Microsoft has said research showing that a higher percentage of US PS3 owners have their consoles hooked up to the internet than Xbox 360 is misleading because it does not reflect pricing or the way services are used.
awww...... how sweet!
From what my friends told me the core online experience is the same just differences like cross game chat but I hope sony provide us that for free and not in the premium service. But this will not end well
i think even the sales of 360 are misleading because of the 50% failure rate you guys have there. but let's just look over that minor issue, eh?
Bad PR spin.
Raiinstorm81 - 1 day 1 hour ago - No one should compare PSN and XBL the only thing is its dumb to compare PSN and XBL, when a free service is comparable to a pay service something is wrong. Besides 50 bucks isnt alot of money but to some thats one extra game they are missing out on a year to others water under the bridge. PS No one goes to mickey D's and says here's 50 bucks i want a happy meal every month for a year. j/k
You can't compare because one is a free service...WTF? Whether free or raping gamers to pay to play online the gamer has to connect the console and facts are ps3 has more consoles connected plain an simple, goin by microsofts logic they should re-do the data and not include all the xbl silver subscribers as that's free.. Ms....new PR department please
I still dont c y pple say live is better than psn. If u ask me they both do the same job..PLAY GAMES ONLINE. U get one free and u pay for the other one. So which one would u get. A free online or the one u pay for!!!!!
Silver membership is free. Wouldn't you connect anyway?
"Xbox 360 continues to lead the charge" It sure leads the "charge" alright....with peripherals such as hard drives as well as wi-fi. Not to mention their "charge" for online gaming
you know how long it takes for me and my cousin to connect to Gears and play Gears online? You knock-off the dead time on a lot of games, and it's probably around the five-hour mark for everyone.
How is it bad PR spin? More PS3 users are connected to the internet but it's not reflected in the comparisons of online gaming activity. Independent researchers Neilson and the NPD have shown that more online gaming activity is logged on XBL than any other service so it's obvious those persons online on the PS3 aren't playing games.
If Microsoft admitted that the two services were comparable, then their annual charge would not be justified. They are going to say that their service is far ahead of PSN and keep charging that fee. I've played plenty on LIVE and PSN, and they are pretty close, really. I get a better connection on the AAA first party stuff on PSN, such as Warhawk, but it's easier to connect and jump into games on LIVE. I don't use cross game chat at all. LIVE has more co-op games, which I like, especially Crackdown and the Gears games, but that situation is gradually improving on PSN.
for not starting the thread with something fanboyish. see.. how clean the first half of the page looks. everyone should practice this. q: of course, Open Zone is a different ball game! lol. q:
It's akin to comparing a Mac to PC. Why do many people (still a minority though) prefer to use a Mac when it cost so much more than PC? Surely a PC does everything a Mac does at a fraction of the cost. Answer is the experience and ease of use. As much as I dislike Apple, I gotta hand it to them, they make some very intuitive and user centric software. So sure PSN does almost everything Live does, but just not as easy or convenient. So if you want your stuff sugar coated and sprinkled with cinnamon, go with Xbox Live Gold. Want a free (maybe cumbersome) experience go with PSN. There are options, and I like options!
How the hell could anyone pay for live if they already have a ps3? I mean unless you want to play halo or gears it's pretty pointless in my opinion. All major games nowadays are having party options and game invites on psn, for free!. Cross game chat to me doesnt justify the price especially when every single major exclusive on 360 doesnt even have dedicated servers while 90% of ps3's do. Microsoft is really ripping people off with live imo.
*PSN premium drops with boatload of features* "the competition still can't compare because, even though they now have a subscriptioned based plan, research shows that more of they're players are still using the free package."........Your freakin point?! Either way people are connected to PSN more than Live. But seriously, did they have to comment on this? The point of more people on PSN than Live is threatning or something?
The only difference is the party system. I actually use chat on 360 with my friends because the party system is so convenient. As for what really matters, the online gaming, XBL has proven to be laggier than the PSN in my experience. The $50/year thing is just a cash grab. There's no need to charge for what they offer. Sucker tax, plain and simple. I think Microsoft's supercharged PR brings in a lot of people who haven't done online gaming before, and so they just don't know any better. Then there's the other type of defender, who pulls out the ol' "paying is better than free". Suppose XBL is better than PC gaming then too, eh? You guys should be spending your time raging against Microsoft for taxing you rather than defending the fee to people who don't matter. The only redeeming quality about XBL Gold for me is the Deal of the Week. A guy like me who buys tons of games online would likely make my money back and then some in a whole year of having XBL Gold.
They totally aren't like omgz. Because you can only play games online on xbox live.. oh wait............ I guess because it's free so it's not comparable. But PR at it's finest. I love Live as much as PSN, but seriously?
You have to think there are two very different ways to compare (or not compare) these services. Interface and infrastructure. By looking at the interface first those who use both obviously know there is a real difference between the two. Some may prefer the XMB to the NXE and vice versa. One thing that catches my eye first when looking at both is how integrated everything is on the NXE. That isnt saying XMB is bad but it is all separate and detached. MS really went to the trouble of making the NXE more unified and seamless witheverything the Live service has to offer. Sony is currently very simple and simple is good to just get in and get going. Where i see the XMB as more of a "mall experience" is when going from section to section and especially the store. Going in to the store is basically that. You can't jump between sections without being prompted to leave the store. I have used this example before so I will use it here. Between the two you could view the XMB like a mall. Lots of stuff but you are basically leaving one section and going to another like leaving one store and going to another in a mall. NXE is more like a big department store. You are in and can go anywhere without ever having the feeling of leaving the overall store. You can tend to wander about between departments. That is basically the interface portion. Infrastructure (as I am using the term) is the actual service itself when it comes to all things interactive. Here we have differences again with Sony feeling detached and MS being more community connected. Both offer similar abilities of finding your friends with Live getting the nod thanks to the ever always connected friends list. Any moment your friend comes on you can see what they are doing and jump out of a game (or into a game) with a few button presses. I have tried the game launching part of PSN but currently it seems you need to be in home to do that. PSN has made some great efforts to become a better service while maintaining the notion of online play being free. That single solitary element seems to be the focal point in many heated debates. If we had to use service providers in place of these you could look at Live like AOL (community driven connected feeling) with PSN being more of the individualized non community based service. Live started out as a community service and has grown better over the years with many additions to try and justify the cost. However, the key ingredient to Live (online play) may or may not change in the coming months. Rumor has it that silver members that are child accounts to existing gold accounts will be getting full gold level percs so long as their profile resides on the same system as a paid gold member. wow...that is a long read (and write).
Sounds like they are a baby throwing there toys out the cot.. They still have the superior online service but JUST not worth the price they charge for the differnce though..
NPD=/=WORLD SALE DATA end of story
The core experience is the same, only, one allows you to do it for free. and thats the reason i'm on the PSN... I think right now it can Go to paid because it offers everything you'd want in a Paid subscription, the beauty of it all is that they dont, they still manage to keep the service free, even with the advent of Netflix, last Fm, PS Home, Video store, and online gaming for games, and it's own achievement like system. all these things are considered premium experience on the the next console. yet Sony does it for free. This makes a world of difference. Which is why the tides have been turning, World wide the PS3 is getting more online play time. MS can cry.
"Xbox 360 is the hands-down leader in online gaming, with 48 percent of all online gamers using Xbox 360 and Xbox Live to connect with friends, family and competitors" PC is the leader in online gaming.
PC is the Platform that established Online gaming orignally, its no surprise PC has the highest online following. That platform just has too many generes as well which gives the user a wide verity of selection.
Wasn't there an article recently claiming that Sony had a higher percentage of users connected to PSN? Of course, that was worldwide, but apparently all that matters is NPD to MS. They LOVE to quote those figures.
When the percentage difference is that small and one service is free while the other is charging...I think that really tells you what service is better.
Take all home PC's into account and see how many are connected to the net. Then take all home consoles and see how many are connected to the net. I think it's safe to say among the PC's, they are used far more often to play online than consoles. Then you can factor in LAN houses/internet cafes and then..well, Korea... and the numbers go even further in the PC's favor.
The numbers posted reasonably are completely comparable, since most XBL users, who were counted in the tally, were Silver users, not Gold. Honestly, if you subscribe to Qore, you're practically getting the same thing as what paying for XBL gives you -- some extra demos and stuff to watch and play. Cross-game chat is nice for some, but that's pretty much the only other thing.
I highly highly doubt that there are more silver users than gold or even close to the same amount. First of all party chat and cross game invites are very very convenient, at least for me. Second, the invite system for PSN is very awkward and inefficient. I'm not going to explain in detail, but if you try both you will surely notice the differences. This doesn't mean that PSN is bad, but like I said, there is a reason that many people are paying for XBL (not silver).
Immersive is as overused a term as the term epic nowadays. Oh MS I hope you didn't take that personal. Shhh you hear that? Ignorance is on the way.
MS is right you can't compare the two with just "connected" numbers. Everyone who has a PS3 and Internet will be on PSN since its free but the majority of them won't even touch the online aspects. While EVERYONE who has XBL WILL use the online aspects because they will want to get their moneys worth.
what a stupid argument wouldnt eveyone that have a xbl silver account also be connected. and as you probably wouldnt no you have to set up a psn account so those that dont want to use online wouldn bother to set one up.
Yeah, the silver account argument kind of disproves that. For what it’s worth, my 360 isn’t connected because it doesn’t have wifi. Between that and Modded offline 360's, you probably have a explanation for a good percentage of the difference. Still interesting numbers seeing the 360 still has a circa 5 million lead.
Please define the "online aspects," because I could have sworn I have been enjoying them since I got my PS3.
@ Max Power... lol Yeah, I was wondering that myself. Online Aspects? WTF. If your online, I'm pretty sure you're enjoying the Aspects of being Online. o_O It's always bizarro world when dealing with the MS faithful.
You guys are just making blind statements. There is a reason more people are using live, even though it cost $50 a year. Facts are facts. Numbers speak. Just because you can get online and play doesn't mean their isn't a better way.
When going online, these "aspects" come to mind, and I use them: - the web browser - the psn store - multiplayer gaming - sending friends messages - my mic - playstation home (They have the first episode of Afro Samurai playing in the theater, and added a new spot on the SOCOM home space). - and I guess playing games so I'm not certain what you mean you you make the inference that PS3 players aren't using this or that to play videogames... especially since most of the things I listed aren't usually used when playing videogames.
See, your list shows your priorities. The web browser and PSN store are what you think of FIRST when you thought of features you use on the PSN. Not multiplayer gaming or playing with your friends. Which, are the biggest features for me on the 360, and what I would think of first before anything else. It may not have been your intention, and that's swell. But, for PSN, I do think in the order of your list... Except I do find the browser pointless, but I have a laptop.. Anyhoo, I don't think of multiplayer games first, because none of my friends have headsets so I never play with them, so I just buy games with real strong single player. So, really, I'm connected to PSN for no reason other than to buy crap off the store, and have people send me messages on occasion.
you cant say majority for psn tho cause they got the right to do with what they want with the money they spend for their ip. ex my friend dont have online no more but when he can get online where ever he go or decide to get it back on he can. and the thing about live is funny cause its true if you paying for it your gonna try in get your moneys worth, but its stupid cause you already brought the game at the store supporting the devs but ms tells you you cant play the other half til you pay them. the real question you should ask them is why they aint making it free for a loyal fan like yourself or why they not letting more customers see the other half of work the dev did which could get the customer hooked and make them seek other games the dev could be making next. im just saying
My over or almost 200 hours of play on multiplayer for the games Killzone2, MAG, Resistance 2, and Warhawk kindly disagrees with you. Not to mention the lesser games of MGO, Battlefront I and II, Killzone 1, and Motorstorm. You didn't pick-up on the sarcastic tone of my order in reference to the OP, is all.
PSN was the reason which saw me play an average of 2 hours a week on my PS3 and subsquently sold it. It is the same reason why my younger brother replaced his PS3 just yesterday with an Elite. Until PSN offers the same fundamental features as Live does that allows friends to play and communicate together without an issue in any game they choose to, it is farcical to suggest that PSN is better for the gamer than Live. Eventually Sony will deliver those functions, although most likely in a Premium Service. I mostly rent games so I'm aware about the costs involved in gaming more than most, but paying £30 a year for Live really is no issue if it sees me as involved as I am with my gaming and my Friends list. I'm on an average of 10 hours a week. That's the difference its made for me.
since wot you stated was fact,expect lots of disagrees.common sense and your personal experience makes ps3 owners very angry on here.
You specify nothing in your statement about why XBL is better PSN. Can you give me a list of features that are missing or problems you had with PSN that stop you playing and communicating with friends. @Wrathman He specified no reason for why they had problems. Also how do you know it is fact. Are you friends in real life with him and also what facts where you talking about? PS3 owners don't get annoyed by people giving reasons why they are having problems. They get annoyed by people not giving any reason for it.
And playing 10 hours a week is nothing haha i do that on sundays alone lol and i only game on Ps3. I have over 10 real life friends that game daily on Ps3 and have played many hours of Uncharted 2 survival together. My gf and i played 10s of hours together on Killzone 2 and have had a huge amount of hours playing MAG with clans and friends with a touch of a button. So what are the features that make live so much better? I am quite serious as i have zero problems gaming with my friends on a daily basis.
I probably average 25 hours a week on PSN as does my daughter. I've never felt there was anything lacking.
The only difference I’m aware of is cross game chat. You can message and forum chat with friends as well as voice chat on the PS3 out of game. Personally I would hate cross game chat because it doesn’t work on multiplayer team games. Isn’t that why MW2 doesn’t allow it? It stops the cheating and communication from dead teammates. It would destroy SOCOM Other than that everything is the same… except the fee.
Hey there is always one thing lacking on the PSN I've noticed. 10 year old boys swearing and yelling fa& this and fa& that. Also less T-bagging BS. I have no interest in Live played both didn't need cross game chat because most of the time we are playing together with my friends and if not my phone works GREAT. I even have a headset for it :)
The only thing that XBL has that PSN hasn't is cross-game chat; which isn't a deal-breaker in the least. If anything (and if you look close enough), every once in a while you also see friends playing on opposite teams friends who coordinate to up their friend's gamerscore. MW2 disabled it in some types of play probably because of that reason from what I hear (I never bought the game)... or maybe not, but it makes sense. Cross-game chat isn't a bad thing in the least, but it's sure not a thing to where it's perfect.
PSN is lacking a lot. Sure, you could point out the obvious like the Party Chat that they're missing, which hey I think is pretty important, and made the Xbox 360 that much more amazing for me. But, seriously, I never meet anyone worthwhile on the PSN, & no one EVER seems to have a head set. Ever. I've played on my friends PS3 until I got my own, and I just have had bad luck with that apparently. But, anyone who buys something outside of the arcade package for 360, the system comes with a headset. So, 99% of the people that I meet on XBL have a headset, and for better or worse, they talk. Which, sometimes really is for the worst, but other times I make amazing friends that I can play for hours and hours with. I never really have had that experience on PSN. Plus, most people buying a PS3 don't realize that the majority of Blutooths would work for it, so they feel that if they want a headset, they'd have to pay $50 for the PSN one, so, they never do. However, if your 360 didn't come with one, the wired ones are $20, and work perfect. Seriously, XBL feels more like a community. & that's worth paying for.
Nowhere in your comment do you actually list any features that Live has over PSN. Once again the argument is just a baseless opinion. You state that a hardware accessory is what makes Live better, and you get this free. Buy PS3 owners also get all the features for free. The PS3 works with most Bluetooth headset and all wired UBS ones. I’m not sure where you get that from. Again, you just list opinions. PSN & Live are the same. They offer the same service except a few minor differences. Read the comments above and you will get the idea.
well live got a whole bunch of stuff i dont need those been on pc. when i use to game on pc i never cared about a mic just the games and playing online (when online wasnt even on consoles) maybe its me cause it seems today most people want to be connect to everything mostly youngings ( myspace, facebook, youtube, im, etc..) its not need to me friends list is good, mic only get used for games that demand them to win in mp both most game can be played with team work without it. im to old to be bff with people i dont even know lol.
i think ps3 sales are highly misleading.since a huge percentage are using it for blu-ray only.count me as a a statistic for using my ps3 as a blu-ray player only.and i doubt im the only 1!! i havent update my ps3 in so long.dont need to to play blu-rays.
Ok, well lets say 5% of PS3's sales are from blu-ray... and over 33% of XBOX ones are from errors. Factoring out the one year lead aswell, the PS3 should have taken over the 360 a LONG time ago.
live> crap psn Ive been playing xbox live and have never had lag problems and have only been disconnected from xbox live 1 time and that was for a split second Download exclusive xbox live video games... live has a better way to party up with your friends and chat with them. More people have a mic because it comes with the console and easier to purchase.
If you bought a PS3 just for Blu-Ray then you're seriously lazy because you obviously didn't bother to look for actual Blu-Ray Players lol. You can pick up a BR player for half the price of a PS3. Probably less if you look hard enough. @knightdarkbox Saying Live doesn't have lag is irrelevant, since it depends ONLY on your connection speed. Also it's up to the game developers to make the online gameplay as smooth as possible, for example CoD4 might always have lag for some people, but then a game with 256 players in one game might have no lag at all :)
@knightdarkbox live doesn't lag? then what the **** do you call that sh*t on Gears of War 2 online?
god I hate people like you. Not on a personal level, but just the fact that you think Online multiplayer is the be-all and end-all of console gaming. Yes I will agree that Xbox Live is the better, smoother more robust service, but a console is for playing games. Do single player games not count? To be honest, gaming has always been my hobby for its amazing single player campaigns, which will be much better than any multiplayer game - because of story, characters, art style etc. That doesn't mean I don't like multiplayer, because playing with friends is fun, but it gets far too much attention. The reason you say PSN is crap is because you rely on the Xbox Live service to give you a superior time when gaming online, rather than just enjoying a game for what it is. I don't mind that you love XBL, but PSN has come really far in a short space of time, and if Sony implements those features that you are sorely missing from PSN, then that will you're argument be? To be honest I wouldn't care that much because I play games for what they are, not the service that runs them.
I agree 100% with the "hate people who think its the end all" however I disagree with the Live being a better more stable service. Not because I'm more towards PlayStation but because when I had Live the only games I played were CoD4, Lost Planet, Gears 1, and a couple of Arcade titles which had some connection issues and kids I couldn't stand longer than 5 min. @Knight Your the person I would block on any online service because you use ignorance as a reason.
MS, shouldn't you have more people connected ANYWAY as Silver should count as its still "connected". Maybe you should have bundled that wi-fi, eh?
Maybe they should have not been the only online service to make people charge for it. I have nothing against the 360, just hate live and the stupid PR people. You should not have to pay for online gaming *period*
If MS would man up and let silver game online for free, I wouldnt continue to renew my Gold. Since I just want to play games online, not the other crap which I can do on my PC for free or the same price without paying to be allowed to do it
I might strongly consider buying a 360 if the silver account users could play online, because I too only care about having the ability to play my games online, nothing more. Until then I will keep adding ps3's to home (I'm up to 3 now). I can have my nephews over to play BF1943 and only pay for it once for 3 of us to play! To do that on the 360 I'd have to purchase a gold account for each system ($60-$70 CAD x3... do the math)! Even if I share the game on the 360, I'd still have to pay to play it online! You're correct divideby0... I've been gaming since the 70's (online since '91) and every single feature that is on xbl is on the pc for free. Yes, even cross game chat! To this day I still can't believe M$ was able to swindle gamers into paying to just play online (& forcing ads to paying customers too boot!)... I'm still blown away by it!
i wouldn't respond to trolls such as yourself but i will this time.... STFU i understand you bots cant troll about sales anymore with HR and God of War moving a solid number of units in under a month... it does show the install base is buying games... but to say you only use your PS3 for movies and to post comments on this gaming website forum just means your not a real gamer... your a idiot or a tool... or both i can list 20 games in the last 2 years that gamers should have played edit ADD ON Wrathman you said: i think ps3 sales are highly misleading.since a huge percentage are using it for blu-ray only then you say this is a matter of fact to you personally... well you say a HUGE percentage meaning your personally aware of millions of other ppl that think like you... thats not matter of fact NOW PLEASE STFU troll.... oh sorry... your out of bubbles
you and awesomeperson are full of horse tripe. what i said was a matter of fact to me personally. your 2 posts are full of pure specualtion.wot you think and wot you know are 2 different things.fact is this..what you guys think you know..is..pure garbage.simply put you know nothing.
Only using your Ps3 as a blu ray player!!! Have you not payed any attention in the last 2 years. GOTY in both 2008 and 2009. GOW3 this year already and you honestly haven't gone. Hmm maybe i'll play THE BEST GAME OF THE YEAR. But no you "have" a ps3 and use it for just blu rays. Which is funny as i use mine only as a blu ray player as all games are on the blu ray format anyway haha Edit: We know nothing hahahahahahahahahahaha, god i don't even need to make comment back about that, that is just so stupid on it's own.
Yor so called fact is an opinion, which is not a fact. Just saying that incase any blind fool thought what you said was fact. Those guys are right, there no need to purchase a PS3 for the use of watching movies, really your shooting yourself in the foot. You know itd be really stupid of you to use the reason of watchign blurays to purchase that PS3. That way you can say you do own one when you complain about it online, that way you can back up your opinions by saying you own both systems. If you own a PS3 and dont use it, sell it and buy a blueray player or just stick with DVD.
I have been a gamer for around 20 odd years, PSN delivers more than enough features for online gaming - and it's free - to me, that's all I need to know I wouldn't be happy buying a console and then paying to play online - i'm amazed so many people quite happily do it
That was the main reason I didn't buy a 360 until 1yr and half ago. I really detest paying to play on-line especially since I have been doing on the PC for years. I paid for one year and have not renewed it since. It really is not any better than PSN. I found it more to do with which system your mates where playing on. Most of them now have bought PS3 and thus have no need for live now. Cross Game chat would be nice but not necessary. EDIT. @Levelhead. I do know what you mean there is something about the feel of xbox live that makes it feel seem less. something I cant put my finger on its weird. They probably have suggestive sounds. Like when you first start the xbox up. But for features wise i don't feel its justify to be paid for.
For being free PSN is hands down a much better value than XBL. Especially with games like MAG and Warhawk that put XBL to shame. However I still prefer the user friendliness of the XBL service as a whole. Communicating with friends, launching and accepting game invites, updating the systems and games, it all seems much simpler and seamless to me.