ps3 vs xbox360 rant

[arcanise]

ok to start i am sick of every one trying to say the xbox is in fact better than the ps3. when i can then turn and ask them about the difference of HDD rpm's and they get lost so here it is my rant on the two systems

ps3-free multiplayer
xbox360-$$ per year to play multi

ps3-$300 for HDMI support, WiFi, Blu-Ray, 120GB HDD, cell Processor.
Xbox 360-$300 for system + ectra $$$ for wifi HDMI large HDD

PS3- large library of games with titles such as GT5 call of duty etc etc
Xbox-smaller library and Halo

PS3- no known system crippling errors
Xbox- RROD

older PS3- capable to load a linux OS
xbox- stuck as an xbox

so if PS3 is a more capable gaming console and a blu-ray player at teh same time for less where the hell does the Xbox win....i just dont understand i won both systems and i havnt touched my xbox since the 2nd week i had it.

i just dont understand how microsoft gets any sales on this thing...im so lost

 

[Archer0915]

I have a PS3 and it is a great machine. You have valid points but I am sure someone will counter.

 

[zexmarquies01]

First off, this thread should be in the Console Gaming section where it belongs.

But the other problem with this, is that some of your information is old.

1 - The PS3 has been known to give the Yellow light of death ( as it's being called ). I believe it's also a heat related issue. But the total death rate is somewhere around the 1% area, which isn't bad in consumer electronics. Also helps that they keep shrinking the die sizes. But it still does have system crippling errors.

2 - PS3 no longer supports linux if you updated to ANY version of the firmware after it was killed. And if you don't update, you can't play the newest games...which kinda makes the console a paper weight outside of playing movies. Unless you Jailbreak the PS3, but that's a totally different topic.

3 - While normal multiplayer on the PS3 is free, They now have a premium service that you pay a monthly fee for. It allows voice chat, and some other extra features.

4 - Saying "Cell Processor" in your 2nd list is kinda unfair. Anyone could easily mention the 360's processor, and how it's easier to port, and code games for.

5 - I wouldn't quite say the 360's library of games is "small". The 360 gets quite a few ports from the PC. It's just easier to move a game from the PC to the 360. But "Small" isn't exactly true. The library on both sides are pretty impressive. But it all boils down to what type of games you play the most.

Personally, I prefer the PS3. BluRay movie playback is probably the greatest advantage the PS3 has. Also, I tend to like the games on the PS3 more, mainly because I'm a big fan of JRPG's. Also, The built in Wireless is nice. Better than paying $99 for an adapter. But too bad it doesn't support 802.11N, because streaming HD video from your computer to your PS3 wirelessly causes jumping in the scenes due to 802.11G not having enough bandwidth. ( My dad had this problem. He finally routed a 50' Ethernet cable to fix the issue ).

That isn't to say there wasn't any decent games on the 360. There were quite a few that I really enjoyed. One of my favorites was "Earth Defense force 2017". Luckily, the new one they are making is going to be on both PS3 and 360. Also at the time, Tales of Vesperia was 360 only. And while it was FINALLY released on the PS3 not too long ago, there still isn't any word that it will be released to America on the PS3. Also at the time, Star Ocean: Last Hope was on the 360 only back then as well. It was only recently ported to the PS3 not to long ago.

Also to mention, I'm not a 360 fanboy. I'm not that big of a 360 fan really. Hell, I sold my 360 about a year ago, because it was collecting more dust than my Nintendo Wii. But at the same time, I can't let people use arguments that are either wrong, or require more information than is given ( yellow light of death, or the PS3 not being TOTALLY free for online use anymore ).

 

[Archer0915]

As far as game selection that is child appropriate for the PS3 and the BOX, BOTH SUCK. I bought a Wii for games. I have kids and other than a few good ones their is no real selection on either platform other than the older games you can get on the network

 

[DBZ]

Its just fanboyism (is that even a word?). I owned all 3 consoles and ignored all of them equally.

 

[Badbonji]

I own a Wii and PS3. Got a YLOD on my first PS3 after 4 years.

Linux support has since been dropped, and Halo isn't the only good Xbox game...

There are advantages to both systems, and if you just use them to play games then the XBOX probably has a wider range of them. The PS3 is better if you want to use it as a media server, although I am happier with my dedicated HTPC.

 

[oakstave]

I got a 360 so I could still play all my Xbox games. Can PS3 do that?

 

[Archer0915]

PS3 can play a lot of ps2 and ps one games. Netflix, hulu plus, downloadable exclusive content and games, purchase and rent movies at the Playstation store, free online gaming, play standard and blueray movies, stream movies from a PC, fold and some other stuff.

 

[oakstave]

PS3 can play a lot of ps2 and ps one games. Netflix, hulu plus, downloadable exclusive content and games, purchase and rent movies at the Playstation store, free online gaming, play standard and blueray movies, stream movies from a PC, fold and some other stuff.

The folding is really great. I'm not surprised that the 360 doesn't fold, and even if it did, I'd be nervous because of it's thermal issues.

You can also stream movies from a PC on the 360.

 

[Archer0915]

I honestly think MS backed the wrong standard (HD DVD) and did not focus on the full potential of the unit. They have improved a bit and I think we will see all of the companies learning from their mistakes next time around.

 

[JonSimonzi]

The folding is really great. I'm not surprised that the 360 doesn't fold, and even if it did, I'd be nervous because of it's thermal issues.

You can also stream movies from a PC on the 360.

You can, but it's very limited to what it can stream. Couldn't get .MKVs to stream no matter what, which the PS3 can handle with ease.

I recently sold my Xbox 360 to buy a PS3, and couldn't be happier. But the games have nothing to do with it. I never played a game on my 360, and will probably never play a PS3 game on my PS3. 3 things the PS3 can do that makes it more valueable to me than a 360:

1) Play Blu-ray movies.
2) Stream .mkv's and just about everything else from my computer
3) Stream Netflix (in HD even) for free, with the 360 you need the "gold" membership.

Those alone to me make it worth the $300 price tag. I am playing through FFVII which I bought of the Playstation store though, that's about the most gaming the system will see

 

[4GHZ_or_bust]

I haven't bothered to get the current gen consoles. I have XBox and it's had a total of 2 hours play time in all of 2010. I have PS2 and the only games I've played are the older PSX games and even then, maybe 10 hours total in all of 2010.

I also have Gamecube and it's got so much dust my local crime lab came to collect them recently for their future fingerprint dusting.

I think the one console with the most play time is

Atari 2600 with 5 to 8 hours per week average. Gameboy Advance/SP is close second because of great many games.

 

[I.M.O.G.]

I'm pretty sure the ps3 and xbox 360 both work fine as media streamers if done with tversity. PS3 seems to make the video look better, not sure if its upscaling or better post processing or what.

Moved to console gaming section.

 

[Aynjell]

blah blah blah

That PS3 is useless without a game worth playing on it. Thankfully some have come out, but in terms of how easy a game is to develop on it, Xbox wins. In terms of "killer apps" xbox wins.

In terms of system hardware, specs, etc, the PS3 wins. The CPU is garbage though, good potential but way too hard to realize.

 

[I.M.O.G.]

I don't think thats very realistic dude. He clearly favors the PS3, but he has some points, and there are lots of good games no the PS3.

What killer apps are on the xbox? Live is better than PSN in my opinion, but other than that.

 

[Aynjell]

I don't think thats very realistic dude. He clearly favors the PS3, but he has some points, and there are lots of good games no the PS3.

What killer apps are on the xbox? Live is better than PSN in my opinion, but other than that.

Halo. halo sells consoles. I'm not calling it a good game. I'm just saying it sells consoles. I seriously loved the story personally and bought Halo 3 to play the story. It's gonna take a lot more than heavy rain and uncharted to get the PS3 to a status of "better" than the Xbox, title wise. Halo is just a huge chunk of awesome that you have to get over. Also gears of war. those 2 games right there are the reason Xbox is better. Without better exclusive content it's a wash between the games that are on all consoles, and MOST times those games are anything special to begin with. Movie games, sub standard racing games, b grade shooters, etc. Nothing that really gets the fans moving. A year ago I googled what the PS3 had that the 360 didn't game wise. It was a very short list. Under 10 games I believe. None of them I wanted to play badly enough to buy a PS3 over my existing 360. I think this makes my point pretty clear. To the consumer, the console is a means to an end. It allows them to play x game. The PS3 can't play X game I want to play? Well then, it sucks. Well, that happens far too often with the PS3 now so I just don't see a need for one.

Sony doesn't have anything near that level of epic. They're JUST NOW getting Gran Turismo. I wonder why? I am thinking, despite what they say, it had a lot to do with the cell limitations.

For most, Forza was good enough. Good enough to justify not waiting on GT5. What really irked me was the GT5 demo... you had to buy... seriously, wtf?

 

[hajalie24]

I haven't bothered to get the current gen consoles. I have XBox and it's had a total of 2 hours play time in all of 2010. I have PS2 and the only games I've played are the older PSX games and even then, maybe 10 hours total in all of 2010.

I also have Gamecube and it's got so much dust my local crime lab came to collect them recently for their future fingerprint dusting.

I think the one console with the most play time is

Atari 2600 with 5 to 8 hours per week average. Gameboy Advance/SP is close second because of great many games.

You can stream mkv to the xbox with a program called "PS3 Media Server"

 

[ArcturusVi]

ok to start i am sick of every one trying to say the xbox is in fact better than the ps3. when i can then turn and ask them about the difference of HDD rpm's and they get lost so here it is my rant on the two systems

ps3-free multiplayer (Yeah, that lets me join games almost seamlessly and party...)
xbox360-$$ per year to play multi (Seriously. Stop this argument. If fifty-sixty a year is even a mark on your budget, stop buying electronics.)

ps3-$300 for HDMI support, WiFi, Blu-Ray, 120GB HDD, cell Processor.
Xbox 360-$300 for system + ectra $$$ for wifi HDMI large HDD

(Ummm...300 for both. One has BluRay..that's the only difference that matters.)

PS3- large library of games with titles such as GT5 call of duty etc etc
Xbox-smaller library and Halo(LOLOL)

Yes, GT5: A six year graphical update to four. If they spent an iota of the time spent making a FIFTH of those cars "premium" on other aspects, it wouldn't have been such a soul-crushing disappointment.

CoD is on both, brah.

PS3- no known system crippling errors(YLOD...burnt lasers...plenty of overheating...)
Xbox- RROD

older PS3- capable to load a linux OS(no)
xbox- stuck as an xbox(Yes. How dare the device I bought do its one desired function)

so if PS3 is a more capable gaming console and a blu-ray player at teh same time for less where the hell does the Xbox win....i just dont understand i won both systems and i havnt touched my xbox since the 2nd week i had it.

i just dont understand how microsoft gets any sales on this thing...im so lost

I seriously have to ask, have you even glanced at console gaming in the past year? Only half of this was correct at best and that was over a year ago when it was.

 

[darkknight187]

Live is better than PSN in my opinion, but other than that.

IMHO this was how the 360 pulled ahead it may have subscription fee's but it just worked easier out of the gate drawing in the initial crowd and then pulling in that crowd's network of friends because in this console generation a lot of weight is on the multiplayer. I get zero MP game time with friends for being the outcast that chose ps3/PC over the xbox. That and apparently Gamerscore has become an addiction for some people...I still don't understand it but to each his own I guess.

 

[I.M.O.G.]

@Aynjell: I think that pretty much makes sense.