PSN vs. XBL. XBL gold is a RIP

I used to love PS3, but then I started checking out Gears of War and the hype around Halo 3 beta was so big I just had to get XBOX 360, so I got the XBOX 360 ELITE and Gears of War. I always new Microsoft charged, but I thought it would blow me away, but it doesn't.

- Online gameplay has less lag on the PS3. I even heard that XBL doesn't have dedicated servers! Developers host the servers EXACTLY like they do on PSN, so what's the point?

- Messaging is free even with XBL silver

- XBL doesn't even have something like Playstation Home(which is free).

- The marketplace is freaking sweet. There's soooo much stuff, but it's even available to silver members

- I was watching GAMETRAILERS XBL vs. PSN and PSN representative said in-game messaging, music, cross game invites are all coming for free

- In the same Gametrailers XBL guy was there and he said they would never allow mods on XBL which is why developers want to make games on PS3 first like Haze and UT3. Developers want you to be able to build your own level then let others download it, but XBL doesnt allow that.

- I though Microsoft was just dumb when ShadowRun was $60 and only multiplayer. Warhawk will be $60 multiplayer only, but it ships with a free bluetooth wireless headset, which costs $60 for XBOX 360. Warhawk will also be downloadable online for $20(1UP said). I dont understand why Microsoft cant allow larger games on XBLM because the hard drive is so huge larger than PS3s and still the games are all like 40mb.

SO the bottom line is that XBL Silver is amazing, but XBL gold IMO isnt worth the $50 a year Microsoft charges. I love how you can listen to music in games and talk to your friends, but playing online is a ripoff compared to the competitors. Any idea why Microsoft is still charging for XBL? There are so many add ons for games, movies, tv shows you can buy meaning Microsoft is probably cashing in and have enough to run the service without charging.

If silver is great and gold sucks then just stay with silver ;).

If I recall correctly, you get a free Live headset with the Premium and Elite packages..

Your facts are... off. Check them again.musicalmac

His facts are way off and he is level 1, first post. Alt account? Weak, can't believe I helped to keep this one alive.

considering there are literally 5 times more downloads on live. movies(austin powers is free for 2 weeks :D), tv shows, demos, trailers, xbox live arcade is ingenious wii may have only throwback games, but the 360 has its own originals (band of bugs aka bugs of war, assault heroes,etc) plus throwbacks like castlevania:Sotn, contra, PoP etc

We have one of the most expensive hobbies and we complain about 50 bucks a year!

PSN Home DOESN'T FREAKING EXIST YET!!!! People, please stop using PSN home when comparing XBox Live to PSN.

edit: typo FTL

Me to the rescue.

http://editorials.teamxbox.com/xbox/1967/AN-INCONVENIENT-TRUTH/p1

Stop the flaming, gentlemen. Recognize the inconvenient truth.

"Paying for peer to peer online gameplay is a scam."

We have one of the most expensive hobbies and we complain about 50 bucks a year!

LEGEND_C4A

I believe your console set the precedent for $60 games. It's still $50 for the PC. And we get mods. Explain to me why PC gamers get greater value for their games than you do.

If you spend $400 and get a less than satisfactory experience, RAISE HELL. Do it. Otherwise, nothing will change.

BUT I SPENT $400! WHY DO I HAVE TO BE UPSET ABOUT FIFTY DOLLARS A YEAR?

Because it's a ripoff. Are you new to this concept? Shoot yourself in the foot much?

Me to the rescue.

http://editorials.teamxbox.com/xbox/1967/AN-INCONVENIENT-TRUTH/p1

Stop the flaming, gentlemen. Recognize the inconvenient truth.

"Paying for peer to peer online gameplay is a scam."

Redfingers

50 bucks for p2p live gold is a rip but if you want to game online you have no choice. Silver is free and lets you do everything but game online so gold is over priced for sure.

Actually they are working on UT3 for 360 before PS3. At least thats what I reda in OXM.NFJSupreme

Wrong. What you read in OXM is that the Xbox 360 is dictating the game's level of graphical detail. This means that it is what's called "the lowest common denominator." All the other platforms are capable of what the 360 is capable of, so the 360 comes first, since it is the most basic platform.

And I actually read that the Playstation 3 will be released first because PSN supports user-created content whereas Xbox Live does not.

get banned much?ParadiddleFill

[QUOTE="NFJSupreme"]Actually they are working on UT3 for 360 before PS3. At least thats what I reda in OXM.Redfingers

Wrong. What you read in OXM is that the Xbox 360 is dictating the game's level of graphical detail. This means that it is what's called "the lowest common denominator." All the other platforms are capable of what the 360 is capable of, so the 360 comes first, since it is the most basic platform.

And I actually read that the Playstation 3 will be released first because PSN supports user-created content whereas Xbox Live does not.

Didn't Sony say something about PSN not always being free?-The-G-Man-

This is what the guy said. "We're very comfortable with this business model and so are our consumers."

I.E, they're not closing any doors, by shutting themselves out of any future maneuverability, but as long as it is mutually beneficial and agreed upon, if they consider it a selling point that PSN is free, it will stay that way.

Home will be a MAJOR source of ad revenue. I expect it to stay free at least for the next 3-4 years, and it's very possible it could always be free. Advertisers are going crazy about Home. Money central, they should call it.

[QUOTE="-The-G-Man-"]Didn't Sony say something about PSN not always being free?Redfingers

This is what the guy said. "We're very comfortable with this business model and so are our consumers."

I.E, they're not closing any doors, by shutting themselves out of any future maneuverability, but as long as it is mutually beneficial and agreed upon, if they consider it a selling point that PSN is free, it will stay that way.

Home will be a MAJOR source of ad revenue. I expect it to stay free at least for the next 3-4 years, and it's very possible it could always be free. Advertisers are going crazy about Home. Money central, they should call it.

Alright. I heard it mentioned somewhere, but I didn't exactly know the whole story behind it.

[QUOTE="Redfingers"]

[QUOTE="NFJSupreme"]Actually they are working on UT3 for 360 before PS3. At least thats what I reda in OXM.akuma303x

Wrong. What you read in OXM is that the Xbox 360 is dictating the game's level of graphical detail. This means that it is what's called "the lowest common denominator." All the other platforms are capable of what the 360 is capable of, so the 360 comes first, since it is the most basic platform.

And I actually read that the Playstation 3 will be released first because PSN supports user-created content whereas Xbox Live does not.

They said they actually are using the 360 to "dictate the level of detail" because they are using it to dictate the lowest common denominator. They also said this is okay, because they have to make compromises for performance on lower-end PC scaleability. That screams lowest-common-denominator to me.

Plus, are you possibly trying to imply to me that Xbox 360 outperforms PC at the Unreal 3 Engine? Because, if you are, you don't know jack, mate.

The Playstation 3 may have fewer shaders than the Xbox 360, but since they are dedicated for specific operations, they can actually do more shader ops per second than the unified shaders in the Xbox 360. The Xbox 360 is theoretically more flexible, while the Playstation 3 can actually do more grunt work in specific areas when speaking specifically of the GPU.

And, if you'd read any of the literature on the Cell's capabilities in graphics rendering, you wouldn't claim ownage on the "PC type CPU," if anything, you'd know it is detrimental in face of the CPU-GPU hybrid that is the Cell.

How much did your pc cost? I'll take 10 dollar extra games for the difference between whatever the number is and 400. And why is 50 dollars a year a ripoff? If it's worth it to me, then it's not a ripoff. end of argument.whoisryanmack

My processor cost me $40. I spent maybe $100 on my 2GB of DDR2 RAM, and $225 on a 7800 GS AGP about a year ago. My father went out one day and bought a processor, a CPU fan, a hard drive, and a motherboard for a little over $100.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2686

And, as you can see, you can get a 7800 GS for $160 on Amazon.

I never undestand why people dont goto the store and get the retail yearly gold with a headset and xbla games packed in for 49.99 or cheaper on ebay.7thSIN

Because if everyone did that, it wouldn't be cheaper than $50. It would be more expensive.

[QUOTE="akuma303x"][QUOTE="Redfingers"]

[QUOTE="NFJSupreme"]Actually they are working on UT3 for 360 before PS3. At least thats what I reda in OXM.Redfingers

Wrong. What you read in OXM is that the Xbox 360 is dictating the game's level of graphical detail. This means that it is what's called "the lowest common denominator." All the other platforms are capable of what the 360 is capable of, so the 360 comes first, since it is the most basic platform.

And I actually read that the Playstation 3 will be released first because PSN supports user-created content whereas Xbox Live does not.

They said they actually are using the 360 to "dictate the level of detail" because they are using it to dictate the lowest common denominator. They also said this is okay, because they have to make compromises for performance on lower-end PC scaleability. That screams lowest-common-denominator to me.

Plus, are you possibly trying to imply to me that Xbox 360 outperforms PC at the Unreal 3 Engine? Because, if you are, you don't know jack, mate.

The Playstation 3 may have fewer shaders than the Xbox 360, but since they are dedicated for specific operations, they can actually do more shader ops per second than the unified shaders in the Xbox 360. The Xbox 360 is theoretically more flexible, while the Playstation 3 can actually do more grunt work in specific areas when speaking specifically of the GPU.

And, if you'd read any of the literature on the Cell's capabilities in graphics rendering, you wouldn't claim ownage on the "PC type CPU," if anything, you'd know it is detrimental in face of the CPU-GPU hybrid that is the Cell.

I never undestand why people dont goto the store and get the retail yearly gold with a headset and xbla games packed in for 49.99 or cheaper on ebay.7thSIN

[QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="akuma303x"][QUOTE="Redfingers"]

[QUOTE="NFJSupreme"]Actually they are working on UT3 for 360 before PS3. At least thats what I reda in OXM.akuma303x

Wrong. What you read in OXM is that the Xbox 360 is dictating the game's level of graphical detail. This means that it is what's called "the lowest common denominator." All the other platforms are capable of what the 360 is capable of, so the 360 comes first, since it is the most basic platform.

And I actually read that the Playstation 3 will be released first because PSN supports user-created content whereas Xbox Live does not.

They said they actually are using the 360 to "dictate the level of detail" because they are using it to dictate the lowest common denominator. They also said this is okay, because they have to make compromises for performance on lower-end PC scaleability. That screams lowest-common-denominator to me.

Plus, are you possibly trying to imply to me that Xbox 360 outperforms PC at the Unreal 3 Engine? Because, if you are, you don't know jack, mate.

The Playstation 3 may have fewer shaders than the Xbox 360, but since they are dedicated for specific operations, they can actually do more shader ops per second than the unified shaders in the Xbox 360. The Xbox 360 is theoretically more flexible, while the Playstation 3 can actually do more grunt work in specific areas when speaking specifically of the GPU.

And, if you'd read any of the literature on the Cell's capabilities in graphics rendering, you wouldn't claim ownage on the "PC type CPU," if anything, you'd know it is detrimental in face of the CPU-GPU hybrid that is the Cell.

Just because it doesn't say lowest common denominator doesn't mean it isn't implied. And my point was, it is very implied.

I also explained to you very clearly why the GPU on the PS3 really isn't substantively "weaker" than the Xbox 360, they're just different. I also explained why that's basically a null point anyway, because the Playstation 3 has the Cell, which is proven to not only aid in current graphics rendering techniques, but it has a substantial amount of potential specifically in rendering GPU-optimized code and in fact, rendering graphics entirely on its own at a level equivalent to or far surpassing modern specialized GPUs.

I can easily explain why multi plats run smoother on the Xbox 360. The reason is like Julian Eggebrecht explained. The Xbox 360 has architechtural dissimilarities to the Playstation 3, which cause issues when porting from the Xbox 360 to the Playstation 3, because the engine or software will require specific utilization of hardware that doesn't exist. These pieces of hardware are the eDRAM framebuffer, the unified shaders, and the unified memory. These are "advantages and disadvantages," according to Eggebrecht, and the problem essentially disappears when you use the PS3 as the lead platform, which he strongly recommends developers begin doing.

Burnout Paradise, Haze, and Dark Sector all use the Playstation 3 as the lead platform. This issue clearly will not be apparent in these games.

Also, if I may lead you over to Eurogamer's graphics comparison: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=74502

They make it very clear that the games that are not equivalent on the PS3 to the Xbox 360 are superior in this comparison. The games that are superior include: Fight Night Round 3, Virtua Tennis 3, Ridge Racer, and Need for Speed. In the Gamespot comparison 2 it is clear that Armored Core 4 and Oblivion are superior on the Playstation 3.

I can get you a whole bunch of developer comments saying the Playstation 3 is the best platform/has a lot of potential/is powerful. I can get you a whole bunch of Julian Eggebrecht comments (Factor Five, Lair, third party developer) saying specific things that they are doing in Lair that, according to him, cannot be done on any other platform.

There. I just explained that "so many" is ultimately subjective, many actually DON'T run better on the 360, and the Playstation 3 is, in all likelyhood, the superior platform. I also resolved the multi-plats that DO run better on the 360 with the current porting issues as explained by Julian Eggebrecht.

Additionally, it is absolutely impossible for the Xbox 360 to be able to run Unreal 3.0 Engine as well as the highest-end PC on the market. There is no possible way. They simply mean that it is able to run the game at the level of graphical intensity they've deemed the Xbox 360 capable of. Seeing as the Xbox 360 is dictating the level of graphical intensity, it makes sense that it'd be capable of running it.

This particular interviewee is only attempting to assure PC owners that the Xbox 360 is not "crippling" PC development. He is not singing the praises of the Xbox 360.

Additionally, the PC version of the game is being ported to the consoles...that, or the PC version is being ported to the Playstation 3, which is then being ported to the Xbox 360. The Playstation 3 version of the game was shown before the Xbox 360 version of the game was even announced, and Mark Rein clearly states that the porting of the game from the PC to the Playstation 3 was "easy" because of the shared Open GL API. This means that the Xbox 360 is not the lead platform. It just dictates the level of detail, according to the guy you quoted from Epic in OXM.

[QUOTE="7thSIN"]I never undestand why people dont goto the store and get the retail yearly gold with a headset and xbla games packed in for 49.99 or cheaper on ebay.akuma303x

The package is for Core users, presumably. The Core does not come with the online set, among other things.

http://gametomorrow.com/blog/index.php/2005/11/30/gpus-vs-cell/

"Recently I came across a link on www.gpgpu.org that I found interesting. It described a method of ray-tracing quaternion Julia fractals using the floating point power in graphics processing units (GPUs). The author of the GPU code , Keenan Crane, stated that "This kind of algorithm is pretty much ideal for the GPU - extremely high arithmetic intensity and almost zero bandwidth usage". I thought it would be interesting to port this Nvidia CG code to the Cell processor, using the public SDK, and see how it performs given that it was ideal for a GPU. First we directly translated the CG code line for line to C + SPE intrinsics. All the CG code structures and data types were maintained. Then we wrote a CG framework to execute this shader for Cell that included a backend image compression and network delivery layer for the finished images. To our surprise, well not really, we found that using only 7 SPEs for rendering a 3.2 GHz Cell chip could out run an Nvidia 7800 GT OC card at this task by about 30%. We reserved one SPE for the image compression and delivery task. Furthermore the way CG structures it SIMD computation is inefficient as it causes large percentages of the code to execute in scalar mode. This is due to the way they structure their vector data, AOS vs SOA. By converting this CG shader from AOS to SOA form, SIMD utilization was much higher which resulted in Cell out performing the Nvidia 7800 by a factor of 5 - 6x using only 7 SPEs for rendering. Given that the Nvidia 7800 GT is listed as having 313 GFLOPs of computational power and seven 3.2 GHz SPEs only have 179.2 GFLOPs this seems impossible but then again maybe we should start reading more white papers and less marketing hype."

According to this article the Cell outperforms the 7800 GT OC (which is a dedicated GPU) at GPU optimized code by a margin of 30%. When this code is optimized around the Cell, this increases to a factor of 5.

I used to love PS3, but then I started checking out Gears of War and the hype around Halo 3 beta was so big I just had to get XBOX 360, so I got the XBOX 360 ELITE and Gears of War. I always new Microsoft charged, but I thought it would blow me away, but it doesn't.

- Online gameplay has less lag on the PS3. I even heard that XBL doesn't have dedicated servers! Developers host the servers EXACTLY like they do on PSN, so what's the point?

There are very few online games on the PS3 (with far less players online) to make the judgement that PS3 has less lag. Some games on XBL allow other players to host dedicated servers. This dates all the way back to the Xbox era (Castle Wolfenstein anyone??).

- Messaging is free even with XBL silver

- XBL doesn't even have something like Playstation Home(which is free).

It doesn't need anything like Home and neither does the PSN. This feature caters to the select few who would rather socialize with other gamers than actually play games. Its not out and we don't know how it performs. Lets stick to the present instead of speculating about the future.

- The marketplace is freaking sweet. There's soooo much stuff, but it's even available to silver members

New games demos are available to XBL gold members first and silver members a week later or something......

Keep in mind that the PS3 barely receives demos. RS6: Vegas had two demos on XBL (before the game came out) and not even one demo on PS3.

- I was watching GAMETRAILERS XBL vs. PSN and PSN representative said in-game messaging, music, cross game invites are all coming for free

When it arrives, we'll see. We know nothing of how it will function. Again, speculation......

- In the same Gametrailers XBL guy was there and he said they would never allow mods on XBL which is why developers want to make games on PS3 first like Haze and UT3. Developers want you to be able to build your own level then let others download it, but XBL doesnt allow that.

Biggest problem with online games is cheating and the Mods could contribute to that (e.g. Halo 2). I want a cheat free environment (or as close as I can get to it). What the above statement tells me that there could be more online cheating in PS3 games.

- I though Microsoft was just dumb when ShadowRun was $60 and only multiplayer. Warhawk will be $60 multiplayer only, but it ships with a free bluetooth wireless headset, which costs $60 for XBOX 360. Warhawk will also be downloadable online for $20(1UP said). I dont understand why Microsoft cant allow larger games on XBLM because the hard drive is so huge larger than PS3s and still the games are all like 40mb.

Again, you are speculating based on hearsay that Warhawk is $20 online. Until the game is out, theres no point in discussing it as fact. Oh yeah, the price for shadowrun is a huge rip off. I agree.

SO the bottom line is that XBL Silver is amazing, but XBL gold IMO isnt worth the $50 a year Microsoft charges. I love how you can listen to music in games and talk to your friends, but playing online is a ripoff compared to the competitors. Any idea why Microsoft is still charging for XBL? There are so many add ons for games, movies, tv shows you can buy meaning Microsoft is probably cashing in and have enough to run the service without charging.

Here's where it gets a bit tricky. Everybody wants to play online and everybody wants to do it for free. The question is "what are the alternatives"??? The Wii............. nope. The PS3.............. not even close (unless they can match the XBLexperience and have a killer online app). ONly choice is PC or X360 for a better than average online experience. Hence many people pay for live .................. those that like to play online games atleast.

own4g343V3R

Wrong. Home is currently in Beta form. Read PSU, they've got previews up already.

What new features may or may not come IS speculating, but commenting on things we KNOW to be true, such as Home's feature set, is completely reasonable. Yes, it's an assessment based on the future, but unless we're wearing blinders or something, I think that's okay.

Additionally, we know that PSN is the only service that is going to distribute a full game via download. We also know that PSN has better user-created content support according to the XBL rep's comments on Gamehead and Geoff Keighley's interview comments, along with stuff like Little Big Planet.

We also know that all PSN games (that support online) have dedicated servers and that some (most?) XBL games have P2P (Gears of War...this gets complained about all the time. Host advantage, bullet lag).

The Warhawk price "speculation" is reasonable because we know the price of the boxed version. The boxed version retails for $60, and comes coupled with some trailers and a $40 headset. We know that Warhawk will be delivered at a reduced price via PSN, expect the range of $20-30.

Additionally, XBL is a little rough around the edges. You cannot deny that the $50 subscription fee is not a factor. The feature set is different, but the question is, are cross game invites, some additional infrastructure, and some content upgrades worth $50 when Sony promises to bring the exact same features and then some to PSN?

And, let's see. Would we like a cheat-free environment or a mod-free environment. How about both? PSN suspends and presumably actively checks for cheaters, the console itself is unhackable, and provides better user-created content support all around.

The XBL excuse "we need to verify user-created content through our mods/licensing process" is just a roadblock more than anything. I've played maybe ten+ mods for HL2 on PC and despite a few issues in getting them to register with Steam, they couldn't be better. Considering the depth of the expansions, I can't understand how you CAN't consider losing out on user-created content a compromise. Especially considering all Steam games have Valve Anti-cheat or punk buster or some such. We have no indication that mods make for cheat-heavy or exploit-heavy environments.

Plus, you forget. Mods=free. Xfire=free. Steam=free. PSN=free. XBL? Pony up, but don't expect dedicated servers or user-created content.

Wrong. Home is currently in Beta form. Read PSU, they've got previews up already.

What new features may or may not come IS speculating, but commenting on things we KNOW to be true, such as Home's feature set, is completely reasonable. Yes, it's an assessment based on the future, but unless we're wearing blinders or something, I think that's okay.

Great but I don't judge games based on half assed previews. You might be more tolerant or perhaps too hopeful..... whatever floats your boat. The only real assessment that was made is that its free to use (to some extent).

Additionally, we know that PSN is the only service that is going to distribute a full game via download. We also know that PSN has better user-created content support according to the XBL rep's comments on Gamehead and Geoff Keighley's interview comments, along with stuff like Little Big Planet.

So wait, distributing a full game via download is a good thing............................... sorry but I want the my games to have some resale value. Downloadable games = no resale value (although MS will probably try to pull some distribution stunt).

Again, we are speculating based on what was shown (which may or may not change) and the game isn't out. More importantly, games made with the intention of mods with very little competitive online play are fine. Its the other ones that Mods will create problems for.

We also know that all PSN games (that support online) have dedicated servers and that some (most?) XBL games have P2P (Gears of War...this gets complained about all the time. Host advantage, bullet lag).

Hey, I'm all for dedicated servers if I can get a seamless experience for all games. Unfortunately, thats not true. Go play Resistance and Motorstorm then come back. I want MS to allow users to host dedicated servers in all games ...........

The Warhawk price "speculation" is reasonable because we know the price of the boxed version. The boxed version retails for $60, and comes coupled with some trailers and a $40 headset. We know that Warhawk will be delivered at a reduced price via PSN, expect the range of $20-30.

I hope you are right about the boxed version but I would rather skip the headset and get my own. Still, if they only allowed the game to be downloadable, I won't be bothering with it.

Additionally, XBL is a little rough around the edges. You cannot deny that the $50 subscription fee is not a factor. The feature set is different, but the question is, are cross game invites, some additional infrastructure, and some content upgrades worth $50 when Sony promises to bring the exact same features and then some to PSN?

The answer is a RESOUNDING YES (given the alternatives). And its not just a little bit of this and a little bit of that but rather the whole damn experience. For you perhaps not but I'm a seasoned online gamer and want the best experience. Also, I paid $30 over ebay for the full year. If you don't pay regularly, then just pay for the month you wish to play................ $5.

And, let's see. Would we like a cheat-free environment or a mod-free environment. How about both? PSN suspends and presumably actively checks for cheaters, the console itself is unhackable, and provides better user-created content support all around.

PSN does diddly squat. They didn't do anything last gen and they do very little now. Console itself is unhackable........................ last time I checked.... nothing was unhackable. Give it a rest....... or believe whatever Sony tells you. Others are far smarter. They did fix the motorstorm glitch but the game is unpopular with very few online that modding isn't an issue. When you get something as popular as Halo 2, we'll talk. User created content support???? What have the users created so far????I do know gamers have created tons of maps on games likes Far Cry for Xbox live and some work well others don't. Don't know anything for the PS3 like that???

The XBL excuse "we need to verify user-created content through our mods/licensing process" is just a roadblock more than anything. I've played maybe ten+ mods for HL2 on PC and despite a few issues in getting them to register with Steam, they couldn't be better. Considering the depth of the expansions, I can't understand how you CAN't consider losing out on user-created content a compromise. Especially considering all Steam games have Valve Anti-cheat or punk buster or some such. We have no indication that mods make for cheat-heavy or exploit-heavy environments.

Halo 2 was heavily moded and created a whirlwind of disaster for all online gamers. Thats your best example. Modded maps, modded weapons, modded characteristics etc. Also, in my experience most mods suck. If you want Mods, stick with your PC.

Plus, you forget. Mods=free. Xfire=free. Steam=free. PSN=free. XBL? Pony up, but don't expect dedicated servers or user-created content.

User created content free (e.g. Far Cry for X360)............PSN = free (better be based on what they are giving me).

Redfingers

RaveRabbid, user created content on X360? lol! Come one man, that's a joke. A simple map is nothing to brag about. The 360 lacks any user created content and fails big time in that department, so does every console due to their limitations. Mods are excellent on the PC, there's just so many of them, you need to search for the good ones. Source mods are a great start. mismajor99

So maps aren't user created content........................... give it a rest kid. So far there has been more user created content (and uploaded to servers)on xbox live than PS3.

I used to love PS3, but then I started checking out Gears of War and the hype around Halo 3 beta was so big I just had to get XBOX 360, so I got the XBOX 360 ELITE and Gears of War. I always new Microsoft charged, but I thought it would blow me away, but it doesn't.

- Online gameplay has less lag on the PS3. I even heard that XBL doesn't have dedicated servers! Developers host the servers EXACTLY like they do on PSN, so what's the point?

- Messaging is free even with XBL silver

- XBL doesn't even have something like Playstation Home(which is free).

- The marketplace is freaking sweet. There's soooo much stuff, but it's even available to silver members

- I was watching GAMETRAILERS XBL vs. PSN and PSN representative said in-game messaging, music, cross game invites are all coming for free

- In the same Gametrailers XBL guy was there and he said they would never allow mods on XBL which is why developers want to make games on PS3 first like Haze and UT3. Developers want you to be able to build your own level then let others download it, but XBL doesnt allow that.

- I though Microsoft was just dumb when ShadowRun was $60 and only multiplayer. Warhawk will be $60 multiplayer only, but it ships with a free bluetooth wireless headset, which costs $60 for XBOX 360. Warhawk will also be downloadable online for $20(1UP said). I dont understand why Microsoft cant allow larger games on XBLM because the hard drive is so huge larger than PS3s and still the games are all like 40mb.

SO the bottom line is that XBL Silver is amazing, but XBL gold IMO isnt worth the $50 a year Microsoft charges. I love how you can listen to music in games and talk to your friends, but playing online is a ripoff compared to the competitors. Any idea why Microsoft is still charging for XBL? There are so many add ons for games, movies, tv shows you can buy meaning Microsoft is probably cashing in and have enough to run the service without charging.

own4g343V3R

Everything you have just said did not come from your own accounts, but an interview that you saw which comapred the PSN and Gold, you really need to get a life.

XBL > PSN always.

[QUOTE="mismajor99"]
RaveRabbid, user created content on X360? lol! Come one man, that's a joke. A simple map is nothing to brag about. The 360 lacks any user created content and fails big time in that department, so does every console due to their limitations. Mods are excellent on the PC, there's just so many of them, you need to search for the good ones. Source mods are a great start. RaveRabbid

So maps aren't user created content........................... give it a rest kid. So far there has been more user created content (and uploaded to servers)on xbox live than PS3.

I'm not a sony fanboy, so give it a rest kid :P

[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]How much did your pc cost? I'll take 10 dollar extra games for the difference between whatever the number is and 400. And why is 50 dollars a year a ripoff? If it's worth it to me, then it's not a ripoff. end of argument.Redfingers

My processor cost me $40. I spent maybe $100 on my 2GB of DDR2 RAM, and $225 on a 7800 GS AGP about a year ago. My father went out one day and bought a processor, a CPU fan, a hard drive, and a motherboard for a little over $100.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2686

And, as you can see, you can get a 7800 GS for $160 on Amazon.

Hey I'll tell you this much anyone knowing anything about computers the ram, and the processor are the most expenisve things. If you mean to tell me that you got a high-end processor for $40 you are a lieing sack of poo. High intels are expensive, and even amd though they are cheaper are no $40. Also if you got 2 gigs of ram for that price you might got them from a yard sale. I built my pc a lot cheaper then you could buy it at stores but it still wasnt cheaper than a console.

[QUOTE="7thSIN"]I never undestand why people dont goto the store and get the retail yearly gold with a headset and xbla games packed in for 49.99 or cheaper on ebay.akuma303x

Because you get more for your money by just getting off your fat @ss?

[QUOTE="LEGEND_C4A"]

We have one of the most expensive hobbies and we complain about 50 bucks a year!

Redfingers

I believe your console set the precedent for $60 games. It's still $50 for the PC. And we get mods. Explain to me why PC gamers get greater value for their games than you do.

If you spend $400 and get a less than satisfactory experience, RAISE HELL. Do it. Otherwise, nothing will change.

BUT I SPENT $400! WHY DO I HAVE TO BE UPSET ABOUT FIFTY DOLLARS A YEAR?

Because it's a ripoff. Are you new to this concept? Shoot yourself in the foot much?

First off, my 360 happens to be my favorite system of all time, am I saying that cause its the best, NO, but I'm saying it because I'm enjoying it more than any other system I have ever had, being able to play 360 games with my best friends and we all have the same systems and playing on the same leveled playing field is unmatched for me, I'm not asking you to agree but thats how it is for me. unlike PC gaming where each one of us has a different system, 2 or 3 have headsets and the others don't, so we can't speak to each other when we play games, its nice to have mods on the PC, but when everyone doesnt have the same mod or the right version this and that becomes a pain. I love pc gaming but I got tired of it and all the upgrading and sometimes having to lower options just so a game runs well.

regardless if the games are 60 or 50 all I say is that Iwon't complain, this is the nature of the business now and we will end up spending more money as time goes on. Can I complain? sure I can, canI cry about 50 bucks a year for live? of course I can, but I won't. the service has been amazing for me so its worth it to me, regardless if its free for sony and free for PC, I already have 30 games on disks and over 30 games on live arcade, that is an insane amount of money right there, but I'm enjoying it to death, so no 50 bucks in the end of the year is not a problem, I don't miss it. like I said before this is an expensive hobby we have, whether its 50 bucks a game or 60.

If I'm enjoying my 360 gaming just as much as you enjoy your PC gaming, how am I shooting myself in the foot? to each his own, but in the end to cry over 50 bucks a year is still a silly thing for me.

we can agree to disagree, but guess what....Will we both not enjoy this year in gaming? YES so lets game on.

Didn't Sony say something about PSN not always being free?-The-G-Man-

Sony is not stupid! they make stupid mistakes, but they will and are learning. if money can be made by charging they will, even if its just one dollar a month, they will not miss this money train, but if I was them, I wouldnt ever admit it, cause they need to at least equal or surpassthe 360 in sales and then BAM! start charging, what are people going to do? return the system back? why? where are they gonna go? to microsoft if they are charging as well.

[QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="akuma303x"][QUOTE="Redfingers"]

[QUOTE="NFJSupreme"]Actually they are working on UT3 for 360 before PS3. At least thats what I reda in OXM.akuma303x

Wrong. What you read in OXM is that the Xbox 360 is dictating the game's level of graphical detail. This means that it is what's called "the lowest common denominator." All the other platforms are capable of what the 360 is capable of, so the 360 comes first, since it is the most basic platform.

And I actually read that the Playstation 3 will be released first because PSN supports user-created content whereas Xbox Live does not.

They said they actually are using the 360 to "dictate the level of detail" because they are using it to dictate the lowest common denominator. They also said this is okay, because they have to make compromises for performance on lower-end PC scaleability. That screams lowest-common-denominator to me.

Plus, are you possibly trying to imply to me that Xbox 360 outperforms PC at the Unreal 3 Engine? Because, if you are, you don't know jack, mate.

The Playstation 3 may have fewer shaders than the Xbox 360, but since they are dedicated for specific operations, they can actually do more shader ops per second than the unified shaders in the Xbox 360. The Xbox 360 is theoretically more flexible, while the Playstation 3 can actually do more grunt work in specific areas when speaking specifically of the GPU.

And, if you'd read any of the literature on the Cell's capabilities in graphics rendering, you wouldn't claim ownage on the "PC type CPU," if anything, you'd know it is detrimental in face of the CPU-GPU hybrid that is the Cell.

guys, play nice!