text:
Sony Says PSN Isn't Playing "Catch Up" with Xbox Live Anymore
Sony's Eric Lempel says "in some cases, I think we've got more."
In online services, we see a good amount of cross-pollination, with various companies taking good ideas from each other. The same has been the case with PlayStation Network and Xbox Live, and now Sony's Eric Lempel says the company has put itself on equal footing or even surpassed the Xbox Live service. Asked about parity with Xbox Live in an interview with Industry Gamers, Lempel humbly points out that he'd give a "much different answer" two years ago. "At this stage of the game when I really look at PSN and the entire offering I think we're in great shape," he said. "I don't think there's a lot of 'catch up' [with XBL] anymore. In some cases, we've got more, and we've got some other things they don't have."
He stresses that their service is free, and Home as a "massive community and application that's totally free to use." He says "there's a lot we're doing that in some cases they're not doing, and I don't see a lot of things they're doing that we're not." It seems Sony is satisfied with the service they provide and not looking to the Xbox service for guidance anymore; though it's an interesting tacit admission that the company ever was.
See Also
Comments (184)
re: poster belowPosted: Jul 16, 2009 12:00AM PST by mysteriousgamer
You do realize that HDMI cables are $7 at a wholesale cable store, right? Please don't tell me you pay $200 for Monster brand cabling. I don't know about you, but I have like 5 HDMI cables lying around collecting dust. Each of my DVRs came with extras, my cable box came with one.
Bluetooth headsets come free with some phones and also some games in the box, so by now most people already have one. Again, a pointless gripe.
There are markups on accessories from Xbox as well. $99 for a 60 GB hard drive? Give me a break. Don't forget, the wireless adapter will set you back another $99. Want to have rechargeable controller batteries? Another $30 per controller.
And, if you get what you pay for, then, in addition to PSN, why is Steam (and XFIRE too) on PC free and contains almost every feature XBL has? What exactly are you getting for your $50 that other services don't offer? Cross-game invites? Sorry, not worth the money.
Cry me a river.
PSN? Really?!Posted: Jul 13, 2009 12:00AM PST by ColdSilence
The thing is this. I have all 3 systems. I do pay for Xbox LIVE and have been a paying member since 2002. PSN is fine to get online and play games with others. When things are free you DO understand that the costs are made up elseware, right? Examples? Here are some:
*You have to buy your OWN HDMI cable.
*You must pay for nearly ALL items when using Home. $3 to $10 each to take full advantage of what it offers.
*You must buy your OWN bluetooth headset.
Aside from these things, Home is still in Beta, but the concept of it is quite corny or hokey or whatever you want to call it. Most users of PSN, and I'm sure there are plenty, do not use Home due to one thing: instant gratification. It takes too long to boot up Home to just go in and say "Hey guys let's play Killzone 2!" People want to get online and play the game NOW, not in the 8 minutes it takes to boot up Home go to the main lobby and hopefully find a friend to play the game with. Its just too much to do.
Sony would have done well to just pimp out the XMB and be done with it. Access is in a matter of seconds for most things but the functionality is already built into the games. Home was Sony's answer to Nintendo's Mii situation. They said "Oh yeah?! We can do alot better than you and make our characters 3D and HD and they'll have this cool world they can walk around in and all the games will support it with their own items you can buy! HA!" Developers are already hip to this game because they know people WILL buy content in Home and they wont think twice about it. Free my ASS! They stiffed you and you don't even know it! I'm fine with SOME things but DAMN! If you need proof for what a subscription-based system buys you look at Xbox LIVE or World of Warcraft even!
Sony can say tomorrow, "OK, We're dropping support for PSN because we cant afford it anymore." A subscription lets the gamer INVEST in the quality of the service and that way the company doesn't have to come up with their own money to pay for upkeep. Users will pay for quality when they demand it. Look at SOE and Everquest as proof of that as well. They have had that game running for the last nearly 12 years! Because of subscription money they know will keep coming, it makes for better quality and state-of-the-art features they can produce for the service indefinitely and meld into the next PlayStation product.
I think I speak for the majority even if they don't want to outright admit it: I REALLY dont need all that stuff! I wanna play my game and maybe download a theme for my XMB background and call it a day.
Some things are passable in terms of buying hardware accessories. But Sony is defeated at this point and they feel that they can't do any better. $50 a year is an awesome model to follow but as I said before free is never free. And you do get what you pay for!
IrishPosted: Jul 11, 2009 12:00AM PST by great_boss
I love to fight.
WOWPosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by REDZONE_313
everyone gets their panties in a bunch because sony say it isn't playing 'catch up' with xbox live if live is that great why you have to defend it so much do you get an extra buck every time you bash sony. 200 comments because of that lol beautiful
....Posted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by Tyrant156
Most people that own a PS3 don't own a mic but the people that game online with the PS3 do. I would say 80% of the people on my friends list have mics. Just because you might hear silence in a game doesn't mean no one has a mic it's possible no one feels like talking. As for Home, it's used to meet new friends not talk and meet up with old ones. i',m guessing the party chat feature on the 360 is more used for friends that you already know . Yes you can meet up with friends in Home but it is easier to just start a text chat room if you want to talk to everyone at once and start a game. Home gets such a bad rap, it's a great tool to find new players that share the same game as you to play online or just talk about games in general.
@sausagelozengePosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by OldMustang
Yes Qore costs but its not the same thing because the service is free for me to buy things. I swear you xbots have no sense of logic.
It's the little things that count...Posted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by ilikesanta
I own all three systems and XBL is well worth the money for what it does that other systems don't. Party System is great, being able to chat with people playing different games is a wonderful feature. Yes you can chat with people in Home, but who wants to wait two minutes getting to your home space, then hope your friends will quite there game just so you can say what's up? also Everything just so much easier on XBL.
Hardly anyone has a microphone on PSN, it's boring without mindless banter, and for those of you who argue that XBL just is nothing but little kids cursing are kidding themselves that PSN doesn't have the same Problem. Everytime I go into home there's at least a couple people running around going "U R a F@ GGot!" Remember, when Home first launched there was voice chat in all the spaces, but they quickly removed that feature when a ton a people were just running around yelling Faggot Cunt Slut N**ger Jews. So please, you can get off your high horse now.
Both Online services are great and they have there own exclusive games, but I prefer XBL hand over fist.
Response to General_GamerPosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by agrainger
I agree with you, Xbox Live is far superior to PSN. I just have to add this correction to your statement:
You can have multiple accounts and gamertags on Xbox Live. All you need is a second email address to register with.
I have my main account setup with my live.com email address and a second account on my gmail.com email address. Of course, you will have to pay for each one if you want them to have Gold membership access but still possible to have 2 accounts for one person.
I mostly do this so I can sign in and play with certain friends only without having to deal with all that "Appear offline" status.
so that itPosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by OldBoygamer
so that it no more updates from sony?....soon xbl is goin to get 1 more big update....this fall
PSN is better than it was, but still not as good as LivePosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by duffmanth
I love my PS3, and PSN is fine for what it is, a free online service. Of course Live is going to be better. MS has more experience with online service and the fact that you pay a yearly fee allows them to make the service that much better.
It's one of the few areas where MS hasn't fucked up. At this point I would say the 360's and PS3's game libaries are on par with each other. What's pathetic about the 360 is that it's still crapping out on people almost 4 years after its launch.
I own them both as well...Posted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by Antknee
I'm in the same camp as agrainger. PSN is fine on it's own. It does have plenty of good stuff, the UI is fine (not great, but whatever) and since I don't pay for it, it makes up for some features that I enjoy from my 360. I do have to say that Sony saying they have nothing to catch up with on Xbox is being...generous to say the least. Look, since I bought by PS3 last summer, every new feature added (and then downloaded...slowly...then installed...slowly...) has been a "me too". That's fine, but any way you scratch it, in the American market your console game network to compair yourself to is the Live. If you don't agree with that, you don't own one or are uninterested in playing games with friends.
Once again, PSN is fine, but it is not the same as Live.
Xbox Live is superior to PSN - Each comment below is fact basedPosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by General_Gamer
Each comment below is based on undisputable fact. You do not need a "link" to prove the things I'm saying. Everyone who has a PSP or PS3 knows you can have multiple accounts. And everyone who has an Xbox 360 knows that you get to use only one screen name, otherwise it costs $10 to change it. You simply don't need a "link" to prove this. This is undisputable fact that anyone knows about. The same can be said about the comments made by Channel G4 during the E3 show. Anyone who watched that broadcast knows what was said. And as far as VG Chartz goes, their website specifically says they use a "proprietary" method of gathering sales information, which includes data "from the manufacturer." So, I want to reinforce that my comments below are 100% accurate:
This is just more of Sony's lies to the media...Sadly, there are websites such as VG Chartz that obtain information from "the manufacturer" (i.e., Sony) when gathering their numbers. This means the lies from Sony are actually going to count in some of the calculations. Thankfully, the NPD numbers are not based on false information from "the manufacturer."
This whole comparison is not a matter of comparing apples to oranges, because PSN and Xbox Live are not competing on equal ground. There is one fundamental difference between PSN and Xbox Live:
* PSN allows each individual gamer to have multiple gamer tags, which allow individual people to count multiple times as a "user." This is a poor setup that does not accurately reflect the number of people who "own" the console or "use" the PS3. In fact, many of the PSN users only have a PSP.
* Xbox Live only allows each person to have one gamer tag. This means each person is counted only one time. It costs $10 if you want to have your gamer tag changed. Microsoft has this rule in place because they know it is definitely not a good thing for people to have the ability to have gamer tags that can be created multiple times for free. If people have multiple gamer tags, it means discipline cannot be properly enforced.
I know quite a few people who have different names for their PS3 and PSN. I also know several people who use different names when they are in North America, Europe, and Japan. Each of those names counts repeatedly according to Sony's numeric calculations. This is not fair when making a comparison to Xbox Live, because Microsoft only counts each gamer tag a single time.
There is simply no doubt that Xbox Live has far more users than PSN.
There is simply no doubt that Xbox Live is a far superior service, which offers more features. There is no doubt that Xbox Live, PSN, and the PC each have some flaws in terms of occasional lag as a result of someone possibly having a weak connection; it's like this on all platforms. But there is absolutely no doubt that Xbox Live offers a better service that is fully compatible with a larger library of high quality games where online standards are upheld.
Ratings of multi-platform games virtually always prove that Xbox 360 versions of software are superior in terms of online service and graphics. Even Channel G4 pointed out at the 2009 E3 that at this point in time it always makes sense to buy the Xbox 360 version of a game, simply because there are so many people to play online with. G4 said that even if the two games were of identical quality, the sheer "quantity" advantage that Xbox Live has in terms of the number of users means that the Xbox 360 version will be better, since there will be more people to play online with -- which also means you won't need to wait as long to find people to play online with you.
If everything on the PS3 is better than xbox,Posted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by SamuraiTerry
why doesn't it sell better?
@OldMustangPosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by SamuraiTerry
Didn't Qore cost money?
@haq_qaedaPosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by osebass
home is being visited today by at least thousands of people who go on it regularly, and they arent on here cuz of it. look some people really dig it and by the looks of what most people put on here, a lot dont. to each his own. if you dont like it dont go to it. simple as that. dont know why you seem so angry that some people enjoy it. funny
I own both systemsPosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by agrainger
I own both systems and play on both PSN and Xbox Live regularly. And I have to say that I would pay to have PSN be more like Xbox Live. Xbox Live is so much better in alot of ways. Here are a few things that PSN is lacking:
Voice messages.
The mic isn't bundled in the system, therefore, mostly everyone doesn't have a mic.
A better game invitation system that is managed by the system and not the games (mostly because this would make the developers jobs easier and give them more time to focus on the actual game, thus resulting in better games)
Scrap the whole "Home" Idea, it's lame anyway.
The Playstation Store is confusing and hard to navigate. In Xbox Live Marketplace, I can find exactly what I'm looking for everytime because the menu is very intuitive.
Trophies.....Do I really give a damn? I can't even find out which games have trophies and which games don't
@aafatkidPosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by osebass
god your annoying. yeah he's spinning, and not bad either (better than george w.), and yes hes an idiot, and thats why he gets paid bank and you dont. i will never message you on psn, cuz you seem like a douche.
im a ps3/wii owner and i have to admit i would love some of those features. cross chat and all that would be awesome and heres to hoping
btw im defending a console that i love to game on, and it too bad people have bad experiences on it. come on guys is it really that bad?
@vangerdahast- that last sentence was hilarious.
Play 1 Vs. 100 on Live tonight, for real prizes.Posted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by CHANCE72
That to me is actual innovation in the online space. I have the PS3 and 360 hooked up online, and MS does have Sony beat in many, many areas. Home is essentially worthless; it's an online chat room crossed with 2nd Life, and full of loading times. I checked it out the first time it was available, and it's just poorly done. It's just not unique enough to what's existed on the PC for years to really be a selling point of innovation. Trying to tap into the Facebook/Myspace social networking thing - just not that interesting on a gaming console.
I hope that both companies can move forward to do more live game shows. 1 Vs. 100 is pretty well done for the first effort. It's the first really interactive gaming killer app., and it's free. Leave social networking to the pc and smartphones, keep gaming the focus for the consoles.
A New IdeaPosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by sepewrath
Yeah here's a new idea for everyone, stop following everyone else because things are never as good the second time around. Come up with your own idea's and let your product sell on its own merit, instead of spending time trying to do what someone else has already done. The PSN is fine it doesn't need to be XBL, it doesn't even need to be better than XBL because when you buy a PS3 you don't have a choice between PSN and XBL. And call me old school, but I think people buy consoles for the games not because they can watch netflix on it. You got demo's, you got friend list and you got online play, thats all that matters to a gaming console. All these uncessary bells and whistles are just something for fanboys to gloat about to each other. The time spent making XBL and PSN do what you can do an internet ready computer could be used to advance the gameplay hardware instead of just copying Nintendo in that regard.
Good thing to hearPosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by Groovin_Dalai_Lama
I hope they start focusing on games now.
@nakedeyePosted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by Vangerdahast
damn that was a deep observation & yet rings so authentic. Obviously, for all the media & gamers who spent time on both systems, that statement speaks for them.
... actually, apart from the fanboys, all scholarly works that evaluate the gaming industry, understand the current superiority of Live over PSN.
this does not indicate there is anything wrong w/ PSN. Its like saying your bargain priced masseuse that gets the job done is bad cause the Beverly Hills one puts a hot pepper in your ass(yeah Natural Born Killers).
....Posted: Jul 10, 2009 12:00AM PST by Tyrant156
Galactic Fanboy, to block someone at any time just go to your recently met players list and hit block. Custom sound tracks can be used on the PS3 exactly like the 360 but Sony would have to pay MS for the use of that technology. When you plug in an Ipod into your PS3 what exactly goes wrong because ive never had any problems with an ipod not working on a ps3 and my ps3 is networked with my pc for streaming and transfering files, i think it took a total of 10 mins to setup. I do agree though that Live is still ahead of psn with its forms of communication but so far Sony has been slowly including everything found on Live so i'm sure those upgrades are next.
honestly....Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by dave_the_dawg_fan
Im sorry, but the NXE marketplace has me at a loss.... its too damn annoying to deal with. I dont know, i prefer the original 360 marketplace. That being said, both marketplaces have excellent material, so i really dont see a point in arguing over it. Apparently some people will fight over anything,lol.
Civil WarPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by great_boss
For those who have not yet fought in this war, pick a side already!!!!
PSN is freePosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by OldMustang
Thats all you need to know. I remember waiting for the release of Qore that had the SOCOM demo and thinking how great it was that I didn't have to pay anything to get my demos and videos like on Xbox Live.
WhateverPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by assdude6989
I still enjoy both systems, so fuck off xbots and ps fanboys
Why do I have to pick a side?Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by KidNomad
I am an old school gamer. I had the original Pong system when I was a young boy. From there, my family had the Intellevision 2, NES, Sega Genesis, Panasonic 3DO, PS1, PS2, and now a PS3. First of all, anyone who complains about Home needs to go away, it's a free service that you never have to use. I love when people have issues with free things. The Xbox crowd wants to "win" this generation because last gen was clearly the generation of the PS2. If you like the games on the 360, then get a 360. Don't try to deny that the 360 has had issues though, RROD. It's a fact, and it's also a fact that Microsoft has made the dreaded RROD a thing of the past. the 360 has some great games on it, but they're not the games I want to play. So, I have a PS3, I like the free Home area, I like the web access, and I prefer their games over the 360. Nothing wrong with the 360, it's just not a system I want to own, and the only reason is the games. Pick your system, buy your games, and just play, because there won't be a winner until the next generation of consoles arrive. And for those of you who just like to talk a lot of trash online because that's the only place you dare do it, a REAL gamer owns all the systems. I think the younger crowds would say, Gauntlet FTW, but only the original.
MICROSOFT....Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by JERZDEVIL
...that best describes the peckers of SHITBOX fanboys.....small and limp. The fact that I don't have to cross my fingers and pray to Bill Gates that my machine doesn't take a shit everytime I turn it on gets my Sony lovin' giant hog standing at attention everyday.
He's right......Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by SlyOneil
"Sony Says PSN Isn't Playing "Catch Up" with Xbox Live Anymore"
That is so true.
PSN is so far behind XBL that SONY decided that the facts are no longer important. So they have gone ahead with a PR assault on the masses. If you can't beat em, just say you have and people will listen.
It's still a businessPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by PhillyDog532
I have never played a game on the PS3 online and have no idea what it is like. But even if sony and microsoft offered the exact same level of service from a purely business perspective microsoft is ahead just because of the fact that they get people to pay for their service. In the end that is the ultimate goal of both Sony and microsoft, not just to offer games to play. I admit that I wish I didn't have to pay to play halo online but it obviously hasn't bothered me enough to stop even though from the videos I have seen I would love to try Killzone 2 out some day.
fanboysPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by Greendewey
Its funny to watch the Sony fanboys get less and less coherent and start throwing insults (like microshit) instead of making solid points. Some of you guys are barely even using english anymore.
Quit crying and just enjoy what you have..Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by Artaiten
You know, it seems like there are more and more of these "Im better than you and this is why:" posts all the time. Bottom line is this: If Sony was still King of the pixel mountain, then they wouldnt have to be running around telling everybody how great they are. Now to be fair I have both a 360 and PS3 and my opinion is that the 360 is better hands down. But like a mature adult that has a life I dont need to attack and ridicule someone who has a PS3. Competition is what makes this industry make itself better. I just wish that Sony would show us somthing instead of acting like the 8 year old on the playground who got replaced by the new kid.
@ 1up_TheProphetPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by theicon1.1up.com
you're calling MS fans fanboys when you're an obvious Sony fanboy.unlike most of the shit talkers on here,i own both consoles andto compare the 360 and the PS3 is something that should be over with long ago and editors posting bait about things like this is only making all fanboys on both sides bite.Yeah PS3 is more powerful,so what,fools like you forget in the last Gen that the Xbox was more powerful than the PS2 but PS2 was still outselling and won that Gen,So the only thing that happened this gen is the to consoles switching places.See fanboy it's about the games and entertainment and the 360 has it.I have a 60 GB model with a 500 GB hard drive and i don't play it much cause whatever game that is multi-platform that i want i get for the 360 cause 9 times out of ten,the 360 has something exclusive.Infamous was a much needed game for the console and tell me what other good release is worth getting that's an exclusive for the PS3 that coming this year???As for PSN,yeah it's free,but what is there to do?go on the interenet?,hell i have a laptop and Desktop for that.watching movies?,there's NetFlix for that.watching Tv shows or UFC matches?,we can do that on the 360.360 also has 1 Vs 100 for free where we can win prizes and Joyride coming this Fall.there are independent games ,Avatar gamesClassic Arcade games,we already know about the DLC for many games that you PS fanboys wont get.So it pays to own both consoles,but for fanboys that don't & won't own a 360 to talk shit about it,come to your senses and stop comparing the 2 cause no matter what you try to say to defend Sony,the 360 won this gen.(i don't count the Wii cause that's just a crappy casual gamer console and to me no considered a real gamer console).
CashPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by great_boss
Anyone have $600?
Hmm.Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by Galactic_Barret
Can I get a link General_Gamer? That would be cool to see, if they actually said all that you have stated. Which I'm guessing they didn't.This is just like the "HD-DVD is superior to BD" comment you made a few months ago. Yeah, you totally got your ass handed to you on that one.
Re: kingdomhearts_fanPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by 1up_TheProphet
Sony doesn't have to do that, that's what ppl can do with using the internet on the PS3.
Bout' Time, Btw how is there crap loads of 360's in PS3's news?Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by kingdomhearts_fan
Lol it looks like Trolls dont have nothing to do lol. So i hope Sony does not go the 360 path with Twitter, Facebook. Those apps should be for PC's and Mobile devices only. Hope they learned from that...
Xbox Live is far superior to PSNPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by General_Gamer
This is just more of Sony's lies to the media...Sadly, there are websites such as VG Chartz that obtain information from "the manufacturer" (i.e., Sony) when gathering their numbers. This means the lies from Sony are actually going to count in some of the calculations. Thankfully, the NPD numbers are not based on false information from "the manufacturer."
This whole comparison is not a matter of comparing apples to oranges, because PSN and Xbox Live are not competing on equal ground. There is one fundamental difference between PSN and Xbox Live:
* PSN allows each individual gamer to have multiple gamer tags, which allow individual people to count multiple times as a "user." This is a poor setup that does not accurately reflect the number of people who "own" the console or "use" the PS3. In fact, many of the PSN users only have a PSP.
* Xbox Live only allows each person to have one gamer tag. This means each person is counted only one time. It costs $10 if you want to have your gamer tag changed. Microsoft has this rule in place because they know it is definitely not a good thing for people to have the ability to have gamer tags that can be created multiple times for free. If people have multiple gamer tags, it means discipline cannot be properly enforced.
I know quite a few people who have different names for their PS3 and PSN. I also know several people who use different names when they are in North America, Europe, and Japan. Each of those names counts repeatedly according to Sony's numeric calculations. This is not fair when making a comparison to Xbox Live, because Microsoft only counts each gamer tag a single time.
There is simply no doubt that Xbox Live has far more users than PSN.
There is simply no doubt that Xbox Live is a far superior service, which offers more features. There is no doubt that Xbox Live, PSN, and the PC each have some flaws in terms of occasional lag as a result of someone possibly having a weak connection; it's like this on all platforms. But there is absolutely no doubt that Xbox Live offers a better service that is fully compatible with a larger library of high quality games where online standards are upheld.
Ratings of multi-platform games virtually always prove that Xbox 360 versions of software are superior in terms of online service and graphics. Even Channel G4 pointed out at the 2009 E3 that at this point in time it always makes sense to buy the Xbox 360 version of a game, simply because there are so many people to play online with. G4 said that even if the two games were of identical quality, the sheer "quantity" advantage that Xbox Live has in terms of the number of users means that the Xbox 360 version will be better, since there will be more people to play online with -- which also means you won't need to wait as long to find people to play online with you.
RaStarr420Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by DrMcThunderstick
ya you had a bad bluray problem thats miner if your past the warenty life sucks and there is a class action case against microsoft cus they rushed out a sub par system hardware wise with faulty motherboard, faulty dvd drive and the dvd drive fuck's up your game and sorry you want your halo game fixed go fuck yourself now u get the red ring of death well just mail it to us at your cost and you get a message that it was damage during shiping sorry here is your system back now u need to buy a new 1 dude detach your lips from microsofts balls cus youy sound stupid
Micro$hits (yes that your name Microsoft)....Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by 1up_TheProphet
your days are numbered, PSN is better & XBL will cease to exist. LMAO its still funny how you xbots still defend Microshits even if it means paying for overpriced items, paying for things that should be free & getting screwed. Sony just getting better & better.
Once again....
Sony & Nintendo FTW!
The Prophet has spoken.
This is my serious facePosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by Sean1680
Honestly I wish Microsoft would provide responsible competition. I've never been a fanboy and have been lucky enough to own every console since the NES. I love having 3 console to choose from. Unfortunately this is the first time I have had to exclude a major system from my collection. Sorry to offend anyone but to endorse a faulty product enthusiastically is just insane. Just listen to it. It's just like an american car. You can actually hear it's demise day by day. It's not like microsoft hasn't done this before. You buy the nicest pc and windows will still find a way to mess it up. I trust Microsoft as much as a used car salesman. Now if only someone could replace them.
If have never had a 360 fail you than your damn lucky. Enjoy Mass Effect 2
Hmm.Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by Galactic_Barret
Average, PSN doesn't need more content. The average (Heh.) quality of their titles far surpass the average quality of its XBL counterparts. This has been so for a long time, quite frankly. Quality over quantity, my good sir. I also find it a little weird that you are the only person here with a 360 that has never had any lag. Even the staunchest of 360 fans admit that lag happens at least some of the time. I guess thats the benefit of being a member of the boards: The fanboys are kept out (for the most part) and the facts come to the surface. Play Halo 3? I heard the last free weekend (or whatever Bungie calls it) was laggy, as well as the debut of Battlefield 1943. The latters' was so bad that the developers even issue a statement about it.Battlefield 1943 gets hammered, double the amount of servers
July 9th, 2009 @ 07:39
By Patrick Garratt
DICE had a fun day yesterday, launching the Xbox 360 version of Battlefield 1943 only to watch the game turn into from lag-fest into a game where it was impossible to connect to anything as the hours drew on.
Server capacity has now been increased to almost double the launch amount, so hopefully you'll find things easier today. The game's Twitter feed's here , if you're looking for constant updates.
Today should be a laugh: EA's launching the PS3 version later.
Posted in: Action , EA , Hot , PS3 , PSN , Shooter , Xbox 360 , Xbox Live
Tags: battlefield 1943 , ea dice
I guess you're just playing the right games, huh?
Meh...Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by average_gamer
Everyone has different experiences. I've had my 360 repaired twice, and never had to pay. I own two of them. The second has never had a problem. Most of my friends' 360s have never had any problem. Only one out of five had to have it repaired (all bought within the first year the console was out). That one didn't have to pay either.
I find a lot of people exaggerate the problems they've had with the 360, and there are a lot of PS3 fanboys who come on here and say they've had problems when they've never owned the console.
I've played on a friend's PS3, and I don't much like PSN. He complains about lag quite a bit, but that could just be his service provider. I've never had any problems with Xbox Live. I play online all the time and never have any lag. Other than that, the services are comparable, though Xbox Live has had their sh!t together for quite a bit longer, and still has quite a bit more content.
I'll say this about Sony, though: they're being damned stubborn. It's like they are buying into their own BS. PSN needs more content. To get it, it probably needs to be a paid service. Until then, it's always going to fall behind Xbox Live. They were stubborn about the price cut the other day as well. It would be nice for them to admit that they're facing some serious problems, with a $400 console in this economy, with Xbox selling for $200-$250. What are they thinking?
I hope behind closed doors they're more honest with themselves. I play on an Xbox, but I don't want PS3 to fail. Microsoft needs the competition. So does Nintendo. The competition is great, I just wish the fanboys would stfu.
Well Dr. McThunderstickPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by RaStarr420
What's your point I went through 2 PS1s, 3 PS2s and a PS3 that broke witihn the same month from a faulty Blu-Ray Drive that I bought it (Feb 2009) and I have both consoles and I keep my obvioulsy unbroke ass off of PSN because it doesn't suit my online gaming needs, so if u can't afford $5 a month PLEASE keep your ass off of XBL
and Sean1680
After being screwed ROYALLY by Sony last genration (Sony I want my $300 back for repairs), yet low and behold I still bought a system that crapped out a month after I bought it. All of that is to say all companies have had issues with hardware this generation it's Microsoft's turn at least they fixed it for free and not act as if they were doing you a favor by charging you $150 to fix their defective console like Sony.
There my rant is complete let the wars begin
Hmm.Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by Galactic_Barret
I have PSN and a decent connection, and since I've had my PS3, I swear I've only had one instance of lag (I do, however, remember a whole 3 hours when I couldn't connect.) that lasted 7 seconds (I counted) and it didn't even affect the game. Maybe its a CoD thing (That seems to be the go-to comparison game, as its the only game I've seen people talk about lag, and the only person I know who buys everything (1UP's Ultimate Collector) says it varies from game to game.). As for the integration of features, I can accept that that makes the service better, but a "feeling" of being in a community? Well, you may not like it, but that is exactly what Home is for. Talking strickly online gaming, XBL is superior because it allows for easier communication with your peers . Totally acceptable. That isn't lightyears ahead, but once MS' copyright/patent is up for these communication features, its definately something Sony should look into.
all the 360 fanboysPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by DrMcThunderstick
how many 360's have you guys gon threw this is the deal wii is fow the cas. gamers and kids the 360 is for the cas. to the hardcore so there online hase to show that ps3 is for the hardcore so there there online is limited but play is the same as the 360 and if people are saying that ps3 costs to much thene keep your broke ass off psn. ive gone threw 2 360 and i play fable 2 fallout 3 gears 2 and it coudlnt handle it
An Xbox 360, Gotcha!!Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by Sean1680
I loved my Xbox 360 and for awhile thought I would never need anything else. But what Microsoft does it bad for gaming. By that I mean stealing form loyal consumers. I've been through 3 360's and spent over 300 dollars on dlc in the 2 years I had a 360. All I expected was for them to replace a defective console so I could keep spending. No. Five of my friends went through the same ordeal and all now have PS3's. All of them will comment on the PS3's superiority. I am amazed how loyal 360 fanboys are. I loved mine as well but when is enough enough. The bridge is closed. It's time to give up your gamerscore.
Bottom line...Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by Damiannnn4
Live is better than PSN. I have played them both. I will buy a PS3 when the price drops but until then the PS3 can fuck off. I know I won't be buying it to play online just exclusives. If something is a Multiplatform game (COD) I will only play on XBL. It really is more challenging on XBL because I do really good on XBL but in PSN I just do too good and where is the challenge in that.
FreePosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by Sean1680
When I first bought a PS3 I really missed Xbox live. Gladly that is no longer the case. Although I miss the private chats and larger community, I think the browser and price point more than make up for it on PSN. With the failure of HD-DVD and the console's horrible reliability it seems as though all microsoft had left was better online funtionality and a few exclusives. Now that PSN has closed the gap with Xbox live i can feel alot better about missing is Gears and Mass Effect, which is all that system seems to offer me anymore. Good Riddance.
@ GalacticBarrettPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by RunawayKibbles
I've played Xbox Live and PSN using COD4 and COD:WAW respectively. On the XBL, my connection was rarely bad and the matches filled up quickly. On PSN, the games had connection issues (lots of lag) about a third of the time, and several of the matches were only about a third full (several 4 v. 3 matches).
PSN's messaging system is not as integrated as XBL's, either. Rather than just pressing the center button when the "message recieved" notification pops up, like on the 360, you have to navigate a menu to get to the message.
Overall, PSN offers pretty much the same stuff from what I've seen, but XBL is much more refined and simply works more smoothly. The 360 handles online better in my opinion because from the second you turn it on you feel connected to a network of other players... the PS3 in comparison makes me feel isolated, like my pre-internet consoles. I'm not saying that the PS3 is a bad console though... I'm just saying you get what you pay for as far as online is concerned. PSN is by no means bad, and being free doesn't hurt.
@ Galactic_BarretPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by C_GloVe
To respond to ur comment, when it comes to the basic core idea of PSN or XBL (to play games online), they both do their jobs perfectly. I have both a PS3 and an Xbox360 so they both get the main job done. The main argument of which is better is its additional features such as chat, downloadable content, and built in programs. For example, PSN has home, and XBL has its avatar system. Where I see XBL being better is its better integration of all its features. Where Home is a separate feature of the PSN package (im not a big fan of Home, but others are), XBL intergrates alot of their features to interconnect, such as avatars being featured in various games. Chat is another option, where PSN has chat, messaging, and in game chat, where XBL has their party system where 6 people can talk and chat at the same time, playing a different game each. It all depends on what you want to do on deciding which is better. I play games online with solely friends, so XBL is my choice based on that. But other than that, both PSN and XBL get the job done with doing the basic of online play.
Hmm.Posted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by Galactic_Barret
I tried to read through all of the comments again (Unsuccessfully, too much negativety, I suppose) and the gist I get from all of it is that the superiority of XBL is imperceptible, but it is mostly because everyone that owns a 360 has friends that use Live. Can I get a clearer answer as to why XBL is better? Are the games better? The stability? I mean, its only fair; The 360 fans are the ones opposing this theory from Sony, and a clear, concise answer would go a long way to ending this debate in a friendly manner. Either side can huff and puff all they want, but a level-headed person will defer to sound logic. At least, thats what I believe.
I have live goldPosted: Jul 09, 2009 12:00AM PST by pspgamer_master
but don't play on live a lot. I mostly have it for the netflix streaming but when I feel like playing against real people and there is none of my friends are around, than it is nice to have live.
I HAVE BOTH CONSOLES...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by ArtiZt
...and I prefer Live much, much more than PSN. Home gets a bit old after a while, though it is a nice touch, and the whole LIVE experience is just too robust for PSN to compete. And though I would love for LIVE to be free, the extra charge enables LIVE to be the best online console service out there. But no one should really complain as long as all the consoles can provide some kind of online gaming experience, and as long as they keep getting better.
I can kinda see what Eric is saying.....Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by MicroGates
My Xbox Live membership runs out in October and that will be it for me (I'll still download stuff, but i'm tired of paying$50 a year just to hear morons full blast there stereo when your playing GOW or qutting when the going gets tuff, I can do all of that for free on PSN!) The fact that I can surf the net and watch Blu-rays are bonuses to me.
BlazingAeroPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by papajason5
haha true that. i hate cleaning up for my friends and when they get their dorito saturated hands all over my white 360 controllers
Hmm.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Galactic_Barret
I agree with Blazing, but mostly for the fact that my friends aren't experienced gamers. If I want to feel good about my gaming skills for a few minutes, I go pound on one of them. If I want to feel like a badass for a few days, I'll play online. Family is a different story, though. Talking smack with my brothers while playing 2k8 just can't be replicated online. I think online play is a great substitute for a lack of local challenge, but a serious struggle against a great player face to face is incomparable.
PSN Home?Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by dablacklisted
I]m still hearing to many mixed fellings about PSN. I'll just have to play it myself but... it well be at a friends cuz $500 is to much for a PS3.
@BlazingaeroPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Vangerdahast
@BrighatPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Greendewey
Did you really just use fartknockers? Hahahaha. Not everyone can get a group of friends together everyday to play a game but you can turn on your console and play a multiplayer game for as much or as little time as you want everyday. That is the appeal in online gaming.
Think...then comment.
Definitely not overrated...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by BlazingAero
While playing with your friends in the room can be cool.... It can be just as cool to connect with my "familiar friends" on Live (rather than "strangers"), not have my food eaten by them, and not have to clean up after them while still having just as much to say to them. I don't have to smell my friends' breath or see their eyes to be connected with them - especially when games are the focus.
And I played PC games online for years before 360 came out... and I can say that Live is much more fun, IMO.
Hmm.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Galactic_Barret
You know, if you press start, you can transport to any place in Home (Granted, if you have the area already dl'ed. If not, yeah, download and wait) in seconds. Its sucks, but its there if you want it.
Hmm.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Galactic_Barret
I don't think any gamer would be apposed to spending x amount of money a year, month, day, however you want to break it down, if you actually gain something from the service. As it stands, you pay X amount of dollars/ cents to play something you paid for already. If it was actually lightyears ahead of the competition, then of course you should have to pay for it, but you only get two features the competition doesn't at around the same network stability. I understand having to pay for it, you have that system and you want to play your games the way they were intended to be played, but when you're trying to convince someone that paying a fee for something that is free everywhere else (With little more or less features, depending on what you play on) is ok, even a good idea, its foolish. Its not the money, its the principal.
homePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Mufugga
-_- i enjoy reading these but yeah.
ok well home isnt free. dont you have to pay to get digital shit at the mall you have to somehow walk to? lol add ons arent free either on killzone 2. lol but thats why its extra.
like the angry video game nerd says...
well thats bashing my ps3 now for my xbox..... :( i havent ran my xbox in a long time :( should i sell it? its an elite and has no issues...yet. i like 360 still but i mean...its just taking up space :( any takers?
Fanboys, pleasePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by rshafe
I've got both. I like them both. I don't like PSN because its harder to match up with friends. I don't like XBL because it costs me more. But they are both good. I've got a Wii a PSP and a DS too if anyone really wants to know. Like someone else said on this thread: No more bait. You guys are all suckers.
I have one recent complaint. I went to play Halo 3 the other night and I hadn't bought all 10 (exaggeration) new map packs and I couldn't play so I went and played Killzone 2 instead. Didn't have to pay a dime because I can pick what maps I want to match make on.
One more complaint. I wanted to check out some new levels in Little Big Planet and there was an update that had to be applied. I had to wait 15 minutes to play. Could have been in the middle of a campaign in Left 4 Dead by that time.
Is everyone satisfied and not going to murder me with crazy posts?
honestlyPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Vangerdahast
if you are any kind of dedicated gamer & the quality of online service is an issue, you are most likely going to choose one to use & the other to visit once in while.
It really doesn't matter if Live is better unless it is obviously much better, which I don't think so but then again I have only had the opportunity to see PSN for a couple of hours on my brother's console.
If you don't co-op w/ family or friends or get tipsy or hit on a Friday w/ old friends & a shooter, pop in your awesome game for any system & stfu about why you like something that is free but you don't use because you don't like to be bothered.
Every system, even the Wii, has great games. If you want the online experience & have both consoles, give both a shot and don't complain about the money.
all this free talk is pathetic. you can find deals on Amazon or CAG that have Live for 13 months that costs less than $4 a month. lunch money for a kid in pre-k.
costsPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by DrMcThunderstick
the only reason why i talked costs is cus every one saying the ps3 cost 2 much and thats not true and to show the nickle and dime of micro soft gold members should get exclusive demos downloads etc. but to have to pay just to play a game online thats sad does the psn need work ya its not perfect either but you get to play games free and there are problems with games on both psn xbl my self i dont want all that extra shit i just want to get online and play i like xbox but i prefer ps3
Hmmm that explains a lot...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by ajof25
BumbleBee: "I still have friend request that I dont know how to except."
So is that? Live users are retarded? It doesnt take half brain to do that... Complaining that its hard to use. So do u need like someone holding ur hand, walking u through and teaching u what to do? Nice work making up stuff, just to hate, u didnt sound biased at all...
I have never play Live, but how u guys make it sound("light years ahead PSN") it better make me coffee in the morning.
Why would I need all that crap, if all I want is being able to download demos and play with my friends? More is not always better. People saying that Live will be better because it will have facebook and twitter, thats a bunch of crap. Why would I want to use that on my console? specially when I usually have my computer next to me when I'm playing. Some thing u have mention might be nice to have but do u really need them?
Hmm.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Galactic_Barret
Are you sure your friends actually want to play the same game as you at the time, merry? I know when I get a message to play Warhawk or something to that effect, I usually ignore it; Yeah, we had a few good matches and whatnot, but I'm playing this game for a reason. Sometimes, I just want to play alone. Speaking of online, I never curse Sony for not including headsets (The people that do have them usually do something useful, gamewise, with them) but I always hate when I don't have one so I can curse out the people on my team who aren't doing their jobs. Kind of a double-edged sword, so I can understand that. Still, I prefer that to giving idiots with nothing useful to contribute free reign to destroy the little bit of civility that exists on PSN.
always fanboy fightingPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by GenJones32
They both offer what they offer and they both do it well. I actually think the two services have a distinct difference and feel. The PSN is noticeably Eastern and XBL is noticeably Western.
For those dissing HOME, HOME is pretty damn successful while ppl want to make fun of it often, especially games journalist, there is a constant rate of thousands of people who use that service daily. At any point during the day you can always find hundreds of people online, I can wake up at 2am and still see hundreds of people not to mention the give and take of spaces/games vs advertising.
Sony is making a damn good penny off home, Home nuts buy tons of shit in that application.
ArguingPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Greendewey
No one is arguing that you get better hardware for a 360. People keep bringing that up and its irrelevant. Games people. Games is what determines what makes the money for the system worth it.
Xbox has more popular games (notice I didn't say better I said more popular. I personally think they are better but that's an opinion). Therefore, it is worth the money regardless of lack of blu ray, smaller HDD and no built in wireless. No one cares about that just like PS3 owners say they don't care about all the extra stuff XBL provides for $50 a year.
Thats all there is to it.
@ osebassPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by merryprankster
Your right, it is easy to see what your friends are doing on PS3. What is difficult is talking to them or getting them doing the same thing you are. The in game XMB really needs and invite and a chat option.
If I'm playing Uncharted and my buddy is playing inFamous, and we feel like shooting the shit, we just can't do it. Conversly if I'm online in a game I can't just pop to the XMB for a quike invite. These are social networking issues that XBL adressed a long time ago, which is why XBL is 'ahead' of PSN in this area.
Don't get me wrong PSN does a lot of things really well, but it needs to streamline getting peopel together and playing games. Home is not the answer, if anything home makes communication more obtuse.
Hmm.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Galactic_Barret
I've never understood something like "X game doesn't appeal to me". I mean, I can understand not liking a particular genre or even the design of some games, but a great game is a great game. Hey, I'll be the first to admit that I prefer the PS3, but I know I'd probably like Halo 3 or Gears 2 if I tried it. What does appealing to you entail? Having a catchy title? A cool looking main character? Is it the developer? I hear that alot and I always cringe at the sound of it because it boils down to you not liking what you see. Is it really as simple as you preferring to utilize one console for one purpose and one for the other? Help me to understand because its really mind-boggling.
food for thoughtPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by osebass
@cronquist- you can check your trophies list on the web. the ps3 website should guide you how to do it, but its not that complicated
@connecticut yankee- there is home support, if you havent relized, but just to clear up the air in here, HOME IS A BETA!
@eatmeahx8- if you actually had a ps3, you would be able to tell the time dummy. just press the ps button in middle. there, does that help. oh yeah check the upper right corner of the screen.
@optmusprime- thats funny you say that since youre on here bashing the psn. why arent you on the best online gaming console , and instead bitchin' about anothers network. funny
@shaka999- no no you please shut your mouth (or fingers since your typing)
@everyone else- i started gaming online with ps2 then graduated to ps3 and found the network works quite well. i have grown accustomed to what my system offers and the manuverability of the system interface and now i love it. im sure if i switched to 360, it would be kind of a pain to navigate around, since im already used to my ps3. i think thats what a lot of 360 owners experience with the ps3 and it interface. i can always tell which buddy is online, and whens the last time they were online. for what the ps3 offers, straight out the box, is awesome and its too bad that some 360 owners will never see that.
Most of My TimePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by porkchop_soldier
Most of my time is spent on XBL because of the overall feel of it. Sure the menus could be improved, but I like the way it is. PS3's menus may be quicker, slicker --and whatever else fits here-- but it just simply is dull.
Free is nice and all but I don't care. 50 dollars a year isn't asking much. Exclusives do. The PS3 has some nice titles, but none of them really suit me. Online gaming and social interaction (voice chat, party chat, text chat) is the deal breaker for me. It's more fluid and accessable on the Xbox.
Waiting for updates on the PS3 is a pain. It's also one reason I hardly play. Sure, watching blu-ray movies on the PS3 is cool, but it's sad when there aren't any appealing games out at the moment and all I have is a blu-ray player collecting dust (it's actually very clean).
The future of the PS3 is what I'm looking forward to, but sadly, it's in the future. When I want to spend my time away from the "real" world, I turn to my Xbox.
I support both. I appreciate both. Both have their faults. Both have their strong points. I just honestly think that Sony does have a lot of catching up to do. I think they need to make the interface more friendly, more interesting and not so dull.
If you can enjoy the games out there now - great. I'm just very selective. I'm kind of picky anymore about what I play. A few years ago, I would have been all about this stuff.
In conclusion, I need to get some sleep. I hope I've made some sense. Even that's enough for me.
UMMM NO?Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by pspgamer_master
Yeah they are still playing catch up no question about it.
3 characters :-)Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Hoffer
I don't mind paying for Xbox Live because it is awesome. Granted I don't play multiplayer games much on my PS3. When I have, it was never as good an experience as Xbox Live. I've gone into Home 3-4 times and I just find it worthless.
1up does it againPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by alienNinja
You know i dont have a problem with rivalry if 360 and PS3 fans were all best friends we wouldnt need multiple consoles because everyone would have the same one. The thing that pisses me off is 1up putting up stupid articles like this every other day to get everyone wound up. Hey 1up hows about putting more news about, guess what? games stuff that people who frequent this site really want to read about Im tired of hearing about what microsoft is doing better than sony or what nintendo is doing better than MS and Sony. We dont need to hear about comments that execs are making in these companies. You guys need to focus on keeping this site updated and gamers informed on whats gonna bring more excitement to the gaming world not petty BS like this article.
DrMcthunderstick's commentsPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by rynedee
I haven't seen the costs broken down like that before.
The arguement that the 360 gives you less features for less price is a bit of a misnomer. You can probably live the wired controllers (i wouldn't mind wired PS3 dual shocks truth be told) and the HDD size isn't that big of a deal for most gamers.
My issue lies with Live. I've yet to hear of a Live feature that is worth $50 a year. It seems the 360 guys/gals like to tout Live simply because they pay for it, much like PS3 owners like to promote the PS3 hardware. The difference is my upcharge is a one-time shot with better components (WiFi, blu-ray, bluetooth, etc.), and this doesn't even consider the user experience (RRoD anyone?).
The PSN functions well for what it is designated purpose, which is serve online games. The people that moan about lack of cross game chat are living in a dream world. We already have devices that allow that type of thing (think telephone or Skype). A gaming network shouldn't use bandwidth to deliver telecommunications, it should be used to provide 1s and 0s gamers need to frag others online.
I like that Sony is comfortable with where their network is at. I'm also glad to see they aren't too excited to get into digital distribution of games. Games are just fine on disc-based media right now. Sony made the right decision to (mostly) limit their online offerings to small indie games (Pain, HVB, etc.).
fanboysPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Vangerdahast
The best are the liars who pretend that they gave Live or Home a real chance by actually using it regularly for a period of time. "I'm an owner of both systems & PSN is better or Live is better".... whatever bitches (some of you who tried or have seen someone else use it for an hour).
rah rah rah, Sony rules rah rah rah MS rules rah rah rah Nintendo rules... You know what rules? Western developers rule & have changed games for the better & are taking Japanese profits.
It is at the point that the once high & mighty "wait a year for the western/european version to come out, if it does at all"Japanese developers are scrambling to make "western style games".
Between Gears/Daggerfall( I mean Fallout for all the fashionably late LA party-goers)/Mass Effect, millions have transferred from the East to the West. I just hope all of this bandwagon saturation takes a Darwinian spin & a handful of amazing games survive.
Heres looking at you Dragon Age! Bring that shit on!
The word "Free" is the key herePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by voodoo_12
Juan, I couldnt agree with you more. Xbox LIVE has extra features than what PSN has but with a price to go with it.
Most of these GOLD users touting their service are afraid to accept that they are paying $40 a year to basically play online and a few (and I mean few) timed demos. In other words, GOLD users are subsidizing the SILVER users.who get the majority of LIVE for free.
PSN isnt the "end all"..its free, plain and simple. All PSN users get the same thing.
And in the end, all that really matters is that we get to play online multiplayer.
and by the way.. for the chumps that try to use the matchmaking bolognia....HALO, Gears of War, L4D, etc... use their own matchmaking/servers, not M$. No different than Devs using their own servers on PSN.
PSN is fine to mePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by juan_time
I'd give Live the edge simply because it's evolved so, the user-base alone helps. Next throw in the membership fees and you have a self-sustaining system.
But PSN seems pretty good imo. I have never used any friends features, but the menu layout is fairly simple and the navigation is something I prefer over Live. If a game has online, you can play it online, right? One or two games or the occasional hick-up doesn't constitute a complete failure to me. Home is something I think I've decided I don't really care for, but it offers feature someone else might like. (My favorite thing in Home was trying to stand on a rail just because I wasn't supposed to.) Maybe I'll give it another try.
Honestly, I haven't really used PSN save for the few D-loads for my PSP, but I actually think of it as a pretty decent operation considering what it offers and that you don't have to pay for it.
JaylanPHNXPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by DrMcThunderstick
your right but if your goin to get a next gen system and trust me i have both i like some games on 1 and some games on the other just spend the extra cash and get loaded 1 which you cant get on the 360 it just sucks that they nickle and dime cash out of you
Hmm.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Galactic_Barret
I'm sorry, prodigy, but when you have a free service like Home that makes millions in revenue just from advertising and purchased goods, without mandatory payments from the consumer, thats something to talk about, regardless of what you feel about the quality. Until it stops making them money, you better believe they'll mention it as much as they can. Sony understands that free to play is the next big thing, and is successful in that area. Just look at Freerealms.
OptionsPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by JaylanPHNX
DrMcThunderstick has a point, but I think the key there is "if you want." The 360 does indeed end up being more for all the options ad hoc, but the PS3 makes you pay for all of them wether you want them or not. There is something to be said for having a cheaper option that can be upgraded later. And the rechargable battery thing can be had for much cheaper if you buy a four-pack of energizer rechargeables and a charger for ~$14. I'm no fanboy, I like both systems, but I am for fair and accurate dialogue (and that doesn't mean I think DrMcThunderstick is a liar or anything, his point is quite valid and well-thought-out.)
tm tired of complaints about cost of ps3Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by DrMcThunderstick
160 gig ps3 $499 120 gig 360 elite $399 and if u want the 360 to do the same as the ps3. You need to spend $90 for wifi cus it dont come with it if you want the cordless controllers to charge there own bats. you need to spend $30. You want to upgrade the hdd you cant unless microsoft makes a new 1 ps3 any laptop hdd and if the hddvd would of won thats another $120 and you want to play online thats $50 a year so thats $689 xbox 360 $499 ps3 so which is more costly
@ great bossPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by born.prodigy
It's $50 a year not per month. It equals out to $1 a week. If you can't afford $1 a week for a much better online service then find another hobby. To be honest, I would rather see Sony switch to a paid service similar to XBL. Even if you only spend a couple hours per week online it's worth it. Also, HOME SUCKS. Sony should NEVER brag about HOME because it was a huge waste of R&D.
Hmm.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Galactic_Barret
Does anyone know how long MS has the copyright on party chat and cross-game invite features? I remember that this was the same reason in-game XMB took so long. Again, I'm not holding my breath (I don't like socializing with the average "gamer", and my friends don't own any next-gen system yet (Swear on my daughter, the only friend I had with a 360 took it back)) but anything to watch the people who say XBL is lightyears ahead of PSN (Same thing they said about Natal vs. PSEye. Dissecting that was pretty fun.) fumble around for the next feature that makes it superior is a great lesson in psychology in my book.
Just waiting for MAGPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by bander_snatch88
Just got my PS3 fixed and I had to update it to hell. It's better than i remembered so im not complaining. Whats better? LIVE or PSN? Dont know, cause im having fun on both;)
FreebiesPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by great_boss
PSN offers free content and Home but is not good enough. Xbox Live has you coughing up $50 for a month and yet it's the hottest thing since sliced bread. Anyone see anything wrong with this picture?
Sony needs a better attitude...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by nrXic
The Party system alone makes XBL better than Steam or PSN.
The fact that I can have 8 close friends (I don't like playing with random people too much) from all over the city jump from game to game instantly while not being disconnected from each other is one of the biggest new features of online gaming IMO.
Going from 8 player Co Op in Duke Nukem to 8 player deathmatch in Bomberman within seconds is amazing.
Sony has made massive strides since the launch of the PS3. But they are still playing catchup, and that's what happens when you aren't the industry leader. MS has taken ownership of online gaming and has made it very good. Half of that has to do with the fact that they charge for it, and they can pay for R&D that makes the experience better and better as years go by.
Sony's Home has potential, if they can allow you to set up Parties in there, and jump from any game, back to lobby, to any game, it would be very comparable. But I'm skeptical as to when we will see such a feature.
NopePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Terpsnation
Try playing MLB 09 on PSN. Its not possible. The lag is ridiculous.
hmmm....Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by themachineryinside
while I don't have a PS3, 'Party" chat is an absolute must for online gaming, it gets pretty lonely with out it. But buying movies and watching them seems ahead of the curve by leaps and bounds with PSN. Streaming while downloading your movie is pretty nice.
UH...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by eye_dig_graves
I'm not trying to start a fanboy war but I really don't think that PSN is remotely comparable to XBL. I play Call of Duty on both systems and I much rather play it on XBL than PSN.
is there a software update to make this happenPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by johnny_cass
coz if there is jez it would be great
milkman_v1Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by slayer0096
LOL....dude nice
Well...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by frost_over_fire
I couldn't care less about online gaming. Running around in a bunch of maps constantly shooting people is not fun for me. I need a story, an adventure, platforming, rpgs, that's my reason for gaming, and that's why I have all 3 consoles.
Mostly truePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by phinn
PS3s games are certainly awesome now, their exclusives are by far the best, and their PSN lineup is solid.
But in terms of PSN features it certainly should play some catch-up, I mean the system still doesn't do Cross Game Voice Chat and have very many Party features. Yea we all know PS3 has 16-way cross-game text chat but F text chat, the 8-way private voice chat it already has out of games it needs to bring into games as well.
This is getting ridiculous.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by drich8103
Why is it when ever there is an article on Sony there is always 360 fanboys on here hating. Now I'll admit I love my PS3 and I talk them up tremedously, I'll even advertise if I could, but Ill never go to an article about Microsoft and bash the competition. This seems to be the case with other PS3 owners. They dont go out of their way to bash the competition all the time on MS articles. It is getting to a point that it seems more like jealousy. Damn, calm down and replace your 360 every three weeks and get a life. Maybe this is because the average age for 360 owners is 1-2 years (j/k I know is 12-18 or something young like that) and PS3 is 24-35. The system and its owners are more mature. Just take a look at the games. PS3 isnt all about kill kill and murder murder. There games actually have meaing and make you use your brain. So stop the hate and congradulate. Besides when the new cheaper slim is release next month it is over for the 360!!
PSN vs XBLPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by KrazzyDealer
Well i have both and I think graphics and pwr PS3 has it going, but they have a horrible line up and they are to expensive. You can have a decent desktop for the PS3 price. Xbox is still the forerunner on gaming PS3 lowers its price i might be game
Thorstein...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by WarCriminal
Thanks for your thorough reply to my post. I was actually pointing out that there was nothing other than home that was unique to PSN. All of those PSN features are the result of 'playing catch-up' (which Sony has done rather quickly). I was just curious how Mr Lempel can, in good conscience, say things like "we've got some other things they don't have," or "there's a lot we're doing that in some cases they're not doing."
i have bothPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by dmike6
There is a huge difference in the services, which is nice. I love the browse service from Sony. Microsoft wins with the games tho. It is just easier and more more user friendly to join and connect. Each one has a few downsides also, but they both are not horrible. Just get a system and stop drawing lines.
I like Xbox Live better.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Zenin
PSN is just... So lonely. I feel like I'm just there to play games, and not socialize. Not becuase that's how I want it, but because that's how it's set up.
XBL is more social, more "warm" and more fun. But XBOX needs to make their menus as smooth and fast as Playstation for reals. That shit is a joke. Not to say I hate the XBOX menus, but speed needs to greatly improve.
this is the testPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by DrMcThunderstick
i have a 360 and ps3 i like the ps3 better myself just cus you can get online with it better halo gears you spend more time finding a game the playing it but 360 is user friendly i do admit the and if M.A.G goes of with out a hitch game over sorry 360 cant compete
@gizakxtorPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Greendewey
your paragraph was waaaay to complex for us nerds with no lifes (its actually spelled "lives" genius) to understand.
@milkman_v1 Lol
Fight Fight Fight FightPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by milkman_v1
Mooooooooorttttaaaaaalllllll Koooooooommmmmbaaaaaaaattt!!!
OK WTFPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by gizakxtor
When i see this page with all the comments i see nerds most of you all don't have lifes. So what i have no problems with my ps3 or getting on my PSN. Why in every damn page that says anything about ps3 theres always a bunch of xbox 360 fanboys snapping there jaws saying ps3 sucks they don't. I have both ps3 and xbox 360 i say there equal in different ways. You got to see that ps3 came out year or 2 later so yeah xbox 360 is going to have some good stuff. PS3 they have stuff that xbox 360 doesn't have and playstation home is not retarded its a place to meet people from around the world and play online games with. Yeah buying stuff for your avetar is retarded but i talk to people from Germany,Iraq,south america,France and many more other location. I don't get it party mode? Its just a place to talk to friends or team up on people on a game ps3 got chat rooms for txt or head phone. Yeah you can chat with one of those cameras for both. Don't ever say messaging is slow its the person you are talking to so shut up.
Xbox 360 User here...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Bullseye76
I have almost bought a PS3 a few times and I have always found reasons not to. Online play is a HUGE reason for me. I want a good way to network with friends and play games and chat while we play via a headset. Don't get me wrong, 360 has MAJOR problems with their online, most of it comes from users in the form of being rude, obnoxious and just all around ignorant, but there are some great people who can be found.
Sony needs to get a move on, Nintendo is a joke when it comes to online. Xbox has many issues(Cost of content, inability to police its own community, etc.) but they are at the top of the mountain.
Im satisfied withPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by AnfonyO
Xbox live and my 360 till now. It's incredible how much of a wide variety of things the console and service offer. Till now I am thoroughly satisfied. Have not tried out the PSN so I'm going to refrain from commenting at all about it. One thing I can comment about is the pricing. Not sure why people have so much trouble paying 5$ a month for a service that provides them hours of non-stop entertainment. Honestly, I think it's extremely cheap. it's like renting a movie except you get a whole month of an incredible ass kicking experience. For me, it's as free as it gets with live.
BumblebeePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by SteveStills
If you can't figure out how to accept a friend request on PSN, then you do not deserve to have a PS3. It's not rocket science. A 5 year old could figure it out.
PS3 needs a PartyChat to comparePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Nowayjose1
I own all 3systems and I love PS3 over my 360 hands down, but without the Party chat the PS3 is lacking big time. Prime example I was on COD4 last night wanted to talk to my boy playing Infamous, we had to trun our 360 to use the Party Chat to talk. How messed up is that? Im sorry but text chat is useless on a FPS. Once the PS3 Gets that Party Chat then you can't compare ever. Offer the party chat for free with everything else then you will people 2nd quess on what system to buy. A power house 10 life or a Red Ring every 7months. ( Im on my 3rd xbox.) Sony Party System make it happen.
Party is what the PS3 NEEDS!Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Nowayjose1
I own all 3system and I love PS3 over my 360 hands down, but without the Party chat the PS3 is lacking big time. Prime example I was on COD4 last night wanted to talk to by boy playing Infamous we had to trun our 360 to use the Party Chat to talk. How messed up is that? Im sorry but text chat is useless on a FPS. Once the PS3 Gets that Party Chat then you can't compare ever. Offer the party chat for free with everything else then you will people 2nd quess on what system to buy. A power house 10 life or a Red Ring every 7months. ( Im on my 3rd xbox.) Sony Party System make it happen.
*sigh* Haku BakuPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Wii360Ps3_owner
Sentence 1: "I absolutely HATE it when people assume that their isolated incidents happen to everyone else and use that to bash a product"
Sentence 2:" I think that most people just want to prefer XBLIVE because that's what is popular.""
I HATE when people assume things like in your second sentence. both your sentences contradict each other. You hate when people assume yet you assume in the secind one. get a life
@Galactic_BarretPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Greendewey
I've had friends playing one game not noticing that I've logged on and when I invite them to Halo for example, then they switch games. It happens a lot with me and my friends.
PSN isnt even on the same road as LivePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by BumbleBeeC
PSN is not friendly in the slightest, I still have friend request that I dont know how to except. Owning both PS3 & Xbox I can say I am happy as hell to pay 50 buck for the endless hours I put into my xbox as opposed to my ps3. LIVE IS LIGHTYEARS AHEAD OF PSN AND I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT USER FRIENDLYNESS AND YOUR FRIENDS ARE SO MUCH EASIER TO CONTACT.
Real FriendsPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by AStrangeDisease
My friends are on Xbox Live. So is Halo. Those two things alone make it worth $50/year.
I don't even need to compare features. People already know which is better. Microsoft is online software.
You get what you pay forPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Greendewey
I get disconnected from PSN all the time. It takes me 3 or more tries to just download an update. It may be my internet connection but I never have that problem with Xbox live, which means regardless of the problem Xbox live can handle it while Sony's free system cannot.
Hmm.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Galactic_Barret
I would love to know what the hell is so great about cross-game invites? I can understand party chat a little (arguing with people about stupid crap online to lessen the chance of ass kicking incidents), but cross-game invites? So I'm inviting people to exit their game just to join mine? Do most people actually go for that? Because I know, if I'm in the middle of a game, I don't even want to talk to my wife, let alone someone I met online in some game. I hate being bothered when I'm doing work, and I really only like talking to someone if its to praise them or curse a teammate out. I don't know, maybe once M$ loses the patent on both I can see what the fuss is about or ask a few trustworthy people if they think those features are really essential, but as it stands, it just seems like its something that 360 owners feel they have left to brag about. It doesn't seem like there is much to brag about nowadays.
Live Superior, PSN inferior...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by IcAnDoDaT
I'm not a fanboy of either console, I have them all (even PSP and DS), etc...
to lets just be honest, Live is way better than PSN, PSN is just plain, and sometimes hard to use, the party system on Resistance 2 is really hard to figure out (once you get the hang of it it's ok), but nothing like the good old Live service...
50 bucks for Live
Free for PSN...
i'm happy with both, if a game is multiplayer, i'll get it on 360...anything else i'll stick to Ps3 :) simple solution, at the end, just enjoy the game and who cares about the rest of the BS...
Ha ha ha ha ha ha....Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by ghost_7
Posted: 07/08/2009
"I you can't afford to pay for online gaming, then I probably wouldn't want to play with you anyway. Serious online gamers want a challange. Part-time PS3 players would just get slaughtered."-AstrangeDisease
Anyways after your Elitst/trollish post.....Riiiiiiiiiiight.....Just like team xbox "slaughtered" team PlayStation on that Capcom's Street Fighter 4 Tournament. Ooh oh ooh oh.....wait.....It was the other way around.
meh....like both.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by BoomerKid
For being free, PSN is ok. Home sucks. And the reason I complain about it while being free, is they sold it as the next big thing. It was supposed to be this awesome online interface. Watch movies on your sony bravia tv in your apartment, share music, photos etc. They never delivered. And now that Hulu doesn't work anymore it just got worse.
I wanted to watch Dr. Horrible blog on Hulu and I ended up buying it on the XBL market place.( i know i can go to my pc for that, but i wanted to watch it in hd on my tv ) There is still catch up to be done, but Sony has made big strides and they are getting close to features on par with XBL.
*sigh*Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by HakuBaku
I absolutely HATE it when people assume that their isolated incidents happen to everyone else and use that to bash a product (ex: I have two friends who had an iPhone and their phone ALWAYS hung up on its own, so therefore, I refuse to buy an iPhone.) Just because you had connection problems with PSN or XBLIVE doesn't mean that it's a problem with Sony or Microsoft's networks. It's probably your own shitty connection. And I'm sure both PSN XBLIVE have their share of problems.
Now as for the quality of both services...I'm not so sure as I've only used XBLIVE briefly. As for the overall presentation, I prefer PSN over XBLIVE, but that's because of personal taste. I despise the XB360's UI (the old and the new one), so, of course I prefer PSN. I do agree with those who say that PSN has thing that XBLIVE doesn't, and XBLIVE has things that PSN doesn't. But hey, that's the joy of having choice. I just don't believe that XBLIVE is miles ahead anymore, as some of you still believe. I think that most people just want to prefer XBLIVE because that's what is popular. People go with what's more popular. Look at the iPod's success. But does popularity always mean much better quality? Hmm....
PSN SUCKS BALLSPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Opt-musprime
I own both the PS3 and Xbox360 and by reading most of these replys I can see bunch PS3 fanboys are replying, probably because everyone with a xbox360 is online playing games right now. It makes me sick to look at my PS3, god what a waist of money. And to GRILLEDCHEESE345 you don't need an extra adapter that cost $50 to get on xbox live for the 360 idiot. Now lets thank the idiots at 1up for bringing us some more important news.
Happy with Live...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by BlazingAero
Live has never given me a problem, and the party/chat options are abundant. $50 a year is chump change for the best console online gaming experience around. Also, WORMS!!
Now if they could do something about Red Rings, then PS3 would be damn near irrelevant (not bashing)...
MAN...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by EATMEAHX8
Fuck you, fanboys. I have both systems and it doesn't take an idiot to realize that Xbox Live is better. Who cares if you pay a little a month. You pay for quality. Like I said, I have both systems(and a Wii, but let's not get into that), but the good ol' Xbox is where it's at! Damn. You can't even bring up the time when you press the PS3 button the middle of the controller. I really noticed that because I don't have a clock downstairs and was playing FFVI waiting for 1 vs.100 to get started.
Problems with PSN???Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Marmac_12
Don't know what ghetto connection you guys have but I've never had a single problem playing online games with my PS3. Never got disconnected. I think it happened maybe once or twice since launch. I've had way more problems with Xbox Live. Go figure that one out.
@ EKGTrooperPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by merryprankster
Yeah it boggles the mind. I know that some games on PS3 have in game friend invites, but on 360 it is so easy to get people together to play. I really think Sony needs to work that out before PSN works as well as Live. If they fixed that, and gave me an erganomic controller that wasn't child sized I suspect my PS3 would see a ton more action.
As sad as it sounds I really do think I play my 360 more just because of my friends list and the more comfortable controller.
Ummmm...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by FiendishDude.1up.com
I'd say it is true in the sense that they probably have the best downloadable games but I don't think their feature list is anywhere near what Live has.
That's BullPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by TJD32204
I play on both PSN and XBL and psn doesn't come close to equaling what XBL offers for a nominal fee. If psn worked as good as XBL I wouldn't mind paying for it. That's not even to mention there's no cross game invites and half the people on psn don't have headsets. I rarely play games online wit my ps3 over my 360, if ever.
I think that Home's issue....Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by merryprankster
Is that it seems focused at a younger demographic, yet the PS3 itself is focused at an older demographic. I don't think the service really matches up with the majority of the PS3 consumers.
@ Legend247Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by EKGTrooper
@ Legend247. I have had a PS3 since day one and I never had any problems getting disconnected or dropping out of games. My Xbox 360 does that a heck of a lot more than my PS3. That is one of the main reasons I tell people to get a PS3, because the online is smoother.
@ merrypranksterPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by EKGTrooper
@ merryprankster. Yep, you couldn't be more correct. The PSN is great with all the things they offer, and the fact that it is free. It has some things the Xbox doesn't, and the Xbox has some things that PSN doesn't. Buy your 100% correct with what you said. It amazes me that Sony has overlooked the fact that us gamers would like to have an easy way to talk to eachother and join eachothers games.
It is simply inexcusable that they have taken so long to put something solid in place for that.
If Sony is so confident in Home...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Connecticut_Yankee
...then why aren't they supporting it like they said they were going to before the beta launched? I think it was a very bad idea for Phil Harison to leave Sony just months before his service launched. He and his team had been working on Home years before the PS3 was unveiled and it was sure to be his legacy. But alas, he left on a mission to save Atari last year and I don't think Sony had much of a clue when they launched Home.
I do like Home's potential, its just unclear what Sony wants to do with it. By the way, I own all three systems and enjoy playing all of them...so there!
Exactly....Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by merryprankster
As long as you don't want to easily communicate and play games with friends PSN is totally up to speed.
I think it's time for Microsoft to catch up with Sony.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Marmac_12
You all seem to forget that PSN is completely FREE. No fees to play online games and download demos. In the end, that's what counts the most for me. I have a 360 with a silver membership and I will never pay to upgrade to a gold membership. I get the same exact online experience on PSN for FREE. I think it's time for Microsoft to catch up with Sony and deliver a free online service for online games and demos. Screw Microsoft.
PSN or XBLAPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by vinny_87p
My answer to this is that PSN is free and you get a ton of features. They do listen to the community through the PS blog and they have and are in the process of making changes because of the feedback. XBLA is also a great service. When i have borrowed my friends 360 i have found it has more to offer but you do have to pay for it. I like the community games channel though at this point it has become a little too crowed with shovelware. (Not dissing the channel just too much games). As for online play both services are about equal. Because the PS3 is set up so you don't have to use PSN, some games, MGO, suffer because the publishers use their own service. However games like COD4 play equally as well on XBLA as they do on PSN.
here we goPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by slayer0096
who cares whats better the only thing i care is that iam able to play games online on both consoles + Wii...not intrested in avatars..themes..just dlc for my games and online play thats all i need..i dont need to turn my game consoles into playing dress up with their dashbords xmb or what gizmos...just to play games.
psn sucksPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by ionlyspeakcowbell
i hate my ps3 with a passion but im grateful that i at least was able to get one in these TOUGH TIMES!!!...plus the bluray player is sweet
My perspectivePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by grilledcheese345
As a PS3 owner, I LOVE THE PSN. I can play with my friends and kick their asses online, I can chat with them (via messaging, chat rooms, and PS EYE), I can send them pictures and videos, and I can make my own highly customizable avatar (and hangout space) on Home. I can rent and even purchase movies from the PSN store. I can buy television programs too. I can purchase PS1 titles. There are also many, many games exclusive to the PSN store (PixelJunkMonsters, Flower, and NobyNobyBoy to name a few off the top of my head) that are available to PS3 owners. With my PS3 I can also browse the internet (not really PSN related, but still pretty nifty). There is more but I just can think of anything else right now lol.
The best part is it's all free.
Ps. I don't dislike Xbox Live or the Xbox 360. I don't mention it because, well, I don't own a 360 so how I can my opinion about be completely accurate? I had the original Xbox back in the day, (I bought it for Halo 2. I loved that game lol) but I've always been a Playstation kid at heart. I've been with Playstation since I first saw Crash Bandicoot 2 at my friend's house in the 3rd grade. Playstation is where I started gaming and Playstation is where I'm going to stay.
wait..Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by SuperNormalGamer
""I don't think there's a lot of 'catch up' [with XBL] anymore..."
but there is still some catch up!!! I like psn and it has all the basic features of XBL but XBL is still better but thats cuz its a paid service. If psn was a paid service it too would be more complete. Yes sony has taken great steps to try to catch up and in many aspects they are working. Many games i play online now are stable and joining a game is always easy now. theres not a lot to complain about but at the same time there is room for improvement so i think Eric Lempel is wrong. Well I wouldnt take him to seriously cuz it is his job of course to blindly advertise Sony
sorry thorstein try againPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Wii360Ps3_owner
Posted: 07/08/2009
And arguing one v the other is ridiculous! Can I use both to find friends and play online together? YES
Can I dload games from both ? Yes
Party Mode? (I thought it was an Xbox and not a Wii) Who cares. this matters alot. i would just like to chat to my freinds while playing COD and not have to hear everyones garbage. live has this and PSN does not.
Can I get DLC from both? Yes.
Can I play online without subscriptions (not referring to XBL subscriptions) with both? Yes
So what exactly is th argument? Voice chat? (Yes
And I will take quality over a quick dload any day. Sony's online service is fantastic. Wii's is good. I would say the Xbox experience is only praised by those that haven't used the others. i have all three and live is better than PSN.
Sony's got Twitter and Facebook via the web browser....live will have that as well. on the blades and not online which is better!
I just remembered something else...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by grilledcheese345
...it's not PSN related...well..sorta..
If you have a PS3 you don't need to buy an adaptor. The PS3 is online enabled right out of the box. I don't know how much an adaptor for the 360 costs but the one I had for my original Xbox was like $50-$60 if I remember correctly.
The PS3 might cost a tid more than the 360, but when you add the adaptor plus the 50 bucks a year it's about the same ya know? With 50 extra dollars in my pocket I can get a new game!
I really wish everyone knew how great the PS3 is. That's the major problem I think. People just don't know.
@thorsteinPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by shadow_logic
And I will take quality over a quick dload any day. Sony's online service is fantastic. Wii's is good. I would say the Xbox experience is only praised by those that haven't used the others. But comparing the new "Xbot" dload service to Steam? Ugh... I don't think so. And therein lies your bias. that is Failz.
Wii's online is good? Explain to me how having 12 and 16 digit mandatory friend codes, no chat features, no friend interaction or even a basic friend LIST is good. I've used all 3, and it's generally accepted that XBL is better. You're boiling down an extensive service to its basic barebone features. True, you can go to Twitter and Facebook in the PS3 browser, but with 360 its integrated, its right there and it's formatted for your TV and a hell of a lot more user friendly. PS3 has no party chat, and yes, people do care. In order to chat with someone I have to play the same game as them AND be on the same team etc. On XBL I can play RE5 and chat with someone playing a completely different game, or even someone sitting on the dashboard. You don't realize what XBL has that PSN never will. Ease of use alone is worth my 50 bucks.
Is this FOX news?Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by LittleBean!!
Can ya'll report gaming news without the Micheal Moore play by play.
"It seems Sony is satisfied with the service they provide and not looking to the Xbox service for guidance anymore; though it's an interesting tacit admission that the company ever was."
In the future... just the facts ma'am.
PSN = WINPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by onslaughtree
I get online play games, chat via voice or text. I play lag free games, see which of m friends are online or not, download demos and games with ease and by god, its all very easy. weather you choose 360 or PS3, the onine funtions and community features are all top notch, so im very hapy with psn and as someone else mentioned, I DONT HAVE TO PAY FOR THESE FEATURES.
Here you goPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by thorstein
"Anyone? I can't think of anything else unique to PSN. I'll stick with my $50 annual fee for a system that works (not including EA titles that never network well on consoles)."
I just checked what the Xperience has to offer:
- Dashboard: The New Xbox Experience delivers a stunning, easy-to-navigate interface that displays rich cover art for your games and entertainment content.
PS Cross Media Bar? Yeah, there at launch. My icons are from Fallout 3 and my background from KZ2....
- Avatars: Show your style with a customized, animated Avatar with hundreds of choices for hair style, clothes, and accessories. Your Avatar can host a LIVE Party, participate in a game, or just chat with friends.
On home... Wii has avatars that you can transport to your friends house via the wii mote....
- Marketplace on Xbox.Com: It's easy to buy and download games, demos, and trailers to your console from the newly redesigned Xbox LIVE Marketplace through Xbox.com
PSN Store: Check Wii shop channel allows for various Virtual Console and Wii Ware games. Punisher and many many more already available on PSN. Wii has full games for dload.
- Community Games: For the first time in the history of console gaming, the Community Games channel on Xbox LIVE will include hundreds of creatively diverse games developed by the community.
Channel? You mean like the Wii channels? All this time PSN was playing catch up!?!! XBOx finally got Wii features! Home has community games as well. LBP has THOUSANDS, not hundreds of creatively deveolped levels by the community.
- Friends Channel: In Friends Channel, keep your social scene active, finding friends, issuing challenges, and texting or voice chatting with friends.
Wii has find a friend (rather poor really.) PSN? Yes. All you need is a name.
- Parties: Parties take the celebration online, connecting up to eight friends in one hot venue to catch up on chat, share photos real-time, and entertain friends across town or around the world
Can be done in Home. Share photos without a special "channel." Texting, chat, is all on PSN.
- Themes: Themes in the New Xbox Experience can take over more than just the background of the Dashboard. You can see your friends' avatars in different themed environments on the Friends Channel.
I can see my friends online too, even in game, I get a message like on steam.
- Guide Button: The New Xbox Experience includes an improved Xbox 360 Guide Button functionality for even faster navigation for your Xbox 360.
Really? A guide button? That is a selling point? Meh.
- Play from Hard Drive: This Feature allows you to copy most Xbox 360 games to your hard drive, cutting load times considerably (original disc still required to play).
I did that as soon as I bought my MGS4 version.
PSN:Friends and Messaging
- Text and chat with your friends.
- See which of your friends are online and see what games they are playing.
- Use voice chat for real-time communication2.
- You can video chat with up to six people using the PlayStation®Eye3.
- PlayStation®Store
- Preview upcoming games with free playable demos.
- Download PS One® games for your PLAYSTATION®3 and PSP® (PlayStation®Portable) systems.
- Purchase exclusive downloadable games for your PLAYSTATION®3 system.
- Watch high-definition movie and game trailers4.
- Download movies and TV shows to watch right now. Rent or purchase. High definition or standard definition. Right to your PLAYSTATION®3 system. You can rent or purchase programs and view them on both your PS3™ system and PSP® system. You can even start watching on your PS3™ system and move them to your PSP® system to finish.
- Online Gaming
- You get online multiplayer gaming at no additional charge.
- In-game matchmaking so you can challenge the competition.
- Your unique, global account ID can be used across all PlayStation®Network-compatible titles.
Doesn't seem like any REAL differences. i post these both for the benefit of all.
Fools!Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Dragongod83
PSN? XBL? all crap! Wii is where its at! the key to solid online is friend codes!
yep!Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by myballzich
i'll take psn over live anyday...could care less bout being part of the live 'community'...me and a few of my rl best freinds on psn is all the community i need/want thanks!!...live can keep the bitch boy community!!
pffftPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by jeff1bartolo2
lol thats funny i love the fact that its free and i never have to worries about fees, who needs to be paying more just to use the internet when in most cases you already have a comuter, so why spend more? and not every one wants another msn on their gaming machine, like i said you already have a computer
I like PSN...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by LittleBean!!
and for that... I will be ridiculed. :-(
It is hands down the best free service I have ever gotten... from any company... ever.
What is most noteworthy is that Sony is listening to it's customers. Sony has been flexible and has done alot to improve thier service. That says alot. I don't feel like Sony is trying to nickle and dime me... Microsoft on the other hand.....
AndPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by luminaire28
i'll continue to just buy a game with that $50 instead, thank you.
Name one thing besides HomePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by WarCriminal
Anyone? I can't think of anything else unique to PSN. I'll stick with my $50 annual fee for a system that works (not including EA titles that never network well on consoles).
BiasPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by thorstein
Enough. Look, if you can't be unbiased at least place that in your "article."
Sony is already (as you said) allowing for games to be dloaded , Punisher Anyone? It is like when Guitar Hero came out with instruments and said it was the first....Rock Band reply: "Isn't that what Rock Band is?"
And arguing one v the other is ridiculous! Can I use both to find friends and play online together? YES
Can I dload games from both (even Wii has that)? Yes
Party Mode? (I thought it was an Xbox and not a Wii) Who cares.
Can I download Blu Ray games from both? Ooops... sorry.
Can I get DLC from both? Yes. (Wii too).
Can I play online without subscriptions (not referring to XBL subscriptions) with both? Yes (Wii too.)
So what exactly is th argument? Voice chat? (Yes on all three).
And I will take quality over a quick dload any day. Sony's online service is fantastic. Wii's is good. I would say the Xbox experience is only praised by those that haven't used the others. But comparing the new "Xbot" dload service to Steam? Ugh... I don't think so. And therein lies your bias. that is Failz.
Sony's got Twitter and Facebook via the web browser....
I can already hear the fanboys loading their guns. THIS IS GONNA BE GOOD!!!Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by grilledcheese345
As a PS3 owner, I LOVE THE PSN. I can play with my friends and kick their asses online, I can chat with them (via messaging, chat rooms, and PS EYE), I can send them pictures and videos, and I can make my own highly customizable avatar (and hangout space) on Home. I can rent and even purchase movies from the PSN store. I can buy television programs too. I can purchase PS1 titles. There are also many, many games exclusive to the PSN store (PixelJunkMonsters, Flower, and NobyNobyBoy to name a few off the top of my head) that are available to PS3 owners. With my PS3 I can also browse the internet (not really PSN related, but still pretty nifty). There is more but I just can think of anything else right now lol.
The best part is it's all free.
Ps. I don't dislike Xbox Live or the Xbox 360. I don't mention it because, well, I don't own a 360 so how I can my opinion about be completely accurate? I had the original Xbox back in the day, (I bought it for Halo 2. I loved that game lol) but I've always been a Playstation kid at heart. I've been with Playstation since I first saw Crash Bandicoot 2 at my friend's house in the 3rd grade. Playstation is where I started gaming and Playstation is where I'm going to stay.
Its not there yet...Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by C_GloVe
The thing that got me with Xbox Live is its navagation and ease of use. I remember getting on, and being able to find friends, send messages, chat, and other things within seconds because it's user friendly. PSN, however, took me a good 10 min just to figure out how to send a message. And dare i try to send one during a game or chat while playing a different game lol. I tried Home, but why do I want to simulate bowling and actually waiting in line to play it when i can go down the street and play a real game or put in wii bowling without having to wait? Home is terrible, but other than Home PSN isnt bad for what its worth. PSN is progressing, and they are doing a good job at it, but they have alot of ground to cover with Xbox Live
PSN okPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by ateam_56
I think PSN is a good service as it is free. However, I think it still needs tweaking to to be compared to Xbox Live as it is going to better than PSN since you pay more for the service which I heard is also good. Also what is it going to take to tell Sony that Home sucks and they should do something to intergrate with the service rather than have it as a second life rip off. I like all consoles and see that each one has something that gives them differences so no fighting and be friends. Peace out
LOLPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by RaStarr420
If you think so Mr. Lempel, when it matches XBL feature for feature and then surpasses it then come talk to me. Not saying that PSN is a bad service it just doesn't inspire to use it like XBL does and being Free doesn't make one bit of difference to ME, because for me it's not about cost-because if I can't affrd $5 a month then I don't need to be gaming PERIOD-it's about services, ease of use of those services and actually wanting to use the services. PSN seems dead when I turn on my PS3, when I turn my 360 I automatcially feel that sense of community and that's what I look for in an online community, the cost argument is moot
the free responsePosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Vangerdahast
really doesn't need to be introduced until the end of a checklist comparison. features, variety, creativity, dedicated monitors, games, etc. should be talked about and how PSN is better of equal in many or all areas. Then when you say its free, compared to 1 day's worth of lunch money for a preschooler to pay for a month of Live, it will resonate.
Don't know which is better, and if a service is provided and is acceptable, it shouldn't matter, but its good that they care and reads a little better than their atrocious PR machine has since the conception of the PS3.
Sorry..you're wrong.Posted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by shadow_logic
Xbox Live has a hell of a lot more than PSN. It always will. More marketplace content, more features, easier navigation, better messaging and party features. Sure, it's not free, but you also have no reporting system, no consistent player filtering (just blocking), no muting, no advanced privacy settings or anything like that on PSN. The only thing PSN has that XBL doesn't is Home. My PS3 sits idle, every time I log on it feels dead, there is no sense of 'community' on PSN at all. Unless you're on home, you may as well have no friends at all.
In short, XBL > PSN.
ughPosted: Jul 08, 2009 12:00AM PST by Wii360Ps3_owner
Anymore commenst from Sony camp and i will puke. It only took them 2 years to catch up and Home is not that great. Its kind of lame so it should be free. And of course PSN is free because they had to one up X box live. If they had a chance they would have charged for it in a heart beat. Thats the only thing that PSN has got over Xbox live. I still think xbox live is still better. Party mode alone makes it somewhat better.