Well my 360 died and I have considered buying a ps3 instead of chancing onother RRoD, but I dont know which one to choose, there are to many fanboys giving biased arguments so please dont turn this into a xbox rules or xbos sucks thread Thanks.

---

garjian:

the clincher... fable has always had erectile disfunction...

its never been long or hard enough to have any fun with

...Thats funny. I only have a 360 because my ps3 died. I think they're both , but I prefer the ps3 over the 360. Not by much though. Its the exclusive games that make or break a system I believe. Now I'm waiting on 150 buckaroos to fix it...

---

...Think of something really profound that would blow your mind...

...And assume it is written here...

Yeah the games are swaying my decision xbox 360 exclusives are rare but usually fun but ps3 has some great looking games like infamous.

---

garjian:

the clincher... fable has always had erectile disfunction...

its never been long or hard enough to have any fun with

I have neither of the consoles, but I do have experience with both.

Although the 360 obviously has more titles, I believe this is only a temporary reason to get the 360. Most of the games come on both consoles anyway. The PS3 is way more powerful, more practical and of course includes great exclusive titles (Killzone!). Not to mention free online services.

The 360 on the other hand has a lot more titles, thus more variety, but I really believe this to be a downside because the quality is not up to par with the PS3's exclusive titles (LBP for crying out loud!). I personally like the controller better than the PS3 one, but that's personal preference and most I've met do like the PS3 one better.

The pro's of the 360, in my opinion, do not outweigh those of the PS3. You have to pay for your online service and that service gives you access to whiny brats (or *** adults). Although, I believe Live! is a service, and may be worth the money, I cannot compare it to the PS3 one, but hearsay has it that they are more mature, I can't confirm that however.

None of the consoles suck! They're both great in their own respect, but depending on yourself, the 360 might just be the better console for you. But if I were to buy one, I'd go with the PS3 as its hardware has not yet been utilized fully and the exclusives are REALLY exclusive. Meaning, they're . Not Halo "", they are outstanding! MGS, LBP and that adventure game I can't remember the name of. All three deadly great games!

So, my summary of this: PS3 has fecking exclusive titles, which are worth the console.

---

No idea what MGS is but from what I have heared killzone 2  isnt that great I read somewhere about aiming being a bit dodgy, I agree its better when exclusives stay exclusive but the 360 seems to have more controll of games, fallout released for both ps3 gets no dlc, then most people I know use live, also xbox 360 has more games that means moe entertainment for longer although the games that intrest me are avalible for both.

But my main issue with deciding is to get the ps3 I sell all my 360 games so I am unable to change my mind but so far from what iv read ps3 is better.

 

---

garjian:

the clincher... fable has always had erectile disfunction...

its never been long or hard enough to have any fun with

skormsweasel:

No idea what MGS is

...Metal Gear Solid. One of/if not the best Series to be created. Hideo Kojima is the creator. He is japans P.M. ...

---

...Think of something really profound that would blow your mind...

...And assume it is written here...

skormsweasel:

No idea what MGS is but from what I have heared killzone 2  isnt that great I read somewhere about aiming being a bit dodgy, I agree its better when exclusives stay exclusive but the 360 seems to have more controll of games, fallout released for both ps3 gets no dlc, then most people I know use live, also xbox 360 has more games that means moe entertainment for longer although the games that intrest me are avalible for both.

Killzone 2 is without a doubt the best console fps i have ever played, the aiming feels heavy but i liked it. However it got patched to be much more sensitive (at least online).  Anyway i have no numbers at all with what console got the most games but uncharted, mgs4, lbp and killzone are all some of my favorite games the last many years and there is a lot more exclusives coming out that wont go to multiplat (sony owns dev or publish the game) like heavy rain, GoW3 and InFamous.

On the 360 i cant see anything but fable 2 that would make me want to buy it and that with the fact live cost money and it likes to kill itself makes me hate it. It usually get the better versions of multiplatform games and DLC and you know lionhead wont make any ps3 games (hopefully pc games though).

Anyway i'm bias as i hate the console 360 so i wont even bother... Ok i will.... Buy a ps3.

or a dreamcast.

---

People assume that just because the 360 RRoD, the PS3 doesn't break. I got a PS3 after I got a 360, and the PS3 crashed before I got RRoD.

---

Off through the new day's mist I run, out from the new day's mist I have come. I hunt, therefore I am, harvest the land, taking of the fallen lamb

dawgz525:

People assume that just because the 360 RRoD, the PS3 doesn't break. I got a PS3 after I got a 360, and the PS3 crashed before I got RRoD.

No people knows all electronics break. But nothing breaks as much and as often as 360, the failure rate is crazy and everyone i know who had a 360 for more than 15 months had it kill itself.

---

Everyone is going to give different answers - both of the consoles have their benefits. The main things to consider are

1. What you actually want it for
2. The excusive games
3. Price

I have both a PS3 and an Xbox 360. I find the PS3 is very as a media centre, and obviously it can play Blu Rays. It's also very quiet, meaning it's my primary DVD player. However, that's basically all I use my PS3 for. I don't really get enough time these days to play a lot of games, but when I do have the time I always play my 360. Why? Because a) the games appeal more to me, and b) I prefer the controller.

Also note - don't get which console you think is the most powerful, ultimately that means nothing if the hardware isn't used to its full potential. Technologically speaking, the PS3 is more advanced than the Xbox 360 in many ways, however multi platform titles always seem to run better and look better on the 360 (Eurogamer.net does regular comparisons of multi platform titles). This is likely because the 360 is often the primary development platform, although the 360s (apparently) superior graphics architecture will also be a factor. You can't always just say one system is more powerful than another - it depends what it's being used for.

However, a lot of what you are hearing from me, or anybody, is just opinion. Saying game a is better than game b is entirely subjective, and no console hard "better exclusives" than another. Sure, reviewers give games a score and you can go to metacritic.com and see what the averages are, but the scoring system is completely abstract in the first place as the quality of a game is un-quantifyable - all that can be measured, albeit very inaccurately, is the amount you enjoyed a game.

So, anwayy - get whichever console suits your needs. If you want a media centre/dvd/blu ray player that also plays games, get the PS3. If you want a system entirely for the games, check out the exclusives availalbe on each platform and see which appeal to you the most.

Salimort:

get whichever console suits your needs. If you want a media centre/dvd/blu ray player that also plays games, get the PS3. If you want a system entirely for the games, check out the exclusives availalbe on each platform and see which appeal to you the most.

The PS3 is indeed the more powerful machine. But that won't do you much if you don't like the games. So I guess it comes down to if you're a LittleBig Planet sorta guy, or a Halo sorta guy. I'd be looking more at future exclusives, mind you - I mean, they're the ones you're probably going to end up buying realistically.

---

True but I dont care about the power I just had my xbox stop playing 360 games but play dvds, and I would have to pay £82 to fix it, so after having it break after about a year maybe 16 months I thought why buy this again if it breaks so easily, the ammount of people who get the RRoD is to high for my liking, so I considerd a ps3 looked at the games and saw some I liked, but most games I like are on both (Bioshock 2 and prototype) but I dont know about many games for the ps3 in the future and they dont get dlc like fallout 3 on xbox. The xbox mainly holds my attention by the posibility of a fable 3 I loved the first not the second if there was a third it would greatly influence my choice, but I think I will pick ps3 quiter, better graphics, more reliable, free (what do they call the ps3 version of live) and has some games that look great . 

---

garjian:

the clincher... fable has always had erectile disfunction...

its never been long or hard enough to have any fun with

skormsweasel:

 I think I will pick ps3

1. quiter

2. better graphics

3. more reliable

4. free (what do they call the ps3 version of live)

5. and has some games that look great . 

1. Indeed - my 360 sounds like a jet engine in comparison to my PS3. The first time I turned on my PS3 I didn't actually thing it was on.

2. This is not exactly true. While the PS3 has significanty greater processing potential, the 360s graphics architecture is said to be better. The PS3s architecture is more processor centric, meaning it is better suited to other processing tasks such as decoding media and calculating physics and AI. In the current state of things, multi platform games tend to run better and look better on the 360.

3. This is certainly true - while I've had my 360 since launch and it has never failed me, a lot of poeple have had the dreaded RRoD. I'm not sure but they may have fixed this on the most recent model of the 360 which I believe has the 65nm graphics card.

4. Yet another advantage of the PS3. While the Xbox Live service is excellent, I resent being made to pay £40 a year for it. However, at the price of a PS3 compared to the 360 you could porbably get a 360, a years subsciption to Xbox Live and 2 games. Either way, it's nice not to have to pay every year and I'm sure it pays off in the long run.

5. This is also true - the PS3 is really starting to come into its own and I am sure the year ahead will produce some fantastic games on both systems.

Don't forget that when you buy a PS3 you get the best blue ray player on the market.

I have a 360, just because the games (some of the exclusive titles), interested me more, if I would've want the best machine, I would've bought a PS3 for sure.

---

“I am the ripper, the tearer, the slasher. I am the teeth in the darkness! The talons in the night! My name is strength! And lust! And power!"

Beowulf71:

Don't forget that when you buy a PS3 you get the best blue ray player on the market. I have a 360, just because the games (some of the exclusive titles), interested me more, if I would've want the best machine, I would've bought a PS3 for sure.

Meh ps3 isnt the best on the market anymore but that's not saying it is bad.

Anyway heavy rain and whatever team ico will do next is enough of a reason to buy ps3.

---

maggot:

Beowulf71:

Don't forget that when you buy a PS3 you get the best blue ray player on the market. I have a 360, just because the games (some of the exclusive titles), interested me more, if I would've want the best machine, I would've bought a PS3 for sure.

Meh ps3 isnt the best on the market anymore but that's not saying it is bad.

Anyway heavy rain and whatever team ico will do next is enough of a reason to buy ps3.

I saw the trailer for that and still wonder what it is about and what I do in the game.

---

garjian:

the clincher... fable has always had erectile disfunction...

its never been long or hard enough to have any fun with

skormsweasel:

maggot:

Beowulf71:

Don't forget that when you buy a PS3 you get the best blue ray player on the market. I have a 360, just because the games (some of the exclusive titles), interested me more, if I would've want the best machine, I would've bought a PS3 for sure.

Meh ps3 isnt the best on the market anymore but that's not saying it is bad.

Anyway heavy rain and whatever team ico will do next is enough of a reason to buy ps3.

I saw the trailer for that and still wonder what it is about and what I do in the game.

Play fahrenheit (indigo prophecy in the US) and you will know. Fantastic game and if you havent already tried it you better buy it, only game that has ever kept me on the edge of my seat all the way through even when the plot went bad in the end.

---

I'll put my 2 cents into this thread.

I have a PS3.  When I was at Wal-Mart one day, I was willing to waste my hard earned money on a new console.  I was even walking back and forth by the display cabinet debating on which one to buy.  Finally, I chose the PS3.  And I am really glad I did.  I bought the 40GB because that was all that they were selling that day and I really didn't need more than that on my system.  I was a little disappointed that it wasn't PS2 compatible, but hey, that's all the money I had and the other thing is, I have a PS2 to play them on so I wasn't complaining too much.

I really can't live without it.  I love it.

My next story is sort of funny.

I have a friend who bad mouthed PS3, all the time!  I am talking about a 360 lover, who had practically everything for the 360.  This includes the HDMI cable, the HD DVD player, and all the great titles that the 360 has.

He came to my house to watch The Incredible Hulk on Blu-Ray, this being his first Blu-Ray movie to watch.  Let me tell, you, his mouth was all the way to the floor because he couldn't believe the picture and sound in it.  He even told me that Blu-Ray looked even far superior to HD.

I then showed him many of the features on the PS3, like PSN (Playstation Network), some games, etc.  He couldn't believe the graphics for some of PS3's exclusives.

So then, he gets the urge to want a Blu-Ray player.  We begin searching online for players, but the one that stood out to him was Sony's Blu-Ray player.  The price on any Blu-Ray is pretty darn close to a PS3, so I told him if he wanted a Sony, he might as well get the PS3 (which even store managers or employees of Target or Gamestop told him). 

He then starts pondering on the thought, going back and forth between a Blu-Ray player, or PS3.  This happens for two weeks.

The two weeks go by, and I get a voicemail on my phone from him, telling me he bought a PS3.  I nearly crapped myself.  I couldn't believe what I was hearing. 

I go to his house with Heavenly Sword, and I was there most the night because he and his roomate were going nuts and I was just laughing at their reaction to the gameplay.

Two more weeks go by, and he calls me up again.  He told me that he had sold EVERYTHING of his XBOX 360.  I really crapped myself that time.  I was in shock.  I really couldn't believe he went as far as selling his 360!

Now, that's all he spends his time on is his PS3.  I am really amazed that I actually converted a PS3 hater, to a full blown PS3 lover.  And crazy part is that he went so far into selling all things of his 360! 

The PS3 is taking its time. But once it reaches its full power of what it will offer, quality will mean a new definition.

Salimort:

>2. This is not exactly true. While the PS3 has significanty greater processing potential, the 360s graphics architecture is said to be better. The PS3s architecture is more processor centric, meaning it is better suited to other processing tasks such as decoding media and calculating physics and AI.

Anh, now if you want to get technical about it, I'l have to insist you know what you're talking about i'm afraid The PS3's graphics architecture is designed so the Cell Processor (CPU) is part of the graphics pipeline. Effectively, all kinds of graphics tasks can be offloaded onto it's SPUs, hence graphics far beyond the reach of it's RSX graphics chip alone are now being achieved. This is how it was always planned - it's just taken a couple of years to get there, which is more or less what was predicted a couple of years back. The 360 had an immediate advantage in that it was running far closer to full potential upon release, because it uses comparatively traditional processor/graphics setup, hence it's seen by some as having more or less peaked now, while the PS3 is just beginning to get into it's stride.

you're quite right that many 3rd party have so far had better graphics on the 360 though, because generally 3rd party stuff just doesn't bother using the PS3 properly. But apart from the occasional aberration (such as Fallout 3) the difference is small enough to have no real impact on your enjoyment, unless you get into having detailed analysis. Whether 3rd party games ever get more into the idea of using the full PS3 graphics pipeline model remains to be seen, though.

Much like modern PCs, things aren't just about a straight CPU/GPU split any more.

---

Thanks for that it's always to learn something new - didn't know that intent was for the Cell to actually be directly involved in the graphics pipeline process. This is a major advantage given that while the graphics card was certainly , it wasn't groundbreaking. I think the point I made is a common misconception (as in 360 - better graphics card therefore better graphics processing)

I suppose this means that the PS3 has much more potential in its future than the 360 does, as the 360 has hit that point in the curve where most graphical improvements are minimal at best. Given your statement, I think it's safe to assume that exclusive PS3 titles will begin to overtake 360 exclusives on a more regular basis fairly soon.

Personally, 360 exclusives appeal to me more so if I were to have no consoles and have the choice again, I would get a 360. Part of the reason for this is that there's a pretty chance I'll just get the next Xbox the day it comes out anyway, meaning the future potential argument becomes kind of irrelevant by that point, plus it saves me £150 if I'm just going to go out and get the latest technology in 2 years time anyway I'm sure we won't see a new Playstation system for at least another year after the 360, probably even more.

Salimort:

Personally, 360 exclusives appeal to me more so if I were to have no consoles and have the choice again, I would get a 360.

Quite so. When it gets down to it, if you want to play games the only thing that really matters is, well, the available games. Anything else - graphics, storage, processing power, memory and so on are absolutely irrelevant.

You buy the machine that plays the games you like

---

Yep, which is why I'm saving up for a DEC PDP-1

SPACEWAR!!!

---

The only thing worse than beating a dead horse is betting on one.

deliriousstudios:

Yep, which is why I'm saving up for a DEC PDP-1

SPACEWAR!!!

hehe!

And guess what.  I might be buying a Super Nintendo just so I can own Super Mario RPG and Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3!

But eh, their probably on the Wii's Virtual Console.  But nothing will ever be the same being played on the original consoles...

my opinion is so biased to 360 beacose a new set of wheels for a skateboard cost on avrege 30 40 pounds and i have 24 a month lus my laptop is dying to i may need a new one soon that will be for a nice one about 200 thanks so yea if its not as cheap or cheaper than the 360 it disgusts me

---

i honestly couldn't care less

before it starts again TAKE THAT SEARCH BAR AND SHOVE IT

matneee:

Salimort:

>2. This is not exactly true. While the PS3 has significanty greater processing potential, the 360s graphics architecture is said to be better. The PS3s architecture is more processor centric, meaning it is better suited to other processing tasks such as decoding media and calculating physics and AI.

Anh, now if you want to get technical about it, I'l have to insist you know what you're talking about i'm afraid The PS3's graphics architecture is designed so the Cell Processor (CPU) is part of the graphics pipeline. Effectively, all kinds of graphics tasks can be offloaded onto it's SPUs, hence graphics far beyond the reach of it's RSX graphics chip alone are now being achieved. This is how it was always planned

well... to get really technical about it, it wasn't really it's a lot of rewriting of history from Sony.  If you followed the development then you'd know (as I'm sure you really do) that is was all meant to be done on the cell originally.  Then they abandoned that idea for a dedicated graphics processor from nVidia.  Unfortunately the RSX wasn't as as they were led to believe so now developers boost it's power by sharing the load with the Cell.  It was never originally meant to be part of it, but it evolved to be part of it when other parts weren't quite up to scratch.  Does any of this matter, no not at all but I'm bored with people buying into Sony's PR.

(plus if the cell was really designed to be part of the graphics pipeline it would have shared memory with the RSX, not split memory.  Additionally it would have more than a 4 wide vector size.)

Buy the one that has the most games you want.  Buy both if you can, then you get the best of everything - tribalism in gaming is so boring.