By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - PlayStation Plus Prompts Me to Rethink My Xbox Live Subscription

 

What do you choose?

Xbox Live 78 26.44%
 
PlayStation Plus 190 64.41%
 
Nintendoland seems pretty cool 27 9.15%
 
Total:295
S.T.A.G.E. on 16 June 2012
smroadkill15 said:

Comparing psn+ with xbl gold, psn+ is definitely a better value and you get more for what you pay for, but in terms of a which service is better, psn is still lagging behind XBL. For the poeple that think I'm just blowing smoke out of my ass, I'll give several example:

1. Party Chat: I would say 98% of the xbl community uses this feature and just makes playing games or doing anything on xbl much better.

2. Download speeds/updates: Xbl is just much faster when it comes to downloading anything. Updates take 5 seconds and is all done in single update instead of several. Downloading any game,demo, video, app, etc. doesn't take very long on xbl.

3. Demo's: Every xbla game and indy game allows you to download a trial demo, and there are more retail demos also on live.

4. Playing splitscreen on two or more gold accounts: Any game with split screen on xbl lets you play with either a guest account or another gold account. I know this is a big issue on PSN and only several games allow you to have more than 1 primary PSN account play splitscreen, where as every game with splitscreen on xbl does.

5. More apps: Yes, both systems have apps you can download, but if you look at the growing number on xbl you can see there are more than psn and that number is only going to get bigger in the coming year. If you compare both services with the same app, say Netflix, the xbl version will almost always be superior with kinect features in everyone of them. Being able to say, "pause" while watching a movie on Netflix just adds a lot to the service.

6. Community/more active players: For me xbl feels more like a community and keeping in touch with friends is beyond simple. Everything just feels so much livelier on xbl.

Those are my main reason, and if you don't agree that's fine, but these are just my personal reasons. Like I stated previously PSN+=Better value, XBL Gold=Better service.


1. Cross chat isn't on the PS3 because of hardware issues. It's on the Vita so we know were getting it next gen. It's definitely not a PSN issue.

2. The speed isn't that great to warrant it payable compared to a free service.

3. Demos are available on PSN.

4. Most likely coming next gen.

5. The apps are getting larger and less relevant to gaming. At this point they are getting them just to snuff out Direct TV.

6. Community on PSN and XBL are active. Neilsons said that the PS3 is the most active gaming console compared to the 360 and then the Wii and the same with Netflix.

...If this is what makes a service better to you. I feel for your argument next generation which is pretty much next year.

PSN+ is the gamers service. Period, giving you conditional games for the cost.



Around the Network
yo_john117 on 16 June 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
yo_john117 said:
I wouldn't ever dream of dropping XBL Gold. All of my friends are on it (whom I get to talk to a lot via party chat) and there's also that little game called Halo which I love so, so much.


Little things like this are the simple little things that hold  the core of the 360. Weak, but yet such a strong chokehold. You pay for so little and they block access to third party subscriptions they have absolutely nothing to do with. Like the guy said, if they can get away with it, why stop? 

Halo is not a "weak chokehold". You're acting like I'm stuck forever paying for XBL and that I hate it when it's quite the opposite. It's like paying for Netflix, I gladly do it because it offers such an incredible amount of value to me hence making it totally worth it. Same thing applys to XBL.



S.T.A.G.E. on 16 June 2012
yo_john117 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
yo_john117 said:
I wouldn't ever dream of dropping XBL Gold. All of my friends are on it (whom I get to talk to a lot via party chat) and there's also that little game called Halo which I love so, so much.


Little things like this are the simple little things that hold  the core of the 360. Weak, but yet such a strong chokehold. You pay for so little and they block access to third party subscriptions they have absolutely nothing to do with. Like the guy said, if they can get away with it, why stop? 

Halo is not a "weak chokehold". You're acting like I'm stuck forever paying for XBL and that I hate it when it's quite the opposite. It's like paying for Netflix, I gladly do it because it offers such an incredible amount of value to me hence making it totally worth it. Same thing applys to XBL.


Halo is a game not an online service. You pay them because a shooters online regardless of Xbox Live is superior to any other? Put your eggs in the right basket. If its worth it to you then its worth it. I am just saying this exactly why they wont drop the $60 yearly subscription. They dropped it on PC because they aren't falling for that, simple.



richardhutnik on 16 June 2012
Chark said:
For PS Plus free game offerings, the way I see it is that its a used/rental game alternative.

PS Plus is $50 a year for 36 games($4.17 a month for 3 games). Your subscription fee funds the industry very directly through digital distribution. The PS3 games are at least 1 year old or something and you don't select which titles come out, though I'm sure you can try suggesting them on PS Blog. The games stay with you as long as you have a subscription and you can renew your subscription down the road and regain access. 36 new titles every year adds up.

To compare, Gamefly offers 1 game rental at a time for $16 a month or 2 for $23. Your subscription doesn't provide any direct funds to the industry, just to Gamefly. You can select what games you want but there is limited availability, so your top priority titles might take some time to receive. Rent to your hearts content but a full year bags you at $192 to $276. You can only keep one or two titles at a time.

To compare, used game purchases don't provide any direct funds for the industry, just the retailers. You are still paying a decent sum per game depending on sales and how new they are. Say $20 a game for 36, that's $720. Though you have total control over which titles are bought but only if available. You get to keep your games because you own them, you can even sell them, although at a very reduced rate.

Difference between Gamefly and PS Plus question: Does PS Plus provide the absolutely latest releases or stuff that has been otu awhile?  I guess, if you don't care about new releases, Gamefly and PS Plus wouldn't be different.   But, that to me, seesm to be a difference.  Also can factor in whether or not you are playing off disks or not.  With digital download, you have to download the entire game, eating up harddrive space.



Chark on 16 June 2012
richardhutnik said:

Difference between Gamefly and PS Plus question: Does PS Plus provide the absolutely latest releases or stuff that has been otu awhile?  I guess, if you don't care about new releases, Gamefly and PS Plus wouldn't be different.   But, that to me, seesm to be a difference.  Also can factor in whether or not you are playing off disks or not.  With digital download, you have to download the entire game, eating up harddrive space.

I mentioned the lack of control over what games you receive and the supposed age of those games. Gamefly would let you have access to new releases but you aren't guarenteed those games and if you get something down your list instead you won't have another chance to get the new release unless you return that title. Digital downloads provide faster loading/playback than disk based games and you can always delete them to make room and redownload them whenever you desire.



Before the PS3 everyone was nice to me :(

Around the Network
richardhutnik on 16 June 2012
pezus said:
richardhutnik said:
Chark said:
For PS Plus free game offerings, the way I see it is that its a used/rental game alternative.

PS Plus is $50 a year for 36 games($4.17 a month for 3 games). Your subscription fee funds the industry very directly through digital distribution. The PS3 games are at least 1 year old or something and you don't select which titles come out, though I'm sure you can try suggesting them on PS Blog. The games stay with you as long as you have a subscription and you can renew your subscription down the road and regain access. 36 new titles every year adds up.

To compare, Gamefly offers 1 game rental at a time for $16 a month or 2 for $23. Your subscription doesn't provide any direct funds to the industry, just to Gamefly. You can select what games you want but there is limited availability, so your top priority titles might take some time to receive. Rent to your hearts content but a full year bags you at $192 to $276. You can only keep one or two titles at a time.

To compare, used game purchases don't provide any direct funds for the industry, just the retailers. You are still paying a decent sum per game depending on sales and how new they are. Say $20 a game for 36, that's $720. Though you have total control over which titles are bought but only if available. You get to keep your games because you own them, you can even sell them, although at a very reduced rate.

Difference between Gamefly and PS Plus question: Does PS Plus provide the absolutely latest releases or stuff that has been otu awhile?  I guess, if you don't care about new releases, Gamefly and PS Plus wouldn't be different.   But, that to me, seesm to be a difference.  Also can factor in whether or not you are playing off disks or not.  With digital download, you have to download the entire game, eating up harddrive space.

Sony will be promoting at least one brand spanking new PSN game (free) per month. Some of the free games are high-profile, relatively new games, others are slightly older. They will try to pick good games. Just having new games because they are new is not good enough. There are not enough good/great new games being released at the moment, better to offer some many might have missed (LBP2, inFamous 2, Just Cause 2, R&C, Darksiders etc.)

PSN content, which is not the same as the AAA stuff that hits the shelves.  Gamefly has issues, but they will end up getting the newest disk stuff.  That is a difference between the two.  Part of Sony upping the content in PS+ would be likely to undermine the used game market of Gamestop.  If you don't mind waiting for the stuff to show up, and have the harddrives space for it, and don't mind waiting to download, the older stuff would be a good deal.

I am pretty sure that Sony, and game publishers would love to steal the business of the likes of Gamefly.  After stomping out piracy, used game market, and game rental where they get nothing of the ongoing revenue stream from the rental is next.  This will likely be a push to get everyone into a subscription model for content.  Sony, with Home and Free Realms (pretty cool MMO type game by the way, more interesting that Home in my opinion), has been experimenting with micropayment also.  I had laid out the direction of this in my other thread on here about companies will push for people to keep paying to play, rather than pay once to own: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=144532&page=1#



brendude13 on 18 June 2012
PullusPardus said:
Its the better service no doubt, I hate the fact that I am paying for Gold and yet I get spammed by adverts left and right about shit I don't care about.

You don't like One Direction and Bratz the movie?