By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
J_Allard on 29 November 2012
Edit Thread
Chark said:
J_Allard said:

You can't ignore a dilemna that doesn't exist. PSN still has a long ways to go before it approaches XBL in many areas. Furthermore given everything MS has done to improve Live this gen it seems rather silly to speculate that they won't continue improving it.

And I still shake my head at anyone comparing PS+ to Xbox Live. As has been said over and over in this thread, they aren't the same thing, they aren't meant to deliver the same thing. I would hope that a discount service provides "attractive content" and value. Otherwise why does a discount service exist? XBL Gold is not a discount service. MS isn't desperate enough to need a discount service.

I'm just going to assume you pulled the comment about PSN closing the gap with XBL out of your butt now.


Excellent. Do you have anything to support your claim? What areas is PSN behind XBL in? Do you know? Can you measure the differences? What areas has XBL been improving in? Can you measure those improvements? How often are improvements made? Have their been any recently? I'm not talking features or functions but actual service delivery quality. Are third parties not incentivized to provide stable server support for their games on PS3? This is doubtful as their quality of delivery will reflect on their game sales. I'm going to assume then that you have no evidence to back your claims and you only disregard mine as to not look foolish.

PS+ is Sony's premium service whether you like it or not. Here is an experiment. What would PS+ be if the restricted online multiplayer to subscribers? Does that stike any cords with you? Both systems have two tier plans. One free and one paid. It's just PS's free one is more valuable than Xbox's and PS's paid one is pulling its weight against Xbox's paid.

I'm glad you're not involved in Microsoft's business department. They would have far more to worry about than encroaching competition.

What do I have to support my claim that PSN is still lagging behind Live Gold in some areas? I don't know, reality? You can disagree on whether or not the advantages of Live are worth the fees involved but that doesn't change the fact that they exist. The service is far more popular, is much faster, and much more reliable.

You can repeat whatever you want about PS+ until you're blue in the face, it won't make the comparison any more logical. You're still comparing two services aimed at two very different things providing very different services. It's not hard. Do you use both services? I use both and they aren't the same thing. I don't go to XBL looking for some great discounts on games and I don't load up PS+ looking for the best social hub and online gaming network around. XBL is vastly superior than PS+ at doing what XBL is intended to do and PS+ is vastly superior to XBL at doing what it is intended to do. Which is fine, because they are not intended to do the same thing. PS+ is an attempt by Sony to rake in some online revenue while keeping their online play free because they know they cannot compete performance vs performance and feature vs feature with Live. Here's a question.. with MS making so much money on XBL, if Sony were as close to Live parity with PSN as you think, why aren't they charging? What, are people gonna go to Nintendo then? They don't charge because they know the service is not worth it.

You seem upset with that last remark. Go have a Coke and a smile, this can't be the first time you've been wrong on the Internets.