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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - PSN vs. Xbox Live - which is better now?

Onyxmeth on 02 August 2009
Taz! said:
Onyxmeth said:

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?

I completely disagree. Last Fall when the argument was LittleBigPlanet vs. Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts, I would have found the most ridiculous argument in the "Which is better" battle to be "Well Banjo costs $20 less, so it's better". Who judges quality that way? Look at your internet service. 56K is not better than cable, it's just cheaper. You said it yourself in your reply to me, "...it doesn't determine how good the service is...", so then why is it a justifiable argument when the topic at hand is "which is better now?". I don't find value and quality to be intertwined. My Sony DVD player is much better than the knockoff Coby DVD player I could have bought for $100 cheaper. It's not that value does not matter at all. It's just that it doesn't matter in an argument regarding quality of service.

I also said that people can like PSN better. In fact many great reasons were given, like certain PSN titles, PSOne classics, Home, dedicated servers, etc. Those are great reasons to like PSN over Xbox Live because it is a portion of the service Sony provides that Microsoft has not matched. However, "free" is not a legitimate reason. It's copout. It's basically saying "Xbox live is better, but I don't want to/shouldn't have to pay for it". Hey look, I'm never going to justify spending money on a Porsche, but I know damn well that doesn't make my Camry a better car than one.



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



Around the Network
Seraphic_Sixaxis on 02 August 2009

PSN enough said.

It's free and its feautres "Nearly" rival that of XBL, once PSN gets Cross Voice chat thats it, XBL has nothing over PSN infact once that happens XBL will have a Handicap VS PSN... the fee.



Taz! on 02 August 2009
Onyxmeth said:
Taz! said:
Onyxmeth said:

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?

I completely disagree. Last Fall when the argument was LittleBigPlanet vs. Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts, I would have found the most ridiculous argument in the "Which is better" battle to be "Well Banjo costs $20 less, so it's better". Who judges quality that way? Look at your internet service. 56K is not better than cable, it's just cheaper. You said it yourself in your reply to me, "...it doesn't determine how good the service is...", so then why is it a justifiable argument when the topic at hand is "which is better now?". I don't find value and quality to be intertwined. My Sony DVD player is much better than the knockoff Coby DVD player I could have bought for $100 cheaper. It's not that value does not matter at all. It's just that it doesn't matter in an argument regarding quality of service.

I also said that people can like PSN better. In fact many great reasons were given, like certain PSN titles, PSOne classics, Home, dedicated servers, etc. Those are great reasons to like PSN over Xbox Live because it is a portion of the service Sony provides that Microsoft has not matched. However, "free" is not a legitimate reason. It's copout. It's basically saying "Xbox live is better, but I don't want to/shouldn't have to pay for it". Hey look, I'm never going to justify spending money on a Porsche, but I know damn well that doesn't make my Camry a better car than one.

Fair enough, I agree with the bottom line fact that price and value don't affect the quality of something, however they should still be highly considered when going to purchase something, or decide between items or services. 

But the title is a direct question, so, you're right ;-(



JaggedSac on 02 August 2009

I would have to say ubiquity and cohesiveness are what make Live so great.



JOhnyBravoos on 03 August 2009

Well if you count the fact there's an internet browser... To me the PSN beats LIVE. If there were none then it would be the LIVE service that wins as we speak right now.

Will it change? Well of course both services will improve over time and it's really up to both companies how much effort and work they're going to put into both.

If Sony adds X-game chat and have the same amount of games/videos/dlc then I don't really see what MS can do to better PSN, mind you I don't see Sony acomplising this in the near future, but as long as I can access the BBC iplayer, Google, youtube and so on; LIVE will never be better than PSN!



Around the Network
DjFlex53 on 03 August 2009

It seems like I often hear PS3 fans write the same word to start their arguments/defense in regards to PS3. It's "once"

Once...the PS3 gets a price drop it will win
Once...the PS3 gets crosschat PSN will be the best
Once...Uncharted 2 comes out the PS3 will be graphics king
Once...FFXIII comes out the PS3 will outsell the wii in Japan
Once...Fat Princess, Braid & Castle Crashers comes out on PSN...blah blah blah

What about right now?



Being in 2nd feels so much better than being in 3rd

Seraphic_Sixaxis on 03 August 2009

^- What about now? there equal right now.

Happy?



V-r0cK on 03 August 2009

Xbox Live best be the better one cause people are paying.

I enjoy PSN and very content with what it offers for free. btw.. PSN has FFVII..nuff said ;P



JOhnyBravoos on 03 August 2009

Right now, PSN is better. But only because of the web browser! If it's no web browsing then it's LIVE>PSN ;]



shio on 03 August 2009

PSN is the best choice because it's free.

Xbox Live is a rip off, and is nowhere the awesomeness that Steam is (and Steam is free!)



http://i48.tinypic.com/120qaon.jpg