Goddbless said:
Jandre002 said:
Goddbless said:
Jandre002 said:
mrstickball said:
Maybe if Sony paid, they'd have the amount of content the X360 has...
I'd rather pay $5 for online, and get 5x or more content.
Oh, about the Warhawk and SOCOM comparison: we do have XBO's 'ya know. Last I checked, Sony had 0 PS2 games available.
And lets not mention the fact that XBLA has about 100 more games than PSN Games. |
100 more games that I dont care about you see. Games I've already played, and shouldn't need $50 a year to HAVE THE OPTION of buying those games again. Its not like you pay $50 and get to play all those games.
and XBO? What...is your point exactly? Still, old games which most people have already played. You still haven't shown why $50 a year is getting an option to pay for other games or getting demos of games you will eventually pay for later on.
XBL free>PSN free. But XBL @$50 vs a free PSN? I dont really think $50 is well spent on anything. I am not going to go and list all the new games the PSN has that XBL will never have because its not even worth arguing about titles.
IS GETTING DEMOS AND PLAYING CLASSICS YOU CAN BUY AT THE STORE ANYWAYS WORTH $50?
It seems thats what you're trying to say, and I can't see how anyone can belive that. If it were a one time fee and unlimited downloads that would be different. That is, of course, not the case.
|
Your argument should be is it worth $50 to play on XBL servers or is it better to play on the game makers servers for free? With the actual game maker they can't support those servers forever but on XBL every game other than EA games(since they are run on EA servers) can be run by using your actual Xb0x/360 as a server. Therefore you can go back to that game years later and if a friend wants to play, you can still do it. That is what the $50 is doing. The other features you keep mentioning (and then some) are free on Live the same way they are free on PSN.
|
Socom 2/Socom CA say hello...lol. Sorry XBL is P2P just like PSN. What you think you are paying for you are not.
IF XBL had dedicated servers and 0 lad I would agree. But it doesn't. This is what I've been trying to stress. XBL and PSN as far as playing games online are equal. I'm not attacking XBL at all, I am just questioning paying $50 for features you get for free on another console.
They aren't enchacing XBL with that money. They are pocketing it all, and occasionally might throw a little money to get a demo earlier or free. I can understand maybe $5 to $10 a year for XBL. But $50 a year with no dedicated servers or free games makes no sense. Stop the defensive fanboy arguments and think about it. What are you paying $50 for a year?
|
You just named 2 1st party games that can P2P but what others can? All the old Live games can do that once the servers are used for the newer games. So you think when games like Ghost Recon had server problems it was because everyones 360 was having FTP issues?
|
Well obviously if some games don't have dedicated servers that means it is NOT MANDATORY! Warhawk and Resistance both have dedicated servers as well but not all games have them.
Some games will some games won't. You do need a central network to manage all the in game messaging, friends invites, etc, but that doesn't mean that XBL has dedicated servers for all games. What is wrong with these 360 fan boys. YOU KNOW MICROSOFT HAS SERVER ISSUES. Just like PSN has server issues. But this guy is saying that all XBL titles are ran by dedicated XBL servers that will be up for eternity.
lol. Are you all serious right now? You are paying for something that Sony is giving away for free. Thats the point. Haha man this is funny. Did you all believe that Microsoft was providing some sort of reliable service with the money you were paying? Some games will, some games won't. Most game servers are ran by the game developer themselves, just like Playstaion.
