@psrock

Amen to that.

I have unlimited minuteon my phone, I'll be on conference call when we play games. Cross chat fixed.

live by a huge margain. :)

haha, then you haven't tried out very many live games.  There are some awesome games on live.  You have aegis wing(which is free), alien hominid, geometry wars 1 and 2, secret of monkey island special edition, undertow, splosion man, shadow complex, duke nukem 3d, perfect dark, the Maw, banjo-tooie, banjo kazooie, portal:still alive, Ikaruga, and more.  They also have a lot more niche games, like magic the gathering:duels of plainswalker (which I really like), and bejewelled 2 games like that. Live has also had access to both braid and castle crasher for over a year now, and they are probably the best games out there right now as far as downloables.  PS3 only owners should be extremely happy they are getting these great games.

PSN has a lot of really good games too, like flower, pixeljunk monsters, savage moon, pain, echochrom, fat princess (hopefully the fix the online soon on this one).  LIke I said before, PSN has a better percentage of good quality games, but when you compare a game library of 108 to a game library of 234, the bigger library is always going to have more good games. 

of course, a lot of this just comes down to opinion.  You may not like some of the live games, and you may not like some of the psn games, but it doesn't change the fact that they are there or what kind of quality they are.  IMO, Live has more content that I enjoy.  I still enjoy the PSN content, I just like more stuff on Live.

Having both LIVE and PSN, i'll go overall LIVE because it seems like MS is actually using the $50 for something NXE 1 vs 100 and some new things coming later but what hurts LIVE is MSP and no dedicated servers makes playing some games a bitch( lag ).

PSN has web browsing which is great when you need some rest after a long game session. Dedicated servers for first/second party titles (Uncharted 2 beta with no lag, even when I team up with some PR's). Plus you spend real money so you know if your getting ripped off or not. The bad thing is no cross voice chat (which probably when implemented if they wouldn't have wasted time and resources on that garbage HOME). and the lack of good PS Classic.

Reasons Xbox Live owns PSN still to this day:

1.Windows Live (IM's) & Chatting with your friends who don't have Xbox Live.
2. Voice Chat
3. Live Party
4. Netflix
5. 1 vs 100
6. Shadow Complex (Coming Soon)
7. Guitar Hero 5 exclusive avatars in the game.
8. More DLC
9. Actual sense of community the second you sign into Xbox Live.
10. 'Splosion Man
11. Banjo-Tooie
12. Facebook
13. Joy Ride
14. Perfect Dark
15. Download Xbox titles
16. Serious Sam HD
17. The Warriors: Street Brawl
18. Uno Rus
19. Virtual On: Oratorio Tangram
20. Rockband gets more content ojn Xbox Live
21. Watching movies with your friends
22. Avatars
23. Major Nielson's news
24. Videochat
25. Theme backdrops
26. Twitter
27. Last. FM
28. 1080 P Zune store

Bottom line......you get what you pay for. Microsoft continues to impress every year.

right now live. but mainly does crossgamevoice chat.

its easier to talk, then sony already announce that for the ps3.

so i will go with the PSN.

I think Live is better. I was a big fan of the arcade scene, and Microsoft has done admirably giving that experience in content over the course of the last few years. I like the party system, I plan to get Netflix soon when the movie parties happen, I don't use cross game chat too often but that has more to do with my friends not being on as much as they used to.

It's all opinion though, and there's no definitive answer here. The only problem I see with the PSN being better argument is the fact that it's free. So what? Something being free does not change the service being provided. It seems as ridiculous as someone saying Yaris, Dash of Destruction and Aegis Wing are the three best games on Xbox Live because they're the ones you don't pay for. The quality does not change based on the price. All price does is tell you whether the quality of what you're purchasing is worth it. It doesn't change what you're getting at all.

Price plays into the 'Value' of the service, and what you get for your money. Granted, it doesn't determine how good the service is, but when comparing services surely Value has to be taken into account?