Icy-Zone said:
J_Allard said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
kain_kusanagi said:
Wiwefak said:
Kain_kusanagi you should stop posting already. You are making yourself look bad. We are basically comparing at the moment PSN with Xbox live. Basically PSn does everything that Xbox live does and for free. PSN+ offers a lot more for a cheaper fee and it is optional. So at this point we should be focusing on PSN, Nintendo, Steam which provide a free service.
Why do you keep bringing Halo up? Doesn't make sense. The topic here is " Is it worth to pay for something that you can get for free on any other platform" and you start talking about PS players can't get Halo. Another example how you lack arguments and just throwing random stuff here and there trying to justify this? I would respected you more, but with the Halo posts. No words.
|
Halo is just one example of what PSN doesn't offer that XBL does. That's the point. If you want to play XBox exclusives online you need XBL Gold and if that means a tiny fee so be it. I've said many times that if XBLG was free I'd be happy about that. Free PSN does not replace the need to play Xbox exclusives. That's the heart of the issue. Sony fanboys act like nobody needs XBL because PSN exists, but you can't play games like Halo on PSN. As good as Killzone is, it is no more a replacement for Halo than Halo is a replacement for Killzone.
I made this topic because I'm tired of the argument. My opinion of PS+ and the words I've used describing it have never been full of the hate that gets spewed at XBL.
|
So even in light of the PSN getting closer and closer and now being equal in offerings where does the superiority come from? It cant be games. Theres no servers Microsoft pays for, they slip you the bill and the person with the best speed is the master of the server.
|
There are servers MS pays for. Matchmaking is done via MS's servers. And Live handles party chats and a slew of other things. There's also much higher bandwidth costs compared to PSN because every single network game is required to have a trial. And unlike PSN, MS does not charge developers for that bandwidth.
Of course, one could easily say MS makes that money back in ads on Live. So then you're left with a lot of profit for MS. And guess what? Nothing wrong with that. Sony would love to be in that position.
|
Are Halo 4 matchmaking games run on Microsoft's servers, or is it run by a peer to peer network? And why isn't the option available for players to play for free without having stuff that are really run on MS's servers, such as cross game chat? That's why people are not really digging Live subscription fees. I mean you have games like Killzone that are run on dedicated servers that won't have a single player disconnect when the host leaves, and this is all provided for free...
|
Killzone is peer to peer when you're playing the actual games. Only the stats and matchmaking are done on dedicated servers. Halo 4 gameplay is peer to peer. Matchmaking is done via dedicated servers.
You can't play a game online without using those servers because that would defeat the whole purpose.
