More often than not, when discussions about the value of paying for a gold account on XBL or playing for free on PSN arises, it devolves into fanboy drivel. Personally, I think that this does nothing to add to the conversation and if anything adds to the already growing fanaticism of people loyal to a corporation rather than a lifestyle, the lifestyle of being a gamer. Having preferences is one thing, but what you see more often than not, on many sites and blogs is another beast all together. With that being said, I would like to express my opinion on the differences in quality and the merits of both PSN and XBL.
When you really break it down and look at it, both companies, Sony and Microsoft play to their obvious advantages. Take for example Sony. Granted, I don't have many friends personally (despite my efforts) who own a PS3, but, out of the ones I do, only one had a hardware related issue with said product. A mere six months after his initial purchase of a PS3 it died on him. The cause of his calamity is irrelevant, especially considering that both of us had already been through several 360's over the years. Thus my point. Sony is known for it's hardware reliability and the PS3 is no different. Now, we all know that the PS2 had some issues with it's failure rate, something that was never truly disclosed by Sony but even still, the level of hardware failure seen with the 360 is inexcusable. To MS's credit, after some relenting, they made good on the problem and offered an excellent solution to the problem. Hardware plays into Sony's favor, something we can all agree to.
Then there is the other side to this coin. Microsoft, love them or hate them, is undeniably a software company and like Sony and it's hardware, the difference is obvious and glaring.
My wife purchased my PS3 on Valentines day for me. I had been holding out on getting a PS3 until the release of Killzone 2, the one game I really wanted that was PS3 only. As much as I love the game, trying to play it online is a chore at best, bothersome at worst, mainly because I have grown accustomed to the quality of XBL.
PSN may be free but let's not kid ourselves, it's not XBL and chances are, it won't be, at least, anytime soon. Not too long ago we got 16 player text chatting on PSN. I don't know about you, but I didn't ask for this feature and no one I know did either. It's cool to have options, yes. However, last time I checked, PS3 owners have being clamoring for something much more substantial in it's offering of updates, more specifically, options pertaining to socializing with friends and fostering a sense of community. The intergration of XBL and xbox.com only further shows the level of detail and planning that MS put into it's online infrastructure. For a system who's slogan is it only does everything, this seems to be a glaring example of how you can be a jack of all trades yet a master at none.
Undoubtedly some will argue the point that XBL has been out longer and that is true. However, should that have stopped Sony from at the very least, piggy backing the ideas and concepts of XBL that work and dare I say, expand upon those ideas when creating PSN? Instead of cross game invites/chatting, we get Home. Ambitous to be sure but really, I as a PS3 owner would like something more usable. If the argument is that Live was first then learn from Live, not use that as an excuse for why you can't compare to it.
This leads us into my next point. Charging for the online console experience. Gaming is not a cheap hobby by any means. You can find bargains sure, but, with the price of new games usually being $59.99, you want to get the best value for your dollar. Why would this not be the case when considering a premium service? $50's for an entire year of XBL gold is pocket change in the grand scheme of gaming. This is a point that many opponents of XBL like to bring up, that you have to pay to play. The real question is, are you getting the value from that investment? I try and think of it this way. If PSN charged as much as XBL would you pay for it? The answer, for me at least, is absolutely not. Especially compared to XBL. Even if XBL was free, I'd still have more time and effort spent using it rather than PSN. I give props to Sony for doing what it has done with PSN thus far.They've brought it a long way from where it started. However, Sony knows that they can't charge for PSN, at least not in it's current state, because it simply doesn't have the quality of it's nearest competition.
Attempting to match feature for feature on XBL isn't going to work either. Simply put, the quality isn't there. Online interaction was an after thought, more of a reaction to XBL, than it was a plan to bring gamers together.Once they realized the success that MS was getting form XBL, they followed suit. From the beginning XBL has been an integral part of the 360's being. Much like the sixaxis, Natal and the "wand" are reaction to the Wii mote.
XBL does a much better job of fostering, harnessing and bringing together the community of online console gamers than PSN does and does a better job of keeping them there. The user interface, ease of use and sheer options of communicating with friends is just something that Home and trophies aren't able to do at this point. Who knows what the future may hold, but as it stands now and for the foreseeable future, XBL will continue to hold the torch for the online console experience.
In the end as I stated previously, it's all about preference. No argument I've read or heard has convinced me of any level of equality between PSN and XBL. That would be like someone telling me that the 360 is just as reliable as the PS3 is. It simply isn't the case. Pound for pound, feature for feature, everything from comparing NXE to XMB, from your PSN card needing to sync versus the speed and functionality of the gamercard, it's better on XBL imo, and warrants the slight investment. PSN is free and that is not a bad thing. However, keep in mind that you get what you pay for. In this case it's a premium service that's simply better in every way. Now, if we could just combine the two so we had a reliable console with awesome online.
One can only hope.
Mecha BREAK is a multiplayer game that allows players to choose from a variety of mechas, customize their appearances, and battle colossal war machines on treacherous terrain. Get ready for the ultimate showdown—blitz, brawl, blaze!
Black Ops 6 will require an internet connection to play all modes, and that includes the single-player campaign confirms Activision.
Online SP? Better have a good autosave/checkpoint system in place. Especially at launch when things tend to go belly up (ala The Final Shape).
For a single player? Anyway 300+ gb for a single game is enough for me to pass on this.
Today's landscape is different for video games. Most gamers aren't so starved for content that they have to take a raw deal like having to pay for cod campaigns that will go away and be wasted money one day when they can buy something else.
@phoenixwing Clearly not true since COD is still the highest selling game every year.
Expand southward to Skyline Valley – a brand-new region of Appalachia.
the janky MMO that should've been dead is now getting a massive update ... damn who knew
And I know the feeling. Going from Live to PSN is a rough transition. There are so many seemingly simple things on Live that we take advantage of.
I don't mind paying the fee for live, since I use it as a social tool just as much as I use it for gaming. But I would really like to see some competition for it. Maybe a lower price? Or more resources put into it so it can stay ahead.
Hopefully, next generation will have equally good online and hardware.
You have a great wife, not much women would buy a $400 sociability killer for Valentine's Day. Whatever happens, stick with her.
free is better
Luckily, I have a cell phone/phone from this century, so I don't need to pay for chat features on my console.
So what I see here is very few examples and a lot of talk. I will tell you I have had a 360 and now have a PS3 and the "Features" you mention is actually A feature. Cross game chat. Something I ad many don't care about. I have a headset. I never use it. I prefer the PS3 online because while there is still racial slurring and otherwise... It is about 95% less on the PS3. As well as about 90% less people with mic's in general.
I don't have a console for the "Community" I have it for competitive gaming against random people and a few friends. If I want the community I would simply log into "home". Which has grown a lot and is something well above anything on XBL. There are a ton of people chatting and haning out there. Not my thing but it is for many.
I have my gaming PC for the community. I game on steam and other places for "Community" because in all seriousness a gaming community is much more driven, aggressive and smart in a game like WoW then on any console...
The big complaint you seem to have is no patience for the free service. Syncing trophies(Takes all of 6 seconds)or maybe it's installing demos after downloading them. Pound for pound stability and in game playability is the same, if not better, on the PS3. I am saying this from experiencing games like COD4 on both systems and ultimately thinking the PS3 was superior for smoothness of play.
Netflix, Cross game invites, and all these online features do exist on the PS3 now as well.
My biggest gripe overall is nickle and diming. That argument you can't get around...