PSN vs Live : When it comes down to it, free is just smarter.

Paying for Live reminds me of the days when I paid for AOL while I already had DSL. See if you can follow me on this one. The internet offers way more content than what's available on Live. Yeah PSN in its first year is short in content (only temporary by the way), but why would it matter when the PS3 is fully able to browze the internet right now?

FYI I have a year's free sub to Live and for those who haven't tried it, it's not that great. I could go on and on about how I don't like what's available on Live and how it costs money to watch what I can find on youtube for free, but I will spare the details for now.

Paying for Live reminds me of the days when I paid for AOL while I already had DSL. See if you can follow me on this one. The internet offers way more content than what's available on Live. Yeah PSN in its first year is short in content (only temporary by the way), but why would it matter when the PS3 is fully able to browze the internet right now?

FYI I have a year's free sub to Live and for those who haven't tried it, it's not that great. I could go on and on about how I don't like what's available on Live and how it costs money to watch what I can find on youtube for free, but I will spare the details for now.

nextgenCurious

Youtube is high def now?

And if you don't care for high def, I guess your username states otherwise.

I payed for WoW

Paying for online halo isnt a big deal to me

Paying for Live reminds me of the days when I paid for AOL while I already had DSL. See if you can follow me on this one. The internet offers way more content than what's available on Live. Yeah PSN in its first year is short in content (only temporary by the way), but why would it matter when the PS3 is fully able to browze the internet right now?

FYI I have a year's free sub to Live and for those who haven't tried it, it's not that great. I could go on and on about how I don't like what's available on Live and how it costs money to watch what I can find on youtube for free, but I will spare the details for now.

nextgenCurious

You can go on and on about what you don't like??? Please do. Otherwise you have no argument.

it's not that i don't care about hi-def is that i'm complaining about quality of the content that's available on live is not great by standards; it does not justify the $50 a year price tag.

what are we getting in Live that's not already available on the internet or PSN? nextgenCurious

Don't know how streamlined PSN is. And you can't compare the internet to an online gaming service.

And look, you're not going to sway me or the millions of other people who've paid for XBL.

So you can stop and enjoy your allegedly superior PSN.

i'm just voicing a genuine first hand comparison that seems not to be pointed out on these forums. and i'm just tired of how fanboys bash PSN as if Live is utopia.

what are we getting in Live that's not already available on the internet or PSN? nextgenCurious

Do you even really have Live? If you want to compare it to the PC, that is one thing, the same services can be found on the PC if your willing to use several different programs, if your comparing it to PSN, that is a whole different story.

When you play on XBL and someone sends you a message, you can check it instantly whether you are playing the same game, different game, watching a movie. On PSN (from what I understand), you have to exit to the main menu just to read/hear the message.

XBL offers voice chat, acheivements, leaderboards etc in every single game that carries the Live Logo.

XBL offers a standard enviroment. It's not a question of whether this game offers voice chat or trophies or what not, if it's on XBL, it just does. Sending messages/invites/finding your friends etc is all done from a main interface. It is not a game to game experience, it is a total experience.

lol example please

live gets as much of a bashing this is system wars

"lol dont go 2 system wars if you seek the truth only another fan boys opinion"

it's free but no great games to play.rowzzr

Pretty much. Everyone would jump all over PSN if it had Halo 3, project gothem racing, gears and Shadowrun. as it hapens they don't. It's all about the games and warhawk is a great start, but isnt enough just yet.

I GUARENTEE you that PSN WILL be a paying service some time in the future. They keep it free now to draw suckers in :P and then b4 you know it you got 50 million games that you love to play online, and then BAMMMMMMMMM they hit you with the info - "PSN servers need to be maintained, therefore a contribution of $30 a year will be compulsory", wait for it.

As for any online gaming service having a charge, i dont blame MS for doing it...they are at the end of the day a company, and need to make money, its easy money too because people WANT to play online. SO dont complain about something you have voluntarily paid for. You want it free...? play a pc online...(which is gr8), if you love your consoles, bite the bullet and hush up :) But you cant complain WHILST handing over your cash so to speak. :)

Paying for Live reminds me of the days when I paid for AOL while I already had DSL. See if you can follow me on this one. The internet offers way more content than what's available on Live. Yeah PSN in its first year is short in content (only temporary by the way), but why would it matter when the PS3 is fully able to browze the internet right now?

FYI I have a year's free sub to Live and for those who haven't tried it, it's not that great. I could go on and on about how I don't like what's available on Live and how it costs money to watch what I can find on youtube for free, but I will spare the details for now.

nextgenCurious

That's kinda like saying that Runescape is better than WoW.

[QUOTE="rowzzr"]it's free but no great games to play.Shazenab

Pretty much. Everyone would jump all over PSN if it had Halo 3, project gothem racing, gears and Shadowrun. as it hapens they don't. It's all about the games and warhawk is a great start, but isnt enough just yet.

Maybe, however I was in a thread the other night that was something to the effect of "Did Sony's poor online service ruin Warhawk?" It was full of manticores complaining about how poor the PSN service was compared to XBL. How many problems they were having with it, so I'm not convinced games would save it. Sony had Socom and other great games on PS2, people still preferred XBL.

Oh and just on a side note, I can watch movies for free all day long on network TV, I'd rather pay a subscription to HBO or Showtime to see the movie commercial free and unedited.

Free does not equal better.

[QUOTE="Shazenab"]

[QUOTE="rowzzr"]it's free but no great games to play._koolgirl_

Pretty much. Everyone would jump all over PSN if it had Halo 3, project gothem racing, gears and Shadowrun. as it hapens they don't. It's all about the games and warhawk is a great start, but isnt enough just yet.

Maybe, however I was in a thread the other night that was something to the effect of "Did Sony's poor online service ruin Warhawk?" It was full of manticores complaining about how poor the PSN service was compared to XBL. How many problems they were having with it, so I'm not convinced games would save it. Sony had Socom and other great games on PS2, people still preferred XBL.

In terms of the ps2s online service Sony killed that off before it even started. Microsoft have been obsessed with online since the xbox's creation and have pushed nearly every develper into making something for it, in contrast Sony not only seemed to have the inferior system, but they seemed to have no faith in it either. sony abandoning the ps2 hdd is testiment to that.

I think the situation is alot different this time though. Sony seem to be putting efort into their online space, but to say they aren't going to charge for anything once it picks up is crazy.HOME is going to be riddled with more micro transactions than a single xbox live game.

The thing is I dont think people even give a damn about online gamplay. The psp had superior online play to the ds at launch, but that hasn't matered. The Wii's online is a joke and I doubt Nintendo care. I get the feeling people who play consoles arestil more happy playing a split screen game than an online one.

Paying for Live reminds me of the days when I paid for AOL while I already had DSL. See if you can follow me on this one. The internet offers way more content than what's available on Live. Yeah PSN in its first year is short in content (only temporary by the way), but why would it matter when the PS3 is fully able to browze the internet right now?

FYI I have a year's free sub to Live and for those who haven't tried it, it's not that great. I could go on and on about how I don't like what's available on Live and how it costs money to watch what I can find on youtube for free, but I will spare the details for now.

nextgenCurious

my PC surfs the web faster than the PS3, makes it easy, i use firefox. Tabbed browsing, not that weird 4 window browsing PS3 uses....

Oh and just on a side note, I can watch movies for free all day long on network TV, I'd rather pay a subscription to HBO or Showtime to see the movie commercial free and unedited.

Free does not equal better.

_koolgirl_

''The best things in life are free''

:D

[QUOTE="Shazenab"]

[QUOTE="rowzzr"]it's free but no great games to play._koolgirl_

Pretty much. Everyone would jump all over PSN if it had Halo 3, project gothem racing, gears and Shadowrun. as it hapens they don't. It's all about the games and warhawk is a great start, but isnt enough just yet.

Maybe, however I was in a thread the other night that was something to the effect of "Did Sony's poor online service ruin Warhawk?" It was full of manticores complaining about how poor the PSN service was compared to XBL. How many problems they were having with it, so I'm not convinced games would save it. Sony had Socom and other great games on PS2, people still preferred XBL.

Even though PSN is free it has a very poor online gaming community. I wonder why?

One of the selling points of the 360 is the online gaming and how easy it is to play with friends around the world. PSN lacks that appeal.

I will say that it sucks that as a silver member I wait a week for certain demo's on XBL. On PSN their is no preferential treatment based on who pays and who doesn't.

And I've never seen the value in paying to hear some kid scream racists words and then tell me what a noob I am after he pwns me.

Why would I PAY to put up with that?

PS3/Wii got it right, free online, let ad space pay for the rest. XBL you pay and have to put up with ads.

50 bucks for 13 months is a joke, I would rather pay 50 bucks for a fun gaming service than a half assed one like PSNNo_Talent_Dev

But with that 50 bucks..I can buy a game with online...play all year for free and have fun as well.

I will say that it sucks that as a silver member I wait a week for certain demo's on XBL. On PSN their is no preferential treatment based on who pays and who doesn't.

And I've never seen the value in paying to hear some kid scream racists words and then tell me what a noob I am after he pwns me.

Why would I PAY to put up with that?

PS3/Wii got it right, free online, let ad space pay for the rest. XBL you pay and have to put up with ads.

Bread_or_Decide

[QUOTE="No_Talent_Dev"]50 bucks for 13 months is a joke, I would rather pay 50 bucks for a fun gaming service than a half assed one like PSNBread_or_Decide

But with that 50 bucks..I can buy a game with online...play all year for free and have fun as well.

And with that $50.00 you can easily play with friends, voice chat, matchmaking in parties, cross invites, gamer zones etc so what is your point? Even though PSN is free the online community is poor and that says a lot.

paying for online play is not on imho. the money generated from online transactions and game sales should be used to fund the service, thats how ninty do it...VC sales cover the cost of keeping the online service running. Sonys got it right too. service may not be perfect at the mo but thatll be fixed.

at the end of the day i can play games online, for free, with any feature i want with it on my PC. its also very reliable and easy to use. why on earth would i pay for xbox live? i tried it for a month (offer that came with a game) and, though its a good service, id expect the high price i payed for a game to cover the cost of online pay. paying extra for what should be free is not on. i will never ever touch it until that price is removed. even if they left things like voice chat exclusive for gold members....thats ok (actually thats a blessing :P). but playing a game online sould be free on every platform.

[QUOTE="No_Talent_Dev"]50 bucks for 13 months is a joke, I would rather pay 50 bucks for a fun gaming service than a half assed one like PSNBread_or_Decide

But with that 50 bucks..I can buy a game with online...play all year for free and have fun as well.

As opposed to having an awesome online service with loads of demos, a unified friends list, universal mic support,etc. etc.

Yes, you can play that game for free online. But, you won't have near as good of an experience as you would on Live.

Paying for Live reminds me of the days when I paid for AOL while I already had DSL. See if you can follow me on this one. The internet offers way more content than what's available on Live. Yeah PSN in its first year is short in content (only temporary by the way), but why would it matter when the PS3 is fully able to browze the internet right now?

FYI I have a year's free sub to Live and for those who haven't tried it, it's not that great. I could go on and on about how I don't like what's available on Live and how it costs money to watch what I can find on youtube for free, but I will spare the details for now.

nextgenCurious

You can watch 300 on youtube?

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]

I will say that it sucks that as a silver member I wait a week for certain demo's on XBL. On PSN their is no preferential treatment based on who pays and who doesn't.

And I've never seen the value in paying to hear some kid scream racists words and then tell me what a noob I am after he pwns me.

Why would I PAY to put up with that?

PS3/Wii got it right, free online, let ad space pay for the rest. XBL you pay and have to put up with ads.

-wii60-

Well PSN exclusve demo's, everyone gets to play them on the same day. Of course I'm not talking about the multiplat ones that always show up late on PSN.

Yeah you can mute them thats true. But I'd still rather not pay to lose because some kid plays Gears 24/7 and I only play it some of the time. That is of course all subjective, but hey I'm being honest.

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]

[QUOTE="No_Talent_Dev"]50 bucks for 13 months is a joke, I would rather pay 50 bucks for a fun gaming service than a half assed one like PSNVerge_6

But with that 50 bucks..I can buy a game with online...play all year for free and have fun as well.

As opposed to having an awesome online service with loads of demos, a unified friends list, universal mic support,etc. etc.

Yes, you can play that game for free online. But, you won't have near as good of an experience as you would on Live.

Speaking soley for myself, I honestly really don't care about those things. I don't play online enough to need it. Thats just me tho.

Even though PSN is free it has a very poor online gaming community. I wonder why?

One of the selling points of the 360 is the online gaming and how easy it is to play with friends around the world. PSN lacks that appeal.

Deihmos

[QUOTE="-wii60-"][QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]

I will say that it sucks that as a silver member I wait a week for certain demo's on XBL. On PSN their is no preferential treatment based on who pays and who doesn't.

And I've never seen the value in paying to hear some kid scream racists words and then tell me what a noob I am after he pwns me.

Why would I PAY to put up with that?

PS3/Wii got it right, free online, let ad space pay for the rest. XBL you pay and have to put up with ads.

Bread_or_Decide

Well PSN exclusve demo's, everyone gets to play them on the same day. Of course I'm not talking about the multiplat ones that always show up late on PSN.

Yeah you can mute them thats true. But I'd still rather not pay to lose because some kid plays Gears 24/7 and I only play it some of the time. That is of course all subjective, but hey I'm being honest.

I guess no kids play on PSN and they are all adults. At least it is super easy to party up with your friends so you don't have to play with kids and muting players is super easy. i ask this again why is the PSn community so small even though online gaming is free? There must be a reason.

[QUOTE="nextgenCurious"]

Paying for Live reminds me of the days when I paid for AOL while I already had DSL. See if you can follow me on this one. The internet offers way more content than what's available on Live. Yeah PSN in its first year is short in content (only temporary by the way), but why would it matter when the PS3 is fully able to browze the internet right now?

FYI I have a year's free sub to Live and for those who haven't tried it, it's not that great. I could go on and on about how I don't like what's available on Live and how it costs money to watch what I can find on youtube for free, but I will spare the details for now.

kenmid

You can watch 300 on youtube?

But you don't get to keep the movie on XBL.

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"][QUOTE="-wii60-"][QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]

I will say that it sucks that as a silver member I wait a week for certain demo's on XBL. On PSN their is no preferential treatment based on who pays and who doesn't.

And I've never seen the value in paying to hear some kid scream racists words and then tell me what a noob I am after he pwns me.

Why would I PAY to put up with that?

PS3/Wii got it right, free online, let ad space pay for the rest. XBL you pay and have to put up with ads.

Deihmos

Well PSN exclusve demo's, everyone gets to play them on the same day. Of course I'm not talking about the multiplat ones that always show up late on PSN.

Yeah you can mute them thats true. But I'd still rather not pay to lose because some kid plays Gears 24/7 and I only play it some of the time. That is of course all subjective, but hey I'm being honest.

I guess no kids play on PSN and they are all adults. At least it is super easy to party up with your friends so you don't have to play with kids and muting players is super easy. i ask this again why is the PSn community so small even though online gaming is free? There must be a reason.

Sure PSN is full of the same kind of people. THe difference is I didn't pay to put up with it. I think the PSN community depends on the game. You'll have no problem playing Resistance, always tons of people online playing it. I think warhawk will have the same level of success.

Meanwhile I am lucky if I can find 10-20 people online to play Calling All Cars.

[QUOTE="kenmid"][QUOTE="nextgenCurious"]

Paying for Live reminds me of the days when I paid for AOL while I already had DSL. See if you can follow me on this one. The internet offers way more content than what's available on Live. Yeah PSN in its first year is short in content (only temporary by the way), but why would it matter when the PS3 is fully able to browze the internet right now?

FYI I have a year's free sub to Live and for those who haven't tried it, it's not that great. I could go on and on about how I don't like what's available on Live and how it costs money to watch what I can find on youtube for free, but I will spare the details for now.

Bread_or_Decide

You can watch 300 on youtube?

But you don't get to keep the movie on XBL.

It's a rental service. More people prefer to rent than pay $20.00 for a movie they look at once. It's also more convenient since you don't need to drive to blockbuster and deal with late fees.

Free is smarter, thats why Sony made PSN free at first to draw in the suckers, then when things are up and running, here comes the fee. You'll see, just wait.

Free is smarter, thats why Sony made PSN free at first to draw in the suckers, then when things are up and running, here comes the fee. You'll see, just wait.

ReverseCycology

Speculating "facts", nice, very nice.

[QUOTE="ReverseCycology"]

Free is smarter, thats why Sony made PSN free at first to draw in the suckers, then when things are up and running, here comes the fee. You'll see, just wait.

0bscurity

Speculating "facts", nice, very nice.

I agree with ReverseCycology tbh...noone is speculating facts..its called an opinion...a very certain opinion, just like a stated on teh 1st page:

"GUARENTEE you that PSN WILL be a paying service some time in the future. They keep it free now to draw suckers in and then b4 you know it you got 50 million games that you love to play online, and then BAMMMMMMMMM they hit you with the info - "PSN servers need to be maintained, therefore a contribution of $30 a year will be compulsory", wait for it.

As for any online gaming service having a charge, i dont blame MS for doing it...they are at the end of the day a company, and need to make money, its easy money too because people WANT to play online. SO dont complain about something you have voluntarily paid for. You want it free...? play a pc online...(which is gr, if you love your consoles, bite the bullet and hush up But you cant complain WHILST handing over your cash so to speak. "

A side note to ponder is this: HOW LONG do you thinkn sony will actually keep up this gr8 online service that they never receive any revenue from...?? They too are a company and their goal is not to SATISFY you but to make money and HOPE to draw you in. they are indeed plotting to make you pay in one way or another, so dont kid yourself guys...you'll be paying for your PSN service one way or another.....if not though, you can expecta really shoddy/broken online experience that noone sod wants to maintain because noones getting paid for it. :)