Does the average gamer understand how online gaming works?

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

After skimming through and posting in the Should Xbox Silver have Multiplayer [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.242267-Poll-Should-Xbox-Silver-have-Multiplayer] thread, I don't think many people understand how online multiplayer works.

Almost every game that has online multiplayer does not use dedicated servers, so if you are on PSN or Xbox Live, you are NOT playing on Sony's or Microsoft's servers. I don't know about Microsoft first party games but I'm almost positive MAG has to use dedicated servers because of the player count, I've read that Killzone 2 uses dedicated servers, and Warhawk had a few dedicated servers (they were in blue) when I used to play it. But for pretty much every game, a player in the game is the host (every player uploads what they are doing to the host and the host then sends everyone's upload data to all the players; that's how it works). The laggy-ness of the game is dependent upon the host, it has nothing to do with Sony or Microsoft. Almost all the expenses of online gaming are on the ISPs and you, since you and your ISP is handling all the bandwidth of online gaming when you are the host. Companies like Activision and EA have game servers but they just track player stats, and the bandwidth and maintenance required is extremely low.

If you think playing CoD is laggier on PSN or Xbox Live, then you are just plain stupid. Also, the only thing you are really paying for with Xbox Gold is the ability to cross-game chat when you are playing a multi-platform game. Microsoft only has to upkeep the servers for their first party games, and very few, if any, of those games use dedicated servers. Therefore, those servers only keep track of player stats so only a couple packets of data is sent to those servers after the match to store player stats. If you are only playing multi-platform titles on 360 and paying for Xbox Gold, you are basically bat-shit crazy because Microsoft experiences no expenses when you play CoD, Bad Company, etc. online. You aren't paying for a better online experience because there is ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE between CoD on PS3 and 360.

---

This isn't meant to be an anti-Xbox thread at all. I just feel paying someone money for a service when they don't experience any expenses is just plain bullshit. It's like paying Walmart money for a game you bought at Target.

 

[BioHazardMan]

I totally agree, we shouldn't have to pay for MP when we already bought the game...

 

[Danish rage]

Because getting exclusives. Making sure DLC and updates don´t fuck up you´re xbox. And the amount of traffic to LIVE. ALL thats free and done by robots.

The reason most of the above is free on pc, is kind of a no brainer, All hail the basement nerds!. But Xbox LIVE is a secure closed network and that takes maintaince, money, and people in suits.

 

[Gizmo007666]

The only reason I can see for Microsoft to charge for online is for the timed exclusives, ie roughly a month exclusive on CoD dlc and however long a wait there was for the Fallout 3 dlc.

In either case then I still can't see why they can't have the timed exclusives available to the gold members and give the silver members basically the same "treatment" that those with sony get, ie free online multiplayer and a wait for the dlc... although if that was the case then there's every possibility Microsoft wouldn't have the spare cash lying about to get those "small" timed exclusives

 

[Signa]

The only reason I can see for Microsoft to charge for online is for the timed exclusives, ie roughly a month exclusive on CoD dlc and however long a wait there was for the Fallout 3 dlc.

In either case then I still can't see why they can't have the timed exclusives available to the gold members and give the silver members basically the same "treatment" that those with sony get, ie free online multiplayer and a wait for the dlc... although if that was the case then there's every possibility Microsoft wouldn't have the spare cash lying about to get those "small" timed exclusives

Didn't they just use that excuse for a reason why the increased the price of LIVE? I call bullshit on that, because a 360 owner isn't going to give a fuck if their PS3 brethren are playing the same DLC too. MS needs to realize that if they are going to fork over millions of dollars to make a DLC pack exclusive so that their service and console are more valuable, then they need to eat those costs and not send them to us. We bought the damn system, we don't give a fuck what the "other" guys are doing.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Because getting exclusives. Making sure DLC and updates don´t fuck up you´re xbox. And the amount of traffic to LIVE. ALL thats free and done by robots.

The data sent to Live to update your online status or what game you're playing has a very low bandwidth requirements. Shouldn't Microsoft be able to handle those low bandwidth costs through all the ads? PSN has less ads and it's free. Furthermore, Microsoft and Sony make some money on games and DLC purchased because their servers host the data. If I'm not mistaken, I think the 360 has more issues with bad patches and DLC than the PS3. For example, a Burnout patch[url] had an issue on 360 but not the PS3 patch. Microsoft isn't doing any QA on these patches and updates, it's all on the developer not Sony or Microsoft. Microsoft's online expenses are a lot cheaper than you think they are. Not to mention, Live has more downtime than PSN.

And timed-exclusives are just stupid and hurt gamers. You wanna pay Microsoft money so they can send a truckload of money to Publisher X so you get something 3 months before PS3 users? Sounds like a waste of money to me. If Microsoft didn't give them money, you'd still get the game or DLC or whatever at the same time, you're not getting the game early, PS3 users are just getting the game later.

 

[Stoic raptor]

No, I do not understand how online works.

A while back, I didn't even know what was a dedicated server.
And I still do not know how to host a server.
So your post enlightened me somewhat.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

No, I do not understand how online works.

A while back, I didn't even know what was a dedicated server.
And I still do not know how to host a server.
So your post enlightened me somewhat.

Usually games have an option to "create game" or something along those lines. That's how you host your own game. Usually when you're just playing regular matches in CoD, the game picks someone to be host, and I'm not sure if CoD says who the host is during the match as I haven't played CoD since CoD4.

 

[tharglet]

Most likely not.

Besides, I think the definition of "dedicated server" has changed slightly on consoles. What you'd call a dedicated, I'd probably call an official server. This is due to the fact with PCs you can run dedicated servers of your own, and they're not just run by the game's developer/publisher. On consoles, this wouldn't be a viable option, so dedicated server has come to mean a dedicated server run by the publisher/dev/console creator.
(I could run a dedi HL/HL2 server on my server at home, but it wouldn't be able to service many people due to it being a domestic ADSL line lol).

MS is probably hurting from all the competition and flops they've had recently, and need to get money back somehow. They don't seem to be terribly efficient with their money, or they seem to hoard it.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Most likely not.

Besides, I think the definition of "dedicated server" has changed slightly on consoles. What you'd call a dedicated, I'd probably call an official server. This is due to the fact with PCs you can run dedicated servers of your own, and they're not just run by the game's developer/publisher. On consoles, this wouldn't be a viable option, so dedicated server has come to mean a dedicated server run by the publisher/dev/console creator.

Metal Gear Online allows a player to run a dedicated server, you can create a game room that you do not play in and just host. But yeah, I agree people probably think of dedicated servers as publisher/developer servers.

 

[obliviondoll]

Because getting exclusives. Making sure DLC and updates don´t fuck up you´re xbox. And the amount of traffic to LIVE. ALL thats free and done by robots.

And you say that like PSN doesn't do ALL THE SAME THINGS without charging for it...

Making sure DLC doesn't break the game/console? Check.
Exclusives? Infamous, LittleBigPlanet, Uncharted, I think those are exclusive, yeah.
Traffic? Loads more than Microsoft had when they started charging.

P.S. You spelt "your" wrong.

P.P.S. I don't have a 360, but I have friends who do, and they think MS is shafting them by charging for multiplayer. If every XBox Live game got dedicated servers and the connection speed and lag was consistently better than they'd get playing the same game for free on PS3/PC, then they wouldn't be quite so upset.

EDIT:

I think the definition of "dedicated server" has changed slightly on consoles.

It's a matter of context - If you say "the game has dedicated servers" it means the developers provide a dedicated server. If you say "the game allows dedicated servers" it means players can set up a machine to function as a server. Most people think of the term these days with reference to the first meaning, where in previous generations where the PC was the main online gaming platform, the second meaning was more common.

 

[Danish rage]

Because getting exclusives. Making sure DLC and updates don´t fuck up you´re xbox. And the amount of traffic to LIVE. ALL thats free and done by robots.

And you say that like PSN doesn't do ALL THE SAME THINGS without charging for it...

Making sure DLC doesn't break the game/console? Check.
Exclusives? Infamous, LittleBigPlanet, Uncharted, I think those are exclusive, yeah.
Traffic? Loads more than Microsoft had when they started charging.

P.S. You spelt "your" wrong.

P.P.S. I don't have a 360, but I have friends who do, and they think MS is shafting them by charging for multiplayer. If every XBox Live game got dedicated servers and the connection speed and lag was consistently better than they'd get playing the same game for free on PS3/PC, then they wouldn't be quite so upset.

EDIT:

I think the definition of "dedicated server" has changed slightly on consoles.

It's a matter of context - If you say "the game has dedicated servers" it means the developers provide a dedicated server. If you say "the game allows dedicated servers" it means players can set up a machine to function as a server. Most people think of the term these days with reference to the first meaning, where in previous generations where the PC was the main online gaming platform, the second meaning was more common.

I never said anything about Psn because it´s not the issue of the thread. It´s yet another microsoft rant.

Regarding my spelling im danish and still do better than most english people.

 

[DJDarque]

Because getting exclusives. Making sure DLC and updates don´t fuck up you´re xbox. And the amount of traffic to LIVE. ALL thats free and done by robots.

And you say that like PSN doesn't do ALL THE SAME THINGS without charging for it...

Making sure DLC doesn't break the game/console? Check.
Exclusives? Infamous, LittleBigPlanet, Uncharted, I think those are exclusive, yeah.
Traffic? Loads more than Microsoft had when they started charging.

I never said anything about Psn because it´s not the issue of the thread. It´s yet another microsoft rant.

You may not have said anything about the PSN, but I have to agree with obliviondoll. Intentional or not, it does sound like you're implying that XBOX Live does something that the PSN doesn't and that the charge is therefore justified.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

[quote="Phoenixmgs" post="9.242624.8797014"the only thing you are really paying for with Xbox Gold is the ability to cross-game chat[/quote]

And I am totally fine with that...Because I have spent hundreds of hours in party chat. PSN still doesn't have 2 person cross-game yet, which the 360 had at launch, ages before party chat. And the interface for getting into a match is so much nicer. PSN's invite system is horrid in comparison.

Hell, I've used Xbox Live Party Chat while playing PS3 games online.

That said, if you don't play too much online, the differences in the services are negligible, and in that case, XBL is indeed a rip-off.

inb4 PC gamers mention free cross-platform chat services

 

[obliviondoll]

Because getting exclusives. Making sure DLC and updates don´t fuck up you´re xbox. And the amount of traffic to LIVE. ALL thats free and done by robots.

And you say that like PSN doesn't do ALL THE SAME THINGS without charging for it...

Making sure DLC doesn't break the game/console? Check.
Exclusives? Infamous, LittleBigPlanet, Uncharted, I think those are exclusive, yeah.
Traffic? Loads more than Microsoft had when they started charging.

I never said anything about Psn because it´s not the issue of the thread. It´s yet another microsoft rant.

You may not have said anything about the PSN, but I have to agree with obliviondoll. Intentional or not, it does sound like you're implying that XBOX Live does something that the PSN doesn't and that the charge is therefore justified.

Agreed.

And,

Regarding my spelling im danish and still do better than most english people.

Agreed. I tend to throw in occasional comments like that when I notice obvious things though. Hope you weren't offended.

 

[Danish rage]

Because getting exclusives. Making sure DLC and updates don´t fuck up you´re xbox. And the amount of traffic to LIVE. ALL thats free and done by robots.

And you say that like PSN doesn't do ALL THE SAME THINGS without charging for it...

Making sure DLC doesn't break the game/console? Check.
Exclusives? Infamous, LittleBigPlanet, Uncharted, I think those are exclusive, yeah.
Traffic? Loads more than Microsoft had when they started charging.

I never said anything about Psn because it´s not the issue of the thread. It´s yet another microsoft rant.

You may not have said anything about the PSN, but I have to agree with obliviondoll. Intentional or not, it does sound like you're implying that XBOX Live does something that the PSN doesn't and that the charge is therefore justified.

As far as im aware Sony recently started charging for it´s product as well. There is no logic in the argument you wrote. I fail to see i maybe.

And Live DOES deliver something PSN don´t, like customer support and quicker fixes/updates.
Psn gives you free games though, i like that.


What pisses me of about these "the industry fuck´s us over" threds, is that ALL of you would do exactly the same if you got in charge.

 

[Anton P. Nym]

TrueSkill-based Matchmaking. (That works.)
99.999999999+% uptime.
Integrated voice message/chat system.
Fairly-good cheat detection.
Live (albeit greatly overstretched) moderation.

I'm comfortable sacrificing one cup of coffee a week for the above. I know not everyone is, but you'd be surprised how many are.

-- Steve

 

[DustyDrB]

I pretty much don't understand technology, period.
Like how TV works. How does a Chuck through wires and manifest on my screen?
And the internet. No clue. I can use it pretty well, but how it does what it does is a complete mystery.
Even phones. I don't know how my voice starts here and ends there.
So, no. I really really don't understand how online gaming works.

 

[Outright Villainy]

Well it's a large reason I don't like console multiplayer. I like the friendliness and reliability you can get with dedicated servers.

Pity my laptop can't run jack. Ah well.