Why even compare a free service to a paid one? I think more people would care about getting something for free, than being able to "chat" with their buddy across different games! Sh*t, casual gamers probably won't play games
that often to even justify the cost they pay for XBL. I know I don't. If I paid for an online service, then play my PS2 once a week, that's a waste of money in my view. 'Free' is the key!
Take the Socom franchise, for example. It enjoyed much success on the PS2 as it's poster child for online gaming, and I would attribute much (most?) of their success to the fact that it was free. The fun factor and growing fanbase helped as well. I know I never would've played it if it wasn't free, because for me, I don't care much for 'chat', 'gamerstat' etc., because I don't play often enough to get anywhere near what the top guys achieve.
Also, AFAICR, didn't M$ post big Live! sign ups when they included free memberships with a certain game? Again, further proof that 'free' is the key element in drawing people online -- not "you can chat across games!"
Anyways, quit these "because XBL has that feature" comparisons, because I think it's quite clear that the PlayStation contingency on these boards are very happy with SONY's new offering, especially since it's 'FREE'!