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

Turkish said:
Lostplanet22 said:
The only reason why PSN is free is that Sony knows very well that people will not stay with PSN if customers had to pay for it...


Ahahahaha, Sony will not charge for PSN because they know online gaming has always been free.  If Sony charged for PSN then where would they go? Live? lol.


Well it is clear people do spending a lot of time on live :).  That is why you see millions playing Halo and other games in the weekend... Something that you hardly see for any sony game....Excluding ofcourse call of duty that is also more popular on live :).  People simply want quality service...And with Sony having to excuse themself that PSn sucks last year and coming up with PSn plus to save their face ......well should not be a surprise that people choose live :).



 

Around the Network

PS+ came out before the hack.



Before the PS3 everyone was nice to me :(

Kantor said:
Lostplanet22 said:
The only reason why PSN is free is that Sony knows very well that people will not stay with PSN if customers had to pay for it...


Can you think of a better reason for it to be free?

You don't take a free service and start charging for features that used to be free. That is immoral, and I think it's a good thing that Sony refuses to do it. But then, anything Sony does will be spun in a negative light by somebody.

Stuff like this is going on for ages...   People are spending hundreds of dollars to just play one game online for years (see World of warcraft and all the other MMO's).  



 

Lostplanet22 said:
Turkish said:
Lostplanet22 said:
The only reason why PSN is free is that Sony knows very well that people will not stay with PSN if customers had to pay for it...


Ahahahaha, Sony will not charge for PSN because they know online gaming has always been free.  If Sony charged for PSN then where would they go? Live? lol.


Well it is clear people do spending a lot of time on live :).  That is why you see millions playing Halo and other games in the weekend... Something that you hardly see for any sony game....Excluding ofcourse call of duty that is also more popular on live :).  People simply want quality service...And with Sony having to excuse themself that PSn sucks last year and coming up with PSn plus to save their face ......well should not be a surprise that people choose live :).


Eh, Halo has million players in the weekend? Lol I dont believe that. I dont understand what you're getting at, are you trying to say that Live has more people playing on it and you only have Halo and CoD to back it up? :') PSN was down because it was hacked, not because it sucked, in what kind of reality do you live in lol :) PS+ launched in 2010, not last year, get your facts straight. :)



I think Lostplanet here is just parodying or something.



Around the Network

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.



Turkish said:
Lostplanet22 said:
Turkish said:
Lostplanet22 said:
The only reason why PSN is free is that Sony knows very well that people will not stay with PSN if customers had to pay for it...


Ahahahaha, Sony will not charge for PSN because they know online gaming has always been free.  If Sony charged for PSN then where would they go? Live? lol.


Well it is clear people do spending a lot of time on live :).  That is why you see millions playing Halo and other games in the weekend... Something that you hardly see for any sony game....Excluding ofcourse call of duty that is also more popular on live :).  People simply want quality service...And with Sony having to excuse themself that PSn sucks last year and coming up with PSn plus to save their face ......well should not be a surprise that people choose live :).


Eh, Halo has million players in the weekend? Lol I dont believe that. I dont understand what you're getting at, are you trying to say that Live has more people playing on it and you only have Halo and CoD to back it up? :') PSN was down because it was hacked, not because it sucked, in what kind of reality do you live in lol :) PS+ launched in 2010, not last year, get your facts straight. :)

oh yeah now not but had that a long time with halo 3/halo reach.  And Halo 4 will have again millions of players online in the weekends :).  I don't need to back anything up. PSn only have third party games that are played the most on PSN while those games are most of the time more popular on Xbox live...And that is a fact..  even free people prefer Xbox live :).  Not that you will accept that fact though...  Even when you could not go online for weeks you would prefer it above xbox live





 

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.



 

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?



Argh_College said:

Over 40M members cant be wrong.

Xbox Live is the best online service on earth and nothing will ever top it.

Steam is Great and PSN is really weak but hey its Free.

Live is on another League, a league of its own, its simple and effective, Psn is messy and buggy.

Psn is so slow when i hit the guide button then messages are a pain in the ass, seeing friends is strange, on Live is so easy and simples and thats why Live is the best. Also has much more and better features than all the others.

But this article is funny haha this guy has to be the master troll.

I'm sorry, but I find this argument extremely weak. Following this logic:

Millions of Bieber fans can't be wrong: dude's an amazing singer

Millions of Twilight fans can't be wrong. Twilight is an incredible movie

Millions of people who Jersey Shore can't be wrong. It's a show well worth one's time.

Numbers mean nothing when it comes to quality (most of the time). At any rate, i think everyone agrees that live is a great service.

Do you own a ps3/psp/vita and have been using psn or psn+ for a long time? I haven't tried live, but I've heard some great things about it.