PSN vs XBOX LIVE WHICH 1 IS BETTER

[QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"][QUOTE="UnnDunn"]

XBL - more online games, better online features, faster and easier to use, centrally managed, better community, designed from the ground up for the best online gaming experience.

PSN - fewer online games, worse online features, harder to use, not centrally managed, worse community, cobbled together to try and copy XBL. But hey, it's free.

XBL is far better than PSN.

UnnDunn

With XBL, developers don't have to invest thousands of dollars to develop online infrastructures for their games; they just let Xbox Live handle all the grunt work. Player authentication, setting up lobbies, tracking skill levels, all that stuff that goes into setting up the actual game session is handled by XBL.

shame because I have yet to see the benefit for the gamer. the online game experience has been average or worse than the competitors.

so the ones benefitting seems to be the developer with more profit not the gamer.

On PSN, the developer has to do all that stuff by themselves. Result: more online games with better online features on XBL. Just ask Sega why Virtua Fighter 5 and Virtua Tennis 3 are online on XBL and not on PSN. Or ask yourself if a tiny game like Pinball FX would be online if it were on PSN, like it is on XBL... complete with voice/video support, leaderboards, trueskill and DLC.

yeah that's good not necessary for gaming but good.

Better community means not only that we have more people with headsets to chat, organize and plan strategies, we also have a team at Microsoft who do things for the community, organizing events and keeping us in the loop. Things like Game With Fame, Community Playdate, GamerChiX and Xbox All-Nighters. But not only that, we have Major Nelson, Trixie and the crew; whenever they come to town, they try to organize a little get-together for XBL members to come out, meet the guys and score some free food and stuff.

again a nice feature but not something I'm interested in purchasing. the supermarket analogy comes to mind...

I have personally gotten a free Turte Beach headset from Major Nelson... we were at one of these dinners, and he literally jst gave me the headset and said "take it, it's yours." That's the kind of community we have on XBL. What's PSN's community like? A bunch of silent usernames? For the Halo 3 launch, Microsoft threw a massive launch party in midtown NYC. Yours truly got to meet Osi Umenyiora and scored tons of free schwag at the event. Plus there were things like Xbox 360 Zero Hour and stuff.

nothing like that has happened where I live. nice for americans I guess.

What has Sony done for YOUR community lately? And on XBL, at least you CAN stick with your friends, because they will stick with the same profile forever, because they paid for it and put lots of achievements and things on it. On PSN, you can set up new accounts and alias all the time, because who cares, they're free. On XBL, you invest in your identity, so you're less likely to just dump it and get a new one. But by all means, continue to bleat the same tired argument about "paying to access content you already paid for," after all, you pay for the internet, therefore you should receive free access to EVERYTHING on it, right? :roll:

I bring that argument because it's valid. yet you don't seem to want to understand it. I want online multiplayer yet a cost is slapped on to me without choice.

the 50$ I pay for doesn't go where I want it to. I or some other user ends up hosting the game instead. if it was a choice about onlinemultiplayer or online multiplayer with a paid community serive. then thats fine. but that hasn't happened. restricting content just to force people to access a different service is bad

practice.

XBL - more online games, better online features, faster and easier to use, centrally managed, better community, designed from the ground up for the best online gaming experience.

PSN - fewer online games, worse online features, harder to use, not centrally managed, worse community, cobbled together to try and copy XBL. But hey, it's free.

XBL is far better than PSN.

XBL is much better, there is no comparison. I've owned both consoles, used both services. But since I don't do multiplayer much anymore, I'd prefer not to pay anything for the little time I do spend online, so PSN is nice.

PSN is great for being free, but it just can't compete with XBL.

shame because I have yet to see the benefit for the gamer. the online game experience has been average or worse than the competitors.

so the ones benefitting seems to be the developer with more profit not the gamer.

I bring that argument because it's valid. yet you don't seem to want to understand it. I want online multiplayer yet a cost is slapped on to me without choice.

the 50$ I pay for doesn't go where I want it to. I or some other user ends up hosting the game instead. if it was a choice about onlinemultiplayer or online multiplayer with a paid community serive. then thats fine. but that hasn't happened. restricting content just to force people to access a different service is bad

practice.

Great_Ragnarok

In addition, every XBL game(with just a few exceptions) works the same basic way in terms of interface, lobby system, etc. so gamers don't have to re-learn how to access multiplayer for every new game they come across. You basically choose between Quick Match, Custom Match, ranked or unranked. Some games like Halo 3 do different things, but it's the same basic setup regardless.

On PSN, you have to be a major, triple A developer to have the budget to develop decent online support, or you contract that out (and pay big bucks) to a company like GameSpy to build your online support for you. And because the service isn't unified, you wind up with a situation where every game has a different setup for getting online. Metal Gear Online has the most convoluted setup process ever, involving three separate account IDs and passwords. CoD4 uses a party system. KZ2 uses a "squad" system. UT3 uses a server browser. Huh?

If the $50 you pay doesn't go where you want it to, then don't pay it and go to PSN and play. Simple.

While throwing parties and what not is fun and all... I dont play online to get a free headset from Major Nelson. I play online for the fun of it... the same way I do on the PSN and Live. And sure, you can set up new identities on the PSN all the time, but you can on the 360 too. I dont get why that's a point why the 360's online is better. Besides, with the patch Sony launched almost a year ago, you can "invest" in your PSN ID with trophies as well. Sure, MS has great marketing for Live and does do alot of things for the community, but you make it sound like the PSN is garbage because Sony doesnt throw parties for people. I'd say it's best just to call Live better than the PSN because it has more features and people have headsets. Everything else seems like a mute point to me.carljohnson3456

THe parties and get-togethersare only an indication of their dedication to their community. They have a steady stream of online events from Community PlayDates to GamerChix Night to Game With Fame, game launch events, gaming with developers, etc. The calendar can be found on Xbox.com. They are continually offering special tournaments and giveaways found in the Spotlight section.

Sure you can make more IDs on XBL, but you'll have to pay each time for Gold. If you just change your gamertag, your friends and rep and feedback follow you. That's accountability. You can hide behind constantly changing gamertags. On PSN, you can continually make IDs. We see how well that works out here on the System Wars forums.

[QUOTE="carljohnson3456"] While throwing parties and what not is fun and all... I dont play online to get a free headset from Major Nelson. I play online for the fun of it... the same way I do on the PSN and Live. And sure, you can set up new identities on the PSN all the time, but you can on the 360 too. I dont get why that's a point why the 360's online is better. Besides, with the patch Sony launched almost a year ago, you can "invest" in your PSN ID with trophies as well. Sure, MS has great marketing for Live and does do alot of things for the community, but you make it sound like the PSN is garbage because Sony doesnt throw parties for people. I'd say it's best just to call Live better than the PSN because it has more features and people have headsets. Everything else seems like a mute point to me.VoodooHak

THe parties and get-togethersare only an indication of their dedication to their community. They have a steady stream of online events from Community PlayDates to GamerChix Night to Game With Fame, game launch events, gaming with developers, etc. The calendar can be found on Xbox.com. They are continually offering special tournaments and giveaways found in the Spotlight section.

Sure you can make more IDs on XBL, but you'll have to pay each time for Gold. If you just change your gamertag, your friends and rep and feedback follow you. That's accountability. You can hide behind constantly changing gamertags. On PSN, you can continually make IDs. We see how well that works out here on the System Wars forums.

The only annoying stuff is finding people who have headsets.....bu bu the kids.....who cares trash talk back...god gave you a mouth use it :Pjg4xchamp

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]The only annoying stuff is finding people who have headsets.....bu bu the kids.....who cares trash talk back...god gave you a mouth use it :Pcarljohnson3456

[QUOTE="carljohnson3456"][QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]The only annoying stuff is finding people who have headsets.....bu bu the kids.....who cares trash talk back...god gave you a mouth use it :Pjg4xchamp

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="carljohnson3456"] That's what she sa... never mind. Yeah, the kids are annoying, and I dont talk trash back. To be honest I dont use a mic on XBL or PSN unless I'm playing with a buddy. carljohnson3456

when the team refuses to be a team, screw it be selfish. Use your teammate as bait if needed :lol:jg4xchamp

[QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"]shame because I have yet to see the benefit for the gamer. the online game experience has been average or worse than the competitors.

so the ones benefitting seems to be the developer with more profit not the gamer.

I bring that argument because it's valid. yet you don't seem to want to understand it. I want online multiplayer yet a cost is slapped on to me without choice.

the 50$ I pay for doesn't go where I want it to. I or some other user ends up hosting the game instead. if it was a choice about onlinemultiplayer or online multiplayer with a paid community serive. then thats fine. but that hasn't happened. restricting content just to force people to access a different service is bad

practice.

UnnDunn

more doesn't always transfer to better. I don't see it because it's not as great as you say it is. you are exaggerating live features way out of scale! XD

In addition, every XBL game(with just a few exceptions) works the same basic way in terms of interface, lobby system, etc. so gamers don't have to re-learn how to access multiplayer for every new game they come across. You basically choose between Quick Match, Custom Match, ranked or unranked. Some games like Halo 3 do different things, but it's the same basic setup regardless.

lmao you find joining a server difficult? take BF2142 for example. you can filter servers based on the maps, country,ping type of game whatever!

you refresh and click on a server you want to join. and all that for FREE! I don't need to be babysit on how to play online. and neither do most gamers.

On PSN, you have to be a major, triple A developer to have the budget to develop decent online support, or you contract that out (and pay big bucks) to a company like GameSpy to build your online support for you. And because the service isn't unified, you wind up with a situation where every game has a different setup for getting online. Metal Gear Online has the most convoluted setup process ever, involving three separate account IDs and passwords. CoD4 uses a party system. KZ2 uses a "squad" system. UT3 uses a server browser. Huh?

I see you are having problems with these things. I never did. but yeah I guess paying someone to do something soooo difficult is worthwhile. :roll:

If the $50 you pay doesn't go where you want it to, then don't pay it and go to PSN and play. Simple.

no the issue is that the 60$ I paid for a product is being restricted. I'm told to pay for something I don't want inorder to access what I want in my game!

that's the simple problem here. its fine to have a community service like that. but it should be a matter of choice whether you want it or not.

keeping your paid game hostage untill you pay them the toll is disgusting business practice.

sure psn is free but what about the psn games do they all have free trials like xbox live? i dont even have gold and i can still try before i buy these arcade games.

[QUOTE="UnnDunn"]

[QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"]shame because I have yet to see the benefit for the gamer. the online game experience has been average or worse than the competitors.

so the ones benefitting seems to be the developer with more profit not the gamer.

I bring that argument because it's valid. yet you don't seem to want to understand it. I want online multiplayer yet a cost is slapped on to me without choice.

the 50$ I pay for doesn't go where I want it to. I or some other user ends up hosting the game instead. if it was a choice about onlinemultiplayer or online multiplayer with a paid community serive. then thats fine. but that hasn't happened. restricting content just to force people to access a different service is bad

practice.

Great_Ragnarok

more doesn't always transfer to better. I don't see it because it's not as great as you say it is. you are exaggerating live features way out of scale! XD

In addition, every XBL game(with just a few exceptions) works the same basic way in terms of interface, lobby system, etc. so gamers don't have to re-learn how to access multiplayer for every new game they come across. You basically choose between Quick Match, Custom Match, ranked or unranked. Some games like Halo 3 do different things, but it's the same basic setup regardless.

lmao you find joining a server difficult? take BF2142 for example. you can filter servers based on the maps, country,ping type of game whatever!

you refresh and click on a server you want to join. and all that for FREE! I don't need to be babysit on how to play online. and neither do most gamers.

On PSN, you have to be a major, triple A developer to have the budget to develop decent online support, or you contract that out (and pay big bucks) to a company like GameSpy to build your online support for you. And because the service isn't unified, you wind up with a situation where every game has a different setup for getting online. Metal Gear Online has the most convoluted setup process ever, involving three separate account IDs and passwords. CoD4 uses a party system. KZ2 uses a "squad" system. UT3 uses a server browser. Huh?

I see you are having problems with these things. I never did. but yeah I guess paying someone to do something soooo difficult is worthwhile. :roll:

If the $50 you pay doesn't go where you want it to, then don't pay it and go to PSN and play. Simple.

no the issue is that the 60$ I paid for a product is being restricted. I'm told to pay for something I don't want inorder to access what I want in my game!

that's the simple problem here. its fine to have a community service like that. but it should be a matter of choice whether you want it or not.

keeping your paid game hostage untill you pay them the toll is disgusting business practice.

no the issue is that the 60$ I paid for a product is being restricted. I'm told to pay for something I don't want inorder to access what I want in my game!

that's the simple problem here. its fine to have a community service like that. but it should be a matter of choice whether you want it or not.

keeping your paid game hostage untill you pay them the toll is disgusting business practice.

Great_Ragnarok

you owned him.

dthach614

[QUOTE="dthach614"]

you owned him.

UnnDunn

you owned him.

[QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"]no the issue is that the 60$ I paid for a product is being restricted. I'm told to pay for something I don't want inorder to access what I want in my game!

that's the simple problem here. its fine to have a community service like that. but it should be a matter of choice whether you want it or not.

keeping your paid game hostage untill you pay them the toll is disgusting business practice.

UnnDunn

[QUOTE="UnnDunn"]

[QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"]no the issue is that the 60$ I paid for a product is being restricted. I'm told to pay for something I don't want inorder to access what I want in my game!

that's the simple problem here. its fine to have a community service like that. but it should be a matter of choice whether you want it or not.

keeping your paid game hostage untill you pay them the toll is disgusting business practice.

dthach614

PSN=more stable, less lag, free

XBL=more features, easier to play with multiple friends, monthly/yearly cost

IMO PSN is better. but that's just my opinion, there will never be a winning arguement in this fight because some people like all the features on XBL and some people like being able to connect to and play games without a problem, but sacrifice the unified friends lists and stuff.

[QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"]no the issue is that the 60$ I paid for a product is being restricted. I'm told to pay for something I don't want inorder to access what I want in my game!

that's the simple problem here. its fine to have a community service like that. but it should be a matter of choice whether you want it or not.

keeping your paid game hostage untill you pay them the toll is disgusting business practice.

UnnDunn

dude if you buy cellphones to talk to someone.. then you know what you are paying for. you are paying for the connection. with xbox live the user pays for the connection charge because the user is the one hosting the game. having features that I didn't want in the first place doesn't justify it's cost to me!

so in summary,

1.when I pay 60$ for a game, I expect all access to the features of that product!

2.MS partially restricts access to this product, unless you pay a yearly charge for a service that you DON'T want.

3.this is a nasty business tactic because the product that you paid for is kept hostage!

that has been my "tired" argument. yet it wouldn't be so tiring if you just listen to me for a while.

it's fine that you come to enjoy automatic matchmaking and cross game features.

but having that forced on me by keeping my paid product hostage is not nice! surely you understand what I'm saying.

[QUOTE="UnnDunn"]

[QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"]no the issue is that the 60$ I paid for a product is being restricted. I'm told to pay for something I don't want inorder to access what I want in my game!

that's the simple problem here. its fine to have a community service like that. but it should be a matter of choice whether you want it or not.

keeping your paid game hostage untill you pay them the toll is disgusting business practice.

Great_Ragnarok

dude if you buy cellphones to talk to someone.. then you know what you are paying for. you are paying for the connection. with xbox live the user pays for the connection charge because the user is the one hosting the game. having features that I didn't want in the first place doesn't justify it's cost to me!

so in summary,

1.when I pay 60$ for a game, I expect all access to the features of that product!

2.MS partially restricts access to this product, unless you pay a yearly charge for a service that you DON'T want.

3.this is a nasty business tactic because the product that you paid for is kept hostage!

that has been my "tired" argument. yet it wouldn't be so tiring if you just listen to me for a while.

it's fine that you come to enjoy automatic matchmaking and cross game features.

but having that forced on me by keeping my paid product hostage is not nice! surely you understand what I'm saying.

the thing is people want online mp. no one really care about surfing the net or msn messenger on consoles. every1 care abnout being able to PLAY online. ps3 does that for free. thats the only thing that matters in a console online service is being able to play online. i think microsoft is mocking us with the BS silver account.

halo_wars86

[QUOTE="UnnDunn"]

[QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"]no the issue is that the 60$ I paid for a product is being restricted. I'm told to pay for something I don't want inorder to access what I want in my game!

that's the simple problem here. its fine to have a community service like that. but it should be a matter of choice whether you want it or not.

keeping your paid game hostage untill you pay them the toll is disgusting business practice.

Great_Ragnarok

dude if you buy cellphones to talk to someone.. then you know what you are paying for. you are paying for the connection. with xbox live the user pays for the connection charge because the user is the one hosting the game. having features that I didn't want in the first place doesn't justify it's cost to me!

so in summary,

1.when I pay 60$ for a game, I expect all access to the features of that product!

2.MS partially restricts access to this product, unless you pay a yearly charge for a service that you DON'T want.

3.this is a nasty business tactic because the product that you paid for is kept hostage!

that has been my "tired" argument. yet it wouldn't be so tiring if you just listen to me for a while.

it's fine that you come to enjoy automatic matchmaking and cross game features.

but having that forced on me by keeping my paid product hostage is not nice! surely you understand what I'm saying.

Your argument is like complaining about buying a World of Warcraft package at retail, and then whining that Blizzard restricts access to the product you paid for, unless you pay another monthly charge. It's a specious, silly argument. You knew going in that XBL online multiplayer requires a separate fee, but you still bought the game. And now you come running to the forums complaining that Microsoft "hijacked" your game and "held it hostage." Well it's your own fault for buying the game and allowing yourself to be "held hostage" by Microsoft. Poor you.

Microsoft has always, ALWAYS said that an XBL subscription would be required for any online multiplayer on Xbox or Xbox 360. They have made that clear, upfront. It's printed on the box of every game that uses XBL. If Microsoft is keeping you hostage, then you, my friend, were the one who willingly walked into the hostage-taker's arms. But you can walk out anytime you like, just by selling your 360 and switching to PS3.

If XBL had started free, attracted a bunch of people, and then turned into a pay service, you might have had a point about nasty business tactics. But MS has been charging the same subscription fee from day 1. You have no-one to blame but yourself.

again pwned loldthach614

both wow and xbl is a ripoff. so customers shouldn't want better service. customers shouldn't give M$ feedback?dthach614

[QUOTE="dthach614"]both wow and xbl is a ripoff. so customers shouldn't want better service. customers shouldn't give M$ feedback?UnnDunn

both wow and xbl is a ripoff. so customers shouldn't want better service. customers shouldn't give M$ feedback?dthach614

[QUOTE="dthach614"][QUOTE="UnnDunn"]Nobody is interested in feedback from the kind of person who would refer to Microsoft as "M$". The sort of feedback those people would supply is usually heavilytainted by their ignorance and bias.

UnnDunn

[QUOTE="UnnDunn"][QUOTE="dthach614"] speak for yourself. according to you, M$ can do no wrong.dthach614

The origional post is a joke. He has no idea what hes talking about.

These threads shouldnt even exist.

[QUOTE="dthach614"]

[QUOTE="UnnDunn"] And according to you, XBL is nothing but a "shopping entice dashboard."UnnDunn

[QUOTE="UnnDunn"][QUOTE="dthach614"] thats the main feat that you lemmings talk about when talking about xbox live.

dthach614

Halo 3 works just fine. Can't speak for Gears 2. But every other online game I play works just fine with the matchmaking. If your experience isn't good, then it sucks to be you. You take your anecdotal evidence and apply it to the whole XBL population.

Is PSN voice support universal? Blacksite says hi. I can be playing single player and speak with everyon in my party, each one of them could be playing separate games or watching movies or listening to music. PS3 can do that? Please talk me through the process on setting that up.

Speaking of cross-game chat, XBL has functional cross-game invites.

Then you have the community managers that are out there meeting with the community and organizing the steady stream of online events in the Events and Spotlight sections on your dash.

Open access to achievement data.

Tight integration with Xbox.com

That's plenty already.... and really... I've danced this dance plenty of times before.

Bottom line: if you don't think these features are worth the subscription, then don't subscribe. If PSN is good enough for you, then this shouldn't be a problem.

Feedback is fine, but you beating your anti-MS drum..here... isn't going to do any good. Go to the Xbox.com forums or send email to their customer service. I'm offering you those options for recourse. On Gamespot, for all your whining, you will change NOTHING.

So let's just agree to disagree and move on.

true skill works like crap, and there;s a similar system in psn. psn games have stat tracking too. psn also have voice support, ease of development? don't matter how easy, the outcome can still be bad. Halo 3 and GoW 2 say hi. so is XBL responsible for the horrible netcoding in GoW2? dthach614

However, XBL is not responsible for the information the game is actually sending or receiving about what's going on in the game. It's still very much up to the developer to make sure the game is sending/receiving the right information at the right times. Some games do this better than others. GoW2 doesn't do a very good job of this. That has nothing to do with XBL.

[QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"]

[QUOTE="UnnDunn"]OMG, you must hate having a cellphone... after all you PAID for the PHONE, but they keep your phone hostage unless you pay the TOLL! :evil:

UnnDunn

dude if you buy cellphones to talk to someone.. then you know what you are paying for. you are paying for the connection. with xbox live the user pays for the connection charge because the user is the one hosting the game. having features that I didn't want in the first place doesn't justify it's cost to me!

so in summary,

1.when I pay 60$ for a game, I expect all access to the features of that product!

2.MS partially restricts access to this product, unless you pay a yearly charge for a service that you DON'T want.

3.this is a nasty business tactic because the product that you paid for is kept hostage!

that has been my "tired" argument. yet it wouldn't be so tiring if you just listen to me for a while.

it's fine that you come to enjoy automatic matchmaking and cross game features.

but having that forced on me by keeping my paid product hostage is not nice! surely you understand what I'm saying.

Your argument is like complaining about buying a World of Warcraft package at retail, and then whining that Blizzard restricts access to the product you paid for, unless you pay another monthly charge. It's a specious, silly argument. You knew going in that XBL online multiplayer requires a separate fee, but you still bought the game. And now you come running to the forums complaining that Microsoft "hijacked" your game and "held it hostage." Well it's your own fault for buying the game and allowing yourself to be "held hostage" by Microsoft. Poor you.

Microsoft has always, ALWAYS said that an XBL subscription would be required for any online multiplayer on Xbox or Xbox 360. They have made that clear, upfront. It's printed on the box of every game that uses XBL. If Microsoft is keeping you hostage, then you, my friend, were the one who willingly walked into the hostage-taker's arms. But you can walk out anytime you like, just by selling your 360 and switching to PS3.

If XBL had started free, attracted a bunch of people, and then turned into a pay service, you might have had a point about nasty business tactics. But MS has been charging the same subscription fee from day 1. You have no-one to blame but yourself.

lmao this is what is puzzling about your incredible sympathy to MS! I have stopped paying for live. but this is system war. so It's perfectly fine for me to express criticism for a product. I'm simply bringing the nasty business tactics of microsoft to light. simple as that. so other people who are thinking of buying the 360 can have a more informed decision about the nature of 360 online games. oh and again in WoW you are paying for something! I don't play the game but I still know that much. those players are paying for more content and the costs of dedicated servers. with live you are paying for something that you don't want. something that has nothing to do with the online features of your paid product. but yeah you don't need to repeat the obvious and say stop buying live. I'm the one criticizing it, so what do you think I did? of course I don't use live anymore. stupidest ripoff since online gaming started./Great_Ragnarok

[QUOTE="UnnDunn"]

[QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"]

dude if you buy cellphones to talk to someone.. then you know what you are paying for. you are paying for the connection. with xbox live the user pays for the connection charge because the user is the one hosting the game. having features that I didn't want in the first place doesn't justify it's cost to me!

so in summary,

1.when I pay 60$ for a game, I expect all access to the features of that product!

2.MS partially restricts access to this product, unless you pay a yearly charge for a service that you DON'T want.

3.this is a nasty business tactic because the product that you paid for is kept hostage!

that has been my "tired" argument. yet it wouldn't be so tiring if you just listen to me for a while.

it's fine that you come to enjoy automatic matchmaking and cross game features.

but having that forced on me by keeping my paid product hostage is not nice! surely you understand what I'm saying.

Great_Ragnarok

Your argument is like complaining about buying a World of Warcraft package at retail, and then whining that Blizzard restricts access to the product you paid for, unless you pay another monthly charge. It's a specious, silly argument. You knew going in that XBL online multiplayer requires a separate fee, but you still bought the game. And now you come running to the forums complaining that Microsoft "hijacked" your game and "held it hostage." Well it's your own fault for buying the game and allowing yourself to be "held hostage" by Microsoft. Poor you.

Microsoft has always, ALWAYS said that an XBL subscription would be required for any online multiplayer on Xbox or Xbox 360. They have made that clear, upfront. It's printed on the box of every game that uses XBL. If Microsoft is keeping you hostage, then you, my friend, were the one who willingly walked into the hostage-taker's arms. But you can walk out anytime you like, just by selling your 360 and switching to PS3.

If XBL had started free, attracted a bunch of people, and then turned into a pay service, you might have had a point about nasty business tactics. But MS has been charging the same subscription fee from day 1. You have no-one to blame but yourself.

[QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"][QUOTE="UnnDunn"]Then sell your xbox, buy a PS3 and play it on that. It's quite simple.

Your argument is like complaining about buying a World of Warcraft package at retail, and then whining that Blizzard restricts access to the product you paid for, unless you pay another monthly charge. It's a specious, silly argument. You knew going in that XBL online multiplayer requires a separate fee, but you still bought the game. And now you come running to the forums complaining that Microsoft "hijacked" your game and "held it hostage." Well it's your own fault for buying the game and allowing yourself to be "held hostage" by Microsoft. Poor you.

Microsoft has always, ALWAYS said that an XBL subscription would be required for any online multiplayer on Xbox or Xbox 360. They have made that clear, upfront. It's printed on the box of every game that uses XBL. If Microsoft is keeping you hostage, then you, my friend, were the one who willingly walked into the hostage-taker's arms. But you can walk out anytime you like, just by selling your 360 and switching to PS3.

If XBL had started free, attracted a bunch of people, and then turned into a pay service, you might have had a point about nasty business tactics. But MS has been charging the same subscription fee from day 1. You have no-one to blame but yourself.

yoyo462001

i'd disagree on 2 points but the lag section is correct, how do they do it for resistance 2? halo is so laggy and games take so long to load, the games on live are better than what's on the PSN and there is a larger selection but prices are way too high and the MS points is just a way to cover that up, the 360's avatars beat home, home's in early stages and doesn't live up to the avatars at the moment, it's making money though so there will hug improvement this year, all live has over the PSN otherwise is cross game chat.hoosier7

I hate how 360 fanboys say with xbl you get what you pay for when in fact its just a big con.

Panther501

Yet with the ps3, (the actual console, not PSN) they say the price is too high. But.....didn't they just say........