By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
BenVTrigger on 09 September 2010
Edit Thread
kitler53 said:
BenVTrigger said:

It is true that Live takes a much more rigid and structured approach to online than PSN does, but so far the benefits are worth it.

I do wonder though if in the future the openness of PSN will become a real factor and more companies may focus in improving the PSN side of things over Live.  Only time will tell I guess. 


other than valve which developers actually give longer term game support for free?  blizzard?..not on consoles.  Anyone?...Bueller?

I might be wrong in this but isn't a large part of why valve angry at MS being that portal, TF, L4D, and L4D2 had a bunch of free updates on PC that MS required valve to charge for on the 360? I just don't see any other developer saying "oh noes, we have to make money off of our work.  that madness!?!?".    so no, i don't think that it will matter at all other than valve.


hmm that is a good point, and in fact it seems like most of the big companies are leaning more towards Live and making money now that I think of it.  Like that deal that Activision has with MS now where every single Call of Duty from now on will receive map packs and updates first on 360 over any other system.

That is really cool though that PS3 fans will be able to get a bunch of free content from Valve for Portal 2, wish we could say the same about 360.  

EDIT: But then again you have to remember that because of Live's structure 360 isn't getting FFXIV.  SE wanted it on 360 but MS says it breaks too many rules to put it on the system, so its got advantages and disadvantages.