520°

XBox Live Gold Vs. PSN Plus (Comparison)

So you’re a gamer that can only have one “premium” gaming service active at any given time, and you want to know which has the most “BANG” for your buck, right? Fear not my intrepid readers, I’m going to break down the pros and cons of each service so you can decide for yourselves which to get. Obviously the preferred choice is to get both, but not everyone has the resources for that, so which should you leave as the standard free service, and which should you go ahead and upgrade?

Read Full Story >>
gadgetreview.com
Dante1124303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

PSN Plus won. I agree with the author, so many free games, discounts for games and DLC, and I'm loving their monthly sales. Cloud saving is sweet as well. I really really wish Microsoft offered some type of online play for Silver members.

Mikefizzled4303d ago

Half of the things you just said are also on Xbox Live though? Deals of the week, Cloud Saving and even the rare free game for everyone.

moparful994303d ago

Except with playstation plus its a CHOICE and you get more then one rare free game.. You get ALOT of free games. I downloaded $180 of free games this past month alone and I've been a plus member since the begining..

nukeitall4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

@moparful99:

To be fair, if I don't play those games and would never buy them otherwise they are hardly worth $180 to me?

Furthermore, once your subscription runs out all those games are no longer accessible to you, so you didn't really get *free* games, but rather access to them.

Again to be fair to some that distinction doesn't matter, but it certainly isn't *FREE* because you paid continually to access them. It's a service!

Also, I want to re-iterate that Xbox Live Gold is a choice. You chose to buy the Xbox 360 which clearly says there is a fee for certain features. It isn't some unknown "thing" you found out afterwards, and it certainly isn't an issue trading in or sell the console when you do. In fact, most people discover this within the 30-day return window so they take it back to the store!

Outside_ofthe_Box4303d ago

***"Furthermore, once your subscription runs out all those games are no longer accessible to you, so you didn't really get *free* games, but rather access to them.

Again to be fair to some that distinction doesn't matter, but it certainly isn't *FREE* because you paid continually to access them. It's a service!"***

Just like how in XBL when your subscription runs out you no longer have access to the multiplayer side of your games?

You see people need to stop looking at it like that.

PS+ doesn't just give you access to free games and XBL doesn't just give access to play multiplayer.

Both services give you MORE than that. If you only get PS+ to get free games and you only pay for Live just to play the multiplayer portion of your games then you are not doing yourself any good in the first place.

Brosy4303d ago Show
MysticStrummer4303d ago

"Live is better than PSN, plain and simple."

In your opinion. I was the only person in my group of gaming friends who waited to get a PS3. The rest all bought 360s. None of those people have a 360 anymore and none of them think XBL is better than PSN. None of them have PS+ either, so that's the free PSN they're talking about.

dedicatedtogamers4303d ago

Paying for the privilege to use the multiplayer portion of a game you already bought, the internet you already pay Comcast for, the Netflix subscription you already pay for, and being given a massive helping of advertisements pasted all over your console's main page is SOOOOO 2010.

ShinMaster4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

-
@nukeitall

Trying too hard again.
'Outside_ofthe_box' makes a good point.

moparful994303d ago

@Nukeitall You are splitting hairs to defend your opinion. Just because they aren't games you suppossedly aren't interested in doesn't negate their value. I could care less about halo or Gears of War but both games sell like crack on sunset blvd.. My opinions of those games in no way alters their market value. Secondly yes XBL gold is a choice but you either pay the subscription or you dont play your games online that you already paid for.. Spin this all you want to but PSN with the added benefits of PS+ is a good model of how microsoft should proceed with live. But we all know that wont happen because the only reason anyone buys live is to play their games online...

TheLastGuardian4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

So you don't keep your free games when your PS+ subscription runs out. Big whoop. If you want to keep playing them so bad, re-subscribe. PS+ is an incredible value regardless.

From the article: "Sony has a plethora of benefits for it's paying members, while Microsoft only offers what base PSN users get for free"

Yep, that about sums it up. With PS+ you're paying for access to 3 full PS3 games per month as well as free PSOne classics, free minis, tons of discounts, cloud game saves, automatic downloading and access to betas. Xbox Live is a total ripoff. Online play should be free on Xbox 360, especially since most 360 games these days are multiplats you can play multiplayer in on PS3 or PC for free.

killershadow1174303d ago

I don't know if anyone caught this but under other benefits the author listed automatic downloads as a pro for PS plus, which Xbox already has too. Essentially all of the other benefits sections is a tie since all of them have the same benefits, so it's a tie overall for the battle. No one wins or loses.

kreate4303d ago

when it comes to discounts on games ... or free games,
however u want to interpret 'free'

xbox gold = psn
psn plus > xbox gold

HOME alone has tons of free games, add on the free psn games giveaway HOME itself pwns xbox silver.

i recieved diner dash for free by looking up the answers on google and submitting via HOME lol

and kudos to ppl who recieved fat princess for free during the scavenger hunt :)

unfortunately i havnt played HOME in a very long time so idk how much it has changed over the last 1-2 years

iiiDystopia4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

It's hilarious. PSN better than XBL? Lol The truth is universally known. Only on N4G would something so stupid be stated. Does PSN even have universal chat yet? It's a joke. At least you can decorate your virtual home and dance/use emoticons in PS Home. PSN feels ancient after being on XBL for 6 years.

Autodidactdystopia4303d ago

God I cant wait till next gen, so we can actually get more interesting news around this joint, been coming here 6 years, and the good news is becoming more and more rare.

I want new technology, im tired of reading all this crap about these blind fanboy driven platforms.

extermin8or4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

Well It think PS plus wins because it's basically a sort of cross between free games and a lovefilm or netflix for games, and plenty of the games especially now are very good quality: I mean Dues Ex is brilliant and that was added this month I may never have played it otherwise but I'm glad I have: for the price of one game I'm getting to play over 20 a year and that's without any games I actually buy; that alone is worth the money and if I can't afford it/don't want to I can stop and still play my own library of games online for free; and then resubscribe to plus as I see fit and get access to the games from before again plus the new ones that in my opinion is why PSN/Plus is better; not saying XBL isn't good (it'd be better without the adverts I mean PSN doesn't throw adverts at me and it's free so really gold should include some sort of *ad free* feature like some free to play browser games do....) but you are kidding yourself if you try to argue that that isn't good value?
P.s: @iiiDystopia yes PSN does have cross game chat (Party) on the PS vita and it also has the cross game text chat on ps3 which does the job quite well and I have no issue with; the PS3's low RAM is what stops it being able to do voice chat across games currently; not the PSN so using that to argue against PSN is stupid really, and yeah if you don't want to use home you wouldn't download it; it's there as an option and clearly plenty of people enjoy ad use it I personally haven't been on it in a long time- might have to check it out as I hear they redid since I was last on. (Hom#s probably still crap though lol)

DigitalRaptor4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

Extermin8or said it better than anyone else.

PS Plus offers tremendous value, even if you want to bring up the fact that game access expires when you stop subscribing. It's a choice to continue the access to games you would otherwise have to spend upwards of $200 per year for, and there's always some really nice surprises in there too like the recent addition of LBP2, inFamous 2, Deus Ex etc. And then there's services like Netflix which is essentially the same thing and no one complains that you have to pay again to access that service.

The biting point here is that simple online play is being defended by Xbox people because they have no choice but to pay, so they feel obliged to defend that unnecessary investment. That is the reason most people pay for it. Then Xbox Live has ads which shouldn't be there for Gold members... inexcusable. It's ridiculous to also charge to access free services and other subscription services like Netflix, but the ones who pay will never admit that. All it is is an app. You don't see Apple or Google charging you yearly to access your apps. Why is BBC iPlayer free on XBL but the rest of them aren't? Inconsistencies in standards - what's with that? What's the difference, other than BBC told MS "no"? More questions that shouldn't have to be brought up but it's another relevant area unfortunately.

Really here, we're comparing premium services of both consoles. The top tier services when compared means this, and exactly this...

More games vs. More features. As a gamer I know EXACTLY which one I prefer, which makes this argument pretty conclusive.

And as far as features go, PS4 will have the capability to offer everything XBL does, once there is enough RAM to implement them. It's not even speculation - Sony can't afford not to. PS Vita has that RAM, and PS4 most definitely will too. That is the REAL biting point. PS4 will offer free online play with pretty much equal services to XBL at this rate, especially with the GAIKAI absorption which will expand PS+ even more.

Choice vs. less choice. Hmmm.

MS needs to either add a similar thing to PS+ for Gold, or remove pay to access multiplayer, going into the future. It seems to be ridiculous to pay for something that everyone else get for free, and that's the simple ability to play games online, that doesn't require your funding of $60 per year. What's worse is that they'll be using that money to funding endeavours like Kinect and we all know how that's turning out. Just think about these things before you defend them, alright?

NewZealander4303d ago

problem with the so called free games on psn plus is they are more like rentals, stop paying for plus and bye bye free games.

Azazel4303d ago

In the last month alone I downloaded $290 in free games! LBP 2, inFAMOUS 2, ect. PS+ is definitly worth it! PS+ > Xbox live IMO.

darkgod4303d ago

how can a downloaded game be rare? and no sorry but psplus won b a long shot. xbox live is utterly trash. we have all systems here and the xbox stuff blows. u see ima nintendo fan and i was shocked to se all of those great free games on psplus i mean wtf rachet and clank was on there a AAA game for free! nd virtul fighter and tons more. if u ask me it pays for it self. with xbox live well it sorta took 6 years yo get a web browser. if u ask me reg psn was on par with xbox live. though deep in my heart i cant forgive microsoft and there gimics with xbox life since the old days when i was younger. when i bouht phantasy star on it cus i could not find it on the cube. why? cus they dident even let me play single player with out paying for that shitty online service.

Diver4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

"xbox live is a choice" no nuke no. PS+ is a choice. if i dont choose + nothing happens. but if i dont choose live then half the game i already paid for dont work. you can call that a choice if you want but youre wrong.

the way you think new cars should come with a padlock on the gas tank an you have to pay a extra fee to chevy ever month just to use the gas you already bought.

rezzah4302d ago (Edited 4302d ago )

^ Great way to contradict yourself.

claim that live isn't a choice when you yourself said "if I don't CHOOSE". That alone is admitting the use of a choice, even if you can't see it yourself.

Everything is a choice, even death is a choice. The reasons behind the choice do not matter, once a choice is made then there was a choice.

To act or to not act on whatever it is you contemplate about? = Choice

Edited for missing word.

ziggurcat4302d ago

@ nukeitall:

the inherent flaw in your argument can be boiled down to these things:

1. while it may be true that you don't have access to those games once your subscription has expired, you're not realizing and/or understanding that that's (in the above poster's case) $180 he didn't have to spend on video games. and just because *you* don't think they're worth $180, doesn't mean they're not worth that much to him. i've been a member since day one, and i've saved around $500 on games. that's not including the money saved from the discounts, free avatars, free DLC, etc... which you get to keep no matter what - so for $50, that's a pretty good return as far as i'm concerned.

2. i don't know about you, but once i completely finish a game, i don't play it again, ands keeping all that stuff on the HDD is doing nothing but take up space i could be using for other games - unless it takes you a year to finish golden axe?

3. sure, i guess it's a choice to get a gold subscription, but if you want to do anything worthwhile with the console, you *need* that subscription. and guess what? once your subscription expires, you no longer have any of those features *gasp*! you don't need PS+ to be able to access a lot of the same online features that an XBL gold subscription provides.

4. PS+ isn't an unknown thing you find out about afterwards, so i don't knwo where you're getting your information from.

5. you're a notorious anti-sony troll, so nothing you say really has any merit.

Diver4302d ago (Edited 4302d ago )

o so now ya wanna play semantics. you can walk down the street and when some punks jump you an start stabbing you an killing your kids an raping your wife you can choose just to let em.

that's your logic. there are no dumb choices just choices. that whole idea is what's dumb.

see how dumb it is if you want to play with words. you can "choose" to get shafted by always buying half games. makes titles like bf3 cod an halo look real good with no mp.

look dude if your argument is sidetracking word meanings then you lost the debate. i bet it smarts when you can't debate the actual subject an have to retreat like that. retreat! Retreat! RETREAT!

+ Show (19) more repliesLast reply 4302d ago
SPAM-FRITTER-1234303d ago

here come the disagree fairies for anyone saying XBL is better.....

SPAM-FRITTER-1234303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

also Steam is actually better than both BUT we are the elites so i would expect nothing less.

suicidalblues4303d ago

Its because you say it like you're a 13 year old brat that you get negged. And you don't sound elite, unless being a douche elevates someone's status.

TekoIie4303d ago

Even though 75% of the time Steam prices are more expensive than retail or they just dont sell the game...

Outside_ofthe_Box4303d ago

There are no "fairies" for disagreeing with an opinion.

If you think XBL is better, fine, just don't start crying and whining about people that disagree with you.

solidjun54303d ago

"also Steam is actually better than both BUT we are the elites so i would expect nothing less. "

What the? you sure do sound self-centered.

StraightedgeSES4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

Your not aloud to say anything is better then the ps3 on N4PS3

rezzah4302d ago

Ever heard of opinions?

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 4302d ago
nukeitall4303d ago

This really comes down to preference, because it isn't an Apples to Apples comparison. It's kind of hard to compare an experience which changes from person to person.

For me, I don't play or care about the games given on PSN+, but I do play online a lot so having the ability to easily get games going with my online friends is monumental.

People that do that a lot know how frustrating it is that you can't communicate with your friends while they are playing a game. With XBL party system and cross game chat, it is as easy as jump into the party (while playing a different game), check status and see if I can join.

I'm hoping MS makes a queue system next, so as soon as the game is over then drop me right into the game with my friends for the next one.

TheFirstClassic4303d ago

What you say might be true, but I find it hard to believe than none of the games for plus interest you. Infamous 2? Lbp 2? I understand if you have them all, but there are some pretty awesome games in many different genres up on plus.

xAlmostPro4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

I love your comments nukeitall.

They are always well wrote but always found on Sony/PS3 articles showing bias towards the 360 haha.

Anyway, i have to disagree(i no longer own a 360) i got one to play with friends because i was the only one gaming on PS3 from the start and all i would hear was XBL is way better, cmon just get one.

I finally gave in awhile back. Party service/chat was fantastic.. it DID let you sort a game fast and communicate better..if you were all playing the same one.

If i was in a different multiplayer game i found it annoying because i'd rather be using the in game chat to talk to my teammates so we could win.

I also found it annoying when trying to play a singleplayer player game and being invited into a party and having to listen to them all being loud while i'm missing parts of the story, i found myself muting them far too often.

So yeah in my experience unless it was being used while you were idle(purposely using it for chat only) or playing the same multi-player game it wasn't as good a feature as made out, not only that but the only MP wanted to play was COD, gears, a little halo and Fifa(which i never owned).

I understand you have your preference but it honestly added nothing special for me, certainly not for the price because that feature a side to the barebones version of each not much is different at all.

TL;DR - I disagree, my experience did not justify the price.

Zweihanders4303d ago

@xalmostPro I'm going to agree with nuketail. Both are good services, and both have their issues (speed, ads, etc.) but your poor experience on Gold was actually partly your own fault. You must have not bothered to learn some of the features such as getting rid of notifications, appearing busy/offline. Or you could just ignore party invites and tell your friends not to spam them. These are very simple solutions. If you ever decide to go back, this should make your time a bit more enjoyable.

For the guy who's complaining about waiting till Christmas to get the subscription.. If you're getting a yearly renew then it doesn't matter, but like stated earlier, they have sales year round.

I think both services are equally good. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. Unless Xbox adds more to their service, however, PSN+ will be better once they add cross chat (I know Vita has this, but not many people have a Vita, I do and love it...go get a Vita people!.. and that doesnt change the fact that PS3 doesn't).

Now to the crappy article.. wrong facts? check. Comparing features that have nothing to do with Gold vs. +? check. Seriously, UI has nothing to do with either. He's reviewing a paid service using criteria that has nothing to do with the paid service. UI isn't even a PSN nor Silver thing, it's just a UI.. Cross Party chat is on PSN but that's on the Vita only. I'm sure there's more but I don't care enough to pick this article apart even more. Poor stuff.

GribbleGrunger4303d ago

sorry but PSN should have won easily on price. how can you even compare LIVE in those terms. you pay less and get hundreds of pounds worth of free games. I know that PSN won but I feel as if the reviewer here was trying to make it close

WeskerChildReborned4303d ago

Yea, i don't dislike Xbox, actually i sometime's which i had one due to some awesome exclusives but i think PS+ is a good deal already and if Gaikai was available with PS+ then it would be the best service ever.

Nes_Daze4303d ago

I completely agree, I'm enjoying LBP2 right now, downloading Just Cause 2, and then Infamous 2, I got the 3 month plan to try it out and I'm going to pay for the whole year soon. Meanwhile, my Xbox is still collecting dust, and those $50 for Live were spent for nothing because I'm not even using it.

TooTall194303d ago

Infamous 2 is awesome. I just finished playing it.

andibandit4303d ago

my PS3 is collecting dust while doing updates *Yawn*

Sheikh Yerbouti4303d ago

"Meanwhile, my Xbox is still collecting dust, and those $50 for Live were spent for nothing because I'm not even using it."

That's your problem not your 360. Show it some love.

a_squirrel4302d ago (Edited 4302d ago )

That's exactly why I love my psn+ sub... if my subscription ends, I just renew it if I use it often enough. If not, I have 10 other games that I can still play with friends online.

Honestly, Gold sickens me. Actually Microsoft does. Pay $60 a month for online access, cloud storage, crosschat and ads. Yeah. Ads. Psn doesn't even have ads and it's free! In fact the only thing it is missing is crosschat, ads, cloud storage and a price. Psn+ fills all of those but crosschat and Ads.

So, how is it superior?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4302d ago
solid_si4303d ago

i own both console but i have to agree. The XBOX Live is far more superier than PSN. Especialy in terms of social gaming. It has party chat which allows me to play and talk to my freinds whiles playing any game, which is a MUST. I also realised, the PSN is more laggy in many games.

Though i do respect sony for allowing free PSN and i hope next gen they keep it that way along with adding party chats ect...once those are implemented, PS4 will have an edge on xbox 720.

For now, XBOX Live is superier in allmost every way.

AusRogo4303d ago

'Psn is more laggy in many games'. No its not, if you were playing cod, and you were lagging, that's either your internet or infinity wards end or whoever. It has nothing to do with psn. With xbl you don't pay for better multiplat servers. I don't get why people think its more laggy. It's THE SAME.

one2thr4303d ago

@solid
Yeah so "superier" that you, the game is forced to pay a company to use your OWN bandwidth for there online features...
So "superier" that games are limited to the space of a Dvd9 disc...
So "superier" that the same online/chat features that you named isn't found anywhere else, oh wait Vita does that...
So "superier" that one of its greatest selling game titles wasnt even compatible to, play on the said system you mentioned from microsoft, which in turn caused it to go through a series of updates to become more playable...
So "superier" that it only has about 4 good games coming out between this year and the end of the next...
This supposed, "superier" console is inferior in the eyes of the superior console owners, but I shouldn't have to spell out which console that is good sir... Good day to you

jessupj4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

The only thing it has is cross game chat. That's it. Don't know where you're getting this "superior in every way" non-sense, unless you count the amount of adds cluttering XBL.

On the other hand PSN has a lot more dedicated servers for almost lagless gaming, yet you keep paying for the privilege to use your own bandwidth to play laggy P2P games.

I get Sony fanboys, but I just can't understand MS fanboys.

SIdepocket4303d ago

I think it's a preference really. I think the online experience on Xbox is a lot better than on the PSN, while you get a lot more free games and discounts on PSN. Whatever appeals to you is really your choice.

@jessupj
PSN GAMES do have more dedicated servers, but Live has a lot more servers running the network itself, which is why it connects players faster, is faster moving in and out of games, has the bandwidth to support VOIP(PSN does not) and faster downloading content. It still all comes down to preference.

Sheikh Yerbouti4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

LIVE is superior to PSN for online. After all these years and many to come, Microsoft is going to outperform Sony in that arena. It is their core (besides marketing) strength they bring to the game industry, but they do it better or as good as anybody across any industry.

But that alone doesn't define the experience for many gamers. It is still the value of the games for the dollar that is going to win over gamers. For that reason PS Plus is such a better value...more games!! What is lost going from LIVE to PS3 isn't going to be more significant than that for most gamers.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4303d ago
ghaleon19804303d ago

@Brosy:

Amen brother. The only reason why you have one bubble is because you don't worship Sony with your posts.

GodHandDee4302d ago

Nope it's because he trolls.

I mean heck, his question about why more people pay for Live Gold is a rather obvious one isn't it? They pay because they 'have' to, in order to even touch multiplayer. What are the chances it would be the same if their basic online MP access was free?

Thatguy-3104303d ago

Ppl need to understand that most games that ps+ offers wouldn't be bought in the first place by many gamers. What's the user installment of plus members? Yea its "free" but even then I don't bother downloading some of the things they offer. IMO live is a more stable service and the reason why gamers prefer to play multiplayers on xbox. The community is more engaging too.

ClimateKaren4303d ago

Sideways
Marvel Pinball
Back to the Future 1-5
Tomb Raider: Underworld
Final Fantasy V
Fatal Inertia
Awesomenauts
Castlevania: Chronicles
Trine 2
Rock of Ages
Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light
Hard Corps: Uprising
Saints Row 2
Rathchet and Clank All 4 One
Just Cause 2
Virtua Fighter 5
Little Big Planet 2
Infamous 2

That's not all the games I've downloaded for free from +, just the ones that I think people do definitely pay money for. There have been several games that went up for free on + that I already paid for as well.

joeorc4303d ago

"Ppl need to understand that most games that ps+ offers wouldn't be bought in the first place by many gamers. "

That is utter Arrogance, AND TO TOP IT OFF HOGWASH.

THE Arrogance ON BOTH SIDES ABOUT WHICH IS THE BETTER SERVICE OFFERED

IS BEING QUITE FOOLISH!

SUCK IT UP AND ADMIT BOTH SERVICES OFFER WHAT GAMER'S WANT AND THAT IS GAMES!

GOD..its that d@mn simple enough for people?

I have tried out both systems online and guess what, they are not that d@mn "superier" over the other.

they offer thing's on one service that's not on the other..yay, for services offered to the gamer's.

it's based on preference nothing more nothing less

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

paying for discounts? steam gave me LA Noire for $7.50 free service!

Megaton4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

It's not really a good comparison, since one offers content and the other is more of a tax. PSN Plus offers "free" and discounted goods. XBL Gold is just an access fee for things that are free everywhere else.

Philoctetes4303d ago

Yeah, I don't even see how this is up for debate any more. Plus and Gold are almost identical except Plus has free and deeply-discounted games while Gold has cross-game chat. Free games win that one every time.

showtimefolks4303d ago

psn:plus gives us free games on top of free online play that's for everyone. Than there are game trials like tiger woods 2013 play for free for one HR along with many other high profile titles

discounts on DLC,avatars and themes

i got my money's worth the day i signed up because i got 12 games for free and 3 more this month. so if 3 new games every month till my renewal is up i should have tippled the value by than

let's put it like this one is optional and other you have to pay for to even go online just to download a demo

going forward let's say if wii-u really step up and has a good working online store within 2 years along with psn from sony MS will really have a hard sell with xblive when parents can buy the other 2 HD consoles and get online for free

Prince_Dim-Lu4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

Looks like the SDF completely missed the part who won won the best online gaming part of this article.

Best online gaming went to Xbox Live for this article, yet the Sony sheep don't mention anything to do with this. The most important part of it all is online gaming, but why should we expect you SDF to understand that? You guys don't really game online like the 360 people do. PS fanboys are more of 1 player game types, rather than multi player. Hence why games like COD suck on PSN compared to Live.

Funny how sony fanboys passed this part of information up and go straight to the free games. Ya, you get free games because they're embarrassed that PSN was hacked.. did you all forget? You like free games that get taken away when your subscription ends too... but nobody talks about which has the better online play.. which in this article, goes to Xbox Live.

Summarize.... Xbox Live>PSN Plus for Online Play... the most important. I love how people rather have content, over a great service. Ya.. that's the deal.. give me free games that go away, over great service. I'm the PS3 fan of 2012.. I don't care about good service.. just free crap for my service that gets hacked, and I have my credit card numbers compromised, and they give me free games to make up for that mistake, then take them away when my ps plus runs out.

CONTENT OVER GREAT SERVICE!

Anon19744303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

Deeply flawed article. First off, the two aren't the same thing. Xbox offers a service. PSN+ is a content subscription. I find it odd that in this article, the huge amount of free content available prior to E3 was just dismissed. Do your homework.

Next, where the hell is the actual comparison of the stability? They mention that XBL is the more stable offering, how did they come to that conclusion? What testing was done? What about a comparison of download speeds?

And when did Sony promise "cross game chat" was coming. If I'm not mistaken, Sony has said time and time again that it wasn't coming because they can't do it. "It's not possible to retrofit something like that after the fact." It's due to the way RAM is handled in the system. Right there that tells me that little research was done for this article.

I agree with their ultimate conclusions, but this article doesn't offer much. Having used both services extensively I don't see that XBL has enough to justify paying $60 a year over the PSN's free offering. If I'm going to spend $50-60 a year, I'd rather go for the service that offers online play AND $450-500 worth of free, retail games. This is one of the biggest reasons to get PSN+, and it barely gets a sentence.

And I'm so sick about hearing of "cross game chat". What a useless, annoying feature. I never used it on XBL, I'd never use it if it came to PSN. Ever answer the phone and try to talk to someone when they're gaming or watching a movie? It's one of the rudest, most ignorant things you can do to a person and I've always just said "Dude, hang up and call me back when you can talk." If you can't give me you're full attention, talk to me when you can. This isn't a "feature" to me. I group this in the same category as those annoying, voice changers.

GuyThatPlaysGames4303d ago

How can you call it a WIN when you have to pay to get a discount? Woohoo I get $2 off a shitty game! You are better off just paying normal price for it. When you get online on PS3, it feels so dead , especially with it's terrible boring XMB. XBOX feels so ALIVE when I get online. It feels like a real community.

pixelsword4302d ago (Edited 4302d ago )

- "How can you call it a WIN when you have to pay to get a discount"?

How do you call it a win to play online when virtually everyone else doesn't, plus NO regular discounts and NO free games regularly? It's like ID: 10-T tax, if you follow me (no offense, justsayin').

PS Plus is like a Sam's card: you pay to get at the good stuff for cheap, plus free samples some days. Don't get me wrong, I still haven't got Plus myself, but I can see the benefits because you get more than what you pay for in free games; it's like a return on an investment. Yeah, all of them aren't AAA games, I know, but AA games are pretty good to get your hands on every month, plus some of them ARE AAA titles.

- "When you get online on PS3, it feels so dead , especially with it's terrible boring XMB".

Okay, I don't see how the XMB makes playing online exciting or not, the games do that for me; but to each his/her own. Hey, maybe you can tell me how exactly the XMB makes you feel like there's a community? I actually don't follow that, so maybe you can help me understand that.

devilluck4302d ago

I don’t know much about the ps3 since I sold mine 3 years ago and got myself another xbox360. My brothers and nephews and I all bought into the ps3 hype and all ended up getting one well three years later we either sold or put aside the ps3 for the Xbox. I personally feel the Xbox is more user friendly like you can really enjoy yourself while the ps3 is just more work than fun. First thing I hated about the PS live version is that you had to download then install and honestly that was a headache. I am not sure if they have that anymore but tell you the truth it’s simply not as fun as an Xbox or its live service. Would I get another ps3 in the future? If any of their game actually interest me to the point, where I buy another PS3, if will only be for that reason. I am sorry but God of War is just another hack and slash I tried to play it on the ps2 and just bored me the tears. Like I said don’t know much about the live service on PS but I honestly don’t care. I only paid 2 dollars for 2 months of live because Microsoft offered me a deal. Now you can’t beat that, they give deals all the time.

+ Show (14) more repliesLast reply 4302d ago
Cocozero4303d ago

I don't see how PSN+ is better when more people are willing to pay for XBL. Sounds like another PS fanboy comparison, but this is N4G so no surprises there.

LycanGav4303d ago

Well, a year's subscription to Plus will net you a 30+ game library. That represents tremendous value.

Cocozero4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

But those games go bye bye once your subscription ends so not really great value.

waltyftm4303d ago

#Cocozero And so does your online games with Live, yet without Plus you can still play online.

Transporter474303d ago

just like how if your subscription to XBL ends you won't be able to play online hmmm

DigitalAnalog4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

The difference between "free" games and "online" for subscriptions is that one can be finished, meanwhile, the other can only last as long as the subscription.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4303d ago
BrutallyBlunt4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

@Cocozero

Difference is people who want to play online with the XBOX360 are forced to pay. So it's not entirely accurate to suggest they are 'willing'.

If XBOX Live was free to play with others online then yes, it would be better than the free version of PSN, but this is about the paid option of PSN versus Gold. Personally i think PSN+ offers greater value than what one gets with XBOX Live Gold. XBOX Live Silver is missing one key component, the ability to actually play games with other people online.

HeavenlySnipes4303d ago

Maybe because you have to buy one to access the MP portion of ALL of your games and the other one is not mandatory.

And another thing. I don't know if you guys noticed, but most of the games offered have very limited to no MP sides to the games. They are mostly single player games. Why? So people can't complain when they lose the game once the subscription is over. What are you going to do with a SP game once its done? How many finished games do you have stockpiled at home that are left untouched after you finished them. You pay $50 and get dozens of games to play and finish before the year is over.

Its not like they are shitty games either. I paid $60 to get InFAMOUS 2 and there it is free to all PS+ subscribers (who paid $50 and get that plus more)

dedicatedtogamers4303d ago

I don't see how 360 is better when more people are willing to buy a Wii.

I don't see how Kinect is better when more people are willing to buy a Wii.

I don't see how [fill in the blank] is better...

See the flaw of your logic?

pixelsword4302d ago (Edited 4302d ago )

I totally agree with what you said, except that it's more like have to pay, if you want to play online, that is.

I can still shoot my bud a letter if I really wanted to talk to him, and I can send the same letter to multiple buds, if the need arises. Cross game chat is a nicety, not an essential component to my gameplay. I know people talk about coordinating games together with friends, but really, if you *have* to talk to your friends to do that, you can make a clubhouse in home and go there to talk together with your mics. I know some people cry foul and say "but we can talk during our different games to do it". Yeah, so? If you're coordinating to play a certain game, eventually you won't be playing different games now, willya? Therefore, some of you will be switching out anyways, so what's the problem? People are splitting hairs about the actual sequence is what actually makes cross-game chat better or not? They both have solutions, there you go.

Playing the multiplayer on a game that I bought is an essential component to my game play, and that should not be hindered. That's why I also say although I like XBL (it's a great online experience, no doubt), and it's not like I'd refuse to play on XBL ,that would make me a little pig-headed for turning down an excellent experience, I do refuse to pay for it (at this time, seeing that all games and consoles may do that, removing the lynchpin from the games industry; ultimately cause it to collapse).

That's the soul argument of net neutrality (the techy term for double-dipping) and is worse than DRM (and I hate DRM). Let's say that DRM made you have to pay to listen to the last half of a song or the rest of a movie, that would be insane, wouldn't it? Can someone tell me how paying for access to the other half of your game after paying for it is NOT insane?

Could I charge you a little for the other half of your sandwich after you paid for it, maybe?

A Napkin fee, why not?

clrlite4303d ago

Well, this being n4g, a site basically run by gamers. It seems that many people on this site tend to favor PSN+ and for obvious reasons given in their statements. If you disagree, that's fine, but there is a reason why gamers (worldwide) tend to prefer certain products, games, and services over others.

hellvaguy4303d ago

Nice bias thoery. However it could be that live users are doing something so crazy as playing online while psn users get bored more frequently from lag and no cross game chat and come here to brag about thier system that they arent playing.

TooTall194303d ago

hellvaguy is too new to remember that N4G used to be full of 360 fanboys.

DebateMaster4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

"Willing to pay" for live? More like people have to if the wanna play online and use other services others offer for free.

MikeGdaGod4303d ago

"I don't see how PSN+ is better when more people are willing to pay for XBL"

so by your logic, controllers with batteries that need to be replaced are better than controllers with rechargeable batteries because the Wii outsold the other consoles.

could it be that people pay for Live because its the only way the can fully access a game they already paid for?

people are sheep, the fact that people advocate for a service that makes them pay for something they already paid for is no surprise.

one2thr4303d ago

@cocozero
If you bought the game on discount, and the PS+ ends YOU STILL OWN THE GAME(can play it)
if you got the game free, and the PS+ ends YOU DO NOT OWN THE GAME(cant play it)
(From what i understand)

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 4302d ago
ChunkyLover534303d ago

I like PSN+ for what it is, but Sony did absolutely nothing to improve the actual PlayStation Network when they instituted PlayStation Plus. I actually pay more for PSN+ $50 a year, than Xbox Live, which I always get for $35 a year.

The games that PSN+ let you borrow while you have a subscription are nice, but a lot of the time they are just the bottom rung of games that nobody really wants. This last batch that were announced at E3 were pretty solid though, I dig both services, but Xbox Live is more for online play and social aspects, easy to find friends, game competitively and things like that, while PSN+ is just like a discount service and some games to borrow while you are enrolled.

moparful994303d ago

So you mean to tell me that losing access to your games with PSN+ once you stop paying is any different then losing access to the right to play your games online if you stop paying for LIVE? It's no different, except you can always play online for free with PSN. You are splitting hairs, and the idea that the social aspect of LIVe is better is all preference.. They both allow you to play games online, connect with friends, as well as other social activities...

ChunkyLover534303d ago

What I am saying is that comparing Xbox Live to PSN+ is a bunk thing to argue. Sony has never updated PSN since its launch in 2006, Microsoft has updated Xbox Live on a regular basis.

PSN is fine enough for playing online games, but it really feels like it lacks depth for me, almost like it doesn't have a true identity. Its very bare bones. When I heard Sony was launching PSN+, I though they would actually improve their online services, which hasn't happened.

I didn't say anything negative about PSN+ aside from the fact that a lot of the games they end up offering to lend you aren't top tier games.

Larry L4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

Did you just say "PSN hasn't been updated since it launched in 2006"?......because if you did.......

You should hang your head in shame, sir. I would expect a Simpsons fan to be more informed about something before they open their yapper about said thing.

You seem more like a Family Guy fan to me. The way you're just repeating what someone else said first, not really coming up with that yourself.

For you to say PSN hasn't been upgraded since launch means that you 100% for sure havn't had a PS3 since 2006 to be able to make a statement like that as though it's fact in the first place.

HAD you actually been a PSN user since the beginning you would know PSN is like a whole new animal compared to what it was at launch. And since PSN was hardly even in place when PS3 launch, PSN has come this far in LESS THAN a single console generation. Live has had 2 whole console cycles to get where it's at.

Perspective.

InactiveUser4303d ago

To be clear, you lose access to the free games, not any games you bought or bought at a discount. Any free DLC, themes, avatars, etc. you can still use, and if you renew your PS+ after a gap in time, you can still reaccess those older free games through your download history. Meaning they're not completely gone once the subscription runs out.

I had the free PS+ after PSN got hacked, didn't have it for a long time because I just buy the retail games. I recently got a year for only $15, so I renewed and could still access old games like Golden Axe, Streets of Rage 2, Sonic 2, etc. I already have Just Cause 2, LBP2, inF2, etc. on disk, but downloaded them anyway on another PS3 in the house.

TooTall194303d ago

@EeJLP

Minor correction. Some free DLC can no longer be used after the sub expires.

PS+ is a much better value.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4303d ago
TBM4303d ago (Edited 4303d ago )

not paying to play online when i'm already paying my cable subscriber, so for me PS+ is the better value. its an option and thats perfect for me.

TheRealHeisenberg4303d ago

Content goes to PS+.
Service goes to Live Gold.

PS+ for me because I get the stuff I care about.

Outside_ofthe_Box4303d ago

***"Content goes to PS+.
Service goes to Live Gold."***

That actually sums it up perfectly imo.

shinrock4303d ago

I like that. Notice how he said the games he cares about.

Show all comments (203)
90°

10 Weirdest Video Games of All Time

Plenty of unforgettable games have completely messed up their players throughout the years, all the way back from the PS1 days to the dark recesses of the modern internet.

Read Full Story >>
culturedvultures.com
JonTheGod21h ago

Why are the Katamari games not on the list??

80°

Tales Of Graces Ƒ Retro Review – Holding Out For a Hero

Gary Green said: Namco Bandai heard the call of many fans asking for the PlayStation release of Tales of Graces which was originally released seemingly exclusively for the Wii back in 2009. If you’re acquainted with the Tales series then Graces f won’t be something entirely new to you, yet if you’re a newcomer then you’ll find a plethora of gameplay mechanics and nuances that distinguish this series from other JRPGs. While the game finds itself following the traditional archetype of JRPGs, such as a somewhat clichéd story, Graces has something to offer to both veterans and newcomers alike.

Read Full Story >>
pslegends.com
GoodGuy093d ago

Odd this and the xillia games still haven't gotten remasters yet.

120°

It's A Crime That There's No Sleeping Dogs 2 Yet

Huzaifah from eXputer: "Sleeping Dogs from the early 2010s is one of the best open-world games out there but in dire need of a resurgence."

LG_Fox_Brazil3d ago

I agree, I consider the first one a cult classic already

isarai3d ago

You say "yet" as if it's even possible anymore. United Front Games is gone, along with anyone that made this game what it is

CrimsonWing693d ago

That’s what happens when games sell poorly. And I’ve seen people wonder why people cry when a game sells badly… this is your answer.

solideagle3d ago

Majority of the time it's true but if a company/publisher is big (in terms of money), they can take a hit or 2. e.g. I am not worried about Rebirth sales as Square will make Remake 3 anyway but if FF 17 doesn't sell then Square might need to look for alternative. <-- my humble opinion

Abnor_Mal3d ago

Doesn’t Microsoft own the IP now since they acquired Activision?

DaReapa3d ago

No. Square Enix owns the IP.

Abnor_Mal2d ago

Oh okay, Activision owned True Crime, but when that didn’t sell as intended it was canceled. Six months later Square Enix bought the rights and changed the title to Sleeping Dogs.*

*As per Wikipedia

boing13d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Sleeping Dogs was a sleeper hit back then. It was fantastic. It actually still is. Would love a sequel to this, or at least a revive of True Crime series.

Show all comments (10)