XBox Live Is Unrivaled

[QUOTE="Killer_Wuggles"]

...Huh? Don't Steam games like CS and TF2 use Steam's online?

Ninja-Hippo

You're asking me if Valve games use Valve's online setup? :|

Let's keep it to just Valve games. XBL all runs on one infastructure,look what happens.

Lag.

I haven't yet seen anyone mention the background stuff that Xbox Live offers, many of which you won't find on any other online gaming service, console or PC.

• TrueSkill
• Stats with Attachments
• Leaderboards
• Party system
• Spectator Mode
• Tournament support
• Intelligent background downloading
• Video Store with HD
• Simplified matchmaking (quick match, optimatch, ranked or unranked)
• Achievements with web-based reporting
• Global muting, blocking, reputation, gamerzone
• Super easy for developers to implement, meaning more games supporting it (VF5, anyone?)

[QUOTE="BobHipJames"][QUOTE="awsss"]

You're 100% right.

...for now.

GazzaB

Steam>>>>>>>>>>>>>Live.

"there is no other console that offers what Live does"

Learn to read:)

Also, I agree. From someone who has both consoles, Sony has a long way to go before PSN is as feature packed and easy to use as XBL. They also need to sort out whatever issues they have with Europe, because the content on the European PSN store is a grade A joke.

That's right about european psn content, but then you can have an US and japanese account too. I have all 3, so i get access to everything and it's easy to switch from 1 account to another. But still, there is no excuse really for having so much less content on the european psn.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="Killer_Wuggles"]

...Huh? Don't Steam games like CS and TF2 use Steam's online?

stephant_6

You're asking me if Valve games use Valve's online setup? :|

Let's keep it to just Valve games. XBL all runs on one infastructure,look what happens.

Lag.

There is occassional lag, yes, Much like any online game. Please dont act like it's anywhere near enough lag to cause anyone distress or annoyance. 9/10 times i play Halo 3 or COD4 just great.

I much prefer the online on my pc. In fact, if it wasn't for the xmb not integrated in game (yet) id prefer psn too.Tykain

I hate to point the fanboy finger, but i find it fairly impossible to prefer PSN to xbox live. The only thing which could produce that outcome is if you really dislike paying for xbox live, which is fair enough. To say PSN is in any way better than Live however, is just plain false. There's a reason it's free.

Say what you want about Xbox Live - I've seen nothing to justify paying to play online. Yes, the features are more fleshed out than, say, PSN. However, PSN allows me to play online with my friends and to meet new gamers. The network services are developing, but for now I'm getting something you can't get on Xbox without paying MS - online play. That, to me, defeats the "Xbox Live is better" argument.

That's all my opinion, obviously. Kvetch all you want.

I hate to point the fanboy finger, but i find it fairly impossible to prefer PSN to xbox live.

That's a cute statement. Something about pointing... fingers pointing back at self... aw, you get it.

There is no equal to Live.

Personally, I do not like the idea of paying $50 for multiplayer access. However, you have to give credit where is it due; there is no other console that offers what Live does.

Nintendo's online is a joke. And Sony's is MIA. Yeah, I get it, Home will "pwn" and it will be for free - ok, sure.

None the less, a lot of you said Live will get "destroyed" since a competitor will come out with something like Live and it will be for free. No such thing has happened. And there is no set schedule or news about anything of that nature.

Demetri_OS

if the PSN was out the same amount of time XBL was (which would of course mean ps3 would have been released the same day as 360) you would create a topic saying the PSNis unmatched

[QUOTE="Demetri_OS"]

There is no equal to Live.

Personally, I do not like the idea of paying $50 for multiplayer access. However, you have to give credit where is it due; there is no other console that offers what Live does.

Nintendo's online is a joke. And Sony's is MIA. Yeah, I get it, Home will "pwn" and it will be for free - ok, sure.

None the less, a lot of you said Live will get "destroyed" since a competitor will come out with something like Live and it will be for free. No such thing has happened. And there is no set schedule or news about anything of that nature.

sambalimbo

if the PSN was out the same amount of time XBL was (which would of course mean ps3 would have been released the same day as 360) you would create a topic saying the PSNis unmatched

XBox Live was around before the PS3 and 360. We had match ups and what not since the XBox 1 days.

Sony ignored creating an online structure back then. And now, they can't even get Home up and running. Am I to use THAT track record as something to expect from Home? Because if that is the case, you still get nothing.

[QUOTE="sambalimbo"][QUOTE="Demetri_OS"]

There is no equal to Live.

Personally, I do not like the idea of paying $50 for multiplayer access. However, you have to give credit where is it due; there is no other console that offers what Live does.

Nintendo's online is a joke. And Sony's is MIA. Yeah, I get it, Home will "pwn" and it will be for free - ok, sure.

None the less, a lot of you said Live will get "destroyed" since a competitor will come out with something like Live and it will be for free. No such thing has happened. And there is no set schedule or news about anything of that nature.

Demetri_OS

if the PSN was out the same amount of time XBL was (which would of course mean ps3 would have been released the same day as 360) you would create a topic saying the PSNis unmatched

XBox Live was around before the PS3 and 360. We had match ups and what not since the XBox 1 days.

Sony ignored creating an online structure back then. And now, they can't even get Home up and running. Am I to use THAT track record as something to expect from Home? Because if that is the case, you still get nothing.

Xbox Live on the first Xbox is nothing like it is on the 360. Sony had years of doing nothing with online gaming to get something better together. Now PS3 owners are in a waiting game for features they thought they were going to get over a year ago.

[QUOTE="Tykain"]I much prefer the online on my pc. In fact, if it wasn't for the xmb not integrated in game (yet) id prefer psn too.Ninja-Hippo

I hate to point the fanboy finger, but i find it fairly impossible to prefer PSN to xbox live. The only thing which could produce that outcome is if you really dislike paying for xbox live, which is fair enough. To say PSN is in any way better than Live however, is just plain false. There's a reason it's free.

[QUOTE="Demetri_OS"][QUOTE="sambalimbo"][QUOTE="Demetri_OS"]

There is no equal to Live.

Personally, I do not like the idea of paying $50 for multiplayer access. However, you have to give credit where is it due; there is no other console that offers what Live does.

Nintendo's online is a joke. And Sony's is MIA. Yeah, I get it, Home will "pwn" and it will be for free - ok, sure.

None the less, a lot of you said Live will get "destroyed" since a competitor will come out with something like Live and it will be for free. No such thing has happened. And there is no set schedule or news about anything of that nature.

Deihmos

if the PSN was out the same amount of time XBL was (which would of course mean ps3 would have been released the same day as 360) you would create a topic saying the PSNis unmatched

XBox Live was around before the PS3 and 360. We had match ups and what not since the XBox 1 days.

Sony ignored creating an online structure back then. And now, they can't even get Home up and running. Am I to use THAT track record as something to expect from Home? Because if that is the case, you still get nothing.

Xbox Live on the first Xbox is nothing like it is on the 360. Sony had years of doing nothing with online gaming to get something better together. Now PS3 owners are in a waiting game for features they thought they were going to get over a year ago.

The basic back bone and structure for multiplayer games was established on the XBox 1. Everything else, is none game related (TV show downloads, music, HD content, etc.) Sony, now has to match the multiplayer functionality, the additional non gamer content, messaging/gaming community unity (Home I guess) AND do it all for FREE - in order to "surpass" Live, as the fanboys hope.

Yes, it is the best console online service right now. MoldOnHold

fixed it :wink:

lets not give hermits a reason to start a flamewar

There's little dispute to that, though the achievements are a waste, the only helpful ones are those that hint at actually unlocking something in the game. And MS points . . . . .

eh, anyway, there's little dispute for most of what it offers.

steam blows. xbox live is filled with whiny 12 year olds but is easily the best online service.

There's little dispute to that, though the achievements are a waste, the only helpful ones are those that hint at actually unlocking something in the game. And MS points . . . . .

eh, anyway, there's little dispute for most of what it offers.

DementedDragon

I take it MS points are a bad thing, which would mean Wii Points are bad as well - right?

[QUOTE="DementedDragon"]

There's little dispute to that, though the achievements are a waste, the only helpful ones are those that hint at actually unlocking something in the game. And MS points . . . . .

eh, anyway, there's little dispute for most of what it offers.

Demetri_OS

I take it MS points are a bad thing, which would mean Wii Points are bad as well - right?

[QUOTE="Demetri_OS"][QUOTE="DementedDragon"]

There's little dispute to that, though the achievements are a waste, the only helpful ones are those that hint at actually unlocking something in the game. And MS points . . . . .

eh, anyway, there's little dispute for most of what it offers.

yoshi_64

I take it MS points are a bad thing, which would mean Wii Points are bad as well - right?

Just looking for consistency - you can't slam MS points and leave Wii points untouched. That would make someone supporting such a thing pretty bias.

If you honestly have to whine over the price of live then you are waaaaaay to devoted to playing games, its 50 bucks a year! thats it!MunkeySpunk69

Paying for peer-to-peer online isn't a positive thing in my books. If it were dedicated servers then I might think otherwise... but even on PC you get dedicated servers for free.foxhound_fox

Dedicated servers are not as good as most people think. Plus, security issues are most likely to happen on dedicated servers.

Just looking for consistency - you can't slam MS points and leave Wii points untouched. That would make someone supporting such a thing pretty bias. Demetri_OS

I can if I don't own a Wii! :P

Dedicated servers are not as good as most people think. Plus, security issues are most likely to happen on dedicated servers.xsubtownerx

"extra crap" lol

LIVE is so much better then PSN don't be crazy. That's like saying what if I want a more exspensive console with far fewer games and 0 tripple A's. Well the answer to both questions is buy PS3!

[QUOTE="Demetri_OS"]

There is no equal to Live.

Personally, I do not like the idea of paying $50 for multiplayer access. However, you have to give credit where is it due; there is no other console that offers what Live does.blitzcloud

I agree!

No other console has the balls to monopolize the online gaming with so many heavy restrictions, peer to peer online, and make you pay a fee.

Microsoft is unrivaled on business tactics and brainwashing.