XBox 360 vs. PS3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by admin

PS3 looks better

---

I actually can't honestly say I've seen gameplay screenshots that look better than the most graphically advanced 360 games.

And no, I'm not trolling here, I really haven't.

http://punchbutton.beloblog.com/arch...ot_6-thumb.JPG

From Killzone 2, actual gameplay. Notice the blurring on the gun and the lighting in the area immediately in front of you. Looks pretty sketchy in general. If you at their helmets and arms you can see "jaggies".

Compared to

http://www.bungie.net/stats/Halo3/Sc...gamertag=Tasit

in between classes so cant post much but just thought i'd let you know that.. yep.. hd-dvd wasn't necessary for gaming for the 360.. i mean the dvd9 is plenty.. yep

P.S dont compare unreleased games to released ones please. everyone knows tweaks always happen as well as other stuff. thanks




According to Australian gaming blog Surfer Girl Reviews (via kotaku), Rockstar's free-roaming sandbox period game L.A. Noire is just too hefty to fit on the Xbox 360s miniscule DVDs. So it will only be available on the PlayStation 3. Sorry, Xbox owners.

More details on L.A. Noire.

The game will be a free-roaming title with a historically-accurate recreation of Los Angeles in 1947.
Team Bondi has even hired a costume designer to research the clothing of the era so the game's attire can be accurate.
Aside from main story, side missions will be based on actual cases pulled straight of the newspapers of 1947.
A US Marine plays a big role in the story.
Thanks, Australia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DemonEyez

in between classes so cant post much but just thought i'd let you know that.. yep.. hd-dvd wasn't necessary for gaming for the 360.. i mean the dvd9 is plenty.. yep

P.S dont compare unreleased games to released ones please. everyone knows tweaks always happen as well as other stuff. thanks

But everyone is talking about how awesome it will be and how good it looks and how totally not HD Halo is. It only seems fair seeing as how it is fairly close to release.


According to Australian gaming blog Surfer Girl Reviews (via kotaku), Rockstar's free-roaming sandbox period game L.A. Noire is just too hefty to fit on the Xbox 360s miniscule DVDs. So it will only be available on the PlayStation 3. Sorry, Xbox owners.

More details on L.A. Noire.

The game will be a free-roaming title with a historically-accurate recreation of Los Angeles in 1947.
Team Bondi has even hired a costume designer to research the clothing of the era so the game's attire can be accurate.
Aside from main story, side missions will be based on actual cases pulled straight of the newspapers of 1947.
A US Marine plays a big role in the story.
Thanks, Australia.

---

This clearly proves that the format is obsolete. Its a bummer, but its not a dealbreaker.

Because a system's RAM, GPU and inability to produce good AI clearly aren't issues, I will just crystalize the argument this way.

PS3 does not have any AAA games.

Xbox already has many released and on the way.

A lot of it boils down to personal taste, yes, but there is a certain appreciable inherent quality in anything whether you care to admit it or not.

And Metacritic will back me up.

Metal Gear Solid is on its way soon.
I don't see anything else promising near release.

....

XBOX 360 FTMFW!!!!!

360

ps3

ps3 > wii > 360

PS3 blows 360 out of the water (I own both) and the game selection is catching up on PS3 especially with Resistance 2, MGS4, BioShock (In Bluray so it's already at 1080p), Home, M.A.G. (256 player battles, divided armies against each other looks badass) Resident Evil 5, God of War 3, Socom 3, Killzone 2, Fallout 3, and the list is growing fast. The only reason I have the 360 is for Halo and Forza that's it only good games on it, but I have to get Gears Of War 2 when it drops..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eViLMunkey

PS3 blows 360 out of the water (I own both) and the game selection is catching up on PS3 especially with Resistance 2, MGS4, BioShock (In Bluray so it's already at 1080p), Home, M.A.G. (256 player battles, divided armies against each other looks badass) Resident Evil 5, God of War 3, Socom 3, Killzone 2, Fallout 3, and the list is growing fast. The only reason I have the 360 is for Halo and Forza that's it only good games on it, but I have to get Gears Of War 2 when it drops..

---

Um... ok. we get resident evil, and fall out. god of war is lame and so is killzone. we also have fable 2 and all our games come out way earlier... like bio shock.. um that is over a year old now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B16a2 Civic

Guess u haven't seen how it looks now, 1 sucked, which leaves 2 for improvement

Lol, saying gt is just a racing game is like saying halo and bioshock is just a fps.

Ps3 has been out a year now, how many breath taking games came out on the 360 in the first year?

Lol, let the ps3 mature and blast it then

---

Ok its been a while and the ps3 still sucks. Not only that but sony has taken a 3.3 BILLION dollar loss on the PS3... Billion... With a B

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeeb

Ok its been a while and the ps3 still sucks. Not only that but sony has taken a 3.3 BILLION dollar loss on the PS3... Billion... With a B

---

Why does it matter? They are nowhere near in the hole as a company, that loss comes back to benefit the consumer.



You are obviously just jealous because you are a 360 owner.



You can realize the supremacy of the PS3, its okay... really. Its just a a video game system, not an extension to your **** size

Not being a hardcore "gamer" and fairly easy to please, I actually like my PS3 over the 360. I got it mainly for the BluRay part of it. I didn't even know I could get online with the thing until I hooked it up and turned it on and it immediately found my wireless. I just play mainly sports games, but my wife is all into the "fantasy" genre games (Prince of Persia and such. The graphics are amazing on the HD side and the movies are as well. Never had my own 360, but played with others. No complaints on it, just don't see the need for two game systems. Buying just one system with dual tasks (games and Blu Ray) seemed to be the smarter choice for me. Later ,QD.

my brother has a ps3 so i play it when i want. theres just nothing out for it i like. its all down to personal preference. For me I like the 360. It would be nice if there were no such thing as the red ring of death. But i have had it once and sent it back for free got a new one for free and it too about a week and a half and havent had problems since. Oh BTW. Xbox Live FTW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quickdodge®

Not being a hardcore "gamer" and fairly easy to please, I actually like my PS3 over the 360. I got it mainly for the BluRay part of it. I didn't even know I could get online with the thing until I hooked it up and turned it on and it immediately found my wireless. I just play mainly sports games, but my wife is all into the "fantasy" genre games (Prince of Persia and such. The graphics are amazing on the HD side and the movies are as well. Never had my own 360, but played with others. No complaints on it, just don't see the need for two game systems. Buying just one system with dual tasks (games and Blu Ray) seemed to be the smarter choice for me. Later ,QD.

---

To me it seems like people who want to watch movies or play sports games usually end up with the ps3. Thats how EVERYONE here is at work...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeeb

Oh BTW. Xbox Live FTW

---

How? Just asking because I don't know, but don't you have to pay to play online? PS3 is free to play. I play baseball and football all the time online and never had a complaint. I've only had one lagging opponent and quit that game. You can rank the people you play and lagging is one of the criteria (you probably already know all this). Other than that, why is it better to pay to play? Later, QD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeeb

To me it seems like people who want to watch movies or play sports games usually end up with the ps3. Thats how EVERYONE here is at work...

---

Like I said, my wife loves playing her fantasy games on it. The only reason she wanted Xbox is for the Final Fantasy game. But we nixed that for value as well as entertainment (for us). Later, QD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quickdodge®

How? Just asking because I don't know, but don't you have to pay to play online? PS3 is free to play. I play baseball and football all the time online and never had a complaint. I've only had one lagging opponent and quit that game. You can rank the people you play and lagging is one of the criteria (you probably already know all this). Other than that, why is it better to pay to play? Later, QD.

---

I'll put my input on it later when i get home. but for now you can read this :D

http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-348-1.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeeb

Ok its been a while and the ps3 still sucks. Not only that but sony has taken a 3.3 BILLION dollar loss on the PS3... Billion... With a B

---

that's because it wasn't fighting the 360, but the HD-DVD market. So they invested all their marketing, resources and big $$$ into the blu-ray technology.

And the best thing, is... even though the war is won, they haven't stopped improving the machine. They put up two firmware updates already this year, to 'tweak and improve' the home theater experience for blu-ray fans. Basically Sony listens. We wanted profile 2.0 and we got it. We wanted DTS HD-MA and we got it. We wanted channel correction/mapping on 7.1 titles and we got it. As a blu ray player, it is now the most 'complete' system on the market.

So now that is done with, they are moving on to the gaming side. We have now in-game x bar, trophies, etc. They also launched their video rental and purchase service.... all to compete with.... the 360. Yes, they may have been a little behind in the gaming sector since they were focused heavily on blu ray and winning that war. But don't think they are sitting on the side and doing nothing about it..... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeeb

I'll put my input on it later when i get home. but for now you can read this :D

http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-348-1.htm

---

1. Holy Sh*t if that is not the most biased article I've ever read. lol


"But as far as the consoles are concerned, the XBOX 360 wins because the DVD player is a separate unit. Playing movies is very taxing on the DVD reader, and let’s face it. In 3 years when your PS3 DVD drive goes out due to playing lots of movies (PS2 was notoriously bad about this) you will have to go buy another PS3. With the 360, you’ll just chuck your HD-DVD player, and go buy another one at the store."

2. what kind of nonsense is that? ^^^

3. It's an old article

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ISAtlanta300

1. Holy Sh*t if that is not the most biased article I've ever read. lol


"But as far as the consoles are concerned, the XBOX 360 wins because the DVD player is a separate unit. Playing movies is very taxing on the DVD reader, and let’s face it. In 3 years when your PS3 DVD drive goes out due to playing lots of movies (PS2 was notoriously bad about this) you will have to go buy another PS3. With the 360, you’ll just chuck your HD-DVD player, and go buy another one at the store."

2. what kind of nonsense is that? ^^^

3. It's an old article

---

haha i know right.... either way it makes me smile lol

just a quick note on the dumbass mentioning the 3.3 bill loss by sony.

thats how all consoles work. event he 360. MS and sony are losing money on both consoles and they ussually dont enter into profit until about 2-3 years in.

Except in this case while MS was already deep in the hole from its normal dev and production and loss per unit sold, they spend something like 1.8billion just to repair the broken units out there so add that. Plus MS is throwing cash around to try and win over developers. 75 million to square enix is the reported figure. 50 million for the GTA4 DLC. and they have not yet come close to making that money back.

on the other hand, Sony will start making a profit on the ps3 this year. not ont he hardware itself, but the accessory and software sales are picking up to the point where their about break even and more games/larger install base = more profit etc along with they've had alot of major production cost cuts. at release the ps3 was costing around 1k to produce and now its just under 400.

so yeah 3.3billion? not a huge deal at all to sony and their not even sweating it. they went through this with the ps1, ps2 and expect it for the ps3 as did MS for their systems.

nintendo just FYI is the only company that didnt go through this on their WII as the wii is just a revised gamecube, and so their research/dev/production costs were never high. but where nintendo is doing bad is their software per wii ration is terrible and 3rd party sales for the system are reallllllly bad. so lucky for them their making money on their system cus their not making money elsewhere

halo series has made enough for everyone at microsoft to retire wealthy... I'm sure they have made it back. I'm also sure sony has made it back, both companies get percentages of all the games on their systems... Either way, I just wanna know what the hell were they thinking. lol I would have fired the dude that headed the ps3... But he quit right when it came out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeeb

halo series has made enough for everyone at microsoft to retire wealthy... I'm sure they have made it back. I'm also sure sony has made it back, both companies get percentages of all the games on their systems... Either way, I just wanna know what the hell were they thinking. lol I would have fired the dude that headed the ps3... But he quit right when it came out.

---

so microsoft made back like 6 billion$ off the halo 3 game?

right because yeah the game sold for 60.. or more.. and ms got all that money. im sure the retailer didnt take a cut, and that there wasnt any production cost. and that there also wasn't bungie's cut.

so your telling me that even if MS made 10% off each game lets say average price 70 for including some of the more expensive ones, they sold around 900 million copies of halo 3?

riiiiiiiiiiiight

no ms might be making money now but overall their still in the hole. same with sony. they will start making a profit this year but are overall still in the hole.

and for the original xbox ms never made it out of the hole btw even tho the unit was starting to turn a profit in the last few years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DemonEyez

so microsoft made back like 6 billion$ off the halo 3 game?

right because yeah the game sold for 60.. or more.. and ms got all that money. im sure the retailer didnt take a cut, and that there wasnt any production cost. and that there also wasn't bungie's cut.

so your telling me that even if MS made 10% off each game lets say average price 70 for including some of the more expensive ones, they sold around 900 million copies of halo 3?

riiiiiiiiiiiight

no ms might be making money now but overall their still in the hole. same with sony. they will start making a profit this year but are overall still in the hole.

and for the original xbox ms never made it out of the hole btw even tho the unit was starting to turn a profit in the last few years.

---

i said the halo series. not just halo three. and where do you get your facts from? i would like to read up... im bored at work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeeb

i said the halo series. not just halo three. and where do you get your facts from? i would like to read up... im bored at work.

---

halo 3 was the only xbox360 release.

the other 2 halos did indeed make money for microsoft during the original xbox lifespan, but, with the overall cost of initial release, production, research etc, microsoft ended up overall not making a profit on that console. They would have probably done this had they not cut producers from creating more xbox games in order to push people to buy the 360.

sony is still asking producers to create games for the ps2 to continue its sales and continues its profit making process. So yes the ps3 isnt yet profitable but the ps2 has been for about 6 years. MS like i said isnt yet making a profit of the 360 or just started to, last i checked was about 4 months ago. and they were for the original xbox, but they killed that system outright.

now MS did know this and plan this, in order to push the 360 to as many people as possible, but I dont believe they can continue this trend, they need this 360 to last as long as possible.

people keep saying that ms doesnt care if they lost money but thats stupid. all corporations do is care about money. Their long term strategy is put as many in as many houses, and once ur the known brand, work on a profit making strategy.

but as such, no game sold to date alone or series alone has created enough cash flow for the console makers to clear their debt.

For example, combine all final fantasy series games for the ps2 and even that world wide would not be enough to clear the ps2 debt. Not even the FF + gran turismo + GTA games for the ps2 would do that.

although there is a new factor out now, the DLC's. MS is making their money back extremely fast due to the DLC on xbox live, and while sony is lagging behind in that respect, their making their money back faster than before due to their blu-ray usage/royalties which they are tying into the ps3 division partially.

either way ur bored at work and im bored in class. someone else post something interesting

Well post up some articles or something on where you get your info...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eViLMunkey

PS3 blows 360 out of the water (I own both) and the game selection is catching up on PS3 especially with Resistance 2, MGS4, BioShock (In Bluray so it's already at 1080p), Home, M.A.G. (256 player battles, divided armies against each other looks badass) Resident Evil 5, God of War 3, Socom 3, Killzone 2, Fallout 3, and the list is growing fast. The only reason I have the 360 is for Halo and Forza that's it only good games on it, but I have to get Gears Of War 2 when it drops..

---

Fallout is going to both consoles, Bioshock has been out for almost a year to anyone who owns an Xbox or a decent PC.

And Killzone, why are people so pumped about it? The original was mediocre at best.

As far as sales numbers and profit margins go, its a fairly moot discussion because none of that impacts how good either is. I'm pretty sure B. Spears has made more money than Trent Reznor ever will, but at the same time that doesn't mean B. Spears' music is better than Nine Inch Nails or more over, good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The12lber

Fallout is going to both consoles, Bioshock has been out for almost a year to anyone who owns an Xbox or a decent PC.

As far as Killzone, why are people getting excited about it? The original was mediocre at best.

As far as sales numbers and profit margins go, its a fairly moot discussion because none of that impacts how good either is. I'm pretty sure B. Spears has made more money than Trent Reznor ever will, but at the same time that doesn't mean B. Spears is good.

---

plus we now get final fantasy 13. :D and resident evil. along side fable. halo. forza. project gotham. and all the other games because its better playing them on a 360 :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ironchef

Your numbers need a little revision.

360 Elite $480 + wireless adapter $90 + hd dvd player $200 + xbox live $50 = $820

PS3 $600 includes wireless, bluray, and the playstation network is free. Blu ray will win out the high def DVD format war.

---

with free network comes seriously ****ty servers

yup... we get dedicated servers

in all 360 has a better game selection at the moment mainly due to designers having to do the code in Bluray format takes alot longer but there is no upscaling having to be done like on computer games and on the 360. Plus I don't want to buy a system that will fry since I'm on my PS3 for at the least 6 hrs a day. I know the 360 will give me the triple rings o' death since I went through 4 original xbox's when I was doing Halo 2 and Forza online alot... And Yes I played BioShock on the 360 that's why I want it for my PS3. But they need to re-do Halo3 I still think 2 was better IMO other than I do like the Forge mode.

But really the debate on which is better is all up to personal opinion but due to track record of faulty systems I'd say 360 still loses.

Oh and the free servers on the PS3 don't suck at all great connection rate everytime I'm on, plus since I paid over $600 for my system and pay my monthly digital cable bill I don't want to pay for gaming online on a system I already spent an A$$load of money on

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eViLMunkey

in all 360 has a better game selection at the moment mainly due to designers having to do the code in Bluray format takes alot

---

BluRay is a physical format, not a coding language. You're thinking of the difficulties related to coding for the CELL processor or whatever that troublesome thing is.

And really, the better game selection is a consequence of Microsoft working to get system exclusives in conjunction with more/better developers than Sony.

Epic > Guerilla Games

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The12lber

BluRay is a physical format, not a coding language. You're thinking of the difficulties related to coding for the CELL processor or whatever that troublesome thing is.

And really, the better game selection is a consequence of Microsoft working to get system exclusives in conjunction with more/better developers than Sony.

Epic > Guerilla Games

---

That is correct, but its just a matter of time before the graphics / content of games won't be able to fit on a normal DVD, making Blu-Ray a necessity; essentially leaving Microsoft nowhere to go but either convert and pay royalties or have a cap in the amount of content they can put in their games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucky Dawg

That is correct, but its just a matter of time before the graphics / content of games won't be able to fit on a normal DVD, making Blu-Ray a necessity; essentially leaving Microsoft nowhere to go but either convert and pay royalties or have a cap in the amount of content they can put in their games.

---

By that time there will be another way of making games besides blueray. and microsoft is already in negotiations with a blue ray supplier rumors are that there is something coming out this winter. But those are rumors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeeb

By that time there will be another way of making games besides blueray. and microsoft is already in negotiations with a blue ray supplier rumors are that there is something coming out this winter. But those are rumors.

---

Your post is contradictory



if Microsoft is in negotiations then that point in time is not too far off then is it? :rolleyes:



If Microsoft does get Blu-Ray then they are either going to lose people to Sony because they would rather just buy the different system and get a larger game selection then just the xbox catalog then have to be forced to buy a new system, horrible marketing strategy.


By forcing people to buy the new xbox and killing off their dvd format they are going to piss people off.



You have a losing argument on your hands when it comes to the future of the systems, whatever xbox does they lose customers and possibly give sony money in royalties to make their system even better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucky Dawg

You have a losing argument on your hands when it comes to the future of the systems, whatever xbox does they lose customers and possibly give sony money in royalties to make their system even better.

---

Doesn't really work that way. Although Sony does indeed receive royalties relating to BluRay production, Sony getting some pocket change from Microsoft isn't going to make their system better just because they're making more money. I'm not seeing the logic here.

Perhaps you think that Sony would be like "LOL BILL IS GIVING US THE $$$$, TIME TO USE IT TO R&D 124305 NEW FEATURES FOR THE PS3 THAT WILL INCREASE OUR PRODUCTION COSTS AND MAKE OUR PROFIT MARGIN SMALLER"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucky Dawg

That is correct, but its just a matter of time before the graphics / content of games won't be able to fit on a normal DVD, making Blu-Ray a necessity; essentially leaving Microsoft nowhere to go but either convert and pay royalties or have a cap in the amount of content they can put in their games.

---

That's not going to matter for the Xbox 360 system's life span.

The next system will incorporate BluRay and and Microsoft will pay Sony some money as a result which really isn't a big deal. I'm pretty sure Sony has been giving money to Microsoft for years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The12lber

That's not going to matter for the Xbox 360 system's life span.

The next system will incorporate BluRay and and Microsoft will pay Sony some money as a result which really isn't a big deal. I'm pretty sure Sony has been giving money to Microsoft for years.

---

If this is going to happen in the next 6 months to a year then yes it will be in the 360's life span.


so yes it does affect the 360


and yes the 360 will lose customers.



i understand that logic





I really don't understand why logic is being underminded by fanboyism, i don't own either system. the system you own does not have to be the best, we are not egocentric 5 yr olds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucky Dawg

If this is going to happen in the next 6 months to a year then yes it will be in the 360's life span.
Its not.

so yes it does affect the 360

See above

and yes the 360 will lose customers.

See above

i understand that logic





I really don't understand why logic is being underminded by fanboyism, i don't own either system. the system you own does not have to be the best, we are not egocentric 5 yr olds

---

For all you know, I own both or neither. My logic isn't being undermined by anything. Not only are games not going to become too large for DVD before the 360 successor is released, compression techniques are extremely sophisticated regardless.

Its not my fault you don't know this and instead decide to base your "logic" on your own rampant speculation.