Xbox Live Versus PlayStation Network

Hellsvacancy - 98 days 3 hours ago

U cant bet FREE

Agree(9) | Disagree(3) | Report

darkride66 - 98 days 2 hours ago

Used both quite a bit and went with PSN. It's great, it's free and it does exactly what I want it to do, connect me online to play games. Really, everything else is just window dressing. One charges me for it, one doesn't.

I think the major thing is where your friends are. Everyone likes to game with their friends. For me, I only know one 360 gamer other then myself, so I play on the PSN because that's where all my friends and family game. For others, the opposite holds true so it might be worth it to them to pay extra fees to play 100% of their games as the developers intended, just to play with their friends. If my friends were all on XBL, I probably would too.

Agree(9) | Disagree(2) | Report

deadreckoning666 - 98 days 2 hours ago

Both have things I like...but Ive been spending more time on PSN lately.

@ShadowFlare- A little one-sided there don't ya thk.And ur argument, while true, you only make ONE point. Ur saying more the ability to have more people in one game automatically makes PSN better.

@Darkride-ALL of my friends are on XBL, but the messed up thing is that they all have PS3s that they hardly use. Im tryin ta convince em ta get MW2 on PS3.

Agree(6) | Disagree(2) | Report

Shadow Flare - 98 days 1 hour ago

@deadreckoning666

So why should you have to pay for Live when it can't even beat psn in those points i mentioned in #1? Maybe it is a biased comment but its true. Why do you think Live is worth paying money for? Frankly, dedicated servers and a high online player count is much more important to me then cross-game invites

Agree(7) | Disagree(3) | Report

Maddens Raiders - 98 days 1 hour ago

teh cross cross game chat is worth a fee. Really it is... 0_o

Agree(10) | Disagree(2) | Report

gaffyh - 98 days 1 hour ago

Oh God, this crap has been done to death, fanboys will never agree!

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report

Vicodin - 98 days 1 hour ago

The only reason the gaming media continues to pretend Microsoft's online service is of the same quality as Sony's goes all the way back to last gen.

The gaming press so desperately wanted the PS2 to fail last gen so they could write their 'Arrogant Sony creates overpriced and 'hard teh program' machine that can't make up its mind if it is a gaming console or a movie player'.

As the PS2 exploded in sales around the 200 dollar mark and left the Xbox fading in the distance Microsoft's online service was latched on to as some sort of 'fairness to Microsoft' bullet point.

Yes the Xbox was dead everywhere but the US and the UK. Yes there was nothing but Halo to play on the console. So in fairness you had to 'give' online play to Microsoft as some sort of 'balance'.

That has continued right into this gen.

40,64, 256 player online games
lagfree dedicated servers
free online play for everyone
the amazing Home online world

but you have to pretend Microsoft's online service is just as good as Sony's because that's fair because Sony utterly dominates Microsoft in exclusives, graphical power, reliability, noise level, cheap and easy upgradability, Blu-Ray, etc.

Agree(6) | Disagree(3) | Report

Immortal Kaim - 98 days 1 hour ago

Shadow Flare: "PSN is the best, XBL suxxorz"
Godmars: "PSN is free and XBL is not worth it, M$ is ripping everyone off"
Morgan: "You're all inferior Homo Sapiens if you think XBL can match the prowess of Sony's free online service. Plus Sony cures cancer"

VS...

I Did Not Murder Him: "XBL has so many many features it is worth the price."
jack who: "You get what you pay for, PSN is cr*p"

We all know how it goes, I see the same comments in everyone of these stupid 'news articles' every few weeks. :)

Agree(5) | Disagree(2) | Report

Shadow Flare - 98 days 1 hour ago

well actually, you're wrong. Usually i wouldn't be talking about psn vs live. I'd be saying "PS3 is the best, 360 suxxorz"

Agree(3) | Disagree(3) | Report

Immortal Kaim - 98 days 1 hour ago

LOL Sorry, honest mistake.

Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report

Shadow Flare - 98 days 1 hour ago

no problem

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

slayorofgods - 98 days ago

I still don't understand why people would prefer paying for xbox live vs. having the PSN for free. I'm sure I'll get some reply saying I just need to experience it? That has been a serious question since Live is always being bragged about.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

DMason - 98 days ago

"I dont need Netflix because I have a Blu Ray player" <<< This statement is ungodly retarded. The two are completely different. You pay $30 for a Blu Ray. I pay $10 a month and get to watch unlimited movies in hi def on my Xbox, AND get to watch as many Blu Rays as I want through the rental service on my PS3.

Yeah, Facebook, Twitter, and LastFM are free on the COMPUTER, but the integration and ease into the existing service is what really counts. I'm already paying $30 a year for a subscription to LIVE, additional bonuses are welcomed.

I'm sorry, but I own both, and XBL is lightyears ahead of the PSN. But it was a nice try on Sony's part with 3.0

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

NoBias - 97 days 22 hours ago

Here come the PS3 fanboys to preach the good word and try to get XBL users to convert. We know we know, "you all don't understand why we pay" and "you can't beat free".

We've heard it... Over and over and over and over...

EDIT: Oh... Disagrees... I guess we haven't heard it enough from them yet...

Agree(2) | Disagree(5) | Report

Syronicus - 97 days 14 hours ago

What service lets you play online for free?

That one is the winner in my book. Paying for online play is stupid.

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

Shadow Flare - 98 days 3 hours ago

you pm me when your 'king of online' has a 256 player game

to think....you have to pay for your online service

Agree(12) | Disagree(11) | Report

YoungKiller25 - 98 days 1 hour ago

what when twitter and facebook come dude i've been on those since august 2007 dude
sky is an xbox version of playon

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report

Godmars290 - 98 days 1 hour ago

You mean with all the things conditionally that XBL can do that you've been able to on a PS3? Like facebook and listening to internet radio?

Though for the record, none of that is through PSN.

Agree(4) | Disagree(1) | Report

Noob - 98 days 1 hour ago

MS adding services to XBL and only limiting it to gold members when they were free to begin with? Lol have fun with that.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

Maddens Raiders - 98 days 1 hour ago

using "moronic" and "desperate" when trying to disparage a rrod - free / charge - free system?

Really...? Really?

Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report

deadreckoning666 - 98 days 1 hour ago

@ShadowFlare-

1. Well, I thk people pay for Live because theres this notion that Modern Warfare is better on 360, when in actuallity the only thg that makes Modern Warfare better on 360 is the controller itself.

2. Another, big reason is that odds are most of our friends are on Live since there are more 360s in homes than PS3s. People get Live just to play with their friends.

3. Live has faster download speeds(than PSN at least) and you can use custom soundtracks with every game.

4. Host migration, Netflix, wider selection of movies and tv shows.

Agree(1) | Disagree(9) | Report

Maddens Raiders - 98 days 1 hour ago

I'm just going to say that I disagree with everything you stated there. Especially the "MW2 is better on 360 because of the controller argument....."

and download speeds...are (((blazing)) fast..just because they are ---> LIVE downloads? (there is so much wrong with this statement)

jeez.....

Agree(4) | Disagree(3) | Report

I did not murder him - 98 days 1 hour ago

LOL at the fanboyism. You guys don't own both consoles as I do so your ignorant opinions simply don't matter.

If you don't know why we pay and only think it's only for Multi player you don't have a fucin clue about XBL lol.

Agree(4) | Disagree(13) | Report

Shadow Flare - 98 days 1 hour ago

well actually i think you nailed a big reason why alot of people use live. And its cos their friends use it. Honestly in that list of things you made, the one thing i would really like is custom soundtracks in every game. But tbh honest, ps3 has custom soundtracks in most of the games i regularly play, plus i don't think thats actually a Live feature, but a feature of the 360 itself. Netflix would be nice to have but i have a bluray player. And netflix themselves said they were hoping to move onto all consoles. Honestly i don't see why people should pay for Live. PC, ps3 and wii don't charge to play online. The reason MS charge is because they know fans will pay. Kinda sad

Agree(3) | Disagree(5) | Report

Microsoft Xbox 360 - 98 days 1 hour ago

Owning both consoles does not automatically make you less ignorant or a non-fanboy.

I own both consoles as well but I don't brag about it to validate my comments here on N4G. That's just stupid. In fact, its beyond open zone stupid because you are trying to pass off as if you should be taken seriously. Pleaseeeeee.........

Agree(7) | Disagree(2) | Report

slayorofgods - 98 days ago

u r calling anyone that likes the PSN moronic, ignorant and fanboys. Then u say u r a neutral gamer with two systems?

Do u see the holes in your argument that make u seem ignorant and how do you have any bubbles left?

Agree(5) | Disagree(0) | Report

Brutallyhonest - 98 days ago

^ have you no shame at all?

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

JustTheFactsMam - 98 days ago

1. Controllers are a user preference. Have nothing to do with Live or PSN

2. There might be more 360's in American homes but that is only part of the equation. More people will join something that is free vs pay. Think Facebook would have as many users if it was $50/year? Of course not. The network effect would be significantly constrained compared to it being free. So you need to rethink some assumptions.

3. Download speed is a function of too many things to say one or the other is faster. Custom soundtracks have nothing to do with on-line.

4. Host migration is a nice feature. It also tells you that XBL games are player hosted servers and not true dedicated servers like PSN. That's partially why PSN can support more on-line players than XBL. PSN can also use player hosted servers. Netflix is available on your PS3 thru PlayOn if you really want it. You can also access content thru the browser. So it's a bit of a wash on the content front.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Ravage27 - 98 days ago

none of my friends would be playing online games with me

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

NoBias - 97 days 22 hours ago

Cheap friends :\

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

Shbzshar - 98 days 2 hours ago

heh.. nice

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

edhe - 98 days 1 hour ago

I disagreed for fun, :D

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

DMason - 98 days ago

WOW Jleak, usually your comments are full of spiteful fanboyism, but this one actually makes sense. Are you turning over a new leaf sir?

Agree(0) | Disagree(3) | Report

LittleBigSackBoy - 98 days 1 hour ago

not a fact, it's better IF you prefer it.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

console_gaming_fan - 98 days 1 hour ago

STEAM kills psn, their corrected. for the rest- psn is fine for free. i play socom on there almost every night. least people on that game actually talk. the thing is though LIVE feels more like a community where as psn is a simple play online and go.

i hate texting on my ps3, it feels 1990's and trying to play with my friends on psn is a pain in the ass, literally. the reason why people like me and millions of others see LIVE as a worthy investment are 2 things:

convenience (voice messaging, party chat, and private chat)
ease of use ( joining my friends over LIVE is so easy a caveman can do it )

depends on what you want really, but since i been on LIVE for almost 5 yrs, when i got on psn, it really was a step backwards. yes it's free and i hate to knock it, but LIVE is better, as it should be, since gold users pay for it. also LIVE been around longer and is more refined than psn. hell the 360 was made around LIVE pretty much.

kudos to sony with their improvement to psn, hope they keep doing so, but they still have a ways to go before they beat/match xbox LIVE's ease of use and convenience, which in my opinion makes LIVE worth it.

edit- back to bandit, too bad you stealth edited because i think you realize that steam doesn't kill LIVE. it's the reason you got a disagree from me anyway. the only thing STEAM has on LIVE is it's free. but when it comes to features LIVE and STEAM are similar, more so than comparing STEAM to psn.

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

TheBand1t - 98 days ago

I didn't stealth edit a damn thing. I typed out "Steam kills them both." Which is true. As it does everything Live and PSN do, and does it free and better.

Considering your comment history, you're only saying I stealth edited to downplay.

http://www.n4g.com/up/85593...

Fanboy.

Oh, and how could I have stealth edited anything if you commented 35 minutes after I did? It takes you that long to write out a comment?

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

Hudahudahuda - 98 days ago

Steam did infact steal LIVE's thunder on PC.

That's why nobody uses LIVE over steam and also why they dropped the subcription fee.

I'm betting most people would use a free online service over LIVE if it were available aswell.

What percent of 360 owners have gold subcriptions anyways?

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

S_Leonhart - 98 days 2 hours ago

$50 VS FREE

PAY $50=CLICK Disagree

FREE=CLICK Agree

Agree(17) | Disagree(1) | Report

jack who - 98 days 2 hours ago

but i pay 30$?

Agree(2) | Disagree(4) | Report

DonCorneo - 98 days 2 hours ago

xbl has LAGGY p2p = AGREE
xbl is a rip-off when you can get the same stuff free and it's still laggy p2p= DISAGREE

Agree(8) | Disagree(1) | Report

Flawza Motorputt 3 - 98 days 1 hour ago

But we still pay $0 as opposed to your 30?

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

cliffbo - 98 days 1 hour ago

so Xbox Live is for W*men?

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report