It's over 9000! (to begin this post with a meme because I admit I am critically overkilling the wall of text posts in this topic)
Why thankyou for being the sony fanboy of the thread, also since when was MTV a god like source of information? Really, lets face it...MTV - Music TeleVision...Who in all honesty can accept the findings of MTV with anything other than a huge dose of salt? MTV should really stick to what they do best, music television programs seriously. I'll listen to findings of my friends personal experiences with computer issues before I will take the advice of a company who would sell the directors mother to pimps if they thought they could make a buck from it. My mates with both 360's and PS3's have no reason whatsoever to lie to customers when a PS3 is £50 more for the basic console which is more money for their department which means they are more likely to get a bonus than with a 360 sale will willingly tell customers the 360 is better for online play. I consider that good enough for me. When it comes to making money we're all serious people especially when your annual wage is not fantastically great a bonus makes a difference if someone is still willing to sell the cheaper console to ensure their customer is satisfied then I'm going with them. Call it what you will.Originally Posted by Bolivar
Bolivar's Guide to Online Gaming - Debunking Myths (lol jk)
TLDR: For those with attention deficiency disorders, here is a summarized snippet of the general ramblings for you to ponder over - - you can just look at headings to get the point
I. Stability - The PSN is faster, more stable, and more PS3 exclusives use dedicated servers
Okay, this is the biggest myth on the internet that needs to be dispelled - XBox Live is not faster or more stable than PSN. How many times was XBox Live unexpectedly down this year alone? I can only think of once that's happened with PSN (and its free). Furthermore, a MTV multiplayer study found that in fact the PSN is faster than XBox Live.
Even if it wasn't, it doesn't matter what system you play a game on. Nearly every multiplayer game on ps3/360 uses P2P, not servers. This mean your connection speed and stability depends on the host of the game, not what network you're using. The only game on 360 I can think of that doesn't are the Battlefield games, but those servers are owned and operated by EA, and they use the same ones on all platforms.
At the same time, plenty of PS3 exclusives use dedicated servers whereas I can't think of a single 360 game that does. Resistance 1 & 2, Killzone 2, Warhawk, SOCOM, and MAG all use dedicated servers, meaning your experience will always be fast and stable no matter how you're playing them.
Where did I say it didn't work? I merely state the fact that wireless signals are incredibly easy to disrupt...this is true. Ask any person who has a neighbour on the same isp using wireless routers. The fact that both devices are emmiting their signal on the same default channel can cause huge ammounts of disruption. If there is interference from another network then your network adaptors are useless. This goes for PC's, consoles and anything else connected. In a move what betrays your lack of knowledge on the subject you are ranting about how many objects or computers are connected to the wireless router, nothing in my point related to that I am talking about external interferences the wireless connection to the router will be 100mbps regardless of the number of consoles/computer terminals connected. The router in most situations without any bandwidth control software will automatically divide the connection in to equal divisions of speed until it has allocated all it's possible bandwidth hence shutting down a few unused terminals can actually increase overall net speeds. I personally use wireless myself all I am pointing out is that Yearg need not spend $60 to pay for a wireless adaptor he could easily set up a bridge via a laptop or computer or even directly interface his 360 to the router via a ethernet cable.II. Wireless - It works...
This simply isn't true. I've been using Wireless for over a year now and there hasn't been a noticeable difference from playing with ethernet. I use a decent $50USD one that's usually simultaneously used by 2 laptops while a 3rd laptops downloads. Even before that, I used a crappy one provided by the landlord, shared with 5 rooms in our apartment as well as our own. Even then, there was no noticeable difference from playing wired.
I'm sorry but Warhawk might offer 32 player matches which would be amazingly awesome for any console but it's still just an FPS with the same old 15 modes you've played for years. Sure 32 is a big number however, I can say from playing on my friends ps3 in Swansea I experienced lag on Warhawk, trouble connecting to the game, long loading times for the game. In fact for the people who play halo 3 or have played halo 3 it was no real different from playing a big team social on Valhalla Heavy mode, excepting the loading times were longer I had time to go make a cup of tea even and so was the game search. In the game to compensate for the 32 players respawn times were longer and I often found it fraustrating since 32 players means getting the equipment you need to play the game on an even footing with most of the veichles in the game is hard to do, much more so than in Halo where as a last resort a BR and a couple of sticky grenades will see you through until you can acquire a better anti-veichle weapon.III. The difference between XBL and PSN is now nominal; PS3 games have richer and more varied multiplayer experiences.
Over the last 3 years, Sony has been slowly chipping away at the differences in services provided between the two, and the only features remaining are a universal Party System and Cross Game (Voice) Chat. But if you can hop into games with friends on the PSN just as easily, what's the significant advantage XBox Live has? The only game that's been a hassle for me is Battlefield 1943, and even then the game had problems with the 360 Party System if I'm not mistaken. Furthermore, many games provide their own party systems like Resistance, Call of Duty, Little Big Planet, MAG, and Uncharted 2. XBL has a little more convenience, no doubt, but not much.
Moreso, I disagree with Iceglow and DK because I have to question what kinds of game experiences you're having on XBL once you get into matches. It seems to me that 360 games just provide the same generic multiplayer modes that have been the norm for the last 15 years.
I would argue the PS3 has better online games. SOCOM and Warhawk are 32 player tactical shooters, the latter with a variety of vehicles on land, sea, and air. You can hop into a friend's game in Little Big Planet and build a level together. Killzone 2 is up to 32 players with dynamic matches with a deep class system boasting an impressive array of effects. Resistance 2 is up to 60 players on massive maps also with dynamic matches. Demon's Souls is arguably innovating the community experience of RPG's. And MAG, well, I think that goes without saying.
The PS3 library offers no more variety than the 360 to claim otherwise is to disregard a good many games the PS3 simply doesn't have and to also focus entirely on a singular genre of game. If we take away the cross platform games then your argument falls entirely flat on it's face considering the fact that there is a greater variety of games exclusive to the 360 most PS3 exclusives fall in to the same categories whereas the 360 exclusives tend to spread across all categories. I'm merely ignoring your evidence from MTV surveys because as I said, MTV is not an impartial computer expert company they are a company after profit.
This I quote because every damn word of it is a 100% truth we have destroyed worlds, and trolled the trolls, we have torn idiot rednecks (sorry americans but it was the only description me and Psy could make) limb from virtual limb with words and actions. In fact, it's become something of a sport for us. I have to admit without Dan and Psy, my gaming has become more boring and now I find even when I am merely exploring the wastelands of Fallout 3 I will sit there in party chatting away to Psy no matter the game he plays. That is why 360 and XBL is best in my opinion. Because at the end of the day, you can have better hardware, you can have faster speeds and anything else but without the people to play with there is nothing to do about it. It'd still damn suck.
Reply With Quote