440°
Submitted by retrovertigo 1791d ago | article

360 vs PS3 - Which Offers a Better Online Experience?

Now that both the Xbox 360 Elite and PlayStation 3 are available at the same retail cost, which one is better? Part one, of a four-part pound-for-pound comparison between 360 and PS3, focuses on examining each system's online experience, to see which one has the best offering. (Culture, PS3, Xbox 360)

« 1 2 3 »
gamesR4fun  +   1791d ago
SIMPLE FACTS - ONLINE EXPERIENCE:
* It is absolutely 100% free to play games using a PlayStation 3. A Gold Membership, which retails for $50, is required to play online using an Xbox 360.

* Every Xbox 360 Elite comes packaged with a headset for online chat. The PlayStation 3 does not come with a headset for voice communication.

* The PlayStation 3 can be connected to the wireless network without any additional costs. A $100 wireless adapter is required to connect an Xbox 360 to a wireless network.

Judgment: The PlayStation 3 is absolutely free to sign up and play online. Voice chat, while recommended for team-based games, is not required to play online. The wireless network option is purely a matter of preference, but the $100 price tag for the wifi adapter is a major knock against the Xbox 360.

Based on the simple facts, the PlayStation 3 the best way to get online and play with friends.

*While I agree with the article fact it came out pro psn wont go well... Still free rock solid dedicated servers to play on make it the best. Besides if i need to chat i can always do it ingame. Not saying that cross game chats or the live party system arnt enviable jus not worth paying for.
#1 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(49) | Disagree(9) | Report | Reply
FlipMode  +   1791d ago
Experience? Well its about the same.
Xbox live is more integrated and fluid no doubt.
But if you play COD4 online it won't feel any different which side you play on.
And you get most of XBL features on PSN for free plus DS on FP titles.

I vote PSN
#1.1 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(34) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
air1  +   1791d ago
flip what many of you fail to realize is that its not just about sony doing online for free. its like you said live is just integrated much better.

when live gets a major update we get things like nxe.

a major update for sony is 3.0 you know dynamic themes and a new information bar and stuff..

i dont think you sony fanatics game online that much or have clans, if you know what that is lol. its a fvcking chore on psn to stay with the same group from game to game on psn, for that reason alone live is worth the 30 bucks i spent for 13 months :)
deadreckoning666  +   1791d ago
Depends on whats important to the person. I have a PS3, but I still think XBL is an overall better online experience as far speed and integration. But I settle for the PSN for 4 reasons:

1. Its about 3/4 what XBL is.
2. Its free.
3. It consistently gets better.
4. I don't care about Netflix or 1 vs.100

If all you care about is playing online, PSN is the better value. If u care about movies, music, and tv shows as much as you do games, then XBL is the best choice.
#1.3 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
OmarJA  +   1791d ago
PS3 hands down...
darthv72  +   1791d ago
GOD love these opinionated questions...
It is personal opinion and therefor has no bearing on anyone else which one is better. PS3 fans will say PSN. 360 fans will say Live.

Nothing new here. The new name for this site: O4G (opinions 4 gamers).
table  +   1791d ago
I actually believe PSN is better if we take these 3 basic categories;

If we compare features the 360 wins.
If we compare price the ps3 wins.
If we compare network stability the ps3 wins - capable of more players lag free(kz2, resistance2).

At the end of the day it is all subjective to your needs and I do believe that you get value for money with xbox live.
#1.6 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(9) | Report | Reply
leyego  +   1791d ago
neither

both are filled with douchebags who have the need to insult one another at a constant basis. the only great online games are the ones where they disable all chat and text communication. face it online gaming has many flaws and will continue to suck till they fix it.

who here wants some douchebag little kid tea-bagging everyone they meet and cursing none stop weither its thru a mic or text anyways?
Microsoft Xbox 360  +   1791d ago
Sony servers are capable of handling 256 players in one room. To top things off its free. Booyah.
Max Power  +   1791d ago
@air1...
xbox gets fewer updates, so naturally it seems as though those updates are bigger. Where as Sony constantly updates, so each one seems insignificant, but added up over time its pretty large. You also have to remember that the PSN has come along way since its inception.

But I think this argument is similar to "which controller is better", its all preference and opinions.
#1.9 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
droid and bot  +   1791d ago
i think PSN gives you a LOT for a free service
i know because i use them both
All-3  +   1791d ago
You should have read further...
> While I agree with the article fact it came out pro psn wont go well...

It didn't come out pro-PSN though.

READ ON...

Judgment - Deeper Look

Just because a system is free doesn't always mean that it's better.

Based on the deeper look, I have to say that the Xbox 360 offers a better online experience. It is very obvious that a lot of thought and planning went into developing every part of the experience, both off and online. Sure, you're going to have to pay for an annual subscription, and might have to purchase a wireless adapter depending the layout of your home, but the integration of online gaming, community, and security is so much better on Xbox 360.

Even though free is good, sometimes things are just worth paying for.
Danja  +   1791d ago
Well to be honest it really comes down to prefernece and what systems you own.

While the PS3 offers everything you need for online play in the box .... The 360 has a better a more developed community.

But the PS3 is better for one ..."Dedicated Servers"

Games like - R2 , Warhawk , Socom , LBP , Motorstorm 2 , Wipeout , K2 .. To name a few.

And I have more friends with a PS3

And its "FREE"
Game13a13y  +   1791d ago
PSN wins
M$ is too greedy with their XBL experience. if you are a silver member, you'd feel like you are getting shafted by M$ in every possible ways.
whereas PSN, everybody is equal. Sony is more humanitarian, fact.
randomwiz  +   1791d ago
@air1
there's really only one main difference between xbl and psn, and that is party system.

And when psn gets that, what else will xbl have left?
#1.14 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
GiantEnemyCrab  +   1791d ago
"*While I agree with the article fact it came out pro psn wont go well.."

Then maybe you should read the article again because you are giving only one point of view.

"Based on the deeper look, I have to say that the Xbox 360 offers a better online experience. It is very obvious that a lot of thought and planning went into developing every part of the experience, both off and online. Sure, you're going to have to pay for an annual subscription, and might have to purchase a wireless adapter depending the layout of your home, but the integration of online gaming, community, and security is so much better on Xbox 360."

I play on both and they are both OK but XBL just does more and feels like a true connected experience. PSN for free is excellent however and if it's all you have then you should be happy. But you should not down the pay service unless you've actually seen it and used it.
Poopface the 2nd  +   1791d ago
its not about whats better, its about whats best
the best is playing on LIVE, PSN and on PC. Ahahahah. You can tell me the one you like is better all day, I dont care cause I like to use em all.
ape007   1791d ago | Spam
HDgamer  +   1791d ago
@ape007
Thats not a fact and you know that. Just because it's your opinion doesn't make it a fact at all. I could say PSN is better and claim it's a fact like you just did. Hell I could even go as far to say PC gaming services is much better than both but you wouldn't care much about anyone else's experience of opinion. You don't even give a definite reason why it's a fact or even remotely prove it's a fact.
cyclindk  +   1791d ago
I know, silly argument.
Simplified:

One must compare like terms, i.e. 360 HAS no free online gameplay therefore PS3 wins...

Like any PAID-for service whatever benefits it provides are inconsequential seeing as more money SHOULD always mean more services..

At most, 360 wins in that it OFFERS more premium options for online, but as there is no true equivalency they can't be compared directly.
Caffo01  +   1791d ago
@ Air
do you think that clans are only on Live? rofl..
HDgamer  +   1791d ago
@cyclindk
With that logic paying for escort services is better than getting free sex from your gf/wife/female friend.

Or paying for free DLC.
GiantEnemyCrab  +   1791d ago
"With that logic paying for escort services is better than getting free sex from your gf/wife/female friend. "

Well they say the most frequent customers of prostitutes are married men. lol
#1.22 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
HDgamer  +   1791d ago
Too many cons for paying for escorts.

1. Diseases
2. Transsexuals
3. Under aged
4. You're not getting sex but you're getting robbed or killed
5. Waste of money for something that can last 20 mins. But what she gives you in the end will live on you. Priceless.
DMason  +   1791d ago
@1st Post
Uhhhhhh, if you would have read the WHOLE article, you would have seen that they choose Xbox Live as the best overall choice. This is what happens when fanboys get excited to quickly. They shoot their load early.
kewlkat007  +   1791d ago
Keyword "Experience"
MS XBOX 360

No contest here, Free or not.
evrfighter  +   1791d ago
I'm not too impressed with PSN. Steam offers way more than PSN. The better question should be 360 vs. Steam.
#1.26 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
NoBias  +   1791d ago
If we're talking about EXPERIENCE
It's LIVE. It offers the best online experience. And I use both regularly. To be honest, I've been using PSN a little bit more in the past weeks but that only comes down to the games that I feel like playing. I still believe LIVE holds the top spot for online experience though.

There is a reason why PSN is slowly adding LIVE-esque features and why many PSN users are requesting LIVE-esque features... :\

I honestly am still shocked that PSN doesn't have voice messaging at the very LEAST >:(
#1.27 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
JsonHenry  +   1791d ago
I prefer XboxLIVE myself. But if I actually knew more than one person that owns a PS3 I might change my mind.
NewZealander  +   1791d ago
i havnt played my ps3 online yet but i can comment on the market place and psn store, psn loads way faster then xbl, nearly no waiting for pictures to load and no lag, but market place is far better organised and simple to find the content you are looking for.

and i had a wee play around on home lastnight....i wont be going back put it that way.

unfortunatly my first experience with the ps3 slim isnt all that positive thanks to the v3.0 update makeing uncharted unplayable.
ReservoirDog316  +   1791d ago
I'm sure XBL is better. In fact, I guarantee it. But I like PSN. Met some good friends on it that I wouldn't have found on XBL. Plus it's free. I don't play online much anyways so the little differences hardly bother me.
Prototype  +   1791d ago
After playing on both Live and PSN personally I'd rather be on PSN.

Free, outside Home I maybe ran into one or two morons in Killzone 2 or Call of Duty 4, and I have Home as a big alternative to Yahoo and MSN messenger. Can't beat a free web browser also.

On Live the one thing I hated is the whole voting system that half-worked (I voted 5 people to not play with them for having a foul mouth only to run into them in Call of Duty 4); and for those of you who think I'm full of it on playing Live my gamertag is BlackTetsujin and its down to silver since I don't feel justified to pay $50 a year to play Call of Duty 4 and Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 once in a while.
darkride66  +   1791d ago
Voice message is almost expected?
Say what? I had XBL for 2 years and this is the first I've heard of voice message. Why on earth would you need to leave someone a voice message? Do people use XBL instead of phones? I don't get it.
gamesR4fun  +   1791d ago
yo he said overall psn is a better deal.
cause its free n has built in wi fi

n ya its biased i mean dude makes it sound like we cant even use voice on psn. Doesnt mention dedicated servers or universal bluetooth support so when u do get a mike u can get whatever u want.

n look like i said live does have a advantage in its party system especially. But the question is it worth the price of a new game every year?

@DMason r ur panties ridin up yur hairy crack much?
ignore check
report check
-bubble check
#1.33 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Syronicus  +   1791d ago
It seems everybody uses COD4 as the benchmark so...
I will say that for FREE, I play COD4 online every night. Heck I have team mates with over 45 days logged into COD4, all on the PS3 - FOR FREE. What shows me better value? The free service. All I want is to play online. I do not want to chat with others while playing a different game. I do not want or need cross game invites. All I want is to play online and the PSN offers that, for FREE.
Montrealien  +   1791d ago
I think they both have their good and bad points, but one comment got my attention..

(But if you play COD4 online it won't feel any different which side you play on.)

Really? the party system alone makes shooters in general something completly deifferent on LIVE imho. I think that the minute PSN has a party system as solid as LIVE, the 50$ a year on live will always be worth it.
paul0388  +   1791d ago
They're both good
The PSN is free

Xbox live is a paid service but offers a good amount that PSN does not.

With that said though, for PC Gamers, STEAM, is better than Xbox Live, does the same thing and more, and is free...
KRUSSIDULL  +   1791d ago
Opinion is my answer.
mingeater  +   1791d ago
i've got both consoles
so i reckon i'm more qualified to give an opinion than a majority of "gamers" (lol not that there is many on n4g nowadays) who have posted on here.

the psn is good for a free service without doubt, live is just better, and by alot....end of story. sorry if i have offended some of you!

and lol at the BLOG that are supposedly not worthy according to the contributor test....yet make up 90% percent of the garbage on this crap site
F N A Pepper  +   1791d ago
@flip-mode
i don't agree, i can't connect to my friend when we want to play on ps3 i don't know why yet but we both have good connection and we can both play online but we can never seem to party up it says can not connect to host if either of us try, this doesn't happen all the time but most of the time it does and we've basically given up on ps3 network and went back to 360 online to play cod 4, if anyone can help me let me know, would love to continue playing on playstation but online is all i care about really and i want to play with my friends. "HELP"!
FrankDrebin  +   1790d ago
PS3 vs 360 Online....
I love articles like this as you can literally see people flipping out on the other end of the computer screen.

Lets set things straight.

The PS3 offers playability and basic features for FREE. Basically the online gaming experience is going to be same as the subscription based 360. The PS3 offers voice chat, messages (texted based) and trophies. You can add Home into the mix but I rather not as there isn't much in the way of enhancing gaming.

Now, the 360 does cost money but the experience is a good one. Any feature you can think of is there. Voice chat, voice messages, party, etc. Overall, a more polished and thought out experience and feature list.

Sure the 360 is smoother but in the end when gaming is concerned, gaming is gaming.

So which is better? Well that depends on the player not the system and features.

While I love my PS3, I have to say I like the smoothness of the 360 and the extra features. I enjoy chatting with my friends while we all are playing different games. I enjoy sending voice messages and not having to hammer out text messages. Is it worth the yearly fee? Sure it is. MS does a great job of adding a ton of content and with each update usually comes even more features.

How does PSN stack up? Dang close! While some subtitle features are missing the over all gaming experience is just as good. It really depends on what you need and use.
Jihad  +   1790d ago
@gamesR4fun
Excellent points.

I vote PSN.
jack who  +   1791d ago
this is a joke

edit

crack head below
wtf you talking bout
#2 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(17) | Report | Reply
gamesR4fun  +   1791d ago
no ms charging you to play the 5 hour dlc u jus bought for 60- bucks is the joke jack.
Xbox360Elite  +   1791d ago
Sony charging you for ps2 remastered games is a joke.
Grammar_Police  +   1791d ago
"This is a joke".
gamesR4fun  +   1791d ago
So 40 bucks for 2 of the greatest ps2 games redone to b native 720p... added trophy support such a rip people are preordering it in droves...

the real joke is yur bubble count time to make another account eh.
#2.4 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
talltony  +   1791d ago
this is a joke
Live has no fps game over 60 players not to mention 256.
Kleptic  +   1791d ago
^ yeah I knew before I read the article that the author would completely miss the dedicated server thing...

its true that total player count does nothing to prove how good or bad an online game is...but Sony clearly wants to push the envelope, and tighten the gap between a massive online multiplayer game, and a 'regular' one...R2, and especially MAG, are prime examples of that...

the author also misses Sony's approach to UGC...which to some of us, especially people migrating from PC online gaming...is a major deal...MS does the exact opposite, policing every single piece of content the 360 can download (to the degree that it doesn't have a web browser...) to the threshold of insanity...you don't find games like LBP, or have mod sharing capabilities in games like UT3, on XBL...because MS hates it, and deems it wasted profit...

so as expected...XBL is still a bit ahead in terms of overall user friendliness...the PSN is WAY ahead everywhere else...
Eric Cartman  +   1791d ago
@Kleptic
Exactly my points. Thumbs up.

The diverse online software content is usually negelected too when doing these comparisons.

PS3, from even an objective standpoint, has a far more diverse software content than Xbox 360.
corywebb93  +   1791d ago
I think the guy that wrote this article is trying to
Say this http://www.youtube.com/watc...
vagisil  +   1791d ago
hahaha
that was some funny sh1t.
PopEmUp  +   1791d ago
F*cking
Hilarious sh*t
Tr10wn  +   1791d ago
Now lets rain some disagree.
AngryTypingGuy  +   1791d ago
Haha, that video never gets old.
n to the b  +   1791d ago
lol, thank u!

there's a comparably well-produced 'official why 360 sucks' music video; but it mentions things like having to use batteries... like I care. don't need rechargable to be standard, thanks.

speaking of rechargable, I bought a flip GBA (makes a great night-cap b4 I zzzz...) and was dismayed to discover it can't take batteries! I'd rather b able 2 have power when I want it, not hope I'm fully charged all the time.

maybe PS3 fans don't understand this, being mostly 10-12 and unable to afford batteries on their own??
#3.5 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Omega4  +   1791d ago
Well considering more people use XBL than PSN and pay for it, isnt it obvious who offers a better experience.
air1   1791d ago | Spam
WildArmed  +   1791d ago
Not really.
People keep thinking about features.

Here's where my opinion kicks in:
Dedicated servers vs P2P ?
i rather game on dedicated server then P2P anyday. Sony offers that on alot of first-party games n i greatly appreciate it.
People just keep comparing features..

feature wise LIVE wins no doubt.

But, having no dedicated server when i game.. .makes those 50bucks seem worthless. On the other hand PSN gives me dedicated servers for free.

I dont play 'features' of consoles.. i play games on them. So if your gonna tell me that LIVE is 'without doubt' superior. I call BS.

Seems like sony fanatics arent the only one that dont think

---------edit-----
btw great job on approving a blog on of a user on a game trading site. kudos to the approvers.
#4.2 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
air1  +   1791d ago
i dont play features either, i use them:)

what happens to dedicated servers when the game isnt as popular any more? right.. p2p and dedicated both have its advantages and disadvantages.

get your self a good connection, make a friends list with ppl that have good connections that you enjoy playing with and all is good. or just get a good connection and host your own games and just kick the bad apples.

like i said sony fanatics just dont think.

edit........................

i forgot the name of the game that got online canned, but it was by sega... it was posted not to long ago here on n4g :P
#4.3 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
WildArmed  +   1791d ago
yes coz COD4 disconnections (when a host leaves) dont have on 360, right.. glad you thought that out.

And btw, feel free to name any dedicated server games that have been taken down on the ps3.
*waits*

Side note:
Just coz people own more Sony stereo system doesn't mean they are better then Bose stereo system. Numbers dont correlate with quality.

ooo i knoes! more people fly in coach then business class! so coach must be better right? lol

edit--
Seems like i missed it. But i still havnt heard of any ps3 titles dedicated server's being canned. heck, R:FoM servers are still alive n that was a launch title
#4.4 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
dp277407  +   1791d ago
no its not obvious your just oblivious, I mean seriously you cant beat the psn for free
Game13a13y  +   1791d ago
Omega
ya, having kids calling you names and telling you what they would do to your mom equal better experience?
WildArmed  +   1791d ago
lmfao...

Thank god Live has a major mute button ^^
First thing i do: Mute every1 but mi buddies

@2.8 agreed. it cant be stopped. really annoying..
And here i thought 2.6's point was that you have to pay for that (its a joke.. dont kill me -.- )
#4.7 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
GiantEnemyCrab  +   1791d ago
"ya, having kids calling you names and telling you what they would do to your mom equal better experience? "

Like that is something exclusive to XBL. Give me a break. I'm on PSN a lot and here the same kinds of crap. I was just in the Siren space in Home yesterday waiting to play the game and it was disgusting what some of the idiots were saying in there. They are constantly trying to get around the text filter, not just sex stuff but racist hate and the poor couple of girls in the room were basically forced to leave.
Brutallyhonest  +   1791d ago
Here we go again with the sales card.
When are people going to stop equating sales and popularity to quality?

The Wii sold the most consoles and has the biggest selling game. With that said how many here will go on record saying it's the best console with the best games?

Why can't people just be happy with what they have without claiming they support the best?
#4.9 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
paul0388  +   1791d ago
WOW
I've read some of your past posts, and they're all idiotic.

Ask mommy for a PS3 for Christmas, you'll be much happier.
ThatCanadianGuy  +   1791d ago
PS3 obviously.

I waited for over 2 hours to join a damn match in gears 2.
I mean, C'mon man..it's only a mere pathetic 5vs5..

Fired up Resistance 2 & within two minutes i was in a silky smooth 30vs30 match.
air1  +   1791d ago
did you ever stop to think that either A) your connection is fvcked up or B) many more ppl actually play gears 2. r2 has like a handfull of ppl still playing it, including the devs:)

live is better you ppl must just play online randomly. try making a clan and staying with them with ease on the psn, its a fvcking chore. just for that reason alone live is worth the 30 bucks i spent for 13 months:)
#5.1 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(14) | Report | Reply
IcyJoker187  +   1791d ago
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

awesome experience!
Qazdaz  +   1791d ago
Even if his connection is fvcked up then that just adds ammo to sony's side. The fact that he could get a slilky smooth 30 on 30 match with a crap connection must prove something doesn't it?
ThatCanadianGuy  +   1791d ago
Oh..so i guess this video & everyone who commented on it have a bad connection..
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Maybe..JUST maybe..the game is a technical failure.Like the first one..
cyborg6971  +   1791d ago
@air-1
Wtf are you talking about you don't have a ps3 so stfu. IF live were to let online gaming go to silver and not gold nobody would be paying end of story. Well maybe air1 because there is always that one dumbsh!t out there and it's usually him.
air1  +   1791d ago
maybe just maybe the game is so fun that it doesnt matter if you cant see a shot gun blast damage to the wall. maybe just maybe i play with ppl that dont use glitches. and maybe just maybe everyone on my friends list has a great connection.

at the end of the day not only is gears 2 a great game but you guessed it sold great, i know how you hate sales.. and the game has come a long way from the launch glitches that you posted so, yea...
GiantEnemyCrab  +   1791d ago
This dude is a slobbering PS3 fanboy and not worth listening to about anything on the 360.. If you had a problem it was yours.. of course the PS3 is perfect.. I don't even see Gears 2 in your recently played games when did you last try the day the game came out?

@below: Here is a tissue, you are slobbering again. The game was patched and it isn't the mess you make it out to be.
#5.7 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
ThatCanadianGuy  +   1791d ago
@Air

If you would of watched the video, you would see how retarded your comment is.

@Crab

Again...if you would of watched the video you'd understand how it isn't "Just me" It's everyone who tried to play the f*cking game.

& I played it at my friends house last month.(Wont give out his Gamertag due to the stalking creeps on here) We never even got to join a match, Pathetic.

I would never put gears 2 in my 360.That's just a RROD waiting to happen..
#5.8 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Tr10wn  +   1791d ago
I don't know if you guys can distinct Glitches from Connection problems, most of the lag in gears2 might be due to your connection the first video posted it was a glitch and most of the glitches showed in the second video are already fixed and for the waiting problem i really recommend you to find some friends if you can't well change your internet provider. for the 30vs30 sh!t well you must be a real moron if you think MS can't handle 30vs30... is all about balance and most of the hardcore shooters players don't play with more than 6 player on the team "MLG 3v3 tournaments 1v1, 3v3, 6vs6" i myself i only play Team Tactical on CoD why? because most of the people playing 6vs6+ are just camping. so please stop complaining about something that doesn't make any sense is been proven that xbl is better than psn. pfft 50$ a year... you guys must be eating rocks if you can afford 50$ a year.
AngryTypingGuy  +   1791d ago
You waited for over 2 hours to play a match in Gears 2. You sir are a flat out liar.
WildArmed  +   1791d ago
Posted this in the gamer section, so i thought i'd post it here too..

People keep thinking about features when comparing online experience.

Dedicated servers vs P2P ?
i rather game on dedicated server then P2P anyday. Sony offers that on alot of first-party games n i greatly appreciate it.
People just keep comparing features..

feature wise LIVE wins no doubt.
But, having no dedicated server when i game.. .makes those 50bucks seem worthless. On the other hand PSN gives me dedicated servers for free.

I dont play 'features' of consoles.. i play games on them. So if your gonna tell me that LIVE is 'without doubt' superior. I call BS.

It's a matter of what you want out of a online experience.

@1.3 lol. I'm in a clan and quite frankly find your post hilarious. Never had a problem when I was jumping games or matches within a game. It is easier on LIVE wid the party system, but in no way is it bad as you make it sound.
air1  +   1791d ago
when you come from live integration and jump in on psn its a damn chore.

when all you know is psn you make your self want to like it and act like its not all that bad when it is..

i dont play features either, i use them:)
WildArmed  +   1791d ago
lol. But thats the thing, i play both on 360 n ps3. feel free to scrounge around my gamer tag. I'm on it often. When people pay for something, they tend to defend the price tag. Its ok, its human tendency. All i know that people keep comparing live n psn when both of them have the upper hand on each other in certain fields. its like asking wat flavor you want vanilla or chocolate? You cant go wrong with either.

and features dont make gaming any more fun, more convenient for sure.
While not being disconnected while playing a game def. keeps the fun going. (Gawd I hates COD4 server system)
cyborg6971  +   1791d ago
Don't worry skv007 air is full of hot air he doesn't have a ps3. He's just a trolling douche with no original thoughts he's part of the hive mind that can't think for himself.
WildArmed  +   1791d ago
>.<

well sometimes i just come here to... debate about random stuff.
its always fun.

Plus, it was my mistake.. i posted in the open zone ^^
#6.4 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
GiantEnemyCrab  +   1791d ago
They both use a combination of P2P and dedicated and yes Sony first party has more.

I am on both everyday and I like XBL better but Sony is not bad at all and for free it's excellent. For what online gaming is, I think a PS3 owner will be just fine with PSN.
thebudgetgamer  +   1791d ago
agreed crab
if i payed for psn i would demand more, but i dont. the two things that i love about xbl is cross game invites and voice messaging. cross chat im not really intersted in.
iHuGi   1791d ago | Spam
TheTeam06  +   1791d ago
When it comes to features the hardcore gamers care about, XBL still has the edge. When it comes to a gamer who thinks with his money and not necessarily his experience, PSN has the edge. Will both be equal eventually? I think so.

There are a ton of things that you would have to factor in when thinking about it, though:

Best, Most Unique & Biggest Downloadable Games (PSN)
Most DLC (XBL)
Cheapest (PSN)
Most (Hardcore) Gamer-Related Features (XBL)
More Casual-Like Experience (PSN)

And the list goes on...

@HDGamer: What am I full of? I'm sorry, I thought I was comparing XBL to PSN and not Steam. I don't even know what service you're trying to defend...
#8 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
thereapersson  +   1791d ago
Really, the only "hardcore" features that XBOX Live has over PSN is the cross-game voice chat and game invites.

Unfortunately for Sony, those features are pretty well-requested by many gamers, so until Sony can get around to implementing them, they will lag behind in that area.
HDgamer  +   1791d ago
Yeah this is the most biased if not ignorant assumption.

Most (Hardcore) Gamer-Related Features (XBL)
More Casual-Like Experience (PSN)

Well lets flip this three times.

Most (Hardcore) Gamer-Related Features (PSN)
More Casual-Like Experience (PSN)

Most (Hardcore) Gamer-Related Features (XBL)
More Casual-Like Experience (XBL)

Most (Hardcore) Gamer-Related Features (Steam)
More Casual-Like Experience (Steam)

Basically you're full of it.
ReBurn  +   1791d ago
Gosh, enough with the "hardcore" crap. What does that even mean, anyway?
HDgamer  +   1791d ago
You're making a BS argument saying only the hardcore play on xbox live which is BS.
moparful99  +   1790d ago
WARNING OPINION-----> Look I understand where youre coming from.. It really all boils down to opinion.. This vague defacto standard that everyone throws around is really quite petty and rediculous.. For example I am a "hardcore" gamer. I spend alot of money on this passion but just because I have no interest in features like cross game chat doesnt negate my hardcore status. Its all about percieved value, while xbl is ripe in features it begs the question are these features worth paying x amount of dollars for? Thats an internal question not an outward demonstration of quality. Eveyone clamors on about how seamless and smooth xbl is... While I have experienced live first hand the service failed to impart a sense of value to me. This is not some underhanded comment at xbl, if you enjoy the service and dont mind the price tag then excellent go for it but the cost of entry is a big deal whether people admit it or not.... I like playin online, in fact im in the top 15,000 players of killzone 2 but never has the lack of cross game chat made me question why I play online with my ps3. <------WARNING OPINION
Unicron  +   1791d ago
Another vs. article?

Didn't see THAT one coming...

Can I next get... I dunno... Cloud's Hair vs the Socialist Movement of the early 1900s?
roxkis  +   1791d ago
HOW DARE YOU GOOD SIR!!!!!
Cloud hair clearly wins that battle!
/s

But yeah I agree these VS articles weak.
They just give people a reason to sling mud at one another.
People are going to use what they like and what works for them.
thereapersson  +   1791d ago
I dunno
I like the fact that the PS3 has a built-in wifi adaptor for those who don't want to bother with stringing up massive amounts of ethernet cable, and the fact that PSN is completely free to use; but I also like the fact that XBOX Live has a lot of features that PSN doesn't -- even though not all of them are gaming-related. The "watch a movie with a party" is pretty cool, IMO.
JonnyBigBoss  +   1791d ago
Depends what you want. I personally feel that such a service should NOT require fees, but that's just my opinion. Therefore, PSN is my choice.
DMason  +   1791d ago
So Jleack
I take it that you dont have cable? You have to pay for cable because it offers more content and a better selection of quality programing. If you dont have cable, sure you can still watch shows, but the content/quality is lacking overall.

Any of you saying that you shouldn't have to pay for online, you might as well get rid of your cable/premium channels because hypocrisy is shining.
pippoppow  +   1791d ago
Everyone needs a broadband service to game. Not every gamer has to pay extra to play their games online. Now, I believe Cable is one option with Satellite being another. If one was free with similar services then I'm sure people would pick the free service most of the time. If the 360 allowed everyone to play their games online without the rest of Gold features then Gold memberships would be low. PSN vs XBL really is like comparing Apples to Oranges. Both have plus and minus' making them close regardless of preference. When services are so close to each other, the free one wins. PSN.
DMason  +   1791d ago
No, that's YOUR opinion. PS3 wins for you. And no, you don't need a broadband connection to game. It's a luxury, not a necessity. And again, no, it's not like comparing satellite to cable. It's like comparing cable to not having cable. You can watch some of the same shows on both, you can get by on both, but one ultimately offers a better experience and more robust services. And because that service has a lot of effort and options put into it, a subscription is required.
pippoppow  +   1791d ago
All opinions.
You do need a broadband connection to play online nowadays. Both services are close enough to one another. Some will prefer the better connectivity and higher player count of PSN. Others will prefer the robust chat features of XBL. These are the meat and potatoes of online gaming. It's unfortunate that to play online with a 360 it is a luxury and not a readily available for free service like on other platforms.
moparful99  +   1790d ago
@Dmason yea you're right online gaming is a luxury just like cable tv. YOu contradict your own statement by using the luxury card. Now if PSN was in every way shape and form inferior to XBL then yea the pay to play route wouldnt be so controversial but this isnt the reality of this situation.. Both services fundamentally do the same thing. They allow you to play with other people over and internet connection. Now b4 you go on a tangent and use the but cable and air tv fundamentally do the same thing well then again your wrong. Cable tv is a service in which programming from across the nation is all captured organized and transferred to your home. Air station are always local and are very limited in channels and programming and the quality is wholly dependent on signal strength and your antenna... So in this instance cable or sattelite is far and above well worth the cost. Now in comparing psn and xbl live you cant use this "lithmus test" if you will because psn and xbl are on very equal footing.. More like comparing cable to sattelite which comes back to the OPINION of the user. So your percieved value of xbl over psn is an opinion not fact...
Mr Bean Laden  +   1791d ago
only an idiot would pay 50$ for cross game chat
KionicWarlord222  +   1791d ago
Enjoying xbl....will be enjoying psn soon.
thereapersson  +   1791d ago
You're getting a PS3? Congratulations, dude! It's a great, reliable system with an enjoyable software library -- no matter what fanboys say about it otherwise.
KionicWarlord222  +   1791d ago
Yes.

Sounds like your in shock.
danthaman15  +   1791d ago
Ima getting one soon, but I don't know a lot of people with one :( Gamertags plz.
moparful99  +   1790d ago
@all three of you
add me my psn id is Moparful99 Hope to be gaming with ya soon!
Microsoft Xbox 360  +   1791d ago
Why pay for lag when you get a lot more stable online play with PSN for free?
MGOelite  +   1791d ago
how is security and community better on the 360? everybody is a arsehole and its stupidly easy to hack a 360 if you know what your doing so they arnt better at that
billbox2010  +   1791d ago
xbl is p2p. Some games have their own dedicated servers however, but hardly any.

psncrap is also p2p but more developers supply there own dedicated servers on psncrap compared to the 360.

Cross-game chat isnt avaiable on the psncrap. (lmafao!)

psncrap is free but not have dowloads of demos (only in qore signed have acess for demos, lmafao )

XBL feels more complete. (owned)

xbl wins again imo...;)
#16 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(11) | Report | Reply
WildArmed  +   1791d ago
Classic bot scenario:

xbl is P2P. Some games have their own dedicated servers however, but hardly any.

psncrap is also P2P but more developers supply there own dedicated servers on psncrap compared to the 360.
----------
sony provides for dedicated servers for their first party.. if your gonna cry that you rather have P2P then dedicated.. i pity yee.

Cross-game chat isn't avaiable on the psncrap. (lmafao!)
-------
True. But, i rather chat with the people im playing with -.- Plus, text-chatting is fine with me anyways. Its not a feature i'd pay 50 bucks for.

psncrap is free but not have dowloads of demos (only in qore signed have acess for demos lmafao )
---
right.. see thats what happens when you dont use PSN and talk crap about it.. Im not even gonna bother answering that.

xbl wins again imo...;)
---
Totally aggreed.. its 'imo' So in your opinion its a win for Live. so i cant be like.. LIES u dont think Live > PSN.. but you do ^^
I'm glad we can agree on something ^^
ajkla92  +   1767d ago
Although PSN wins. You can't complain about a free service. Its like you live in the streets and someone gives you a pizza and instead of saying thanks you say "why the f*** there aren't any olives?".
spacetoilet  +   1791d ago
PSN is nice. And FREE.
360 is ok if you want to be called a Ni**er every five seconds on Halo 3 by a 15 year old.
JonnyBigBoss  +   1791d ago
I was called the n-word when I was playing Halo 3 at my buddy's house. I'm white too...
erik cartman  +   1791d ago
360 because i know more 360 owners and its funnier
i use ps3 for mostly single player games
Iceman X  +   1791d ago
Cross Game Invites????
Since when did the PS3 not have this??? My 1st game for PS3 was Ridge Racer 7 and it had Cross Game Invites since day1, I have a launch 60gb which i upgraded to 160 after 3 months of having it. Most if not all PS3 game have the ablilty to invite someone to your game that you're playing. Anf yes you can invite them no matter what game they are playing. And for the record Sony is working on cross game chat atm.
#19 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Allowen  +   1791d ago
I can speak about my experience with the PS3.

Normaly I leave my mic turned off but I had lots of great moments playing games such Resistance 1&2 and Killzone 2 with minor lag problems or dificulty to find a match to join.

on the other hand to I totally did not like Socom Confrontation but after many months with patching I heard it is a good game now but I totally lost the interest on it now.

I am still waiting for some MMoRPGs... if I remember right the game AION was supposed to also come to the PS3 but it seems that it will be a PC only game.

Playing online multiplataform games such Resident Evil 5 was not good to me, too much lag and boring disconnections all the time.

Multiplayer deathmatch seems to have almost the same number of games on both consoles but seems that the Xbox360 still have an advantage of having more online games with cooperative modes then the PS3 .

I hope that with Uncharted2 and GT5 I can play more online with friends in a cooperative way.
On that matter I really envy the xbox360 with games coop online such Left4D, halo3, GoW172 and etc.
blazed13  +   1791d ago
nope
aion is only coming to the pc. where you heard that is completely wrong..
PimpHandHappy  +   1791d ago
really?
if your talking games that are offered online its PSN all day! The only games played on XBL online are Halo Gears and COD
ReBurn  +   1791d ago
I've played online with both. The only real difference in the experience for me is that there are fewer people on PSN with voice. The actual experience is pretty much the same once you're in-game.
Death2494  +   1791d ago
Look simple facts pt. 2
Look i'm a psn lover just like the next person but i honestly think "after the 3.0 update" that LIVE is still king.
1. Easier to communicate with friends
That's the one and only reason i think LIVE is better for gaming experience. Everything revolves around doing it with your buddies. That's why co-op is turning into a necessity rather then an luxury.
That fact that my dear Sony chose to ignore our outcry for cross game voice chat and a real party system make me feel alienated.

Foot Note: I guess if they did use cross game voice chat then the text keyboard add-on would become absolute.
moparful99  +   1790d ago
Dude stop getting so uppity with sony over these features. Sony is working hard and delivering the content and features we want.. Just because they didnt release it with 3.0 and it didnt fill the Gotta have it now mentality of this generation doesnt mean sony ignored you.. You have no idea the legal hurdles that they may have to jump through or the technical implications. We have no way of knowing what is involved with bringing these features so dont jump the gun and start hating on a company that always gives its consumer base what they want... Hell we got in game xmb which is wat everyone and their mother cried about for nearly a year! Instead of gratitude you and the other spoiled gamers keep getting pissy over what the other side has that you dont.. Jesus I thought consoles were about games not online features. " No! I refuse to enjoy killzone 2 because I cant talk to billy bob button masher while he plays metal gear solid 4!!!" See how silly that sounds??
#23.1 (Edited 1790d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
PimpHandHappy  +   1791d ago
PSN
the machine along with that games gives it the edge! Sorry but cross game chat and invites mean jack sh!t when ALL games have a party system built in already!
and as far as cross game chat..... text chet is available and allows you to keep talking with the ppl your INGAME with
btw i didnt read this
i just know what Halo players are like and i know what Warhawk/Socom players are like
PSN hands down!
Nelson M  +   1791d ago
Xbox Live Should Be renamed to Xbox Lag or Xbox Dead !!!
That's all you need to Know
Death2494  +   1791d ago
I'm not a bot....
But LIVE revolves not just around you, but you and your friends. It makes you feel like you're still having those gamer nights where you don't leave until 3am. That's what it's all about man. Sony would dominate if they only get that simple fact in their heads.
Saaking  +   1791d ago
PSN of course.
TheMART  +   1791d ago
No need to even discuss this anymore. PSN will be out of Beta with the launch of the PS4 in 2012/2013 with cross game chat, cross game invite and custom music in every game.

The question in this article is: Which offers a better online experience?

The thing I hear PS3 fandroids say: PSN is free, doesn't change anything to the answer. Which is the better online experience? XBL is, without a doubt.

And all those saying PSN is, should get their head checked.

EDIT

@ the one below

You're saying it yourself, cross game chat, cross game invites. Its on XBL and not on PSN. SO they're not equal already. Thanks for the confirmation. XBL does more and does better then PSN.

Then you skipped the also important:

Custom music ingame in EVERY game
Gamerpoints (Trophies) in ALL games
A party system like XBL has

No dude. You're wrong on all points. And yes, 50 bucks are a great investment if it makes EVERY game that has online better.

Not only that, I can still pop in and play Halo 2 online, or any other old game that has an online option. Can you still play MGS3 online on your PS2 or PS3?

Another one: how many great co-op games (online) do you have on the PS3 through story mode or even otherwise? Another great implementation based on the unified XBL and the jump in/out option for friends that boosts that game option on the 360 and not so much on the PS3.
#28 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
Saaking  +   1791d ago
Well mart, PSN does what it needs to do right. What do you get by paying 50 bucks a year? Cross game Chat. and.....that's it. PSN and XBL are equal and I'd rather have the FREE service.
callahan09  +   1791d ago
"or any other old game that has an online option"

That's simply not true. Certain games have always had their own publisher-owned servers that the publisher reserved the right to take down. And that applies to Xbox games as well. Any EA game is hosted on EA servers, which EA reserves the rights to take down. Same with Konami's games. Even Microsoft can't get those companies to go along with their rules, they get exceptions so that they can still run their own servers. If you look at the back of the box of Madden 10 for Xbox 360 and PS3, it says right under the online features portion that EA reserves the right to discontinue online game service for Madden 10 at their whim any time past 90 days after the season ends. So what if Konami removed their servers for MGO on PS2. If that game had been on Xbox as well, they'd have removed the Xbox servers too. And plenty of old PS2 games still work online, like Killzone and SOCOM.
PimpHandHappy  +   1791d ago
@Mart
the only games that need personalized music is racing games and fighters! EVERYTHING else music is a huge part of the game... you think i want music playing over MGS4 or COD online... no way

cross game invites are over rated... i can send a text asking if the person wants to play... whats the difference? Explain please... 90% of games that play online have a party system and invite system!

XBL does more then PSN and it does it better? Really? Doesn't play 16 vs 16 better! It doesnt run 20 vs 20 better! it doesnt run 256 players on one map at all... i remember the days of you talking about Huxley and its 100 player maps! Still waiting on that

you say: how many great co-op games (online) do you have on the PS3 through story mode or even otherwise? How many do you have? I know for a fact you have nothing like R2!

anyway good luck with 50 bucks a year! I'll buy a game with that.. maybe even 3 or 4 games off PSN
Faztkiller  +   1791d ago
IMO its the PS3 only because NO LAG with more players and it FREE
but i do play the 360 more online because of halo 3
HDgamer  +   1791d ago
Halo 3 is a good game. Can't argue with that.
Dr_Nefarious  +   1791d ago
Why would any body in their right mind pay for an internet connection and then waste money to have to pay online when it should be free any way? Stupid and just down right ignorance. Should be free for any system. Thank you bots very much for giving the psn high standards to go by. It's because of your $50/year that the psn keeps improving. Enjoy paying extra for a connection you already pay for any way. Suckers (I guess we all should call it bots for now on), theres one born every minute.
GiantEnemyCrab  +   1791d ago
And what idiot would go to Starbucks and drop $3 on an espresso everyday! Stupid idiots!!! Durrrr! /sar

People spend their money on what they want. What you think is a "waste" others don't. I get free PSN but guess what? I still pay for Live because I think it's worth it. You going to tell me I'm wrong and I'm an idiot ya douchebag?
#30.1 (Edited 1791d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
Dr_Nefarious  +   1791d ago
durr? Starbucks? What? I know you used StarBucks as an example, but it is a bad example. Any example used against the main issue at hand would be a bad example.

I don't think of you as an idiot, I just used it as an example and yes idiot was too harsh, I admit that I was wrong. I look at it this way. You have your own money so you can do what ever floats your boat. It's your life and your opinion. I just think that from a bussines point of view it is profitable for MS, but it is just plain wrong for the customer. A down right shame. You know this. I've heard all the excuses before about how it's worth it. Just think about it, with no fan boy emotions involved and you will see what I am talking about. Playing a game you pay $60 for, plus the online is a birth right in my opinion, not something you should have to pay for.
« 1 2 3 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
10°

4PM Review | Good Game

5m ago - Scrolling through the comments on the 4pm's pitch page prior to its release, you could see people... | PC
40°

Digimon All-Star Rumble revealed for PS3, 360

11m ago - Bandai Namco has announced a new Prope-made 3D action/arena battle Digimon title for the PlayStat... | Xbox 360
20°

Disgaea 4: A Promise Revisited Review: Never Forget | GamerTell

43m ago - From the review, "Seeing has how the core of Disgaea 4 remains completely unchanged for Disgaea 4... | PS Vita
30°

Review: Magic 2015 – Duels of the Planeswalkers | FanSided

43m ago - With the rise of card-collection battle games over the past 12 months, large in part due to the r... | PC
Ad

Looking for a great Pokemon Community?

Now - Look no further. Join us at the BulbaGarden Forums, the best community for everything Pokemon | Promoted post
40°

Chick Chick Chicky Deluxe Indiegogo trailer

43m ago - Dunham Bro's Games is two-man Indie videogame developer, currently working on Chick Chick Chicky... | Arcade