Well... I'm sure XBL has better online head-to-head capabilities, but I think part of that is developer interest. If developers spent time on their PS3 ports, maybe it wouldn't be so bad. My experience with Resistance, Warhawk and Metal Gear Online have led me to believe the PS3 online experience can be just as rewarding as Live, and Resistance 2 apparently is just as good.
As for choice of games, that's just a matter of taste. My taste lies with PSN. As cool as many of the games on XBL are, I can already get almost all of them. After all, I have MAME, a Dreamcast and an original Xbox. All that leaves is Braid and Castle Crashers, which I would love to get, but I can deal.
I personally prefer PSN's artsy games like PixelJunk Monsters, PJ Eden, Echochrome, Everyday Shooter and the latest crazes Noby Noby Boy and Flower. They even have some arcade style fare with Nucleus, Blast Factor, Super Stardust HD, Soldner X and Wipeout HD.
PSN does have video downloads. Unfortunately, the fees are a bit excessive, but still, they have them.
Virtual Console sounded like a sweet deal at first, but after dropping a load of money on that, it seems like a rip off. $8 for SNES and Genesis games, and $10 for N64? That's a bit excessive, especially when PSN is charging $6 for most PSX games.
XBL vs. PSN
Re: XBL vs. PSN
7K, I can definately see how PSN has some amazing downloadable games. The exclusives they have are amazing. XBLA is better supported, (in terms of sheer quantity) but other than Braid, there probably are better exclusive downloadable games on PSN.
But, I still spend so much more time on my 360 and on Live, than on my PS3. In fact, the PlayStation game I've spent the most time on recently is Persona 4. Its sooooo good. And its only a PS2 game.
But, I still spend so much more time on my 360 and on Live, than on my PS3. In fact, the PlayStation game I've spent the most time on recently is Persona 4. Its sooooo good. And its only a PS2 game.
-
noiseredux
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 38148
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:09 pm
- Contact:
Re: XBL vs. PSN
Even if you think 8 or 10 bucks is expensive, you can't deny the excellent library that the VC already has. And it shows no signs of slowing down the additions.
-
scottykick
- 32-bit
- Posts: 212
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 8:02 pm
Re: XBL vs. PSN
That is another reason i have not yet bought a 360 and.or PS3. My PS2 still has life, I picked up Persona 4 when it came out and it's excellent, next up to buy are Yakuza & Yakuza 2, also Fire Pro Wrestling returns has kept me very busy...
I figure i will decide on which system to buy first following E3, as of now it looks like PS3 should trump 360 in terms of games released in '09, but that could change.
I figure i will decide on which system to buy first following E3, as of now it looks like PS3 should trump 360 in terms of games released in '09, but that could change.
Re: XBL vs. PSN
One thing that needs to be said is that the 360 has trial versions of everygame on the XBLA. PSN only has trials for a few. That's really annoying because I can't try games before I buy.
Plus when you download the trial version on XBLA and decide to buy it, it unlocks straight away you don't have to download a separate version like you have to do with PSN.
Matchmaking is over-rated, what is interesting is the fact you can join any game from any game and receive invites for any game whilst playing any other game. You can also chat to people regardless of what game they are playing. You can also use the chatpad to talk to people who don't even own a 360 over Live Messenger.
PSN forces you to install everything. After waiting for ages for it to download (MY PS3 also downloads hideously slowly, wired or wireless, makes no difference) it just takes the piss.
However I've found myself playing my Wii more and more since I've soft modded it. I've been putting all the games that I already own on a different format onto my virtual console. It's great. Personally I think the Wii VC is better than the XBLA and PSN retro selection combined. I'm not thinking much of the Wiiware games though. There's only soldner-x that has actually caught my attention.
So to some it up, as far as pure online multiplay features goes the 360 and Xbox Live wins. Followed by PSNs online purely for the fact you can have one friends list instead of one for every game a la Wii. Then the Wii for it's functional but severely limited online play.
For overall package I think the 360 is the best, the Wii comes second and then the PSN. The Wii is a more versatile console than the PS3 regarding classic gaming and the amount of DLC it has.
Plus when you download the trial version on XBLA and decide to buy it, it unlocks straight away you don't have to download a separate version like you have to do with PSN.
Matchmaking is over-rated, what is interesting is the fact you can join any game from any game and receive invites for any game whilst playing any other game. You can also chat to people regardless of what game they are playing. You can also use the chatpad to talk to people who don't even own a 360 over Live Messenger.
PSN forces you to install everything. After waiting for ages for it to download (MY PS3 also downloads hideously slowly, wired or wireless, makes no difference) it just takes the piss.
However I've found myself playing my Wii more and more since I've soft modded it. I've been putting all the games that I already own on a different format onto my virtual console. It's great. Personally I think the Wii VC is better than the XBLA and PSN retro selection combined. I'm not thinking much of the Wiiware games though. There's only soldner-x that has actually caught my attention.
So to some it up, as far as pure online multiplay features goes the 360 and Xbox Live wins. Followed by PSNs online purely for the fact you can have one friends list instead of one for every game a la Wii. Then the Wii for it's functional but severely limited online play.
For overall package I think the 360 is the best, the Wii comes second and then the PSN. The Wii is a more versatile console than the PS3 regarding classic gaming and the amount of DLC it has.
Marurun wrote:Don’t mind-shart your pants, guys
-
sakicfan84
- 24-bit
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 1:22 pm
- Location: Michigan
Re: XBL vs. PSN
Definitely prefer XBL overall. The arcade has some great stuff, but most importantly the online is seamlessly integrated into the console. I know what friends are on right when I get on my console, and I can get into a party with them in a few seconds. The Wii isn't in the same league as the 360 in that regards...it's probably a few leagues away from being in the same league as the 360.
I'd probably would like the VC if I didn't already have access to everything that is available on it. I'm not paying them $5-$10 in order to play a ROM of an old game. I'd rather pay $5-$15 and play something original. Unfortunately, WiiWare isn't really close to the XBLA or the PSN in terms of content.
I'd probably would like the VC if I didn't already have access to everything that is available on it. I'm not paying them $5-$10 in order to play a ROM of an old game. I'd rather pay $5-$15 and play something original. Unfortunately, WiiWare isn't really close to the XBLA or the PSN in terms of content.
X-Fire: ezsblehman
Re: XBL vs. PSN
A lot of what will interest you depends on the type of gamer you are. I'm 28 years old, and a lot of "retro" games are the types of games I grew up with. Downloadable games are just as big a part of my current gaming trends as new retail releases are. That being said, my nod goes to the Xbox Live Arcade, followed by the Wii's Virtual Console, with the Playstation network coming in at a distant third.
I own all three consoles, so I am hardly biased towards any one of them. If an exclusive comes out for any of them, then I am all set. However, I look at the following matters when considering which console to purchase multi-platform games on.
Example 1: Retail titles Xbox Live versus Playstation Network>
Each game that is released with online play for the Playstation network, be it for Playstation 2 or Playstation 3 requires a dedicated server. That means the company that makes the game also has to set up and maintain a server for said game in -most- cases. With Playstation 2 titles, this also requires a seperate login, username, etc. for each game. When the game is not longer popular, and the servers are no longer populated, they are often shut down after only a couple of years.
With Xbox 360 and backwards compatible Original Xbox Live titles, everything is integrated through the Xbox Live service. A developer has only to make the game fully compatible with the service, and all matchmaking and online is handled through Xbox Live after release. So, even now, with the release of Street Fighter IV, I can meet people who still have copies of Street Fighter Anniversary Collection for the Original Xbox, and setup matches of Street Fighter III: Third Strike and play, years after that game has been released. There are no specialized servers for each game so to speak, just Xbox Live, and anything compatible with it.
Because of this, I prefer buying games that have online play for the Xbox 360 not only because of the better network, but because of the longevity of any online titles that are compatible with it. There are still tons of people playing Halo 2 on a regular basis because of this. Of lesser importance, but still a point to be made is the matter of Achievements for Xbox 360 titles. While not important to some, and not very important to me, it is still a factor in deciding what version to buy. They give games replay value that they otherwise would not have. They showcase your accomplishments and are fun to go after.
Example 2: Downloadable titles available on two or more of the networks>
Let's look at Sonic the Hedgehog for starters. On the Wii, it is nothing more than a Genesis ROM, priced at 800 Wii points ($8.00), on Xbox Live Arcade it is priced at 400 Microsoft points ($5.00). The Xbox Live Arcade version has widescreen capability, graphics smoothing, save states, leaderboards, and Achievements. Which is the better value? If a game is available on Xbox Live Arcade, I almost always download on that rather than Wiiware/Virtual console or Playstation Network. MegaMan 9 is another example. While Achievements are the only difference, it sets it apart from the other two consoles. $10 on each console, but best on Xbox because people can easily check the leaderboards and your Achievements without going into the game itself to check it.
As far as original downloadable titles go on each console, the Xbox wins again. Face it, WiiWare and PSN don't really shine in this arena compared to the likes of Castle Crashers, N+, Braid and others. Also, classic arcade titles on XBLA not only have leaderboards, but online play in multi-player games. Playing Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles the Arcade Game online with four people is a real treat, and not something that can be had on the other consoles.
On the matter of cost for Xbox Live, that is somewhat a misconception. You pay for a Gold Membership to gain the ability to play games online and to get early access to certain discounts and early downloads. A Silver Membership is entirely free, and gives you access to all downloadable content and other online features, so it isn't entirely a definate additional cost unless you want to play games online, and not everyone does. Also, $50 for 13 months really isn't that much. That's less than $5 a month to play every game online. If you complain about that, then you're kinda being silly. Anyone can afford that if they can afford the console, controllers and games.
Wii is good for classics you missed out on growing up. I've downloaded tons of Turbographics shooters and such on mine, because I never had that console way back when. The problem is the Wii only has 512mb of storage space on the system. So, you have to put all your extra games on an SD card and transfer them back and forth between card and console when you want to play them. That is an unfortunate hassle.
The Playstation 3 is essentially a glorified Blu-Ray player and Playstation Exclusive player for me. Aside from those functions and playing Playstation 2 releases on it, I don't turn mine on often. I'd go as far as to say my gaming playtime breaks down like this:
Of what free time I have to play games,
Xbox 360: 90%
Wii: 8%
PS3: 2%
Yeah, it is to that degree in all honesty.
I own all three consoles, so I am hardly biased towards any one of them. If an exclusive comes out for any of them, then I am all set. However, I look at the following matters when considering which console to purchase multi-platform games on.
Example 1: Retail titles Xbox Live versus Playstation Network>
Each game that is released with online play for the Playstation network, be it for Playstation 2 or Playstation 3 requires a dedicated server. That means the company that makes the game also has to set up and maintain a server for said game in -most- cases. With Playstation 2 titles, this also requires a seperate login, username, etc. for each game. When the game is not longer popular, and the servers are no longer populated, they are often shut down after only a couple of years.
With Xbox 360 and backwards compatible Original Xbox Live titles, everything is integrated through the Xbox Live service. A developer has only to make the game fully compatible with the service, and all matchmaking and online is handled through Xbox Live after release. So, even now, with the release of Street Fighter IV, I can meet people who still have copies of Street Fighter Anniversary Collection for the Original Xbox, and setup matches of Street Fighter III: Third Strike and play, years after that game has been released. There are no specialized servers for each game so to speak, just Xbox Live, and anything compatible with it.
Because of this, I prefer buying games that have online play for the Xbox 360 not only because of the better network, but because of the longevity of any online titles that are compatible with it. There are still tons of people playing Halo 2 on a regular basis because of this. Of lesser importance, but still a point to be made is the matter of Achievements for Xbox 360 titles. While not important to some, and not very important to me, it is still a factor in deciding what version to buy. They give games replay value that they otherwise would not have. They showcase your accomplishments and are fun to go after.
Example 2: Downloadable titles available on two or more of the networks>
Let's look at Sonic the Hedgehog for starters. On the Wii, it is nothing more than a Genesis ROM, priced at 800 Wii points ($8.00), on Xbox Live Arcade it is priced at 400 Microsoft points ($5.00). The Xbox Live Arcade version has widescreen capability, graphics smoothing, save states, leaderboards, and Achievements. Which is the better value? If a game is available on Xbox Live Arcade, I almost always download on that rather than Wiiware/Virtual console or Playstation Network. MegaMan 9 is another example. While Achievements are the only difference, it sets it apart from the other two consoles. $10 on each console, but best on Xbox because people can easily check the leaderboards and your Achievements without going into the game itself to check it.
As far as original downloadable titles go on each console, the Xbox wins again. Face it, WiiWare and PSN don't really shine in this arena compared to the likes of Castle Crashers, N+, Braid and others. Also, classic arcade titles on XBLA not only have leaderboards, but online play in multi-player games. Playing Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles the Arcade Game online with four people is a real treat, and not something that can be had on the other consoles.
On the matter of cost for Xbox Live, that is somewhat a misconception. You pay for a Gold Membership to gain the ability to play games online and to get early access to certain discounts and early downloads. A Silver Membership is entirely free, and gives you access to all downloadable content and other online features, so it isn't entirely a definate additional cost unless you want to play games online, and not everyone does. Also, $50 for 13 months really isn't that much. That's less than $5 a month to play every game online. If you complain about that, then you're kinda being silly. Anyone can afford that if they can afford the console, controllers and games.
Wii is good for classics you missed out on growing up. I've downloaded tons of Turbographics shooters and such on mine, because I never had that console way back when. The problem is the Wii only has 512mb of storage space on the system. So, you have to put all your extra games on an SD card and transfer them back and forth between card and console when you want to play them. That is an unfortunate hassle.
The Playstation 3 is essentially a glorified Blu-Ray player and Playstation Exclusive player for me. Aside from those functions and playing Playstation 2 releases on it, I don't turn mine on often. I'd go as far as to say my gaming playtime breaks down like this:
Of what free time I have to play games,
Xbox 360: 90%
Wii: 8%
PS3: 2%
Yeah, it is to that degree in all honesty.
Re: XBL vs. PSN
I refuse to pay for a Gold membership, even though I can easily afford it. I have a problem with them charing for it in the first place. For the past 10 years I've been playing online for free on my PC, with one exception: WoW. I accept WoW's fees because the fees get me a large amount of post-release content, plus the upkeep of running the servers. Xbox Live is doing nothing more than Battle.net does, which is why I won't pay for it. As a result, the 360 is the last place I go to for games, so the only titles I have are the exclusive RPGs for the system.LoneCynic wrote:Also, $50 for 13 months really isn't that much. That's less than $5 a month to play every game online. If you complain about that, then you're kinda being silly. Anyone can afford that if they can afford the console, controllers and games.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
Re: XBL vs. PSN
Not true, the majority of 3rd party titles on the PS3 are handled via Peer 2 Peer, the same as most Xbox Live titles - the only difference is that you're paying to play P2P games online on the 360.LoneCynic wrote:Each game that is released with online play for the Playstation network, be it for Playstation 2 or Playstation 3 requires a dedicated server. That means the company that makes the game also has to set up and maintain a server for said game in -most- cases.
It shouldn't be a factor any more, as every title submitted to Sony after January 09 requires trophies to be included, so no more lazy developers leaving them out.LoneCynic wrote:Achievements for Xbox 360 titles. While not important to some, and not very important to me, it is still a factor in deciding what version to buy.
I really can't agree in the slightest, but this is a totally subjective area of opinion - personally I find the majority of games released on XBLA to be complete trash, with a few gems like Braid & Castle Crashers here and there. PSN has a large collection of unique and innovative downloadable titles that for the most part couldn't be achieved on other systems due to Microsoft's size restrictions - games like Warhawk, Siren: Blood Curse, Wipeout HD, Gran Turismo 5 Prologue, Tekken 5, Ratchet and Clank Quest for Booty & Soldner X. Also, PSN seems more open to experimental and unique titles such as the PixelJunk series, Dark Mist, flOw, Flower, The Last Guy, Linger in Shadows, Echochrome, LocoRoco Cocoreccho & Everyday Shooter which is certainly more to my tastes.LoneCynic wrote:As far as original downloadable titles go on each console, the Xbox wins again. Face it, WiiWare and PSN don't really shine in this arena compared to the likes of Castle Crashers, N+, Braid and others.
Well, I guess i'm kinda silly then - because I will not pay to play games online, not anymore, and find the Xbox Live subscription an unnecesary cost - I pay for the console, I pay for the game, I pay for the internet connection; why should I pay again just to play online? It may be a miniscule cost, but it's the principle of the matter. All I want from Xbox Live is the abillity to play games online, I don't give a shit about 8-way party chats, or quick invites or any of the other fluff Xbox Live offers - I just want to simply play online games for free, just like i've been doing on the PC since 1994. PSN isn't a match for Xbox Live in terms of functionality, usability & features - but it does offer me online gaming for free and thats one of the main factors in why I switched to the PS3 as my main console (the other being hardware reliability). Microsoft should allow Silver users to play online, and then charge the Gold subscription for all the extra fluff the service provides as well - i'm not going to pay for online when I can get largely the same experience on another console for free. Also, every single online game on the 360 should be handled via dedicated servers - it's a joke to pay for P2P gaming, a freaking joke.LoneCynic wrote:On the matter of cost for Xbox Live, that is somewhat a misconception. You pay for a Gold Membership to gain the ability to play games online and to get early access to certain discounts and early downloads. A Silver Membership is entirely free, and gives you access to all downloadable content and other online features, so it isn't entirely a definate additional cost unless you want to play games online, and not everyone does. Also, $50 for 13 months really isn't that much. That's less than $5 a month to play every game online. If you complain about that, then you're kinda being silly. Anyone can afford that if they can afford the console, controllers and games.
PSN; Bootaaay ---------------------------------------------------------------- XBL; B007444Y
-
noiseredux
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 38148
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:09 pm
- Contact:
Re: XBL vs. PSN
Again, it's all personal taste. But to me, I think the Wii is probably the best because I'd rather play tons of old games than a lot of the new ones coming out anyway. So the VC rules. As far as "paying for ROMS" goes, well that's a silly argument. I'd rather just pay the $5 or $8 and legally own something. I do have some roms admittedly, but they're generally rare games not available in any other way anymore (like Friday The 13th for NES, which I also own as a cartridge anyway). But if I had a Wii, and said game was made legally available to me, then yes. I would buy it.