Why do people pay for Xbox Live?

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Wii was released after the xbox 360, the DS has some of the worst wireless built in *dsi updated that* it wont even support WPA I believe. Psn was down for 24 hours+ when the internal clock glitched happend and has been down for 11, 14, and 24 hours for maitenance before.

Built-in wireless is better than no built-in wireless. And, it really took Microsoft long enough to put in built-in wireless.

PSN was NOT down during the "ps3 apocalypse." It was a BIOS glitch in the FAT PS3s, PSN was up the whole time, you just couldn't access PSN if you had a FAT PS3.

 

[WilliamRLBaker]

um its important because it offers lower latency and higher response then G, and offers better media sharing then G I won't media share on my ps3 unless its connected via ethernet.

You shouldn't be online gaming on any wireless to begin with, you should be courteous enough to play on wired without anything being downloaded so you have the least possible lag. I only play online if I'm on wired and I have no other network activity. I even reset my connection (modem and router) before I hop on and play weekly Survival on Metal Gear Online.

Wireless N is useful for only moving files and you have to stream media on the 360 as you can't put it on the hard drive, the PS3 can play 1080p video off the hard drive, no need to stream anyways. Plus, I never had an issue streaming wireless on my PS3. The max bitrate a Blu-ray can have is 40.0Mbps, which is slower than wireless g so streaming HD video should be easily handled by wireless g. Wireless N is almost completely useless except for slightly better latency, it's for moving files from network device to network device.

love that you shouldn't be gaming on wireless? you just killed most online gaming not every one has a wired connection near them.
Wireless N is not useful only for moving files its useful for decreasing the latency so HD content steams okay. And yes the ps3 can play 1080p video files...after you've moved them onto a harddrive or usb stick and connected them to the ps3 *of which the ps3 can only read FAT32 not NTFS* streaming I can stream every thing wired from my computers to the ps3 and for play on my tv..in 1080p and dts no need to transfer stuff to usb sticks and put em on the ps3 and streaming has never been easily handled by wireless g unless you have the unit right next the receiving unit wireless g is subject to interferance even when you have full connection strength bits I've sent stuff wireless to the ps3 and high bit rate 1080p stuff will hitch and lag on wireless g.

 

[Scizophrenic Llama]

I could always make the obligatory statement about how Live is actually up at this moment.

I can do more on my PS3 with PSN down than Xbox Silver users can. I can watch Netflix and access all of the Internet through the web browser.

Your point? I never saw a point in a browser on a console; that just is a security risk with all the lovely spyware out there. If I really wanted to use Netflix I could also use it on my computer. But, I'm not a self-entitled person who seems to think it's completely outrageous to pay roughly five dollars a month for a good quality service. So I can watch my Netflix with some friends on the other side of the country and have a good old time.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Updating a game and downloads take seconds on the xbox. PS3 takes quite long. Thats the main difference. I only pay because I decided to choose microsoft over sony.

If a game patch is say 20 MBs, it's 20 MBs. It's not going to go faster on a 360 than a PS3.

 

[TheEvilCheese]

Xbox is cheaper than PS3 and a good PC

What's that? The sound of you being wrong?

As of this minute, the 250g Xbox, with built in wireless adapter is £175 on amazon.co.uk. The Slim PS3 (160g) costs £225. That list is so outdated most of the models on it are not in production anymore.

What's that? The sound of you being wrong?

 

[WilliamRLBaker]

Wii was released after the xbox 360, the DS has some of the worst wireless built in *dsi updated that* it wont even support WPA I believe. Psn was down for 24 hours+ when the internal clock glitched happend and has been down for 11, 14, and 24 hours for maitenance before.

Built-in wireless is better than no built-in wireless. And, it really took Microsoft long enough to put in built-in wireless.

PSN was NOT down during the "ps3 apocalypse." It was a BIOS glitch in the FAT PS3s, PSN was up the whole time, you just couldn't access PSN if you had a FAT PS3.

Love how you ignored the fact Wii was released after the 360...and yeah sorry but crappy wireless that requires you to turn on easily crackable WEP *wep is so bad that most routers now don't even support it* instead of WPA is bad wireless and if you dont your not able to use it so in essence no wireless. Much like free isn't always better.

and yeah sorry but for the 40 or so million phat users psn was essentially down.

 

[kayisking]

Could we please just end this thread, at this moment it has no point other then to serve as flamebait. I am sure the OP posted this with the intention of fostering a reasonable discussion (how very naive of him), but it's now nothing more then a flame thread so could a mod please close it down.

 

[Denomoses]

well i have xbl without paying so yeah awkies...

 

[hutchy27]

That list has been proven to be complete fabricated propaganda by Sony.

But right now, 360 is $250 and PS3 is $300. One year of Live makes the 360 $10 more than a PS3.

In UK, a xbox 360 elite is £150 with a game, 2 controllers etc while a PS3 £250 with a game and one controller. With xbox live only costing £30 in the Uk, you get 3 years worth of online, a extra controller and a spare ten pounds.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

love that you shouldn't be gaming on wireless? you just killed most online gaming not every one has a wired connection near them.
Wireless N is not useful only for moving files its useful for decreasing the latency so HD content steams okay. And yes the ps3 can play 1080p video files...after you've moved them onto a harddrive or usb stick and connected them to the ps3 *of which the ps3 can only read FAT32 not NTFS* streaming I can stream every thing wired from my computers to the ps3 and for play on my tv..in 1080p and dts no need to transfer stuff to usb sticks and put em on the ps3 and streaming has never been easily handled by wireless g unless you have the unit right next the receiving unit wireless g is subject to interferance even when you have full connection strength bits I've sent stuff wireless to the ps3 and high bit rate 1080p stuff will hitch and lag on wireless g.

It's not hard to format something in FAT32, you can format anything in FAT32. Again, I never had an issue streaming videos over wireless. I just prefer having videos on my hard drive, which I can copy over via the media server, so I can go back 5 seconds if I missed a line of dialogue or wanted to see something again or whatever. Not sure if it's my PC (10 years old) but seeking can take long on wired if the media server has to transcode the video.

 

[Saulkar]

After spending some time waiting for my 3D animation to finish rendering and reading the whole topic I find myself amused. Why you ask? Just because. ._.

Though I must admit regardless the pseudo logic and unhidden bias is more easier to see from a neutral standpoint. Plus it is funny to read comments of people who did not read the whole OP combined with general ignorance of the topic at hand. So yeah, little bit of just because and this.

 

[Vykrel]

I just use Silver, It's free and I don't have to deal with the usual clientèle on Xbox LIVE.

meaning you dont get to play with anyone outside your room.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Love how you ignored the fact Wii was released after the 360...and yeah sorry but crappy wireless that requires you to turn on easily crackable WEP *wep is so bad that most routers now don't even support it* instead of WPA is bad wireless and if you dont your not able to use it so in essence no wireless. Much like free isn't always better.

and yeah sorry but for the 40 or so million phat users psn was essentially down.

A year difference isn't that big. It's not like wireless was cutting edge technology when the 360 launched then commonplace when the Wii and PS3 launched. Microsoft is a company that I'm sure could get its hands on cheap wireless for the 360 by buying in bulk instead of overcharging the consumer for proprietary wireless adapters and hard drives.

A weird BIOS glitch like that is kind of random and you really can't account for that. It has happened to other devices over the years, and you just got to wait until you get past the non-real date and everything is fine. You shouldn't even be bringing up hardware with the 360's horrible RROD history, the PS3 has it's YLOD issue but it's not nearly as bad as the RROD issue was. Microsoft released the console prematurely to get a jump on Sony and Nintendo. If you are going to add the "ps3 apocalypse" to PSN downtime, I'll add all the time 360 users were without a 360 because of the millions of RRODs to Live downtime.

 

[PseudoDuck]

Huh. Originally I paid for Live because it was the first online gaming service offered on a console that I owned.

Now, I continue to pay for it because it costs relatively nothing to me. I have outgoings every month of over £300. Xbox Live is at most £40 a year (though I can always get it cheaper somewhere) which is a drop in the ocean. Getting a takeaway or buying from a fast food restaurant once a month costs more than Xbox Live does.

Now obviously that isn't going to fly with those who ask "So you pay for it because you've always paid for it?" so I concede that I play on my Xbox more than anything else. If I had to pay for PSN then no doubt I'd use it more to get the most out of it. But I prefer my Xbox. Paying a tiny sum of money in order to play Halo online, or get demos early, or get deals on the Marketplace is well worth it to me.

 

[Saulkar]

love that you shouldn't be gaming on wireless? you just killed most online gaming not every one has a wired connection near them.
Wireless N is not useful only for moving files its useful for decreasing the latency so HD content steams okay. And yes the ps3 can play 1080p video files...after you've moved them onto a harddrive or usb stick and connected them to the ps3 *of which the ps3 can only read FAT32 not NTFS* streaming I can stream every thing wired from my computers to the ps3 and for play on my tv..in 1080p and dts no need to transfer stuff to usb sticks and put em on the ps3 and streaming has never been easily handled by wireless g unless you have the unit right next the receiving unit wireless g is subject to interferance even when you have full connection strength bits I've sent stuff wireless to the ps3 and high bit rate 1080p stuff will hitch and lag on wireless g.

It's not hard to format something in FAT32, you can format anything in FAT32. Again, I never had an issue streaming videos over wireless. I just prefer having videos on my hard drive, which I can copy over via the media server, so I can go back 5 seconds if I missed a line of dialogue or wanted to see something again or whatever. Not sure if it's my PC (10 years old) but seeking can take long on wired if the media server has to transcode the video.

Dude, I can sympathize with your point of view and even some people opposing it but you really need to stop. Not because you have offended me in any way but I honestly feel that it is better for you. You cannot change peoples minds because they do not want to be changed for a number of variables. Just leave it as it is, this is pretty much a relativistic debate thus no one can win. Some points are better than others but this is left mostly up to personal interpretation. You gave them a good run anyways and did a heck of a lot better than I did on such a hot topic.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Dude, I can sympathize with your point of view and even some people opposing it but you really need to stop. Not because you have offended me in any way but I honestly feel that it is better for you. You cannot change peoples minds because they do not want to be changed for a number of variables. Just leave it as it is, this is pretty much a relativistic debate thus no one can win. Some points are better than others but this is left mostly up to personal interpretation. You gave them a good run anyways and did a heck of a lot better than I did on such a hot topic.

I posted the thread because of real life people pissing me off about how Live is better because of this PSN hacking. Also, there is a lot of people that just don't understand how online gaming works. Lots of people think playing COD on PSN or Live is them playing on Sony's or Microsoft's servers when it is not. PSN is not less laggy than Live or vice verse. Both services are equal in many ways, I was not even saying one service was better or worse, I was just saying to look at what Microsoft is asking you to pay for with Gold membership and ask yourself, "Does that make sense?" once you know the facts.

 

[fgdfgdgd]

As of this minute, the 250g Xbox, with built in wireless adapter is £175 on amazon.co.uk. The Slim PS3 (160g) costs £225. That list is so outdated most of the models on it are not in production anymore.

What's that? The sound of you being wrong?

In the words of the internet: Pics or it didn't happen, don't worry, I just got them for you, and before you complain about the HDD, they're the closest in size that aren't in a bundle or stripped bare.

 

[CaptQuakers]

I will always pay for what I deem the better service. It's £40 a year. Thats not exactly a HUGE drop in the ocean It's so little I barely even notice it leaving my account. And as far as I know on a silver account you can't play game online. I'm not entirely sure on that though.

The xbox is just overall better for me personally. The PS might have better graphics better overall even but the online is just weak......

O and for those who bring up blu-ray or the net. I have a dvd player and a computer that do those things about 100 times better so I'm going to use those....

 

[Best of the 3]

Well, we pay to not have our information stolen >.>

<..>

So you're implying that Sony being hacked and having the information "stolen" was their fault? They didn't put up security because they under-estimated a bunch of hackers who were mad at Sony for not dropping the case of a guy who was jail-breaking PS3s. How would YOU like it if some guy jail-broke Xbox 360s?

If I remember rightly, the guy Jailbroke his PS3 because Sony did not give all the features it promised it would give. And as you said, they underestimated it so yeah, it is partially their fault.

And if some guy Jailbroke 360's, well I won't lose any sleep over it too be honest. I pay for my things so I don't really care. That, and like GeoH, they'd most likely be discovered and punished. But seeing as 360's give what they say they give, there's no reason like Geoh's to jailbreak one.

Two things. Zing! And nice avatar!

Thanks

And geez, 16 quotes over 1 post XD

 

[ramboondiea]

people pay because microsoft charges, its that simple, there is a supposed increase in quality but as i have never used psn or had to ring sony customer service i cant say, i can say that from my experience microsoft customer service is dire. anyway not everyone does pay for gold, i dont use gold and im quite happy with that