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

Forums - Gaming - reelGamers.com:PSN Vs. XBOX live

PIMP said:
SpartanFX said:

in this comparison reelgamers compare xbox live features with PSN after the 2.4 update in 4 main categories.

"Overall: PSN
This will be the hot topic of debate amongst Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 gamers over the coming months and years. With Sony offering all the same features of the Microsoft’s Xbox Live, why should gamers be required to pay $50 per year? It might not seem like a whole lot initially; however, gamers looking to game online for five to six years will end up paying $250 to $300 dollars, the price of the 360 console itself. We love XBL, but with Sony’s recent additions to the PSN, we think it’s time Microsoft halved the cost of entry. Until then, Sony offering their service for free makes Microsoft look like Scrooge McDuck."

http://reelgamers.com/games/online.html

 

 

 

WoW. Total lies. This is some biased site and should have no credibility. PSN still doesn't some features that XBL has(cross game invite, in game chat) and the content is not even close.

 



Around the Network

So they did a review based on the features in an unreleased firmware patch?

That makes sense



Leo-j said: If a dvd for a pc game holds what? Crysis at 3000p or something, why in the world cant a blu-ray disc do the same?

ssj12 said: Player specific decoders are nothing more than specialized GPUs. Gran Turismo is the trust driving simulator of them all. 

"Why do they call it the xbox 360? Because when you see it, you'll turn 360 degrees and walk away" 

Man these threads are popping up all over the place. Don't pay for it if you don't want it. Simple as that.



I'm one of those that says that Sony should make their service subscription based, not the other way around.

There's too much money to be had. I don't think it's sustainable long term unless we get a deluge of advertisements. I'll make my final judgement once home is out, however.



http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">

PSN is better if your not a teenager and dont have all day to play online games. I dont want to pay for service if I go for awhile without playing online.

Xbox Live is better though if you have alot of time and play online games every day.



Around the Network
Kasz216 said:

Cause a website that doubles in being big movie fans isn't going to be a bit biased towards the system with a built in blu-ray player.


Your logic fails me.This has nothing to do with biases,or Movies.

Double post.



reelGamers? more like reelFailures, am I right folks?

Without actually testing the new features for the upcoming firmwire, I find their objectivity is a compromised seeing as how they are pretty much reading off of a feature list created by sony for what should be in the next firmware update and the feature list created by MS for what XBL offers and ticking them off as they match, there isn't a real world comparison, nor is there a review of which one is more user-friendly (for obvious reasons).

Honestly, both have their merits, and while PSN is free, I never got kicked off a game due to "Connection Interrupted" in CoD4 when I was using XBL. So I'm a little biased towards XBL because of that.



Im happy that my ps3 will get better online...but come on already with these threads...

All you are doing is justifying your PS3 puchase by saying onlineis almost as good but free.

I don't mind paying for the xbox live service just like I don't mind paying for a bluray player in a console which I didn't ask for.



ive seen better comparisons



"I like my steaks how i like my women.  Bloody and all over my face"

"Its like sex, but with a winner!"

MrBubbles Review Threads: Bill Gates, Jak II, Kingdom Hearts II, The Strangers, Sly 2, Crackdown, Zohan, Quarantine, Klungo Sssavesss Teh World, MS@E3'08, WATCHMEN(movie), Shadow of the Colossus, The Saboteur