interest in the Wii right now, I will say that Nintendo's offerings on VC makes that service nearly as appealing and they've only had a fraction of the time on the market. I'm glad the other two consoles are out, hopefully it will force Microsoft to pick up their game.
Microsoft has lied more than once on the amount of games that would be out by the end of the year - and it seems like half the time when we get a new game, it's some warmed over stuff from 1983 that hasn't exactly aged gracefully. If they stuck to more fan-favorite stuff like SFII, UMK3 people wouldn't complain as much about the arcade releases. I don't think anyone would be bitching if they released TMNT Arcade or Golden Axe, for example.
Oh, and fire Greg Canessa.
DeezNuts420 @ Dec 13th 2006 10:26AM
You get what you pay for. With that said I will gladly pay $50 a year for the BEST online service ever.
wolvie75 @ Dec 13th 2006 10:38AM
So i'm wondering.. When is Sony actually going to do something first when it comes to online? I remember reading that Sony says MS always copies them. Look who's copying who..
Mr Blonde @ Dec 13th 2006 11:06AM
I have used XBL since 2003 (RainbowSix 3)and have been very impressed with it. The thing I love to hear is the people that say "wait for Sony's online service to get fleshed out." Read my first sentence, 2003! That is 3 years for Sony and Nintendo to come up with online services to rival XBL and what do we have? Not much. These services should have been ready to go with the launch. To me that makes it seem like online is still an after thought to these companies.
I would be happy if the only thing they (Sony/Nintendo) provided was a friends list and ingame/lobby chat and invitation. Lets get on it.
Domingo @ Dec 13th 2006 11:26AM
There's nothing wrong with the SF2 controls. Yes, I'm not a fan of the 360's d-pad, but that's not Capcom's fault. If you use the DOA joystick or even the 360 pad's analog stick there is NOTHING wrong with the controls for the game. It's the controller, not the game. The lousy thing is that because of MS restrictions, we might not ever see a pad with a d-pad centric layout for games like this. Either way, I got used the the analog stick and don't even care anymore.
Willie @ Dec 13th 2006 11:26AM
I have both the Xbox 360 and PS3. I will say this about the online services of each. Xbox is very good but I feel that some of the additional content is too much money. I hate the Microsoft points too.
The PS3 is very young but has a lot of potential. I have been impressed with the most expensive games costing $10. The majority of additional content so far is free and usually $4.99. Not too bad for a free service. I think Microsoft will have some competition with PS3's online service. I haven't tried Wii's yet....so who knows.
JJ @ Dec 13th 2006 11:27AM
MR Blonde... the PS3 and Wii (as far as i know) DO provide friends list and i haven't tried it yet, but they do also allow you to invite people to game if i'm not mistaking.
In so far as much as i have about 7 people on my PS3 friends list and it does basically what the XBL list does, tell you that their on or not and what they're playing and whatever "comment" they have up at the moment.
and as for fleshed out i think most mean... give them more than 3 weeks to get stuff out. Live wasn't as nearly full of stuff 3 weeks out as it is today and thats with several years of getting things right witht he original xbox.
and yeah PS2 in terms of a unified service sucked compared to XBL, but that doesn't mean nobody played it, in fact PS2 online did quite well for being an "afterthought" compared to the flagship that XBL is.
Beock @ Dec 13th 2006 11:32AM
Wow, If MS copies Sony, and Sony copies Nintendo, then by definition doesn't that make all consoles decendent from the Big "N"? What would that make Nintendo...... the original god? naw.... *mumbles to himself* D-Pads, top loading cartiges, rumble, analogue, motion sensing....*mumble mumble*
But seriously, I personally dont own either Xbox but I do know MS, if nothing else, has an excellent online program and sucessfully does its job in connecting gamers together and making it an exciting fast paced experiance. And with its due credit, I give them the praise they deserve for it and hope, at least Nintendo, will work towards and maybe improve that standard of service.
However Id pose a question to how far Nintendo can go in accessories that can be used in Online play. The Wii establishes wireless signals with up to 4 wiimotes. (I dont know how online play works with consoles but I assume more than 1 person can play per console) so if Nintendo were to make headsets for online ( some awesome glossy white ones with a shining blue light on the side *drools*) how would they connect to the Wii if the wiimote slot is taken by the nunchuck. I dont believe they could expand the number of wireless connections into the console with a firmware update, but I could be wrong. If they wanted to add headsets they could try using the GC ports for it as well.
The other possibility is giving a reciever with the headset that plugs into the USB port (and since there isnt 4 of those) that can accept 4 headset signals on its own. ( I know 1 reciever with 4 connections is a stretch but Nintendo IS badass with wireless applications. Go wavebird! woot!)
Either way Im going to continue to hope Nintendo will strive for a bigger expansion into the online realm (hopefully even more than the DS)by listening to their customers ideas on new additions. Only time will tell.
wolvie75 @ Dec 13th 2006 11:41AM
Question.. Does nintendo need online to succeed in this generation?
heavyness @ Dec 13th 2006 12:18PM
i have both the 360 and Wii and its hard to compare Xbox Live Arcade to the Wii's Virtual Console. Nintendo just dumped the rom's online and let you download them. they don't update them or fix anything. i bought Bomberman [hell of a game] and if you use a wavebird controller, you have to hold down the R button for it to work [we were using 2 wiimotes and 3 wavebirds].
no online play, no leaderboards, and no achievements for the same prices as the 360 arcade game. now, you don't need leaderboards or online play for some of these old games, but when you see that you get that with every Xbox Live Arcade title, you see what you're paying for. plus, leaderboards for F-Zero or for speed run in Super Mario Bros would of rocked!
also, if your using the Wii in widescreen mode, the virtual console games get stretched [luckly i can change my aspect on my tv].
Spartacus @ Dec 13th 2006 1:04PM
Even if you compare Nintendo and Sony's online offerings to LIVE on the 360 AT LAUNCH one year ago, LIVE would've beat them hands down. Sure there's been some tweaks to XBL since last November, but the vast majority is the same. The fact is that MS upped the ante with LIVE when the 360 debuted and no one else has challenged it. Sony talked a lot about how every LIVE feature would be matched with their service, but as usual, it was just talk.
LIVE is simply the best online experience to date. It was good on the XBOX and it is exceptional on the 360. With the introduction of Achievements, chat, messaging and invites built into the 360 rather than being game dependant, it is very user friendly and intuitive. Add to the fact that the OS uses less system resources than the PS3's while being able to do all this, it is quite an accomplishment.
For online gaming:
360>PS3>Wii
For media downloads:
360>PS3>Wii
For game downloads:
360>Wii>PS3
For friends accessability:
360>PS3>Wii
There is simply NOTHING that MS's competitors do better online. The ONLY gripe one could ahve is the Gld membership, which is a measly $50 a year. But the vast majority of LIVE is available for free. You only need Gold if you want to play online multiplayer. I've been a LIVE member for about 2 years now and I consider it money well spent. I'd rather pay for cable TV than just have bunny ears even though the latter is free.
Dirk Dorkelson @ Dec 13th 2006 1:32PM
"MR Blonde... the PS3 and Wii (as far as i know) DO provide friends list and i haven't tried it yet, but they do also allow you to invite people to game if i'm not mistaking.
In so far as much as i have about 7 people on my PS3 friends list and it does basically what the XBL list does, tell you that their on or not and what they're playing and whatever "comment" they have up at the moment."
Yeah, but Wii doesn't have voice chats or headsets, which will make coordinating play in team-based games next to impossible. PS3 does have some similar features, but you can't, say, carry on a conversation with your friend while he plays Gears of War and you play Outpost Kaloki X. And don't you have to exit your game session to read messages from friends and stuff like that? I've read articles comparing the PS3 online service and the 360 service, and it doesn't sound like the PS3 one is anywhere near as smooth and comprehensive and easy to set up. Have you not read this stuff?
(The Wii online service has generally not been treated kindly.)
mrfreeze @ Dec 13th 2006 5:49PM
@ 20. You get what you pay for. With that said I will gladly pay $50 a year for the BEST online service ever.
by DeezNuts420
I agree with you on that and nobody on here has said anything like that. I also will pay 50 bucks a year to get quality online service. Free Wii and PS3...we'll see how they'll fairly stack up.
Aex @ Dec 13th 2006 6:11PM
I have yet to try out Nintendo's or Sony's Online ever. Also before sunday I havn't tried out the Xbox's. Well, after drilling a hole in my wall, I must say that Xbox Live and XBLA are quite amazing. Though sometimes game matching is a little annoying. I find a game, try to enter it and it says the host cannot connect :( That and wierd disconnects during Gears of War coop, but overall I'm very impressed. I turn on my 360 and it is all connected. Very seamless. I love the demo downloads, already spent loads of time on the R6 demo. Only downside is the $50 a year, but it is very worth it :) XBL is much more than I ever could have expected.
tiremfej @ Dec 13th 2006 9:52PM
Give the guy a freakin' break. It's a blog for crying outloud! I read the story without any issues. I'm sure everyone is perfect and have never made any spelling errors. The people around here....
=[`] @ Jan 9th 2007 3:56PM
seriously. shut up you fucking pedants.
XBLA/M are the 2 reasons that I even consider an x360 - if the 2 other systems can produce an online system as good as, near to or better than the MS model then i will be parting with my cash.
1 year should give me ample time to see how it pans out.
Is there anyone with all 3, or even 2 of these systems that can give some sort of comparison, or explain some of the foibles of a particular online model?