Btw my PSP will be here on the 21st. THE TWENTY FIRSTdamn Paypal and it's "clearing".
Hey, just in time for Christmas!
So, are you advocating to the OP (and all of us) that we should get a PSP instead of either the 360 or PS3?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I can't decide Xbox 360 Elite or a PS3
- Thread starter Steve Jobless
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hey, just in time for Christmas!
So, are you advocating to the OP (and all of us) that we should get a PSP instead of either the 360 or PS3?
Nint£ndo? Doesn't really work does it. It's hard to call them M$ when they're paying billions of them $'s to fix these 360's.
diamond.g - There's no point in posting NDP data anymore. You can predict the order in which the systems will be.
Btw my PSP will be here on the 21st. THE TWENTY FIRST
The sad thing is so many people expected the PS3 to do better than what it did, considering the price drop. Software differences are insane though. COD4 sole 1.5 million units on the 360 while <500k on the PS3. Exclusives to the PS3 are doing horribly.
Not what anyone was expecting two years ago.
I purchased a 360 about a month ago, and I love it! I got Xbox Live, Halo 3, Viva Pinata, as well as the two pack in games, Forza 2 and Marvel Ultimate Alliance.
I love Halo 3. I still suck, but I'm ranking up quickly in online matches. Forza 2 is surprisingly good for a pack in game, but Marvel kinda sucks. Viva Pinata is a good chill out game.
If the OP hasn't purchased yet, I would vote for the 360. Wait for more games and more price drops from the PS3. The 360 is where it's at.
Oh, I also purchased Connect360, and with the new Fall Update for the Xbox, I can stream all my DivX and Xvid movies from my Mac to my 360 in my living room! Very sweet, I think.
I love Halo 3. I still suck, but I'm ranking up quickly in online matches. Forza 2 is surprisingly good for a pack in game, but Marvel kinda sucks. Viva Pinata is a good chill out game.
If the OP hasn't purchased yet, I would vote for the 360. Wait for more games and more price drops from the PS3. The 360 is where it's at.
Oh, I also purchased Connect360, and with the new Fall Update for the Xbox, I can stream all my DivX and Xvid movies from my Mac to my 360 in my living room! Very sweet, I think.
Speak for yourself
Even my "Sony/MS fans will disregard the Wii and say it's for casual gamers only" prediction came true!
I am surprised to see it not doing as well now though, what with the price drops and people on forums making the games sound like the second coming. The cheapest model here has dropped £130. £50 off the price of a Wii! They just need to accelerate some of these "killer apps" like Home. They're competing against the 360 for it's online component, not the Wii.
Speak for yourself
Even my "Sony/MS fans will disregard the Wii and say it's for casual gamers only" prediction came true!
I am surprised to see it not doing as well now though, what with the price drops and people on forums making the games sound like the second coming. The cheapest model here has dropped £130. £50 off the price of a Wii! They just need to accelerate some of these "killer apps" like Home. They're competing against the 360 for it's online component, not the Wii.
I figured the Wii would do well. I just didn't think Sony would slip so much in NA. They are doing well in rest of the world though.
Chewbacca is a Wookiee...
That was vaguely familiar to me but I had to google it, heh. Thanks for the laugh! We are talking about games here...
How hard is it to compare game graphics? You plop one dvd in and look. Take it out. Plop a different dvd in the other console and look. I wasn't talking about game depth which I would assume goes to ME, although I have heard people finish it in 14 hours. I have no idea how far along I am in Uncharted but it seems like I have a lot of Rewards left to accomplish. I have about 8 hours in so far. It is completely linear, no question. But again I wasn't referring to the game depth or design, just the graphics of those two particular games.
As for M$ vs. $ony... I think that the work MS has done on the xbox overall is very good. They have poured billions into it and they are doing what seems to be their best to make it a compelling platform. They dropped the ball on manufacturing of the 360, however, as the 33% failure rate proves. Sony dropped the ball on the PS3 launch, obviously, and they are trying hard to catch up. Clearly, there is enough room in this space for all players. Based on my own research and hands-on testing the PS3 is a better platform for me and I am extremely happy and satisfied. Originally, I had a strong bias against the PS3 because of it's failure to launch. In retrospect, that was a costly bias as I have now concluded that the PS3 fits my needs much better than the 360.
That was vaguely familiar to me but I had to google it, heh. Thanks for the laugh! We are talking about games here...How hard is it to compare game graphics? You plop one dvd in and look. Take it out. Plop a different dvd in the other console and look. I wasn't talking about game depth which I would assume goes to ME, although I have heard people finish it in 14 hours. I have no idea how far along I am in Uncharted but it seems like I have a lot of Rewards left to accomplish. I have about 8 hours in so far. It is completely linear, no question. But again I wasn't referring to the game depth or design, just the graphics of those two particular games.
This is the kind of advice that is not germane as of Dec 2007. The PS3 is already less expensive feature for feature and it has plenty of great titles already available. Do you need 200 games at 50+ each or do you need several excellent games in every genre? I don't know how much time people have to play, but for me a few great games will last me months.
Well... partly true and partly not true. If you want to play wireless which is probably most of us, your price of the 360 just went up (due to having to buy the add-on wifi component) to match the price of the PS3 (which also includes the high def dvd player). Secondly, there are many people who like the fact that just one machine and one connection to the TV will do games, normal dvd's, and high definition dvd's. It's a great way to simplify.
As for M$ vs. $ony... I think that the work MS has done on the xbox overall is very good. They have poured billions into it and they are doing what seems to be their best to make it a compelling platform. They dropped the ball on manufacturing of the 360, however, as the 33% failure rate proves. Sony dropped the ball on the PS3 launch, obviously, and they are trying hard to catch up. Clearly, there is enough room in this space for all players. Based on my own research and hands-on testing the PS3 is a better platform for me and I am extremely happy and satisfied. Originally, I had a strong bias against the PS3 because of it's failure to launch. In retrospect, that was a costly bias as I have now concluded that the PS3 fits my needs much better than the 360.
Regarding the NPD data, I notice that the PS2 is still outselling the PS3. Any comments on this (other than it being super cheap)?
How hard is it to compare game graphics? You plop one dvd in and look. Take it out. Plop a different dvd in the other console and look. I wasn't talking about game depth which I would assume goes to ME, although I have heard people finish it in 14 hours. I have no idea how far along I am in Uncharted but it seems like I have a lot of Rewards left to accomplish. I have about 8 hours in so far. It is completely linear, no question. But again I wasn't referring to the game depth or design, just the graphics of those two particular games.
The point was that games can't be properly compared unless they are similar in terms of scope.
Take a theoretical tech demo of 1 character being rendered on, say, the PS3. They could apply the systems full resources to that 1 model and have it look as real as they want.
But a game isn't that. Mass Effect has to render and process a lot more than Unchartered, they even manage much more realistic looking human faces than Unchartered.
Compare UC to something more like GoW, or a game that doesn't need to render as much as ME.
We disagree. Faces are the main thing I compared between ME and UC. For example on the ship in the opening scene that new recruit's face had shadows that were all jaggie, pixelated, and boxy. I'm on a 46" 1080p TV so that could cause some stretching (although ME is promoted as a 1080p game). Also, teeth and lips are often overlaying each other and clothing cuts into the body. UC looks smoother and more natural to me. We're probably splitting hairs at this point because what I really want are graphics as good as Shrek 3 or Beowolf. Games are -close- but not quite there yet.
^ The reality of the matter is simple. If you want to compare hardware you can not compare two completely different games from two different publishers. Its like saying Madden is better graphically on PS3 than Lego StarWars on the 360. It does not work.
In order to compare graphics to get an accurate example of hardware power you have to use the same game.
Now if Uncharted was available on the 360, then by all means we could use it to compare between the PS3 & 360. The same for Mass Effect (only vice-versa).
The reality is, hardware power wise - both consoles are pretty much dead tied. All the developers have pretty much said so, and I'm sure they have a little better knowledge of what's possible on both consoles than anyone else here.
The choice of what console you should buy boils down to the following.
1) Do you prefer the exclusive titles on PS3 or 360
2) If your going to be playing against friends online, which console are they on ?
3) Do you want HD movie playback from the outset ?
4) Do you require WiFi off the bat ?
Both the 360 and PS3 are great consoles. Both are seriously not without faults. The 360 has a reportedly horrendous 1/3 failure rate. Although this is offset by the fact that you get a 3 year warranty.
The PS3 has in comparison to the 360, a much weaker online structure, and it's dashboard is lacking key features, such as ingame XMB.
I'm guessing the OP has by this stage already made his decision, and therefore is there any point in continuing this nonsensical little boy pissing contest, that has dragged on page after page ?
I think for the sake of inner peace within the gaming forum, this thread should be allowed to die and people should stop arguing and go and play there own consoles or take up another hobby....
In order to compare graphics to get an accurate example of hardware power you have to use the same game.
Now if Uncharted was available on the 360, then by all means we could use it to compare between the PS3 & 360. The same for Mass Effect (only vice-versa).
The reality is, hardware power wise - both consoles are pretty much dead tied. All the developers have pretty much said so, and I'm sure they have a little better knowledge of what's possible on both consoles than anyone else here.
The choice of what console you should buy boils down to the following.
1) Do you prefer the exclusive titles on PS3 or 360
2) If your going to be playing against friends online, which console are they on ?
3) Do you want HD movie playback from the outset ?
4) Do you require WiFi off the bat ?
Both the 360 and PS3 are great consoles. Both are seriously not without faults. The 360 has a reportedly horrendous 1/3 failure rate. Although this is offset by the fact that you get a 3 year warranty.
The PS3 has in comparison to the 360, a much weaker online structure, and it's dashboard is lacking key features, such as ingame XMB.
I'm guessing the OP has by this stage already made his decision, and therefore is there any point in continuing this nonsensical little boy pissing contest, that has dragged on page after page ?
I think for the sake of inner peace within the gaming forum, this thread should be allowed to die and people should stop arguing and go and play there own consoles or take up another hobby....
Good points.
Except I see this as communication offering valuable insight from people who have hands-on experience. Not a pissing contest by adolescents whining about their fanboyism uberness. I am sure there are readers of this thread still on the fence and this discussion may provide some help in their decision making process. I know that when I research products I generally read as many forum posts on the item as possible. And for the most part, members of MacRumors are intelligent, witty, and genuinely interested in helping others.
^ I think for the sake of inner peace within the gaming forum, this thread should be allowed to die and people should stop arguing and go and play there own consoles or take up another hobby....
For those of us who haven't got one of the heavy-weight consoles yet, it's still interesting to see how opinion towards each changes as time goes by.
But it has nothing to do with actually playing games.
A 360 is no more crippled at playing video games than a Ps3, period. I love how "BluRay" and "WiFi" are brought up in a "which to buy?" scenario like you absolutely cannot and will not be able to play games on anything but a BluRay disc-based system, or a networked system with WiFi instead of wired 10/100. If this were the case, than every other system at this point in time would be nothing but a door stop (and that's obviously not the point when Nielsen reports that the Ps2 is still the most played system).
This isn't like paying extra for required hardware (like a required hard drive)...Sony threw those features into their system to account for jacking the price up. People who favor those "extras" call them "bonuses"; I call them "excuses for jacking up the price". I'd rather run cat5 through a wall than pay extra for wireless. I'd rather not get a BluRay player and be able to save $100. Developers have gone on record numerous times and said that the DVD format is sufficient for games. The only company against DVD is Factor 5 and from what I remember, Lair was already ripped and dumped and found to contain a whole lot of 'dummy data' and if that is truly the case then F5 is full of crap.
Hell IMO WiFi is still at infancy as it relates to support on game consoles considering that the DS only supports WEP (pathetic) and the PSP only supports WPA. The Wii supports WPA2 and that's great; I have no idea if the Ps3 supports WPA2 (I'm sure it supports WPA though). Because of this, I'd rather run wired anyway.
?
I own both consoles and both games, and there is nothing on the 360 that can touch Uncharted in terms of detail and large environments. You show me anything on the 360 that comes close to, say, the jet ski ride up the rapids in uncharted and I might believe you.
There are many fine games out for both systems, and if you can afford it, you should probably get both (and maybe a Wii too), but the PS3 absolutely spanks the 360 in terms of pure power.
Yeah, see this is where you lost credibility in this discussion because you have either a) not read this entire thread, or b) selectively deleted portions from your memory, or c) chosen not to accept that this generation of consoles are about more than just playing games for many people. Oh well... have a nice day.
This is a so far unproven statement. In order for this to be tested we would need to see Uncharted on the 360 optimized for it's core strengths, and then we could compare discrepancies.
Uncharted is a great looking game granted, but to say it proves beyond a shadow of doubt the PS3 is better than the 360 power wise is an utterly untenable position and one that is utterly facetious.
As I have already stated, most developers agree power wise the hardware is pretty much evenly matched. One has benefit A, the other benefit B - but when taken as a whole they are pretty much even.
I've got an inkling we'll be saying this till the cows come home
I just dont understand why the fanboy's on both sides just simply can't except this simple thing ? Is it so hard to understand ?
They too and fro, spend huge amounts of time and energy knocking each other, formulating examples which just so happen to 'prove their point' irrespective that their logic and formula is utterly wrong.
They disregard what the majority of the industry is saying and convince themselves that the hyperbole and propaganda a manufacturer has stated holds more 'truth' than what the rest of the inside developing community is saying; simply because it somehow re-affirms their own flawed position.
It's really tiresome to be honest. I just wish I had a big stick that I could beat some sense into peeps
But I fear even that wouldnt work. All you would get then is .... "the Sony stick gives a better beating than the Microsoft branded one" When the majority of games are multiformat, and seemingly in this and probably to an even greater extent the 'next' generation of consoles, where costs continue to spiral, we will see less and less exclusives.
So get over it people. Be happy that you have the freedom to play any console you desire, and stop wasting your time feeling the need to justify your purchase by knocking someone elses.
Accept that manufacturer A will tell you theirs is better than B, and vice versa. Learn that the world is full of misinformation, specualtion, and at the end of the day BS.
A better use of your time would be to try and develop the sense to see through the BS, and spend the time instead playing the games for the said product.
But somehow I doubt any of these common sense words will make any difference and the continued flaming and stupidity will continue.
^You really can't blame them MRU when dumb arse game sites promote the dumb crap of "which one is best" with all of these comparison videos and articles twisting what is being said by the developers...its the media fueling this stupid "console war"
I think we are just repeating ourselves in this thread but it is the most action the gaming section is getting.
Bless
I think we are just repeating ourselves in this thread but it is the most action the gaming section is getting.
Bless
The reason for this could be that a lot of people bought the PS3 after the price drop in order to go format neutral in the HD films territory. I know of quite a few people that did exactly that, myself included. Most of which have no plans whatsoever to use the PS3 as a gaming machine.
I still think the PS3 is nowhere near as good a gaming machine as the 360 and anyone wanting a gaming machine should get the 360. However, from a Bluray point of view, the PS3 is probably the best and one of the cheapest Bluray players out there. Even when it comes to HD films though, given the choice between HD-DVD and Bluray, HD-DVD wins every time for me.
You show me one 360 game that has large scale 3D environments on the same scale and to the same detail and definition and speed as Motorstorm or Uncharted (things like the huge castle in the latter). The only one I can think of is Oblivion, and while the world is fairly detailed in that, motion is pretty simplistic and lame in that game (which doesn't matter so much given the type of game it is). Edit: Test Drive Unlimited has a huge environment, but the gameplay and detail is somewhat limited.
Gears of War has about the best graphics on the 360, but the environments are much much smaller. It's the same with the Tom Clancy games on both systems. Compare Ratchet and Clank with Kameo, and you will see what I mean. Halo 3 has expansive environments, but isn't true HD because of it.
That's the big difference between the consoles. I spotted it as soon as I fired up Motorstorm.
It was no lie to say that the original XBox was a more powerful machine than the PS2. Now the boot is on the other foot.
Out of curiosity why does speed come into the equation?
Mass Effect, Alan Wake. Don't they have super huge expanses of land too? Oblivion was the obvious one, and a very early 360 game. Unchartered is big? I think the non-linearity of the level design sorta explains that one.
What about the upcoming GTA? Rockstar are only bringing out downloadable content on the 360 version. As if they've made their mind up which will provide the best experience already. I suppose loading a huge and detailed city onto 256mb of system ram isn't going to be an pleasant experience.
And MRU I can't believe that so soon after explanations we're already getting
Mass Effect, Alan Wake. Don't they have super huge expanses of land too? Oblivion was the obvious one, and a very early 360 game. Unchartered is big? I think the non-linearity of the level design sorta explains that one.
What about the upcoming GTA? Rockstar are only bringing out downloadable content on the 360 version. As if they've made their mind up which will provide the best experience already. I suppose loading a huge and detailed city onto 256mb of system ram isn't going to be an pleasant experience.
And MRU I can't believe that so soon after explanations we're already getting
With the only evidence being 2 exclusive games and a disregard for the systems specs.Agathon said: