Will you still pay when LIVE features are on the PS3

the 2.4 update is coming in summer, as said on a 1up podcast, and is due to have all the functionalities of LIVE like cross-game messaging etc.

and it's free! and there's home! and i can go on the internet on my PS3!

will lemmings still pay when the PS3 owners can get it for free?

you get what you pay for, period....creekfan_basic

and that goes for all everything else.

If the PS3's online cababilities work just as fine as the 360's then it would definitely be an equal to XBL. Only difference is the games (RFOM, Warhawk vs Halo 3, Gears of War) and amount of friends.

As for the question, I'm already on my silver membership and thinking of getting another 12 months of XBL but with the recent news, I could just stick with silver membership (first need to fix connection) and save money. But I hate to leave my friends. I know it's online but they're a bunch of great guys to talk to and great sports. Most don't have a PS3 and only a few are thinking of one. So, no, I wouldn't stop paying for XBL but I won't spend $50 every year.

Leave it to Sony to add features months after everyone.

I still can't believe how the cows haven't woke up and realized that Sony is the least innovative, and just rely other companies to come up with innovations, and then copy them.

Oh well. You're welcome, cows.

[QUOTE="creekfan_basic"]you get what you pay for, period....Rhen_Var

and that goes for all everything else.

except the 360 hardware :)

What do achievements have to do with XBL?

Anyway XBL has been up for over 5 years now and they have solved problems that PSN has not even encountered yet. I have both and can tell you right now that I would happily pay $$$ to get PSN up to XBL's level.

No voice chat support in UT3, FEAR and other games on PSN? Wth is up with stuff like that?

I'll still pay for Live regardless since its the only way I can play with others who have Live, and you can still keep/have achievements without paying for the service.

I'll also enjoy PSN and it's updates.

Leave it to Sony to add features months after everyone.

I still can't believe how the cows haven't woke up and realized that Sony is the least innovative, and just rely other companies to come up with innovations, and then copy them.

Oh well. You're welcome, cows.

MortalDecay

Last to add features? How's Wii online doing?

Least innovative? I thought blu-ray has done very well. The cell, no, no innovation there. Get real.

let's see. early 360 owners paid $400 for the console. say the xbox 360 will last 5-6 years by 2011 early xbox 360 owners would have spent $300 on xbox live half or enough money to buy the next console. microsoft thought this through. They sold the cheapest console not by much but in reality they are empting your pockets with their xbox live fees. Now let's not forget all the broken consoles and how much money people spent to replace or fix. This console doesn't even have wi-fi and has extremely high priced hard drives which they value at about $1.50 per GIG on the PS3 you can get 120GB hard drive for $50 yeah that's like $0.40 per GIG. Okay so the hard drive is expensive... how about limiting users on how they can use their space, to only market place content. Microsoft is a joke. Trust me I use to have an xbox 360 elite but I've open my eyes. Sure the ps3 is too expensive and people without alot of money usualy go for the cheapest thing out there... but is it really?

oh let's not forget the lack of hdmi the xbox 360 pro until july 2007 and even those were hard to find until the others without hdmi were sold.

the 2.4 update is coming in summer, as said on a 1up podcast, and is due to have all the functionalities of LIVE like cross-game messaging etc.

and it's free! and there's home! and i can go on the internet on my PS3!

will lemmings still pay when the PS3 owners can get it for free?

amcallisterni

Dont know why but that made me lol.

It's kind of funny, but i don't believe that MS should have Live for a price it's kind of BS, and not even that much open space for devs to work with, whereas people are nwo coming and saying "ZOMG the PSN has great reliability and so much different options to work with" and all on top it's free.

Not that i'm bashing live but it is kind of stupid you must agree.

It's kind of funny, but i don't believe that MS should have Live for a price it's kind of BS, and not even that much open space for devs to work with, whereas people are nwo coming and saying "ZOMG the PSN has great reliability and so much different options to work with" and all on top it's free.

Not that i'm bashing live but it is kind of stupid you must agree.

Solid_Max13

it definately is stupid, but i still pay for live because they have games that i want to play online, theyve at the very least made it somewhat easy to pay for live

honestly even with the updates im not sure PSN will ever be as good, if it ever does get as good though we need to ask microsoft some serious questions about where our money is going thegoldenpoo

i can answer that question for you right now, the money is going into making up for all of those loses on the original xbox :)

[QUOTE="thegoldenpoo"] honestly even with the updates im not sure PSN will ever be as good, if it ever does get as good though we need to ask microsoft some serious questions about where our money is going linkin_guy109

i can answer that question for you right now, the money is going into making up for all of those loses on the original xbox :)

Leave it to Sony to add features months after everyone.

I still can't believe how the cows haven't woke up and realized that Sony is the least innovative, and just rely other companies to come up with innovations, and then copy them.

Oh well. You're welcome, cows.

MortalDecay

it's a measley 5 dollars a month...why would you get up and leave the system? if someone wanted both that's fine but to leave 360 to avoid the $60 live membership? who in their right mind would?not to mention if you don't have ps3 you would have to buy one.

Leave it to Sony to add features months after everyone.

I still can't believe how the cows haven't woke up and realized that Sony is the least innovative, and just rely other companies to come up with innovations, and then copy them.

Oh well. You're welcome, cows.

MortalDecay

So XBL is still better when PSN has the same features and is also free? Right, gotcha. MS is just milking XBL users, that's bad, but XBL users also being in denial is worse.

an owner of all 3 I can honestly say i will always pay for xbl and have no problem with it.

it is thee superior service, with headsets being a cakewalk to get, pc intergration. I bought the ps3 for bluray movies and maybe 4-5 games max. I have played one ps3 excluvie with onlien I can stand. Im sure Im just picky buy motorstorm was it. Resistance, spawning ONTO grenades, right INFRONT of enemy fighters....just didnt do it for me.

[QUOTE="MortalDecay"]

Leave it to Sony to add features months after everyone.

I still can't believe how the cows haven't woke up and realized that Sony is the least innovative, and just rely other companies to come up with innovations, and then copy them.

Oh well. You're welcome, cows.

Supafly1

So XBL is still better when PSN has the same features and is also free? Right, gotcha. MS is just milking XBL users, that's bad, but XBL users also being in denial is worse.