So, I decided to take the console leap, after figuring out that a decent desktop PC plus console would be about the same price as a decked-out compatible-with-the-latest-games PC.
Also I've owned a Wii for the last year, and damn me if console gaming isn't practical. No bigass loading intervals, no crashes, no despair at dwindling hard drive space, etc.
The question is, should I pick up the XBox 360 or the PS3? Gaming libraries strike me as almost identical, and the XBox is slightly cheaper around here. Nonetheless, I have an intense distrust of all things Microsoft.
So I welcome the advice of old videogaming hands. Which one should I get, and why?
Quote from: The Butcher;420762So, I decided to take the console leap, after figuring out that a decent desktop PC plus console would be about the same price as a decked-out compatible-with-the-latest-games PC.
Also I've owned a Wii for the last year, and damn me if console gaming isn't practical. No bigass loading intervals, no crashes, no despair at dwindling hard drive space, etc.
The question is, should I pick up the XBox 360 or the PS3? Gaming libraries strike me as almost identical, and the XBox is slightly cheaper around here. Nonetheless, I have an intense distrust of all things Microsoft.
So I welcome the advice of old videogaming hands. Which one should I get, and why?
Yeah, I've been on the fence here, too. I know I don't want a Wii...that 260 failure rate still looks pretty bad...but the price is sure better. Last I heard, if I go the Netflix route, streaming through the machine, I need an XBox Live Gold subscription, whereas all the PS3 requires is an internet connection.
But I kinda don't like Sony...=(
That said, there are a few 360 exclusives I'm interested in...no PS3 exclusives, though.
The PS3 is better in about every way on paper. You don't have an online subscription price, its a blue ray player, and it has a web browser.
The X-Box 360 on the other hand cost 60-70 bucks a year. I have an X-Box though and I wouldn't trade it. The Support is much better, they actually ban cheaters occasionally, and the community works better. The voice chat system is much better.
With the 360, if you care about communication, meeting people, better competition, and all that, it is the way to go. If you want something cheaper with a Blue Ray player, PS3.
Quote from: Cranewings;420764The PS3 is better in about every way on paper. You don't have an online subscription price, its a blue ray player, and it has a web browser.
The X-Box 360 on the other hand cost 60-70 bucks a year. I have an X-Box though and I wouldn't trade it. The Support is much better, they actually ban cheaters occasionally, and the community works better. The voice chat system is much better.
With the 360, if you care about communication, meeting people, better competition, and all that, it is the way to go. If you want something cheaper with a Blue Ray player, PS3.
So...if my only desire for online is for downloadable content, not playing against people, I'm better off with a PS3?
you can still download stuff off the marketplace of the xbox without paying the subscription fee's so it's still a matter of choice really if your not into online multiplayer.
I'm not into online multiplayer.
I'm not looking for a Blu-Ray player either.
I'm not sure I'll be able to plug either console to a broadband connection, unless either one of them has wireless capabilities.
I'm not entirely familiar with either console's library, but most of the games I'm interested in seem to be released for both. Tommy, which XBox exclusives are you interested in? And which PS3 exclusives did you hear about, that failed to interest you? Just curious.
Yeah, but if he isn't into online competition, it isn't important to be able to find people to talk to easily. In most online games on the X-Box, well over half the players will be on voice chat. On the PS3, almost no one is. To me, that is the big, number one important feature on the X-Box. If you don't care about that, the PS3 has the same graphics, games, no subscription, a blue ray player and a net browser. It is no contest.
Then i'd go for whichever is cheapest since your not bothered about anything cept the games.
I have both. I barely ever turn the PS3 on. I think, outside of personal preferences, they're pretty much even. As I understand it, one is a little better at this and the other is a little better at that.
Personally, I like the XBox controllers much better. I like playing people via XBox better. And I really, really like Xbox's online experience - news, the store, etc. - better than that of the PS3.
Seanchai
Quote from: Seanchai;420778I have both. I barely ever turn the PS3 on. I think, outside of personal preferences, they're pretty much even. As I understand it, one is a little better at this and the other is a little better at that.
Personally, I like the XBox controllers much better. I like playing people via XBox better. And I really, really like Xbox's online experience - news, the store, etc. - better than that of the PS3.
Seanchai
Personally I agree with you totally. I have an X-Box, and my girlfriend has a PS3. I barely play her PS3, despite loving her game library. It just doesn't feel like a good use of my relaxation time when compared to how much more fun I have on X-Box.
Quote from: The Butcher;420769I'm not into online multiplayer.
I'm not looking for a Blu-Ray player either.
I'm not sure I'll be able to plug either console to a broadband connection, unless either one of them has wireless capabilities.
I'm not entirely familiar with either console's library, but most of the games I'm interested in seem to be released for both. Tommy, which XBox exclusives are you interested in? And which PS3 exclusives did you hear about, that failed to interest you? Just curious.
The ones that jump to mind:
XBox 360 - Fable 2/3 (released by Microsoft), Dead Rising 1 (I am all about bargain bin shopping old, used games)
PS3 - God of War (honestly, I think that by the time the PS3 made it out, the only exclusives left for them were made by Sony).
Quote from: Seanchai;420778I have both. I barely ever turn the PS3 on. I think, outside of personal preferences, they're pretty much even. As I understand it, one is a little better at this and the other is a little better at that.
Personally, I like the XBox controllers much better. I like playing people via XBox better. And I really, really like Xbox's online experience - news, the store, etc. - better than that of the PS3.
Seanchai
Yeah, that's the bugbear for me: I prefer XBox controllers, some of the games. etc...I loved the XBox over the PS2 by a country mile...but one of those systems died on me, and the other one has stayed working...(and it's not the one that I liked the most)...combine that with the 360 failure rate and it grudgingly pushes me towards the PS3.
I'm gonna have to get something, though...my kid like video games too much, even if I'm fine with last generation's games.
Halo series is also XBox exclusive of course (though some are also on Windows and the first at least is on Mac).
Sony has the MLB the Show series.
On the other side of the fence, I have both 360 and PS3. 360 Red ringed twice and I've given up on it as a usable device. PS3 does everything I want of it and more.
I use it for all my media, and since I am in Australia, I've hooked up PlayTV to it and the who unit is basically my PVR (especially since I dumped a much larger HDD into the caddy). Gaming on it is really rather good and I've never had a complaint, mind you I am certainly not a big online gamer.
From my experience it is whatever takes your fancy. For me the PS3 turned out to be much more reliable and have a lot of nice content for us louts downunder.
Also, I never thought I'd want Blu-ray but of course now I have it I couldn't live without it ;)
The failure rate of Xbox's has plummeted alot though since launch and the slim verson has an almost spotless track record so far(theres a few minor cases of idiots claiming its just as bad but none have actually been confirmed as legit so far) so dont take that as a negative factor in any decision as even during the worst problems most people barely had a problem(mines been fine since i got it xmas 05 for instance witrh only a minor easily fixed issue with the fan coming loose a couple months back that was fixed with no further troubles).
I was thinking a bit about exclusives and decided to search for a list. Wikipedia in fact has what appear to be useful but not necessarily complete lists.
Here's the list of PS3 games: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_3_games
Here's the list of XBox 360 games: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_360_games
I assume both consoles will also play PS2/XBox games, respectively, so you could look for those lists. Note that each list has a column for whether the game is exclusive to that console.
Wikipedia also has this separate list of exclusives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_exclusives_(seventh_generation)) but it's definitely not complete. E.g., as I mentioned the MLB the Show series should be on the list, but it's not.
neither console plays ps2/xbox games anymore, xbox never had more than a half assed version of backwards compatability and sony discontinued there version when they realised people were still buying ps2 games instead of ps3 ones.
While it's true PS/3 no longer is backwards compatible as far as I know all Xbox360's except the arcade play original xbox games and I've never had any issues on any of the old games working on the xbox. With a couple exceptions and even then they still ran just had jitters that I don't remember happening originally.
Basically as it's been said it comes down to the games. For games that come out on both consoles the default statement is that PS/3 games have a slight edge on graphical looks but the frame rate is better on the 360 and the load times are also better since read times on DVD are way faster then blue ray - though with the ability to dump games to the harddrive on both systems the load time issue on PS/3 is better.
Xbox exclusive Gears of War, Halo, Fable are the big ones probably.
PS/3 has Little Big Planet and God of War.
Xbox slim and the last few regular generations of the old 360 console couldnt play them(my brother got one to play some of his games and was gutted that they wouldnt play), microsoft changed track from allowing backwards conpatability to allowing you to download certain xbox games from the marketplace instead...they have since phased those out in favour of 360 titles.
Halo. XBOX.
Xbox = vhs
PS3 = Betamax.
That tells you all you should need to know :D
Xbox 360 for Mass Effect 1 and 2. I know that you will soon be able to get ME2 for the PS3, but the original is still totally worth playing.
Quote from: kryyst;420914While it's true PS/3 no longer is backwards compatible as far as I know all Xbox360's except the arcade play original xbox games and I've never had any issues on any of the old games working on the xbox.
There's a list of old games it'll run. (Or there was.) It was a decent list, but didn't include everything. Of course, now you can buy a lot of old titles as downloads from XBox Live.
Don't know if PS3 has something similar or not. It could be part of their new pricing structure. They've introduced areas where you have to pay a monthly subscription fee to get access to, etc., and, obviously, I'm not doing that.
Seanchai
Quote from: Seanchai;420941There's a list of old games it'll run. (Or there was.) It was a decent list, but didn't include everything. Of course, now you can buy a lot of old titles as downloads from XBox Live.
Don't know if PS3 has something similar or not. It could be part of their new pricing structure. They've introduced areas where you have to pay a monthly subscription fee to get access to, etc., and, obviously, I'm not doing that.
Seanchai
True it's not 100% backwards but 90% at least. Plus it plays the important ones.
Crimson Skies
Fable
KOTOR
Jade Empire
Munch's Odyssey
Strangers Wrath
Some things to consider:
- In addition to its console refresh, Microsoft has recently released an improved controller.
- Both companies have (and will continue to have) first-party exclusives.
- Both companies want to integrate your gaming experience with mobile gadgets (Windows Phone 7 for Xbox, and Android for PS3).
- The PS3 is now a 3D Blu-ray player.
Quote from: JongWK;420951- The PS3 is now a 3D Blu-ray player.
Yeah, but only at 30 FPS. I'm not very much sold on 3d in the home anyhow. Vudu on the PS3 is a little more compelling for me. As well as Netlfix use w/o the need to pay for an Xbox live gold membership. It also supports Hulu Plus, the value of which I'm not entirely sold on yet.
Here's my elevator pitch that I hand out to any friends/family that ask.
If you care more about the blue ray then (basically) a handful of exclusive games get a PS/3.
If gaming is your primary concern then my personal opinion is that 360 collectively has a better lineup, and a better online experience - even though you have to pay for that.
Quote from: kryyst;420944True it's not 100% backwards but 90% at least.
Yeah, that seems about right.
Seanchai
Quote from: kryyst;420962even though you have to pay for that.
This is a HUGE turn-off for me.
I'm not really into online gaming (so far...) and I'm not even sure I'll be physically capable of hooking up the console to my broadband connection (unless either console has built-in wireless networking capabilities).
So, jury's still out... though it seems the XBox is clearly on the lead.
(why didn't I add a poll? stupid) :mad:
Quote from: The Butcher;421013This is a HUGE turn-off for me.
I'm not really into online gaming (so far...) and I'm not even sure I'll be physically capable of hooking up the console to my broadband connection (unless either console has built-in wireless networking capabilities).
So, jury's still out... though it seems the XBox is clearly on the lead.
(why didn't I add a poll? stupid) :mad:
Both Consoles now have built in wireless.
Quote from: Angry_Douchebag;421016Both Consoles now have built in wireless.
Now that's a game-changer.
Can anyone educate me on the finer distinctions between XBox Live and PSN?
What makes XBox Live a better online gaming venue?
Xbox Live has more players, better community features, etc.
I have a PS3 (no Xbox), mainly because of my taste in games (I'm big on JRPGs and fighters when it comes to console games, not to mention I have a huge PS2 backlog of games), but I don't find it's online to be quite as streamlined or easy to use.
I'm mainly a PC gamer, but IMHO, Xbox has a better community and a better list of exclusives, PS3 has better hardware (in terms of reliability, not just processing power). PS3 also works a little better as a general entertainment device (I use it to stream movies from my PC, and to play Blu-Ray movies).
Suffice it to say if it weren't for the hardware failure issues, I would've shelled out for an Xbox a long time ago.
Quote from: Peregrin;421030Suffice it to say if it weren't for the hardware failure issues, I would've shelled out for an Xbox a long time ago.
And how common are those?
If you really don't have a preference game wise, then go into a store and get your mittens on the controllers for the consoles. One will lie better in your hands.
failures are pretty much solved(minus a few morons making stupid claims that have no basis in truth) with the newer consoles so dont worry about them.
Quote from: Broken-Serenity;421040failures are pretty much solved(minus a few morons making stupid claims that have no basis in truth) with the newer consoles so dont worry about them.
Well, maybe they've solved them with the new version of the 360, but every single one of my friends has had their original design console fail, a few 2-3 times. Upon speaking with their friends, I find more and more people who've had the failures.
Granted, MS has done a good job with the way they handle the repairs, but after the fiasco with the original 360 design, I'm not sure. The only thing I heard about the revamped casing is that it "has a bigger fan."
Any links with information regarding any significant redesign of the casing or airflow modifications with the new boxes?
just look the console up online and you'll see its pretty much a complete redesign inside with better airflow, will try to find you a link though if you have no look finding that stuff yourself.
Quote from: DominikSchwager;421036If you really don't have a preference game wise, then go into a store and get your mittens on the controllers for the consoles. One will lie better in your hands.
You know, this is pretty good advice. Notwithstanding the availability of 3rd party controllers, I like the feel of the XBox controller better than the DualShock. Basing that on what I think is the 2nd generation original XBox vs. DualShock 2 for PS2. And also notwithstanding the fact that PS2 has more buttons, which could be a necessity for some games. E.g. I think the controls for Super Dimension Fortress Macross (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Dimension_Fortress_Macross_(PlayStation_2_game)) (PS2 import) are well laid out and and all the buttons are essential.
If you go third party, of course, you can not only get different regular controllers but also stuff like racing wheels/pedals or stick/throttle or even this monster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel_Battalion).
Quote from: Peregrin;421041Well, maybe they've solved them with the new version of the 360, but every single one of my friends has had their original design console fail, a few 2-3 times.
I have two different XBoxes with the old design (I had to get a second one when I got an HD TV) and I haven't have problems with either.
Seanchai
Quote from: The Butcher;421033And how common are those?
They don't warrant any more mention now than does the "yellow light of death" of the PS3. Pretty much anything with Jasper or later architecture on the 360 and you should be good to go. My 360 dates to early '07 now with only one issue; a failed power supply (I didn't realize the brick needed some airflow around it too and cramped it up in the back of my entertainment center.
Quote from: JongWK;420951Some things to consider:
- In addition to its console refresh, Microsoft has recently released an improved controller.
- Both companies have (and will continue to have) first-party exclusives.
- Both companies want to integrate your gaming experience with mobile gadgets (Windows Phone 7 for Xbox, and Android for PS3).
- The PS3 is now a 3D Blu-ray player.
IME the ps3 was better able to play media files. The 360 is rubbish for streaming and couldn't play any of my DCAU avi files. The ps3 could not only rip musical discs, i was able to store those avi files permanently on the HD which the 360 also couldn't do.
The online functinality was just as robust, IME, on either platform (or just as crap, depending on the game). The 360s new dashboard still hasn't been patched to work properly and is increasingly filled with fucking adverts and commercial shit (maybe the ps3 is just as bad IDK).
Quote from: Seanchai;421056I have two different XBoxes with the old design (I had to get a second one when I got an HD TV) and I haven't have problems with either.
Seanchai
For the old models, you have a 30-some-odd percent chance of getting a "non-defective" model, so it's reasonable.
I was skeptical of the hype, too, until 6 friends within my immediate group of close friends had their boxes fail, 4 of them having to get the unit replaced at least a second time. Then talking to old high-school friends on summer breaks and finding out nearly every person who owned an Xbox had a failure.
as of right now, I think Sony is the more economic choice and the X-Box is the more full featured choice:
With Sony you have no real hidden fees: $300 gets you the ability to play games (fully, with online multiplayer), Blu-Rays and watch Netflix. You can also use it as a media hub and a PSP pairs really well with it. Most of the cross-platform games are a little worse off on the PS3, but not horribly marred or unfit by any standard (just a couple lost FPS or a less crisp presentation). It has more geeky exclusives(in a good way IMHO) then the X-Box: Demon's Souls, Gran Tourismo, The Last Guardian and etc. Also it has the best version of FFXIII. There's also the $400 bundle that comes with the Move motion controller.
The X-Box has a lot of different models varying from $200 to $400 with varying levels of performance. With a Hard Disk, without, With a Kinect...without etc. Most of the cross platform games end up a bit better on the Xbox and Microsoft secures a TON of exclusive 3rd party deals: Exclusive expansions for Fallout: New Vegas and Dead Rising 2 come to mind. You WILL however pay $60 a year for Xbox LIVE Gold. Without it you can't play Multiplayer, can't watch NetFlix/ESPN, you get demos late and pay more for Arcade games. Their network is way faster then PSN and the Voice chat is better, but you pay an annual fee for what you mostly get for free from Sony.
I own both, so I hope this information helps you decide.
I thought of something else. The PS3's batteries are built into the controllers. To charge them, you have to plug them into the PS3, which has to be on. I don't know if you have charge them while you're using them.
The Xbox's controllers use normal AA batteries that you replace or recharge as needed.
Seanchai
Quote from: Seanchai;422657I thought of something else. The PS3's batteries are built into the controllers. To charge them, you have to plug them into the PS3, which has to be on. I don't know if you have charge them while you're using them.
The Xbox's controllers use normal AA batteries that you replace or recharge as needed.
Seanchai
Actually the Xbox has multiple options there as well. Wireless controllers come standard with the AA battery pack you mentioned, but you can replace the battery pack with Play&Charge kits which have a rechargeable lithium ion and a (proprietary) USB charging cable.
Or you can even buy the old school wired controllers for it.
Quote from: KrakaJak;422669Actually the Xbox has multiple options there as well. Wireless controllers come standard with the AA battery pack you mentioned, but you can replace the battery pack with Play&Charge kits which have a rechargeable lithium ion and a (proprietary) USB charging cable.
Or you can even buy the old school wired controllers for it.
What's your experience with the life of the PS3 batteries? I don't play mine often enough to require them to be charged more than one or twice. Do they eventually start to lose their ability to hold a charge? I know you can open them up and put in replacements.
Seanchai
Quote from: Seanchai;422657I thought of something else. The PS3's batteries are built into the controllers. To charge them, you have to plug them into the PS3, which has to be on. I don't know if you have charge them while you're using them.
The Xbox's controllers use normal AA batteries that you replace or recharge as needed.
Seanchai
The ps3 should come with a recharge cable (which iirc is usb) and can be charged while playing. IT's a better deal than the 360 as the charge kits (essential) are sold separately.
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;422784The ps3 should come with a recharge cable (which iirc is usb) and can be charged while playing. IT's a better deal than the 360 as the charge kits (essential) are sold separately.
Not really. The PS3 still costs about $100 more than a 360 in each comparable hard drive category.
Quote from: Seanchai;422724What's your experience with the life of the PS3 batteries? I don't play mine often enough to require them to be charged more than one or twice. Do they eventually start to lose their ability to hold a charge? I know you can open them up and put in replacements.
Seanchai
I picked up a PS3 in '08; I haven't had any noticable degradation of the battery life yet.
When are expecting the next Xbox, next PS and next Wii?
It seems to me that we are due for "the next big thing" from all three of those console producers.
Quote from: Spinachcat;422862When are expecting the next Xbox, next PS and next Wii?
It seems to me that we are due for "the next big thing" from all three of those console producers.
Sony promised "10 years", and Microsoft vowed to match the PS3's lifespan.
Quote from: Peregrin;424038Sony promised "10 years", and Microsoft vowed to match the PS3's lifespan.
Is that realistic? 10 years in tech time is a century.
It's realistic as it's a bit unreasonable to expect people to upgrade a games console every five years.
It's not unrealistic to expect people to upgrade consoles every 5 years - it's unfortunate but not unrealistic.
The issue right now is that if Sony or Xbox made a new console for next year it's just not going to be that much better then the current generations. But even if they could put out the xbox 720 and double the current power of the 360 and keep it in a competitive price point (that's also important) then that creates a bigger issue.
Currently game devs spend a lot of money to put out games that take advantage of the current gen stuff. If they were expected to pump out games that took advantages of double the processing power, graphics etcc.... that will put a significant increase in their costs. Which they'll only be able to absorb in volume (which doesn't work on a new console) so it'd have to go into increasing the cost of games. Which are already hitting a level that the market is less willing to pay.
Still with all the technology jumps we are only talking a graphical improvement. Doubling the speed of the consoles won't impact the quality of the games at all. There's just very little incentive or need to make better consoles right now. It's more a case of protecting developers then it is about being nice to consumers.
Not upgrading consoles helps to increase their market foothold which will help to increase sales in games and other pay per use services and that's where the real money currently is.
Quote from: Spinachcat;424699Is that realistic? 10 years in tech time is a century.
[just noticed my post overlapped with what some of kryyst said -- sorry]
The focus in game design has (thankfully!) shifted back to "better gameplay, less emphasis on graphics" because it saves developers money and it makes better games for us. I partially thank the Wii for this, since while I'm not particularly fond of the platform (I like the DS more in terms of library), it's re-oriented developers in the right direction, basically, most people (gamer or not) care more about how fun a game is than how spiffy the graphics are. Casual gamers are good for something. ;)
This is of course too little, too late for PC gaming, since the whole graphics wars nearly killed off my platform of choice and made it an expensive niche.
I mean, they're still getting made by the studios that can afford them, but the sales gains from having Crysis or idTech5 levels of graphics doesn't guarantee you'll get CoD sales numbers, and when the best-selling games of the last few years include WoW, Starcraft, and a few shooters/RPGs with graphics far below the caliber expected from id or Crytek, there's a lot less incentive to put your resources toward developing the "next big thing" right away that will necessitate a new platform. It's just too expensive for everyone, the platform developers and the software developers.
In an industry where you can sell 6-8 million copies of a game in the first year or two, but then still are being outsold by people making flash-games on lower budgets with a
lot less financial risk, it's time to re-evaluate how you conduct your business.
So I went ahead and sprang for the PS3 for me and the boy this year...so far, so good...but their internet browser does decidedly suck. In fact, online altogether has been unimpressive, but it was also my smallest selling point.
Quote from: Tommy Brownell;428565So I went ahead and sprang for the PS3 for me and the boy this year...so far, so good...but their internet browser does decidedly suck. In fact, online altogether has been unimpressive, but it was also my smallest selling point.
It's better than the 360 browser (as there isn't one), plus you can usb a keyboard if need be. I really never understood the criticism of the ps3 browser. It's perfectly fine IMO. You can click on a game in the HD and go straight to its webpage for example.
The PSN gets a lot of stick because some people foolishly believe that for such a service to work properly it needs to charge it's users, like XBL. The only reason there are problems playing online is because MS have the develoeprs of such games (egActivision) in their pockets.
For PS3, I recommend that you get Heavy Rain. I've been playing it for hours. Amazing game. You are a number of characters, all involved in finding a serial killer. It looks almost like you're watching a movie while you play. And different choices affect later outcomes. I really, really hope this style of game becomes more popular. It's the most fun I've had on a console.
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;428688It's better than the 360 browser (as there isn't one), plus you can usb a keyboard if need be. I really never understood the criticism of the ps3 browser. It's perfectly fine IMO. You can click on a game in the HD and go straight to its webpage for example.
The PSN gets a lot of stick because some people foolishly believe that for such a service to work properly it needs to charge it's users, like XBL. The only reason there are problems playing online is because MS have the develoeprs of such games (egActivision) in their pockets.
Considering the thing freezes my PS3 up when I'm trying to post something on Facebook through it, I rather think it sucks...I also did not care for the Playstation Home thing...but that's cool...the Playstation Store works fine, and that's really all I need to be happy with their online thing.
Quote from: Peregrin;424038Sony promised "10 years", and Microsoft vowed to match the PS3's lifespan.
So there will be no new console release form Microsoft anytime soon?