Honesty people...PSN

[souixan]

Skeeuk said:

souixan said:

Skeeuk said:
ive used psn since i got my ps3 its superb and easy to use. all the games i play onlne like cod4 burnout and gta4 play perfectly. i see no reason 2 pay 39.99 a year to play them same games over live.

once the free home network is out i cant see the point in live.

live has a couple more functions than psn, and some p2p games like vegas2 seem more stable over live than psn. but even so i still play vegas2 get into games etc on psn.

 

If you want to be honest, XBL's structure yields one big benefit over PSN's. Small companies can include online features and modes to their games because Microsoft is footing the server bill where on PSN the small companies could not afford to do it and sony does not provide it.

In the end XBL has a lot more online games by far most of the downloadable games have online modes where PSN games and PS3 games by and large are limited on their online modes. It's all up to preference personally I play Smash bros online more often than anything on PSN or 360. I won't pay to play and I dislike shooters...

well i respect your opinion, but a machine thats been out for nearly 16months longer than ps3, obviously its going to have more online games, but that doesnt make live better.

i agree live has some features that are better than psn, but the fact remains that i can play all my online enabled games perfectly for free. psn being free is by far and larger reason of it being better.

i stick with my opinion in when home is released, theres no point in live. the features in home are better than anything on 360 live can offer.

but you are right in saying its a preference

 

I wasn't really stating an opinion and yes I agree the amount of time out does have something to say for the amount of game. However, even taking into consideration that factor XBL offers more games with online through % of games out which can only be harder to attain as you get more games.

I wasn't saying that it had more online games to make it sound better, in truth the services are pretty much identical except in the games offered. What I was pointing out is Microsofts structure allows a company that normally could not provide online modes to do so as they don't have to support it Microsoft will. That was a big point of Xbox live, and one reason Microsoft can justify charging.

The end result is who is paying for the games? On PSN the developer is supporting and paying for the servers on Xboxlive the user is paying for it to enable more developers to take advantage of the structure.

Better, worse has no bearing in my statement but I will respect your right to think whichever way you like, I was merely stating they were different structures that benefit different people.