[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"][QUOTE="lowe0"]

So I'm trying to play GTA IV today. I started on PS3, since my friends bought it on PS3 and I'd like to unlock stuff for MP against them. Anyway, I'm trying to play, and my game hangs at the loading screen. The fix?Disable your Internet connection. I haven't heard a peep from Sony or Rockstar on this issue. When you combine Sony's lack of a multiplayer infrastructure for developers to use, coupled with Rockstar's failure to properly test the results of excessive network load, the end result is that multiplayer is unavailable, and even single player requires a workaround to function.

Just to confirm, I threw in the 360 version - fired right up. (And looks better - I hadn't tried the 360 version yet, but wow, that's quite a difference in clarity. I need to turn it off before I'm spoiled.)

So, the next time you want to know what we're getting for our $5 a month, here it is: we're getting something that we know is being done right instead of being farmed out to Gamespy, and when it does go down due to excessive load (which I've only seen once in 5 years as a subscriber), we get MS working to make things right because they know that their revenue stream, and not just their reputation, is at risk.

Sony fans: how can you possibly defend this?

DXGreat1_HGL

Uhmmm...you only disable the PSN to prevent the single player mode from freezing. If you plan on playing multiplayer, you leave PSN enabled. And this has nothing to do with SOny or PSN and instead is a problem with Rockstar's game itself. A game that also has issues with freezing for the 360 (just like BUlly). At least there is a FIX for the PS3 version. What about all the 360 fans who bought the game and have freezing issues?

Second, you ask what good is free online if it doesn't work? Yet you seem to be ignoring that people pay $50 for XBL and it has been down a number of times, and even crashed during the past Christmas. So if you hate it when free online doesn't work, what is your position on PAYING for online that doesn't work?

You're taking one extreme case on MS's part and they compensated every Gold member. Sorry but XBL is way far and above better then PSN. Any unobjective person can see it.

Using the logic PSN supporters use:

• Eating Ramen noodles is better then a steak dinner because its cheaoer
• Riding a bike from New York to California is better then flying because its cheaper
• Public access golf is better then playing on a pro level course because its free

Just give it up, PSN is a joke and its lame to justify every PSN problem by trying to make it look like its just as bad on XBL...

paying $50/year just to play online is a joke.

dont even get me started cuz i'd rather use that $50 for gas

[QUOTE="SHuN_G0Ku"]

i'll ask this;

1. what is the purpose of Live/online?

2. where can you get a $50 worth of gas for free today?

3. which is more important: taking care of your needs or your entertainment?

elbow2k

You're asking rhetorical question of which the answers are painfully clear, but in hindsight, your outlook on the subject is totally flawed. How can you even compare paying for gas and then paying for something as trivial as an online functionality for a console?

"Not everyone can afford it", well then it isn't for you. No one ever said you needed to get it, however, when someone does say that it is better than what others have to offer, then you shouldn't knock it because of the fact that basically you can't afford it, or that it seems unethical to you.

I honestly wouldn't pay a cent for Xbox Live because I feel that the services it provides aren't up to the price they demand. Part of me wants to say that "online should be free" but in this world of ours, the better something is, the more expensive it usually is. Consumer goods - like Xbox Live for example - are fueled by the you, if you don't agree with it, then turn a blind eye to it, but at the same time acknowledge that "it's what you pay for".

so basically from what you stated: PSN > Live ??

i have PS3 and a 360 and like what i said from my very first post in this thread:

why should i spend $50 for Live just so i can play with my friends where i can get it for FREE somewhere else..?

what TC failed to acknowledge is the importance of the two

i'll only agree to TC as long as everyone's as rich as Bill Gates

[QUOTE="SHuN_G0Ku"][QUOTE="Nedemis"][QUOTE="SHuN_G0Ku"]

for the money: game >>> live

dont mean to be rude but there are people out there who aren't on the same financial stats as yours..; there are 360 owners who lives in a dump and there are those who live in a golden palace.

...AND this is the main reason why a lot of gamers question about PS3's PSN vs. 360's Live

if you only have $460 in your lifetime and you end up with just 2 choices: $400 + FREE online or $400 + $50 Live

heck, i could care less about a $60 dollar game and just download a demo and save that extra $60, but in Live's case, you have to spend before you even get a demo

vashkey

If people are really that poor then maybe they should be a bit smarter as to where they put their money. :|

FINALLY SOMEONE WITH A SMART POINT!!!!

if i ONLY have $50 in my pocket right now, would i use it to play games with my friends online OR save it for food, water, gas, etc...??

I think his point is if they are that poor they probably shouldn't be wasting their money on games at all or at least just buy cheap consoles and games...

..and that's the point that i've been trying to state (bolded)

[QUOTE="SHuN_G0Ku"]

for the money: game >>> live

dont mean to be rude but there are people out there who aren't on the same financial stats as yours..; there are 360 owners who lives in a dump and there are those who live in a golden palace.

...AND this is the main reason why a lot of gamers question about PS3's PSN vs. 360's Live

if you only have $460 in your lifetime and you end up with just 2 choices: $400 + FREE online or $400 + $50 Live

heck, i could care less about a $60 dollar game and just download a demo and save that extra $60, but in Live's case, you have to spend before you even get a demo

Nedemis

If people are really that poor then maybe they should be a bit smarter as to where they put their money. :|

FINALLY SOMEONE WITH A SMART POINT!!!!

if i ONLY have $50 in my pocket right now, would i use it to play games with my friends online OR save it for food, water, gas, etc...??

[QUOTE="SHuN_G0Ku"]

well according to TC, he's mainly focusing on people who can actually afford and/or that are rich.

i'm taking the side of an average person who has limited financial expenses here...

some people just can't afford $50 a year just to play games online with your friends but what about gas for your car:

going to work, groceries, errands, etc...?

i may sound stingy but i still tend to find a better way to spend less

man.., if ONLY gas were $1.45 then yea, it'd be no problem...

elbow2k

Dude come on, that's just a bad excuse. Xbox Live is the price of ONE game, think about it, the price of one game for the supposed "best online experience" - which it isn't - in theory is just one hell of a deal. When you look at it that way, how can you seriously justify penny pinching as an excuse for Xbox Live being terrible?

If anything, you should look towards the fact that even though it's 50 bucks per year, you still have to pay for everything. It's like getting a membership at Cosco, or something like that, except not as good. Basically you don't get your monies worth with XBL.

i'll ask this;

1. what is the purpose of Live/online?

2. where can you get a $50 worth of gas for free today?

3. which is more important: taking care of your needs or your entertainment?

[QUOTE="SHuN_G0Ku"][QUOTE="vashkey"][QUOTE="SHuN_G0Ku"]

gas is more important than XBL.

if i can play with other people online for free in some other console, why pay $50?

tell me, where can you get a $50 worth of gas for free today?

vashkey

It's a great service. It really depends on how much you like online, though. I mean if you don't play many game online or don't like online play I think it's obvious live isn't for you, but Live is leauges ahead of PSN and the Wii's online service.

While I don't really approve of MS charging for online play, it's worth it really. It's less than five bucks a month. And really, is it going to hurt to pay for somthing good.
I mean, it's cheaper than buying a bad game anyway.

well according to TC, he's mainly focusing on people who can actually afford and/or that are rich.

i'm taking the side of an average person who has limited financial expenses here...

some people just can't afford $50 a year just to play games online with your friends but what about gas for your car:

going to work, groceries, errands, etc...?

i may sound stingy but i still tend to find a better way to spend less

man.., if ONLY gas were $1.45 then yea, it'd be no problem...

If you can afford a 360 games I can't see how you can't afford live. I mean, unless your so poor you bought a hard driveless 360 with just a memeory card and one game or somthing. I doubt this is the case for most 360 gamers.

for the money: game >>> live

dont mean to be rude but there are people out there who aren't on the same financial stats as yours..; there are 360 owners who lives in a dump and there are those who live in a golden palace.

...AND this is the main reason why a lot of gamers question about PS3's PSN vs. 360's Live

if you only have $460 in your lifetime and you end up with just 2 choices: $400 + FREE online or $400 + $50 Live

heck, i could care less about a $60 dollar game and just download a demo and save that extra $60, but in Live's case, you have to spend before you even get a demo

[QUOTE="SHuN_G0Ku"]

gas is more important than XBL.

if i can play with other people online for free in some other console, why pay $50?

tell me, where can you get a $50 worth of gas for free today?

vashkey

It's a great service. It really depends on how much you like online, though. I mean if you don't play many game online or don't like online play I think it's obvious live isn't for you, but Live is leauges ahead of PSN and the Wii's online service.

While I don't really approve of MS charging for online play, it's worth it really. It's less than five bucks a month. And really, is it going to hurt to pay for somthing good.
I mean, it's cheaper than buying a bad game anyway.

well according to TC, he's mainly focusing on people who can actually afford and/or that are rich.

i'm taking the side of an average person who has limited financial expenses here...

some people just can't afford $50 a year just to play games online with your friends but what about gas for your car:

going to work, groceries, errands, etc...?

i may sound stingy but i still tend to find a better way to spend less

man.., if ONLY gas were $1.45 then yea, it'd be no problem...

Street Fighter II

lol, who's heard of Tekken 3? 3rd Strike? Shaq Fu?

til this day, i'm pretty sure 99.9% has played SFII

the other 0.01% are the people who mentioned those other games..

gas is more important than XBL.

if i can play with other people online for free in some other console, why pay $50?

tell me, where can you get a $50 worth of gas for free today?

[QUOTE="l-_-l"][QUOTE="st1ka"][QUOTE="Riverwolf007"][QUOTE="st1ka"][QUOTE="septicvirus"]

To make things worse, the PS3 is stiffling the development of better looking 360 games because developers don't want the bad PR of making a sub-par port. (and their already dedicating more time and effort to getting the PS3 games up to par)

Riverwolf007

the lack of space on a DVD9 also slowed the developmet of GTA4, just so you know

was it the whole game or a demo/beta?

You guys are so out of touch with reality it's not even funny. DVD delay a game? How is that even possible?

DVD delays a game because it's "limited"

ie: Killzone 2's first stage already took 2 gigs

if Killzone 2 were to put in DVD......, i'll let you do the math

note: btw, we're not talking about compressed or decompressed; we're talking about a game being put in a medium layer-by-layer