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?

Seraphic_Sixaxis on 03 August 2009
shio said:
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!)


I agree the Fee is very greedy on MS's part, and yeah Steam is Free to lol.



Around the Network
Boutros on 03 August 2009
madkiller said:
Boutros said:
madkiller said:
It's so hilarious that people still complain about having to pay for Live. If you can't afford $40 for 13 months (always a $40 deal somewhere for a Live 13 month card), then you really shouldn't even have a game system at all since you gotta be 10 years old or poor as hell...

It's 65$. And that's a 65$ that could cover the price of a newly released game.

Excuse me, NO it is not $65. It is $40, period. I am not sure where you found that price, but the worst price that ANY retailer charges is $50, but there is always a deal for $40 somewhere on the net, like the one I got from newegg last year.

It might not be in your world but in mine LIVE costs 65$. I live in Canada BTW.

http://www.amazon.ca/Xbox-Live-Month-Gold-Bonus/dp/B000CMWEBY/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1249274109&sr=8-3

 



pearljammer on 03 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.

I completely agree with you but only in regard to how you interpret the word better.

Before I had started reading over the thread, my initial interpretation of better was: which of the two services is better suited to me or, in otherwords, which of the two is most suitable to my preference/needs.

I don't think either party would be wrong here, it's just simply a matter of whether you interpreted better as meaning of greater quality or of greater suitability; of which both are incredibly subjective. One can either be better suited to your needs, or it can be of greater quality in your opinion. However you decide which one is better, is simply up to you... I think so anyway.

OT: I'm now playing Fat Princess online, but it's the first game that I've done so in about a year. Online gaming doesn't appeal much to me, so I'd say that PSN is the better choice for me. Although, I must admit, LIVE (for the month that I did use it) seemed to be the much cleaner experience.



Procrastinato on 03 August 2009

Live! is better than PSN? When did Live! get Fat Princess?

Games == winner == PSN, in my book.



 

FKNetwork on 03 August 2009
Zizzla_Rachet said:

Superb!!!!



Around the Network
RDBRaptor on 03 August 2009

Here's a question that I'm not entirely sure the answer to, does PSN support jumping into a friend's game in progress? I haven't had much experience with it but it feels like the answer is no, especially on BlazBlu (I don't know if you can jump into a friend's room on the LIVE version).



Kingdom Hearts 3 Bet: If Kingdom Hearts 3 becomes a multiplaform title/is not Wii exclusive then I will be banished from this land for 1 week and sing my praises to those who have proved themselves to be more intelligent than I.http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y267/RDBRaptor/rdbraptor_sig16.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">
My Anime List

FKNetwork on 03 August 2009
Seraphic_Sixaxis said:
^- What about now? there equal right now.

Happy?

LMAO! FAR FAR from it actually, PSN is free for a reason, noone would want to pay for a service that basic.....



Seraphic_Sixaxis on 03 August 2009

dood besides Cross Voice chat thats all XBL has over PSN enough said.



AussieGecko on 03 August 2009

i love this people choose psn for the argument, it doesnt have as much as live but its free.

A game demo = free
A game = you have to pay, people pay for games because they want the whole thing.

If you want the better service if you are happy with psn because you don't want to pay for it fine. Btw kind of sick of people talking about ps1 classics, live has xbox games which are actually last gen as opposed to the previous gen before that, so if that is an advantage for the ps3, it should be cancelled out by the 360's venture, and when they are getting full this gen games on, the gap will then be widened.

As one has said, you get what you pay for



 

Bet with Conegamer and Doobie_wop 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3879752

AussieGecko on 03 August 2009
shio said:
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!)


ok we get it you dont like xbox.

 

So is steam one of psn or xbox live? ... what no... its not... THEN WHY DONT YOU STICK TO THE TOPIC AND PUT YOUR 360 DISTASTE AWAY FOR A WHILE.

 

And actually one could argue that xbl shits all over the steam network.



 

Bet with Conegamer and Doobie_wop 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3879752