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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - How Xbox Live is blatantly better than PSN

IIIIITHE1IIIII on 20 August 2012
the2real4mafol said:
naruball said:
the2real4mafol said:
paying for xbox live DOES NOT make it better. it's just plain stupid you have to pay for xbox live to access services that are FREE elseway like youtube, netflix etc.

it may be better organised but that is the system not xbox live

no other REAL arguments here, this guy is a moron, so xbox live is better because it's american? seriously??
here's an idiot, basically saying japan are communist!! wtf?

xbox live is good for it's cheap games and features and so is the PSN

Please tell me you're kidding

this is how i saw the arcticle, what did i say that made you think that? 

he was acting like a damn patriot saying america is the ONLY democracy and that anything american is just better because it is american. damn fool, that's not always right 


Just so you know, he (as in the writer of this article) was joking. Neither that part, nor any other was serious.



Around the Network
the2real4mafol on 20 August 2012
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
the2real4mafol said:
naruball said:
the2real4mafol said:
paying for xbox live DOES NOT make it better. it's just plain stupid you have to pay for xbox live to access services that are FREE elseway like youtube, netflix etc.

it may be better organised but that is the system not xbox live

no other REAL arguments here, this guy is a moron, so xbox live is better because it's american? seriously??
here's an idiot, basically saying japan are communist!! wtf?

xbox live is good for it's cheap games and features and so is the PSN

Please tell me you're kidding

this is how i saw the arcticle, what did i say that made you think that? 

he was acting like a damn patriot saying america is the ONLY democracy and that anything american is just better because it is american. damn fool, that's not always right 


Just so you know, he (as in the writer of this article) was joking. Neither that part, nor any other was serious.

i didn't notice he was joking, i don't read his stuff, so i don't know what he's like. 



Xbox One, PS4 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)

'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin

Prediction: Switch will sell better than Wii U Lifetime Sales by Jan 1st 2018

brendude13 on 20 August 2012
Mr Puggsly said:
brendude13 said:

Which is $60 a year, or $480 for 8 years (roughly the length of this console generation). 

$480 doesn't seem bad considering we're talking about almost a decade of entertainment.

I'm not a rich man, but I can easily afford the $60 A YEAR to play games I prefer online. Although, I never actually have paid $60 thanks to eBay and Amazon.

The PS3 is almost a decade of entertainment, but people weren't too enthusiastic about paying $600.



Lostplanet22 on 20 August 2012
pokoko said:
Lostplanet22 said:
pokoko said:
The idea some people have that "it's the best for me so it must be the best for everyone" annoys me. Value is relative. Using myself as an example, I don't give a rat's fuzzy ass about cross-game chat. If PSN added it tomorrow, I still wouldn't care. I play console games online in brief spurts now and then, not in any dedicated fashion. I mostly use consoles for single-player games, but still, being able to go online on a whim, or try it out multi-player or co-op when I get a new game, without paying for the time I DON'T use it, is awesome to me. When I do play, everything seems to work fine, and any lag I've had seemed to be related to specific game servers rather than to the network. Also, and I mean this with complete and total honesty, the fact that less people have headsets is absolutely glorious to me. Seriously. I spend too much time muting people as it is.

You can tell me that LIVE is best for you, and that's fantastic, but do NOT tell me that it's best for me or for everyone.

Well that is what you get with a free service =p.


I'm not sure what you're saying here.  Are you implying that PSN has more immature players than LIVE?

Also, always using FPS games as examples is a bit disingenuous, isn't it?   We KNOW that FPS games are far more popular in the US, where the 360 has a massive installed base.  What about soccer games, or fighting games, both of which are much more popular on the PS3?  What are the numbers for those types of games?

Getting banned on Xbox live is like getting getting banned on  Neogaf..good luck with coming back quick..

While getting banned on PSn is the same like on Vgchartz...Trolls just make another account...

I am just comparing the biggest multiplayer games...I know people call the Xbox the shooterbox but even the most played games are FPS games.



 

Mr Puggsly on 20 August 2012
brendude13 said:
Mr Puggsly said:
brendude13 said:

Which is $60 a year, or $480 for 8 years (roughly the length of this console generation). 

$480 doesn't seem bad considering we're talking about almost a decade of entertainment.

I'm not a rich man, but I can easily afford the $60 A YEAR to play games I prefer online. Although, I never actually have paid $60 thanks to eBay and Amazon.

The PS3 is almost a decade of entertainment, but people weren't too enthusiastic about paying $600.

People weren't enthusiastic about paying $600 for a console with a crappy library. I feel PS3 didnt get strong exclusives until about 2008-09. At that point the hardware was significantly cheaper.

I think a lot of people buy a Xbox with no intention of playing online. But MS pushes it so hard that people eventually give in and do subscribe. MS doesn't get any credit for really getting people interested in online gaming. Which forced Sony to make their online service better. Hence, PSN wouldn't be as strong without XBL. Anyone who even enjoys PS Plus should thank MS for forcing Sony to compete.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Around the Network
killerzX on 20 August 2012
Mr Puggsly said:
killerzX said:
Mr Puggsly said:
KylieDog said:

Only Xbox Live SIlver should be compared to PSN. XBL Gold should be compared to PS Plus.

Free service vs free service. Premium service vs premium service.

OP isn't funny.

I wouldn't even compare them at all. If the 360 has exclusive content you really enjoy, it makes sense to pay for Live.

As long as the 360 has content not found on PS3, you can't say their services are the same.

I mean c'mon people, you're complaining about something that doesn't even cost 20 cents a day.

although i do enjoy xbox live, and i do think its every bit as good as psn, i still think it should be free. but i pay the fee because i pretty much have to in order to play the games i already bought. its a great service, but it should be free,

i digress, if we go by that logic (the bolded) then cars a really cheap too, i mean they cost less than a dollar a day!! and houses cost less than a netlix subscribtion!!!

I would like it to be free, but I don't think it SHOULD be free. Instead, MS should do what they want. People who have a problem with paying for online services on a console should get a competitors hardware and stop complaining. Nobody forces you to pay their fees or buy games or even buy the hardware. You are a consumer with options and apparently chose Xbox.

I don't understand your second paragraph. Cost of cars and houses can vary. They can also very expensive maintenance fees. Perhaps you should elaborate.

for example if you buy a $5000-6000 car and own it for 15 years... look it only cost a dollar a day!

 

but nobody i seriously going to tell you cars are cheap. $60 a year is nothing to scouf at. its a good bit of money and it adds up.



killerzX on 20 August 2012
Mr Puggsly said:
brendude13 said:
Mr Puggsly said:
brendude13 said:

Which is $60 a year, or $480 for 8 years (roughly the length of this console generation). 

$480 doesn't seem bad considering we're talking about almost a decade of entertainment.

I'm not a rich man, but I can easily afford the $60 A YEAR to play games I prefer online. Although, I never actually have paid $60 thanks to eBay and Amazon.

The PS3 is almost a decade of entertainment, but people weren't too enthusiastic about paying $600.

People weren't enthusiastic about paying $600 for a console with a crappy library. I feel PS3 didnt get strong exclusives until about 2008-09. At that point the hardware was significantly cheaper.

I think a lot of people buy a Xbox with no intention of playing online. But MS pushes it so hard that people eventually give in and do subscribe. MS doesn't get any credit for really getting people interested in online gaming. Which forced Sony to make their online service better. Hence, PSN wouldn't be as strong without XBL. Anyone who even enjoys PS Plus should thank MS for forcing Sony to compete.

definitely agree... competition has most certainly made both services better (especially sony's)



WiiBox3 on 20 August 2012

Why do I pay for XBL. Most of my friends IRL who play online have XBOXs, but they removed my favorite part of XBox live last year(No more Netflix streaming with friends...). I don't have any friends on PSN :(. Also my brother just got a job at the Xbox Accessories division, so I need to support him.



SOLIDSNAKE08 on 20 August 2012

it doesnt matter if xbox live cost 1p a day, you shouldnt have to pay to play online. why are you paying your isp then? once we pay our monthly internet fee's, we should be able to connect what we want to it without having to pay extra.



DirtyP2002 on 20 August 2012

The funny part is that the sony fans are the ones bein pissed that XBL is not free, while XBL users have no problem with it.



Imagine not having GamePass on your console...