Strange PSN theory?

[NeedAUserName]

I can't be certain, but if we were to put a survey out saying "Is the Xbox live community 90% good 10% bad, or visa versa?" I think I would put my money on the majority saying visa versa.

You are completely entitled to your opinion, it's just that I think you are in the minority

That would depend entirely on who you asked - if you were to make a survey, players who had played on Xbox live for around 6 months should be the only people edible, as they will have played to an extent to understand the way the general community behaves.

Sounds fair, so only people who have actually played the PsN extensively should be allowed to comment on this, and I can say without a shadow of a doubt that my full year on the PsN has been less offensive and less buggy than the 3 hours I spent on Live.

Seconded. I only play Live at my friends & cousins houses, and I get more abuse from XBL then PSN, even though I play PSN a lot more.

 

[Apocalypse Tank]

So there's this new theory floating around, I saw it on GT's Bonus Round, and in the shop where I work. Apparently, PSN being free is actually detracting from the experience. The idea goes like this:

People don't pay to play on PSN, and therefore it is difficult to deny them the privilege. Basically, a one month ban on XBL is costing you money and the threat of that ban keeps people in line. Without anything at risk on the network, people behave even WORSE than they do on Xbox Live. This creates a less enjoyable play enivornment and keeps the online population low.

I don't know how much stock I put in this theory, but it's come up a couple times today and its pretty interesting. Also, I can't afford a PS3, free online or not, so I have no opportunity to test it.

I am sure the discipline of both console are enforced in different ways. The behaviors of these gamers shouldn't differ.

Personal experiences should not count towards how either communities act and please dont stay off topic, this might just turn into a console war.

 

[NeedAUserName]

the beauty of the ps3's exclusives is that they manage to be fun and interesting and don't necessarily cater to the mainstream.

Resistance... Drakes Fortune... MSG4...

If you need to be an indie gamer to enjoy them, then pardon me while I take up my Lancer and continue the fight against the Morlocks.

mgs4 is pretty much the antithesis of uncomplicated mainstream gaming. the plot would be incomprehensible to anyone who hadn't played the previous games in the series and the cutscene/gameplay balance is decidedly unconventional. resistance and drake's are original in concept if not in gameplay.

I was just taking issue with your assertion that the ps3's lack of mainstream popularity (only in north america and the UK, I might add) necessarily implies a lack of fun & interesting exclusives. the vast majority of the ps3's best exclusives have no online component anyway.

First of all, I have a PS3, and own Drake's Fortune. But I would point out that Drake's isn't to original, as it does borrow a lot of its base ideas/concepts/designs from the Tomb Raider series.

 

[D_987]

Seconded. I only play Live at my friends & cousins houses, and I get more abuse from XBL then PSN, even though I play PSN a lot more.

Possibly due to the availability of microphones for each system.

Your experience may also have been tainted by playing at certain hours, bad luck and the fact your more likely to remember any abuse you suffered during a short period on live than on PSN, as you play on it significantly longer.

 

[NeedAUserName]

Seconded. I only play Live at my friends & cousins houses, and I get more abuse from XBL then PSN, even though I play PSN a lot more.

Possibly due to the availability of microphones for each system.

Your experience may also have been tainted by playing at certain hours, bad luck and the fact your more likely to remember any abuse you suffered during a short period on live than on PSN, as you play on it significantly longer.

1. First off, this is what I assume you were trying to quote.
2. I use headsets for both systems.
3. I remember the abuse on XBL quite well, as most of it was racial slur
4. I can't ever remember being abused as badly on PSN, as I was on XBL.

 

[shatnershaman]

I was just taking issue with your assertion that the ps3's lack of mainstream popularity (only in north america and the UK, I might add) necessarily implies a lack of fun & interesting exclusives. the vast majority of the ps3's best exclusives have no online component anyway.

Really? The eight of the top ten have online play.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/ps3/

EDIT: Sorry I missed the exclusive part.

Still Resistance 1/2.MGS4,Motorstorm,LBP and the NBA series all have online.

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

Seconded. I only play Live at my friends & cousins houses, and I get more abuse from XBL then PSN, even though I play PSN a lot more.

Possibly due to the availability of microphones for each system.

Your experience may also have been tainted by playing at certain hours, bad luck and the fact your more likely to remember any abuse you suffered during a short period on live than on PSN, as you play on it significantly longer.

Availability of Mics? Last time I checked there were more microphones for the ps3 then the 360. Maybe the people just don't want to talk? (Not to mention any USB microphone can be plugged into the ps3 if I am right.)

 

[shatnershaman]

Seconded. I only play Live at my friends & cousins houses, and I get more abuse from XBL then PSN, even though I play PSN a lot more.

Possibly due to the availability of microphones for each system.

Your experience may also have been tainted by playing at certain hours, bad luck and the fact your more likely to remember any abuse you suffered during a short period on live than on PSN, as you play on it significantly longer.

Availability of Mics? Last time I checked there were more microphones for the ps3 then the 360. Maybe the people just don't want to talk? (Not to mention any USB microphone can be plugged into the ps3 if I am right.)

But the 360 has one out of the box and not all bluetooth headsets are compatible with the PS3 (and it seems some of the compatible headset mess the system up or don't work fully)
and the 360 also has USB ports.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bluetooth_headsets_compatible_with_PlayStation_3

 

[D_987]

If on the rare occasion I don't have any friends online, I will attempt to converse with the community. However, it has proven most UN-FUCKING-BAREABLE. So, in order to entertain myself I piss about with them, creating or impersonating various people or personas. Solid Snake being one of them, Geoffry Hogentosh being another. This may put me in the 90% of the cuntery, but I intend to be there when I do the voices.

Your post was quite enlightining about your views, it tells me two things.

The first being the fact you play Halo 3 a lot, now this is well known to be the community with the biggest amount of irritating users. If you played titles such as Soul Calibur 4, Battlefield : BC etc.. (off the top of my head) you would not find the same level of abuse.

The second is that you yourself appear to be in the 90%, as you rightly stated yourself. How can you possibly expect people to act civil when you "fuck about with them".

Anyway if its that bad, do what I did and add some gamertags from The Escapist.

 

[NeedAUserName]

the beauty of the ps3's exclusives is that they manage to be fun and interesting and don't necessarily cater to the mainstream.

Resistance... Drakes Fortune... MSG4...

If you need to be an indie gamer to enjoy them, then pardon me while I take up my Lancer and continue the fight against the Morlocks.

mgs4 is pretty much the antithesis of uncomplicated mainstream gaming. the plot would be incomprehensible to anyone who hadn't played the previous games in the series and the cutscene/gameplay balance is decidedly unconventional. resistance and drake's are original in concept if not in gameplay.

I was just taking issue with your assertion that the ps3's lack of mainstream popularity (only in north america and the UK, I might add) necessarily implies a lack of fun & interesting exclusives. the vast majority of the ps3's best exclusives have no online component anyway.

First of all, I have a PS3, and own Drake's Fortune. But I would point out that Drake's isn't to original, as it does borrow a lot of its base ideas/concepts/designs from the Tomb Raider series.

Except that it, unlike the Tomb Raider series at any point in its history, is actually good.

Yeah, but you understand what I mean?

 

[Radelaide]

That theory falls apart by the fact that people on the PsN do not act like jackasses the whole time. In fact, paying for live gives people a sense of entitlement, making them feel like they can act however they want. So paying for Live makes it worse.

Being a "jackass" is subjective to opinion, I assure you 90% of live users do not act like jackasses (In my opinion).

It's only the 10% you hear about that bring the rest of us down. Damned rotten apples.

 

[D_987]

[Except that it, unlike the Tomb Raider series at any point in its history, is actually good.

Your opinion, you keep presenting it as fact...

The first Tomb Raider games were fairly innovative.

 

[Aardvark]

If a mainstream game needs to be known and played by non-gamers, then Nintendo almost have the monopoly on that one, with only Guitar Hero as their missing ace. I saw all three games advertised on the sides of buses at launch. As far as I'm concerned, advertising on the side of a bus is marking your game as mainstream.

Fun and interesting don't necessarily equal popularity, but for the most part they do. A good game with solid marketing will hit mainstream. Even an average game with excessive marketing or a fantastic game going by word of mouth can manage it, but a balance of good gaming with good marketing is the most successful formula. If your game doesn't make it to mainstream, you can wallow in pretentiousness, warm and secure in your belief that liking it somehow makes you better than the rest of the planet, but chances are, there's a better reason that people didn't pick it up than "Most people are too stupid to get this". When your game was advertised on the side of a bus, then the marketing wasn't the issue.

 

[D_987]

That theory falls apart by the fact that people on the PsN do not act like jackasses the whole time. In fact, paying for live gives people a sense of entitlement, making them feel like they can act however they want. So paying for Live makes it worse.

Being a "jackass" is subjective to opinion, I assure you 90% of live users do not act like jackasses (In my opinion).

It's only the 10% you hear about that bring the rest of us down. Damned rotten apples.

Yep, it seems people just want to hate the community as I have tried reasoned argument and gotten nowhere =(

 

[shatnershaman]

Except that it, unlike the Tomb Raider series at any point in its history, is actually good.

Tomb Raider was good.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psx/tombraider

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps3/uncharteddrakesfortune

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

Since we've devolved into a XBL vs PSN debate I just want to throw an opinion out there.

Big Team Battle-ers on Halo 3 are among the best groups of people on the entire Internet (if not necessarily the most skilled or intelligent).

 

[Aardvark]

Yeah, lets get back to the issue.

You don't get teenage cocktards on PSN because their mummies aren't going to buy a PS3 when there's this perfectly good Xbox at half the price.

 

[NeedAUserName]

If a mainstream game needs to be known and played by non-gamers, then Nintendo almost have the monopoly on that one, with only Guitar Hero as their missing ace. I saw all three games advertised on the sides of buses at launch. As far as I'm concerned, advertising on the side of a bus is marking your game as mainstream.

Fun and interesting don't necessarily equal popularity, but for the most part they do. A good game with solid marketing will hit mainstream. Even an average game with excessive marketing or a fantastic game going by word of mouth can manage it, but a balance of good gaming with good marketing is the most successful formula. If your game doesn't make it to mainstream, you can wallow in pretentiousness, warm and secure in your belief that liking it somehow makes you better than the rest of the planet, but chances are, there's a better reason that people didn't pick it up than "Most people are too stupid to get this". When your game was advertised on the side of a bus, then the marketing wasn't the issue.

Pain Killer. Hardly anybody knew about it, then Yahztee reviewed it, and sales went up by 400(0)% (can't quite remember which)

 

[shatnershaman]

Since we've devolved into a XBL vs PSN debate I just want to throw an opinion out there.

Big Team Battle-ers on Halo 3 are among the best groups of people on the entire Internet (if not necessarily the most skilled or intelligent).

I prefer Team Tactical since sometimes people on it want to win and are willing to work together (well "I get Sniper while you run at them!" is pretty good for Halo).

 

[Aardvark]

I never saw Painkiller on the side of a bus. Which was a damn shame, because I still believe that it had the best representation of Hell ever.

Even Dante didn't come close to the aesthetic mastery of that final mission.