PS3 or XboX 360?

Dublinstiofán

Here’s the story. Finally have the 42” HD telly now its time to pick up the next Generation console. But dilemma has struck.

I’m really a Playstation man, have had PS1 and PS2. Also have an Xbox that wasn’t really ever used. Favourite game Metal Gear Solid series.

What I need to know is:
• Can the extra cost of €630 be justified? A full €230 with no games. The current deal in Smyth’s has Xbox 360 premium, 3 games, loyalty card, €10 vouchers and a play and charge kit for €399.
• What’s the difference in the games? I’ve noticed that most are multi format released and that the PS3 ones are €20 - €30 more expensive every time.
• After you fork out the damn €630 for the console, you then have to spring for a cable to hook it up to the TV. I mean what a joke. And the cable is like €30
• Blu-Ray DVD’s are ridiculously overpriced (€40- €50)
• HD-DVD more reasonable (€20-€30)

I know there was a year in the difference with the release date but come on as much as I loved the Playstation. I’m about set to jump on the Xbox band wagon. Everything appears to be going their way at the moment.

Please tell me if I’m wrong. Would love your opinions on this.

Apologies if this has already been talked about to death but i cant find any previous posts about it. (not that i bothered to look too hard)

Thanks

Mossy Monk

Dublinstiof&#225 wrote: »

Apologies if this has already been talked about to death but i cant find any previous posts about it. (not that i bothered to look too hard)

Troll.

Dublinstiofán

Mossy Monk wrote:

Troll.

Just want some fresh input, that doesn't help at all. so fe*k off, if you have nothing relevant to add.

savemejebus

Look at the games and make your decision. Check out the exclusives for both formats and make your decision based on that. Multiplatform games will be much of a muchness for the time being with the 360 having a slight edge at the moment.

If HD Playback is your thing then the PS3 is a very capable blu-ray player and DVD upscaler. HD-DVD standalone units are dropping in price now so I wouldn't really bother with the 360 HD-DVD unit at the moment (just my opinion), I'd hold off a few months and pick up a standalone one near xmas.

BTW Blu-Rays are not always much more expensive than HD-DVD counter parts, it all depends where you look. Many shops will rob you on HD-DVDS too.

Chumpski

Dublinstiof&#225 wrote: »

Here’s the story. Finally have the 42” HD telly now its time to pick up the next Generation console. But dilemma has struck.

I’m really a Playstation man, have had PS1 and PS2. Also have an Xbox that wasn’t really ever used. Favourite game Metal Gear Solid series.

What I need to know is:
• Can the extra cost of €630 be justified? A full €230 with no games. The current deal in Smyth’s has Xbox 360 premium, 3 games, loyalty card, €10 vouchers and a play and charge kit for €399.
• What’s the difference in the games? I’ve noticed that most are multi format released and that the PS3 ones are €20 - €30 more expensive every time.
• After you fork out the damn €630 for the console, you then have to spring for a cable to hook it up to the TV. I mean what a joke. And the cable is like €30
• Blu-Ray DVD’s are ridiculously overpriced (€40- €50)
• HD-DVD more reasonable (€20-€30)

I know there was a year in the difference with the release date but come on as much as I loved the Playstation. I’m about set to jump on the Xbox band wagon. Everything appears to be going their way at the moment.

Please tell me if I’m wrong. Would love your opinions on this.

Apologies if this has already been talked about to death but i cant find any previous posts about it. (not that i bothered to look too hard)

Thanks

These are my thoughts on it. I don't own either a 360 or PS3 yet and i honestly don't know which ill go for...

Its a crazy price at the moment, youre right, and there are only a few standout exclusives for the PS3. But if youre a big MGS fan then thats a plus right?

Not much of a difference in games, no more so than there was between ps2 and xbox games, one console will produce better looking games eventually but its gameplay that counts.

Dont base the argument on HD DVD, it seems Blu Ray is going to be the format winner. And remember you need to spend 130 extra or so for your 360 to play HD DVD's. The fact is neither might replace DVD's at all and whichever wins wont matter.

Its not an easy decision at the moment but it will get easier with time.

Zombrex

Dublinstiof&#225 wrote: »

Please tell me if I’m wrong. Would love your opinions on this.

I've both, so here are my honest opinions

Buy an Xbox 360 now and a PS3 in 6 months.

If you want a system with games now, the Xbox 360 is the way to go.

Very few games out for the PS3 at the moment. But this will pick up. The Xbox 360 on the other hand has more games out, and has moved a lot of its first release of games to budget (Ghost Recon, Dead Rising, PGR etc). I play my 360 a lot more than my PS3, simply because I've a lot more games for my 360

The price isn't that different if you plan to buy Wi-Fi, the HD-DVD, rechargable battery pack for the wireless controller etc for the Xbox 360. One of the nice things about the PS3 is that you don't have to buy anything else essential (Blu-ray, Wi-fi, rechargable controller). But then again if you don't have Wi-fi or a TV that needs HD movies, you are paying for something you will never use.

Personally I think the Xbox 360 is too loud (the fan) to watch a movie on it, so I have not bothered with the HD-DVD drive. I'm converted to Blu-Ray simply because the PS3 is nearly silent when playing movies. So I would not recommend buying a HD-DVD add on until after you have set up the Xbox 360 and listen to how loud it is where it is set up.

jester77

I was the same as you OP a few months back. Went with the 360 for a few reasons. It currently has a good selection of quality games to play and these can mostly be picked up for under €30 (good sale on play.com now). It has a well established online community. It's now good value IMO. Uncertainty over Blu-ray/HD formats. At least with the 360 you are not paying a premium for a format that might flop. Look at Sonys record in this dept., betamax, minidisc, ATRAC, UMD... it's awful but blu-ray does look promising.

I think that currently the PS3 is too expensive and I can see a price drop coming soon. I read an article today where the sales figures for the PS3 in Japan are even poorer for the month of June with the Nintendo selling 6 times the amount of Wii's. Figures are not available for the rest of the world but I would imagine they are not much better. Sony are going to have to address this and the only real way is a price drop. I would hold off until at least xmas before getting a PS3. Plus the games catalogue is small at the moment but this will have improved by the end of the year and hopefully there should be a few bargains online for games! I'll probably pick it up around then as well.

Oh and as for MGS, there is a rumour that it will get a 360 release. But this is just a rumour!

jodolan

I have to say PS3 mainly due to the xbox being built really badly just take 5 mins to look at the amount of threads here about rings of death and broken xbox's .

Games wise the PS3 has resistence rainbow 6 tiger woods motorstorm and on import the Darkness ( out here in 2 weeks ) end of the month ghost recon 2 thats more than enough to keep you going . There is nothing on xbox thats any better than those games bar C&C ( xbox may have more games but it also has loads of crap games ) and its pointless having loads of games if your xbox is broken

Online for both is full of idiots it really is a waste of time unless you have a few mates online that you can team up with to play . Downloading games is pretty poor on both PS is slightly better as you can get tekken and GT , then older games like lemmings wipeout etc .But why do you want old ass games on a next gen machine .xbox charge while sony is free to play online

PS has blue ray & its wireless xbox isnt ( you can buy an add on but then the price is more or less the same so the PS3 really is the better then )

IT comes down to what kinda money you have to spend if you can afford a PS3 get it but you could get a xbox and a heap of games for the same money .

Both are great machines its really up to you what you want .

Ciaran500

jodolan wrote:

Games wise the PS3 has resistence rainbow 6 tiger woods motorstorm and on import the Darkness ( out here in 2 weeks ) end of the month ghost recon 2 thats more than enough to keep you going . There is nothing on xbox thats any better than those games bar C&C ( xbox may have more games but it also has loads of crap games )

What about Gears of War, Crackdown, Forza 2, Dead Rising, PGR3? And thats just looking at the games I have on my shelf.

jodolan

Ciaran500 wrote:

What about Gears of War, Crackdown, Forza 2, Dead Rising, PGR3? And thats just looking at the games I have on my shelf.

GEars of war is class but too short and IMO ( just my opinion dont freak out ) not better than rainbow 6 or ghost recon 2.

Crackdown terrible - jumping over buildings :eek:
PGR terrible
Dead rising i couldnt get into got to and agian not better than the others which is my point not saying they're isnt good games just not anythign better than rainbow and ghost.

Forza = Borza see what i did there

jodolan

screw it get an atari 2600 great console .

Pong class game next gen graphics , tank blaster

Where are you seeing blu rays for 40 or 50 euros, I got loads and not one of them cost me more than €30. Also you are a big MGS fan, PS3 is the console for metal gear. Lair and Heavenly Sword are out soon, wont see them on an xbox.

Smellyirishman

jodolan wrote:

Games wise the PS3 has resistence rainbow 6 tiger woods motorstorm and on import the Darkness ( out here in 2 weeks ) end of the month ghost recon 2 thats more than enough to keep you going . There is nothing on xbox thats any better than those games bar C&C ( xbox may have more games but it also has loads of crap games ) and its pointless having loads of games if your xbox is broken

Em, perhaps I am missing something but aren't Rainbow 6, The Darkness and Ghost Recon 2 out on the 360 (And probably TW as well) ... and weren't they released earlier in some cases? Which brings the list down to Resistance and Motorstorm and while I'm sure they are good games, I'd be positive that the 360 could offer up some competition atm never mind with the "holiday season" releases due.

My opinion is 360 at the moment by a country mile. I don't doubt that the PS3 will start to make a comeback, possibly by holiday season next year, but for now, it's not worth the money IMO if you're getting the console for gaming.

AnCapaillMor

At the moment the 360, purely for the slectection of games.

The PS3's a better machine and as most are saying in 6 months time it will have caught in the games. the other thing is PS3 is blu-ray so games will have more data, ie more extras. word has it that Pro evo soccer 7 has 19 gigs of data on the bluray version already. You can convert and play and store movie files, no offense to others but none of this streaming crap from another PC.

Bluray depends where you're looking. buy them online you;'d want to be insane to get them in the shops here. Movie selection is better than hd-dvd at the mo, plus you;ll need to the buy the hd-dvd drive along with the 360.

I've both at the mo, i am a bit dissapointed on game selection for the PS3. but personally i'd go PS3, in the long run its better.

Kiith

I'm buying a 360 this week, and will see about getting a PS3 in a few months time, when there are some games that i actually might like.

I'm really looking forward to playing Rainbow Six online, and Crackdown looks great. Plus it has some amazing looking games coming out. Mass Effect IS going to be amazing. Too Human looks good. Online Ace Combat (*drools all over the place).

PS3 will be great, but other the Little Big Planet, theres nothing on it that i'm looking forward to (at least nothing that theres enough info about yet). Motorstorm looks like good fun. Resistence look ok, but as a fan of pc fps's, i dont think i'd like the control scheme.

LookingFor

Dublinstiof&#225 wrote: »

• What’s the difference in the games? I’ve noticed that most are multi format released and that the PS3 ones are €20 - €30 more expensive every time.

That shouldn't be the case, unless on one platform the game has been out longer. Both systems' new third party games should be the same price, so perhaps you have a dodgy retailer there..

If I recall correctly, Sony published games also actually have a lower RRP than Microsoft's, but retailer discounts may neutralise that.

Dublinstiof&#225 wrote: »

• After you fork out the damn €630 for the console, you then have to spring for a cable to hook it up to the TV. I mean what a joke. And the cable is like €30

Depending on the cable you want, you can do cheaper than that online..

Dublinstiof&#225 wrote: »

• Blu-Ray DVD’s are ridiculously overpriced (€40- €50)
• HD-DVD more reasonable (€20-€30)

Dodgy retailer strikes again? In most stores Blu-rays are usually about €35 from what I've seen. In either case, you can do much better online, though. Online, certainly, there is usually no difference in price..and in fact, where there is one, it's often in Blu-ray's favour because HD-DVD discs are sometimes double DVD-HD-DVD discs which cost more.

jodolan

Smellyirishman wrote:

Em, perhaps I am missing something but aren't Rainbow 6, The Darkness and Ghost Recon 2 out on the 360 (And probably TW as well) ... and weren't they released earlier in some cases? Which brings the list down to Resistance and Motorstorm and while I'm sure they are good games, I'd be positive that the 360 could offer up some competition atm never mind with the "holiday season" releases due.

My opinion is 360 at the moment by a country mile. I don't doubt that the PS3 will start to make a comeback, possibly by holiday season next year, but for now, it's not worth the money IMO if you're getting the console for gaming.

Yea your kinda missing the point a little

I know there on xbox thats where i played them i was saying that they are now out on PS3 and outside of these games there is very little in the line of other great games that the PS3 doesnt have . And by the time he is finished playing those 3 or 4 games it will be the end of the summer and pro evo GT4 etc will be coming out ( On both ) so getting an xbox while waiting for the PS3 to catch up isnt needed anymore , that there is enough to get you goign and lots coming over the summer to keep it going .

Its a far better machine IMO

Smellyirishman

jodolan wrote:

Yea your kinda missing the point a little

Ah, OK, got you now. In that case though, why not go with the 360 since it has all the good game that the PS3 has, bar 2, but is 230 euro cheaper, has a much larger library of games atm including more exclusives and is set to release a few major titles before the year is out (Halo, GTA w/exclusive content, Blue Dragon, Mass Effect...)?

LookingFor

Smellyirishman wrote:

In that case though, why not go with the 360 since it has all the good game that the PS3 has, bar 2, but is 230 euro cheaper, has a much larger library of games atm including more exclusives and is set to release a few major titles before the year is out (Halo, GTA w/exclusive content, Blue Dragon, Mass Effect...)?

There's a bunch of very promising games coming by the end of the year on PS3 that aren't coming to 360, and he might prefer them? There'll likely also be a pricecut, and the price difference may well get smaller depending on that (very particularly if you take the Elite into consideration!). Then there's the fact you can play online for free, often on dedicated servers, that you can pick up Blu-ray movies, that you have a bigger hard drive etc. The initial cost may be steeper, but after that there are far fewer extra charges unlike 360 - no extra charge to play online, no extra charge to play HD movies, no extra charge for wireless, no extra charge for more HDD space, no expensive proprietary peripherals, no extra warranty cover All those things add up, I ended up spending far more than 400 on my 360 when all was said and done, and over time would actually spend far more for it via Live subscriptions and pricey HDD upgrades.

PS3 may hit your wallet hard upfront, but 360 is like death by a thousand paper cuts in that regard.

And yeah, it's true that more and more games are going multiplatform - in both directions - but PS3 still holds some key third party aces, and Sony themselves is by far a larger publisher and developer than MS, and obviously all of their stuff will only be on PS3. Sony is apparently the third largest games publisher in the world (behind EA and Ubisoft), and a fairly high fraction of the PS2's more popular games came from Sony themselves, so that's something to take into consideration.

jodolan

Smellyirishman wrote:

Ah, OK, got you now. In that case though, why not go with the 360 since it has all the good game that the PS3 has, bar 2, but is 230 euro cheaper, has a much larger library of games atm including more exclusives and is set to release a few major titles before the year is out (Halo, GTA w/exclusive content, Blue Dragon, Mass Effect...)?

Mainly Reliability , all the games in the world are no use if your xbox is in holland getting fixed for a month

Personally i think the PS3 is better and worth the extra money if you get the cheaper one its only 140 more and if you intend on playing online with the legit xbox live subcription its going to be 84 euro , So that means its really only 56 euro more for a PS3 . So thats 56 euro for a blue ray player cant argue with that price


But i think he needs to really do some searching himself see whats coming out whats out for both consoles then deciding which suits him better both games and money wise before making a choice also maybe looking at the controllers if you have been a PS user till now the xbox controller might not suit you , while its good to get other reviews on here for example they are just that other peoples opinions .

One mans garbage is another mans treasure and all that jazz

Ciaran500

jodolan wrote:

Personally i think the PS3 is better and worth the extra money if you get the cheaper one its only 140 more and if you intend on playing online with the legit xbox live subcription its going to be 84 euro , So that means its really only 56 euro more for a PS3 . So thats 56 euro for a blue ray player cant argue with that price

They don't sell the €500 PS3 anymore and you seem to be forgetting a 360 is €400 with 3 games.

LookingFor

Ciaran500 wrote:

They don't sell the €500 PS3 anymore and you seem to be forgetting a 360 is €400 with 3 games.

+€60/year for online play + €20 or €30 for play-and-charge kits + all those other little expenses. Upgrading a 360's hard disk will end up costing you a fortune. If you want wifi, another €100. You sure you'll never have to pay for out-of-warranty repairs? And so on..

PS3 has far fewer hidden costs. And where there is room for upgrading and peripherals, you can do so much more cheaply.

Chumpski

I dont know much about the PS3 or 360 myself but from what i've read on this thread the hidden costs of the 360 seem a right pain, at least the PS3 is upfront about how expensive it is. But the 360 does have alot more games out at the moment...

xanthor

Dublinstiof&#225 wrote: »

After you fork out the damn €630 for the console, you then have to spring for a cable to hook it up to the TV. I mean what a joke. And the cable is like €30

...or a fiver on eBay.

jodolan

Ciaran500 wrote:

They don't sell the €500 PS3 anymore and you seem to be forgetting a 360 is €400 with 3 games.

Dont they , i suppose i have nt been looking at them since i bought it . One of those 3 games is project gotham which they have given me free twice !! once with the console once with the wheel . and its crap .

There is all sorts of different arguements that could be made you get 3 games with the xbox you get 60 GB wireless plus blue ray plus a blue ray movie on the PS is it worth it its up to the buyer .

THink it really comes down to your own choice for me the money doesn tcome into it 400 600 its all the same id prefere to spend the extra and get more console features

shortys94

I am pretty much a playstation man, had the PS1, PS2 and PSP.

But I decided to go for the Xbox 360 this time. Many people just want a console dedicated to gaming and thats what the 360 is. Regarding the live subscription, I had never used xbox live before and I can tell you playstation users that this itself is worth buying the console for. ( Oh yea one can avail of four free months of the gold sub too so not too bad)

I have the plan to buy a PS3 when there are more exclusives for it but Im not totally convinced. The Xbox 360 seems to be getting far more upcoming exclusives, well that Ive heard of. Alan Wake, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Halo 3, Too Human, Blue Dragon, and PGR4.

I just havent seen enough games to lure me into buying another Playstation console. Perhaps E3 will change this.

Regarding the Xbox360 technical issues I can say that Ive never had a problem with mine. There may be more than a reasonable amount with issues but by now I'd say the majority of consoles should be fine.

Anyway you could buy the PS3 for all the extras it has yet find yourself waiting for significant game releases for months. It seems familiar to me in that the PSP had the same ordeal, game releases for most of the first year of the handhelds life were few and far between with only few great games coming to the handheld. The PS3 is the same really, its a nice piece of machinery but you will find yourself waiting for quite some time.

The 360 seems like the right decision and with the upcoming and present games library you wont be disappointed. The PS3 can always wait, and drop in price, and o yea promise more exclusives.

Anyway its up to you.

LookingFor

shortys94 wrote:

I have the plan to buy a PS3 when there are more exclusives for it but Im not totally convinced. The Xbox 360 seems to be getting far more upcoming exclusives, well that Ive heard of. Alan Wake, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Halo 3, Too Human, Blue Dragon, and PGR4.

..

Anyway you could buy the PS3 for all the extras it has yet find yourself waiting for significant game releases for months. It seems familiar to me in that the PSP had the same ordeal, game releases for most of the first year of the handhelds life were few and far between with only few great games coming to the handheld. The PS3 is the same really, its a nice piece of machinery but you will find yourself waiting for quite some time.

At this point, you won't be waiting too long. There's been a definite quiet period post-launch - not unlike a certain other console that launched last year - but judging by the releases set from August that should be a dim and distant memory soon. Sony alone has over a dozen exclusives scheduled for the rest of the year (a much larger number than Microsoft are scheduled to publish this year).

And if you were buying now, there'd be a decent catalogue of higher profile titles to sink your teeth into while you wait the month or so for the autumn/winter schedules to kick in.

I think the only downside to buying a PS3 now is the potential for a price drop in a few months.

mickoneill30

LookingFor wrote:

Sony alone has over a dozen exclusives scheduled for the rest of the year (a much larger number than Microsoft are scheduled to publish this year).

This list was compiled in June. So there's probably a few more games announced since then for all formats. But they've done a few lists for other months so you can see for yourself which way it's heading.

http://www.gamingtarget.com/article.php?artid=7064

steviec

The price difference is greatly exagerated.

Online is free for PS3, it's not for 360. You'll be using the console for the next 4 years at least - that alone makes up the price difference between the two machines.

Add to that the fact that the PS3 has cheaper accessories and downloadables, it's region free so cheap games are far easier to import, it's compatible with standard PC hard drives and accessories rather than expensive propietary ones like the 360, it has a wireless card and a blu ray player built in should you need them, the PS3 doesn't seem like such bad value long term.

As for games, the 360 has undoubtedly the better catalogue right now, as it should do having been out for quite a while longer. What's key is that from next year on 99% of third party games will be multiplatform and what you have to look at is first party stuff, and for me Sony have far stronger first party developers than Microsoft, but it's a matter of taste really. If you like Japanese RPGs, action adventures, platform games or racing games I'd go with Playstation, if you like FPS or Third Person shooters then go with Xbox.

Then the other key is build quality. Easiest comparison of the lot. The PS3 is a beautifully made, extremely quiet, very reliable piece of sophisticated hardware. The 360 sounds like a jumbo jet and seems to be held together by duct tape. I had both, but having had three seperate 360s implode on me I've stopped bothering with the console. I'll buy another when they improve the hardware because there are a number of games I'll be wanting to play on it.

cedomination

jodolan wrote:

Dont they , i suppose i have nt been looking at them since i bought it . One of those 3 games is project gotham which they have given me free twice !! once with the console once with the wheel . and its crap .

Hey anto1208 would you mind giving better reasons then "its crap"?

LookingFor

mickoneill30 wrote:

This list was compiled in June. So there's probably a few more games announced since then for all formats. But they've done a few lists for other months so you can see for yourself which way it's heading.

http://www.gamingtarget.com/article.php?artid=7064

I keep an eye on these things myself Those lists aren't very comprehensive, and are a bit out of date (an in a couple of cases incorrect). But it does highlight how heavily skewed the 360's lineup is with PC ports. Factor those out and it shrink's significantly..factor them out in PS3's, and only a few are removed. The significance of that would depend on whether you like those games or not, and/or have a decent PC already I suppose.

My original point was about Sony's games vs Microsoft's i.e. the true, guaranteed exclusives. Sony has over a dozen coming in the next six months alone, MS has far fewer.

steviec

LookingFor wrote:

I keep an eye on these things myself Those lists aren't very comprehensive, and are a bit out of date (an in a couple of cases incorrect). But it does highlight how heavily skewed the 360's lineup is with PC ports. Factor those out and it shrink's significantly..factor them out in PS3's, and only a few are removed. The significance of that would depend on whether you like those games or not, and/or have a decent PC already I suppose.

And the vast majority of those PC ports would have been on PS3 except it wasn't in the hands of developers yet - the number of new exclusives will drop drastically in the coming year. You can see this by the way many of the earlier ones already have confirmed sequels on PS3, like Call of Duty, Full Auto, Ridge Racer and Saint's Row.

mickoneill30

LookingFor wrote:

I keep an eye on these things myself Those lists aren't very comprehensive, and are a bit out of date (an in a couple of cases incorrect). But it does highlight how heavily skewed the 360's lineup is with PC ports. Factor those out and it shrink's significantly..factor them out in PS3's, and only a few are removed. The significance of that would depend on whether you like those games or not, and/or have a decent PC already I suppose.

I don't get your point. The Xbox list is less impressive because there are some games on the PC too? I'd imagine that most of the people buying a 360 or PS3 aren't paying fortunes to keep their PCs up to date to play games on those too. And Microsoft are gearing up Live to let Xbox users play against PC users for some games.

Is it not a good thing that the games come out for more platforms. The developers are only there to make money. Exclusivity is all well and good but unless the PS3 sales start to take off there will be less developers working exclusively for the PS3. I suppose Sony will always produce exclusive games but there are a lot of other defectors (http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/07/sonys-lost-excl.html)
Plenty of people are pinning their hopes on a PS3 price drop to boost sales. I'd say MS are just waiting for Sony to do that, then they'll do exactly the same. Ah well, it's good for the consumer.

At the end of the day if you buy a console it's to play games. Look at the games that are currently available and what's in the pipeline and decide which console has the games you want.

I really don't buy the point about the PS3 having a Blu-Ray player. I have no need for a HD player, I know nobody that buys HD content. I wouldn't want to pay for a HD player now. Maybe I will in a couple of years but adding the player to the cost of the PS3 was a bad move. It's equally likely I'll just move to downloadable content (I seem to be the only person in Ireland with a good broadband connection according to the posts on boards ) Sony only did it to make sure that the Blu-Ray format wins. That's great. But it adds nothing to the games so for people that just want to play games they're subsidising the format war. It might be good for Blu-Ray but it's affecting sales of PS3.

Pedro Monscooch

I'd also like Jodolan to post his gamertag to see if he's played any game at all or just talking through his ass. Are you desperately trying to justify spending so much money on a PS3 in every single PS3 vs Xbox thread?

mayto

in a years time they'll be saying waiting till the ps3 gets all these exclusive games

I havent turned my ps3 on since April, maybe if your very fond of playing games its worth the money, but if you just like to play games every so often the ps3 is a waste of money at the moment. Most ppl dont have wireless routers, most people dont have hdtv's, most ppl havent a clue wtf Blu-ray and hd-dvd are,.........and their the people who have buying the ps2 over the years. When its 300 euros it might take off properly here.

LookingFor

mickoneill30 wrote:

I don't get your point. The Xbox list is less impressive because there are some games on the PC too?

Yeah, as a PC gamer it does make the list less impressive to me. And my point was, as steviec has sort of pointed out, that those games are very vulnerable to porting, be it sooner or later. A couple of those on that list have since already been mooted for PS3 for example. Both Sony and MS can really only truly rely on the stuff they're publishing themselves to remain exclusive.

mickoneill30 wrote:

And Microsoft are gearing up Live to let Xbox users play against PC users for some games.

Whoop-de-whoop, I did that on my Dreamcast. And for free too. Live ain't gonna fly in PC-land as long as they're charging for it.

mickoneill30 wrote:

Is it not a good thing that the games come out for more platforms. The developers are only there to make money. Exclusivity is all well and good but unless the PS3 sales start to take off there will be less developers working exclusively for the PS3. I suppose Sony will always produce exclusive games but there are a lot of other defectors (http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/07/sonys-lost-excl.html)

And there've been as many 'defectors' from Xbox too.

And I don't necessarily see it as a bad thing that games go to more systems as long as quality isn't compromised. But as also pointed out earlier, if all third party stuff ends up on every system, then it comes down to first parties to differentiate their content, and there Sony has the upper hand IMO - certainly in terms of numbers, there's no arguing with that. At the moment it hasn't come down to that, both PS3 and 360 still have some third party exclusives, even if they're only a small fraction of the whole library now.

mickoneill30

LookingFor wrote:

And there've been as many 'defectors' from Xbox too.

I quoted where I read about the Sony defectors. Have you got links for the 360 ones?

From the list I quoted above.
Xbox 360 has 26 titles that are exclusive to the console (not appearing on PC either). 12 of those are done by MS.
The PS3 has 30 titles exclusive to it. 23 are done by Sony.

Is that a good thing that 2/3 of the exclusive content for the PS3 is done by one company? Is it not better to have a broader base of publishers for the console?

LookingFor

mickoneill30 wrote:

I quoted where I read about the Sony defectors. Have you got links for the 360 ones?

Think about it - Oblivion, from a developer who last gen didn't touch Playstation, is now on Playstation 3. Team Ninja is making PS3 games now, their first in the Ninja Gaiden franchise. iD didn't touch playstation last generation, but did develop on Xbox, and now they're also developing on PS3. There's many more examples, particularly of PC developers who didn't dabble in Playstation before, but did dev for Xbox, but who are now also on PS3. If you think websites should be editorialising about this rather than just focussing on the traffic from one side to the other, perhaps you should let them know

mickoneill30 wrote:

Is that a good thing that 2/3 of the exclusive content for the PS3 is done by one company? Is it not better to have a broader base of publishers for the console?

Developers, you mean? Sony works with a very broad base of developers. These games aren't all coming from one company, but Sony is publishing them. I don't think that's a bad thing if the publisher is as supportive and resourceful as is needed to make a great game, and certainly in that regard, Sony seems to deliver. They've given apparently huge budgets to many of their games being made by external developers. As a production house, Sony has also risen pretty high since they started out..the quality of their output rose very sharply during the PS2 years, showing they can get many great games out of all of these developers. A lot of these developers now working with Sony could probably have done far worse from a resource and production expertise point of view when choosing a publisher, so no, I don't think it's a bad thing if Sony has a large presence here. If you look at the most popular games on PS2, Sony had a very high profile there too.

Sony also commissions games and funds games from developers that no other publisher would. Who else would have made a GAA game, for example? They've never been risk-adverse, and they say repeatedly in interviews that it's their job to do stuff that third parties won't. So the more the merrier from them, IMO.

steviec

mickoneill30 wrote:

From the list I quoted above.
Xbox 360 has 26 titles that are exclusive to the console (not appearing on PC either). 12 of those are done by MS.
The PS3 has 30 titles exclusive to it. 23 are done by Sony.

Is that a good thing that 2/3 of the exclusive content for the PS3 is done by one company? Is it not better to have a broader base of publishers for the console?

But soon enough it will be getting closer to that sort of figure on 360 too - except they're pumping out fewer first party games than Sony.

The third party exclusives MS have include various franchises and games from developers who just didn't have PS3 dev kits in time or didn't see a reason to release right now when there's so few PS3s out there - a couple of years from nowthough and PS3 owners will be playing the next games in most of those franchises because they'll have gone multiplatform. Remember when Resident Evil 4 was the reason to own a Gamecube, or the PS2 was the only place you could play GTA, or when you needed an xbox to play Ninja Gaiden?

But the first party content, that's permanent. If you only own a 360, you will never play any of those 23 games, simple as that. And the same goes for Microsoft's 12 first party games.

Plus, as has been said, that's all games coming from one publisher, not one developer, there's actually a huge variety in developers working under Sony's wing from the teams in Japan working on Ico and Gran Turismo to the teams in the US working on God of War and Ratchet and Clank, to the teams in the UK working on Singstar and Wipeout. The variety there is vast and in general the quality of first party titles is very good. The same goes for Microsoft by the way, in general first party titles are better funded and more polished than, say, the games that Activision or THQ might typically pump out because the platform holders are more concerned with keeping their system's reputation up rather than just making money and meeting deadlines on each game and thus they give the developers more tools and more time to get their games up to scratch.

jodolan

Pedro Monscooch wrote:

I'd also like Jodolan to post his gamertag to see if he's played any game at all or just talking through his ass. Are you desperately trying to justify spending so much money on a PS3 in every single PS3 vs Xbox thread?

:rolleyes:

Stick to the xbox forum if you dont want to hear about the Playstaion . I dont ever need to justify how i spend my own money to you .

cedomination

jodolan wrote:

:rolleyes:

Stick to the xbox forum if you dont want to hear about the Playstaion . I dont ever need to justify how i spend my own money to you .

Oh really?Then why do you always bring the ps3 into every xbox360 thread?

mickoneill30

In fairness to the guy this is a PS forum.

cedomination

mickoneill30 wrote:

In fairness to the guy this is a PS forum.

This is a thread for discussion of the 360 and ps3 so theres nothing wrong with talking about the 360.
You clearly haven't seen his posts in the xbox360 forum,he just drops into threads and talks about how the 360 is crap and the ps3 is the way forward.

mickoneill30

cedomination wrote:

This is a thread for discussion of the 360 and ps3 so theres nothing wrong with talking about the 360.

Your post two posts up asked why he was talking about the PS3. I'm confused now.

That's all grand but I'm not defending his actions in the 360 forum (I haven't seen them anyway). But I'd expect people to be saying the 360 is crap in a (this) Playstation forum.

cedomination

mickoneill30 wrote:

Your post two posts up asked why he was talking about the PS3. I'm confused now.

That's all grand but I'm not defending his actions in the 360 forum (I haven't seen them anyway). But I'd expect people to be saying the 360 is crap in a (this) Playstation forum.

In the post you are referring to I asked him why he is always bringing up the ps3 in xbox 360 threads.

justbringit89

i have both a 360 agus a PS3, the 360 is the way to go for now

jodolan

cedomination wrote:

This is a thread for discussion of the 360 and ps3 so theres nothing wrong with talking about the 360.
You clearly haven't seen his posts in the xbox360 forum,he just drops into threads and talks about how the 360 is crap and the ps3 is the way forward.

Show me one thread where i have said the Xbox is crap , ive never said it .
anything ive said is true .


I prefere the playstation ive never claimed other wise if someone puts out a question asking which one they should get im going to recomend the playstation .


If someone asks which should i get ice cream or chocolate and i say chocolate doesnt mean i hate ice cream i just prefere chocolate .

cedomination

jodolan wrote:

Show me one thread where i have said the Xbox is crap , ive never said it .
anything ive said is true .

o.0 Are you serious?
Let me go dig up some threads.

jodolan

cedomination wrote:

o.0 Are you serious?
Let me go dig up some threads.

Do .

Im awaiting my apoligy

cedomination

jodolan wrote:

Do .

Im awaiting my apoligy

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055115028

really makes sense to get a PS3 ASAP. XBOX could have a million games but they are usless if your console is in Holland getting fixed

Thats just one example,you might want to read some of the replies to that thread by the way,I can go on and find tons of posts from before you got banned.

lee_baby_simms

I can't believe this moron is back making every thread unreadable.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

cedomination wrote:

I can go on and find tons of posts from before you got banned.

With respect why would you waste your time?