• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Why is XBL still the superior online service...

RedSwirl

Junior Member
Paying $59.99 and not paying $0 is a huge difference

XBL is considered better due to the fluid-ness of it all, it just flows

Doesn't annoy and gets frustrating to use

Sony I bet didn't even want Online in the PS3 in it's first 2-3 years with what it was, but when it realized there is potential, it started working at it

XBL - Message comes, you hit the Home button, automatically gets you to the message and respond
SEN - Message comes, if you have notifications off (Good Luck), if on, a Prompt shows you, if you didn't look thinking someone else was just signing in, you missed it, you have to press home button, look at the top of the right screen, see an envelope icon, go to message list, read message, reply

Trophies take for fucking ever to show up, Cheevs Instantly (God Forbid you compare with me @104+ platinums and 6500+ trophies), takes 4-5 minutes to just load all that bullshit, and if you press O by mistake LOL, start it up again
Don't forget if you just wanna change your message on your gamercard while you are playing a game without synching the trophy list to the server and you cancel it, the software glitches, either reboot or wait 15+ minutes for it to go back to normal

XBL cost $60 and streamlines your flow/experience while gaming easily
SEN is free and you get what they offer, they try, but you can tell, they get some aspects right, but always fuck up something someway

I think PS4 might be more user friendly and more streamlined in tune with XBL
Sony is playing catch-up, and is literally LTTP

Also XBL money does get dispersed for moneyhats also, forces devs/pubs to have demos/releases due to keeping their base happy (it's just hidden away), always release content world wide instantly like clockwork
SEN is just whatever you feel like, dev/pubs discretion and we will release it when we think it's ready
Tell me what time do all the PSN store updates?, no one would have the right time, and all are released at separate times

I think that's part of the core issue - Microsoft planning ahead. Sony can't really copy what Microsoft has done on a platform they've already built. I think the reason the PS3 can't ever have cross-game chat is because Sony didn't set aside a certain amount of system resources for it like Microsoft did.

Even if Sony corrects those hardware mistakes in the PS4, Microsoft will have moved on with other innovations that Sony wouldn't be able to catch up to. On the hardware level it's a moving target. Sony can't ever hope to catch up to Microsoft by following after them.


So while people defend Live as a paid service, here are some things you missed out on as a result of Microsofts paywall;
  • Larger online player bases
  • Longer lasting online communities
  • Dedicated game servers
  • Cross platform play
  • A web browser
  • Mod support
  • Free to Play titles
    [*]LAN play support

Isn't system link basically the same thing? But otherwise I agree.

If Sony suddenly instituted dedicated servers as a standard for PSN that would instantly leapfrog it over XBL in my mind. I've always thought of ways a console manufacturer could do that: allowing consoles to be used as servers for any game (technically any PS3 developer is allowed to do this on their own accord), renting out their own servers, or going into deals with game server services.
 

Gattsu25

Banned
The service on paper is amazing, and has some pretty sweet features, but there's no way I'm going to play a game with Youtube quality bitrate and 250ms delay.
I travel for work and only had a crappy laptop for around a year. Onlive was better than any other option I had and the damn thing just worked.
 

bangai-o

Banned
Live as it is today held back by 7 year old restraints on the 360. Expect to see features blow open next gen. Expect to see unified products and services between all MS products. True cross platform functionality between Xbox "Durango", Windows 8, Windows Phone 8 and other devices. The Xbox brand is big business now and MS has built an entire campus in Redmond for this Xbox 'team'. Some of the original brains behind WindowsNT code are now working on cloud services for the next Xbox. (http://www.bgr.com/2012/01/19/father-of-microsoft-windows-nt-joins-xbox-team/) They are treating the brand with as much respect as they do Windows and have big expectations for it over the next few years. There will be features on Live that are not possible on other platforms, mark my words.

it would be interesting to see if they allow Internet Explorer onto the new console. Will it be the exact same IE as on PC? will it be a watered down version that blocks certain services that make their business as "apps"? It could also be a gimped IE because of porn. Microsoft probably wouldn't want to be the console maker that gives kids easy access to porn.
 

GraveRobberX

Platinum Trophy: Learned to Shit While Upright Again.
Good point, I've also been getting many green bars playing SFAE 2012 on the PSN as of late, and I have region selected to ANY.

I think, for sure:

Resistance: Fall of Man
Resistance 2
Warhawk
KillZone 2
MAG

3rd Party:
Homefront, I think 360 got this too
Battlefield 3 (Now, 360 too)

Might be missing some or some don't belong
 

Vol5

Member
The only innovation I can see is MS decided to charge for online. You and your friends are then locked in to a yearly plan that you don't want to change in order to justify your purchase. It's genius.

Personally I cancelled my Live sub this year. I wasn't getting the £200 value back in simply connecting to other gamers when it's free elsewhere.
 

FINALBOSS

Banned
I like the ease-of-use of playing with friends on XBL (back when I was a 360 user) but I honestly have no problem with PSN either--and I VERY much enjoy PSN+.

Do I think XBL is a superior service? Yeah, probably.
Does that superiority translate into paying $40-$50? I dunno, I guess that's up to each person.

I do know for a fact that if I was gaming predominantly on 360, I'd be straight up fucking pissed at Netflix/HBO-Go/Hulu/etc. requiring me to have a gold membership.
 

GraveRobberX

Platinum Trophy: Learned to Shit While Upright Again.
You know what I realized how can you call XBL superior, when 40% of the request in Free to a Good home thread are about 48 hour XBL Codes

I know it's a weird sample I'm using, it just portrays, that even the ficklest gamer still would rather be offline with their 360, and work off 48 hour codes, then pay them out right to use this superior service
 

RedSwirl

Junior Member
MS is a software giant and unified platforms and standardizing them is something that is their specialty. Sony is not a software company and it shows when you use PSN. The best part about PSN is its free to play online. And lets not kid ourselves, its only free as a marketable feature.. the only one they have against MS. Sony would do anything to get $250 million/yr from subscriptions like MS does. Don't pretend for a second they are giving you free online play because they are nice people. Other than that its painfully obvious how far behind their software team is when compared to MS. Just look at the Sony catalog of media they have stashed, yet here were are in 2012 and they still cannot figure out a way to just stomp the competition by delivering up those goods to consumers. Sony could completely own the living room if they wanted ... which I'm sure they do. They just lack the know how to make something like that happen. Its like a second world country trying to get to the Moon.

Live is the best because it simply just 'works'. It was designed from the ground up, from the first line of code to now with easy and usability in mind. Its efficient and standard, and as a consumer you rarely if even ever see a hiccup with that experience. Sony unfortunately doesn't have enough talent on board to go toe to toe when it comes to these kinds of architected platforms. Nintendo? Nintendo refused to go big with online not because they see little value in it. They refuse because unlike Sony, they know they cannot play that game with MS. They continue riding that Mario/Zelda fanbase, and leveraging that innovative creative hive mind in the Wonka factory to appear cutting edge at each generation. All 3 bring something unique to the table, and all 3 have a place in this industry. Each company has its strengths and its weaknesses... but when talking about software development, and online infrastructure its Microsoft's back yard.

Live as it is today held back by 7 year old restraints on the 360. Expect to see features blow open next gen. Expect to see unified products and services between all MS products. True cross platform functionality between Xbox "Durango", Windows 8, Windows Phone 8 and other devices. The Xbox brand is big business now and MS has built an entire campus in Redmond for this Xbox 'team'. Some of the original brains behind WindowsNT code are now working on cloud services for the next Xbox. (http://www.bgr.com/2012/01/19/father-of-microsoft-windows-nt-joins-xbox-team/) They are treating the brand with as much respect as they do Windows and have big expectations for it over the next few years. There will be features on Live that are not possible on other platforms, mark my words.

This is something neither Sony nor Nintendo have the ability to produce or compete against. All they can do is try to keep up and they will always be doing so.

This more or less better explains why I think MS is ahead in the console space in terms of firmware and networking for gaming purposes. MS set the rules and set what consumers wanted. Sony is trying to beat them at their own game, but they can't because they didn't plan on it back in 2006, by which time Microsoft already had the foundation built.

I'm not sure I agree with your last paragraph though. I'm wondering if Sony and Nintendo should even TRY to play catch-up with MS. Why shouldn't each platform just try to innovate on their own according to their own strengths? That's exactly what Microsoft did.

My suggestion for Sony would be to find a way to consolidate all their different media businesses and services into the PS4. Make PSN/SEN offer media services with resources Microsoft simply doesn't have.

Like I said earlier about Nintendo, they still know what makes multiplayer gaming fun, they just haven't effectively implemented that knowhow on a platform-level. The 3DS's coins, and Mario Kart 7's "communities" are small-but-good examples of them thinking up their own thing, but they need to expand on stuff like that.

If either of them wants to catch up with Microsoft in their game, I think their best options would be to hire outside companies to built their online gaming services like Nintendo has hinted at.
 

bangai-o

Banned
This more or less better explains why I think MS is ahead in the console space in terms of firmware and networking for gaming purposes. MS set the rules and set what consumers wanted. Sony is trying to beat them at their own game, but they can't because they didn't plan on it back in 2006, by which time Microsoft already had the foundation built.

I'm not sure I agree with your last paragraph though. I'm wondering if Sony and Nintendo should even TRY to play catch-up with MS. Why shouldn't each platform just try to innovate on their own according to their own strengths? That's exactly what Microsoft did.

My suggestion for Sony would be to find a way to consolidate all their different media businesses and services into the PS4. Make PSN/SEN offer media services with resources Microsoft simply doesn't have.

Like I said earlier about Nintendo, they still know what makes multiplayer gaming fun, they just haven't effectively implemented that knowhow on a platform-level. The 3DS's coins, and Mario Kart 7's "communities" are small-but-good examples of them thinking up their own thing, but they need to expand on stuff like that.

If either of them wants to catch up with Microsoft in their game, I think their best options would be to hire outside companies to built their online gaming services like Nintendo has hinted at.
since you mentioned it, I was going to buy a 3ds but Im waiting to see if Purple is going to be announced. How does the online on 3ds work? Is it friends code or a gamertag-like name? Does it carry over to all games or do you create a new one for each game?
 

Brera

Banned
What we have to ask ourselves is the same question next generation...Will PSN 2.0 be as good as XBL 3.0?

I would say if they follow the same plan next gen again, free access but a paid for PSN+ then I think MS are in trouble. Cross game yet, custom sound tracks etc are not on PSN for technical reasons. These wont exist next generation.

Also, PSN has evolved 10 fold. XBL has remain stagnant...in fact each addition MS have made and made it look more and more poor value for money.

Stuff like Netflix should be free, not for Gold members!
 
This, i feel almost like my expired card is being held to ransom until i phone up and ask them to remove it. I have been using paid cards for live for three years since i used it once for live and the stories i hear of ghost cards somehow still being charged makes me even more pissed off i cant remove it without phoning up.

I have heard about this. My card expires soon but I think they can still charge on it, yet you cannot use the same expired card to buy food for yourself. . . it is deliberate though, not incompetent service or badly thought out design. Just banks and corporations looking out for each other. Would be a pisstake if they successfully charged a 3 year old expired card. Try it and take one for the team then post the story to IGN or something. This is going off topic though.
 
The thread title should be really, "Why My Paid Online Service Still Rocks, While Your Free Shit Sucks/Stinks, Here's No Proof, This Is Why"

Also have you realized how many fucking Trophy Whore(s) Collectors/Grabbers have been caught with the PSN+ net

The problem with trophies is that they are not universal and not all games have them so they are not a good representation of your gaming on the system.
 
I'm sure if you only bought games during that first year and a half and never bought anything else, it wouldn't be a good showing.
 
my experience with xbl: ads. ads everywhere. even when paid for gold membership, there is ads everywhere

What do you consider ads? The new content on the service are not ads to me. I love seeing what's new. There's tiny ads in the lower right of most sections that are only an issue if you purposely tab over to see them. You have to work in order to have them affect you. I pay for TV and magazines and still get ads, so this stuff doesn't bother me as long as the service is still the best around (non-PC) and as long as my friends list is still populated with people playing games similar to me.
 

GraveRobberX

Platinum Trophy: Learned to Shit While Upright Again.
The problem with trophies is that they are not universal and not all games have them so they are not a good representation of your gaming on the system.

True, but the enticement sure is there
So far if you only count since trophies came to be 8/2008 till 5/2012, I've roughly played 224 Games, 120 of them to full 100% completion
If you took my gaming habits from start of PS3 11/06 till 7/2008, I must have played 20+ titles within that time frame

Trine 2/Awesomenauts alone must have gotten some to bite on a 3 month PSN+ pass

All I'm saying, there are many different gamers, each has different needs/want
The system that can offer the most combinations to appease them wins out, so far MS is doing a damn good job keeping them stuck to their platform
Sony is trying, but hasn't found the right mix, as it companies philosophy, it let itself stretch out too thin
 

OrangeOak

Member
So while people defend Live as a paid service, here are some things you missed out on as a result of Microsofts paywall;
  • Larger online player bases
  • Longer lasting online communities
  • Dedicated game servers
  • Cross platform play
  • A web browser
  • Mod support
  • Free to Play titles
  • LAN play support

There are still people playing online in GRAW1,Rainbow Six and PGR3 on Xbox so I'am not sure if longevity of online communities is problem on live.
I don't see a connection between "Microsoft paywall" and dedicated servers on psn as well.
 

bangai-o

Banned
There are still people playing online in GRAW1,Rainbow Six and PGR3 on Xbox so I'am not sure if longevity of online communities is problem on live.
I don't see a connection between "Microsoft paywall" and dedicated servers on psn as well.

i think there are some gamers who prefer a "pay wall". This was discussed in the Phantasy Star Online 2 thread. Some people just dont want to play with slackers.
 
The problem with trophies is that they are not universal and not all games have them so they are not a good representation of your gaming on the system.

Every game now has trophies except MiniS..
And why should old games without trophies matters on a "superior" online service thread ?

His original point was that the fact those games were free was a good point on the PSN favor
 

coldfoot

Banned
Not everyone will sign up for 12 months. Credit to Sony for offering a quarterly sub though.
Non-issue as you can't play the "free" games without an active PS+ subscription.
Obviously both Sony and the developers are happy about PS+, otherwise you wouldn't see free games on PS+, or Sony would announce that they're discontinuing it.
 

SnowHawk

Member
Isn't CGC and the other "Live" features part of the OS and not xbox live at all? so what you're paying for Xbox Live is to access features you should already have as it's part of the OS plus to have online access.

The only reason your paying for Live is to play online and watch subscription services, so tell me, how is that better than PSN/SEN?
 
Isn't CGC and the other "Live" features part of the OS and not xbox live at all? so what you're paying for Xbox Live is to access features you should already have as it's part of the OS plus to have online access.

The only reason your paying for Live is to play online and watch subscription services, so tell me, how is that better than PSN/SEN?
Exactly.

XBL is 'better' purely because Sony didn't foresee the importance of these OS features. The PS3 lacks CGC not because of a network failing but rather for not having the spare RAM to make it possible for every title in its catalogue. That was the genius of Microsoft this gen.
 

FyreWulff

Member
Isn't CGC and the other "Live" features part of the OS and not xbox live at all? so what you're paying for Xbox Live is to access features you should already have as it's part of the OS plus to have online access.

The only reason your paying for Live is to play online and watch subscription services, so tell me, how is that better than PSN/SEN?

How would you use CGC without being online?
 
The main reason, I think, why Sony-software isn't as great as Microsoft-software, is because Sony isn't a software-company. Microsoft, on the other hand, has years of experience and a full team of adequate programmers at their disposal.

You might say: Well, why doesn't Sony hire adequate people and form a good team to focus on PS3 / Vita software? Well, I still don't know the answer...

Thing is; Most (almost all) firmware-related things still go through Japan and are done by a relatively small team and then needs to go through tons of paperwork, testing and localization. It's a bitch, and until Sony changes this process and expands their team (or add a second, wester based-team) to the equation, Microsoft will always be the 'better' company when it comes to software and services.

Like a bunch of other people said: The PSN (and the Vita), the apps... they all feel terribly separated. Although you can potentially play with millions of people, you still feel very lonely.

Just look at the 'Near' app. It's a great idea, but the interface is such a mess and there's SO much more they could do with it...

:(
 

Combichristoffersen

Combovers don't work when there is no hair
The main reason, I think, why Sony-software isn't as great as Microsoft-software, is because Sony isn't a software-company. Microsoft, on the other hand, has years of experience and a full team of adequate programmers at their disposal.

You might say: Well, why doesn't Sony hire adequate people and form a good team to focus on PS3 / Vita software? Well, I still don't know the answer...

Thing is; Most (almost all) firmware-related things still go through Japan and are done by a relatively small team and then needs to go through tons of paperwork, testing and localization. It's a bitch, and until Sony changes this process and expands their team (or add a second, wester based-team) to the equation, Microsoft will always be the 'better' company when it comes to software and services.

Like a bunch of other people said: The PSN (and the Vita), the apps... they all feel terribly separated. Although you can potentially play with millions of people, you still feel very lonely.

Just look at the 'Near' app. It's a great idea, but the interface is such a mess and there's SO much more they could do with it...

:(

And this is why Sony should kill SCEJ with napalm and nukes and give PSN and FW development to someone competent.
 

Avinexus

Member
I have heard about this. My card expires soon but I think they can still charge on it, yet you cannot use the same expired card to buy food for yourself. . . it is deliberate though, not incompetent service or badly thought out design. Just banks and corporations looking out for each other. Would be a pisstake if they successfully charged a 3 year old expired card. Try it and take one for the team then post the story to IGN or something. This is going off topic though.
If you think calling is a hassle like the guy you quoted does, you can just remove the card on xbox.com once your account goes Silver.

Not sure how your credit card can be "held ransom" when you can remove it with a phone call or through their website...
 

RedSwirl

Junior Member
There are still people playing online in GRAW1,Rainbow Six and PGR3 on Xbox so I'am not sure if longevity of online communities is problem on live.
I don't see a connection between "Microsoft paywall" and dedicated servers on psn as well.

And there were still people playing Halo 2 until Microsoft cut off the original Xbox's online servers. Dedicated servers create longer-lasting communities for popular games (or games with dedicated communities) because no big company can pull the plug, like what happens to EA games or what happened to Chromehounds.

The games you listed came out five years ago, but there are still people playing Counter-Strike over 10 years after its release because people can still establish servers. Years after the Xbox 360's online servers are shut down you will probably still be able to play the PC version of Call of Duty 4 online.

since you mentioned it, I was going to buy a 3ds but Im waiting to see if Purple is going to be announced. How does the online on 3ds work? Is it friends code or a gamertag-like name? Does it carry over to all games or do you create a new one for each game?

Both. Each system has one friend code for all games that is attached to a "gamertag". Both players still have to enter friend codes, but after they do, they show up as gamertags, you can see them online, what game they're playing, and even instantly join them.
 
If you think calling is a hassle like the guy you quoted does, you can just remove the card on xbox.com once your account goes Silver.

Not sure how your credit card can be "held ransom" when you can remove it with a phone call or through their website...
Except that it isnt so simple and my credit card was used even when i used this method..
 

Carl

Member
Most of the comments in here are talking about PS3. I think it's fairer to compare it to PSN on Vita, no? Since Vita was more designed around the PSN, whereas the PSN was basically shoved up the PS3s arse after it was finished.
 
Except that it isnt so simple and my credit card was used even when i used this...


Yup. I removed my card from the site several times and it took FOUR phone calls before it actually disappeared off my account.


Also... PSN - hacked, my account is fine. XBL - 'it must be your fault' - account FIFA'd, 5500+ points stolen, locked out of my account for 6 weeks while MS investigated it... Investigation came back saying that "Everything is fine"

I asked if "what does everything is fine mean? My account got hacked! Am I getting those points back?" The person on the phone didn't know, said he would resubmit it. Two weeks later I got my account and points back.


Superior network my ass. Party chat quality is horrendous. People drop in and out like crazy. Sometimes one friend can't hear another. It's just a fucking mess.


And then the ads... how can they have a shitty, hacked and ad-riddled service and have the gall to charge money for it?!? XBL creates active disdain for microsoft in me.
 

triggaz

Banned
So while people defend Live as a paid service, here are some things you missed out on as a result of Microsofts paywall;
  • Larger online player bases
  • Longer lasting online communities
  • Dedicated game servers
  • Cross platform play
  • A web browser
  • Mod support
  • Free to Play titles
  • LAN play support

COD biggest game of all time sales more onXbox 360.
How many PS3 games servers got shut down?
Gears of War has dedicated servers
Shadowrun was the first cross platform console title xbox and windows
because the ps3 web browser is any good.
Mod support for what one game? I would take indie games over PS minis it's a wash.
There have been several free games but sony wins here especially if you count ps plus
there are plenty of lan games on xbox
 

triggaz

Banned
Most of the comments in here are talking about PS3. I think it's fairer to compare it to PSN on Vita, no? Since Vita was more designed around the PSN, whereas the PSN was basically shoved up the PS3s arse after it was finished.

As it stands now the vita is a non factor and it's not a console dude you are reaching.
 

USC-fan

Banned
I just switch to ps3 after my xbox360 broke. Really not any difference.

Sony just needs to learn how to make updating better in the ps4 and it would be perfect.
 

triggaz

Banned
I just switch to ps3 after my xbox360 broke. Really not any difference.

Sony just needs to learn how to make updating better in the ps4 and it would be perfect.

do you play online I"ve owned a ps3 for years and it's a huge difference as far as I'm concerned.
 

OrangeOak

Member
And there were still people playing Halo 2 until Microsoft cut off the original Xbox's online servers.

Exactly.

Dedicated servers create longer-lasting communities for popular games (or games with dedicated communities) because no big company can pull the plug, like what happens to EA games or what happened to Chromehounds.
The games you listed came out five years ago, but there are still people playing Counter-Strike over 10 years after its release because people can still establish servers. Years after the Xbox 360's online servers are shut down you will probably still be able to play the PC version of Call of Duty 4 online.

I don't understand what you are trying to say and I think it's because you are confusing dedicated servers with p2p server lists.
 

rCIZZLE

Member
do you play online I"ve owned a ps3 for years and it's a huge difference as far as I'm concerned.

I play on both and notice zero difference when in game. Even fighting games, where the effect lag has is magnified, feel the same. I don't see why anybody thinks there would be a difference.
 
Every game now has trophies except MiniS..
And why should old games without trophies matters on a "superior" online service thread ?

His original point was that the fact those games were free was a good point on the PSN favor

Free is when you do not pay money for something. These "free" games require a subscription to PSN+ which currently sits behind a paywall.

I'm sure if you only bought games during that first year and a half and never bought anything else, it wouldn't be a good showing.

So these games magically stop being sold after release? Look at this thread of an older game coming out now being rereleased and what is the main topic? No trophies.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=471506
 

Carl

Member
As it stands now the vita is a non factor and it's not a console dude you are reaching.

Lol? Of course it's a console. And it uses PSN, which is what this thread is about. "Why is XBL still better than PSN?". Not "Why is 360 still better than PS3?" Vita uses PSN. A much better PSN than is on PS3, because the console was built around PSN.
 

Joni

Member
Shadowrun was the first cross platform console title xbox and windows
.

Sony already had cross-platform online play on the PS2. (Final Fantasy XI and one of the Need for Speed games) while cross-platform is very limited on Xbox 360 due to Games for Windows Live.
 

Jimrpg

Member
i cancelled my xbox live subscription years ago....

im not a hardcore multiplayer gamer by any means, but even if i was, the Sony service seems by and large the same as the xbox service except its free... why pay $50... and if your friends are on xbox live - why are they all paying $50... if everyone just switched then it wouldn't be a big deal.

i assume ppl just have the one console then.
 

tzare

Member
I play on both and notice zero difference when in game. Even fighting games, where the effect lag has is magnified, feel the same. I don't see why anybody thinks there would be a difference.

this. The only 'superior' thing in XBL is convencience if switching games while being in a party chat. PLaying is just the same, p2p gaming most of the time so lag is an issue on both systems in some games.
 

Jburton

Banned
I don't think it is a superior service.

A lot of the things people state as the reasons for Live being better are actually 360 firmware features.

As an online gateway/ service, Xbox Live is certainly not superior ..... It's bloated, slow and keeps things that should be standard features and apps behind a pay wall.

Not worth the price.
 
If you think PSN+ is crazy, go check out Onlive, those motherfuckers over there are B-A-N-A-N-A-S

I got Batman Arkham Asylum for $0.99, Divinity II $0.80
They have a service called Playpack, $9.99/mo, and like 30+ games free to play, some are hella' recent
Now tell me oh wise one, how on earth are dev/pubs making money off that?
If Sony is doing only 1-2 games per month, Onlive is straight up Murdering and Pillaging the ever living shit out of the hypothesis you bring up

I missed this earlier and I was rushing, but did you just compare PS+ to Online?

Good Lord. The services aren't comparable in the least. And what 'hella recent' games are available through playpack? I can't seem to find any that aren't at least 3-6months old, with the majority of them being really old titles.

It's actually prertty simple how devs make money from games in the playpack bundle, you're not stupid, so I'll let you figure out how relatively old titles can make their devs money through playpack, which just so happens to be double the price of PS+.

I thought your F2P comparison was laughable, but got damn son, you just to continue to deliver the laughs.

As for my points, I'm thinking long term. It's easy to dismiss the potential damage now, but as with most things, we'll only really know the damage or potential benefit in a year or so.
 

AngryMoth

Member
Its funny, all I ever hear is people talking shit about download speeds on the PS3, yet its always been my fastest downloading device.
 
Its funny, all I ever hear is people talking shit about download speeds on the PS3, yet its always been my fastest downloading device.

It's a strange thing, my PS3 download speeds are shite but my vita download speeds are on par (in some cases, better ) with my 360 download speeds.
 
People seem to leave out that live aside from ea games tends to run the backend on most games where third party games for example borderlands went with gamespy on ps3 instead which pretty much killed the game at launch with a ton of issues.
 
Top Bottom