What's Wrong with Xbox Live?

[The Imp]

Equally, it's hardly all roses & icecream with dedicated servers. The last game I played online regularly which used them, COD2, was a navigational nightmare full of servers that were empty, locked, playing a map I didn't like, or servers that seemed open but then after 10minutes of loading informed me that it was infact full.

You know, PC games usually come with a filter system for their online part. Do you want to display full/empty/password protected/playing map ABC? |Yes|/|No| Just check/uncheck the right box and everything is all right. But if even that is too much to ask from a current generation console gamer...Then i'm at a loss for words. Really.

 

[mjc0961]

Citing Newell's bullshit (the Left 4 Dead series makes his statement sound like a bunch of crap, unless he'd like to speak up and offer some clarity as to why he can manage to keep those games updated, but not Team Fortress 2) doesn't really make any case against Xbox Live. I found that entire part of the article to be pretty worthless honestly.

As for the part about servers... If they wanted to do something like that as an extra for those who want to use it, fine. I'd rather not be assed though, just being able to go to the MP menu and picking Quick Play works fine for me. So maybe they can expand but keep the current system there as well for people who don't want to deal with it. Of course it would probably only work for Microsoft published games. I don't think any amount of money tossed at Microsoft is going to stop EA from pulling the plugs on game servers faster than Gabe Newell can make statements that make him look stupid (and not just the ones about Xbox Live, remember when he was hating on the PS3? How's that foot taste, Gabe?).

If you are a UK xbl user you will have seen those 2 arse holes (with their stupid hair cuts) who post the "sentuamessage" video, each week, answering questions.

Oh man, why would you ever remind anyone that those guys exist? Never remind anyone that those guys exist (sadly we get them in the US as well).

 

[Blazenwizard]

What Im trying to figure out is why Microsoft is increasing the price of Live Gold but I can't block people from msging me w/o signing off of live. Sometimes I want to slay online in silence and privacy. also I can't download a demo and play a game at the same time? what gives. But i can browse face book from my 360 whoppeee!!! (soo sarcastic)

 

[SageRuffin]

What Im trying to figure out is why Microsoft is increasing the price of Live Gold but I can't block people from msging me w/o signing off of live. Sometimes I want to slay online in silence and privacy. also I can't download a demo and play a game at the same time? what gives. But i can browse face book from my 360 whoppeee!!! (soo sarcastic)

That's not hard at all. Either turn your notifications off, or set your status to "appear offline".

Unless someone knows otherwise, you either won't get notified of any messages (you know - out of sight, out of mind), or you'll have virtually dropped off the face of the planet. Kaboom yo, now you can frag, kill, and maim in the privacy of your own room.

 

[Earthbound]

I find it disappointing that there exist people who believe moderation by Microsoft in any major form is positive. You do not need Microsoft's help or assistance if you had dedicated servers. Make games work using the same general system of Left 4 Dead 2 for the PC. You have a "Quick Game" button that just chooses a pseudo-random vanilla server, a "Custom Game" button that let's you specify conditions for the server, and a server browser for advanced users to find exactly what they want. Give people the option to search for servers with vanilla content instead of policing what servers can allow. Modded servers simply don't have a "vanilla" tag. Even better, give admins the ability to make their own tags to describe how the server works. "Casual," "DM_only," "XTREEM_MODZ," and "j3i9zM3," are all valid tags, and people will easily be able to judge the general feel of a server by reading them.

Will people make stupid servers where anyone who kills the host is kicked? Yes. Will they have servers that severely gimp non-admins? Yes. Will there be servers with ludicrously stupid gameplay changes? Yes. All players are free to go or not to go to these servers. They'll have the ability to favorite or blacklist any servers that they want. They can even choose to just use the "Quick Game" and ignore all the previously mentioned things. The important thing is that they, the gamers, would have the choice. They do not need Microsoft to guide them. They can guide themselves and be better off for doing it.

Now we just have to somehow convey this to Microsoft.

 

[ionveau]

I agree consoles are money sinks

 

[Ferrious]

Maybe slightly off topic, but I really had to comment on the whole "Let us run private servers!" angle.

Personally I much prefer the world of the 360's matchmaking than I do the PC-style "Server Browser". Bad Company 2 on the PC spelled this out for me - while trying to play with 3 friends we either had the choice of joining half-dead servers (whose lag you couldn't gauge until they finally fixed the browser), or trying to join a server with 4/5 spots (which pretty much meant 3 of you get in, one doesn't and the whole cycle starts again - again this is now fixed by allowing you to queue, but that took months). It takes at least three times as long to find a game (and that's excluding the "Oh, this server is set to some stupid game rules" or "Hmm, they've turned feature X off, which we want") as it does on any of the matchmaking systems of the console world.

As far as I'm concerned, I want to form a group and join a game. On XBOX Live (Halo being the first game that comes to mind) this is simple and quick. Yeah, you occasionally end up with jerks, but it's only for one game and you can set the system to avoid them in future (and you can just as easily run into jerks on PC games - just 'cos then CAN be moderated doesn't mean they are, server admins have to sleep).

That said, some PC games have embraced matchmaking to good effect. StarCraft 2 nails the system for me. Pick players, game type, some basic options and let StarCraft do the rest. Game in 3 minutes or less, against appropriately skilled players. Go Blizzard.

Simply put - please don't bring the dreaded server browser to my more casual multiplayer console - I don't want to spend 15 minutes finding a server each time I want a game, I just want to push a button and have the system find me a match that's roughly to my liking.

 

[ranger19]

Being mainly a console gamer, I have a question to ask: the dedicated servers idea certainly seems to have merit, even if I'm not sure I'd want it over what Xbox Live is currently.

But who would pay $20 a month to run their own servers? I mean, it sounds like you pay to run a server but it's free to join other servers. Wouldn't everyone want to join servers, and only a few care enough to pay the cost? Because that sounds expensive. And then how would you play online if there were not enough servers?

 

[Jfswift]

I agree, I ran my own game server for a while and it was great. All the people I enjoyed playing with showed up and if idiots dropping n-bombs and swearing all the time showed up I could just ban and remove them, so everyone else's game didn't get disrupted. This is a serious problem too, like everytime I fire up mw2 now, the very first thing i do is mute everybody, instead of checking my weapon loadouts. It's like you said, it's better if you can choose your own bar, and your own game server.

 

[Earthbound]

But who would pay $20 a month to run their own servers? I mean, it sounds like you pay to run a server but it's free to join other servers. Wouldn't everyone want to join servers, and only a few care enough to pay the cost? Because that sounds expensive. And then how would you play online if there were not enough servers?

I'll break this answer into two parts, for both questions you asked.

1) Who would pay for servers? A lot of people, in fact! $20, while not insignificant, is not much money to host a social network over which you are basically God. It is your server, no one else's. You can do whatever you want. Want custom textures, sound files, entire new game modes? You have the power to do that, and you can bring your friends along to play it, and their friends and those friends' friends.

2) How would you play online if there weren't enough servers? The principles of economics apply to this. The number of servers will naturally fluctuate with the number of active players. This is guided by the <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_hand>invisible hand that governs supply and demand. If there are not enough servers, people will make them, for the aforementioned reasons. If there are too many servers, then many will simply be empty, which may cause the server owners to shut them down. The entire thing is self-regulating and shouldn't be a major concern.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

That line about how Xbox owners don't say anything because people are too busy yelling and filling the room with bile sums up my Xbox life. Whenever someone sees that I have a mic, they instantly go "Hey, say something. Say something. Come on man, can't you talk? Say something." I'll say "Hi" maybe, but that's it. I don't want to take part in a conversation that makes my skin crawl.

 

[crazypsyko666]

If player-run servers were to become the secondary standard, they could lessen the price of Xbox Live Gold, and simply add on an additional price for the matchmaking service.

You know, Sony has been looking for a way to get in line with MS's online console service. This may be their gateway. Allowing 3rd party mods and player-run server support (a la counterstrike 1.6 model, where all additional mods were auto-installed before you entered the server), they could bring a whole new group of gamers to their system. That, combined with a new streamlined, integrated and standardized multiplayer support, could make them as a new power in multiplayer.

Edit: At first, I thought Microsoft had nothing but contempt for the PC. Now I think they have nothing but contempt for their consumers.

 

[CitySquirrel]

Especially when the justification is that they have shit like Facebook and whatnot; so either stuff I can get free on my PC, or stuff that you have to pay for already on the PC which you then pay more for to use on XBL.

This was exactly my issue. I don't mind Xbox raising its prices, but don't try to pretend you are offering some grand set of services, because you aren't.

 

[ranger19]

But who would pay $20 a month to run their own servers? I mean, it sounds like you pay to run a server but it's free to join other servers. Wouldn't everyone want to join servers, and only a few care enough to pay the cost? Because that sounds expensive. And then how would you play online if there were not enough servers?

I'll break this answer into two parts, for both questions you asked.

1) Who would pay for servers? A lot of people, in fact! $20, while not insignificant, is not much money to host a social network over which you are basically God. It is your server, no one else's. You can do whatever you want. Want custom textures, sound files, entire new game modes? You have the power to do that, and you can bring your friends along to play it, and their friends and those friends' friends.

2) How would you play online if there weren't enough servers? The principles of economics apply to this. The number of servers will naturally fluctuate with the number of active players. This is guided by the <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_hand>invisible hand that governs supply and demand. If there are not enough servers, people will make them, for the aforementioned reasons. If there are too many servers, then many will simply be empty, which may cause the server owners to shut them down. The entire thing is self-regulating and shouldn't be a major concern.

Cool, thanks for the (fast!) response. First - whoa - I did not know you could do so much with dedicated servers! I thought it would just be a matter of, say, turning off the grenade launcher or stopping MLC classes in MW2, but.. wow and changing textures means you could make the game look even better, right?

The second part I get it a bit of economics. I guess this struck me as one of those times where free trade would break down - I can't think of a perfect example, but imagine if it were cheaper (and legal) for a company to dump their sewage into a river than get it treated for proper disposal, almost all companies would dump it. But then in the long run the river would get all polluted and maybe become too toxic for the factories to stay there. So it's best for everybody if nobody dumps in the river, but everyone will. (If that makes sense.)

I just thought that it would be like that for dedicated servers - like, I was expecting there to be a part about how the guy who buys the server charges people like $1 a month to join or something. Obviously the system does work because it exists.. I guess I was a bit surprise at it is all. Thanks again for the explanation though.

 

[Earthbound]

Cool, thanks for the (fast!) response. First - whoa - I did not know you could do so much with dedicated servers! I thought it would just be a matter of, say, turning off the grenade launcher or stopping MLC classes in MW2, but.. wow and changing textures means you could make the game look even better, right?

Yes, you can make the game look better, but there is so much more than that available to modders. Take this clip of Modern Warfare 2, for example:

<youtube=-rqLUDfl26Y>

That's a hacked MW2 server for the PC. It is, in fact, completely batshit. Yes, game balance has been thrown out the window and realism is crying a grey and brown puddle in the corner, but doesn't that just look fun? Now imagine all the players sped up with five times the health. The gameplay is completely changed! They could play on a map that was made by someone in the community! The possibilities, while not technically endless, are vast and extraordinary.

I just thought that it would be like that for dedicated servers - like, I was expecting there to be a part about how the guy who buys the server charges people like $1 a month to join or something. Obviously the system does work because it exists.. I guess I was a bit surprise at it is all. Thanks again for the explanation though.

The server owner has every right to charge players money to play on his or her server, but with equivalent or better servers available, who would pay? The owner would be metaphorically shooting themselves in the foot by doing that. They can offer benefits to people who donate, like increased health or god weapons, but, again, why would a non-donator play on the server then? What I've seen used is either strictly vanity or non-gameplay affecting benefits of donating to a server. Donators get to feel and look special (and have the knowledge that they're keeping a good server alive), the owner gets money, and the regular players just get a server to play on. "Cooperation without coercion."

 

[Irridium]

And this is also why the PC version of Halo 2 and even Halo 1 is still up. The community runs the servers.

I can proudly state that there are more people playing Halo 1 online than there are people playing Halo 2 online.

Oh trust me I know. I too am a proud player of Halo 1 on the PC.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

I love servers. Anyone here play on the TF2 Fugworld Servers? That place is buckets of fun!

 

[Dexiro]

I didn't know much about the Xbox 360 being a bit of a PS3 fanboy, but i figured it had a few nice features even if i wasn't big on the exclusives.

After reading this i'm thinking... does the 360 really have any redeeming features?
So far the only thing that i prefer to PS3 is the cute avatar things that waggle their head when you move the analog stick, everything else on there seems immensely stupid.