PSn because it does everything live does except party chat for free. i dont really care about party chat because i like to talk in game especially during multiplayer. and when i am playing single player i dont want to bothered.
Yes you do, you pay your ISP for the online service and then you pay Microsoft for letting you use that service.
My ISP just gives me an Internet connection. It doesn't mean I automatically get everything on the Internet for free :| No but you get your connection which is what you're paying for. Microsoft is not charging for "everything on the internet" but or the basic connection which is exactly what you're paying to your ISP
[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] You don't need warm water to survive either just water, and the analogy works, paying to play online $60 a year is a rip off and paying $300 for a glass of warm water is a rip off.kuraimen
no, it really doesn't. again, you must have some experience with xbl to hate it so much, right? I don't see any refuttal, just you saying no and changing the subject. how have i changed the subject? so let's put it this way. water is openly available to most out of a tap. let's say you want flavored water. you have to pay for it at a store. if its differing quality of service, then perhaps some would see the value of paying for it. again, i'll ask and receive no answer, you've used xbl a lot to form such a hateful stance toward the service, correct?
[QUOTE="kuraimen"]That you are paying for the same service twice is not opinion it is a fact.waltefmoney
Xbox Live and the Internet connection are two different services dude. Just because one requires the other doesn't mean you're paying for the same thing.
No Xbox Live includes the access to the connection service which means it is part of it. For them to be different Live would have to charge you for the services it provides like Cross Game Chat, etc but not for online connectivity.
Yes you do, you pay your ISP for the online service and then you pay Microsoft for letting you use that service.
kuraimen
My ISP just gives me an Internet connection. It doesn't mean I automatically get everything on the Internet for free :| No but you get your connection which is what you're paying for. Microsoft is not charging for "everything on the internet" but or the basic connection which is exactly what you're paying to your ISP
and services that PSN does not provide. if you had ever, you know, actually used xbl you'd be aware of this. whether or not you feel those services are worth the money is subjective, but your argument doesn't hold water.
Uh... wut Lol, your sig clearly proves it :P No his sig shows hes a smart man.... Regardless, XBL is worth it too some and not too others... I prefer salvage denim jeans because there amazing quality (plus they look sweet)... I pay for the quality service and I dont understand why alot of people on here almost demand I explain why im paying for $40 a yr for a service I use everyday...
No Xbox Live includes the access to the connection service which means it is part of it. For them to be different Live would have to charge you for the services it provides like Cross Game Chat, etc but not for online connectivity.kuraimen
It's not charging you for online connectivity, it's charging you for access to certain features of the games. You're free to connect your xbox to the internet with no fees or anything.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="clone01"] no, it really doesn't. again, you must have some experience with xbl to hate it so much, right?clone01
I don't see any refuttal, just you saying no and changing the subject. how have i changed the subject? so let's put it this way. water is openly available to most out of a tap. let's say you want flavored water. you have to pay for it at a store. if its differing quality of service, then perhaps some would see the value of paying for it. again, i'll ask and receive no answer, you've used xbl a lot to form such a hateful stance toward the service, correct? You pay your ISP for connectivity and you pay game developers for the online portion of the game. To use both those things you already payed for you have to pay Microsoft again. That's paying twice. The new analogy you used is like paying the company who brings water to your home for that service and then Microsoft stepping in front of the tap charging you to let you use it. When you pay for it Microsoft pours a little sugar in it and gives it to you. You should be able to use the tap of water without sugar if you want since you're already paying the water company for it.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="locopatho"] My ISP just gives me an Internet connection. It doesn't mean I automatically get everything on the Internet for free :|clone01
No but you get your connection which is what you're paying for. Microsoft is not charging for "everything on the internet" but or the basic connection which is exactly what you're paying to your ISP
and services that PSN does not provide. if you had ever, you know, actually used xbl you'd be aware of this. whether or not you feel those services are worth the money is subjective, but your argument doesn't hold water.
Wether I feel those extra services are worth it is indeed subjective and I choose if I pay them or not like I choose not to pay for PSN+. But PSN provides and lets me use the service I already pay for which is the internet connectivity and online portions of the games which is not worth paying twice for and it is simply a rip off.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"]No Xbox Live includes the access to the connection service which means it is part of it. For them to be different Live would have to charge you for the services it provides like Cross Game Chat, etc but not for online connectivity.waltefmoney
It's not charging you for online connectivity, it's charging you for access to certain features of the games. You're free to connect your xbox to the internet with no fees or anything.
Those features of the game you are already paying for and the online connectivity you're already paying for.
Yes you do, you pay your ISP for the online service and then you pay Microsoft for letting you use that service.
kuraimen
My ISP just gives me an Internet connection. It doesn't mean I automatically get everything on the Internet for free :| No but you get your connection which is what you're paying for. Microsoft is not charging for "everything on the internet" but or the basic connection which is exactly what you're paying to your ISP They are charging me for the service they provide over the Internet, which is playing online on their console. Not seeing the value of it is fine, hysterically claiming it should be free is silly. I'd like it to be free, but then would it be the same quality? Probably not, if PSN and Wii online are anything to go by.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="locopatho"] My ISP just gives me an Internet connection. It doesn't mean I automatically get everything on the Internet for free :|locopatho
No but you get your connection which is what you're paying for. Microsoft is not charging for "everything on the internet" but or the basic connection which is exactly what you're paying to your ISP They are charging me for the service they provide over the Internet, which is playing online on their console. Not seeing the value of it is fine, hysterically claiming it should be free is silly. I'd like it to be free, but then would it be the same quality? Probably not, if PSN and Wii online are anything to go by. I feel that so much talk about quality is simply a excuse people use to convince themselves they are not being ripped off by paying for a service twice since the connection quality of PSN is pretty much on par with XBL. Would you pay Machintosh, Dell, HewlettPackard, Asus, Toshiba, etc everytime you would like to connect any of their devices to the internet? What if each of them charged $60 a year?
[QUOTE="kuraimen"] No but you get your connection which is what you're paying for. Microsoft is not charging for "everything on the internet" but or the basic connection which is exactly what you're paying to your ISPkuraimen
They are charging me for the service they provide over the Internet, which is playing online on their console. Not seeing the value of it is fine, hysterically claiming it should be free is silly. I'd like it to be free, but then would it be the same quality? Probably not, if PSN and Wii online are anything to go by. I feel that so much talk about quality is simply a excuse people use to convince themselves they are not being ripped off by paying for a service twice since the connection quality of PSN is pretty much on par with XBL. Would you pay Machintosh, Dell, HewlettPackard, Asus, Toshiba, etc everytime you would like to connect any of their devices to the internet? What if each of them charged $60 a year? Your logic is soo flawed its baffling me...
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="locopatho"] They are charging me for the service they provide over the Internet, which is playing online on their console. Not seeing the value of it is fine, hysterically claiming it should be free is silly. I'd like it to be free, but then would it be the same quality? Probably not, if PSN and Wii online are anything to go by.
vistamanV5
I feel that so much talk about quality is simply a excuse people use to convince themselves they are not being ripped off by paying for a service twice since the connection quality of PSN is pretty much on par with XBL. Would you pay Machintosh, Dell, HewlettPackard, Asus, Toshiba, etc everytime you would like to connect any of their devices to the internet? What if each of them charged $60 a year? Your logic is soo flawed its baffling me...
It is too easy to say someone's logic is flawed without providing any argument whatsoever... in fact that's a sign that you probably don't understand or have an argument yourself.
[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] I don't see any refuttal, just you saying no and changing the subject.kuraimen
how have i changed the subject? so let's put it this way. water is openly available to most out of a tap. let's say you want flavored water. you have to pay for it at a store. if its differing quality of service, then perhaps some would see the value of paying for it. again, i'll ask and receive no answer, you've used xbl a lot to form such a hateful stance toward the service, correct? You pay your ISP for connectivity and you pay game developers for the online portion of the game. To use both those things you already payed for you have to pay Microsoft again. That's paying twice. The new analogy you used is like paying the company who brings water to your home for that service and then Microsoft stepping in front of the tap charging you to let you use it. When you pay for it Microsoft pours a little sugar in it and gives it to you. You should be able to use the tap of water without sugar if you want since you're already paying the water company for it. and they are differing qualities of service.
[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] No but you get your connection which is what you're paying for. Microsoft is not charging for "everything on the internet" but or the basic connection which is exactly what you're paying to your ISPkuraimen
and services that PSN does not provide. if you had ever, you know, actually used xbl you'd be aware of this. whether or not you feel those services are worth the money is subjective, but your argument doesn't hold water.
Wether I feel those extra services are worth it is indeed subjective and I choose if I pay them or not like I choose not to pay for PSN+. But PSN provides and lets me use the service I already pay for which is the internet connectivity and online portions of the games which is not worth paying twice for and it is simply a rip off.
and some feel that the services are worth the price. for you to say its a rip off is subjective. and i certainly question your credibility in the matter, as you have no previous experience with xbl.
[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="clone01"] how have i changed the subject? so let's put it this way. water is openly available to most out of a tap. let's say you want flavored water. you have to pay for it at a store. if its differing quality of service, then perhaps some would see the value of paying for it. again, i'll ask and receive no answer, you've used xbl a lot to form such a hateful stance toward the service, correct? You pay your ISP for connectivity and you pay game developers for the online portion of the game. To use both those things you already payed for you have to pay Microsoft again. That's paying twice. The new analogy you used is like paying the company who brings water to your home for that service and then Microsoft stepping in front of the tap charging you to let you use it. When you pay for it Microsoft pours a little sugar in it and gives it to you. You should be able to use the tap of water without sugar if you want since you're already paying the water company for it. and they are differing qualities of service. The online connection is the same service and the online portion of the game is the same product.
yeah agreed with that. It's just not right when all other platforms are free to play same games online, you have to pay a fee to unlock feature when you play it on 360.
It is too easy to say someone's logic is flawed without providing any argument whatsoever... in fact that's a sign that you probably don't understand or have an argument yourself.
kuraimen
you are paying for the overall service, not just internet connectivity. your logic is flawed.
[QUOTE="locopatho"]Live is better, PSN is free. Choose your poison :PvistamanV5
Spot on... If you think PSN is a better service then your lying to yourself... But PSN is free and thats awesome... But wish I had PSN Plus for that DC universe beta.. :(i dont know whether it was the time i searched for a game (3am) but i could not find ONE game for L4d2... im assuming it searches for local games only? in which case fair enough.
and services that PSN does not provide. if you had ever, you know, actually used xbl you'd be aware of this. whether or not you feel those services are worth the money is subjective, but your argument doesn't hold water.
clone01
Wether I feel those extra services are worth it is indeed subjective and I choose if I pay them or not like I choose not to pay for PSN+. But PSN provides and lets me use the service I already pay for which is the internet connectivity and online portions of the games which is not worth paying twice for and it is simply a rip off.
and some feel that the services are worth the price. for you to say its a rip off is subjective. and i certainly question your credibility in the matter, as you have no previous experience with xbl.
Paying for a service twice is a rip off anywhere in the world.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"] The online connection is the same service and the online portion of the game is the same product. not the additional services, though. are there, or are there not services on xbl that are not available on psn?
[QUOTE="kuraimen"]It is too easy to say someone's logic is flawed without providing any argument whatsoever... in fact that's a sign that you probably don't understand or have an argument yourself.
clone01
you are paying for the overall service, not just internet connectivity. your logic is flawed.
That the service includes online connectivity is what makes it a rip off in the first place.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"] No but you get your connection which is what you're paying for. Microsoft is not charging for "everything on the internet" but or the basic connection which is exactly what you're paying to your ISPkuraimen
They are charging me for the service they provide over the Internet, which is playing online on their console. Not seeing the value of it is fine, hysterically claiming it should be free is silly. I'd like it to be free, but then would it be the same quality? Probably not, if PSN and Wii online are anything to go by. I feel that so much talk about quality is simply a excuse people use to convince themselves they are not being ripped off by paying for a service twice since the connection quality of PSN is pretty much on par with XBL. Would you pay Machintosh, Dell, HewlettPackard, Asus, Toshiba, etc everytime you would like to connect any of their devices to the internet? What if each of them charged $60 a year? Its not an excuse. 360 games take roughly 10 seconds to update, PS3 games take 10 - 15 minutes. Every 360 console came with a mic, so everyones talking. PSN is eerily silent. Achievements are standard on 360, trophies are not on PS3. I had to accept different Terms Of Use thingies for multiple PS3 games(believe it was Motorstorm and Killzone 2 ), none of that silliness on 360. The PSN shop is awful, it had two copies of every bit of DLC for GOW3. It is badly organised, with demos, full games, and arcade games all mixed up together. There was content that didn't mention the game it was for, just "Extra character pack: Enjoy these characters in Arcade mode!" or something similar, no clue what game it was for, I was laughing my head off. 360 makes it super easy to transfer gamer tags about and let everyone play on their own account regardless of console, doesn't seem to be anything simiar on PSN. When I downloaded an arcade game on my PS3, I had to hit download, which added it to que. Turns out I had to go into the que and hit "download" again to make it start. Just overall weird and badly organised and definately feels like a cheap experience. I don't see how anyone who has experienced both could think PSN is better. This isn't "fanboyism", just my honest experience with both. Your example is poor, btw, thats hardware not software, 360 is a big ol ball of both.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"] Paying for a service twice is a rip off anywhere in the world. not if its a service that's not available on a similar business model. again, why do you feel the need to state opinion as fact, and determine what is best for everyone.
yeah agreed with that. It's just not right when all other platforms are free to play same games online, you have to pay a fee to unlock feature when you play it on 360.
Don't get me wrong, I would prefer it to be free, but the whole not right argument is stupid. If that had any validity, then MS would be breaking the law. But they are not, and if it continues to be a profitable venture for them then, next gen Sony will do the same, I bet. It's too much money lost.
[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] The online connection is the same service and the online portion of the game is the same product. not the additional services, though. are there, or are there not services on xbl that are not available on psn? Yes there are and PSN and PSN+ has services not available on XBL. Still the point is not about those extra services or their worth, I already said the worth of those services is subjective. But online connectivity is not, it is a rip off.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"]It is too easy to say someone's logic is flawed without providing any argument whatsoever... in fact that's a sign that you probably don't understand or have an argument yourself.
kuraimen
you are paying for the overall service, not just internet connectivity. your logic is flawed.
That the service includes online connectivity is what makes it a rip off in the first place. and it includes other things that psn lacks, making that claim subjective. i don't know why you're still arguing this. you have zero experience with xbl, have not used the service, and have been repeatedly proven wrong, yet continue to make claims based on subjectivity and opinion. bottom line is this: xbl has features not available on psn: true is xbl worth the money for said features: completely dependent on the consumer
[QUOTE="kuraimen"] Yes there are and PSN and PSN+ has services not available on XBL. Still the point is not about those extra services or their worth, I already said the worth of those services is subjective. But online connectivity is not, it is a rip off. what does psn offer that xbl does not. and psn+ is a paid service. nice logic. once again, the additional services that xbl provides justify the cost to many. and i'll ask again and not be answered: what experience do you have with xbl?
[QUOTE="kuraimen"] I feel that so much talk about quality is simply a excuse people use to convince themselves they are not being ripped off by paying for a service twice since the connection quality of PSN is pretty much on par with XBL. Would you pay Machintosh, Dell, HewlettPackard, Asus, Toshiba, etc everytime you would like to connect any of their devices to the internet? What if each of them charged $60 a year? you "feel." that would be an opinion, correct? your opinion does not equal other's opinions.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="locopatho"] They are charging me for the service they provide over the Internet, which is playing online on their console. Not seeing the value of it is fine, hysterically claiming it should be free is silly. I'd like it to be free, but then would it be the same quality? Probably not, if PSN and Wii online are anything to go by.
locopatho
I feel that so much talk about quality is simply a excuse people use to convince themselves they are not being ripped off by paying for a service twice since the connection quality of PSN is pretty much on par with XBL. Would you pay Machintosh, Dell, HewlettPackard, Asus, Toshiba, etc everytime you would like to connect any of their devices to the internet? What if each of them charged $60 a year? Its not an excuse. 360 games take roughly 10 seconds to update, PS3 games take 10 - 15 minutes. Every 360 console came with a mic, so everyones talking. PSN is eerily silent. Achievements are standard on 360, trophies are not on PS3. I had to accept different Terms Of Use thingies for multiple PS3 games(believe it was Motorstorm and Killzone 2 ), none of that silliness on 360. The PSN shop is awful, it had two copies of every bit of DLC for GOW3. It is badly organised, with demos, full games, and arcade games all mixed up together. There was content that didn't mention the game it was for, just "Extra character pack: Enjoy these characters in Arcade mode!" or something similar, no clue what game it was for, I was laughing my head off. 360 makes it super easy to transfer gamer tags about and let everyone play on their own account regardless of console, doesn't seem to be anything simiar on PSN. When I downloaded an arcade game on my PS3, I had to hit download, which added it to que. Turns out I had to go into the que and hit "download" again to make it start. Just overall weird and badly organised and definately feels like a cheap experience. I don't see how anyone who has experienced both could think PSN is better. This isn't "fanboyism", just my honest experience with both. Your example is poor, btw, thats hardware not software, 360 is a big ol ball of both.
The experience on the organization of each service is subjective, many people could experience similar annoyances on XBL. I'm talking online play which is the main most important service and the one you pay for to your ISP and game developers which is pretty much even between both services. If you want to talk about added value then what about PSN having more games with dedicated servers than XBL?
[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] Paying for a service twice is a rip off anywhere in the world. not if its a service that's not available on a similar business model. again, why do you feel the need to state opinion as fact, and determine what is best for everyone. It is a service that is available elsewhere for free, like online connectivity. That's not opinion that's fact.
The experience on the organization of each service is subjective, many people could experience similar annoyances on XBL. I'm talking online play which is the main most important service and the one you pay for to your ISP and game developers which is pretty much even between both services. If you want to talk about added value then what about PSN having more games with dedicated servers than XBL?
you are paying for the overall service, not just internet connectivity. your logic is flawed.
clone01
That the service includes online connectivity is what makes it a rip off in the first place. and it includes other things that psn lacks, making that claim subjective. i don't know why you're still arguing this. you have zero experience with xbl, have not used the service, and have been repeatedly proven wrong, yet continue to make claims based on subjectivity and opinion. bottom line is this: xbl has features not available on psn: true is xbl worth the money for said features: completely dependent on the consumer
Where have I been proven wrong? stop trying to convince yourself about that, it makes your argument weaker.
[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] Yes there are and PSN and PSN+ has services not available on XBL. Still the point is not about those extra services or their worth, I already said the worth of those services is subjective. But online connectivity is not, it is a rip off. what does psn offer that xbl does not. and psn+ is a paid service. nice logic. once again, the additional services that xbl provides justify the cost to many. and i'll ask again and not be answered: what experience do you have with xbl? Browser Playstation Home Playstation Life Game share probably others
[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] I feel that so much talk about quality is simply a excuse people use to convince themselves they are not being ripped off by paying for a service twice since the connection quality of PSN is pretty much on par with XBL. Would you pay Machintosh, Dell, HewlettPackard, Asus, Toshiba, etc everytime you would like to connect any of their devices to the internet? What if each of them charged $60 a year? you "feel." that would be an opinion, correct? your opinion does not equal other's opinions. Well yeah it is my opinion that people are making excuses they could be misinformed though or some other thing.
[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] Yes there are and PSN and PSN+ has services not available on XBL. Still the point is not about those extra services or their worth, I already said the worth of those services is subjective. But online connectivity is not, it is a rip off.kuraimen
what does psn offer that xbl does not. and psn+ is a paid service. nice logic. once again, the additional services that xbl provides justify the cost to many. and i'll ask again and not be answered: what experience do you have with xbl? Browser Playstation Home Playstation Life Game share probably others
Isn't game sharing getting removed? And Xbox Live has a browser.
The experience on the organization of each service is subjective, many people could experience similar annoyances on XBL. I'm talking online play which is the main most important service and the one you pay for to your ISP and game developers which is pretty much even between both services. If you want to talk about added value then what about PSN having more games with dedicated servers than XBL?
waltefmoney
Source?
MAG, KZ2, WARHAWK, I think Resistance and R2 have them as well. Several PS3 exclusives have dedicated servers. I haven't heard of a 360 exclusive game with dedicated servers yet though.
[QUOTE="locopatho"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] I feel that so much talk about quality is simply a excuse people use to convince themselves they are not being ripped off by paying for a service twice since the connection quality of PSN is pretty much on par with XBL. Would you pay Machintosh, Dell, HewlettPackard, Asus, Toshiba, etc everytime you would like to connect any of their devices to the internet? What if each of them charged $60 a year?kuraimen
Its not an excuse. 360 games take roughly 10 seconds to update, PS3 games take 10 - 15 minutes. Every 360 console came with a mic, so everyones talking. PSN is eerily silent. Achievements are standard on 360, trophies are not on PS3. I had to accept different Terms Of Use thingies for multiple PS3 games(believe it was Motorstorm and Killzone 2 ), none of that silliness on 360. The PSN shop is awful, it had two copies of every bit of DLC for GOW3. It is badly organised, with demos, full games, and arcade games all mixed up together. There was content that didn't mention the game it was for, just "Extra character pack: Enjoy these characters in Arcade mode!" or something similar, no clue what game it was for, I was laughing my head off. 360 makes it super easy to transfer gamer tags about and let everyone play on their own account regardless of console, doesn't seem to be anything simiar on PSN. When I downloaded an arcade game on my PS3, I had to hit download, which added it to que. Turns out I had to go into the que and hit "download" again to make it start. Just overall weird and badly organised and definately feels like a cheap experience. I don't see how anyone who has experienced both could think PSN is better. This isn't "fanboyism", just my honest experience with both. Your example is poor, btw, thats hardware not software, 360 is a big ol ball of both.
The experience on the organization of each service is subjective, many people could experience similar annoyances on XBL. I'm talking online play which is the main most important service and the one you pay for to your ISP and game developers which is pretty much even between both services. If you want to talk about added value then what about PSN having more games with dedicated servers than XBL?
Some of the things I said are opinion, true, but many are facts. The overall experience is just worse on PSN. Dedicated servers are nice, until they get shut down. Don't get the point of them on consoles.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="clone01"] what does psn offer that xbl does not. and psn+ is a paid service. nice logic. once again, the additional services that xbl provides justify the cost to many. and i'll ask again and not be answered: what experience do you have with xbl?waltefmoney
Browser Playstation Home Playstation Life Game share probably others
Isn't game sharing getting removed? And Xbox Live has a browser.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="clone01"] what does psn offer that xbl does not. and psn+ is a paid service. nice logic. once again, the additional services that xbl provides justify the cost to many. and i'll ask again and not be answered: what experience do you have with xbl?waltefmoney
Browser Playstation Home Playstation Life Game share probably others
Isn't game sharing getting removed? And Xbox Live has a browser.
The game sharing being removed was a rumor and I didn't know Live had a browser, why haven't I heard of this?
The experience on the organization of each service is subjective, many people could experience similar annoyances on XBL. I'm talking online play which is the main most important service and the one you pay for to your ISP and game developers which is pretty much even between both services. If you want to talk about added value then what about PSN having more games with dedicated servers than XBL?
kuraimen
Source?
MAG, KZ2, WARHAWK, I think Resistance and R2 have them as well. Several PS3 exclusives have dedicated servers. I haven't heard of a 360 exclusive game with dedicated servers yet though. i hear gears 3 is getting some.. (well they mentioned it in this video interview i saw)
MAG, KZ2, WARHAWK, I think Resistance and R2 have them as well. Several PS3 exclusives have dedicated servers. I haven't heard of a 360 exclusive game with dedicated servers yet though. i hear gears 3 is getting some.. (well they mentioned it in this video interview i saw)
It should, for $60 a year all of them should have.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] Paying for a service twice is a rip off anywhere in the world. not if its a service that's not available on a similar business model. again, why do you feel the need to state opinion as fact, and determine what is best for everyone. It is a service that is available elsewhere for free, like online connectivity. That's not opinion that's fact. but its not the same service. there are features available on that service that are not available elsewhere.
[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] That the service includes online connectivity is what makes it a rip off in the first place.kuraimen
and it includes other things that psn lacks, making that claim subjective. i don't know why you're still arguing this. you have zero experience with xbl, have not used the service, and have been repeatedly proven wrong, yet continue to make claims based on subjectivity and opinion. bottom line is this: xbl has features not available on psn: true is xbl worth the money for said features: completely dependent on the consumer
Where have I been proven wrong? stop trying to convince yourself about that, it makes your argument weaker.
Bottom line is this:
psn has features not available on xbl: true
paying for a service twice is a rip off: fact
not if that service has features not available elswhere. if a car has power windows, would it not be more expensive? and drop the condescending attitude.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="clone01"] not if its a service that's not available on a similar business model. again, why do you feel the need to state opinion as fact, and determine what is best for everyone. clone01
It is a service that is available elsewhere for free, like online connectivity. That's not opinion that's fact. but its not the same service. there are features available on that service that are not available elsewhere.
yeah and again, I'm not arguing about those features but the online connectivity service.
Log in to comment