This topic is locked from further discussion.
this is just wrong, for one.
ps3 does not have in game chat which is very annoying.
it does not have a party system like ps3 does, me and my buddy tried to play killzone 2 and it took around an hour to finally make it in a match where we were both on the same team
i own both consoles and 360 is hands down the better service, saying otherwise is crap. and home is lame guys.
one thing psn has on 360 is the dedicated servers. other then that, 360 is better for online.
[QUOTE="Panther501"]
I hate how 360 fanboys say with xbl you get what you pay for when in fact its just a big con.
Yet with the ps3, (the actual console, not PSN) they say the price is too high. But.....didn't they just say........
They don't see the PS3 as worthwile the purchase for the titles.. Lets face it even now Xbox360's library is still stronger, and their online service/arcade service is leagues better.[QUOTE="rsoxguy12"][QUOTE="Panther501"]
I hate how 360 fanboys say with xbl you get what you pay for when in fact its just a big con.
sSubZerOo
Yet with the ps3, (the actual console, not PSN) they say the price is too high. But.....didn't they just say........
They don't see the PS3 as worthwile the purchase for the titles.. Lets face it even now Xbox360's library is still stronger, and their online service/arcade service is leagues better.The idea that live is leagues better than psn is your opinion, but to me it seems your stating it as a fact. From what i've come to understand is that, save for roughly three features(that aren't worth 10$ imo), psn and live are equal, with the exception of one coming with a fee, and the other not.
And to even complain about $4 a month suggests you don't have a job, are on a allowance, or are so flat broke you shouldn't be playing games to begin with.. Your TV will waste more money energy wise in a month.sSubZerOo
You know it's entirely possible that people justprefer paying nothing for a service that does just about the same as live,save for three features,as oppossed to paying(pennies a day or not) anything; I know i do.
20 mil psn subscribers compared to the 17 mill the 360 has
halo_wars86
Does anyone else question these numbers on both sides? So many alt accounts on 360 and wonderingare thePSN 'subscribers' actually using the service for online gaming.
They don't see the PS3 as worthwile the purchase for the titles.. Lets face it even now Xbox360's library is still stronger, and their online service/arcade service is leagues better.[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="rsoxguy12"]
Yet with the ps3, (the actual console, not PSN) they say the price is too high. But.....didn't they just say........
ProChamp
The idea that live is leagues better than psn is your opinion, but to me it seems your stating it as a fact. From what i've come to understand is that, save for roughly three features(that aren't worth 10$ imo), psn and live are equal, with the exception of one coming with a fee, and the other not.
well these 3 features are the most important to me, cross game chat, a party system, and cross game invites. i own both btw, and 360 is LEAGUES better.
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]And to even complain about $4 a month suggests you don't have a job, are on a allowance, or are so flat broke you shouldn't be playing games to begin with.. Your TV will waste more money energy wise in a month.ProChamp
You know it's entirely possible that people justprefer paying nothing for a service that does just about the same as live,save for three features,as oppossed to paying(pennies a day or not) anything; I know i do.
Lol xbox fanboys are always like "teh xb0x iz onley 14 centz a day!!!!!11!" But in reality, if you bought an xbox 360 in 2005, by 2010, thats $250 tacked on to the launch price. Can't forget batteries for the controllers (unless you have the rechargeable packs). And if you want wireless access for online gaming? Thats $100 more. Oh yeah...and the RROD might attack you too after all that spent money.If you are going to criticize, at least criticize on the basis of correct information. what's incorrect about my criticism? price is a fair a point. and yoyo462001 I disagree. in terms of online gameplay Ive had the best lag free experience on PSN. out of all the systems I find steam the best.[QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"]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./UnnDunn
[QUOTE="ProChamp"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]And to even complain about $4 a month suggests you don't have a job, are on a allowance, or are so flat broke you shouldn't be playing games to begin with.. Your TV will waste more money energy wise in a month.rsoxguy12
You know it's entirely possible that people justprefer paying nothing for a service that does just about the same as live,save for three features,as oppossed to paying(pennies a day or not) anything; I know i do.
Lol xbox fanboys are always like "teh xb0x iz onley 14 centz a day!!!!!11!" But in reality, if you bought an xbox 360 in 2005, by 2010, thats $250 tacked on to the launch price. Can't forget batteries for the controllers (unless you have the rechargeable packs). And if you want wireless access for online gaming? Thats $100 more. Oh yeah...and the RROD might attack you too after all that spent money.Honostly, do you cows actually continue to beleive the garbage you continue to spew in here? You seem to try to recycle the same lame arguments over and over again.
[QUOTE="ProChamp"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]And to even complain about $4 a month suggests you don't have a job, are on a allowance, or are so flat broke you shouldn't be playing games to begin with.. Your TV will waste more money energy wise in a month.rsoxguy12
You know it's entirely possible that people justprefer paying nothing for a service that does just about the same as live,save for three features,as oppossed to paying(pennies a day or not) anything; I know i do.
Lol xbox fanboys are always like "teh xb0x iz onley 14 centz a day!!!!!11!" But in reality, if you bought an xbox 360 in 2005, by 2010, thats $250 tacked on to the launch price. Can't forget batteries for the controllers (unless you have the rechargeable packs). And if you want wireless access for online gaming? Thats $100 more. Oh yeah...and the RROD might attack you too after all that spent money. exactly dude! I have a 360 because of the good exclusives. but I still think its the worst console of the bunch. I just have no idea why developers make exclusives. I mean they have to pay a percentage to the system owners as well![QUOTE="rsoxguy12"][QUOTE="ProChamp"]Lol xbox fanboys are always like "teh xb0x iz onley 14 centz a day!!!!!11!" But in reality, if you bought an xbox 360 in 2005, by 2010, thats $250 tacked on to the launch price. Can't forget batteries for the controllers (unless you have the rechargeable packs). And if you want wireless access for online gaming? Thats $100 more. Oh yeah...and the RROD might attack you too after all that spent money. exactly dude! I have a 360 because of the good exclusives. but I still think its the worst console of the bunch. I just have no idea why developers make exclusives. I mean they have to pay a percentage to the system owners as well!You know it's entirely possible that people justprefer paying nothing for a service that does just about the same as live,save for three features,as oppossed to paying(pennies a day or not) anything; I know i do.
Great_Ragnarok
Probably because they know they have a better chance of making a profit supporting the 360 then they would supporting the PS3...
exactly dude! I have a 360 because of the good exclusives. but I still think its the worst console of the bunch. I just have no idea why developers make exclusives. I mean they have to pay a percentage to the system owners as well![QUOTE="Great_Ragnarok"][QUOTE="rsoxguy12"] Lol xbox fanboys are always like "teh xb0x iz onley 14 centz a day!!!!!11!" But in reality, if you bought an xbox 360 in 2005, by 2010, thats $250 tacked on to the launch price. Can't forget batteries for the controllers (unless you have the rechargeable packs). And if you want wireless access for online gaming? Thats $100 more. Oh yeah...and the RROD might attack you too after all that spent money. AlphaGamer469
Probably because they know they have a better chance of making a profit supporting the 360 then they would supporting the PS3...
that still doesn't make sense because going multiplat means both systems will have it. why would that decrease sales for the 360? so going multiplat could only increase sales...And to even complain about $4 a month suggests you don't have a job, are on a allowance, or are so flat broke you shouldn't be playing games to begin with.. Your TV will waste more money energy wise in a month.sSubZerOo
You know it's entirely possible that people justprefer paying nothing for a service that does just about the same as live,save for three features,as oppossed to paying(pennies a day or not) anything; I know i do.
Lol xbox fanboys are always like "teh xb0x iz onley 14 centz a day!!!!!11!" But in reality, if you bought an xbox 360 in 2005, by 2010, thats $250 tacked on to the launch price. Can't forget batteries for the controllers (unless you have the rechargeable packs). And if you want wireless access for online gaming? Thats $100 more. Oh yeah...and the RROD might attack you too after all that spent money. Fail. The Playstation 3 takes away the award for being the most expensive console to run, costing $248 a year to run while on and idle. Playing a game doesn't up the rate much, making it just over the $260 mark. The Xbox 360 comes second costing $203 to run per year while a game is being played, and $184 while idle. http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2008/06/04/ps3-xbox-360-consume-more-energy-than-a-fridge-mac-beats-pc/ .. There is your $57 right there, you spend it running the PS3.. Apparently you should research this stuff before you open your mouth, and by the way I own a PS3, I like it alot aside from their shoddy online service.. Killzone 2 is evidence of this, its hard as hell to play witha friend.. And no matchmaking.. and as a pc gamer as well as playing on my firends Xbox360 for a long time I can say that PSn and the store is sorely lacking.I prefer PSN. There's no doubt that LIVE wins when it comes to features, but I still think it should be free, and I like that on PSN there are a few games that support 32 players or more online.
Of course, "better" is subjective, so there will be people that think completely the opposite, which is fine.
[QUOTE="halo_wars86"]
20 mil psn subscribers compared to the 17 mill the 360 has
strudel420
Does anyone else question these numbers on both sides? So many alt accounts on 360 and wonderingare thePSN 'subscribers' actually using the service for online gaming.
Here's something to chew on:
http://kotaku.com/5167384/online-gaming-jumps-in-2009
"The console leader for online gaming is, not surprisingly, the Xbox 360 which dominates the survey with 50 percent. I was more than a little surprised to see that the survey shows that Nintendo's Wii, and not the Playstation 3, is in second place with an amazing 29 percent. The PS3 rounds out the group in third place."
This NPD Group study defies the # of subscribers listed above. It's third party verification and qualifies how people are using the online services.
this forum is for people who have BOTH 360 and ps3.
comparing the 2 online services.
psn = free
360 = 50$
WINNER = PS3 (FREE IS ALWAYS GOOD)
psn = lots of amazing games (flower , tekken 5 ,stardust)
360 = ALOT more games but most of them are trash and OVERPRICED.
WINNER = PS3 (HAVING A SMALL GREAT GAME COLLECTION IS BETTER THAN HAVING A HUGE GARBAGE COLLECTION)
psn vs 360 soulcalibur 4 = they are practically identical with no lag if some1 has 4 or 5 bars.
WINNER = ITS A TIE. BOTH GAMES PLAY THE SAME ONLINE BUT ONE IS FOR FREE WHILE ANOTHER IS NOT.
psn vs 360 online exclusive games.
psn
1. resistence 2 = 0 lag + 60 mp matchs and the games does not take long to start
2. killzone 2 = u will find online lag and aiming lag in this game. but mp experience is amazing.
360
1. halo 3 = 1 of my fav fps but matches take long time to start.
2. gears 2 = my fav 360 game but online is so bad. sometimes it take up to 15 minutes for a wingman match to start.
WINNER = HANDS DOWN PS3. A FREE SERVICE PROVIDES GREAT GAME THAT RUN BETTER(WITH NO LAG) ONLINE THAN A NON FREE SERVICE. HALO 3 AND GEARS 2 SHULD BE FLAWLESS ONLINE WITH NO LAG SINCE THE ONLINE MP IS NOT FREE. SO BASICALLY THE BEST ONLINE GAMES FOR 360 LAAAAAAAAAG SO MUCH AND TAKE SO MUCH TIME FOR THE MATCH TO START YET THEY CHARGE U FOR IT.
psn vs 360 online experience.
i am no fan of ps home or the 360 avatars but ps home wins hand down on this.
WINNER = PS3. I DONT LIKE PS3 HOME BUT I THINK IT IS VERY CLEEAR THAT PS HOME WHIPS 360 AVATARS BUTT.
psn vs 360 applications.
360 can use msn messenger while ps3 can surf the net (so u can say this is a tie)
WINNER = ITS A TIE
online updates.
360 get demos usually a week or 2 weeks earlier than ps3 does. it is excpected since the service is not free.
WINNER = 360. 360 GET DEMOS EARLIER THAN THE PSN DOES.
FINAL VERDICT.
PS3 ONLINE is so much better with so much lesser lag in game and is FREE. better downloadable games and 20 mil psn subscribers compared to the 17 mill the 360 has. i am a new ps3 owner but the psn is so much better than 360 live yet u pay for 360. 360 live is the biggest rip off ive ever seen(THEY SHUD CHANGE IT FROM 360 LIVE TO 360 LAG). i think 360 live shud be the free one and sony shud start asking for money to play online since it is so much more superior to the 360 live. every single aspect of the online experience is almost better in psn. most of the online expirience on 360 live is ACTUALLY WAITING FOR A GAME TO START. the ps3 does not have this problem and yet it is free.
PSN > 360 live (ANY1 WHO SAYS OTHERWISE IS EITHER LYING TO HIMSELF OR NEVER COMPARED THEM BOTH FIRST HAND)
Read this to yourself before bed everynight and maybe you will trick yourself into actually believing it!Xbox Live b/c Microsoft had more time to create and perfect their online infrastructure while PSN is still playing catch up.
And to even complain about $4 a month suggests you don't have a job, are on a allowance, or are so flat broke you shouldn't be playing games to begin with.. Your TV will waste more money energy wise in a month.sSubZerOoI get $10 a week and have no problem paying $50 a year really I don't, besides even if I did mind paying it, what else am I supposed to do? Pay $400 for a Playstation 3 so I can get free online? No. The main reason Xbox Live costs money is because what else are you going to play your Xbox 360 games online with? It's not like the PC where you can use Steam, X-Fire, Games for Windows Live, or nothing at all and just jump online.
this forum is for people who have BOTH 360 and ps3.
comparing the 2 online services.
psn = free
360 = 50$
WINNER = PS3 (FREE IS ALWAYS GOOD)
psn = lots of amazing games (flower , tekken 5 ,stardust)
360 = ALOT more games but most of them are trash and OVERPRICED.
WINNER = PS3 (HAVING A SMALL GREAT GAME COLLECTION IS BETTER THAN HAVING A HUGE GARBAGE COLLECTION)
psn vs 360 soulcalibur 4 = they are practically identical with no lag if some1 has 4 or 5 bars.
WINNER = ITS A TIE. BOTH GAMES PLAY THE SAME ONLINE BUT ONE IS FOR FREE WHILE ANOTHER IS NOT.
psn vs 360 online exclusive games.
psn
1. resistence 2 = 0 lag + 60 mp matchs and the games does not take long to start
2. killzone 2 = u will find online lag and aiming lag in this game. but mp experience is amazing.
360
1. halo 3 = 1 of my fav fps but matches take long time to start.
2. gears 2 = my fav 360 game but online is so bad. sometimes it take up to 15 minutes for a wingman match to start.
WINNER = HANDS DOWN PS3. A FREE SERVICE PROVIDES GREAT GAME THAT RUN BETTER(WITH NO LAG) ONLINE THAN A NON FREE SERVICE. HALO 3 AND GEARS 2 SHULD BE FLAWLESS ONLINE WITH NO LAG SINCE THE ONLINE MP IS NOT FREE. SO BASICALLY THE BEST ONLINE GAMES FOR 360 LAAAAAAAAAG SO MUCH AND TAKE SO MUCH TIME FOR THE MATCH TO START YET THEY CHARGE U FOR IT.
psn vs 360 online experience.
i am no fan of ps home or the 360 avatars but ps home wins hand down on this.
WINNER = PS3. I DONT LIKE PS3 HOME BUT I THINK IT IS VERY CLEEAR THAT PS HOME WHIPS 360 AVATARS BUTT.
psn vs 360 applications.
360 can use msn messenger while ps3 can surf the net (so u can say this is a tie)
WINNER = ITS A TIE
online updates.
360 get demos usually a week or 2 weeks earlier than ps3 does. it is excpected since the service is not free.
WINNER = 360. 360 GET DEMOS EARLIER THAN THE PSN DOES.
FINAL VERDICT.
PS3 ONLINE is so much better with so much lesser lag in game and is FREE. better downloadable games and 20 mil psn subscribers compared to the 17 mill the 360 has. i am a new ps3 owner but the psn is so much better than 360 live yet u pay for 360. 360 live is the biggest rip off ive ever seen(THEY SHUD CHANGE IT FROM 360 LIVE TO 360 LAG). i think 360 live shud be the free one and sony shud start asking for money to play online since it is so much more superior to the 360 live. every single aspect of the online experience is almost better in psn. most of the online expirience on 360 live is ACTUALLY WAITING FOR A GAME TO START. the ps3 does not have this problem and yet it is free.
PSN > 360 live (ANY1 WHO SAYS OTHERWISE IS EITHER LYING TO HIMSELF OR NEVER COMPARED THEM BOTH FIRST HAND)
due to the level of bias towards ps3 in this thread i stopped reading 3/4 of the way through. And uh almost everything i read is untrue. And everyone who plays video games knows that Xboxlive > Psn[QUOTE="nmaharg"]Party system = better service. Party system is an instant win.clyde46Party system = FAIL. Constant drop outs, voice drops and network errors.thats the players not the Party System.
What are you guys talking about?
Nintendo Wi-Fi connection beats both XBL and PSN hands down, lol.
But seriously, I would have to go with XBL. I own both systems and I find XBL to be an overall superior online service, however PSN is coming very close to delivering XBL's quality!
XBL beats PSN in almost every thing the two services provide other than pricing.
Content:
XBL has a much larger library of Movies, TV shows, and other various things. XBL for the most part recieves Demo's earlier than PSN and has had almost all multiplat Beta's exclusive to its platform.
Arcade Games:
XBL has a much larger selection of Arcade games and currently has more quality arcades with the only services between the two that has recieved several AAAE arcade game. XBL also allows its users to create their own Indie games and get them placed on live.
Features:
XBL has more features over PSN including things like Cross-game invite, MSN messenger, Parties, Cross-game chat, etc... The only feature PSN currently has over XBL is home.
Community:
MS hosts events on XBL and gets the community involved, while PSN does very little, XBL also provides every user with a Mic to communicate unlike PSN.
Reliablility:
XBL games are usually released in a stable state, with Gears 2 being the exception (still playable online though), PSN games have seen problems due to developers not being as assisted with online tools with games like GTA4, Warhawk, Socom, LBP, etc.. being released unplayable online, or other problems.
etc...
And to even complain about $4 a month suggests you don't have a job, are on a allowance, or are so flat broke you shouldn't be playing games to begin with.. Your TV will waste more money energy wise in a month.sSubZerOoI get $10 a week and have no problem paying $50 a year really I don't, besides even if I did mind paying it, what else am I supposed to do? Pay $400 for a Playstation 3 so I can get free online? No. The main reason Xbox Live costs money is because what else are you going to play your Xbox 360 games online with? It's not like the PC where you can use Steam, X-Fire, Games for Windows Live, or nothing at all and just jump online. People also fail to realize that the PS3 energy cost on average is $30 more than the Xbox360, thats about the same amount you can get for a whole years worth of multiplayer on XBL by getting a card off amazon..
i honestly could care less about everything you just said. All I care about is online gaming. and lol @ the reliabilityXBL beats PSN in almost every thing the two services provide other than pricing.
Content:
XBL has a much larger library of Movies, TV shows, and other various things. XBL for the most part recieves Demo's earlier than PSN and has had almost all multiplat Beta's exclusive to its platform.
Arcade Games:
XBL has a much larger selection of Arcade games and currently has more quality arcades with the only services between the two that has recieved several AAAE arcade game. XBL also allows its users to create their own Indie games and get them placed on live.
Features:
XBL has more features over PSN including things like Cross-game invite, MSN messenger, Parties, Cross-game chat, etc... The only feature PSN currently has over XBL is home.
Community:
MS hosts events on XBL and gets the community involved, while PSN does very little, XBL also provides every user with a Mic to communicate unlike PSN.
Reliablility:
XBL games are usually released in a stable state, with Gears 2 being the exception (still playable online though), PSN games have seen problems due to developers not being as assisted with online tools with games like GTA4, Warhawk, Socom, LBP, etc.. being released unplayable online, or other problems.
etc...
opex07
[QUOTE="opex07"]i honestly could care less about everything you just said. All I care about is online gaming. and lol @ the reliabilityXBL beats PSN in almost every thing the two services provide other than pricing.
Content:
XBL has a much larger library of Movies, TV shows, and other various things. XBL for the most part recieves Demo's earlier than PSN and has had almost all multiplat Beta's exclusive to its platform.
Arcade Games:
XBL has a much larger selection of Arcade games and currently has more quality arcades with the only services between the two that has recieved several AAAE arcade game. XBL also allows its users to create their own Indie games and get them placed on live.
Features:
XBL has more features over PSN including things like Cross-game invite, MSN messenger, Parties, Cross-game chat, etc... The only feature PSN currently has over XBL is home.
Community:
MS hosts events on XBL and gets the community involved, while PSN does very little, XBL also provides every user with a Mic to communicate unlike PSN.
Reliablility:
XBL games are usually released in a stable state, with Gears 2 being the exception (still playable online though), PSN games have seen problems due to developers not being as assisted with online tools with games like GTA4, Warhawk, Socom, LBP, etc.. being released unplayable online, or other problems.
etc...
dthach614
Hey, regular broadcast TV is perfectly fine. It has good programs. But some of us don't mind paying for the extra features of cable or satellite.
[QUOTE="rsoxguy12"][QUOTE="ProChamp"]Lol xbox fanboys are always like "teh xb0x iz onley 14 centz a day!!!!!11!" But in reality, if you bought an xbox 360 in 2005, by 2010, thats $250 tacked on to the launch price. Can't forget batteries for the controllers (unless you have the rechargeable packs). And if you want wireless access for online gaming? Thats $100 more. Oh yeah...and the RROD might attack you too after all that spent money.You know it's entirely possible that people justprefer paying nothing for a service that does just about the same as live,save for three features,as oppossed to paying(pennies a day or not) anything; I know i do.
sSubZerOo
Fail. The Playstation 3 takes away the award for being the most expensive console to run, costing $248 a year to run while on and idle. Playing a game doesn't up the rate much, making it just over the $260 mark. The Xbox 360 comes second costing $203 to run per year while a game is being played, and $184 while idle. http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2008/06/04/ps3-xbox-360-consume-more-energy-than-a-fridge-mac-beats-pc/ .. There is your $57 right there, you spend it running the PS3.. Apparently you should research this stuff before you open your mouth, and by the way I own a PS3, I like it alot aside from their shoddy online service.. Killzone 2 is evidence of this, its hard as hell to play witha friend.. And no matchmaking.. and as a pc gamer as well as playing on my firends Xbox360 for a long time I can say that PSn and the store is sorely lacking.
i dunno about you, but i turn off my console when I'm done playing it....
i honestly could care less about everything you just said. All I care about is online gaming. and lol @ the reliability[QUOTE="dthach614"][QUOTE="opex07"]
XBL beats PSN in almost every thing the two services provide other than pricing.
Content:
XBL has a much larger library of Movies, TV shows, and other various things. XBL for the most part recieves Demo's earlier than PSN and has had almost all multiplat Beta's exclusive to its platform.
Arcade Games:
XBL has a much larger selection of Arcade games and currently has more quality arcades with the only services between the two that has recieved several AAAE arcade game. XBL also allows its users to create their own Indie games and get them placed on live.
Features:
XBL has more features over PSN including things like Cross-game invite, MSN messenger, Parties, Cross-game chat, etc... The only feature PSN currently has over XBL is home.
Community:
MS hosts events on XBL and gets the community involved, while PSN does very little, XBL also provides every user with a Mic to communicate unlike PSN.
Reliablility:
XBL games are usually released in a stable state, with Gears 2 being the exception (still playable online though), PSN games have seen problems due to developers not being as assisted with online tools with games like GTA4, Warhawk, Socom, LBP, etc.. being released unplayable online, or other problems.
etc...
VoodooHak
Hey, regular broadcast TV is perfectly fine. It has good programs. But some of us don't mind paying for the extra features of cable or satellite.
great way of looking at it.
i honestly could care less about everything you just said. All I care about is online gaming. and lol @ the reliability[QUOTE="dthach614"][QUOTE="opex07"]
XBL beats PSN in almost every thing the two services provide other than pricing.
Content:
XBL has a much larger library of Movies, TV shows, and other various things. XBL for the most part recieves Demo's earlier than PSN and has had almost all multiplat Beta's exclusive to its platform.
Arcade Games:
XBL has a much larger selection of Arcade games and currently has more quality arcades with the only services between the two that has recieved several AAAE arcade game. XBL also allows its users to create their own Indie games and get them placed on live.
Features:
XBL has more features over PSN including things like Cross-game invite, MSN messenger, Parties, Cross-game chat, etc... The only feature PSN currently has over XBL is home.
Community:
MS hosts events on XBL and gets the community involved, while PSN does very little, XBL also provides every user with a Mic to communicate unlike PSN.
Reliablility:
XBL games are usually released in a stable state, with Gears 2 being the exception (still playable online though), PSN games have seen problems due to developers not being as assisted with online tools with games like GTA4, Warhawk, Socom, LBP, etc.. being released unplayable online, or other problems.
etc...
VoodooHak
Hey, regular broadcast TV is perfectly fine. It has good programs. But some of us don't mind paying for the extra features of cable or satellite.
whats feats? cross invites chat room lol cause i really need to that to enjoy online gaming. so was XBL worth the money when it first came out.One of the best features on XBL is the ability with a couple button presses to avoid someone on ANY GAME you will EVER PLAY. Or to add someone as prefered so you are more likely to play with them. Also the fact that if you mute someone they are muted on every game. The party system is AWESOME also.
actually you still can get matched up with players you avoided. don't believe the hype.One of the best features on XBL is the ability with a couple button presses to avoid someone on ANY GAME you will EVER PLAY. Or to add someone as prefered so you are more likely to play with them. Also the fact that if you mute someone they are muted on every game. The party system is AWESOME also.
SpideR_CentS
whats feats? cross invites chat room lol cause i really need to that to enjoy online gaming. so was XBL worth the money when it first came out.[QUOTE="dthach614"][QUOTE="VoodooHak"]
Hey, regular broadcast TV is perfectly fine. It has good programs. But some of us don't mind paying for the extra features of cable or satellite.
VoodooHak
So your response is the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and "lalalalalalalalalala"-ing. Because obviously, you didn't read any of the responses made by multiple people listing those features for you.
So....posting........ this.... yet... again....
*Ahem* Those of us who find value in those features have no problems paying. If you don't share that opinion, you have the option not to participate in the service. Do one or the other....but whatever the case, DO something. Grinding your axe on an internet forum that doesn't belong to MS does not qualify as taking action. It qualifies as wasting everyone's time and Gamespot's server space.
well i have a theory. i think the main reason people choose to pay for xbl because its the only way to play some games. Xbox have some great exclusive and the only way to play them is on xbl. i don't believe people choose $50/year xbl over a free psn cause of a chatroom. lol i honestly don't believe people value those "feats" its all about the games.whats feats? cross invites chat room lol cause i really need to that to enjoy online gaming. so was XBL worth the money when it first came out.[QUOTE="dthach614"][QUOTE="VoodooHak"]
Hey, regular broadcast TV is perfectly fine. It has good programs. But some of us don't mind paying for the extra features of cable or satellite.
VoodooHak
So your response is the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and "lalalalalalalalalala"-ing. Because obviously, you didn't read any of the responses made by multiple people listing those features for you.
So....posting........ this.... yet... again....
*Ahem* Those of us who find value in those features have no problems paying. If you don't share that opinion, you have the option not to participate in the service. Do one or the other....but whatever the case, DO something. Grinding your axe on an internet forum that doesn't belong to MS does not qualify as taking action. It qualifies as wasting everyone's time and Gamespot's server space.
the point is that there's no other choice other than to buy a silly service to access the multiplayer features of his/her paid product. if you however love this service then that's fine as well. but at least you should try and understand the nature of the complaint instead of repeating a whole list of what live does. because it should be clear that gamers like us don't care! we buy games to play games. not to chat online. this is what I said before, but it clearly explains the point "1.when I pay 60$ 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! "XBL beats PSN in almost every thing the two services provide other than pricing.
Content:
XBL has a much larger library of Movies, TV shows, and other various things. XBL for the most part recieves Demo's earlier than PSN and has had almost all multiplat Beta's exclusive to its platform.
Arcade Games:
XBL has a much larger selection of Arcade games and currently has more quality arcades with the only services between the two that has recieved several AAAE arcade game. XBL also allows its users to create their own Indie games and get them placed on live.
Features:
XBL has more features over PSN including things like Cross-game invite, MSN messenger, Parties, Cross-game chat, etc... The only feature PSN currently has over XBL is home.
Community:
MS hosts events on XBL and gets the community involved, while PSN does very little, XBL also provides every user with a Mic to communicate unlike PSN.
Reliablility:
XBL games are usually released in a stable state, with Gears 2 being the exception (still playable online though), PSN games have seen problems due to developers not being as assisted with online tools with games like GTA4, Warhawk, Socom, LBP, etc.. being released unplayable online, or other problems.
etc...
opex07
i was hoping for replies in this post to be more in this form (reasons for y u believe psn or xbl is better). not i prefer psn or i prefer xbl.
its only my opinion alot may disagree.
gears 2 online really made me hate xbl. gears 2 is an AAA title microsoft SHOULD have fixed the online problems with the money xbl gold subcriber pay yearly.
xbl get payed around 400 mil $ yearly from gold members sony dont, yet AAA titles on sony play with lesser lag and faster connection than xbl AAA games.
[QUOTE="opex07"]
XBL beats PSN in almost every thing the two services provide other than pricing.
Content:
XBL has a much larger library of Movies, TV shows, and other various things. XBL for the most part recieves Demo's earlier than PSN and has had almost all multiplat Beta's exclusive to its platform.
Arcade Games:
XBL has a much larger selection of Arcade games and currently has more quality arcades with the only services between the two that has recieved several AAAE arcade game. XBL also allows its users to create their own Indie games and get them placed on live.
Features:
XBL has more features over PSN including things like Cross-game invite, MSN messenger, Parties, Cross-game chat, etc... The only feature PSN currently has over XBL is home.
Community:
MS hosts events on XBL and gets the community involved, while PSN does very little, XBL also provides every user with a Mic to communicate unlike PSN.
Reliablility:
XBL games are usually released in a stable state, with Gears 2 being the exception (still playable online though), PSN games have seen problems due to developers not being as assisted with online tools with games like GTA4, Warhawk, Socom, LBP, etc.. being released unplayable online, or other problems.
etc...
halo_wars86
i was hoping for replies in this post to be more in this form (reasons for y u believe psn or xbl is better). not i prefer psn or i prefer xbl.
lol. That post is by far one of the most misguided post in this thread.
not included with your gold subscription
Cross game chat and parties is one in the same. You do not need a gold subscription to access MSN messenger. So is cross invites and a chatroom worth $50/year?
Do people actually participate in those events? and all those events is nothing more than a sneaky ploy to promote a game for you to buy. Smarten up fellas. cause inorder for you to particpate, you're going to have to buy the game.
Please list those problem. We are not the developers, so why should we care. Let's talk about GoW2 netcoding, Let's talk about Halo 3 netcoding and how damage don't register, GTA4 online is trash on XBL too, Let's talk about Street fighter HF and that lag fest. LBP and socom play fine on PSN, so stop lying, I can't speak on Warhawk. Lets talk about Street Fighter IV quickmatch, why didn't the greatness of XBL fix that?
[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="halo_wars86"]PSN uses dedicated servers where as the 360 uses p2p hosting. Not every PS3 game uses Dedicated Servers. this is true, mainly sony produced games really doi did this threat because i just recently got a ps3. all the BS lag stories i was hearing about the psn where lies. xbox live lag so much more compared to the psn.
Synthetic_NinJI
lol. That post is by far one of the most misguided post in this thread.
not included with your gold subscription
Cross game chat and parties is one in the same. You do not need a gold subscription to access MSN messenger. So is cross invites and a chatroom worth $50/year?
Do people actually participate in those events? and all those events is nothing more than a sneaky ploy to promote a game for you to buy. Smarten up fellas. cause inorder for you to particpate, you're going to have to buy the game.
Please list those problem. We are not the developers, so why should we care. Let's talk about GoW2 netcoding, Let's talk about Halo 3 netcoding and how damage don't register, GTA4 online is trash on XBL too, Let's talk about Street fighter HF and that lag fest. LBP and socom play fine on PSN, so stop lying, I can't speak on Warhawk. Lets talk about Street Fighter IV quickmatch, why didn't the greatness of XBL fix that?
dthach614
All of those movies demo's betas etc.. are avaliable to all 360 users.
Cross game chat and parties are not the same thing, you can invite friends to a chat, or you can invite them to a party and bring them along with you in games, share photos, and other content. You also need a XBL account to access ur MSN messenger on your 360.
Yes people participate in the events the bungie Halo 3 event was a large success.
Both GTA4 (PS3), and Socom launched in a broken state where playing online was impossible to almost everyone. GTA4(PS3) Also caused problems to single player games if you were logged on. Warhawk was not recording stats correctly so ranking up was impossible. LBP had server problems aswell.
As for your street fighter problems I have not played HF but I have not heard any problems for it, and street fighter 4 has been playing fine for me.
its only my opinion alot may disagree.
gears 2 online really made me hate xbl. gears 2 is an AAA title microsoft SHOULD have fixed the online problems with the money xbl gold subcriber pay yearly.
xbl get payed around 400 mil $ yearly from gold members sony dont, yet AAA titles on sony play with lesser lag and faster connection than xbl AAA games.
halo_wars86
Each system will have certain games that will have problems, but focusing on those games just to make your argument stronger doesn't really help when that isn't the case for most games, we could focus on MGS4 the highest scoring game on the PS3 that doesn't even really use PSN, but its own system, which has its own problems, or focus on PSN as a whole.
[QUOTE="dthach614"]
lol. That post is by far one of the most misguided post in this thread.
not included with your gold subscription
Cross game chat and parties is one in the same. You do not need a gold subscription to access MSN messenger. So is cross invites and a chatroom worth $50/year?
Do people actually participate in those events? and all those events is nothing more than a sneaky ploy to promote a game for you to buy. Smarten up fellas. cause inorder for you to particpate, you're going to have to buy the game.
Please list those problem. We are not the developers, so why should we care. Let's talk about GoW2 netcoding, Let's talk about Halo 3 netcoding and how damage don't register, GTA4 online is trash on XBL too, Let's talk about Street fighter HF and that lag fest. LBP and socom play fine on PSN, so stop lying, I can't speak on Warhawk. Lets talk about Street Fighter IV quickmatch, why didn't the greatness of XBL fix that?
opex07
All of those movies demo's betas etc.. are avaliable to all 360 users.
Cross game chat and parties are not the same thing, you can invite friends to a chat, or you can invite them to a party and bring them along with you in games, share photos, and other content. You also need a XBL account to access ur MSN messenger on your 360.
Yes people participate in the events the bungie Halo 3 event was a large success.
Both GTA4 (PS3), and Socom launched in a broken state where playing online was impossible to almost everyone. GTA4(PS3) Also caused problems to single player games if you were logged on. Warhawk was not recording stats correctly so ranking up was impossible. LBP had server problems aswell.
As for your street fighter problems I have not played HF but I have not heard any problems for it, and street fighter 4 has been playing fine for me.
I know that. How's that a perk for gold subscribers when they still have to buy the arcade game?
I know the difference between party chat and private chat. When you're in party, you can chat with each other so it still have the same function of cross game chat. so what are you saying exactly? What other content? Speak on that please. to my knowledge, photos is the only thing you can share. What other content? Please don't exagerrated. I do have an XBL account and and had once since Rainbow Six 3 first came out for the original Xbox. There's no lies you can sneak pass me.
those events are for promotional reason for you to buy the game. wisen up
GTA4 is trash XBL too. Socom has been fix.
At a boy!Since I hate paying for over priced crap, ill vote for PSN.
clyde46
[QUOTE="dthach614"]
lol. That post is by far one of the most misguided post in this thread.
not included with your gold subscription
Cross game chat and parties is one in the same. You do not need a gold subscription to access MSN messenger. So is cross invites and a chatroom worth $50/year?
Do people actually participate in those events? and all those events is nothing more than a sneaky ploy to promote a game for you to buy. Smarten up fellas. cause inorder for you to particpate, you're going to have to buy the game.
Please list those problem. We are not the developers, so why should we care. Let's talk about GoW2 netcoding, Let's talk about Halo 3 netcoding and how damage don't register, GTA4 online is trash on XBL too, Let's talk about Street fighter HF and that lag fest. LBP and socom play fine on PSN, so stop lying, I can't speak on Warhawk. Lets talk about Street Fighter IV quickmatch, why didn't the greatness of XBL fix that?
opex07
All of those movies demo's betas etc.. are avaliable to all 360 users.
Cross game chat and parties are not the same thing, you can invite friends to a chat, or you can invite them to a party and bring them along with you in games, share photos, and other content. You also need a XBL account to access ur MSN messenger on your 360.
Yes people participate in the events the bungie Halo 3 event was a large success.
Both GTA4 (PS3), and Socom launched in a broken state where playing online was impossible to almost everyone. GTA4(PS3) Also caused problems to single player games if you were logged on. Warhawk was not recording stats correctly so ranking up was impossible. LBP had server problems aswell.
As for your street fighter problems I have not played HF but I have not heard any problems for it, and street fighter 4 has been playing fine for me.
LBP only had server issues because there were far more people were trying to connect online than Media Molecule expected.
I have both, I like both, but my first instinct is to say that it's close, but XBL is a bit better because 1. there are more DLable games, movies, TV shows, etc. than PSN, 2. there are slightly more features, and 3. more games on XBL support Acheivments than PSN games with trophy support.
But when you think about it, PSN, has it's share of advantages too. 1. Dedicated servers, which = less lag. 2. Cleaner interface in the PS store and XMB, at least IMO, and 3. it's free, so with XBL, you have to pay $50 a year for some more features.
So I really can't decide.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment