View Full Version : Sony online play of better quality than Microsoft's
kotsosps3
02-23-2007, 21:26
So I was over at my local gamestop to purchase a copy of winning eleven, Pro evolution 2007. I asked the employee which version was better because I could not decide. The xbox 360 version or the PS2 version (have both 360 and PS3). His answer was if you want to play online, the 360 version is better. Against my better judgement I bought the 360 version.
The other day I was at my local dvd rental store so I rented a copy of the PS2 version to check out online play. Let me tell you that Sony blasts Microsoft out of the water as far as online play in this game is concerned. The xbox 360 version has no match rooms, it lags a lot (I have cable internet and it still lags)and it does not support multiplayer play online.
The PS2 version has all of the above and it does not lag at all even though I maybe downloading a large file from the internet at the same time.
Lessons learned: Xbox live may look better than the Sony Store but online play is better in the case of Sony. (at least for pro evolution)
Never trust a gamestop employee.
lol i would hardly say that xbox live on line isnt as good based off of one game but i do agree with you on asking the employees of the store what game they think is better, allways read reviews on line first fo sho!
kotsosps3
02-23-2007, 21:34
lol i would hardly say that xbox live on line isnt as good based off of one game but i do agree with you on asking the employees of the store what game they think is better, allways read reviews on line first fo sho!
I agree with you but I wish someone would explain to me how come winning eleven nine on the original xbox supported multiplayer online and the new xbox 360 version does not....crazyness.
WhatRuOn
02-23-2007, 21:39
Uhh, the 360 version of the game does support online multiplayer...what are you talking about?
PaiPaiMaster
02-23-2007, 21:42
Winning Eleven on the 360 was a horrible rush job of utter poop. If Konami continues to support the 360 with the series, hopefully they'll do a better job next time.
It's a better buy on the PS2 or even the PSP any day.
Does this mean PS2 servers are still up and running and for how long do you think they will stay? I might get Killzone on tuesday, are thoes servers still up?
NightStalker
02-23-2007, 21:46
i keep hearing that even though Xbox Live is much better looking and offers all these things, the PSN core gameplay part of online is extremely reliable w/ no lag ( e.g. Resistance w/ 40 players) and i think that is what really counts. It's free too!
Dissident
02-23-2007, 21:49
it known that online play is better on ps3 because of the cell chip.
in 2 years live is history. you will see the ps3 community explode as it is free while xbots playing the smae amount of users.
Post of the year, surely? Good effort! :D
To me, there are all the same, Sony is free though. :D
kotsosps3
02-23-2007, 21:50
i keep hearing that even though Xbox Live is much better looking and offers all these things, the PSN core gameplay part of online is extremely reliable w/ no lag ( e.g. Resistance w/ 40 players) and i think that is what really counts. It's free too!
Exactly if I am to pay 20 bucks for online play on 360, it better not lag at all. If I have problems with my cable connection imagine other people with slower connections.
kotsosps3
02-23-2007, 21:52
Uhh, the 360 version of the game does support online multiplayer...what are you talking about?
Care to give me the instructions how to get the thing play multiplayer online? Because I am going crazy here. And it is not just me, my friend also has the same problem.
Curious you experienced lag on Live. Obviously not in common place among live members. Could it be that MS's servers are finally getting overloaded?
Live is well known for its online options with the Marketplace, unified buddy list, cross-game invites, private chat and such. I guess no one really hyped up the online play because it's kind of hard too. Either it lags or it doesn't, and each game is different than another. Only multi-platform games like this can compare across the board.
I wonder why they didn't offer online multiplayer on the 360 version. I think we'll see the PSN catch up to Live this gen, but a lot will be based on the upcoming March update.
PES on the 360 was slated because the PS2 version had more features, as i recall. I think it is a situation like the PS3 is going through at the moment where the 360 gets online stuff and the PS3 doesn't.
Tha_Legend
02-23-2007, 22:23
Compared to Live the PS2 network has a noticable amount of lag, although the PSN has as little lag as Live. The main reason I prefer the PSN is because you can join whatever room you want if the circumstances such as rank or passwording permit. In Live you are limited to randomly joining a match unless you create the game or have friends/clanmates in the game.
"Live is well known for its online options with the Marketplace, unified buddy list, cross-game invites, private chat and such." -Beamer1112
Yeah, thats what I hope the PSN service gets with updates. Hopefully Phil will announce something like this at GDC.
Other than that, everything else is the same. Read the sig. :)
it known that online play is better on ps3 because of the cell chip.
That is the funniest thing I have read all day. Thanks for the laugh!
it known that online play is better on ps3 because of the cell chip.
in 2 years live is history. you will see the ps3 community explode as it is free while xbots playing the smae amount of users.
Oh GOD you don't think that because it's called the cell broadband engine, do you? Aww jeeze.
I think the original poster meant that Pro Evo did have online multiplayer for the 360, but that it didn't allow multiple players to play together from the same console online.
I agree that there is so much lag on Xbox Live, but I have never experienced any on the PS3.
I'm using wireless for both systems.
natureman3
02-23-2007, 22:33
Here in France, where PES is probably one of the 3 biggest franchise, all gaming mags gave the ps2 version the uppr hand, with higher score, due to content richer on ps2 AND online play much better on ps2 (wharing the same servers with PC by the way), than on 360 (lags, etc.)
So I was over at my local gamestop to purchase a copy of winning eleven, Pro evolution 2007. I asked the employee which version was better because I could not decide. The xbox 360 version or the PS2 version (have both 360 and PS3). His answer was if you want to play online, the 360 version is better. Against my better judgement I bought the 360 version.
The other day I was at my local dvd rental store so I rented a copy of the PS2 version to check out online play. Let me tell you that Sony blasts Microsoft out of the water as far as online play in this game is concerned. The xbox 360 version has no match rooms, it lags a lot (I have cable internet and it still lags)and it does not support multiplayer play online.
The PS2 version has all of the above and it does not lag at all even though I maybe downloading a large file from the internet at the same time.
Lessons learned: Xbox live may look better than the Sony Store but online play is better in the case of Sony. (at least for pro evolution)
Never trust a gamestop employee.
Dude i has PS2 Online and it sucked. BIG time. It was seriously the worst online service imaginable. Xbox live blows it out of the water. Yes there may be more lag on xbox live (i really havn't experienced any) coz it's really easy to set up and more people have it. Chances are you play someone in a different country more on xbox live. Can't compare it to PSN since i don't have a PS3 but i would imagine something similar. You will get no lag on resistance since you are only playing people in America. See how it goes in March.
Its not the service thats the problem here really its the game.
Konami gimped the 360 version of PES 6 to hell, since MS rushed them to make a "next-gen" pes for their console. There are loads of features which have been cut from the 360 version of the game as far as I know.
Two simple things which were not included in the 360 verison were
Saving replays
Editing teams
Konami could have easily implemented these, hell they're on the PS2 version, but chose not to. It seems MS got on the wrong side of this team and Konami have screwed them over. I can only assume that the lag you experienced online also plays a part somewhere here.
dfontes1188
02-23-2007, 22:52
I hate gamestop with a passion. Deffinately don't ask them for suggestions cause they always back up M$. But when in doubt trying to decide which version of a game to get just go to ign.com, they have some pretty good reviews.
AFMR-PS3
02-23-2007, 23:09
Two simple things which were not included in the 360 verison were
Saving replays
Editing teams
You serious?
No option to save replays? :shock:
Thats so Fifa 99'..really is. Bleh, I just find it funny M$ brags of having a 'net-gen' PES...
I prefer the full version of the game on PS2 any day of the week...
TheDude059
02-23-2007, 23:16
That is Konami's servers not MS or Sony. ANd most next-gen games are rushed. There still isnt a really good sports next game on any system.
mobbology
02-23-2007, 23:20
Sony online play of better quality than Microsoft's.....
thats an oxymoron statement. no matter how much you love sony.
Stewie Skywalker
02-23-2007, 23:58
The online play on PS3 does tend to be better than Live due to the dedicated servers you host on or play on. It still doesn't match Live in terms of features but it does have a more lag free, and seamless play through online.
MoneyMaker
02-24-2007, 00:32
it known that online play is better on ps3 because of the cell chip.
in 2 years live is history. you will see the ps3 community explode as it is free while xbots playing the smae amount of users.
Don't count on it! It may be FREE NOW, but Sony will use everything in its arsenal to recuperate its losses from the PS3.
champstones
02-24-2007, 00:38
Oh GOD you don't think that because it's called the cell broadband engine, do you? Aww jeeze.
I swear i remember hearing years ago when PS3 was still in design stages about some kind of online ability to share bandwidth amongst other PS3s. I have no link whatsoever but I know i read this somewhere. It could have been another marketing ploy or whatever, and im not really sure what they were refering to. All I can figure is maybe updates/downloads in the future will be based on torrents or something, but that still dont seem to impressive. or maybe some kind of processesor sharing kind of like the folding programs that are for medical research, but for use in games...dunno. I know this is next to impossible to implement in a launch title, so im not suggesting something such as this is in place right now. But I must give sony credit, resistance online is amazing...i dont think ive experienced lag yet, and i played since launch nearly.
As far as I know Sony isn't just offering up servers for any game that wants to include online play. Just some they chose for whatever reasons. It will be interesting to see what happens with some multi-plat/3rd party titles in the future.
You hear all the time that give PSN some time to get up and running, you have to also remember to give it some time to get bogged down with 6 million users playing 100 different games, to really see how it holds up.
I'm still glad it's free, and I'm still glad it's doing quite well so far.
or think about 5 years from now when it's already taken off (30-40 million PS3s), then we'll see the true power of the PSN
Wierd, i gave up playing PES6 online on the PS2 because i got lag.
kotsosps3
02-24-2007, 00:56
Sony online play of better quality than Microsoft's.....
thats an oxymoron statement. no matter how much you love sony.
I have both and that's how I feel. Period.
So I was over at my local gamestop to purchase a copy of winning eleven, Pro evolution 2007. I asked the employee which version was better because I could not decide. The xbox 360 version or the PS2 version (have both 360 and PS3). His answer was if you want to play online, the 360 version is better. Against my better judgement I bought the 360 version.
The other day I was at my local dvd rental store so I rented a copy of the PS2 version to check out online play. Let me tell you that Sony blasts Microsoft out of the water as far as online play in this game is concerned. The xbox 360 version has no match rooms, it lags a lot (I have cable internet and it still lags)and it does not support multiplayer play online.
The PS2 version has all of the above and it does not lag at all even though I maybe downloading a large file from the internet at the same time.
Lessons learned: Xbox live may look better than the Sony Store but online play is better in the case of Sony. (at least for pro evolution)
Never trust a gamestop employee.
thats funny, i never get any lag, and there are always 15+ people to play against. as for the online multiplayer.....there is, hence 'playing online'.
all you do is on the menu screen:
xbox live
xbox live player/ranked match
edit the settings you want
choose a match
you're in.
PersonofInterest
02-24-2007, 01:16
Free=/=Better (5 word miminum)
well then, i havent experienced any lag on resistance, is it because its region servers,
but on RR7, i get some lag, but its only this one guy out of 14, people, ,, just 1 PERSON, flies accross the track left and right like a bug , back and forth, next round the host kicks him out, and then we playing again, normal no lag, its some weirdo messing with his connection i beleilve or a bad connection all toghter
NovemberMike
02-24-2007, 01:26
Do you by any chance have your 360 hooked up wirelessly and your PS2 hooked up to a cable?
BlindSight
02-24-2007, 01:36
I dont understand the original post. Did he buy a core 360 and forget to subscribe and thats why he cant play online?
The online play on PS3 does tend to be better than Live due to the dedicated servers you host on or play on. It still doesn't match Live in terms of features but it does have a more lag free, and seamless play through online.
Really? I didnt know that.
i remember back in the days when online was just 2 player, in the same house on the same console
eg, Street fighter 2 on snes, 2 player
awesom, , it had video conferencing (see each other while you paly)
it had audio chat ( talk to each other while you play)
NO LAG
BigBrother
02-24-2007, 02:05
i remember back in the days when online was just 2 player, in the same house on the same console
eg, Street fighter 2 on snes, 2 player
awesom, , it had video conferencing (see each other while you paly)
it had audio chat ( talk to each other while you play)
NO LAG
Trash talking and taking matters into your own hands with cheaters, bad games, etc. was also much easier as well.
iLLuSionS
02-24-2007, 02:08
lol, my friend was pissed at his xblive... so he sold his 360... he likes 360 a lot, but player hosting = nono. esp when ur playing mexicans when ur in canada in gears of wars.
he ended up getting a ps3... and hes enjoying the lagless cod3 server hosted online games
thats funny, i never get any lag, and there are always 15+ people to play against. as for the online multiplayer.....there is, hence 'playing online'.
all you do is on the menu screen:
xbox live
xbox live player/ranked match
edit the settings you want
choose a match
you're in.
apparently you dont know what he is talking about. Its ok, you dont have to put the effort forth to understand.
The Old Man
02-24-2007, 02:40
So I was over at my local gamestop to purchase a copy of winning eleven, Pro evolution 2007. I asked the employee which version was better because I could not decide. The xbox 360 version or the PS2 version (have both 360 and PS3). His answer was if you want to play online, the 360 version is better. Against my better judgement I bought the 360 version.
The other day I was at my local dvd rental store so I rented a copy of the PS2 version to check out online play. Let me tell you that Sony blasts Microsoft out of the water as far as online play in this game is concerned. The xbox 360 version has no match rooms, it lags a lot (I have cable internet and it still lags)and it does not support multiplayer play online.
The PS2 version has all of the above and it does not lag at all even though I maybe downloading a large file from the internet at the same time.
Lessons learned: Xbox live may look better than the Sony Store but online play is better in the case of Sony. (at least for pro evolution)
Never trust a gamestop employee.
It seems that the only ones experiencing lag on Live are Sony supporters.
Do us all a favor, sell the 360 and get a PS3!
Lag on Live, yeah..OK:sleep:
apparently you dont know what he is talking about. Its ok, you dont have to put the effort forth to understand.
what did i miss? the op said he couldnt get multiplayer on xbox live, hence:
Care to give me the instructions how to get the thing play multiplayer online? Because I am going crazy here. And it is not just me, my friend also has the same problem.
so i replied with that post you quoted. simple.
The Old Man
02-24-2007, 02:44
So I was over at my local gamestop to purchase a copy of winning eleven, Pro evolution 2007. I asked the employee which version was better because I could not decide. The xbox 360 version or the PS2 version (have both 360 and PS3). His answer was if you want to play online, the 360 version is better. Against my better judgement I bought the 360 version.
The other day I was at my local dvd rental store so I rented a copy of the PS2 version to check out online play. Let me tell you that Sony blasts Microsoft out of the water as far as online play in this game is concerned. The xbox 360 version has no match rooms, it lags a lot (I have cable internet and it still lags)and it does not support multiplayer play online.
The PS2 version has all of the above and it does not lag at all even though I maybe downloading a large file from the internet at the same time.
Lessons learned: Xbox live may look better than the Sony Store but online play is better in the case of Sony. (at least for pro evolution)
Never trust a gamestop employee.
Some of the dumbest comments that I have read on this forum about Live exist in thi,s thread!
Live is better...PERIOD!
kotsosps3
02-24-2007, 02:44
thats funny, i never get any lag, and there are always 15+ people to play against. as for the online multiplayer.....there is, hence 'playing online'.
all you do is on the menu screen:
xbox live
xbox live player/ranked match
edit the settings you want
choose a match
you're in.
I don't think you understand. I am not stupid you know. I just want to play 2 on 2 online. me and my friend on one console against another 2.
I don't think you understand. I am not stupid you know. I just want to play 2 on 2 online. me and my friend on one console against another 2.
you can't do that. its 1 on 1 only. sorry i misunderstood you. multiplayer usually means 2+ players.
kotsosps3
02-24-2007, 02:47
[quote=AlternateReality;1118666]I dont understand the original post. Did he buy a core 360 and forget to subscribe and thats why he cant play online?
No I have a premium 360 with 3 month subscription to live and a cable internet connection. Duhh.....
the original post wasn't very clear at all so it was easily misunderstood. hence why more than 1 person misunderstood it.
it known that online play is better on ps3 because of the cell chip.
in 2 years live is history. you will see the ps3 community explode as it is free while xbots playing the smae amount of users.
wow, good for you, cell can cure cancer too.
earth to xbot open your eyes and take the microsoft controller out of your *ss
thats 2 infractions right there mods. insult and name calling.
this is exactly what we have been talking about the past couple of days.
Xtreme04
02-24-2007, 03:12
thats 2 infractions right there mods. insult and name calling.
this is exactly what we have been talking about the past couple of days.
but it'll be most likely me or u getting the infraction instead...:rolleyes:
The Old Man
02-26-2007, 02:05
I reported him, but we'll see if the mods will treat him as we are treated. All I ask for is consistancy is dolling out the infractions.
It's people like him that are driving this site right into the pits.
PhillyPhreak
02-26-2007, 02:26
I reported him, but we'll see if the mods will treat him as we are treated. All I ask for is consistancy is dolling out the infractions.
It's people like him that are driving this site right into the pits.
Lefein was banned and Ch!ef was banned recently. Both are big supporters of the PlayStation brand. You bash the PS3 and its fans yet you're still here. I suggest you quit your f'ing complaining.
It's people like YOU that's driving down the quality of this site.
EncoreEncore
02-26-2007, 02:54
These type of threads need to be stopped, this is a PS3 forum for PS3 news and info, if you want to start a fanboy pissing contest go and take it somewhere else, and leave the gamer here to enjoy their console/s.
I thought this site was going to enhance my PS3 experience by reaching other PS3 owners and getting info and tips and PS3 news, i did not release i would have to wade though piles of rabid fanboy crap on a daily basis.
Puppet_Master
02-26-2007, 03:15
This issues you experienced are game related.
Sloppy net code is always a killer.
Lefein was banned and Ch!ef was banned recently. Both are big supporters of the PlayStation brand. You bash the PS3 and its fans yet you're still here. I suggest you quit your f'ing complaining.
It's people like YOU that's driving down the quality of this site.
huh? this is news to me? 25
janenba352
02-26-2007, 03:34
For one... my friend has Live. He has played a few games of Gears that were so laggy he left the game due to unplayability.
The PS2 version allows for 2 v 2 online. 2 players on one console vs 2 players on another console through the internet. Sorry to say but Live cant support this due to having to be logged into your account. Until they add in simultaneous logins on one console it cant be done.
As for the argument on the services themselves. Feature-wise Live has it, actual online play Sony wins due to the dedicated servers and the fact the Cell Broadband Engine is basically an insanely powerful server processor so hosting games on your console wont cause lag even in resistance with 39 other people. Trust me I tried it.
Sockpuppet
02-26-2007, 03:59
For one... my friend has Live. He has played a few games of Gears that were so laggy he left the game due to unplayability.
That would be because your friends search for a quick match rather than performing a custom search and looking at the quality of the connection.
We have Americans join our Aussie rooms in Gears of War all the time, we warn them there will be alot of lag, they stay because "my connection is really fast." End of the first round and in the lobby all you hear is constant bleeting about how much lag there is. Duh. FPS + high latency = no good for gaming.
At the moment, PS3 games are locked to playing against opponents in your own country. The servers are also likely capable of dealing with more players than there currently are PS3 owners (naturally the servers in Resistence would have been a big focus for Sony to provide servers capable of showing off this games online features) as well as a small games library where many companies currently only have to provide servers for one game.
I wouldn't be saying the PSN is lag-free till there is something better to guage the system on. More players online, what servers other developers are providing and whether you can ever play against competition internationally. There's still nothing to say some companies won't just drop support for a server if they feel the cost isn't worthwhile for the number of gamers still playing a certain title.
Not to mention EA's servers. Holy **** they are bad. The only company to provide their own servers for gamers on Xbox Live and it's an absolute joke, especially considering how wealthy the company is and how capable they should be of providing solid server.
thelegend9123
02-26-2007, 04:23
Oh GOD you don't think that because it's called the cell broadband engine, do you? Aww jeeze.
Wasn't that name derived from the ability to scale the Cell to multiple processors? Either way I do not think it had anything to do with ethernet capabilities.
Really though honestly you cant compare the whole online system on one game. Live has its good points too. Its just nice that all systems now have online functionality of some sort.
thats 2 infractions right there mods. insult and name calling.
this is exactly what we have been talking about the past couple of days. Yes, I have infracted him.
but it'll be most likely me or u getting the infraction instead...:rolleyes: Why the hell is that :roll:? Care to give a LOGICAL explanation as to how you arrived at that flawed presumption?
I reported him, but we'll see if the mods will treat him as we are treated. All I ask for is consistancy is dolling out the infractions.
It's people like him that are driving this site right into the pits.
And it's also people like you that drive forums like this into the pits... Talk about yourself first, thank you very much.
I hate gamestop with a passion. Deffinately don't ask them for suggestions cause they always back up M$. But when in doubt trying to decide which version of a game to get just go to ign.com, they have some pretty good reviews.
when i finally found a ps3, i asked my dad to pick it up for me (i was in school at the time) and the gamestop employee told him he was wasting his money and should buy the core 360. :lol:
Puppet_Master
02-26-2007, 05:46
when i finally found a ps3, i asked my dad to pick it up for me (i was in school at the time) and the gamestop employee told him he was wasting his money and should buy the core 360. :lol:
If your sole purpose was to game, then he would be correct.
If you're an online player, then its silly.
CashMoney
02-26-2007, 07:32
I use both... and I can attest to this:
XBL has MORE features ATM... anyone doubting that and saying the PSN does is fooling themselves... So, to some, maybe the PSN is lacking...
then, you play the games:
PSN gameplay just smacks the hell out of XBL... and it shouldn't be as you're paying for it... MS dropped the ball with gameplay... Which is the most important feature with games... Resistance absolutely tears every game ever offered on any console to pieces... Tons of features, TONS, and it's just about LAG FREE, and at 40 Players! No Xbl game comes close to the performace of this yet, and most likely, won't happen until Halo3 comes out... and, with talk of MS not alotting dedicated servers, who knows how it'll run, especially with the amount of traffic it's going to have... It screams for dedicated servers... Sony's first-party titles all seem to have the luxury of using these, and hopefully will continue to...
While MS was working on ways to make more money with consumables, Sony was working on something that really matters, gameplay via stability...
skarekrow
02-26-2007, 09:03
I didnt read through all of this, but I thought that I would point out that online modes and what not are decided by the developers, not the people making the console. So if the 360 is missing something, you can mark that up to the devs doing a rushed job and not MS for having "crappy online" as they really dont have much to do with it.
No it is not 360 has an overall better experience and you might of got unlucky with the Live thing or maybe it is a problem with PES but overall most games play better on Live.
Lessons learned: Xbox live may look better than the Sony Store but online play is better in the case of Sony. (at least for pro evolution)
Here's a trick: go play any auto racing game on Xbox Live. Now go play Ridge Racer 7 on PS3. On XBL the lag is so bad, it's often virtually unplayable, and it certainly doesn't look or play like a car race in high definition. When I was playing RR7 online, in several different rooms, one based in the States, my location, and one in Japan -- or at least it seems; I'm not exactly sure where RR7 hosts online matches -- I couldn't tell if I was playing online or off, except I got beat a bit worse than then AI can usually beat me. My wife was wondering how the AI was killing me so bad; she couldn't tell the difference either, even if she, a very casual gamer, can tell the visual difference between a 360 game on or offline.
Try Resistance and Gears. Very different styles of online play, but even the best connection Gear games are jumpy. Resistance is smooth as glass, just like offline.
[To be fair so as to avoid the PS3 vs. 360 war -- slagging consoles at launch is like a Christmas tree: it's tradition, even in agnostic homes; the only reason Wii didn't catch it is because it did much better than expected and there was P3 to whack on -- PSN and XBL are different services with different features, and it matters most which features you want. From experience the PSN provides smoother player, with less if any difference than playing offline. XBL offers more services integration. You can't really knock XBL just for one issue -- poorer connections -- just as I'm tired of people knocking Sony for "over pricing" their console to push the Blu-ray standard. (Most people don't seem to know Blu-ray uses an open Java-based menu system, while HD-DVD uses proprietary, expensive, licensed menu software developed by -- you guessed it -- Microsoft. Microsoft is hanging up HD media adoption in Hollywood by pushing their standard down everyones throats just as much as Sony is adding cost to their games console to push their Blu-ray standard -- which, by the way, is more of a joint standard than HD-DVD, as the push for HD-DVD is all based on that proprietary menu software.)]
All three consoles offer unique online experiences; of course if you want to *play* online now you have to choose between 360 XBL and PS3 PSN, since Wii doesn't support actual game play online as yet. I've been telling people this: if you are a game addict, or even just a constant player, get all three systems; if you're just looking for something for your younger kids, get Wii; if you want a mainstream and a totally unique games experience, get PS3 and Wii. So, it's hard now that PS3 is out and readily available for me to recommend 360 to anyone who doesn't already know they just have to have Halo 3 or whatever. Except in cases where people want to spend the least money *upfront* for a new generation console, then I can recommend the 360, knowing you'll eventually spend at least US$100 more, not including annual XBL subscription, to get similar features into the 360 as the US$600 PS3 has out of the box. Still, I've done it, bought low to save some money up front, knowing I would have to tack on expense later to get what I wanted out of a product.
All that being said, it would be hard for me to justify buying a PS2 version of a game if a 360 version is available, or I could wait for a PS3 version. But as for online play connection quality, you may be onto something. I like Rainbow Six Vegas, but after getting tired of technical and social problems on XBL -- laggy games and jerky players -- I traded in my copy of RB6 Vegas while it still had some value, and I'll likely buy it again in March for PS3, hoping for better online play, which for me is the only reason to own RB6; the single-player campaign in this edition of the franchise left me cold, cold and bored.
If they can't get the ridiculous host advantage for Gears of War fixed, that may get traded in, too, once I finish the single player to my satisfaction. It may go anyway, because sometimes voice support in an online game is the worst thing: with the popularity of Gears, everyone has a copy, and everyone includes a lot of knuckle-walking pigs. Part of me hopes that PS3 will hang back in third place in the States for a while, so that PSN maintains that sort of friendly, exclusive club feel. (Although as far back as soccer/football title on PS2, I was playing some guy, and once he was killing me like 20 to 1 at the end of the first half, he got me to stop playing a regular-style game so he could teach me the tricks of playing better. There may be just some sort of sociological divide between your average XBL player and your average PS3 player. Just like I've never had an adult from the UK or Australia or continental Europe or Canada on XBL be rude to me or anyone I'm playing with. Never. Not once. The French have been known to insult me, in French, not knowing I understand enough French, but they are good-natured ribbing.
(Hey can you tell from the length of this post that I'm supposed to be working this morning? Too this word count doesn't count.)
The Old Man
02-26-2007, 12:47
Here's a trick: go play any auto racing game on Xbox Live. Now go play Ridge Racer 7 on PS3. On XBL the lag is so bad, it's often virtually unplayable, and it certainly doesn't look or play like a car race in high definition. When I was playing RR7 online, in several different rooms, one based in the States, my location, and one in Japan -- or at least it seems; I'm not exactly sure where RR7 hosts online matches -- I couldn't tell if I was playing online or off, except I got beat a bit worse than then AI can usually beat me. My wife was wondering how the AI was killing me so bad; she couldn't tell the difference either, even if she, a very casual gamer, can tell the visual difference between a 360 game on or offline.
Try Resistance and Gears. Very different styles of online play, but even the best connection Gear games are jumpy. Resistance is smooth as glass, just like offline.
That's funny, we played BO Revenge and NFS:MW on line to death when they came out and no lag problems. We are in the midst of a PGR 3 revival playing a couple of times per week and again, no lag.
When GOW was released we played daily together without lag.
I can point you to a place where EVERYONE playes on-line together without lag. There are a few isolated reports of lag but it's the exception and definitely not the rule.
Lefein was banned and Ch!ef was banned recently. Both are big supporters of the PlayStation brand. You bash the PS3 and its fans yet you're still here. I suggest you quit your f'ing complaining.
It's people like YOU that's driving down the quality of this site.
It's about time for both of these guys. They come over to the 360 side and bash all day. I have been trying to stay over there but I have spread the occasional truth when I see outright lies over here.
Perhaps if everyone stayed on their own sides, things would be OK. :wink:
The Old Man
02-26-2007, 14:08
And it's also people like you that drive forums like this into the pits... Talk about yourself first, thank you very much.
It's a shame that I can't point out what I would like to point out for fear of a ban.
I guess that's censorship at it's best around here ;)
Bash a mod, not me, I know better.
By the way, what do I do to drive this into the pits? I might have done something (probably did), but some verification would be nice. I simply spread the truth brother.
**turns around and walks away gently on the path of egg shells just laid**
That's funny, we played BO Revenge and NFS:MW on line to death when they came out and no lag problems. We are in the midst of a PGR 3 revival playing a couple of times per week and again, no lag.
We may have different definitions of "lag", which has become a catch-all term for any network connection disturbance in online games. Formally, in networking engineering terms, "lag" is the delta between time data is sent from the host and data is received on the remote system; we look for in games is the visual or auditory representation of that datain the game. So by definition all network connections, no matter how clean, no matter how traffic-free, lag. The speed of light is fast, but it's not instantaneous. Factor in packet-control systems on subnets and network backbones, etc., there's always going to be some lag.
For the purposes of this discussion, let's define "lag" as a misrepresentation on the client consoles of what is actually occurring in the game at any given moment.
BO Revenge lagged terribly for me. yet I have a very high-speed, low-latency cable network connection, that consistently tests as such. I don't know about NFS: MW, but NFS: Carbon, frequently, in game, cars that are out of the race are still racing, still running the course, before the game registers that those cars shouldn't be there any more. PGR2 on Xbox lagged terribly. Cars *jumped* down the routes rather than "drove" over them. I never played PGR3. If you are all playing in the same geographic area, say within a 20 - 50 mile radius, you're going to see much better online performance. Likewise, if you're all on the same network carrier with the same service provider within that geographic area.
When GOW was released we played daily together without lag.
I don't doubt it. But GOW online play is a lie. Granted, it's a very deft lie, a brilliant piece of network software manipulation. Rather than represent the real misrepresentation borne of network lag in games, they represent what you'd expect to see: a smoother experience. Only rarely, with extremely bad connections to the host, or a bad connection originating at the host, do you see what we like to call "laggy" behavior; e.g. sprites jumping around like mad, delayed projectile launch, other unexpected behavior. I say it's a lie and an intentional conceit, because I assume it is designed to work this way. It could have just come out this way by chance, but I suspect it was a design decision to present the impression of better network performance than they were capable of achieving with the level of graphic detail and physics integration they wanted. I haven't know anyone personally at Epic since not long after the Jazz days; and I certainly make no claim to have direct knowledge of the GOW engine design.
But simply put, you ever wonder why in some games you shoot someone in front of you in the face with a shotgun five times and nothing happens? It's because he's not there, you only see that he's there. Most people chalk it up to lack skill on their own part, that the other player is better, is more adeptly dodging. But he was indeed there many milliseconds ago, but not anymore. Or you take two pops off a lancer and you're down? In reality, taken 30 hits but only a couple of them have been represented to you on your console. Yet everything looks and plays superficially hunky-dory on the network front.
I'm not sure how much choice they had in designing in this conceit. GOW is the only XBL game I've played that will lag a connection to death or shut the stream down altogether if you are streaming music from your PC. GOW is extremely network intensive, extremely reliant on connection to XBL if it believe it exists. Once, during some sort of XBL service disruption -- not total failure, but intermittent connection disruption -- you couldn't even play GOW single-player campaign unless you logged out of XBL because GOW was hanging up trying to report what you were doing in GOW to XBL. Now that is a design flaw. The software should know to time-out and allow local play to precede if a connection cannot be established within a certain amount of time.
I can point you to a place where EVERYONE playes on-line together without lag.
Excepting of course that some lag is always inevitable, PSN, XBL or mobile phone, where? It's not XBL. I like GOW, I like XBL. There are features of XBL that in tight game integration quite surpass current PSN features. But connection quality is not one of them. That's not to say that most of the "lag" on XBL isn't bearable, or that I don't often play games in which the lag is barely noticeable or at least not bothersome, or require play adjustment.
Have you had the opportunity to personally compare PS3 online via PSN with 360 online via XBL? If not, try it for an hour or so, and you may see what I mean.
p.s. Forgive typos. I'm in a rush.
guybrush
02-26-2007, 15:57
Question here, will I be able to play Pro Ev 6 for the PS2 online with the PS3 when I get it?
Here's a review of the game . Seems like the game was half ported to the 360 anyways.
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/02/24/223210.php
Is a long read but explains some of the 360 features and some of the ps2 features.
Sockpuppet
02-26-2007, 16:36
We may have different definitions of "lag", which has become a catch-all term for any network connection disturbance in online games. Formally, in networking engineering terms, "lag" is the delta between time data is sent from the host and data is received on the remote system; we look for in games is the visual or auditory representation of that datain the game. So by definition all network connections, no matter how clean, no matter how traffic-free, lag. The speed of light is fast, but it's not instantaneous. Factor in packet-control systems on subnets and network backbones, etc., there's always going to be some lag.
For the purposes of this discussion, let's define "lag" as a misrepresentation on the client consoles of what is actually occurring in the game at any given moment.
BO Revenge lagged terribly for me. yet I have a very high-speed, low-latency cable network connection, that consistently tests as such. I don't know about NFS: MW, but NFS: Carbon, frequently, in game, cars that are out of the race are still racing, still running the course, before the game registers that those cars shouldn't be there any more. PGR2 on Xbox lagged terribly. Cars *jumped* down the routes rather than "drove" over them. I never played PGR3. If you are all playing in the same geographic area, say within a 20 - 50 mile radius, you're going to see much better online performance. Likewise, if you're all on the same network carrier with the same service provider within that geographic area.
I don't doubt it. But GOW online play is a lie. Granted, it's a very deft lie, a brilliant piece of network software manipulation. Rather than represent the real misrepresentation borne of network lag in games, they represent what you'd expect to see: a smoother experience. Only rarely, with extremely bad connections to the host, or a bad connection originating at the host, do you see what we like to call "laggy" behavior; e.g. sprites jumping around like mad, delayed projectile launch, other unexpected behavior. I say it's a lie and an intentional conceit, because I assume it is designed to work this way. It could have just come out this way by chance, but I suspect it was a design decision to present the impression of better network performance than they were capable of achieving with the level of graphic detail and physics integration they wanted. I haven't know anyone personally at Epic since not long after the Jazz days; and I certainly make no claim to have direct knowledge of the GOW engine design.
But simply put, you ever wonder why in some games you shoot someone in front of you in the face with a shotgun five times and nothing happens? It's because he's not there, you only see that he's there. Most people chalk it up to lack skill on their own part, that the other player is better, is more adeptly dodging. But he was indeed there many milliseconds ago, but not anymore. Or you take two pops off a lancer and you're down? In reality, taken 30 hits but only a couple of them have been represented to you on your console. Yet everything looks and plays superficially hunky-dory on the network front.
I'm not sure how much choice they had in designing in this conceit. GOW is the only XBL game I've played that will lag a connection to death or shut the stream down altogether if you are streaming music from your PC. GOW is extremely network intensive, extremely reliant on connection to XBL if it believe it exists. Once, during some sort of XBL service disruption -- not total failure, but intermittent connection disruption -- you couldn't even play GOW single-player campaign unless you logged out of XBL because GOW was hanging up trying to report what you were doing in GOW to XBL. Now that is a design flaw. The software should know to time-out and allow local play to precede if a connection cannot be established within a certain amount of time.
Excepting of course that some lag is always inevitable, PSN, XBL or mobile phone, where? It's not XBL. I like GOW, I like XBL. There are features of XBL that in tight game integration quite surpass current PSN features. But connection quality is not one of them. That's not to say that most of the "lag" on XBL isn't bearable, or that I don't often play games in which the lag is barely noticeable or at least not bothersome, or require play adjustment.
Have you had the opportunity to personally compare PS3 online via PSN with 360 online via XBL? If not, try it for an hour or so, and you may see what I mean.
p.s. Forgive typos. I'm in a rush.
Which all stems to what I posted earlier, many a game we have been playing in an all Aussie room with an Aussie host and inform the one American they will lag to the ****house. They claim their connection is fast enough, we say bull**** the latency will be too high. They believe it will be fine. End of first round and we get incessant whinging of 'lag' because the host connection must be crap despite the fact that every Aussie in the room is getting an entirely lag free experience.
Lost Planet uses a similar system, where a player does in fact appear to be in sync with the on screen action on the players screen, but in reality could be anywhere; to the side of you, behind you etc, resulting in players emptying entire clips into the enemy and wondering their enemy is not down, only to suddenly die for no apparent reason from a shot gun.
Being a P2P connection, the geographic location of the host coupled with their latency and upload connection decides how much lag players experience. In racers it's not a huge deal, maybe a car will morph a little but for the most part you are a fair indication of where they are. In a shooter where absolute precision is necessary, it's a nightmare.
The benefit of PSN is that they operate from a centralised server. In some ways thats good. However it also means that players can only play against other players in their consoles national location. It also means that if the service provider is ****house (read; anyone half assed as EA) then everyone is pretty much guaranteed to lag. Furthermore, should a company deem that the cost of maintaining a server vs how many users are still playing the game, the company may drop online service for the game entirely (read; EA's purchase our latest 07 or 08 game because we're discontinuing servers for the previous year policy).
At the moment I can't imagine there being lag for games like Resistence. Being a high profile title, I'm sure Sony is providing plenty of funds to maintain a large server to manage the current load of gamers. However time will tell whether smaller developers can afford large enough servers or that the popularity of a game may in fact be too large for a company to maintain a steady, lag free experience.
As I said Resistence I'm sure runs fine, for now, but even if the servers had over 50% of all PS3 owners using the server at the one time, it should damn well better be able to handle it because the numbers still aren't there to stress what server capability Sony is no doubt funding for that one particular title.
I have no problems getting lag free games on Live (with exception to EA) but then I know not to join games of GOW and the like with an American host and so I have no problems at all and I know that I will be able to play all my Xbox360 games online for the duration of the Xbox360's lifetime without a company dropping support for a game that is deemed not worth offering a server for, or a company wanting to push it's users onto the next title in their catalogue.
m9105826
02-26-2007, 17:09
lol, lefein wasnt banned. He just posted like 5 minutes ago...
lol, lefein wasnt banned. He just posted like 5 minutes ago...
Lefein, Aquanox and I was banned before few days, but that was "error" so we are now unbaned :)
Its amusing how because a game lagged its the live service that sucks.
You do realize that Live is a Peer to Peer service right? the game does NOT reside on a server, but 1 persons console acts as the host.
This is the same as the playstation network.
Its all in the matchmaking.
Its amusing how because a game lagged its the live service that sucks.
You do realize that Live is a Peer to Peer service right? the game does NOT reside on a server, but 1 persons console acts as the host.
This is the same as the playstation network.
Its all in the matchmaking.
yeah this is so ****ing silly..........
san - please just quit spouting bollocks:
1. get a good internet connection
2. go to 'custom match' and pick a game with a low ping.
then you won't get lag. its that simple.
in fact, in most games you can just choose 'quick match', and you won't have a problem.
oh and shooting someone in the face 5 times without them dying is 'real' lag - there is no 'deft lie'. they don't die cause they are not there. you wait long enough and they will disappear. hence LAG.
i don't know why you have issues....... i can play all day on US servers from the UK without lagging - perhaps thats because Im clever enough not to choose a host who thinks its a good idea to carry on downloading torrents whilst playing a game.
TheDoctor
02-26-2007, 20:24
For one... my friend has Live. He has played a few games of Gears that were so laggy he left the game due to unplayability.
The PS2 version allows for 2 v 2 online. 2 players on one console vs 2 players on another console through the internet. Sorry to say but Live cant support this due to having to be logged into your account. Until they add in simultaneous logins on one console it cant be done.
As for the argument on the services themselves. Feature-wise Live has it, actual online play Sony wins due to the dedicated servers and the fact the Cell Broadband Engine is basically an insanely powerful server processor so hosting games on your console wont cause lag even in resistance with 39 other people. Trust me I tried it.
Couple 'o questions. Live can't support it - so it's just tricking me on GRAW then? It's not -actually- signing 4 separate accounts in? Or Halo 2?
Resistance lag free with 40 players - are all 40 players using voice communications concurrently? Are they spread across the globe? Does the netcode even allow you to see where their feet are in real time? Most XBL lag is caused by latency issues, not by server problems. There is no way any service could get me a < than 50ms ping time to the US, paid for or not. It's what it makes of what it gets that counts. (Numbers? bbc.co.uk, 32ms. abc.com, 184ms(returns))
Most games, such as GOW use a predictive system to keep the game tunning smoothly. While this can cause problems, I have no doubt that R:FOM uses a very similar system. It's less bandwidth intensive netcode means that the position updates can be sent more often.
san - a low latency connection. To what? Latency is defined between two things, not just your end of it. PGR2 is playable on dialup with few problems - something whacky must have been going on in your games....
Geographic location does not count quite as much as people think - I can have a better connection to someone 100 miles away than my next door neighbour, if only becuase to get to him the connection has to bounce over an interchange 200 miles away
Couple 'o questions. Live can't support it - so it's just tricking me on GRAW then? It's not -actually- signing 4 separate accounts in? Or Halo 2?
just 'trust him' - hes 'tried it'......... :rolleyes:
Its amusing how because a game lagged its the live service that sucks.
You do realize that Live is a Peer to Peer service right? the game does NOT reside on a server, but 1 persons console acts as the host.
This is the same as the playstation network.
Its all in the matchmaking.
This is true and not true, but it's a good point. Most games that involve more than two players, and even some that are only two players, are actually not peer-to-peer, but host-client; but the host is not some centralized server, but the console of whoever is hosting the game. Therefore you get the infamous, massive Gears host advantage and the lesser but still significant host-team advantage (immediately this doesn't make sense because everyone is just connected to the host as clients, even though they are on the same team; it must have something to do with way incoming and outgoing packets are processed by the host and clients consoles, priority going to data related to players on the same team).
But yes, Live is a US$80 per year matchmaking service with extras, *not* a game-hosting service. But a lagging game can still be, and often is, a problem with the Live service, as the matchmaking service is not making the best matches it can. For example, in GOW it's not displaying a list of the hosted games open with the absolute best possible connections to your console; it's leaving some good ones out and throwing some bad ones in. This is possibly due to the attempt, probably poorly architected attempt, to match players not only with good connections between one another but similar "Trueskill" levels. The other error can be in misreporting the quality of the connection by Live. In other words, Live shows a great connection to a particular host when in fact that connection is just terrible. In GOW, 3 gray bars are used for good connection, two yellow for acceptable, one red for poor. But I've had terribly laggy matches that I went into with 3 gray bars, and ones that played just fine with two yellow bars. So client-server or peer-to-peer game matchmade by Live can indeed reflect on the quality of Live. Also XBL is not just a service, but a set of software code and protocols and that game developers must use for online if they want to include it in their titles. So if that code and protocol architecture is poor, the online experience will be poor, and, yes, you can blame the service, or at least the 360 in general, for that bad online play.
Oddly enough in GOW, I can sometimes get good matches hosted in Australia or Japan, but I suspect this is "perfect storm" connection that doesn't last all that long; they are usually in the middle of the night in the States when it is late in the evening in Japan or Australia, meaning overall worldwide network traffic is low.
Sockpuppet, I was going to address a couple of your comments, here, too. First of all Aussies and some UK and continental Europeans are some of the most fun to play GOW with, so I it's unfortunate we can't get better connections across the distance -- except rarely as noted above -- because I have never been abused by an Aussie player, while stateside players are often abusive. I'm sure it does happen some with Aussie players, but since I have little opportunity to play with Aussies, I've never had it happen.
I'm in a rush again, but I was going to say that I don't know if PSN uses a client/central-server or client/console-host-server system for Ridge Racer 7, but I was able to play in games hosted both in the States and in Japan, both with mixed players from the States and Japan, and there was just no lag. Of course you make a good point that if properly implemented -- and I do not see good implementation of online racers developed for XBL -- it's pretty easy to create a realistic, lag-free game with car positions well approximate and the game moving smoothers. But with shooters, you of course have 4 - 40 "people" running all over the places, firing thousands of "projecticles" at various targets simultaneously.
san - a low latency connection. To what? Latency is defined between two things, not just your end of it. PGR2 is playable on dialup with few problems - something whacky must have been going on in your games....
Geographic location does not count quite as much as people think - I can have a better connection to someone 100 miles away than my next door neighbour, if only becuase to get to him the connection has to bounce over an interchange 200 miles away
Yeah, I know how latency works. It's been tested as best as possible. I'm not running a corporation here.
As for PGR2 on a dial-up connection, XBL and the original Xbox never supported dial-up. Broadband only I know there are tricks to do to get it working, but otherwise, how did you test this?
I have a moment, so I thought I'd write that I believe the real issue, the real problem, with playing games online isn't technical -- not lag, or latency, connection speed or any such thing, not XBL's features versus PSN's features -- but it's the recognition that although in most games we compete online, it's a *game*, it's competition in fun. You win, you lose, you win, you lose. You may be good, you may be bad, you be better or worse depending on the technical issues, the quality of your connection at the time. But the important thing about online games is that they be an enjoyable *recreation* as a part of a well-rounded life that includes other forms of recreation, and study and continued intellectual growth, physical health and well-being, and productive work of the sort that makes you happy -- not what your parents wanted you to do, or your spouse, or what makes the most money.
Instead we get angry young, and somewhat older, men of all backgrounds who curse you for the simplest mistakes, malign you by race, creed or nationality, and take all this so seriously it's bound to cause everyone problems with their vascular systems. The thing I say playing GOW that *always* gets a laugh from almost everyone in the match is when someone has a good chance to revive me and for whatever reason doesn't, then apologizes and tries to explain, I reply "That's okay. I didn't die in real life."
My opinion is that the PS3, online and off, is a superior system to 360, it has "longer legs", and will again dominate the console market this generation. But 360 is great and has brought me hours upon hours of entertainment, excepting the flat ugly people I run into sometimes on XBL. Oh, and Wii is just nifty, too. "Best" or "better" in console systems is so subjective, especially if you're having a great time with what you have and don't feel like you're missing anything. Indeed having three great contenders in the market is only going to push developers to create better games and the budget is going to be there to do them, as well as create an even larger market for low-budget, quick-and-dirty titles that are inexpensive and sometimes turn out to be gems.
PSN: martin_blank (I have no PSN friends, so anyone is welcome to add me.)
XBL: martin blank (I have a huge, unmanageable list of XBL friends, but you're still welcome to add me.)
Rubics Cube
02-26-2007, 23:39
I get lag on PS3 as well as my Xbox Live. No surprises there. Everyone I talk to online on PS3 or Xbox confirm the experience lag once in awhile.
Dude i has PS2 Online and it sucked. BIG time. It was seriously the worst online service imaginable. Xbox live blows it out of the water. Yes there may be more lag on xbox live (i really havn't experienced any) coz it's really easy to set up and more people have it. Chances are you play someone in a different country more on xbox live. Can't compare it to PSN since i don't have a PS3 but i would imagine something similar. You will get no lag on resistance since you are only playing people in America. See how it goes in March.
You are way off the mark! First off!
FACT: PS2 network has far more people on line than Xbox Live!
FACT: Players online with PS3 DO PLAY people all over the world, like in Japan!
People don't understand the major difference between the two setups. PS3 network is a "Hypertunneled" (it's protected, but not through Gateways from an intranet) network of servers on the internet. Microsoft's Xbox Live is like an Intranet like AOL is. This prevents it from abuse on the internet from certain things and gives some of the good features like chat with anyone in the online community, etc! But when with a game like this, going from Live Intranet to a separate Game run Internet server, it's going to produce more lag through the Gateway. Only so much water can fit through the pipe!
PS2 network works the same way as PS3 network, and is already on the internet. So running games, you will see less lag in general. When X360 gets into more cross platform play and using servers outside their intranet they will suffer from even more lag. Especially noticable in shooters like UT3. You're clogging up at the "INTRANET Gateway" itself then!
This is the same problem AOL customers have always had. They are fine on the Intranet, but when they try to go on the Internet, they have lag and very slow service. Live was never intended to go on the Internet, it was designed as an Intranet for good reason when it came out. Now with cross platform play and outside servers running from the Internet, they will have to. Onramps and Offramps of their Intranet will be taxed to the Max! Just like AOL Hell!!!
Microsoft will have to do some mighty revamping to even compete. "Live" in cross platform play is bound to lose it's lustre after a few rounds with the PC's and PS3's in a wide open internet server! The Intranet Gateway Server will be taking heavy hits with extra "hops" required and bound to take a heavy hit for it!
So that's the reason you'll see better online on that PS2 or PS3 game as compared to "Xbox Live" with certain games!
Geostrophic
02-27-2007, 00:31
Lessons learned: Xbox live may look better than the Sony Store but online play is better in the case of Sony. (at least for pro evolution)
I'm glad you qualified it as "at least for pro evolution". Sony's online components are done on a vender-by-vender case...unlike MS, which has a centralized service. Personally...I play allot of FPS online...and both Resistance and Halo 2 have very similar lag rates (very rare...usually relegated to the scattered player with a cruddy connection. I don't even think they know it's happening :) ).
...BTW...R:FOM is a far superior online game, just by design. I recently re-bought a 360 after a few breakdowns, and buying a PS3. Playing Halo 2, is like playing in molasseses. ...it had nothing to do with the online...it's just an older game, ya know. But still...Halo 3 better kick things up a notch, after seeing the buttery-smooth speed of R:FOM. Unfortunately, you don't get the cohesiveness with your buddies with PSN, that you get with XBL. ...a SEPARATE friends list from game-to-game? I'm not a fan of that approach.
Isn't there an overall friends list for PSN? And then you have to have a separate one for each game. What I'm trying to say, there is a PSN friends list, and then lists for each game you play that don't automatically include all your PSN friends.
That can be updated if it proves unpopular, and they give developers time to change to using some sort of universal friends architecture -- which will, due to the concepts listed in 7's very erudite post above, be harder to implement than a global games friend list on XBL.
BananaFish
02-27-2007, 18:11
Never trust a gamestop employee.
Definately. Anyone who thinks that some retail clerk who makes $6 dollars an hour reselling used video games knows ANYTHING about ANYTHING ought to have thier head examined.