It is not a question about limitations but choice they made.

Plus, the system the PS3 is using is a standard server/client architecture... even the wii could do that ...

Only blind idiots think it has something to do with the so-called superiority of the PS3....

Implementating a correct and dynamic P2P services is .... well... implementing a service indeed... and Sony is too poor to afford it ...

@OP : Because MS didn't want to pay for dedicated servers.

That's one of the superior points on PS3 : you actually can play with 32 or 64 players on the same map.

MAG will make it 256 players on much bigger maps, allowing more tactical considerations and squad fights. It should begin to look like a real war...

If you've only got a 360 and still want to play huge scale battles well... just buy a PS3.

Loosing money is sooo superior...

Go read some pages on this forum and learn something... newbie...

I didn't want to hurt you by expressing my opinions Sardauk. If you can't stand other people opinions, then why do you come on a board ?

And you're the one losing money since you pay for Live every month, while on PS3 you can enjoy bigger online competitions for free. ;)

Look, you created an account today and you are already polluting this forum with stupidity.

My PS3 experience, even free with more players, can't compete with my XBL experience... if you want to know...

Try to reason a bit your communication, otherwise you are just wasting time and space...

I have been reading your other posts and it doesn't bring anything to the conversations... improve or post those stuffs on your blog...

Personal attacks or joke posts never improve any debate.

I disagree with you, my online experience is better on PS3, that's why I cancelled my Live subscription. That's my opinion, get over it.

Feel free to tell me which game on 360 allow 256 players to play on huge scale battle ? None, oh... Ok.

It is not about your personal opinions only ---> explain it ! Develop your argumentation !

The fanboy message : " I think 360 sucks and PS3 is great" has not his place here except if you take the time to explain why you think so.

Got it ?

(We are off-topic know, I suggest we continue this conversation in private if needed).

Says the guy who called me 'newbie' in his first post earlier. Oh the irony. Look at yourself in a mirror troll, I didn't attack you, YOU did.

I gave you my explanation : dedicated servers offer a better experience, 256 players games are what makes the PS3 superior in online (Resistance 2 or Killzone 2 also allow big matches too)...

I still had no answer to my question : which game on 360 allows you to play with 256 gamers ?

Or are you too busy trolling ?

This really has nothing to do with Live being better or worse than PSN.

It's about the fact that PSN's servers can handle more people than those of Live, which from what we've seen so far is true. The highest number of players in a single game out right now is 60, in R2, on PS3. The highest scheduled for the future is 256, in MAG, on PS3.