XBL vs PSN

View previous topic View next topic Go down

XBL or PSN

61% 61% 
[ 20 ]
9% 9% 
[ 3 ]
21% 21% 
[ 7 ]
9% 9% 
[ 3 ]
 
Total Votes : 33

XBL vs PSN

Post by laxspartan007 on Sun May 16, 2010 2:36 pm

yes we have a topic for this, but a poll will show what is more prefered...
avatar
laxspartan007
Minion

Male Number of posts : 1272
Age : 22
Location : Embry Riddle Aeronutical University
Registration date : 2009-02-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by Ukurse on Sun May 16, 2010 4:45 pm

A onesided poll so far.
avatar
Ukurse
Minion

Male Number of posts : 1441
Age : 23
Location : Auckland, New Zealand
Registration date : 2009-01-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by Nocbl2 on Sun May 16, 2010 4:51 pm

LOL
avatar
Nocbl2
Lord's Personal Minion

Male Number of posts : 4811
Age : 18
Location : California
Registration date : 2009-03-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by CivBase on Mon May 17, 2010 10:36 am

PSN is completely free... and that's all it has going for it.

_________________
avatar
CivBase
Adbot

Male Number of posts : 7336
Location : Etchisketchistan
Registration date : 2008-04-27

View user profile http://pathwaygames.forumotion.net/

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by Indecisive One. on Tue May 18, 2010 5:49 am

Hahaha. Go XBL.
avatar
Indecisive One.
Minion

Male Number of posts : 349
Age : 22
Location : Canton Ohio
Registration date : 2010-03-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by squirrelboy on Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:06 pm

i voted PSN. im sorry guys. My brother has a PS3 and when i see him play online, i really dont see a difference between the two, other then the fact that PSN is free.
avatar
squirrelboy
Minion

Male Number of posts : 123
Age : 23
Location : socal
Registration date : 2008-07-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by PiEdude on Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:16 pm

X

Box

Live.

Even though you have to pay for it.
avatar
PiEdude
Crimson Jester

Male Number of posts : 4571
Age : 24
Location : In the middle of a hollowed crust.
Registration date : 2008-03-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by Death no More on Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:24 am

lol at the person who voted for PSN
avatar
Death no More
Lord's Personal Minion

Male Number of posts : 2178
Age : 22
Location : Spreading Holy convergence in the sprawl.
Registration date : 2009-03-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by Rotaretilbo on Tue Jun 22, 2010 11:11 am

PC > XBL + PSN

_________________
avatar
Rotaretilbo
Magnificent Bastard

Male Number of posts : 4540
Age : 27
Location : Arizona
Registration date : 2008-07-21

View user profile http://cdpgames.com

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by czar on Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:22 pm

Rotaretilbo wrote:PC > XBL + PSN
/thread
avatar
czar
Minion

Male Number of posts : 570
Age : 23
Location : ohio
Registration date : 2009-04-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by PiEdude on Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:25 pm

Rotaretilbo wrote:PC > XBL + PSN

I still have to disagree.

PC is great for RTS and anything by Valve, but I've played a lot of other shooters on the PC, and I definitely prefer a console.
avatar
PiEdude
Crimson Jester

Male Number of posts : 4571
Age : 24
Location : In the middle of a hollowed crust.
Registration date : 2008-03-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by czar on Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:27 pm

PiEdude wrote:
Rotaretilbo wrote:PC > XBL + PSN

I still have to disagree.

PC is great for RTS and anything by Valve, but I've played a lot of other shooters on the PC, and I definitely prefer a console.
PCs are better at everything except fighting and racing games. Unless you get a cheap usb controller, then it is ultimate.
avatar
czar
Minion

Male Number of posts : 570
Age : 23
Location : ohio
Registration date : 2009-04-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by Vtrooper on Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:35 pm

they are Equal to me, besides there are no sqeekers on PSN
avatar
Vtrooper
Crimson Henchmen

Male Number of posts : 2885
Location : The reaches of Space
Registration date : 2008-07-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by PiEdude on Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:35 pm

czar wrote:
PiEdude wrote:
Rotaretilbo wrote:PC > XBL + PSN

I still have to disagree.

PC is great for RTS and anything by Valve, but I've played a lot of other shooters on the PC, and I definitely prefer a console.
PCs are better at everything except fighting and racing games. Unless you get a cheap usb controller, then it is ultimate.

Again, I disagree.
avatar
PiEdude
Crimson Jester

Male Number of posts : 4571
Age : 24
Location : In the middle of a hollowed crust.
Registration date : 2008-03-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by Rotaretilbo on Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:19 pm

PiEdude wrote:I still have to disagree.

PC is great for RTS and anything by Valve, but I've played a lot of other shooters on the PC, and I definitely prefer a console.

Pick up a game not ported from console, like any Battlefield game pre-Bad Company 2 that DICE has put out (Bad Company 2 is a good game too, but not up to par for PC shooters). When it comes right down to it, console FPS are all shit. The problem is that the console FPS market is so shitty that even shit can look like a Kobe beef steak to a console gamer. That's why, when you port these shitty games to PC, they are shit when compared to actual PC shooters.

There are a handful of exceptions, like Bio Shock, but that's mostly because Bio Shock is more focused on story and less on hardcore shooting whatnot. Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2 are both Counter Strike clones with a few perks.

And can you believe there are people out there saying DICE is copying Treyarch by announcing Bad Company 2: Vietnam? Aside from the fact that DICE has been planning on making the game for three years now, Battlefield Vietnam, the precursor of Bad Company 2: Vietnam (Battlefield Vietnam is to Bad Company 2: Vietnam as Battlefield 1942 is to Battlefield 1943; BC2V is going to be Battlefield Vietnam on the Frostbite engine with fewer maps and fewer players per server).

_________________
avatar
Rotaretilbo
Magnificent Bastard

Male Number of posts : 4540
Age : 27
Location : Arizona
Registration date : 2008-07-21

View user profile http://cdpgames.com

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by PiEdude on Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:28 pm

Rotaretilbo wrote:
PiEdude wrote:I still have to disagree.

PC is great for RTS and anything by Valve, but I've played a lot of other shooters on the PC, and I definitely prefer a console.

Pick up a game not ported from console, like any Battlefield game pre-Bad Company 2 that DICE has put out (Bad Company 2 is a good game too, but not up to par for PC shooters). When it comes right down to it, console FPS are all shit. The problem is that the console FPS market is so shitty that even shit can look like a Kobe beef steak to a console gamer. That's why, when you port these shitty games to PC, they are shit when compared to actual PC shooters.

There are a handful of exceptions, like Bio Shock, but that's mostly because Bio Shock is more focused on story and less on hardcore shooting whatnot. Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2 are both Counter Strike clones with a few perks.

And can you believe there are people out there saying DICE is copying Treyarch by announcing Bad Company 2: Vietnam? Aside from the fact that DICE has been planning on making the game for three years now, Battlefield Vietnam, the precursor of Bad Company 2: Vietnam (Battlefield Vietnam is to Bad Company 2: Vietnam as Battlefield 1942 is to Battlefield 1943; BC2V is going to be Battlefield Vietnam on the Frostbite engine with fewer maps and fewer players per server).

I still disagree.

I've played plenty of demos for straight PC FPS's in the past (another problem I have with PC gaming is that you have to install each and every game, which takes up space) and I still just like console better.

And I really don't have to explain myself. It's just my opinion that I like playing console FPS's more. I never said they were better, I just prefer them. There's no installation, less lag (my computer's not a gaming computer, even with the new RAM and graphics card), and I get to pull a trigger on a 360 controller, which is just more satisfying to me in a shooter.
I've tried hooking the controller to the computer before with the USB, but it doesn't work for some reason, and I really don't care to figure it out. PC has its virtues, sure, but what I'm not going to say is that the console doesn't have any. Because it does.
avatar
PiEdude
Crimson Jester

Male Number of posts : 4571
Age : 24
Location : In the middle of a hollowed crust.
Registration date : 2008-03-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by Elabajaba on Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:42 pm

PiEdude wrote:
I still disagree.

I've played plenty of demos for straight PC FPS's in the past (another problem I have with PC gaming is that you have to install each and every game, which takes up space) and I still just like console better.

And I really don't have to explain myself. It's just my opinion that I like playing console FPS's more. I never said they were better, I just prefer them. There's no installation, less lag (my computer's not a gaming computer, even with the new RAM and graphics card), and I get to pull a trigger on a 360 controller, which is just more satisfying to me in a shooter.
I've tried hooking the controller to the computer before with the USB, but it doesn't work for some reason, and I really don't care to figure it out. PC has its virtues, sure, but what I'm not going to say is that the console doesn't have any. Because it does.

http://home.novint.com/products/pistol_grips.php
It has a pistol grip, and trigger. In terms of installing games, 5 minutes isn't very long, and since its installed it loads faster, which makes up for the fact you have to install. It isn't very hard to have a gaming computer these days, for close to the price of a console you can have a computer which plays every game out there on high without lag.

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/build_a_500_pc_play_crysis_40fps

In terms of plugging a controller in, you just need the drivers for it.

Games look better on pc, with a decent pc like the one linked above, you'll run everything with no lag and it will look better than what it would on a console.

Elabajaba
Crimson Epileptic

Male Number of posts : 1114
Age : 23
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2009-06-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by PiEdude on Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:57 pm

Elabajaba wrote:
PiEdude wrote:
I still disagree.

I've played plenty of demos for straight PC FPS's in the past (another problem I have with PC gaming is that you have to install each and every game, which takes up space) and I still just like console better.

And I really don't have to explain myself. It's just my opinion that I like playing console FPS's more. I never said they were better, I just prefer them. There's no installation, less lag (my computer's not a gaming computer, even with the new RAM and graphics card), and I get to pull a trigger on a 360 controller, which is just more satisfying to me in a shooter.
I've tried hooking the controller to the computer before with the USB, but it doesn't work for some reason, and I really don't care to figure it out. PC has its virtues, sure, but what I'm not going to say is that the console doesn't have any. Because it does.

http://home.novint.com/products/pistol_grips.php
It has a pistol grip, and trigger. In terms of installing games, 5 minutes isn't very long, and since its installed it loads faster, which makes up for the fact you have to install. It isn't very hard to have a gaming computer these days, for close to the price of a console you can have a computer which plays every game out there on high without lag.

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/build_a_500_pc_play_crysis_40fps

In terms of plugging a controller in, you just need the drivers for it.

Games look better on pc, with a decent pc like the one linked above, you'll run everything with no lag and it will look better than what it would on a console.

Almost all of this involves paying $$$, which I do not have.
avatar
PiEdude
Crimson Jester

Male Number of posts : 4571
Age : 24
Location : In the middle of a hollowed crust.
Registration date : 2008-03-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by czar on Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:39 pm

PiEdude wrote:
Elabajaba wrote:
PiEdude wrote:
I still disagree.

I've played plenty of demos for straight PC FPS's in the past (another problem I have with PC gaming is that you have to install each and every game, which takes up space) and I still just like console better.

And I really don't have to explain myself. It's just my opinion that I like playing console FPS's more. I never said they were better, I just prefer them. There's no installation, less lag (my computer's not a gaming computer, even with the new RAM and graphics card), and I get to pull a trigger on a 360 controller, which is just more satisfying to me in a shooter.
I've tried hooking the controller to the computer before with the USB, but it doesn't work for some reason, and I really don't care to figure it out. PC has its virtues, sure, but what I'm not going to say is that the console doesn't have any. Because it does.

http://home.novint.com/products/pistol_grips.php
It has a pistol grip, and trigger. In terms of installing games, 5 minutes isn't very long, and since its installed it loads faster, which makes up for the fact you have to install. It isn't very hard to have a gaming computer these days, for close to the price of a console you can have a computer which plays every game out there on high without lag.

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/build_a_500_pc_play_crysis_40fps

In terms of plugging a controller in, you just need the drivers for it.

Games look better on pc, with a decent pc like the one linked above, you'll run everything with no lag and it will look better than what it would on a console.

Almost all of this involves paying $$$, which I do not have.
Then PC gaming is not for you.
avatar
czar
Minion

Male Number of posts : 570
Age : 23
Location : ohio
Registration date : 2009-04-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by PiEdude on Tue Jun 22, 2010 9:13 pm

czar wrote:
PiEdude wrote:
Elabajaba wrote:
PiEdude wrote:
I still disagree.

I've played plenty of demos for straight PC FPS's in the past (another problem I have with PC gaming is that you have to install each and every game, which takes up space) and I still just like console better.

And I really don't have to explain myself. It's just my opinion that I like playing console FPS's more. I never said they were better, I just prefer them. There's no installation, less lag (my computer's not a gaming computer, even with the new RAM and graphics card), and I get to pull a trigger on a 360 controller, which is just more satisfying to me in a shooter.
I've tried hooking the controller to the computer before with the USB, but it doesn't work for some reason, and I really don't care to figure it out. PC has its virtues, sure, but what I'm not going to say is that the console doesn't have any. Because it does.

http://home.novint.com/products/pistol_grips.php
It has a pistol grip, and trigger. In terms of installing games, 5 minutes isn't very long, and since its installed it loads faster, which makes up for the fact you have to install. It isn't very hard to have a gaming computer these days, for close to the price of a console you can have a computer which plays every game out there on high without lag.

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/build_a_500_pc_play_crysis_40fps

In terms of plugging a controller in, you just need the drivers for it.

Games look better on pc, with a decent pc like the one linked above, you'll run everything with no lag and it will look better than what it would on a console.

Almost all of this involves paying $$$, which I do not have.
Then PC gaming is not for you.
Exactly my point this entire time.
avatar
PiEdude
Crimson Jester

Male Number of posts : 4571
Age : 24
Location : In the middle of a hollowed crust.
Registration date : 2008-03-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by Angatar on Tue Jun 22, 2010 9:17 pm

Lern2save.

_________________
avatar
Angatar
Lord's Personal Minion

Female Number of posts : 3862
Age : 22
Location : Long Island
Registration date : 2008-07-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by CivBase on Tue Jun 22, 2010 11:44 pm

Console shooters are not evolving NEAR as rapidly as they should be... but they're not all crap. Yah, MW and MW2 were major letdowns - perhaps even a step backwards - and should not receive anything like the praise they've been getting... but they're still fun in moderation.

_________________
avatar
CivBase
Adbot

Male Number of posts : 7336
Location : Etchisketchistan
Registration date : 2008-04-27

View user profile http://pathwaygames.forumotion.net/

Back to top Go down

Re: XBL vs PSN

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum