XBox Live and Modern Warfare 2?

[Renegade_Turner]

Who has XBox Live and Modern Warfare 2 and a headset, preferably? I do, my gamertag is DogzOnFire. All my friends seem to have it for the PS3.

[Glabbit]

Does that include me?
No, because I lack the game and headset.
M'hah.

You actually pay for Xbox Live, Ren? You surprise me. I had expected better of you.

[Renegade_Turner]

Why, is there a way to attain XBox Live without paying for it? If there was, I would. 4 euro a month is a pretty nominal fee to pay considering it's a better online service than PS3's online service and the online service for most PC games.

[Glabbit]

Not that I know of, but microsoft, in my opinion, is a moneygrubbers company rather than an electronics production company. Also their consoles tend to die.
Thus PS3.

[Renegade_Turner]

My XBox 360 is just fine. Microsoft is moneygrubbing and Sony isn't? LOL

[Glabbit]

Less so, anyway.

[Grayswandir]

Its just business. They're both out to make money.
As for XBL, I haven't played online in quite a while. I should really get back online or cancel my subscription until I get back on a regular basis.

[Renegade_Turner]

Less so, anyway.

lol naivety

[m3nace]

well there have been rumors surfacing about sony making playstation network subscription based too.
But they're only rumors

[Glabbit]

Less so, anyway.

lol naivety

If they were equally so, you'd have to pay for the internet connection and their consoles would be scheduled to die at an average of a few months after purchase.
This is not the case, so I find them less moneygrubberylike.
Disagree with me if you will, but you won't change my opinion.

[Renegade_Turner]

Sony not moneygrubbing? What about Sony insisting that Spiderman 4 featured Black Cat as a villain instead of the villain Sam Raimi wanted, thereby causing Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire to drop out of the picture altogether? Not being moneygrubbing?

There's countless examples of Sony and Microsoft being moneygrubbing. Assuming one multinational corporation is more or less moneygrubbing than another is, basically, naivety.

You might like to think that Sony's free multiplayer service is them being benevolent or non-moneygrubbing, but I wouldn't bet on it. Behind every move these companies make is the ultimate query they're posing themselves of "How can we make the most money out of this?"

Both companies were founded on excellence in technology. Whether or not they are still based on such principles, they sure do love money.

[invertin]

Unfortunately I do not currently have live. I've got a year's code and a 48 code, but a whole year of live is one of those things that are so awesome that you never use them.

And 48 hours is no-where near enough time killing terrorists/being terrorists.

[Renegade_Turner]

You have a year's subscription purchased and you're not using it?

[Glabbit]

Both companies were founded on excellence in technology. Whether or not they are still based on such principles, they sure do love money.

Alright then, so maybe I just mean Sony has better technology because PS's don't die nearly as much as xboxes do.

Leave me alone, damnit, ignorance is bliss, and I'm plenty depressed about humanity already D=

[Renegade_Turner]

Alright then, so maybe I just mean Sony has better technology because PS's don't die nearly as much as xboxes do.

Not really. I think you'll find XBox 360's had a much shorter production time. If they'd taken the same amount of time as the PS3 and if they had costed as much to put in needless additions like blu-ray and whatnot, they'd be just as technically advanced. The PS3 when it came out costed considerably more than the XBox 360 when it came out.

Anyway, this is all semantics, the two systems are pretty much identical to me with minute differences.

Why is it when I ask a question about whether or not anyone has a certain game on a certain console, I get people going "LOL CUZ NO 1 HAZ DAT KONSOLE STUPID!!!" as if I'm going to go "NO U!!! XBOX 360 IS BESTTTT!!!!! =["