"I don't know what problems you are talking about, but I'm not having them. I have a ps3 and a 360, and I can't connect to shit with my ps3, but my connection is perfect with live.

A weird coincidence? I don't think so."

"HandsomeDead said:

"TTreen said:

"My only comment on the XBL vs PSN debate is the irony it shines on one of the major talking points of the "console war".  Think about it: 3 years of XBL is $150-$180, added to the price that most people paid for 360s (approx $300-$400), it's just as much as (if not more than) a PS3.  I'm not trying to say that PS3 is better, I just find it humourous that Live users consider the PS3 more expensive when they are in fact the same price in the long run.  Granted, none Live users get a less expensive console, but the lack of online support may not be important to those gamers.

Take it easy Bombers."

Thanks for invalidating your own point. It makes arguements so much easier."

I did not invalidate my point, I simply provided a different perspective.  Someone who does not play  online obviously has no reason to care which console has a better online service.  However, there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in buying a Xbox 360 for the purpose of playing online and still considering it a less expensive alternative to the PS3.  In the end, it all has to do with your personal preference in online services and  your choice between spending the same amount of money in one sitting or over the course of several years.  You're mistaking a comment that simply states financial realities with an opinionated arguement, and I apoligize if the way I presented the comment was misleading."

"TTreen said:

"HandsomeDead said:

"TTreen said:

"My only comment on the XBL vs PSN debate is the irony it shines on one of the major talking points of the "console war".  Think about it: 3 years of XBL is $150-$180, added to the price that most people paid for 360s (approx $300-$400), it's just as much as (if not more than) a PS3.  I'm not trying to say that PS3 is better, I just find it humourous that Live users consider the PS3 more expensive when they are in fact the same price in the long run.  Granted, none Live users get a less expensive console, but the lack of online support may not be important to those gamers.

Take it easy Bombers."

Thanks for invalidating your own point. It makes arguements so much easier."

I did not invalidate my point, I simply provided a different perspective.  Someone who does not play  online obviously has no reason to care which console has a better online service.  However, there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in buying a Xbox 360 for the purpose of playing online and still considering it a less expensive alternative to the PS3.  In the end, it all has to do with your personal preference in online services and  your choice between spending the same amount of money in one sitting or over the course of several years.  You're mistaking a comment that simply states financial realities with an opinionated arguement, and I apoligize if the way I presented the comment was misleading."

It's a different viewpoint, but it's a useless viewpoint. Like Jayge said, it's all relative and also, if you're looking in the long run, you may as well factor in the games you're going to buy etc."

Looks at the technical aspects ( reliablility) it is better.But Xbox live is an overall better service as of now.

 "In the end, it all has to do with your personal preference in online services and  your choice between spending the same amount of money in one sitting or over the course of several years"

It is the same idea as a mortgage: some people choose to buy a house upfront, others finance it through a mortgage.  Like I said, it is a personal preference.  One way is not necessarily better than the other, I'm only saying that the price of the two products ends up being the same.  It is much more difficult to calculate games into this equation, as someone could easily spend thousands of dollars on games and make their video gaming budget much larger than that of other users.  I am simply comparing the price of the hardware and it's online capability over an extended period of time.

Handsome Dead, the viewpoint I presented was not "useless".  You could make the agruement that it was irrelevant to this discussion, but uselessness implies that there is no situation in which it is a valid perspective.  I'm sure their are people who purchased Xbox 360s for financial reasons and have never played online, which would make their situation similar to the one I desribed in my second post.

"It's a different viewpoint, but it's a useless viewpoint. Like Jayge said, it's all relative and also, if you're looking in the long run, you may as well factor in the games you're going to buy etc."

"Wii online is better than SNES online."

"Okay, last night marked the 3rd time in the last few weeks the Xbox live has had issues. Then I check my gamertag today (which isn't there), shoot over to Major Nelson's website and, low and behold "the team is aware of the issues." Major, you seem like a pretty good guy, and by all accounts you are, but if I see that quote one more time in 2008 I'm going to send my fist through my computer screen.

I love the NXE, everything about it is better than that clunky god-awful blade setup, and I really like my 360 for the most part. Yet, Live is supposed to be the main reason for owning a 360. It's supposed to be the creme de la creme of console online. Than why is it that I'm paying $50/year for this service that is down on a consistent basis? Because my friends are too stubborn to see the light and buy PS3's, that's why.

Yep, that's right, PSN is working just fine. In fact, PSN is NEVER down: certain game servers have issues now and then (see last months Socom and LittleBigPlanet's releases), but PSN as a whole is only ever down for maintenance. This is where Sony's online service method is superior than Microsofts: it's already catching up in functionality, it's free, and a helluva lot more reliable."

nope.

To be honest, the PSN has been just as good for me as Xbox Live has. Xbox Live doesn't really add anything that is worth the extra cost, but to be fair, it's only a small price every year so it doesn't bother me.

I own both consoles and i agree PSN dominates live, its free and easier to use.

Only simple conclusion in a topic like this, especially for resurrecting it: People are stupid.

here we go again
                              

"here we go again
                              "

PSn is More reliable BUT IT IS NOT BETTER

Everyone shut the fun up and lock this topic already.

Was I the only person who had an Xbox 1, Live sucks, its laggy no matter what u do

i personally enjoy PSN compared to XBL.

for gaming and socializing purposed psn suits me better with the games and home.
i have the blutooth headset  and the chatpad. its just more stylish and hi tec than what xbl offers at the moment.

sorry but cross game chat just isnt worth it when its time to sign the dotted line.

Three quick points and then I agree, we should all be done with this:

Haha, this kid is funny.

they are the same damn thing on both systems you click play online in any game and guess what it plays online
the only difference is 360 people are paying $50 for it and since they have been paying for it  the 360 fanboys will defend it to death 

"don't you need to download patches for PS3 multiplayer?"

How about we let this thread die! Who keeps digging it up anyway?

"How about we let this thread die! Who keeps digging it up anyway?"