Top
180°

Sorry But PSN Is No Xbox Live...Yet

PlayStation Gamer UK Writes: "As many of you readers will know, the writing staff at PlayStation Gamer UK are all gamers and play games not systems, so don't sound surprised by the title. The reason for writing this is simple. Now and then i will scan some of the popular forums such as N4G, Official EU PlayStation community forums and OXM UK and one topic in recent months is that users believe that PSN is now better than Xbox Live. To be fair they have some valid reasons with PSN being free and offering many features Xbox Live does, however while it offers many of the features, it doesn't offer all of them and some of the ones they do offer are of a lower standard."

Read Full Story >>
playstationgameruk.com
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
ape0074010d ago

is overall better,of course

everything in xbl is cross everything,it's like a fully connected world

psn has strong points and.......kz2......no lag.....free.......home(which enhance every week,has endless potential)

psn you are just a few steps of matching or surpassing xbl

kz2 is one of the best online experiences in this gen.

resistance1004010d ago

completely agree, i suspect by the end of this generation PSN will be better than Xbox Live, providing Sony don't slow down on the rate they are improving PSN at the moment.

mint royale4010d ago

but the fact that both experiences, live and psn, are awesome whats the point in arguing over this topic. Its not as if neither are inadequate.

lociefer4010d ago

oh well , he's right, but at least he's just talkin about psn , god knows whatll happen if a ps / xbox fansite wrote a dont buy this console article ,,,,, Oh wait ....

INehalemEXI4010d ago (Edited 4010d ago )

I'm glad PSN is no XBL. I has both and prefer PSN it may lack some features but it has the games I want, and free 2play like PC.

It all comes down to the games and PSN has what I need.

Sitdown4010d ago

"i suspect by the end of this generation PSN will be better than Xbox Live"

I really would like to hear your reasons on why you believe this. Is Sony more dedicated to psn than Microsoft is to Live?

thenickel4010d ago

"I'm glad PSN is no XBL. I has both and prefer PSN it may lack some features but it has the games I want, and free 2play like PC.

It all comes down to the games and PSN has what I need. "

This is about live being a better overall service than PSN and not your gaming preference. Next gen Sony will be all about online from ground up and only then will they be no different.

slak4010d ago

They both have there ups and downs

DelbertGrady4010d ago

"psn has strong points and.......kz2......no lag.....free.......home(which enhance every week,has endless potential)"

Killzone 2 is not an online feature, it's a game. That's like saying Halo 3 or Gears 2 is what makes Xbox Live great.

No lag? That solely depends on what games you are playing. People said that the PS3 version of SFIV lagged more than the 360 version. Many PS3 games are completely deserted when you get online. Play something else than Sony published exclusives, and that is more than a year old, and you'll notice the absence of gamers. Much more people online on Xbox Live.

Free. That is awesome but also probably what separates it's quality from XBL.

Home? Really? It's more or less already flopped. Hyped up to be something revolutionary ended up being a big 'meh'.

"psn you are just a few steps of matching or surpassing xbl"

Umm...no. PSN is behind XBL and will probably never catch up as MS generates money from it's gold accounts, which they can spend on improving Live. If anything Live will keep improving over PSN.

UnwanteDreamz4010d ago

You are sad man. Ape007 didn't say one negative thing about Live, hell he complimented it, and you still have to run in and spout all this negative crap about PSN.

Whatever

GWAVE4010d ago

I'm puzzled by people (even PS3 gamers) who willingly consign to the idea that PSN is automatically inferior to LIVE.

As for me, I'd rather take the stable servers of PSN to the (generally) immature community and laggy Peer-to-peer of LIVE, even if it means I have to forgo cross-game chat and invites.

Israfel4010d ago

In other words, I don't have to PAY 50 dollars,for roughly the same service. Where even in some aspects PSN is superior to xboxlive.

Eddie201014010d ago

I agree with much of what he said except the demo thing, but I live in the U.S.. here in the U.S. most multi platform demos are released within a couple of days of each other on each platform, with a few releasing earlier on PSN and a few releasing earlier on Xbox live.

The head set issue, the games that really need it support it, as for most everything else your still able to communicate with the virtual keyboard or a USB keyboard, and sooner rather than later we will have cross game chat and invite using a head set across the majority of games. Not really missing it that much on PSN. other than the two things I just mentioned there pretty much equal in what they offer, and PSN offer a couple of things that Xbox live does not offer, YouTube support, and in game video recording, although its not mandatory for developers to use it.

The difference on either is not enuff to say that one is way superior than the other, and you can have a real good experience on both.

2EXS4010d ago

I really don't think so, why do we have to give these sites free hits? why do we fall for the same $hit over and over again?To me PSN is great as it is,I don't need to brag about it , I just need to play games online.
PSN does what I want it to do and that's all I need, period

4010d ago
pippoppow4010d ago

Is it free? Yes. Does it have the most dedicated servers for a better online experience? Yes. Does it allow developers and users to create mods? Yes. As a gamer these are the most important aspects of an online service which to me and many other makes the PSN better. Funny how Netflix is seen as such a great feature. PS gamers can use the PS3 browser to view all kinds of videos, including Netflix and be able to download all kinds of content,play flash games, etc.
PC is the best followed by the the PS3 which edges out the 360. Why people keep paying for a service that really isn't better than a console rival is ludicrous. Even if one prefers the 360's service the fee is unjustified and shouldn't be tolerated.

PS3

likedamaster4010d ago

"As for me, I'd rather take the stable servers of PSN to the (generally) immature community and laggy Peer-to-peer of LIVE, even if it means I have to forgo cross-game chat and invites"

I beg to differ. http://www.ps3center.net//a...

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 4010d ago
Zeus Lee4010d ago

IF Sony fire some of the people running the PSN and hire some people who understand,from a marketing and gamer perspective,the importance of social gaming-Then the PSN will easily surpass Xbox Live.

Since Sony are stubborn with letting go of underachieving employees,it appears that in this generation of gaming,Microsoft will have the superior Online offerings.

Just the cold hard truth.

thor4010d ago

No...

The reason people perceive PSN as inferior is down to a couple of reasons:
1) The PS3's OS is lacking in features
2) Many things are not standard in games
3) It's a free service

It's nothing to do with the network structure itself, that's how a simple firmware update can add OPERATING SYSTEM functionality. Similar to in-game music - that's effectively the same thing, but it doesn't come under the umbrella of "PSN" to most people because it doesn't pertain to online gaming, when actually it's the same problem.

Many things are not standard - voice chat is proprietry for each game, custom soundtracks are handled in a different way for each game, trophies aren't in every game, the list goes on. This means that you can't have cross-game voice chat because the games use radically different systems for handling it. This is a planning problem, and cannot be remedied because games have already released and they will not support these features.

Lastly, because it is free, people perceive it as an inferior service. If you pay for Live, you feel like you're part of some exclusive club, like it's some kind of special service; you're a paying customer. PSN being free gives the impression that it's tacky, cheaply run and amateurish.

Standard headsets might have some part in it as well; but again, this is just a planning thing. They better start thinking ahead for the PS4.

heroicjanitor4010d ago

But the problem might be patenting, Microsoft did patent in-game music after-all, which is a basic thing so as long as Microsoft patent every piece of crap they stand in then psn will be slowed down.

IdleLeeSiuLung4010d ago

Then it is time for Sony to innovate and patent their own stuff. I'm sure Sony have no lack of talent that can come up with ideas.

I just think that Sony didn't foresee that online gaming was such a big factor and MS coming from a PC background understood this well. Thus the landscape we have now.

somekindofmike4010d ago

@ heroicjanitor

Did MS really patent in game music? (serious question) because it seems like such an everyday feature it'd be impossible to patent,

a bit like saying Dreamworks patent CGI Animated Movies, therefore no one else can patent it?

I would of thought more likely MS developed a software to deliver in game music and that is what the patent is for, but it doesn't stop a competing company producing it's own software which delivers the same feature surely?

A bit like MS have a patent on Windows Media Player, but it doesn't Stop Apple Developing iTunes.

Just my thoughts, Correct me if I'm wrong :)

heroicjanitor4010d ago

http://patft.uspto.gov/neta...

That is microsoft's patent, and it stops Sony from introducing any in-game soundtracks without microsoft's permission. That is why I said microsoft patent absolutely everything. But Sony may have already found a loophole in the patent to allow them to provide custom soundtracks for particular games, as long as the functionality is not system-wide(ie if it is associated only with single games that the developer put in as a feature, since it is the game doing it not the ps3).

Look at this too
http://www.ripten.com/2008/...

somekindofmike4010d ago

interesting read, it does seem to sound like a patent for the method, and therefore not stopping anyone else creating there own method for in-game music, or loophole as you put it.

It's could be a bit like Nintendo have a patent for the d-pad, but it doesn't stop Sony & MS creating there own style of d-pad.

Either way I'm not going to loose sleep over it :)

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4010d ago
locos854010d ago

Of course its not..... it's better because it's FREE!!!!

resistance1004010d ago

Free doesn't always mean better ;)

table4010d ago

better on your wallet though ;)

resistance1004010d ago

Can't disagree with that lol

Sitdown4010d ago

only because I have always had the convenience of having somebody else pay for live...therefore my wallet was never harmed in either case. Technical wise...some might say Live is better.........but perception wise is subjective. If somebody cares less about all the other features and just wants to log on and play online...then to them, both might seem fairly equal.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4010d ago
Bren864010d ago

psn STILL doesn't allow us to send or received game invites via the friends list.

rhood0224010d ago

Considering the fact the PSN is a 2 year old service going against a 6 year old service, its amazing how close it's come to parity with LIVE.

For me, the services offer exactly the same thing based on my needs--online play, dlc, and movies/tv content. Anything outside of that is pointless to me.

resistance1004010d ago

I agree with the article about Party Chat. I would love to have that on PSN when playing Killzone 2 =D. Still i guess its a feature which will come in time

spunnups4010d ago

my thoughts exactly, althought cross game party chat would be nice, and it is my only gripe at the moment

Show all comments (62)
The story is too old to be commented.