Top
410°

GameSpy: PS3 is 'definitely beating 360 in some areas of online'

The momentum's now with Sony, reckons firm's director of technology

"I don't think you've seen the same pace of innovation from Microsoft as you have from Sony recently," Todd Northcutt told Develop in a pre-E3 briefing. "It's been steadily improving the PlayStation 3 as an online gaming device and an entertainment device while the Xbox 360 has had its half yearly updates but there's nothing groundbreaking that's been released, other than a couple of changes to the marketplace."

Full article after the jump:

Read Full Story >>
developmag.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Eiffel3327d ago

Article is Fail, Xbox live has a better service than Sony's PSN.
So much is missing from Sonys PSN that they will need to make it up in their next console. They got In game XMB like what a few weeks ago? Late like always.

Surfman3327d ago

blablabla
same comment everytime from 360 lovers. The quality of the same is almost the same, and since the PSNetwork is free, i guess its better now to play online with the PS3. And Home is coming... need more explications my friend? Probably, because youre a 360 fans that will never understand and keep your eyes closed on the best console.

Eiffel3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

Home, please I bought my console for games but I guess sony needs to give you something to distract you from all the delays, Enjoy your little Second Life for the PS3, I'll be gaming instead of trying lure unsuspecting gamers into my pedo ring. Don't say there won't be any porn related conflicts with your little home cause we all know at least one pedo owns a PS3.

Aquanox3327d ago

The reason why the PSN has had so many incremental updates is because the service had an awful lot to catch up with whereas Xbox Live has been working consistently since the Xbox 360 launch (except for the 2007 xmas downtimes)

As for "no groundbreaking changes in Xbox Live"... uhmm... Somebody hasn't watched Microsoft's E3 conference.

na2ru13327d ago

XBL is better so so much better it kicks butt and everything. PSN sucks.

but what makes it better????????

its more social yes. what else for £40 a year?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3327d ago
Bangladesh3327d ago

The guy says "PS3 is definately beating 360 in some areas of online", then doesn't say what he believes these areas are, strange. PSN doesn't hold a candle to Live, from my experience.

TOSgamer3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

But here's a few things that PSN offers that XBL service does not. And remember Xbox Live is going on 6 years now. PSN is nearing only its 2nd year of existence.

Reason 1. Dedicated servers for first party games.

Reason 2. User generated content is allowed on the PSN service. As seen with UT 3 and Little Big Planet in a few months time.

Reason 3. Ability to purchase some movies not just rent.

Reason 4. Free userpics and themes as well as the ability to have user generated themes.

Reason 5. Trophy system is more in-depth then achievements.

Reason 6. That's right its free. Charging money is a barrier to entry and if you bother to look PSN is gaining on XBL Gold Membership. By this time next year there may be more people to actually play and interact with then there is on XBL Gold. Right now there are about 8 million PSN users and about 12 million XBL Gold members. That is some serious progress in less then 2 years.

socomnick3327d ago

:/ Xbox live is above psn right now. With the fall update it will once again leave it behind. Only reason psn is getting pretty decent is because its easier to copy than to innovate all they are doing is copying xbox live.

Bangladesh3327d ago

360 has dedicated servers on all EA games, ps3 does aswell. 360 has XNA, and Halo 3 has user generated forge creations that can be downloaded to the 360 via the Bungie website. There are plenty of free gamerpics and themes on Live, as well as the option to use any image from a digital camera, pc, or burned cd as a theme. I disagree regarding the trophy system, as it isn't a requirment in every ps3 game. Achievement are required in all 360 games, giving a more thorough picture of what type of gamer you are via your gamerscore. And yes PSN is free, but it's also technically inferior to Live.

nieto3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

"PSN doesn't hold a candle to Live"

don't be so exaggerated. you can play online easily on the ps3. you can send messages without exit the games, we got trophies, mic, it's free. we can download demos, movies and games. psn it's not the wii online it is more sophisticated.

live it's better but not buy much. you're just giving away money to MS for nothing.

edit: it is the f****g true why are you disagreeing bots?

Sez 3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

the reason people are disagreeing with you is because anyone that has played with both services would tell you that live "WIN" hands down. and the only thing psn has going for it is that it's free.THATS ALL.
only a small few have headsets or chose to talk in games which makes it hard to play games like warhark,RFOM,ect. yes you can send/receive text messages in-game without exiting the game. but what about voice chat,cross-game invites,ect. and trophies. don't get me started. trophies is starting to look like a joke. it only supports a handful of games.not enuff to get all excited about.

sony problem is that they are trying to hard to be the jack of all trades but master of none. they need more trophy support,in-game chat/text, cross-game invites, unified friends list,custom music.ect

Aquanox3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

1. Microsoft don't give dedicated servers for first party games because they all have been working great without them. At least in my experience it's been like that.

Sony does NEED to use dedicated servers to convince people their service is worth it and because PSN is still more unstable than xbox Live, and it would hurt their image if first party titles suffered from that as well.

Sony fans usually brag about X people online, while most of the games (on Xbox Live at least) rarely use big party systems. Most rooms are 16 players only and anything more than that is considered as messy which make those rooms fill up very slowly.

2. User generated content: I could give you that to some extent. So far it hasn't been an issue and has only affected UT3 in a limited way (user created content will still be released) On the other hand, Sony doesn't have anything nearly similar to XNA, and once user created games (GAMES not content) are released on Xbox Live, it will be a much, much bigger step ahead than mods in a couple of games.

3. Ability to purchase some movies not just rent: This is absolutely trivial. It's more a business decision than anything else. Also, PSN will not count with a partner nearly as solid as Netflix for video distribution.

4. Free userpics and themes as well as the ability to have user generated themes: This is also on Xbox Live.

5. Trophy system is more in-depth then achievements: Thropies are a blatant copy of achievements and it's not implemented in most games. Gamers will need to rebuild their trophies from scratch, whereas Xbox gamers already have an extensive achievement history.

As you can see, PSN has virtually nothing on Xbox Live at the moment. Only that it's free, but as in most cases, you still get what you paid for.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3327d ago
Truplaya3327d ago

mmm, i own both and i dont agree. PSN has a lot of catching up to do.
The fact it is free is the only thing going for it.

Prismo_Fillusion3327d ago

I agree, but being free is a huuuuuuge huge plus for the PSN. You can't underestimate that.

I've been having fun with Warhawk though - it's certainly as easy to play online as Halo 3.

HighDefinition3327d ago

1.FREE.FREE.FREE.
2 Less Lag

masterg3327d ago

To me PSN is the way better product free or not.
I don't care much about online friend lists.
I care about lag free games.

Winter47th3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

HighDefenition i couldn't agree more, add to that the Dedicated Servers, even if they're in some games it's still a huge plus, over 100 Dedicated Servers for Warhawk alone just brightens up the future of all major exclusive games on the way.

Free, Lagless and Dedicated Servers that MAG with its 256 players online will benefit greatly from, Little Big Planet with its open-platform concept and user generated mod, HOME, not to mention MMOs, **** yeah!

Anon19743327d ago

I also owned both until recently but opted to cancel my XBL gold and downgrade to Silver and game online exclusively on the PSN. I keep hearing that XBL is still ahead, but as a user of both I don't see how. I've been using only PSN for about 6 months now and I haven't regretted this decision once. The only thing I do regret is that it didn't come along sooner. I've been paying XBL fees for almost 6 years now. It took them awhile but the PSN is in fine form.

PimpHandStrong3327d ago

being free is the only thing going for PSN? How about full downloadable games? How about good indie type games?

Show me one game on XBL that matchs GT5P Warhawk or Socom or Siren! You cant because MS has a limit on the size of game they can bring you!

Try harder next time

TresTrendu3327d ago

That is some funny crap, only reason ps3 has been on a good pace with new updates and such is cause they was so far behind it wasn't even funny. MS had their vision since day 1, and we enjoyed that vision since day 1. We didn't have to wait years for catching up. Completely absurd if you ask me.

dan-boy3327d ago

another rallying call for the sdf i see. and did i read this rite? coz i didnt actually see any of the points where it was better, just something very very vague!

HD: no lag?? lol i take it everyone on the psn has super fibre connections and everyone lives in the same region?? thought not! open zone is that way--------> you of all people belong in there.

MazzingerZ3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

@TresTrendu
"vision since day 1"
Yeah...that's why the "new" XBL experience, Mii60s, added HDMI output, allow game installs...and to enjoy of the "new" features such as watching movies with buddies or game installs you need to get a NetFix account (only subscriber can watch movies together) and a new HD.

I see coming built-in batteries and wi-fi next year in a new SKU...last SKU, within 2 years will support HD format (BR)... and X360 owners rather than feel rippedoff gets excited with the oportunity MSFT gives them to "upgrade" their console...ohhh well...I jumped off from that train in time.

PSN is catching up faster reg. online gaming that MSFT HW-wise

XBL is charging today for voice messaging and in-game chat aside from that, both offer pretty much the same when it comes to features to play online (let's forget about dedicated servers vs peer-to-peer)

After that gets patched on the PSN, XBL will be for free.

Hiresdes3327d ago

Are you guys sane, the only reason that you think that PSN has less lag is because their are always significantly less people playing online on the PSN due to lesser install base, and the nature of most of the PS3's gaming lineup. XBL is always taking significantly bigger hits to its server, but whats great about it is, that they are constantly improving it.

Kratos Spartan3327d ago

you can try harder than that, can't you?

Monchichi0253327d ago

I Hear ya! I have no idea where people get this complaint about lag on LIVE. I can honestly say I have only experienced Lag 1 TIME during my three years with it.

I'm thinking it's more the people's connection then LIVE. They should spend some money and upgrade from there DSL and they won't get lag.

DJ3327d ago

You stated "the only reason that you think that PSN has less lag is because their are always significantly less people playing online on the PSN due to lesser install base"

What you apparently don't know is that there's 12 million Xbox Live Gold & Silver users, and 10 million PSN users. PSN is well constructed and constantly maintained. Fast download speeds, as well.

supahbad3327d ago

man the green is on the rise, go back to gamesradar please. i prefer PSN because of dedicated servers, i don't think some of the people who posted before me understand what those are, because they've never had that option on the 360. really after 2.4 i'd say the two services are pretty much equal, PSN slightly in the lead

staub913327d ago

Wow...You only lagged 1 time in the last 3 years.

Well..You must have only played 1 game session in the past three years.

OR

You are a liar.

TheXgamerLive3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

And for this guy to state this just weeks before the Xbox LIVE HUGE upgrade is crazy talk. I'm thinking he must be a sony fan, that's all or something else that puts crazy thoughts in his mind.

The Xbox LIVE network is making some very huge leaps here soon and it's already a phenomenal service that's well worth some $4.99 a month. I mean he must live like an ostrich w/his head in the ground.

Well the wannabe's will make up crap about this anyway so go ahead girls.

p.s. In reference to WiiJ (DJ) psn does not have 10 million subscribers you fool. The last update per sony was 6 million. Not even close to 10 million.

power of Green 3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

What a ignorant thing to say, what is wrong with GameSpy. PS3 is attempting to match what the 360 could do and what XBL offers.

Sony's PS3 isn't even matching the 360's launch offerings.

How long did it take somebody to find this rubbish.

I hate this "me Too" PS3 needs attention-here's an excuse to fight and boast news.

BiggDaddy3113327d ago

Well not to get to involved in this flame war if you look at Sony's plan compared to Microsoft. You see Sony is pushing to offer larger gaming communities with 60 player R2, LBP community share, MMOs DC Universe online and the Agency, 32 multi-player killzone, Fat Princess is 32 player down-loadable game, Mag 256 player, 32 player Socom. Sony is pushing to have larger varied communities of games for free. Microsoft seems content to rest on their laurals that gamers will pay 50 bucks a year for the right to play 16 player Halo COD, Gears and Left 4 dead. We will see if Sony's strategy pays off in a year if we are still talking about how great is is to pay for live then that will mean Sony failed.

MazzingerZ3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

@BiggDaddy311

And the reason why MSFT is stuck with those 16 players is peer-to-peer...many people write that they don't experience lag in XBL that PSN is lag-free because less people, etc...with that you realize they are not even aware of Microsoft is actually using their consoles to host...they don't know what dedicated servers are nor Peer-to-Peer...

Peer-to-Peer is not bad if:

-Games controls how many players you can host according to your connections speed
- Allow dedicated hosting so people with good connections can share it

People talk about the great QA of MSFT and blablabla but then why MSFt don't demand developers to control the number of players a user can host in order to ensure lag-free matches?...the answer is easy, because if they do, XBL would be a ghost town as many don't really have the required connection and those that do might not like to host.

They charge today for peer-to-peer...what I see coming once PSN patches the in-game chat and voice messaging is that MSFT might start putting up dedicated servers in order to justify the fee otherwise XBL must go free.

BlackTar3327d ago

it seems to be ignored. Can anyone answer me would you rather have private chat or have games brought on there like Siren,Socom,GT5P,ixel Junk Etc.

Im sorry Live is better then PSN in some small areas(Im a live fan)but I have all 3 consoles and saying live extras are more exciting then fully realized PSN games is ridicules and I wonder why all xbox fans seems to ignore or refrain from posting on those comments and no one calls them on it. I would give up the 2 things live charges for to play Siren not even mentioning Socom and pixel junk monsters. But to each his own. Anyone who's played a comp. online knows that PSN is more then acceptable and those Xboxs only people are the only ones spoiled. I see it on eway I want to play online LIVE AND PSN both work for me great(Lag on ps3 and Live)but both work PSN(Army of 2, R6V2and 1 etc) Xbox(Splinter cell from xbox still isn't even fixed yet what am i paying for? civilizations) it works both ways is what am trying to say but my main point is I love Siren and Socom and GT5P etc compared to terrible xboxlive games except SOTN and Puzzle fighter HD(Which i bought on xbox for community) which can be bought on both systems. the ease of live is also a step above PSN. but strengths and weakness both they do there job. We just need to learn to admit sometimes things are better on the other side sometimes there not.

TheDude2dot03327d ago

No way. PSN and Live are identical now. I think what PSN needs is something that Live will try to copy. Something fresh. Please don't mention Home because I'm waiting too long for it already.

I'd prefer Live if it was free, but that pricetag is preventing me from getting it. I like PSN, but I wish they would have a Playstation brand mic. You know, just so I can talk to more people.

KBDuB3327d ago

Why do people complain so much about $50 a year, $4 a month...? I guess I'll never understand. =/

TheDude2dot03327d ago

@below

Maybe you don't see a problem but I do. I have to pay $50 for something that should be free? Hell no.

KBDuB3326d ago

Uhm, okay. So, why are you paying for internet on your computer? It should be free, right? Why are you paying for phone service? Why are you paying for electricity? Hell, why are you paying for water?

It should be free, right?

Calvin_ISA3326d ago

The FACT that you're PAYING for ONLY Peer-To-Peer, whilst PSN has DEDICATED SERVERS.

The FACT that PSN DOESN'T have advertising like LIVE.

The FACT that PSN busts out of the "pretty much" 16 player limit LIVE has.

The FACT that PSN is four dollars less a month you have to spend on something like LIVE, and PSN IS free and better, so why isn't LIVE?

I hope your ignorant fanboy brain has "opened it's eyes" after reading this post. :)

Dmitry Orlov3326d ago (Edited 3326d ago )

What idiot wrote this article?
PSN's offerings:
"Whoa! We have made Messeging service for you folks! Enjoy"
"Whoa! We have made voice chat for you folks! Enjoy"
And all off that after more than 1,5 years!? You gotta be kiddin' me.
I HAVE played on PSN. I played COD4 and I must say - PSN is a big pile of rubbish. Disconnects and lags ALL THE TIME. And don't tell me I'm a liar - I saw everything myself with my own eyes. ..so much for your DEDICATED SERVERS...
Sonyboys, you're all, who are standing for PSN, just pityful.

solidt123326d ago

The games on PSN are way better than the games on Live already. The service is free and Live is not much better. Once most games on the PS3 support in-game music then PSN will be better. in-game music is my only complaint which Sony has already address and now it is up to the developers to implement.

KBDuB3326d ago (Edited 3326d ago )

Half the stuff you just said was stupid. You sound and write like... are you Nasim!? Lol.

"The FACT that you're PAYING for ONLY Peer-To-Peer, whilst PSN has DEDICATED SERVERS." Actually, Live does have some Dedicated Servers.

"The FACT that PSN DOESN'T have advertising like LIVE." PSn will have advertisements in home, and Live doesn't have a lot of advertisements anyway.

"The FACT that PSN busts out of the "pretty much" 16 player limit LIVE has." Yea, okay, but more players doesn't always equal better.

"The FACT that PSN is four dollars less a month you have to spend on something like LIVE, and PSN IS free and better, so why isn't LIVE?" After using both Live and PSn, I still prefer Live's features over PSn, and I disagree, as well as many others, that PSn is better than Live.

"I hope your ignorant fanboy brain has "opened it's eyes" after reading this post. :)" I did not put down PSn in anyway in my other posts, and you put down Live in your post, yet, you call me a fanboy? Lol. Okay.

Now, do me a favor and answer my questions that I asked Robondacob.

+ Show (26) more repliesLast reply 3326d ago
Relcom3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

Its free, thats my favorite part. Also PSN games are so different and awesome. I mean having games like SOCOM and Warhawk is something Xbox can't do on live. I'll give it that.

People should just keep in mind the PSN is young and has yet to release it's diffining feature, HOME, whenever it does decide to come.

Kill Crow3327d ago

is just like second life ... I'd rather be playing games ....

xboxLive getting wii looking Avatars ... waste of time ...

Relcom3327d ago

Well it also at functions like being able to get your mates in a room and launcing into a resistance 2 game from home. So there is more to it than just socializing.

juuken3327d ago

Yep, that's what I love about it too.

I also love how Sony implemented the Trophy system for games. I still wouldn't say Sony is close to Microsoft in terms of online but they're getting closer, and closer to providing that same service for the PS3.

TresTrendu3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

What do you mean something xboxlive cant do? They can do it they just prefer not too. We have gig's and gig's of xbox originals on marketplace for download. And BTW which Socom is for download on PSN i might want to check it out.

Vertius3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

People who think Home is just another Second Life seem to know very little about it. It's much more of a gaming platform than people realise.

And the SOCOM that'll be hitting the PSN is SOCOM: Confrontation. It's out in October, on BD as well, shipping with an optional Official Playstation Headset.

CViper3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

Although, if you ever participated in second life.. or.. even read about it... or looked at pictures... you would know its nothing like Home.

But at least He isn't the guy who craps on home, then turns to praise how new and amazing MicroMii's are.

bubbles.

Home is "JUST LIKE" second life as much as Little Big Planet is "JUST LIKE" Crysis's sandbox editor. Just like it.<-- sarcasm

Kill Crow3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

What is the difference between being invited to a multiplayer game from a friends list, or having to go into a 3d virtual friends list in a virtual room .... and join the same game?

What you're doing is joining a game which is the important part ... not how you get into the game and especially not how wonderful the virtal wallpaper in the virtual room are ...

People who think home is anything more than a second life rehash need to go back and understand what second life is again ....

EDIT: it's more like a cut down verrsion of Home ... no one has offered a decent explanation of how HOME is much different from SL?

Quote:

... , called Home, looked very much like a minimalist version of Second Life. Players can create realistic avatars for themselves, then wander around a 3D online world filled with fellow PlayStation 3 owners.

Players can meet up in a "game room" and play pickup games of pool, or select from a few arcade games, all of which are seamlessly integrated into the 3D world. Harrison said that game publishers will be able to create their own spaces in Home to preview their wares.

Each player will have a virtual apartment, which they can decorate to their liking, putting their own photos on the wall or playing videos on their in-room television while your friends hang out and voice-chat with you.

Players will also be able to visit a virtual trophy room where they and other players can view their accomplishments in PS3 video games -- a system identical to Xbox 360's "Achievements" program. (This represents an about-face for Sony, which told Wired News prior to PS3's launch that they were not interested in pursuing such a feature.)

Kill Crow3327d ago

I happen to think the Avatars thing is a waste of time. Microsofts platform isn't aimed at 14 year old girls so why all of a sudden should they market online community at it? Maybe it's just for the family sing song thing (again I don't think that's for me) ....

What microsft do well are making it really easy to find you friends online, chat, and play games. Everything else is just getting in theway of what we all bought consoles for i nthe first place ... playing GAMES!!!!

supahbad3327d ago

you don't have to use HOME. but if you like the sims you may want to

MazzingerZ3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

PSN games are not just different and great... But you can jump from one game to the other without getting up from the couch, no discs needed...after FW 2.40 you can be playing Warhawk (PSN version) and jump to GT5P by using in-game XMB or to any other PSN game or to SIREN ,and soon to SOCOM or Wipeout HD or to the BR game.

That's a great feature if you ask me

KBDuB3326d ago

On xBox Live, all you hafta do is send an invite. =)
In Home, yous gonna hafta wait for them to travel to your house. Lol. Nah.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 3326d ago
otacon683327d ago

First party games are using only dedicated servers. Games like resistance1,2 has 40/60 players online, games like warhawk, soon socom are PSN exclusives and there is nothing like those on live. Trophy system with its leveling features is purely better than gamerscore with only point system...
Games like siren blood curse or RaC: quest for booty are really big games accesiable only via PSN, again there are no big games like those on LIVE...
After 2.4 fw on PS3 only difference between PSN and LIVE is ingame chat and cross-game invites. Do you really think these two are worth 50 bucks/year? I dont think so...
On PSN we play for free, home will come soon for free and xfans will be still paying for basic features like online gaming, how pathetic.
PSN is much better..
Sorry for my english, Iam just trying to get used to it after some time.. :-)