Xbox Live different league to PSN

By Robert Purchese Published 15 May, 2007

Shane Kim doubts Home.

Microsoft Game Studios' Shane Kim has attacked the ambitious PlayStation Home service, stating that he doubts Sony can create a top-notch virtual world, GamesIndustry.biz is reporting.

He went on to claim that Sony's PlayStation Network wasn't in the same league as Xbox Live.

"I doubt [Sony's] ability to implement it and execute it in a really rich and compelling way," Kim told Shack News.

"PlayStation Network is not Xbox Live, it's not even close. To think about layering [Home] on top of that - wow. The hardest part is not even creating the system, it regulating the behaviour and all of that too. That's a massive investment in infrastructure."

Kim also said that Microsoft has no plans to produce a similar virtual world for Live, as it would require too much work for gamers that don't necessarily want it.

"I don't think we need anything like that. I've spent some time with the Linden Lab guys [developer of Second Life]. To try to build Second Life on Xbox Live - or YouTube, Facebook, any of those big social networking services - it's a lot of work," Kim added.

"I actually believe that most gamers will always find more value in what we have on Xbox Live and now Games for Windows Live and how we're building that out. That's what I think is a much better approach, and that's what our approach is going to be."

Help yourself to another slice of industry news over at GamesIndustry.biz.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds. @Clert on Twitter.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (62) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • souljacker2000 #1 5 years ago

    Just giv eup sony. Online gaming is dominated by MS and always will

  • Beano #2 5 years ago

    "Shane Kim doubts Home."

    Really?

    I'm surprised!

  • AcidSnake #3 5 years ago

    Oh dear...
    There is some truth in the article ofcourse...
    Shane Kim does work for Microsoft Game Studios...

    So there...

  • GamesConnoisseur #4 5 years ago

    The test is as always is in the pudding, especially with Home. We will know better once it is up and running.

    It would be interested if some Xbots who have access to PS3 or even own it and decide to make scene at Home? What about other type of protests?

    If this is possible then this is something that can only be done on Home and not Live?! Though I have never been interested in Second Life anyway. Too busy gaming!

  • Darkuss #5 5 years ago

    How convenient...

  • urban #6 5 years ago

    good for him. *claps like a seal* ....twat.

  • #7 5 years ago

    Shane Kim can go fuck Steve Ballmer.

    Sony will kick som MS ass.

  • geepersd #8 5 years ago

    fair points except that some people'd really dig a well implemented home / second life vibe as part of xbox live / sony psn and others can choose not to use it if they don't want.

    The amount of investment to provide such choice versus take up and return is obviously a business and accounting decision, but despite not wanting it myself choice is normally good for the end user.

  • Kilters #9 5 years ago

    To be honest, I find most strangers offensive to the ears on xbox live. I certainly don't want to see an overcompensating, overly macho, digital representation of them created by some immature little bollox.

    I couldn't be arsed with 'Home' just as I can't be arsed with Bebo, myspace et al. Its unnecessary one upmanship on behalf of Sony built on what seems to be fairly shaky foundations.
    Edited by Kilters at 15/05/07 @ 11:17

  • WickedDeeJ #10 5 years ago

    Well unless Microsoft get their international act together soon, it won't matter anyway. $70 for online play when the US gets it for 50, and no Video Marketplace? No thank you.

  • MrFlump #11 5 years ago

    Problem i see with home is that it will be populated mostly by people i wouldnt want to talk to anyway, let alone see represented virtually. I'm happy having my friends list on the 360 and adding friends as I encounter good players on my multiplayer travels.

    Sony's approach is novel, but its just a glorified chat room from my understanding, and chat rooms tend to be populated with idiots for the most part - i see the same happening here and i'd probably end up spending longer filling my ignore list than making use of the service.

  • drumbaby #12 5 years ago

    Shane may even change his mind once he actually uses Home.

  • Steroyd #13 5 years ago

    Microsoft guy doubts opposition's strategy.

    More news at Ten.

  • Fab4 #14 5 years ago

    M$ employee in "My employer is better than their competitor" shocker!!!

    I know...I was stunned too.

  • CannonAnBall #15 5 years ago

    I bought my games consoles to play games on it. I'm busy enough as it is in my real life to want to start another in a virtual world.

  • EmiliasHorse #16 5 years ago

    I have to agree with Shane, having installed and tried Second Life I cannot express just how much I don't need that sort of thing on my 360....I want games not virtual existence.

  • Planet #17 5 years ago

    "Gamers clearly only want and need what we do, and they just have to utterly despise what they do, it's this ridiculous!"

    So even if PSN doesn't work as flawlessly as Live does (which i have often heard otherwise), but is about to match it feature-wise, and is topping that with Home - it is still "a different league"? That's like saying you can't compare eggs with eggs...

  • CrumpledPaper #18 5 years ago

    A laggier, P2P league? That's been my experience with Live games versus my PSN games..

    He's also going to have a lot of egg on his face if and when Sony does deliver on Home . He's basically hyping it up as something that requires lots of work and investment, even beyond what Microsoft would be comfortable with - despite the fact that we directly pay them for their service. Someone should save these soundbites and come back to him with them in a year or so.

  • zuljin #19 5 years ago

    Well this is my 2 cents:

    XBox was and arguably still is the leader in online abilities...

    Sony is trying hard to get up to that standard, and will have the same features as XBox Live if all rumours of Home and Firmware 2.0 are true.

    Great.

    So how bout some multiplatform networking already? Imagine playing say counterstrike on PS3/XBox against someone on their lunchbreak on a PC...

  • Avaloner #20 5 years ago

    And I think he is right on that one

  • Overlush #21 5 years ago

    And if his comments are wrong he's going to look like a complete cockknocker. Home offers something new that LIVE currently does not and Sony MAY not pull it off, but if they do MS will have a bit of egg on their faces what with it all being FREE!
    Edited by Overlush at 15/05/07 @ 11:45

  • Overlush #22 5 years ago

    "Sony's approach is novel, but its just a glorified chat room from my understanding"

    Indeed, and we all know what a failure chat rooms are, right?

  • Les #23 5 years ago

    Standard MS FUD alert. Don't these guys ever learn?!

    I'm glad PSN is different from Live. If I want Live, I'll get Live.

  • Lov3 #24 5 years ago

    "Microsoft Employee Slags off Competition Shocker!"

    Really, I could have written that article without even talking to him.

  • CrumpledPaper #25 5 years ago

    >> So how bout some multiplatform networking already? Imagine playing say counterstrike on PS3/XBox against someone on their lunchbreak on a PC...

    Unfortunately I don't think that would happen. I think MS would have a problem with people playing against Playstation users, since they want to make a big deal out of PC/360 online play, and charge you for it (despite the fact that Sega was doing crossplatform multiplayer between console and PC back with the Dreamcast, and for free - it's really no big deal to do that if politics don't get in the way).

    I expect you'll see PC/PS3 multiplayer and PSP/PS2/PS3 multiplayer (which we've already seen in games like F1, if my memory is not failing me), but adding 360 to that mix might be difficult given that MS is trying to mould that sort of feature as something 'special' and something you should pay money for.


    "Sony's approach is novel, but its just a glorified chat room from my understanding"

    Well, here's the bit that's important - it's a glorified chat room that lets you matchmake for PS3 online games. To go into online games as a group of friends, come out as a group of friends, and go into another totally different game the same way. No other console online service lets you do that. And asides from that, it offers that same kind of nice reward functionality 360 users go crazy over, it offers media sharing between users (something no other console online service offers either). And it offers a way for users and developers to interact via spaces, with the opportunity for events etc. It's potential in that regard is fairly limitless.

    So actually, there is some pretty compelling functionality underlying all of this, and skinning that functionality with the interface Home offers actually makes sense. The metaphor of a group of friends hanging out in an area works very well for that (game-to-game group management and group media sharing), better than could be done via the XMB IMO.
    Edited by CrumpledPaper at 15/05/07 @ 11:53

  • belziah #26 5 years ago

    grass is green

    sky might be blue

    Shane Kim is so deep

  • CannonAnBall #27 5 years ago

    We also aware of the people that frequent the chat rooms as well!!!

    Not my idea of fun but each to there own.

  • belziah #28 5 years ago

    When are Pete and Shane going to start talking about the 360. In the last couple of months all they've talked about is what Sony cant do, only for Sony to go and do it.

    Surely they're busier than that.

  • MrFlump #29 5 years ago

    "Indeed, and we all know what a failure chat rooms are, right?"

    My point was more about i don't want to be forced into a chat room with people I have little or no interest in talking to. All the l33t kiddies and those there just to perv. As I said, the MS service lets me pick who I want to have on my friends list and contact. This sounds like i'm going to be thrust into the middle of a party I don't want to be at.

    I'm not belittling their attempts, it'll certainly be interesting to see, i just don't think its something i'll be drawn to using.


    "So actually, there is some pretty compelling functionality underlying all of this, and skinning that functionality with the interface Home offers actually makes sense. The metaphor of a group of friends hanging out in an area works very well for that (game-to-game group management and group media sharing), better than could be done via the XMB IMO."

    I'm not opposed to it, its an interesting concept, it just seems a cumbersome way of joining a game to me and it seems like something i'd have a limited interest in. Some might find all the media sharing aspects appealing, to me, just seems like dressing. I'm an oldie, i prefer things simpler.
    Edited by MrFlump at 15/05/07 @ 12:03

  • zuljin #30 5 years ago

    @CrumpledPaper
    No I agree, whether it will happen is a completely different matter. But I guess I'm looking at people like EA and such, that could possibly invest in a feature that would quite frankly be really nice.

    But yes I reckon MS would get their panties up in a bunch over that. :)

  • zuljin #31 5 years ago

    @MrFlump
    "My point was more about i don't want to be forced into a chat room with people I have little or no interest in talking to."

    Ok, fact time: Home is free. It is on the XMB. If you don't like it, don't use it. All it does, is add a 3D world to the PSN.

    Forced?

  • chronom4n #32 5 years ago

    How about the fact that Microsoft are charging £40 to have a yearly subscription? And Sony are attempting the same feat but not charging the gamer. On top of the cost of the console, games, accessories, on-line gaming with MS can be expensive.

    Yeah, maybe Sony are not the on-line masters that MS are but you have to take your hat off to them for not charging for the on-line experience.

    And, I am not surprised in the least as the guy is bound to criticise the opposition. Give Sony's attempt time to bed in and then make criticisms and let them be constructive ones at the least.

  • mattigan #33 5 years ago

    But it's not really free is it?

  • CrumpledPaper #34 5 years ago

    "I'm not opposed to it, its an interesting concept, it just seems a cumbersome way of joining a game to me"

    What's more cumbersome - finding friends and bringing them altogether into one game online with either PSN or Live at the moment is cumbersome. You have to arrange that or send out multiple invites and do that again and again for each different game you want to play. In Home, you just all get together in one space (which might require some initial arrangement, granted) and then launch into the game. And when you're finished, you're all booted back into Home from where you left, and can immediately go back into a different game as a group without the same overhead of rearranging to meet etc.

    Again, I think this kind of interface, the metaphor of virtually hanging out, actually lends itself very well if not better to that kind of functionality than what currently exists (which is little to no support for that).

    That's, of course, assuming the matchmaking is all there and in place and works as expected. I don't know if it will be from launch or not, but it seems to be one of the main ideas behind Home.
    Edited by CrumpledPaper at 15/05/07 @ 12:46

  • mattigan #35 5 years ago

    Well, don't they only provide the basics for free (with home in particular), with the cool stuff available via microtransaction?

  • Steroyd #36 5 years ago

    When are Pete and Shane going to start talking about the 360. In the last couple of months all they've talked about is what Sony cant do, only for Sony to go and do it.

    Surely they're busier than that.

    Yeah and when are they going to stop turning the Xbox 360 into the PS3, 1080p inclusion of a HDMI port and being sold in Black is taking the piss.

  • mattigan #37 5 years ago

    And the 360 really should have a browser

  • Fab4 #38 5 years ago

    Yep, its definitely a bad sign when people start complaining about an increase in consumer choice...barstewards!!!

  • zuljin #39 5 years ago

    @mattigan
    "Well, don't they only provide the basics for free (with home in particular), with the cool stuff available via microtransaction?"

    Yea, as in cool stuff, additional appartments, clothes, emotes stuff like that. They can't charge for stuff which is on the XMB, because, well, pp would go back to the XMB then wouldn't they?

  • CrumpledPaper #40 5 years ago

    "Well, don't they only provide the basics for free (with home in particular), with the cool stuff available via microtransaction?"

    Cool stuff like the functionality I was talking about is free.

    If you want to buy some snazzy new clothes or furniture, that's your perogative, but it's by no means necessary to enjoy the core experience and functionality.

  • spongebob #41 5 years ago

    Wahey. After last week's excellent games news, we're back to regular programming. I just hate all this PR people bitching, and it's such a given anyway, because how many times a company representative says something positive about their competitor, especially in the field of videogames?

  • kangarootoo #42 5 years ago

    "Microsoft Game Studios' Shane Kim..."

    That is pretty much all the info you need for how to interpret and article like this.

    In other news, "apples are shit, says orange grower".

  • captainrentboy #43 5 years ago

    I think this Home malarky is quite impressive, and should tap into a massive consumer group, I'm thinking Sims loving teenage girls and the Myspace generation, which obviously could only be good news for Sony baring in mind the size of that potential market.
    But stupidly whilst the PS3 is still at THAT price point, and is still being marketed towards the tech loving 16+ male it all seems like a pretty useless addition.
    I'm 24, and can in no way see HOME appealling to me in the slightest, it just seems like a lot of fuss, fiddling about making 3D avatars and wandering around a virtual world, it just gets in the way of what I should be doing on a mightily powerful console and that's playing frikkin decent games.

  • Arcadian #44 5 years ago

    I like Home, I'd probably use it if it was on Xbox Live.

    But I don't want to have to run around a building each time I want to play Jetpac. o_O

  • The-Bodybuilder #45 5 years ago

    Because, Mr Kim, Home is aimed not at gamers, but at the masses.
    Although why the masses would go and buy a £425 console just to play second life-a-like is beyond me.

    But don't knock sony for trying. It's called AMBITION Mr Kim. Give it a try.

  • mkreku #46 5 years ago

    I'm interested in Home, but I don't think it'll be as fantastic as Sony makes it sound like. I mean, even with a lot of features, it's still a glorified chat room at the core.

    As long as there's a simple way of connecting your games with your friends and just play, everything will be ok..

  • zuljin #47 5 years ago

    Is this the first post of mkreku without the words "PS3", "the", and "boycot"?

    Not necessarily in that order :)

  • The-Bodybuilder #48 5 years ago

    The problem with Home from what I can see is the social aspect you.
    You see, stuff like second life, and (more specifically) MySpace became popular through the use of girls.
    Girls love to socialize, and modern girls love MySpace and whatnot. Sure you get the chubby nerdy gamers that become part of second life, but it's the mainstream users, who are mostly girls, that makes the stuff more popular.
    The guys just go to wherever girls populate, just like real life.

    MySpace, Facebook & chatrooms become popular for the younger girls to socialize over the web. Boys (and peados) just followed suit to get the girls. I mean, how many guys went to chat rooms to chat to other guys (heterosexually speaking)?

    Problem is, girls are notoriously impulse buyers. A £425 grill-lookin games consolse is not exactly impulse by for the 24yrs old techie bachelor, let along younger girls.

    But time will tell...

  • Les #49 5 years ago

    "I'm interested in Home, but I don't think it'll be as fantastic as Sony makes it sound like. I mean, even with a lot of features, it's still a glorified chat room at the core."

    Nothing ever is as interesting as the manufacturer wants you to believe...

  • zuljin #50 5 years ago

    @The Bodybuilder
    I'm not sure thinking of it as glorified chatroom is quite right... To me it seems more like an open chatroom with MSN (your friends list). You're right, I don't think very many guys use chatrooms, but how many people use MSN?

    Personally, I'd welcome any app on the PS3 that would let me chat to multiple friends simultaneously to kick off a game... If it does that then I'll be a happy bunny.

  • BettySwallocks #51 5 years ago

    So Sony's offering a virtual world eh...

    ... maybe that's where the all the PS3' games are ;)

    Just out of interest does anybody know if Home intergrates with those users that don't use it and want a traditional lobby system? Or will all online play have to be done through Home?

  • Xerx3s #52 5 years ago

    Oh for god sake, marketing muppets should shut the fuck up.

  • The-Bodybuilder #53 5 years ago

    @Zuljin

    Nah.
    With MSN and other IMs, you're adding and chatting to people you already know (or atleast, know from someone/somewhere else).
    Home is just like second life, which IS a 3D chatroom. You're getting to know and meet people you've never met before.
    And second life, just like chatrooms, is that it's focal point is to social and meet new people.

    You don't meet new people with IM, but you do with chatrooms.

  • The-Bodybuilder #54 5 years ago

    @WaxBrazillian
    Essentially, yeah.
    If sony wants home to be like MySpace, then expect people like that.

    God forbid some emo plans to commit suicide over his girlfriend dumping him, than tried to hype it up on Home.

  • zuljin #55 5 years ago

    @The BodyBuilder
    "With MSN and other IMs, you're adding and chatting to people you already know (or atleast, know from someone/somewhere else)."

    Thats what I was saying: "open chatroom WITH MSN (your friends list)."

    How is MSN different from talking to people on your friends list? I know everyone on my friends list in person... I'm not saying the opportunity to talk to randoms isn't there, but I think most people are going to see - Ooh, 2 of my mates are playing Home on the XMB, lets join em and catch up.

    Not arguing, just that we don't really know the focal point of Home until we play it. Different people are going to use it for different purposes.

  • chacha #56 5 years ago

    @zuljin

    so in essence you mean that home is great in the sense if you want to use it as a means of a universal friends list ala live.
    Home is not really offering anything to the gamer that live is not already offering and should i say has been for a very long time.
    IMO sony really has dropped the ball gaming wise with the ps3, they seemed to be more interested in flogging Bluray to the consumer and seem to have forgotten that its is fundamentally a games console..... the ps3 was delayed launch in japan by at least half a year from the original date and in erope for at least a year from the original publicised global launch date yet we still only have a handful of mediocre games at best or 360 ports.
    Edited by chacha at 15/05/07 @ 16:08

  • zuljin #57 5 years ago

    @chacha
    Yeay you got it!

    Now, my original point was, Sony are trying to get up to the point of Live, and like I said earlier, if all rumours concerning Home/firmware 2.0 are true, then they'll be at similar capabilities.

    So we can all play online and have fun, woohoo!

  • dsmx #58 5 years ago

    As I understand it at the moment home is a 3d world that you can walk through. Within the world you can view trophies from games, view trailers for upcoming games, play pool and bowling and chat with people. If you don't feel like walking around you can essentialy beam into areas using the psp within the gameworld to decide where to go next. Everyone within the world has there own house where they can invite people to and chat with them and share the media they have on there ps3. If you don't feel like doing that you could always organise a game of say motorstorm with your friends.

    So far as I know everything I mentioned is free, so while you may not like sony give them credit for what there offering.

  • chacha #59 5 years ago

    @dsmx

    "So far as I know everything I mentioned is free, so while you may not like sony give them credit for what there offering. "

    but isnt that the whole point, sony are not offering it at the moment a whole year after thier initial launch ambitions.... call me sceptical but i have been stung by sony and its false promises before, so i wont be getting excited and start praising sony for what they may offer.

  • onyx_elite #60 5 years ago

    No! Don't you people see? Home is a way of emulating real life via repeated, unnecessarily expensive micro/macrotransactions! It's the future!

    For example, in Home you pay a subscription fee, just like rent in the real world! Also, if you want new clothes, hats, shoes, furniture, food, movies or other entertainment and digital lifestyle objects, well just like in the real world they're gonna cost you a fortune too.

    Ultimately Home is targeted towards single, male, 45yr old middle-management types who make enough money to be persuaded to pay £6.99 for a pretend chair and who has such poor luck with women and normal social interaction that running around a sparsely decorated cinema foyer dressed as a 16yr old skater talking to similar tardwits about myspace whilst paying £10 to watch Starship Troopers actually sounds like a fun time to them.

    Oh and also possibly upper-middle class emos who, despite wanting for nothing thanks to the bank of daddy, we are assured live very, very difficult and emotionally complicated lives...

  • 3william56 #61 5 years ago

    Give it a rest onyx. There's no subscription, and no-one's forcing you to buy virtual clothes, doohickies or doodads. Ergo, free. If you *want* to pay for ducks flying by your window - on you go.

    And paying to watch Starship Troopers - whoo - uber evil. Not like cinemas, blockbuster or anyone else makes you pay to watch movies, is it?

    It's an 3d web/chat interface. It's free. You don't have to use it. You can buy stuff if you want. So where's the problem again?

    And as far as I am aware, it's a much more restricted content environment than Second Life, so no user programmed flying p*nis attacks or kiddie fiddler meetings possible either. Probably not my cup of tea, but hey, a virtual EG would be fun (with a virtual shotgun as the ignore poster control).

  • G-Money #62 5 years ago

    "It won't work unless your twelve and then it wil be awesome dude. "

    LOL!!

    Got to agree with your comments here Warzin......