Ps3 Or x box 360?

Patricide

Ok im finally getting around to buying myself a "next gen" console and im not too sure what to get. I know i dont like the wii(although mario is class). Im leaning to an x box just because i cant really see too many reasons to buy me a ps3. All the major games are out on both consoles with the x box performing better in my eyes for most of them (using game trailers comparisons). Also it has exclusives like lost oddesy and bioshock.

I do have a few gripes with the 360 though, its so fricken loud its not even funny, also what are the odds of the tech being pushed to its limits any time soon and what good ps exclusives are on the way. All this not to mention the 360s attrocious break down record kinda put me off.

So, Convince me here....what console should i get?

Varik

Patricide wrote: »

Ok im finally getting around to buying myself a "next gen" console

it's not next gen at this stage try using hd gen, so people don't recomend a wii

what game do you like name a few

Rev Hellfire

Patricide wrote: »

So, Convince me here....what console should i get?

I don't know anything about consoles but kittens are frightfully cute.

Varik

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I don't know anything about consoles but kittens are frightfully cute.

i agree kittens are way better than a wii

Zonda999

Posting the same thread in both xbox and playstation threads??Well you know what different answer each thread is going to give you anyway....

Patricide

ahh but that way i get the pros from one and the cons from the other. if you get me. I like mostly fps games, a few racing games and the regular suspects such as gta and metal gear solid.

Leonid

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I don't know anything about consoles but kittens are frightfully cute.

What a lovely thought you beautiful ,fragile little thing.

Mossy Monk

Patricide wrote: »

metal gear solid.

PS3 it is so. Wont be available on the 360.

Bard

Also, HD-DVD is dead... which makes the PS3 all the more attractive with built-in BluRay.

Patricide

ah but thats the thing, i thought the same thing with mgs2 on the ps2 but then like 3 months later they got it with added content. No real interest in blu rey, dvds are cheaper and can be read by all or most blu rey players i think? or am i wrong here?

Bard

You're right.

Video cassettes are cheaper too - why not buy a cheap VCR for your movie viewing pleasure and avoid shiny discs altogether?

JavaBear

FPS is always better on the PC.. so if you have money to burn, by a gaming PC!

Otherwise, I would recommend the PS3.

+ The PS3 has a future proof Blu-ray player built in. The 360 can support HD-DVDs but that format is dead and it is not built in. A Blu-ray drive might be available in the 360 in the future. Don't quote me on that because it's pure speculation/idea on my part.

+ PS3 sales have picked up. Outselling the 360 recently. Obviously a larger fanbase == more games and better games (debatable)

+ PS3 will have MGS. 360 won't.

+ PS3 has free online play, unlike the 360 which requires an annual fee.

- PS3 won't have BioShock. (It's on the PC though).

- Xbox probably has more titles than the PC at the moment. Their weight (of pure goodness) is debatable.

+ PS3 controller is better (IMO)

+ Rachett & Clank on the PS3

Varik

mgs2 substance came out on both mgs 3 was ps2 only mgs4 will never be on 360


yes blu-ray player will play dvds

Patricide

yea but they also said that mgs 1 would be a ps1 exclusive then it comes out on the pc and the game cube years later as a remake. then they said mgs2 would be a ps2 exclusive and although substancecame out for both consoles it came out on the xbox first. I dont see whats preventing the same thing this time, kojima has said in interviews before that he actually prefers the 360 like.

Mossy Monk

You seem to know more than everyone else so why bother asking for anyones opinion?

AtomicHorror

Patricide wrote: »

yea but they also said that mgs 1 would be a ps1 exclusive then it comes out on the pc and the game cube years later as a remake. then they said mgs2 would be a ps2 exclusive and although substancecame out for both consoles it came out on the xbox first. I dont see whats preventing the same thing this time, kojima has said in interviews before that he actually prefers the 360 like.

There is no X360 version in production so at the very least the PS3 version will be exlcusive for the forseeable. Porting seems to be tricky in either direction when the PS3 is involved and as you pointed out, ports for the previous versions came several years later. So unless you want to wait until sometime about 2009-2010 to play MGS4, the PS3 is your only man.

AtomicHorror

JavaBear wrote: »

- PS3 won't have BioShock. (It's on the PC though).

I recently played the opening stages of BioShock on a 360. I'm a big PS3 fan, but the lack of a port is a terrible shame. Excellent game.

bandit197

Buy a new ps3 and a used 360 in good nick. Best of both worlds. There are arguments for and against each of them. This question has been done to death all over the net.

r3nu4l

Bard wrote: »

Also, HD-DVD is dead... which makes the PS3 all the more attractive with built-in BluRay.

My 2c...

PS3 is the one to go for, not because I own one but because everything I've read from business analysts suggest that it is the one to get. Apparently the PS3 is predicted to be the worlds dominant console (most units sold) by 2009. This will mean that game developers will be falling all over themselves to ensure that they produce excellent games for PS3. That said, I honestly believe that the XBox 360 and PS3 right now are very similar for game-play.

Also the PS3 Blu-Ray player is future proof so that's a bonus. Regular DVD's will become increasingly difficult to buy over the next few years, especially now that the format war has been won.

Also, the PS3 default settings are used for most game trailer comparisons, a very minor and easy tweak by changing the colour settings makes the games far more comparable to XBox 360 for vividness and clarity. I'm not sure why Sony made the PS3 defaults the way they did but they must have had a reason. Since I switched mine to the "right" settings I've enjoyed some excellent visual effects in my gaming

Finally, by the end of 2008 there will be a new PS3-slim released. That will look cool but my worry is that it may be noisier. I'm very happy with my PS3 and haven't had any problems with it. I'm happy with the choice I made and I'm sure a lot of XBox 360 owners are happy with their choice.

penguinpoppers

I own both consoles and I can genuinely tell you that I prefer the ps3.
Like you said, the 360 is VERY loud and no one mentions that it comes with a massive power supply.
People saying that ps3 online is **** is a myth.There are literally hundreds of people on call of duty(best game ever)
Never mind side by side comparisons, programmers are only just getting to grips with using the ps3 while 360 is almost at maximum capacity so thinking of it as a long term investment i'd go with the ps3.
Cost is pretty similar when u take the harddrive into account.
I know nothing of reliability cuz my 360 works just fine.
Always remember God of war 3,final fantasy 13,killzone 2,mgs4,mgs online. And keep in mind gears of war 2.....i want it.

Oh and barry is gay!!

penguinpoppers

r3nu4l wrote: »

a very minor and easy tweak by changing the colour settings makes the games far more comparable to XBox 360 for vividness and clarity.
Since I switched mine to the "right" settings I've enjoyed some excellent visual effects in my gaming

Sorry to go off on a tangent on this page but what are these changes you speak of?you mean i can make my ps3 look even better?

AtomicHorror

r3nu4l wrote: »

Finally, by the end of 2008 there will be a new PS3-slim released.

Unlikely I think. Even if they make the chip size transition as planned it's far too early in the PS3's lifespan for a redesign.

Explosive_Cornflake

GT5 I assume will also be an exclusive?
I have neither, but I'll get a PS3 at some stage I think when I have time to play it.

r3nu4l

penguinpoppers wrote: »

Sorry to go off on a tangent on this page but what are these changes you speak of?you mean i can make my ps3 look even better?

Just display setting tweaks, Go to Settings>Display Settings>RGB Full Setting. Then change your RGB from 'limited' to 'full'. You can also turn on Super White as well if you like. If you don't like the picture you get you can reverse the changes. I like it a lot on COD4

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Unlikely I think. Even if they make the chip size transition as planned it's far too early in the PS3's lifespan for a redesign.

Yeah it's all just rumour right now but I'd say they could manage it, they really are working hard to shrink as many components as possible right now. Although maybe end of 2008 is too soon, perhaps mid-2009? Who knows?

Mossy Monk

Explosive_Cornflake wrote: »

GT5 I assume will also be an exclusive?

Have no doubt about it.

steviec

bandit197 wrote: »

Buy a new ps3 and a used 360 in good nick. Best of both worlds. There are arguments for and against each of them. This question has been done to death all over the net.

Do not do that.

Buy a used PS3 and new 360 if you want, but a used 360 may as well be a ticking time bomb.

AtomicHorror

r3nu4l wrote: »

Just display setting tweaks, Go to Settings>Display Settings>RGB Full Setting. Then change your RGB from 'limited' to 'full'. You can also turn on Super White as well if you like. If you don't like the picture you get you can reverse the changes. I like it a lot on COD4


Yeah it's all just rumour right now but I'd say they could manage it, they really are working hard to shrink as many components as possible right now. Although maybe end of 2008 is too soon, perhaps mid-2009? Who knows?

They won't change their entire manufacturing process until they have cause. There'd have to be a strong reason to redesign and effectively rebrand the PS3 to a new audience. That would be the impending (ie < 1 year pre) release of the PS4- maybe 2010 if they're quick on that.

Jerichoholic

I was faced with this dilemma not long ago, I went for the 360, and here's why.

It's cheaper.

A LOT more games.

Gears of F'n War.

Achievement Points ~~~! (a small thing, but an ingenious invention)

Some of the exclusives are far too good to be left in favour of a brand new system with nothing particularly available that justifies it. eg-Halo3, GOW, Bioshock, PGR etc.

XBLA

MSN Messenger is on it, should you want it, it's nothing much, but it's handy and it's something you wont find on PS3.

I'm no fanboy, I'll eventually get a PS3 when it comes into it's own, but at thisvery moment in time the 360 is a fantastic gaming apparatus.

Patricide

penguinpoppers wrote: »

I own both consoles and I can genuinely tell you that I prefer the ps3.
Like you said, the 360 is VERY loud and no one mentions that it comes with a massive power supply.
People saying that ps3 online is **** is a myth.There are literally hundreds of people on call of duty(best game ever)
Never mind side by side comparisons, programmers are only just getting to grips with using the ps3 while 360 is almost at maximum capacity so thinking of it as a long term investment i'd go with the ps3.
Cost is pretty similar when u take the harddrive into account.
I know nothing of reliability cuz my 360 works just fine.
Always remember God of war 3,final fantasy 13,killzone 2,mgs4,mgs online. And keep in mind gears of war 2.....i want it.

Oh and barry is gay!!

see this is what i was looking for a good structured debate which so far(touch wood) hasnt gotten ugly haha. Anyway mgs and god of war seem to be two things that temp me mainly for the ps3 not to mention the future proofing and the quiet factor in compared to the 360 anyway....ahhh desicions desicions . Not fun.

Also Sheldon is gay

ShaneU

The ps3 isn't sh1t online...but when compared to the 360 online it is, for numerous reasons....

1. Can't invite friend to games whilst playing the game, completely retarded tbh.

2. Can't accept friend requests whilst playing a game.

3. The console not coming with a headset in the box, barely anyone online has them.

4. The poor design of the playstation store and it's neglection of Europe, also no trials for their psn games.

That's just off the top of my head.

AtomicHorror

ShaneU wrote: »

1. Can't invite friend to games whilst playing the game, completely retarded tbh.

XMB access including friends list is on the way.

ShaneU wrote: »

2. Can't accept friend requests whilst playing a game.

As above.

ShaneU wrote: »

3. The console not coming with a headset in the box, barely anyone online has them.

It is a pain considering none of the online games supports text chat but more and more people will get on that if they consider it important.

ShaneU wrote: »

4. The poor design of the playstation store and it's neglection of Europe, also no trials for their psn games.

Yeah, it could do with an overhaul and a serious injection of content.

Qs

bandit197 wrote: »

Buy a new ps3 and a used 360 in good nick. Best of both worlds. There are arguments for and against each of them. This question has been done to death all over the net.

thats my plan. I've already got a PS39well 2 actually) now I'm looking to pick up a 2nd hand Xbox.

Gonzo

im now thinking of gettin a ps3 finally after the past 12 months puttin it down. my 360 is completely in bits and I really look after machines well.... all the games skip and jump/freeze. My 360 has scratched over 6 games on me (perfect forming circle scratches on back of cds).

The cd tray keeps jamming on me. The machine is really noisey. My machine is almost 2 years old and suffers from everything except the red rings of death. Its got to the point where I cant buy any more games for it, and I dont trust paying 400 euro for another machine only to find out that it mite end up the same way as so many 360s fail either immediately or after a period of time.

The ps3 has a far inferior online service to the 360, its games library isnt as good as the 360 atm but for 400 euro I want a machine that will last years without having to worry about it so thats why im going to get a ps3. Any of the good 360 games i'll get to play them on my pc. Microsoft has given me no confidence that even the newer machines/elite 360s are better manufactured and there is still stories about a 16% failure rate.

Over the next 12 months the ps3's games library will be far improved at least matching what the 360 offers, also cross platform games should perform/look similar on the 360/ps3 than they have been in the past.

penguinpoppers

I dont think anyones arguing that ps3 has better online and I agree that xbox live is superior. But with MANY of the problems being fixed you have to wonder how far behind ps3 will be this time next year.
Graphics wise you have to admit that there is a trend appearing.First ppl said that xbox graphics were way better than ps3 graphics, then they said that xbox graphics were the same as ps3 graphics, nw ppl are starting to complain that ps3 graphics are only ''a little'' better than xbox....
All i know is that at the moment buying an xbox over a ps3 is short sighted because even though xbox has been better up to now, I think blu ray winning the format war is the start of the ps3 coming into is own.This yea there will be alot of changes.

(well noticed barry!Feel free to give both consoles a try)

senorskittles

Bioshock could come to the playstation3 there is a ps3 version already made but microsoft are arguing over exclusivity rights. personally myself i love my playstation its game library is building into something to be proud of and god only knows how many games the xbox will keep exclusively, lost planet has already made the transition.

another good thing is the fact that the ps3 runs at about 30% of its processing power which means things can oonly get better.

Patricide

yea i was thinking that but then i thought if games are so expensive to make these days then there gonna have to be multiplatforms and the transition being small between the 2 consoles being so relitivly small they wont make drastic redisigns. Its why you see so few exclusives these days. Thats the thing thats really got me thinking about the 360 really. Tbh it feels like a ps2 xbox dilema to me. At the end of its life x box had plenty more under the hood that they never ended up using...none of its games really pushed the boundrys of the consoles and it ended up getting ps2 graphics, etc.

I dont wanna have somthing like that happen like if you get me.

whiterebel

I have a PS3. I was seriously looking at XBox360, despite hating Microsoft with a passion. When your Hardware buddies won't touch building your console with a barge poll, you re-think - not plough ahead yourself. As well as the problem with build, I had a fair few PS2 games that I hadn't started. With a Wii on the way for my boys, one console was the only option. The price drop in October decided it, and I haven't once wished I had made a different choice. Games v PS2 are biblical in the difference already. BluRay is fantastic on a 37" Philips. Wireless, works well as a Media server, even with a Mac(!!!), quiet, gorgeous looking, Dual shock 3 is ace.

When the original XBox came out there were no good games for it. Sony had all the good exclusives. Sony laughing their socks off, thought they would never be caught. Better XBox release, PS2 getting left behind in the dust. Better exclusives on the XBox, looks way better on graphics etc, extra to go wireless on both etc, etc. PS3 released and the circle begins again. I really, really hope MGS4 is better than 2, because I was so disappointed in the initial release with its over long cut-scenes etc. Too wordy and not enough action. PiXXed off too, that a better version was released only months later. Sony have to get the next big releases right - MGS, GT5 GTA4 have to be mind blowingly good to put the XBox to the sword and start a real tilt at knocking Wii and M$ off the sales charts. After all, we all know the XBox has more games, but are they all good? Because the PS2 ones certainly weren't all brilliant when it was dominant over the Xbox.

djfitzerjnr

i had a the first playstation, bought a ps2, was always a ps2 man all the way, when i heard of the ps3 i was like, im getting that, but one of my friends always was an xbox lad, when i first played the old xbox, i was like, its ok, but when i played the 360, i was like, where can i trade in my ps2.

xbox 360 wins hands down!

penguinpoppers

djfitzerjnr wrote: »

when i played the 360, i was like, where can i trade in my ps2.

You cant compare the 360 and ps2......
Noone would keep their ps2 over an xbox.(well i hope not anyway)

djfitzerjnr

no, i meant interms of upgrading, i had a choice of ps3 or 360

AtomicHorror

senorskittles wrote: »

Bioshock could come to the playstation3 there is a ps3 version already made but microsoft are arguing over exclusivity rights.

I really doubt that man. The development time, especially for a port to the PS3 would make that a crazy thing for them to have done without a guarantee that they could sell it. There's at least one developer on record as saying there's no PS3 version.

senorskittles wrote: »

another good thing is the fact that the ps3 runs at about 30% of its processing power which means things can oonly get better.

What are you basing that figure on? I agree that we'll see improvements as developers get used to coding for the machine and figure out how to put resources to better use, but I wouldn't expect a 3x improvement in any aspect of the software (other than volume of content delivered by the Blu Ray discs) during the system's lifetime.

penguinpoppers

I read the same thing in playstation magazine that ps3 is currently using 1/3 of its power.

0ubliette

senorskittles wrote: »

Bioshock could come to the playstation3 there is a ps3 version already made but microsoft are arguing over exclusivity rights. personally myself i love my playstation its game library is building into something to be proud of and god only knows how many games the xbox will keep exclusively, lost planet has already made the transition.

another good thing is the fact that the ps3 runs at about 30% of its processing power which means things can oonly get better.

Wrong, bioshock is not coming to ps3. There was confusion over this as there was a folder called 'ps3' in one of the root directories on the PC or Xbox version, which led people to think that there were assets of the game already made for the PS3. This folder was just a part of the unreal 3 engines setup, it automatically had folders for PC, 360, and PS3, it was not a confirmation that bioshock was coming to ps3.

AtomicHorror

penguinpoppers wrote: »

I read the same thing in playstation magazine that ps3 is currently using 1/3 of its power.

A pretty vague statement really.

senorskittles

AtomicHorror wrote: »

I really doubt that man. The development time, especially for a port to the PS3 would make that a crazy thing for them to have done without a guarantee that they could sell it. There's at least one developer on record as saying there's no PS3 version.

i read it in psm3 mag issue98 page12, maybe its not true just quoting from there though.

What are you basing that figure on? I agree that we'll see improvements as developers get used to coding for the machine and figure out how to put resources to better use, but I wouldn't expect a 3x improvement in any aspect of the software (other than volume of content delivered by the Blu Ray discs) during the system's lifetime.

Drakes fortune arguably one of the best looking games on the ps3 supposedly only uses around a third of its power,we might not see games getting three times better but even twice as good is still an amazing feat in my opinion.

tp://www.ps3center.net/story-1435-Uncharted-Only-Utilises-13-of-PS3-Power.html

penguinpoppers

AtomicHorror wrote: »

A pretty vague statement really.

Im confused. In what way is it vague to say that I read in ''playstation magazine'' that the ps3 is ''currently using only one third of its power''

Read the comment after mine by skittles for another example......

mcgovern

Did anyone read the interview recently with Tim Sweeney from Epic?

What we’ve found in this generation—and here are some scary numbers—is that writing an engine system designed for multicores, that can scale to multiple threads efficiently, takes about double the efforts as single threaded. It takes double the design effort, implementation effort, lifetime support effort, debugging…all the costs metrics multiplied by a factor of two for multicores. That’s pretty expensive, but ends up being bearable.

Whereas, some of the other hardware trends are even worse than that, like programming for Cell, we found, had a [five-times] productivity divisor. It’s five times harder and that really starts to hit…you have to question whether it’s economically viable for mainstream developers to put real effort into it at that point.

...

We haven’t seen that with today’s CPUs. When you have one, two, three or four CPU cores, you can use all of the traditional techniques to multithread that productively. For example, in Unreal Engine 3, we’ve only implemented multithreading in about, say, 10 percent of the total code. The renderer is multithreaded, the physics system is multithreaded, a few other little things are, but the far majority of the lines of code of the engine are just running in a single thread—and that’s okay, because, we don’t have any major bottlenecks.

So looks like both consoles still have a lot of power left to utilise but it may not be economically viable to use it all.

Patricide

now thats interesting but it makes sense. It kinda backs up what always thought that eventually games will stop getting better(technologicly wise) cause itl get to the point where its not economicly viable to spend so long writing code for some of the less important things (like trees plants etc) therefore they wont improve the main things cause they will look out of place. ok i know i explained that kinda crappy but youl get the gist.

senorskittles

so even though the ps3 has a ton of power under the hood it might not come to life until its financially viable to do so.

AtomicHorror

penguinpoppers wrote: »

Im confused. In what way is it vague to say that I read in ''playstation magazine'' that the ps3 is ''currently using only one third of its power''

I meant that the statement by PSM, if it is as quoted by the poster, is vague. Power could refer to any number of hardware resources individually or in combination. I am wondering what the statement specifically means.

senorskittles wrote: »

i read it in psm3 mag issue98 page12, maybe its not true just quoting from there though.
tp://www.ps3center.net/story-1435-Uncharted-Only-Utilises-13-of-PS3-Power.html

Cheers for the link! Doesn't really tell us much more sadly, but it is encouraging that the word comes from a developer!

AtomicHorror

mcgovern wrote: »

So looks like both consoles still have a lot of power left to utilise but it may not be economically viable to use it all.

Give em time. Or bigger teams. The money is there, it's a huge market. Competition will ensure that we get every last drop out of the PS3.