Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
raggedjimmi said:
Ah right so it's not $100. Anything else you'd like to correct in your "advice" post?
I think he's correct. It seems to be $120 here in NZ so $100 sounds right for Australia.

Thankyou.

Mackilroy said:
Um, you're doubling the price. I pay $50 a year for XBL, not $100 or even $87.
That would be the same as me trying to tell you that you're halving the price. My post said "I", just like yours did. That is what it costs ME, in my currency, which is (not surprisingly) AUD, as my location says Australia.

raggedjimmi said:
Anything else you'd like to correct in your "advice" post?
No, as those are things I like on the PS3 over the 360. You are quite welcome to disagree with it or create your own, I won't love you any less. :p
 
So... I keep haring people say "Live is better, live is better, live is better." That's been said about 40 times in this thread, and no one has stated why.

For the Thread Starter, I will let you in on my experience with the 360.

Bought a launch unit. It failed 3 months later. Got a replacement. That failed two months later. Now, a year and a half later, the third unit is starting to fail (keep in mind it's in the most open spot in my entertainment center, with about 22 inches above it that is completely open on both sides.)

So, their failure rate sucks. Plus, it scratched the ever loving **** out of my Assassin's Creed disc (no, I didn't tip it, it just made a funny sound when I was playing it and put a huge circular scratch all the way around the disc).

Then the last update wouldn't allow me to go on Live. Why? Well, the Microsoft Tech support guru was wise and said "ah, yeah, you're router isn't compatible." I told him it was plugged straight into my modem. He said "Ah, yeah, your modem isn't compatible."

Seriously, get the **** out of here. He was telling me that after 4 years of using live none of my equipment was compatible. What a douche. I finally got on live after restarting all of my equipment and assigning manual IP and DNS addresses in the network section for the 360.

Save yourself the trouble and heart-ache and keep the PS3.
 
Did you get that one out of the

"How To Take A Subjective Opinion and Lay It Out As Fact For Dummies" book you got at xmas


;):p j/k

Haha. :D

To the OP, these threads rarely ever work because everyone has their different opinions and in the end it's up to you. You may play PS3 and wish you had 360 or swap and then wish you had kept PS3 (which would make it even more awkward with your mum if you bought one yourself later).
Maybe you should just make a list of all the games you like (current + upcoming) and decide which system accommodates you the best, then go with that. :)
 
why is xbox live better than PSN?
i have a 360 but not a ps3

For a number of reasons.

1. each game MUST have some form of online component. PS3 games do not

2. you have a standardized service which works pretty much the same for every game you play.

3. you have the choice of gamer zones, which does indeed effect the amount of smack talk dependent on the zone you choose.

4. you can sign on, a friend sees that you have come online and can send you a request to play the game.... the PS3 can not do this at all. The PS3 will annoyingly tell you someone has signed on, but indeed to send them a message or communicate with them at all, you must leave your game. Really annoying to be honest, I ended up turning notifications off on the PS3 because you cant do anything with them, other than feel frustrated.

5. gamerscores - love them or hate them. The majority however seem to love them. Having a comparative gamerscore for your Arcade title compared to your friend can create great competition.

6. voice. Quite simply the 360 online has far better voice support in all its games, and it is used very often on online sessions. Whereas PS3 PSN voice support is again left to developers to implement, some don't bother, and some make it so cumbersome or bug ridden that most online gaming sessions on PS3 often feel like bot battles because no one is interacting with each other. This is most annoying in tactical games, when your in a squad and there is zero communication. It can kill the atmosphere totally.

7. Clan support. Quite simply there is far more 'clan' support out there based on 360 and LIVE than there is in PSN. Clan's may not be everyones cup of tea, but they certainly can be fun and addictive.

8. Demos. Sure the PSN has online demo's, but in comparison to the 360 it is constantly playing catch up. Quite often the demo hits 360 Marketplace, but PS3 users are left waiting weeks, months if anything turns up at all. That can be annoying. Most people want to try a game before it's released, not 6 months after its been on the shelves.

I could go on.... but you get the point.

PSN is great because it's free, but offers in comparison a very stripped down package and one that has GLARING omissions. It is very much Generation 1 of Sony's online mission

LIVE is more mature, offers a broader and more complete package, and if providing that service costs $50 a year..... Then the 6 million 360 owners who have gold accounts must think it provides something of value.

If PSN improves and offers the same service and still costs nothing, then we may have somthing to grumble about, but until then people need to stop bitching about LIVE. It is OPTIONAL after all ;)



Maybe you should just make a list of all the games you like (current + upcoming) and decide which system accommodates you the best, then go with that. :)


I said somthing similar back on page one ;)


So... I keep haring people say "Live is better, live is better, live is better." That's been said about 40 times in this thread, and no one has stated why.


I can't type that fast Oni ;)
 
but until then people need to stop bitching about LIVE. It is OPTIONAL after all

This is my one gripe. It's NOT optional if you want to play online.

What Microsoft should have done is make XBox Live Silver allow online play, but pull stat tracking, clan support, the ability to publicly display gamerscore, etc from it; so people who want all the extra features can buy Live, but you can play online (very simple and basic) for free. I'd personally go with that option; It's just like PC online play, and probably still better with Wii (which I don't mind at all).
 
This is my one gripe. It's NOT optional if you want to play online.

But you don't have to play online do you. If you do take heart in the knowledge your getting the better system of the three machines.

Like I say, we may see some other basic service or free service IF and WHEN Sony improve their online system and requirement and still offer it for free.

:)


We will wait and see what HOME is like, but personally I'd rather they sort out the XMB so it can be accessed in game, add the other glaring omissions rather than add a layer of complexity and over the top GUI that may be more cumbersome in practice than in theory. But we shall see.... but it does make me think HOME is not so perfect in practice when they keep delaying it over and over again.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/3A110a Safari/419.3)

Both systems are better in different ways. IMO, the 360 has better titles out now not available to the PS3 (Gears, Mass Effect, Bioshock) but I think the PS3 is a better system. Blu ray, better reliability, better graphics, more powerful and other factors make it to me a better system for the future. I've had lots of experience with the 360 as well and I just perfer the PS3. Others may disagree, but OP, just stop fretting and enjoy your system.
 
This is my one gripe. It's NOT optional if you want to play online.

What Microsoft should have done is make XBox Live Silver allow online play, but pull stat tracking, clan support, the ability to publicly display gamerscore, etc from it; so people who want all the extra features can buy Live, but you can play online (very simple and basic) for free. I'd personally go with that option; It's just like PC online play, and probably still better with Wii (which I don't mind at all).

Then no one would pay for Live Gold, plain and simple.
You can't have one without the other.
If online play is free yet you have a second tier that costs money, those who pay will feel ripped off. No matter what features the paying customers have over the free ones; if the free ones have online play, then I guarantee you that none of the paying people will find any feature worth the premium that they do pay.

There's only one way to have Live be universally free yet also have the pay service so Gold members don't feel ripped off, and that would be either a) a daily limit on how long Silver members can play online, b) advertising for Silver members (but no ads for Gold members), or c) a combination of both.

For what I get with Live Gold - less than $3 a month is a drop in the bucket. Look at the free alternatives. MRU basically nailed all of it (rightfully so, *he does own all 3*) but I'll add/reemphasize that PSN is in infancy and hardly as feature rich as Live, and as for the Wii online play - look how many games support it. Sorry, I'd rather pay that >$3 a month and know that 99% of the games that come out will support online play.

[Not trying to stir the pot or cause a ruckus - I'm just defending Live]
 
That would be the same as me trying to tell you that you're halving the price. My post said "I", just like yours did. That is what it costs ME, in my currency, which is (not surprisingly) AUD, as my location says Australia.
And we'd both be right. *laughs* But your point is made. :)

better graphics, more powerful

The Xbox 360 has a more powerful GPU, and the Cell doesn't outstrip the Xenon core by that much.
 
I miss ya MRU. You, and a few others, the rest can all die. :p


Oni....long time no see man...glad to have ya back....hope you had a merry merry(I'm talking about drinking here) christmas.

I've yet to update my live account to gold again.....I'm too freaked out about RROD to waste my money on it.

Like I've said before PSN does everything I want...thats play online and it does it well so PSN is great for me.



Bless
 
So... I keep haring people say "Live is better, live is better, live is better." That's been said about 40 times in this thread, and no one has stated why.

For the Thread Starter, I will let you in on my experience with the 360.

Bought a launch unit. It failed 3 months later. Got a replacement. That failed two months later. Now, a year and a half later, the third unit is starting to fail (keep in mind it's in the most open spot in my entertainment center, with about 22 inches above it that is completely open on both sides.)

So, their failure rate sucks. Plus, it scratched the ever loving **** out of my Assassin's Creed disc (no, I didn't tip it, it just made a funny sound when I was playing it and put a huge circular scratch all the way around the disc).

Then the last update wouldn't allow me to go on Live. Why? Well, the Microsoft Tech support guru was wise and said "ah, yeah, you're router isn't compatible." I told him it was plugged straight into my modem. He said "Ah, yeah, your modem isn't compatible."

Seriously, get the **** out of here. He was telling me that after 4 years of using live none of my equipment was compatible. What a douche. I finally got on live after restarting all of my equipment and assigning manual IP and DNS addresses in the network section for the 360.

Save yourself the trouble and heart-ache and keep the PS3.

I bought a launch unit and it's still working. It's connected to Xbox live since day 1. I have over 15 games for X360 and only 1 game for my PS3 : FF XII. You heard me, I don't even own a PS3 game because there is not much to play right now on that platform. If the game is multiplatform, it usely is better on X360.

I know there is alot of blu-ray/PS3 fan around here but I just wanted to give a different side of view. It's not Microsoft's fault if your router is a piece of ....
 
I know there is alot of blu-ray/PS3 fan around here but I just wanted to give a different side of view. It's not Microsoft's fault if your router is a piece of ....

That's why you buy an Airport Extreme, and then boost the signal with an Airport Express ;).
 
wow, if you can think of so many reasons to day one console is great you are labeled as a FANBOY, have fun ;). Anyway... why hasn't the thread starter ever replied??? Did he just type this to start an obnoxious console war?

I might note that MRU is hardly a 'fanboy.' He's always been very partial to all of the systems, and he owns all of them, IIRC.

Try not to jump to accusations before you know the character. ;)
 
I might note that MRU is hardly a 'fanboy.' He's always been very partial to all of the systems, and he owns all of them, IIRC.

Try not to jump to accusations before you know the character. ;)

Exactly. Somebody asked a question and I answered accurately with factual differences of why Live is a better online system rather than just subjective opinion. :confused:

So now I'm a fanboy :rolleyes:

You can only say one word......




Bless. :)



(sorry stolen from 2ny)

I guess the fact I've mostly been playing on my DS, PS3 & Wii over xmas so far means nothing ;)
 
After doing some research I have decided to get a 360, maybe go after a PS3 later in the year when the better titles come out. As for what my mom thinks, well she doesn't care either way. I know a lot more people with 360's and I am interested in xbox live.

MRU does give the best unbiased reviews here.
 
Because I can save my mother a few hundred bucks.:)

Well you don't mention that anywhere in the first post, and if this is the real reason you want to return it, then you shouldn't have to come here for the answer.

There are some pretty ungrateful people on this forum. It makes me cringe.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.