Paying for P2P services is a joke. Its only done because M$ know they can get away with it. Id be more happy to pay for Live if there were dedicated servers but there are less than PS3 which is a joke as I dont think the other benefits outweigh the subscription fees! Maybe a one off joining fee would be more acceptable.
XBL Silver offers Free Online Play
- Thread starter lee87
- Start date
It has been said many times is that they will not charge for PSN, using Qore as a reason why they have seems a bit strange and totally unrelated TBH. Qore is optional, its a magazine with a few demos and other stuff that you can get free later, no different from going to a shop and buying a computer mag with an exclusive demo on it. Its just like any other content on PSN or XBLA, for example the socom beta many got qore for will be available earlier if you preorder the game or fulfill other requirements much like the Resitance 2 one with the next edition.
What is the point?
Whilst is could have been worded less inflamatory, a common complaint I keep hearing is that people don't talk enough on PSN. Not including a head set vs. including a head set in all but the budget bundle, doesn't.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 23,162
- Location
- stat city
Abooie is spot on. Microsoft knew online is the future while sony didn't even know what online was. The reason why sony are now playing catch up. I still think paying for XBL is a rip off though.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 14,081
- Location
- Between Realities
If he didn't pay for it, He wouldnt get to play online games on it. 
For me the free PSN service far outweighs what LIVE offers in addition, because I don't game online a huge amount, so it isn't a simple case of what's better but more a case of what suits my needs.
For instance when I had my 360 I opted to pay the £5 a month when I needed the service but found it was virtually impossible to cancel and restart the service as I wanted so ended up paying £60 for the year and I can only remember playing 3 games online (PGR3, GOW, GRAW). PGR3 was awfull with american kids swearing all the time, and GRAW often had connection/voice com issues. GOW was excellent but tbh the CO-OP was the only thing worth playing as the multiplayer aspect of the game was a joke (4 vs 4).
And this leads me onto the biggest issue with LIVE and that is P2P. How anyone who has played online on their PC can honestly say they don't mind paying when some games host such small numbers is unbelievable. I mean GOW2 is now upping the numbers from 8 to 10 which is shamefull for such a popular game
Microsoft should be ashamed of the service they offer at a premium, even if they did supply everyone with a 50p headset.
PSN has plenty of faults also but for free you can't complain.
For instance when I had my 360 I opted to pay the £5 a month when I needed the service but found it was virtually impossible to cancel and restart the service as I wanted so ended up paying £60 for the year and I can only remember playing 3 games online (PGR3, GOW, GRAW). PGR3 was awfull with american kids swearing all the time, and GRAW often had connection/voice com issues. GOW was excellent but tbh the CO-OP was the only thing worth playing as the multiplayer aspect of the game was a joke (4 vs 4).
And this leads me onto the biggest issue with LIVE and that is P2P. How anyone who has played online on their PC can honestly say they don't mind paying when some games host such small numbers is unbelievable. I mean GOW2 is now upping the numbers from 8 to 10 which is shamefull for such a popular game
Microsoft should be ashamed of the service they offer at a premium, even if they did supply everyone with a 50p headset.
PSN has plenty of faults also but for free you can't complain.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,720
- Location
- Surrey
the multiplayer aspect of the game was a joke (4 vs 4).
And this leads me onto the biggest issue with LIVE and that is P2P. How anyone who has played online on their PC can honestly say they don't mind paying when some games host such small numbers is unbelievable. I mean GOW2 is now upping the numbers from 8 to 10 which is shamefull for such a popular game
Ah yes the bigger is better crew, you certainly sound like a PC gamer.
Are any of those games good?
Found this posted elsewhere
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/53886
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/53886
(moved the update to the bottom to make it a bit clearer)
If he didn't pay for it, He wouldnt get to play online games on it.
since his 360 does not work then thats not a problem
why do you need to challenge me all the time please grow up
plus he has never played a 360 game on his account yet nevermind online lol
Last edited:
No not really but it's nice to have the option of being able to play in larger teams and then have the game scale it down if others would prefer smaller teams.
Also it gives better options for clans, or if you have a large group of friends that play the same game.
I would have thought anyone who has played online on a PC can see how inferior going from multiple sized servers to being restricted to 4 vs 4 or 5 vs 5is?
Exactly, why would they not charge for it when their customer base go around internet forum saying how it's worth every penny?
It must be great to go around robbing people and have them actively defend your actions.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,720
- Location
- Surrey
Yeah I agree, I find anything over 8 v 8 just descends into chaos.