Has PS+ eclipsed Xbox Live?

They're both great, but I see the Plus as more of a value, consumer-wise.

@Sagemode87: Hardware doesn't lie. There are a significant amount of people that cannot handle a competitor having something better than the console they purchased.

Giving free games adds value to the service, but it doesn't upgrade servers. Sony stated they were making upgrades, but didn't give a number, while Microsoft did 300k.

While I do my gaming on my PS4, I am not going to make shit up to feel better about my purchase.

They match each other in functionality. PS+ just has MUCH better value so hence it wins. XBLive is a joke in comparison.

This

PSN $50/yr with lots of good free games.

Xlive $60/yr with some way older games for free.

Each work well and about the same in every area with a couple things working slightly different on each.

They are on par with each other.

Speed is the same.

Both have the same features with some slight advantages to Xlive.

Xlive gives fewer and much older games for $60/yr

PSN gives more and newer games for $50/yr

When they're this close it's too close to declare a winner. Like last gen sales between 360 vs PS3 was too close to declare a winner.

I've had absolutely no lag on PSN ever and the only lag i've had in a game is Fifa and that was because they had a rubbish connection. HD chat??? Chat is Chat, and I use studio professional headphones and amp to play my games online, so audio is superb, and yes PSN maintenance is a bit of a pain, but I mean for $10 less than Xbox Live I get a free game for my ps4 I get a couple of games for my ps3 and I can get games for my ps vita which i haven't even bought yet, such good value, netflix is already there so i don't need to pay extra for it.

I was just having a joke with you, about the first bit when you said inb4 the fanboys lol

I just wanted to point out how much mumbo jumbo all these big companies say to try and get us to buy there stuff, I mean 300'000 servers they said and all this and yet still titanfall managed to get over run, it just shows servers don't mean that much and it was just babble talk

PS+....

1) Discounts on the PSN store.

2) 18 games instantly on your account.

3) 5 new games a month for multiple systems that are usually newer games.

4) Full game demos

5) Online game save backups.

6) Occasional and random 5 dollar PSN store credits and other bonsues for users.

7) 50 dollars a year.

8) Access to online games. But free to play games are free and don't require PS+

9) Friends lists, messaging, chat, Netflix, and other internet based stuff does not require subscription

XBLG......

1) 2 games a month that are older games.

2) You get an occasional tshirt or free pair of glasses for your XBL avatar.

3) Costs 60 dollars a year.

4) You have to buy XBLG even to play free to play online games.

Yeah PS+ blows away XBLG in every single aspect.

I know all the xbox fanboys are like "well at least I own my XBLG games and Im not renting them from sony". Well, you are renting them because they are digital games because there is no guarantee the service or your games will even be available 20 years from now, you don't actually own them. People who think you can own digital content are morons. Digital content is just a lease with a uncertain time period attached to them. Besides, that's a pretty weak argument to begin with and laughable at best if that is the best you can muster.

And no XBLG didn't dominate sony. Last gen PSN was free to everyone 100% and gave every thing that XBLG did (except cross game chat). Then you have the fact that you could do everything XBLG did and more on the PC for free. People were just stupid enough to think "I know I can do everything XBLG can do other places for free but Im paying a lot for it so it has to be better!" much like people who think their watch, purse, or jacket is better because they paid a ton of money for it. Its that dumb mentality people have where more money means better, like no matter how good a mechanic is no one would go to him if he charged 5 bucks an hour, they would assume he doesn't know shit and will instead go to one that charges 75 dollars an hour.

I like my 360 and all but Im not a fool and Id never pay Microsoft for a vastly inferior product. Come one, who the hell supports a company that wont even let you watch your Netflix account unless you pay them to let you? Or send even have a friends list?

I don't care about old free games or game rentals; I look at that stuff as just a bonus that has little appeal to me since I like owning my games on disc. The things I care about are online multiplayer functionality, innovation, and community; and for these things, Xbox Live is the best.

@Sagemode87: really?! Explain please.

The free games on PS+ are a big deal. But outside of those 2 words can answer your question. Hell No. PSN seems to be down a lot. Speeds are slow and all of the functions still aren't there. They gave done a good job since the PS3 days. But there is still plenty of room to grow. The free games are HUGE though. Thanks for that Sony.

Lmaoooooooooo

You guys are so biased...I really dont know why I even come on this site anymore,

If you guys knew anything about how the real world works, how techonology/online services work, you would know Xbox Live is ahead of PSN when it comes to online gaming

Lmaooo, cmon guys stop being biased, sony isnt paying your bills..

Let's see if PSN takes a nosedive after Infamous releases like Live did with TFs. Loving all this big talk about superior functionality when the console that was almost always-online would have been bricked for a day or two because of one game release.

why would a single player game cause PSN to take a nosedive?

It makes more sense for a multiplayer focused game to stress an online service, although the XBL issues were not due to titanfall

That was actually my point. It was the login servers that took a shit because it couldn't handle the volume of worldwide traffic. I can only assume it was the number of users authenticating. People love to wave around that Live banner like it's the magical make everything better rod of +1 internets, but the reality is that it's probably about par for the course. If PSN becomes a CF to log into when Infamous drops, I'll gladly claim my ownage, though.

I'd be really nice if someone would actually outline the major differences, because both services seem kind of weak. Sony's implementation strikes me as more appealing, since it provides you with tangible value in return at least.

They've both copied each other in all the important areas- free games, cloud saving, cross game chat, trophies- there's not much in it anymore. I'd say PS+ does give out more/better games.

I will put it this way: I am happy to pay for PS+; I was not happy when I used to pay for Live Gold on the 360.

Even if it was not required for multiplayer on PS4, I would have paid for PS+. I still don't understand how they are profitable with this model, but hey, not my problem I suppose.

Only problem now is if Sony rest on their laurels now that it is a requirement for multiplayer, they might become lazy on their value proposition like Microsoft did (90% of the shit they offer on Gold was worthless, I just wanted to play online)