Ps3 Vs 360? (no Wii!1)

Discussion in 'Gaming' started by thoth243, May 14, 2008.

  1. darkshine

    darkshine Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    The closet...trying to find Narnia!
    For all those screaming Blue Ray as a major reason why he should buy PS3, first realise Blue Ray means nothing unless you have a good TV and if you don't that'll set you back at least £500 on top of the console. Then take into account that only a selection of films come out on Blue Ray and although currently it seems to be beating HD DVD (why? who knows) that is by no means set PLUS by the time it is a major technology actually worth investing in the players will have come down in price a lot. So basically unless you're a movie fanatic Blue Ray shouldn't come into it, and if you are you'd know that the PS3 one is cheap for a reason...

    On the actual merits then of the consoles, don't bother mentioning graphics; in the long run PS3 may just have the edge but for the next two years they will be running the same and until that future date, as xlink said, 360 runs faster and smoother at the same detail.
    For the rest of the hardware, yes everyone is currently pointing to the Red Rings of Death (RRoD) on the 360 but lets face it Sony has a worse track record for sub standard hardware, especially in home consoles, than M$. I give it another six months or so before the PS3's all start dying unexpectedly as well, and when that happens at least the 360 is cheaper to replace and getting cheaper all the time. Sony are making such heavy losses on PS3 that they really can't cut prices any more; if they do so it will be a final attempt at saving the console and seeing as currently sales are healthy that won't be happening soon.
    As for peripherals/games first of all you mentioned you didn't want to pay for online gaming subscriptions on 360...yet you also said you'll have to shell out $200 for a PS3. Last time I checked Xbox Live was significantly less than this so I don't really see the problem, especially when the end service is so much better. Games libraries for both are getting pretty good though obviously 360 has the best games NOW and far more of them. You've already said you're not an MSGS fan so from my opinion there's little on the horizon for PS3 you can't get on 360 now or in the future.

    In other words PS3 is still not a console that validates its heavy price tag. Personally I'd spend the money on upgrading a computer, a gaming platform with the largest library, best hardware and greatest capabilities for multimedia and future expansion plus potentially free online game play...but that's just me. If you want a console for whatever odd reason, go 360.
     
  2. Niosis

    Niosis Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    949
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    The OP said he didn't want a Wii. Care to explain why you brought it up?

    Regarding the post above mine: Toshiba stopped producing HDDVD players so yes, HDDVD is going to be a dead format as far as movies go.
     
  3. TheMuffinMan

    TheMuffinMan Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    I brought it up to convince him to get it, as his reasoning was quite narrow-minded and unintelligent.
     
  4. Niosis

    Niosis Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    949
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    He said he wasn't interested, therefore bringing it up was unnecessary.

    Besides, I'm sure those aren't the only reasons.

    EDIT: In fact, the title of the thread is PS3 Vs 360, therefore your post is off-topic.
     
  5. xilence

    xilence Member

    Posts:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
    Personally, I say get the PS3.

    A bunch of people say that the 360 has a wider range of games than the PS3.
    But I mean, come on. The PS3 console has just been released in 2007. Therefore, there isn't a huge list of games yet.
    But it'll develop a whole bunch of games when time gives em, uh... time. :P

    And for that, why do you care if he doesn't wanna move around while playing? Really...
    You'd want to relax on a big soft comfy couch and play. And Hilsee is right. You're like, off topic for posting that Wii thing.
    And thoth243 said he's NOT interested on Wii. And his decision... Is probably FINAL.
     
  6. dementia

    dementia Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    6,244
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Location:
    Denver
    360.

    Coming from a Sony fanboy, I have all 3 of the next gen systems, and the PS3 is the only one I still have in the box. The ONLY reason I bought it is for when FFXIII comes out, and I bought it early so I def wouldn't have to wait, as I know locally when FFXII came out the PS2 sold out the same day.

    PS3 has a horrible game selection at the moment, and the 360 is on par hardware wise with a better game selection.
     
  7. darkshine

    darkshine Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    The closet...trying to find Narnia!
    I didn't say it wasn't a dead format, I just said I don't understand why Blue Ray won. Blue ray disks are more expensive, the hardware is less well designed so arguably more likely to suffer from technical problems and initially HDDVD had greater support (especially as Sony was taking heavy losses across the board and shares were bottoming out). But you're right, Blue Ray appears to have won unless something goes majorley wrong or somebody ploughs new investment into the tech.

    Back on topic though, for people claiming the PS3 hasn't been around long so can be excused not having a good games library I point them to the Wii and especially the 360, both of which had very good selection of games shortly after release. Plus the many delays on the release of PS3 should have meant when it finally did arrive there would be a good number of games almost ready to go to production...but their weren't. Partly because of the success of its rivals, partly because of developers not liking the larger price tag feeling the console wouldn't sell well and partly because its a pig to code for making fast conversions impossible from the likes of Wii, PC and 360.
    Plus the argument should be moot by this point, PS3 has been out almost a year and has absolutely nothing to show for it really.
     
  8. Niosis

    Niosis Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    949
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    They didn't win because of quality or because of anything. They won simply because Toshiba said "Hey, we're not making HD-DVD players anymore." and that settled it. That's all it took.

    I figured HD-DVD would come out on top but I didn't realize that one company could change the fate of a format.
     
  9. darkshine

    darkshine Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    The closet...trying to find Narnia!
    It wasn't just that. A lot of companies took sides rather than staying open, I seem to recall Panasonic did very well in Australia with HD-DVD players and got a few more companies involved shortly before the format failed, but at the end of the day more film studios had signed with Blue Ray exclusively than could be competed with.
     
  10. Gam

    Gam Active Member

    Posts:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2008
    360 is better, more fun games can be used there. The live fee is only a yearly fee.
     
  11. Niosis

    Niosis Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    949
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Eh?

    That's like saying my cell phone bill is only yearly because I payed for it all at once.
     
  12. Galione

    Galione Well-Known Member

    Age:
    38
    Posts:
    3,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Location:
    Utah, USA
    lol if you think there is little on the horizon for PS3 then you fail at life and choose not to look into the gaming world and the reason why some games run smoother on the 360 compared to the PS3 is because those are ported games which cause the system to run hella slower because it's programming sucks and is swiss cheese compared to that of what it is supposed to be for a smooth run on PS3. Look at all the exclusives it has and you'll see they run faster than any 360 programmed game out there. Resistance fall of man being on of them I added a third party FPS counter to my PS3 and it runs way better what halo does on my 360 or any of the others at that and RFOM has 2x more dynamic shaders than the most recent halo and also runs an engine almost equal if not better than Halo 3.

    Also the whole "360 has way more games" crap is a cop out cause over half of the games that come out on 360 blow badly and at least 80 percent of the games that have come out for PS3 actually have some entertaining value don't get me started on 360's exclusive "vampire rain" I can actually count how many games got 7 or above in overall game rating on the 360.

    I love my 360 don't get me wrong but it's a hobby gamers console and live blows with all the little racist kids and nerds that play for 8 hours straight a day.

    oh and 360's failure rate with the red ring of death is almost at 40% so you have almost a 50/50 chance of your console dying on you that's wonderful when ps3's failure rate is a little under 8% at this point.


    last thing I have to say is check into things before you go ranting about them cause someone who's been playing and making games for as long as I have will shut ya down. Oh and if you'd been keeping up on the word around the gaming developers world they are starting to program first for the PS3 now cause to port it down to the 360 is easier cause they only have to delete coding to port it not make more and fill in the holes. Also the word is that PS3 is still projecting to come out on top for the year and it hasn't changed since January.
     
  13. Galione

    Galione Well-Known Member

    Age:
    38
    Posts:
    3,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Location:
    Utah, USA
    ? what Blue Ray has less well designed hardware you kiddin me? you know that Blue Ray players are a more advanced and fail safe technology than a dual layered hd-dvd? while BR is quad layered with more disk space available and more advanced layer and hardware technologies? also unlike hd-dvd players blue ray players can expand and also be updated via firmware updates meaning you can add more applications to run with the initial booting hardware and playing capabilities.

    that's what I thought just talking out ya arse. Also this has nothing to do with the PS3 for both hd-dvd and blue ray don't need a console to be it's own separate player and btw blue ray won with more players sold than ps3's sold so ps3 really had very little to do with it's success, it's just the added bonus to have both your console and blue ray player in one plus have games programmed on blue ray disks meaning more room for games to expand only grow better in graphics and engine usage. Cell Broadband Engine FTW!
     
  14. l0l0l

    l0l0l Senior Member

    Posts:
    556
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    I'm sorry but I really don't think what you said is right at all. You cannot say 360 is the best and has the best games, because this all just eventually becomes 100% opinionated. To me, I think that PS3 has really fun games, infact i've had more fun with a PS3 game than an Xbox 360 game.

    100% agreed
     
  15. Galione

    Galione Well-Known Member

    Age:
    38
    Posts:
    3,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Location:
    Utah, USA
    Danke Schion
     

Share This Page