 |
Cheat Engine
The Official Site of Cheat Engine
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ArcaneKnite
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
 Reputation: 2
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 1519
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:53 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | No, if even if XBL doesn't entirely go free, the online multiplayer part will go free. And if that doesn't PSN will start charging.
Trust me on this one. When PS Home launched, I saw this dude interview the guy in charge and he was like, how is Sony doing all this and not gonna making money from PSN?
The dude was like, who says we're never gonna charge? |
No, PSN will never charge either. I've seen that interview. He meant charge for items in Home, which they are doing. Just because you saw it on TV, doesn't mean it is true. |
Ohplz. I saw it on a gametrailers.
It is inevitable. When PSN becomes as good as XBL in like a year or two, there's no way they can go free and only charge for PS Home. The revenue isn't enough, and there are no complaints from people who pay for XBL.
Its just 60 extra dollars in pure profit that Microsoft pockets per year, and Sony won't be able to pass up on that. |
If Sony were to start charging for PSN, they would lose literally MORE THAN HALF of PSN users. They make a ton of money off of the store and off software sales. They don't need to charge for PSN, and they won't because they'll end up with a net loss.
Benji, shut up. This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard you say. Don't listen to bullshit economists who have shows, especially ones that specialize in the electronic industry. |
You make it sound like Microsoft doesn't make money off of their software sales online and they only get money through XBL membership.
And why would you think that Sony users would not cough up 60 dollars a year to play online. Gamers are more than willing to pay to face against other people, the perfect example is XBL. Would you pay 60 dollars a year if they started charging? Or would you stick to playing by yourself?
Sony is not stupid, they are not going to just start charging for things that used to be free. They are obviously going to start off with things that are going to incentivise their userbase to pay. Things like access to demos or DLC that you can't get in XBL or whatnot. Either way, I never said that PSN will have to charge, but it is a possibility, yet you seem to look at it like it is an impossibility. |
Your bolded sentence contradicts everything else you have been saying. |
If you read what I said after it, you would understand.
They are going to make it seem worth your while to pay. Maybe it will even be worth your while to pay. Obviously if it's just the same thing, maybe not a lot of people will jump at it, but how long do you think YOU can go for without playing against people online? |
I'm guessing you never had a PS2. It had online, but no one played it because it was released years after the console itself and was too much of a hassle for people who had an older PS2. All of those games, super fun, not online. inFamous doesn't have an online. You don't need online to play games. You kids having started playing games this generation don't understand. It's absolutely foolish to think that you need to pay an extra 50-60 dollars a year to enjoy playing games. Sony knows this.
They simply won't do it. Since PS3 tends to appeal to an older audience anyway that pay for games and consoles themselves, they aren't going to fork out extra money when they know they don't have to. |
What world do we live in?
Why do people develop games? It's a business. Sony is in it for the money.
Yeah sure, there are games that are fun and are single player. I own a PS2 myself.
The world is changing and everything is getting more advanced. Multiplayer is the future, because ultimately, computer AI isn't as good as working with real people. It's hard to tell AI to do things, but with a mic, you can interact with humans easier. Of course, the single player games will never die out, but they will lessen.
But you still haven't answered my question. Would you rather not pay 60 dollars a year which is 5 dollars a month, and stick with playing against AI, or dish out that 5 dollars and get to play with other sentient beings? |
I wouldn't pay. Go ask /v/ the same question. You'll get a punch to the face. |
Interesting. However, it is still a possibility, and if Sony wants it to happen, they will have their way of convincing their userbase. At least, you're not treating it like an impossibility anymore, which is different than from when we started.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
elpacco
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
![]() Reputation: 30
Joined: 16 Oct 2007
Posts: 1258
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | No, if even if XBL doesn't entirely go free, the online multiplayer part will go free. And if that doesn't PSN will start charging.
Trust me on this one. When PS Home launched, I saw this dude interview the guy in charge and he was like, how is Sony doing all this and not gonna making money from PSN?
The dude was like, who says we're never gonna charge? |
No, PSN will never charge either. I've seen that interview. He meant charge for items in Home, which they are doing. Just because you saw it on TV, doesn't mean it is true. |
Ohplz. I saw it on a gametrailers.
It is inevitable. When PSN becomes as good as XBL in like a year or two, there's no way they can go free and only charge for PS Home. The revenue isn't enough, and there are no complaints from people who pay for XBL.
Its just 60 extra dollars in pure profit that Microsoft pockets per year, and Sony won't be able to pass up on that. |
If Sony were to start charging for PSN, they would lose literally MORE THAN HALF of PSN users. They make a ton of money off of the store and off software sales. They don't need to charge for PSN, and they won't because they'll end up with a net loss.
Benji, shut up. This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard you say. Don't listen to bullshit economists who have shows, especially ones that specialize in the electronic industry. |
You make it sound like Microsoft doesn't make money off of their software sales online and they only get money through XBL membership.
And why would you think that Sony users would not cough up 60 dollars a year to play online. Gamers are more than willing to pay to face against other people, the perfect example is XBL. Would you pay 60 dollars a year if they started charging? Or would you stick to playing by yourself?
Sony is not stupid, they are not going to just start charging for things that used to be free. They are obviously going to start off with things that are going to incentivise their userbase to pay. Things like access to demos or DLC that you can't get in XBL or whatnot. Either way, I never said that PSN will have to charge, but it is a possibility, yet you seem to look at it like it is an impossibility. |
Your bolded sentence contradicts everything else you have been saying. |
If you read what I said after it, you would understand.
They are going to make it seem worth your while to pay. Maybe it will even be worth your while to pay. Obviously if it's just the same thing, maybe not a lot of people will jump at it, but how long do you think YOU can go for without playing against people online? |
I'm guessing you never had a PS2. It had online, but no one played it because it was released years after the console itself and was too much of a hassle for people who had an older PS2. All of those games, super fun, not online. inFamous doesn't have an online. You don't need online to play games. You kids having started playing games this generation don't understand. It's absolutely foolish to think that you need to pay an extra 50-60 dollars a year to enjoy playing games. Sony knows this.
They simply won't do it. Since PS3 tends to appeal to an older audience anyway that pay for games and consoles themselves, they aren't going to fork out extra money when they know they don't have to. |
What world do we live in?
Why do people develop games? It's a business. Sony is in it for the money.
Yeah sure, there are games that are fun and are single player. I own a PS2 myself.
The world is changing and everything is getting more advanced. Multiplayer is the future, because ultimately, computer AI isn't as good as working with real people. It's hard to tell AI to do things, but with a mic, you can interact with humans easier. Of course, the single player games will never die out, but they will lessen.
But you still haven't answered my question. Would you rather not pay 60 dollars a year which is 5 dollars a month, and stick with playing against AI, or dish out that 5 dollars and get to play with other sentient beings? |
I wouldn't pay. Go ask /v/ the same question. You'll get a punch to the face. |
Interesting. However, it is still a possibility, and if Sony wants it to happen, they will have their way of convincing their userbase. At least, you're not treating it like an impossibility anymore, which is different than from when we started. |
No, it won't happen, because Sony knows that they don't have the retard fanbase 360 does. They have a smarter and better one.
_________________
| [AM]Misery wrote: |
| FangBanger wrote: | | What is the best way for a lv19 Soldier to solo Sledge on Borderlands? |
Shoot him. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArcaneKnite
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
Reputation: 2
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 1519
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | No, if even if XBL doesn't entirely go free, the online multiplayer part will go free. And if that doesn't PSN will start charging.
Trust me on this one. When PS Home launched, I saw this dude interview the guy in charge and he was like, how is Sony doing all this and not gonna making money from PSN?
The dude was like, who says we're never gonna charge? |
No, PSN will never charge either. I've seen that interview. He meant charge for items in Home, which they are doing. Just because you saw it on TV, doesn't mean it is true. |
Ohplz. I saw it on a gametrailers.
It is inevitable. When PSN becomes as good as XBL in like a year or two, there's no way they can go free and only charge for PS Home. The revenue isn't enough, and there are no complaints from people who pay for XBL.
Its just 60 extra dollars in pure profit that Microsoft pockets per year, and Sony won't be able to pass up on that. |
If Sony were to start charging for PSN, they would lose literally MORE THAN HALF of PSN users. They make a ton of money off of the store and off software sales. They don't need to charge for PSN, and they won't because they'll end up with a net loss.
Benji, shut up. This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard you say. Don't listen to bullshit economists who have shows, especially ones that specialize in the electronic industry. |
You make it sound like Microsoft doesn't make money off of their software sales online and they only get money through XBL membership.
And why would you think that Sony users would not cough up 60 dollars a year to play online. Gamers are more than willing to pay to face against other people, the perfect example is XBL. Would you pay 60 dollars a year if they started charging? Or would you stick to playing by yourself?
Sony is not stupid, they are not going to just start charging for things that used to be free. They are obviously going to start off with things that are going to incentivise their userbase to pay. Things like access to demos or DLC that you can't get in XBL or whatnot. Either way, I never said that PSN will have to charge, but it is a possibility, yet you seem to look at it like it is an impossibility. |
Your bolded sentence contradicts everything else you have been saying. |
If you read what I said after it, you would understand.
They are going to make it seem worth your while to pay. Maybe it will even be worth your while to pay. Obviously if it's just the same thing, maybe not a lot of people will jump at it, but how long do you think YOU can go for without playing against people online? |
I'm guessing you never had a PS2. It had online, but no one played it because it was released years after the console itself and was too much of a hassle for people who had an older PS2. All of those games, super fun, not online. inFamous doesn't have an online. You don't need online to play games. You kids having started playing games this generation don't understand. It's absolutely foolish to think that you need to pay an extra 50-60 dollars a year to enjoy playing games. Sony knows this.
They simply won't do it. Since PS3 tends to appeal to an older audience anyway that pay for games and consoles themselves, they aren't going to fork out extra money when they know they don't have to. |
What world do we live in?
Why do people develop games? It's a business. Sony is in it for the money.
Yeah sure, there are games that are fun and are single player. I own a PS2 myself.
The world is changing and everything is getting more advanced. Multiplayer is the future, because ultimately, computer AI isn't as good as working with real people. It's hard to tell AI to do things, but with a mic, you can interact with humans easier. Of course, the single player games will never die out, but they will lessen.
But you still haven't answered my question. Would you rather not pay 60 dollars a year which is 5 dollars a month, and stick with playing against AI, or dish out that 5 dollars and get to play with other sentient beings? |
I wouldn't pay. Go ask /v/ the same question. You'll get a punch to the face. |
Interesting. However, it is still a possibility, and if Sony wants it to happen, they will have their way of convincing their userbase. At least, you're not treating it like an impossibility anymore, which is different than from when we started. |
No, it won't happen, because Sony knows that they don't have the retard fanbase 360 does. They have a smarter and better one. |
Oh lord... Fanboy elitism.
Do you really think Sony will lose any sleep over it?
"Hmm, we can start charging and make 100million or more a year."
"OH! But the kids won't like it! I guess we shouldn't."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chidori
Grandmaster Cheater
![]() Reputation: 1
Joined: 25 Apr 2008
Posts: 691
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I have both
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
elpacco
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
![]() Reputation: 30
Joined: 16 Oct 2007
Posts: 1258
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | | elpacco wrote: | | No, PSN will never charge either. I've seen that interview. He meant charge for items in Home, which they are doing. Just because you saw it on TV, doesn't mean it is true. |
Ohplz. I saw it on a gametrailers.
It is inevitable. When PSN becomes as good as XBL in like a year or two, there's no way they can go free and only charge for PS Home. The revenue isn't enough, and there are no complaints from people who pay for XBL.
Its just 60 extra dollars in pure profit that Microsoft pockets per year, and Sony won't be able to pass up on that. |
If Sony were to start charging for PSN, they would lose literally MORE THAN HALF of PSN users. They make a ton of money off of the store and off software sales. They don't need to charge for PSN, and they won't because they'll end up with a net loss.
Benji, shut up. This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard you say. Don't listen to bullshit economists who have shows, especially ones that specialize in the electronic industry. |
You make it sound like Microsoft doesn't make money off of their software sales online and they only get money through XBL membership.
And why would you think that Sony users would not cough up 60 dollars a year to play online. Gamers are more than willing to pay to face against other people, the perfect example is XBL. Would you pay 60 dollars a year if they started charging? Or would you stick to playing by yourself?
Sony is not stupid, they are not going to just start charging for things that used to be free. They are obviously going to start off with things that are going to incentivise their userbase to pay. Things like access to demos or DLC that you can't get in XBL or whatnot. Either way, I never said that PSN will have to charge, but it is a possibility, yet you seem to look at it like it is an impossibility. |
Your bolded sentence contradicts everything else you have been saying. |
If you read what I said after it, you would understand.
They are going to make it seem worth your while to pay. Maybe it will even be worth your while to pay. Obviously if it's just the same thing, maybe not a lot of people will jump at it, but how long do you think YOU can go for without playing against people online? |
I'm guessing you never had a PS2. It had online, but no one played it because it was released years after the console itself and was too much of a hassle for people who had an older PS2. All of those games, super fun, not online. inFamous doesn't have an online. You don't need online to play games. You kids having started playing games this generation don't understand. It's absolutely foolish to think that you need to pay an extra 50-60 dollars a year to enjoy playing games. Sony knows this.
They simply won't do it. Since PS3 tends to appeal to an older audience anyway that pay for games and consoles themselves, they aren't going to fork out extra money when they know they don't have to. |
What world do we live in?
Why do people develop games? It's a business. Sony is in it for the money.
Yeah sure, there are games that are fun and are single player. I own a PS2 myself.
The world is changing and everything is getting more advanced. Multiplayer is the future, because ultimately, computer AI isn't as good as working with real people. It's hard to tell AI to do things, but with a mic, you can interact with humans easier. Of course, the single player games will never die out, but they will lessen.
But you still haven't answered my question. Would you rather not pay 60 dollars a year which is 5 dollars a month, and stick with playing against AI, or dish out that 5 dollars and get to play with other sentient beings? |
I wouldn't pay. Go ask /v/ the same question. You'll get a punch to the face. |
Interesting. However, it is still a possibility, and if Sony wants it to happen, they will have their way of convincing their userbase. At least, you're not treating it like an impossibility anymore, which is different than from when we started. |
No, it won't happen, because Sony knows that they don't have the retard fanbase 360 does. They have a smarter and better one. |
Oh lord... Fanboy elitism.
Do you really think Sony will lose any sleep over it?
"Hmm, we can start charging and make 100million or more a year."
"OH! But the kids won't like it! I guess we shouldn't."
"Why does that matter?"
"Because we'll lose almost the entire fanbase we have. And if the 360 is already beating us in sales, how are we going to compete when we've lost one of our biggest selling points?" |
You didn't finish the conversation.
_________________
| [AM]Misery wrote: |
| FangBanger wrote: | | What is the best way for a lv19 Soldier to solo Sledge on Borderlands? |
Shoot him. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArcaneKnite
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
Reputation: 2
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 1519
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you'd recall properly, I'm talking about a year or two from now when PSN is at the same level as XBL.
A year or two from now, I doubt that the PS3 will be behind in sales compared to the 360.
Especially since it's a Blu Ray disc player that costs equal to or less than most other players but comes with a lot more useful stuff and is a game box.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saya
Master Cheater
 Reputation: 6
Joined: 11 Feb 2008
Posts: 395
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| After reading all this. The PS3 seems more appealing to me now.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael
Expert Cheater
![]() Reputation: 15
Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 180
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Daleks are Suppreme wrote: | I already have both consoles.
S> Limited Edition Simpsons and Halo 3 xBox 360s. |
How the fuck did you get the halo one. That ebay auction was impossible.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zyndr0m
I post too much
 Reputation: 4
Joined: 23 Oct 2007
Posts: 4358
Location: Japan!
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| hiroshi12789 wrote: | NIGGAHZ THATS NOT THE POINT.
BUY IT FEGGWARTS.
Oh and haven't you guys watched the Bonus Round. Either XBL is going free soon, or they are gonna start to charge for PSN.
One or the other.
And a lot of places are bundling X360 wifi adapter with their elites.
 |
ps3 slim 120gig has the same price. thanks and good bye.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
To0k
How do I cheat?
![]() Reputation: 14
Joined: 16 Nov 2007
Posts: 0
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| XB360 > Wii > PS3
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArcaneKnite
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
Reputation: 2
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 1519
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| zyndr0m wrote: | | hiroshi12789 wrote: | NIGGAHZ THATS NOT THE POINT.
BUY IT FEGGWARTS.
Oh and haven't you guys watched the Bonus Round. Either XBL is going free soon, or they are gonna start to charge for PSN.
One or the other.
And a lot of places are bundling X360 wifi adapter with their elites.
|
ps3 slim 120gig has the same price. thanks and good bye. |
lol...
That was my point for that picture.
The X360 Elite and PS3 Slim are now at the same price.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
masterzero
Expert Cheater
 Reputation: 1
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
i find wii the most fun :/ Xbox360s are really unreliable
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael
Expert Cheater
![]() Reputation: 15
Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 180
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Actually, The elite comes with halo 3, So its actually saving you 60 dollars.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
-J-
Master Cheater
 Reputation: 1
Joined: 27 Jan 2008
Posts: 321
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Michael wrote: | | Actually, The elite comes with halo 3, So its actually saving you 60 dollars. |
Halo 3 and Fable 2 actually
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael
Expert Cheater
![]() Reputation: 15
Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 180
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kaotic wrote: | | Michael wrote: | | Actually, The elite comes with halo 3, So its actually saving you 60 dollars. |
Halo 3 and Fable 2 actually |
120 dollars.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
