Will PS Network Rival XBOX Live?

C

Carlosinfl

Loves the juice
Joined
Sep 25, 2002
Messages
6,633
It's been a good amount of time since the PS3 has hit the shelves and yes I am totally aware that it's free but it just seems like the PS Network is very static and doesn't appear to be developing. I was sick of replacing my XBOX 360 monthly so got a PS3 but now realize that the XBOX Live network is very dynamic and easily accessible for demos, media, friends and so much more. The PS3 is very awkward in regards to layout and doesn't flow anywhere near as smooth as XBL.

What are you thoughts on the PS Network and do you guys feel it needs a change? Would you pay for it if it was significantly overhauled?
 
as long as I can play my games online with friends for free im fine. im not using my PS3 as a media device. netflix, etc
 
Carlosinfl said:
What are you thoughts on the PS Network and do you guys feel it needs a change? Would you pay for it if it was significantly overhauled?
Click to expand...

Its fine for being free. I'm quite annoyed with XBOX for not being free. theres no real advantage to paying for it. Ive had connection issues with both services and Ive quit using my 360 for online playing. I just use my pc instead as it is free (except for WoW).
 
then, uhhh.... you're in a position to just simply cancel xbl service and not care either way :p
 
Definitely needs improvement.The Xbox360's UI feels like it was built around Xbox Live while PSN feels like an addition to XMB. I wouldn't pay for PSN until more of my friends get PS3's.
 
I'm not a Sony fan by any means, but PSN isn't that bad. I feel, at this point, that it and Live are pretty much on level ground these days.

With a few exceptions, you can pretty much do the same things on either consoles 'network'. Live has a few advantages, but I like Sony's 'free' service much better. I wont be renewing my live subscription when it ends next year.
 
My biggest problem with PSN is the goddamn slow downloads. Seems to take ages to download stuff from it.
 
Mathemabeat said:
My biggest problem with PSN is the goddamn slow downloads. Seems to take ages to download stuff from it.
Click to expand...

This and just about every update. Heavens forbid I leave my PS3 idle for any longer than a few weeks, else I'll be sitting through update after update. I haven't played Little Big Planet in months because every time I turn it on, there's another slow ass update waiting for me.
 
PSN has a long way to go to really catch up to Live. Feature wise PSN has done a good job at 'catching up' but general quality of service a major disadvantage. The PSN infrastructure is so far behind Live, its hard to put into words. Patching on Live just 'works', 1 cumulative for any game, press A. PSN requires you to download/install every patch (in order) ever released for games, its very archaic in design and cumbersome.

Cross game chat is something the 360 has had since it launched, and is a staple of the Live experience. Using party chat or private chat to speak with friends regardless of what games/apps they're using is paramount to the onlne experience. PSN has chat features but they are not unified in any way whatsoever.

We could have list wars showing features that Live has and what PSN offers. These lists would be fairly close, fairly. However the biggest differences IMO are both structural and software. Its clear after using Live for 5 years then borrowing a friends PS3 just how well Live simply 'works'. Its polished, it provided a better experience and the biggest thing...

Live feels alive, like a true community. PSN feels so disconnected and cold, even though the feature list is much of the same. This is a testament to Microsoft making standards a vital requirement for the Xbox brand. When they develop a feature, its standardized and has to work for EVERY single piece of software that launches on the platform. This is the biggest difference between Live and PSN and probably goes back to Microsoft being a software company first whereas Sony mainstay has traditionally been hardware. Experience tips the scale here, and it shows.

As long as PSN remains a mish mash of disconnected features that have no kind of standardization it will continue to trail Live in every regard. Live certainly isn't perfect and I'm not a fan of paying for P2P online play, but the service overall as a complete package is well worth the price of entry (IMO).

Last I'll end with this, the only true selling point that PSN has is that it doesn't have one because its free to use. Because of this, everything .. its faults, shortcomings and flaws are brushed aside and ignored because its the free solution. If Sony was charging anything for PSN, $1 a month.. there wouldn't be discussions about which service is better. In the end PSN is good, Live is great.. and its the behind the scenes type work going on that makes the Live service come to life and really sets it apart from PSN.

I have used both, both have their Pros/Cons. Live is significantly better and looks to remain so in the near future. Hats off to Sony for making such strides over the past generation, I hope for the sake of PSN they continue to keep it free going forward.

edit. Half of the 25 million Live users (http://www.investorplace.com/25005/microsoft-msft-xbox-live-gold-susbcribers/) seem to agree. Also don't think for a second that Sony wouldn't love to get a piece of that cash. 12500000x60/yr = $750,000,000 just in Live subscriptions. It could also be argued that the service generating income helps pay for itself and fund a healthy growth going forward. People expect Live to be progressive because the Xbox brand is healthy, and the Live service is more than self sustaining. The same cannot be said about PSN, and perception goes a long way.
 
Last edited:
SPARTAN VI said:
This and just about every update. Heavens forbid I leave my PS3 idle for any longer than a few weeks, else I'll be sitting through update after update. I haven't played Little Big Planet in months because every time I turn it on, there's another slow ass update waiting for me.
Click to expand...

that is one of my biggest complaints about the PS3.

I don't mind updates. It happens. But the way that Sony handles it is completely assinine. I installed PAIN from a friends account and it literally took me around an hour to even get it to the point where it was playable due to the amount of updates that it had to download and install.

I mean, why would they keep the updates seperate? It seems very redundant.
 
SPARTAN VI said:
This and just about every update. Heavens forbid I leave my PS3 idle for any longer than a few weeks, else I'll be sitting through update after update. I haven't played Little Big Planet in months because every time I turn it on, there's another slow ass update waiting for me.
Click to expand...

Yup. I got a free download of PAIN with my new TV and after I downloaded it from the PSN I literally had to sit through over an hour and a half of update patches on top of one another...and none of them were optional.

In general, the PSN is a lot better than it was, but it's a pretty far cry from the 360's faster menus, additional content, and extra features simply look better and more integrated into what the system is all about.
They had the chance to do more with it with the whole Playstation + thing, but that barely added anything except a couple of random discounts.
 
I love my PS3, I am a firm believer that the PS3 is without a doubt the better game console to own this gen with tons of amazing exclusives. That said, PSN still sucks. Microsoft has a huge advantage for two reasons. Namely that they are a software company and they have been working on this since the original XBOX.

They knew coming into it with 360 that Live would be the major reason people bought it which is basically exactly what happened. They based the GUI around Live (like was mentioned earlier).

I really doubt Sony will be able to overcome Live anytime soon. They might get up to that level with the Playstation 4 (like abandoning XMB). I've always looked at it like this;

"If Sony had Live who would seriously own a 360"

Sony needs to really hit their GUI either this gen or next. They need to abandon XMB and focus on something similar to what can be done with HTPC's and one fundamental system that applies to everything.

Hulu, Netflix, Vudu, PS Store, Home, Live, etc all have different GUI's and it just seems tacked on and un professional. They need a way better friends system and cross game chat/rooms.

PSN+ is just fucking dumb, I have it because of Hulu Plus/2yr Service Plan but other than that it's frankly worthless unless you love Mini's, DLC, and PSN Store games.
 
jeremyshaw said:
then, uhhh.... you're in a position to just simply cancel xbl service and not care either way :p
Click to expand...

Fun fact: Pressing the cancel button within the dashboard does not work. You have to talk to india and they are jerks. I lost 30 bucks for me and my wife not knowing this last year after waiting two months..
 
Carlosinfl said:
It's been a good amount of time since the PS3 has hit the shelves and yes I am totally aware that it's free but it just seems like the PS Network is very static and doesn't appear to be developing. I was sick of replacing my XBOX 360 monthly so got a PS3 but now realize that the XBOX Live network is very dynamic and easily accessible for demos, media, friends and so much more. The PS3 is very awkward in regards to layout and doesn't flow anywhere near as smooth as XBL.

What are you thoughts on the PS Network and do you guys feel it needs a change? Would you pay for it if it was significantly overhauled?
Click to expand...
  • The UI is not as good as Live.
  • Because Live is a pay-for program that has a lot more money, there is some times exclusive content for cross platform games that PSN won't have.
  • It's fucking bullshit that you have to pay for Live gold to use Netflix. It's free on PS3.
  • If you are a serious online gamer, Live is probably better because of the community. I don't believe more players = better experience though.
  • I wish PS3 trophy support would let you see what games people played to earn their trophies.

All in all it doesn't matter. PS3 is a better console hardware wise and has better games and equal features in all other area's.
 
Sony really fumbled with PSN, I own a PS3 and will never own a 360, but I do agree that PSN sucks even if it is free, because of the slow fucking downloads, and how the updating system works. I would greatly prefer if I could just download one nice easy painless cumulative update so I can play my game.

I wonder if you can find a site to download patches/updates from if you absolutely had to? Could you then xfer it to the PS3? Wondering if that's possible, i'm not sure myself.
 
next-Jin said:
I love my PS3, I am a firm believer that the PS3 is without a doubt the better game console to own this gen with tons of amazing exclusives.
Click to expand...

really? can you tell me? cause I just bought a 60GB for GT5, and theres not much else in exclusives, I would hate to have spent so much for just GT5...

I only bought a 360 for Halo(and playing it with friends) and slowly picked up some exclusives

I prefer my PC for any cross platform games.
 
The PS3 has quite a few great exclusives, although that has nothing to do with how so-so the PSN is :)
Uncharted, MGS4, God of War 3, Killzone, Motorstorm, Heavy Rain, Demon's Souls, Ratchet & Clank, and those were just off the top of my head.
I love PC games as much as the next guy, but if there's been a platform lacking in exclusives as of late...
 
bigdogchris said:
  • I wish PS3 trophy support would let you see what games people played to earn their trophies.
Click to expand...

There is a section somewhere in the XMB where you can compare trophies. I think it is somewhere in the friend list when you open their profile.
 
86 5.0L said:
really? can you tell me? cause I just bought a 60GB for GT5, and theres not much else in exclusives, I would hate to have spent so much for just GT5...

I only bought a 360 for Halo
Click to expand...

I'm not going to list all of the games that the PS3 has that are only for the platform so I'd check metacritic anything over 70 is worth playing imo, 80 and above are exceptional.

I was comparing exclusives a few weeks ago and its almost laughable to the 360. I have a 360 still and only play it once in a blue moon exclusive comes out.
 
bigdogchris said:
  • The UI is not as good as Live.
  • Because Live is a pay-for program that has a lot more money, there is some times exclusive content for cross platform games that PSN won't have.
  • It's fucking bullshit that you have to pay for Live gold to use Netflix. It's free on PS3.
  • If you are a serious online gamer, Live is probably better because of the community. I don't believe more players = better experience though.
  • I wish PS3 trophy support would let you see what games people played to earn their trophies.

All in all it doesn't matter. PS3 is a better console hardware wise and has better games and equal features in all other area's.
Click to expand...


You can see what games people played to earn thier trophies as well as what trophies they have individually. When you bring up the friend you can go left or right and select the trophy list then just hit the x button and a list of games they played shows up as well as a list of games you played for a side by side comparison. In this view it shows you a percentage of the total amount of trophies earned per game and if you select a game it will show the individual trophies.
 
I dont think the ps3 hardware is good enough to improve psn any further, I think we will have to wait for ps4 to see something better, sony need to step it up a few notches and stop playing catch up.i used to love the xmb, but now it just feels so slow and dated. Sony need to put aside more ram on the next console to keep things fluid and get the ps4 out before any other next gen.
All being said, I have always had probems getting chat to work flawlessly on psn and live. Auto patching on psn plus is good but not worth the subscription, they need to make that one free. Its sonys turn to make the most powerful console, none of their machines have been the most powerful for gaming, get it sorted lol! We want the xmb/ psn to be as fluid as iphone and android menus.
Hats off to live even though ill hate paying for it, I dont like being forced to pay extra to play online but im left with no choice thanks to kinect!!
 
PC is my true do it all entertainment. I don't out to bars and drink I stay home and game!
AVP
Left 4 Dead
Left 4 Dead 2
Serious Sam HD 1st & 2nd Encounter
*I'm always on Steam doing or playing something.

PS3 use for BlueRay player.
Guitar Hero
Move controllers on shooter games
PSEye "KungFu-Live"
*PS3 I like I don't have to pay for Multiplayer!

I recently got a Free XBOX360 w/Kinect (Burger King Giveaway).
Kinect games
(were trying) Racing games
*XBOX360 is pretty new to me only had it 1 week, Kinect is vary nice hope they get some more games for it.
 
Rash said:
I dont think the ps3 hardware is good enough to improve psn any further, I think we will have to wait for ps4 to see something better
Click to expand...

lol wut?

Sony just needs to bump up their infrastructure on their side of things to make the system a bit faster; make patches and such download quicker and I'm happy. I get to play online for free and I never really have connection issues. When I do, it is usually do to my internet connection or my router.

Everyone talks about how much better Live is but I don't see it. I mean as far as features and integration go, sure it has more. But frankly, I just want to play games against other people and PSN does a fine job of delivering there. I never noticed a drastic difference as far as quality of connection for gaming between Live or PSN.
 
Rash said:
I dont think the ps3 hardware is good enough to improve psn any further, I think we will have to wait for ps4 to see something better, sony need to step it up a few notches and stop playing catch up.QUOTE]

Lets see........Firmware update the PS3 and then update the PSN network.


Can be done just as easily as the 360.

Both systems still have a good number of years to fully mature. and from what developers are saying the 360's limit was reached a good while ago.
Click to expand...
 
next-Jin said:
They knew coming into it with 360 that Live would be the major reason people bought it which is basically exactly what happened. They based the GUI around Live (like was mentioned earlier).
Click to expand...

And regarding PSN vs Live, IMHO that's why Live wins hands down even though PSN is free. I get around the XMB good enough but it's still clunky. They've refined it since launch and grouped a few things together, but it's still clunky.

Granted, NXE is a bloated slow mess compared to the XMB, and I do like the XMB being fast and ad-free....but still, NXE is put together and organized so well that there's just no comparison.

The problem is -

next-Jin said:
I really doubt Sony will be able to overcome Live anytime soon. They might get up to that level with the Playstation 4 (like abandoning XMB). I've always looked at it like this;

"If Sony had Live who would seriously own a 360"

Sony needs to really hit their GUI either this gen or next. They need to abandon XMB and focus on something similar to what can be done with HTPC's and one fundamental system that applies to everything.
Click to expand...

...this isn't going to happen.
Sony has put all their eggs into the XMB basket, clearly, when they started putting it in their TV's (from what I've heard). I figured, XMB on the PSP, then the Ps3....eh, maybe they'll change and do something new from the ground up. Now that they're putting it in their other products, I'd say XMB is here to stay. Then again, MS did overhaul the Dashboard into the NXE..but, again...even the Dashboard was put together pretty well. :eek:

I hate paying for Live, I'm not sure if I will reup again. I hate to, I really do....but when push comes to shove (and this has been the last few years that this has happened)....I get in on a deal and do it anyway. (ie Live 12mo cards for $30) Now that the price has gone up though, even minimally...IDK. We'll see. I know that since reupping for Live probably 8-9 months ago, I've spent less than 10hrs total on there because I just don't have the time especially now with a 2 1/2 month old in addition to the wife and 6 year old. :D
 
Cataulin said:
Rash said:
and from what developers are saying the 360's limit was reached a good while ago.
Click to expand...

PR is PR. The 360 actually has a better GPU whereas the PS3 has a better CPU. Optimizing Cell means getting more on screen not improving the graphic quality. Both consoles continue to get better but you also have to keep in mind the 360 is over 5 years old now, thats beyond the traditional cycle. PS3 is getting there too, so when talking about reaching 'limits', its the same for each.

The PS3 simply does not have this secret unlockable graphics magic stored away in a chest that requires magical spells cast by talented developers to unlock. You need to understand that by and large the PS3 and 360 are just about as powerful as one another, and any kind of graphical or computing difference you see will be minimal at best.
Click to expand...
 
theNoid said:
Cataulin said:
You need to understand that by and large the PS3 and 360 are just about as powerful as one another, and any kind of graphical or computing difference you see will be minimal at best.
Click to expand...

I never said that they weren't. I'm replying to the other guy and I'm saying that PSN can overhaul and change it self just as easily as 360 can. Also stating that they PS3 is still younger and thus developers have not taken full advantage over everything. Also stating that with the 360's age Many developers have stated that they have used the 360 to max capabilities. I never stated any thing about graphics.
Click to expand...
 
I honestly think Sony is pretty tied to the XMB. Like zero2dash mentions - it's literally used in every major product they make. TV's, Blu-Ray Players, PSP, Monitors, Receivers, etc.
Plus, if it were really that easy to overhaul...don't you think they would've tweaked it at least a little bit over the course of the last 4 years?
It's not to say that by the time the PS4 rolls around that they won't be using something else - but if they were truly going to change the PS3 XMB interface they would've already made at least some change thus far, which they haven't.
They can flesh certain things out (like the friends list) but that interface isn't going anywhere.
 
ebs5049 said:
Everyone talks about how much better Live is but I don't see it. I mean as far as features and integration go, sure it has more. But frankly, I just want to play games against other people and PSN does a fine job of delivering there. I never noticed a drastic difference as far as quality of connection for gaming between Live or PSN.
Click to expand...

It's ok for playing randoms online for free on PSN but you try and organise play with some friends and the experience turns sour very very fast. With Live that side of the online experience is so seemless it's scary, I was shocked at first how easy it was to join a party whilst playing a different game, then joining the other guys when I was done.....when I game on the PS3 online now it feels so clunky and you can really see what they need to do. Sony need to concentrate on that side more.

Also, is it me or is voice chat getting worse on the PS3 too? I was trying to talk to someone on SSF4 & Transformer WFC the other day and I just gave up...was horrendous. Yet you can play totally different games on the 360 and chat away np. This needs sorting too.
 
The audio on the PS3 is sadly hampered by its own strength - open compatibility. Instead of everyone speaking on telephone quality headsets, people are on everything from $5 shit-tastic bluetooth sets that are 6" from their head to $175 studio quality sets...and all of 'em are bandwidth hogs. That doesn't even include the people using the EyeToy or having headsets so tiny that they pick up ever bit of ambient noise within a mile.
Plus, things MAY have gotten worse lately since there are now more people on the PSN compared to a year or two ago. Considering how slow download speeds are, there's definitely some kind of bandwidth issue going on over there.
 
Cataulin said:
Also stating that they PS3 is still younger and thus developers have not taken full advantage over everything.
Click to expand...

Yes they have. ;)
http://www.joystiq.com/2009/09/11/naughty-dog-maxed-out-the-ps3-with-uncharted-2/
Despite the copious amount of gigglebytes and Dilithium Crystals under the hood of the PS3, it's never enough for developers. Their lot is constantly pushing envelopes and raising bars everywhere they go -- and the fine folks at Naughty Dog are no exception. During a preview of Uncharted 2 at PAX, Naughty Dog's Amy Hennig commented that the first Uncharted game only managed to utilize a third of the PS3's power, but Naughty Dog has "maxed it out" for the sequel.

This is something Naughty Dog achieved by taking a lot of the processes on the main processor and shifting them onto the SPUs (which may be one of the reasons why it could never work on Xbox 360). This allowed the developers to significantly increase the quality of the animations and other aspects of the game, leaving the main processor to "focus on getting all of that richness in the backgrounds." Well, whatever that means, we're glad they did it. This game is purty.

Head past the break to watch the video interview -- around the 3:37 mark is where she starts talking about the powah of the PS3.
Click to expand...

re: "younger"
Ps3 is by (roughly) 1yr (counting US release of 360 vs Japan release of Ps3) however both systems had to have had devkits out at least 6-9 months ahead of launch so there's a smaller of a gap of time difference.

Cataulin said:
Also stating that with the 360's age Many developers have stated that they have used the 360 to max capabilities.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen anything regarding the 360 being "maxed out" yet. I think there's a fair chance that Cliffy B will say something about Gears3 being 100% of the 360's power but otherwise I haven't heard a "360 is at it's max" blurb yet.

I really honestly don't give much of a care either way. At this point every game could look like Gears of War 2 or Uncharted 2 and I'd be happy as hell. IMHO there's no need for new consoles anytime soon. The current consoles have everything I could hope for in a console. Both consoles have ridiculous graphics, good online features (store, demos, videos etc), and online play in nearly every game.
 
Last edited:
Cataulin said:
theNoid said:
I never said that they weren't. I'm replying to the other guy and I'm saying that PSN can overhaul and change it self just as easily as 360 can. Also stating that they PS3 is still younger and thus developers have not taken full advantage over everything. Also stating that with the 360's age Many developers have stated that they have used the 360 to max capabilities. I never stated any thing about graphics.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing that up. I was just being very general so the speak, I though you were implying the PS3 had all sorts of untapped power we've yet to see... because that is not the case.

I think the best we'll see 'this gen' is going to be iDTech5 on these consoles, even though it'll be stripped down until next gen.
Click to expand...
 
zero2dash said:
Yes they have. ;)
http://www.joystiq.com/2009/09/11/naughty-dog-maxed-out-the-ps3-with-uncharted-2/


re: "younger"
Ps3 is by (roughly) 1yr (counting US release of 360 vs Japan release of Ps3) however both systems had to have had devkits out at least 6-9 months ahead of launch so there's a smaller of a gap of time difference.



I haven't seen anything regarding the 360 being "maxed out" yet. I think there's a fair chance that Cliffy B will say something about Gears3 being 100% of the 360's power but otherwise I haven't heard a "360 is at it's max" blurb yet.

I really honestly don't give much of a care either way. At this point every game could look like Gears of War 2 or Uncharted 2 and I'd be happy as hell. IMHO there's no need for new consoles anytime soon. The current consoles have everything I could hope for in a console. Both consoles have ridiculous graphics, good online features (store, demos, videos etc), and online play in nearly every game.
Click to expand...

That's an old link, lets see what they do with Uncharted 3 before taking that as gospel.
 
Tigerblade said:
That's an old link, lets see what they do with Uncharted 3 before taking that as gospel.
Click to expand...

Considering that 95% of the Ps3 library does not look nearly as good as U1 or U2, I'd say that's a pretty safe bet that those titles nearly (U1) and do (U2) max it out. (Likewise with Gears and the 360 library.)

In all honesty, probably no more than 10% of any console's library pushes the console that far because developers don't spend the $ on the resources to push the console to it's potential. It's always been that way, I'd expect nothing different from the 360 or Ps3. A handful of games will be true showcases, the rest of the library is average/ordinary to ugly looking. ;)

Unless U3 uses a different game engine (doubtful since the groundwork from the first two is already laid out) or something comes out in the devkit api's that is above and beyond what's there already......U3 may be no more "full" than U2. Again though, I could give a shit. ;) Graphics have never been the do or die clause of any good game. The point is - both consoles have their share of incredible looking titles, and on a good setup to a blind unbiased eye you probably are not going to find favortism one way or the other or someone acting like one is a 360 and the other is an N64. :D
 
zero2dash said:
Considering that 95% of the Ps3 library does not look nearly as good as U1 or U2, I'd say that's a pretty safe bet that those titles nearly (U1) and do (U2) max it out. (Likewise with Gears and the 360 library.)

In all honesty, probably no more than 10% of any console's library pushes the console that far because developers don't spend the $ on the resources to push the console to it's potential. It's always been that way, I'd expect nothing different from the 360 or Ps3. A handful of games will be true showcases, the rest of the library is average/ordinary to ugly looking. ;)

Unless U3 uses a different game engine (doubtful since the groundwork from the first two is already laid out) or something comes out in the devkit api's that is above and beyond what's there already......U3 may be no more "full" than U2. Again though, I could give a shit. ;) Graphics have never been the do or die clause of any good game. The point is - both consoles have their share of incredible looking titles, and on a good setup to a blind unbiased eye you probably are not going to find favortism one way or the other or someone acting like one is a 360 and the other is an N64. :D
Click to expand...

Hey man, I'm not calling which is better but if anyone can push the PS3 it's Naughty Dog. What was said in 2009 may not be true in 2011. I will say I really don't expect much more than U2 but it has to be better in some way.
 
Last edited:
What I like about xbox live is how organized it is. You look at a game title, you see a link to the demo, screen shots and sometimes a trailer. With PSN, that crap's all over the place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top