i read somewhere that it was much higher then 36%
Printable View
oh no...well before the fanboys infest ill give you my impressions
here are your options
A. xbox 360 pro with 60 gb hdd+xbox live= 350+tax(estimate), plus about 50 every year
B. xbox 360 arcade +60 gb hdd+xbox live= 350+tax(estimate), plus about 50 every year
C. playstation 3 80 gb hdd, free online= 399+ tax, free online
other than the 60 gb ps3(which is rare to get btw) backwards compatability sucks on both
both have a great selection of games(unlike all the bs you here from the 360 fanboys stating that ps3 doesnt have good titles)
xbox 360 top titles- gears of war, halo, fable
ps3 top titles- uncharted:drakes fortune, metal gear solid 4, resistance: fall of man, little big planet
other ones not mentioned are multi-platform games
downside to xbox 360, best selling games usually end up on pc anyways where you can either buy it for a cheaper price and get free online play on it(a lot of ppl that bought it for 360 and have a good pc get mad at that lol), or you can pirate it, another downside is paying for online features, and if you want wireless internet access you have to pay 100 bucks for the wifi adapter
downside to playstation 3, online play isn't as organized as xbox live, having to listen to 360 fanboys rant and rave over ever ps3 vs 360 topic, every time you get a game you have to install some data to your hdd
upside to having a 360, great online community, getting some exclusives(cant really think of more atm)
upside to having a ps3, web browser capabilities, free online connectivity, wifi ready, bluetooth ready(if you have a bluetooth headset at home you can use that to chat with people), blu-ray player as well
those are all th epoints i can think of...it might seem a bit one sided but its all factual....in my opinion ps3 is a better console and now that xbox 360 doesnt have such a heads up lead with the exclusives i can honestly say that this year might be sonys year to win the console war
what you dont realize though is that they both have an extensive lineup and ps3 has quite a few exclusives...the most notable exclusives for 360 are gears of war, halo and fable...and imo halo is wayy overrated and so is gears...and other games are multi platform
Halo is like eating a bread sandwich; tolerable, but why would you ever do it? I agree.
Gears, as much as I love it, is overrated also. It's a lot more worthy of the praise it does get, though.
So go for it, what's PS3's extensive line-up? What do you achieve or gain by buying a PS3 over an Xbox, as a gamer (Casual or not)?
well im not trying to side with either but atm ps3 exclusives consist of
uncharted drakes fortune- very underrated game which includes lots of challenges and excellent story
metal gear solid 4- though ppl act as if its the greatest game ever....i'll admit its a very good game and the story is great along with the gameplay(though not the greatest gameplay ever)
resistance fall of man 2- it plays pretty similar to halo but it has more fun gameplay modes....better arangement of weapons(though it has the advantage of coming out a while after halo 3, the original resistance was equally better than halo)
little big planet- though not everyone likes it...its a very good game that anyone can play and put their creativity to the test..very innovative game as well
and there are still other games coming out in the future which will be ps3 exclusive...another thing too is if you go to gamespot and look at upcoming releases you notice how less and less 360 titles will be released while ps3 titles are increasing as time passes
hate to burst your bubble, but 360 still has more ANNOUNCED release dates then the ps3, having games in the making is cool and all, but, there not worth mentioning till there's a release date stuck to them as far as im concerned, i mean, look at duke nukem forever.
I see norrin's point perfectly though, most gamers in general, already own a 360 due to the fact it came out earlier, is cheaper, and such, and this is the public sony pretty much has to take back(core gamers, at least). and, to be honest, there is almost virtualy nothing on the ps3, aside from MSG4 to make a 360 owner want to purchase a ps3, speacialy since alot of ps3 titles are poor ports of 360 games =/
i would honestly recomend for evryone who is thinking about getting a ps3 to wait until late 09, and see how things go.
hmm well i agree about the 360 coming out first and all...but atm ps3 is only 50 dollars more but you get 20 gigs extra hdd space and free online/wireless online....
and as the games go i just finished browsing through gamespot listing exclusives from each for each month for the year....turns out 360 had 3 notable exclusives while ps3 has 3 as well
ps3
Killzone 2
Infamous
uncharted 2
360
Star Ocean: The Last Hope
Halo Wars
Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Conviction
there were a few exclusives each had but i didnt mention since they werent that important
and about the games being ported from the 360...no theyre not since the games have to be coded in a different format which is why a lot of companies had a hard time releasing games on the ps3 at first....the games arent ports from 360 though
and about the titles..tell me what are the greatest titles 360 has other than the 3 most mentioned ones(halo, gears of war, fable)
and just to mention since i played halo 3 nearly to death back in the day and gears of war i will openly admit resistance 1 and 2 were both way greater than halo(reason i compare those 2 is because they share similarities), uncharted is way better than gears of war(reason i compare these 2 is because uncharted has a cover system very similar to gears, only difference is that uncharted actually has other things to do...you have to solve puzzles throughout the levels etc etc where as in gears all you do is run cover shoot which gets repetetive after a while, fable i wont judge since ive never played it but im a huge fan of fable 1
So does the 360. Although it doesn't have the other FF title, but I doubt it matters unless you're a Final Fantasy buff. :-/
The PS3 sitting on the cold floor, isolated by itself in the den with NOTHING SURROUNDING IT seems to have some heating trouble. It could be facing a huge amount of problems that I'm not sure I can identify. All I know is that this mother ****er better stop giving me PSN errors and slowing down on me during Valkyria. Can my tank smoke a little without the FPS dropping below 20? CRIPES.
Get a PS3, we have Lair.
i have an xbox 360 and i dont regret it, great games, decent price with a good HD (some stores actually pay back some of the money but i think that action is over) XBL is really worth the price 60€ for one year is cheap
what does suck is that most games have downloadable content that costs to effing much, like Ace combat 6, hardest missions (ace of aces) cost 350 MS points EACH, and there are 12 missions, planes cost 300-500 MS Points and there is a shitload of them.
though i like the idea of playing games like duke nukem 3d and sonic the hedgehog 1&2 over XBL, thats fun to do
a huge selection of games for the 360 like gears and halo as stated by others (but i dont get whats so good about those 2 anyways), dead rising, banjo-kazooie nuts and bolts, etc...
though i cant say much about the ps3 except for the prices, but thats just because of the blueray, i dont see alot of game titles that really make me go "damn now i wish i had a ps3" because most of them are racing games or shooters (maybe resistance and killzone 2 but thats it).
uncharted made action puzzle games fun, it took the tomb raider series and made them good.
MGS4 showed what a games story line should be, but yes i do admit that it wasnt as good as the hype said it was
Reistance 2, are you dumb? why would you compare R2 with gears 2 there completely different, same with lost planet and fallout3, then you dont need a xbox at all if you have tetris.
Ps3 exclusives:
-Afrika
-Angel Rings
-Eight days
-EyeDentify
-Fifth Phantom Saga
-Final Fantasy XIII
-Final Fantasy Versus XIII
-Folks Soul
-Formula One
-Full Auto 2: Battlelines
-Genji: Days of the Blade
-God of War 3
-Gradius
-Grand Turismo 5
-Grand Turismo HD
-Gretzky NHL
-Heavenly Sword
-Hot Shots Golf 5
-Jak and Daxter: The Lost Frontier
-Killzone 2
-Lair
-Little Big Planet
-Metal Gear Solid 4
-Mobile Suit Gundam: Gundam World
-Monster Hunter 3
-Motor Storm
-My Singstar
-Ninja Gaiden Sigma
-Ni-Oh
-Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction
-Redwood Falls
-Resistance: Fall of Man
-Resistance: Rise of Man
-Ridge Racer 7
-Shin Megami Tensei
-Tekken 6
-The Eye of Judgment
-The Getaway
-Uncharted: Drake's Fortune
-Untold Legends: Dark Kingdom
-WarDevil Enigma
-Warhawk
-White Knight Story
-Wipeout
Playstation 3 PNS Arcade:
-Flow
-Pain
-Super StarDust HD
-Super Street Fighter 4 HD Turbo Remix
-Super-sonic acrobatic rocket powered battle cars
Random Japanese Titles:
-Jikkyou Powerful Pro Yakyuu
-Generation of Chaos VI
Uncertain of it Development:
Kingdom Heart 3
Makai Wars
Monster Carnivl
Shadow of the Colossus 2
Socom 4
Sly 4
Zone of the Enders 3
Uncertain Titles (May be multi-platform):
Big Time Revenge
Castlevania
Fatal Frame
FIA World Touring Car Championship
Heavy Rain
Iron and the Maiden
L.A Noire
Silent Hill 5
PS3Forums Users Exclusive Titles added:
ActiveDogs (aka Castleween 2)
Guan Yu (aka Dysnasty Warriors)
Kurayami
Rengoku: The end of the Century
Rockstar Old West
Way of the Samurai
SOE DC MMO
Real men buy ps3's
Real men also use apostrophes in their correct places.
First; Ok, now how many of them are worthy of console purchase, as opposed to just being names of games? Exactly. Anyone can be impressed by an alphabetised list of games.
Metal Gear Solid 2 was the last Metal Gear to have any kind of decent writing. Hideo Kojima has long since disappeared up his own ***, you see. You're like everyone else who feels they have to say that it has an amazing story, it doesn't. It DID, at one point, but then it did what happened in The Matrix Reloaded, it overcooked itself.
As soon as The Architect appeared in that scene with Neo, all the dullards started wetting themselves, calling it smart because they didn't understand it. Those of us with brains realised that he was saying simple things in complicated ways, just because the Wachowskis wanted to seem smart. Kojima has done the same.
Metal Gear Solid was a thriving, pulsating and atmospheric game with a tremendously exciting and enthralling dynamic, gameplay, characters, setting AND storyline. Notions of mistaken, created and born identity, finding ones place in the world and how circumstances of existence shouldn't blind you to the fact that you exist anyway were amazing themes for a video game of it's time, especially on the Playstation.
It then descended into a sob story.
Uncharted made Tomb Raiders good? Are you serious? Tomb Raider: Underworld is better than Uncharted. I had more fun playing all the Tomb Raiders than Uncharted. It's got good graphics and a cover system, how unique. It made puzzle games fun? Yeah, as in, easier.
The kind of people who like Uncharted are generally the kind of people who moan about not being able to walk while you shoot in Resident Evil. For those people, Capcom made Devil May Cry. A nice, bright, easy game with infinite ammo and the minimum of creativity.
Uncharted is for the kind of people who played Tomb Raider 3 and cried because each level was fiendlishly difficult and massively long. Yet, there isn't a more rewarding adventure game out there.
Personally, I think Tomb Raider: Underworld was brilliant. Not perfect, but then what is? It still beats games like Uncharted based on merit.
None
Go for Wii :D
PS3:
better graphics, free multyplayer, and metal gear solid 4.
Enough said.
I wouldnt trade my gba for any of them; if i would, id sell it and buy a gba again.
But i guess the 360 is superior, at least IMO.
Is it the dumbest thing you can do? I think you broke that record in your own reply.
It's not only about longer, it's about better. More gamers generally enjoy the 360 because it's got the better games for them.
I'll get back to why this massive argument fails on an immense scale in just a second.
Ok, so when are they going to start using all this potential to actually start justifying the hype and the pricetag?
You can sit there like a fanboy and use the "potential" and "power" argument all day long, until the cows come home and the chickens return to lay their eggs. It won't change the fact that it's a 'fraidy cat argument.
Is that all you BS3 fans have? Falling back on what it can and "will" do, but hasn't done? I'm sorry, but until it does all this, your argument is worthless.
If I get into a ring with Floyd Mayweather and my punches do nothing, and I therefore get beaten by the more efficient fighter, what would you say if my excuse was "Yeah, but I totally have the potential to beat him."? You'd say "But...you didn't, because he's better. When you prove you can beat him, we'll agree.", right? If you have any sense, that's what you'll say.
Why is the BS3 any different? Why is it accepted to fall back on can and will? When will it actually do this? You think that using 20% on Fallout 3 to Xbox's alleged 80% is proof of anything? So what? It can run Fallout 3 on less, well done. It doesn't even look or run noticeably worse on the Xbox, so it's a dumb argument.
It's like the Bluray Vs DVD argument. I don't actually sit there not enjoying my films because the resolution isn't the best possible, because it doesn't add anything practical now.
Ok, so I'm going to ask; is this not lost on you?
Do you not see that all your arguments revolve around "Can", "Will", "Could"? What about now? If the BS3 delivers, then we can talk, but so what? Xbox delivered and keeps delivering. BS3 might justify itself by the time Microsoft come out with their new console, which will be better than the BS3 by miles, forcing Sony to make a BS4.
There's a reason Sony fail in this fight. If they're not fighting to their full potential, that's their own problem. Potential is promise, it's nothing to go by in any concrete manner.
Which would be why loads...and loads...and loads of people are losing faith in it, yes?
I have done this debate many times, in real life and on forums, and not once have I see a pro-BS3 argument that doesn't rest on, if not revolve around, "It has potential!", "Think of the future!", or technical specifics that essentially mean nothing. Not once.
Go buy the world's best home cinema system that money can buy, everything top of the line, tech-wise. Ok? Then you tell me what it feels like to sit down and watch either a blank screen or Mean Girls.
Exactly.
What good is power and technical specifics if you're not using it?
Sony have a history of over-hyping their tech specs, also. In the run-up to the PS2's release, they said you could use it in government to launch missiles. The thing can barely run Resident Evil 4.
"Fallout 3 runs on the BS3 with 20% power!".
1) That's a blatant lie.
2) If it's not, then why the need for the rest? Games are not going to get that much better in the time the PS3 is born and killed.
Think before you dive in. I know you'd love to believe that the PS3 is some mega-dom machine that'll last you MANY years, but...it really will not. In five or so years, less maybe, there will be a new one, and the PS3 will be obsolete.
Consoles are not multimedia investments, no matter how much you wish to believe it. I killed that argument for good a long time ago. I'll do it again if I have to.
The funny thing is that x-box is releasing a new system 5 years after their crap box 359.5 and Sony being sure in their product aren't panning on releasing a new system for the next 10 years.
Hahahahaha.
"The 360 looks like a toy.".
Because the PS3 comes with a supermodel girlfriend and a membership to the "I'm mature!" club, while you sit there playing Little Big Planet.
Please think before you type. It's embarrassing.
You couldn't debate properly when I wasn't one, so my name being green doesn't change anything.
Not necessarily. The N64 still wipes the floor with the PS1, and most of the PS2. PS2 has much "better" technology at its disposal.
I'm going to issue you a challenge, ok?
Give me a pro-PS3 Vs Xbox 360 argument that doesn't involve you using stuff that hasn't happened yet, as back up.
Go. I want it in your next reply. The PS3 didn't come out yesterday, it's had time. The Xbox 360 was flying by this point.
So? The PS3 has had plenty of time if what you say is true. Here's something to think about;
If it needs so much time to find its feet, maybe it's not actually got that much power, because surely it would be easy.
Yes, why wouldn't you? If something has potential, that's fine, but you can't use potential as an argument against something that is actually happening. It doesn't matter if the PS3 is potentially better than the Xbox 360, if it doesn't fulfill that potential, it's all been for nothing.
I'm waiting for your argument, then.
Sony is not comprised of three men working in a Japanese technology store at the back of a mall.
It's a multi-national, billions earning corporation of hundreds of thousands, probably millions, of employees.
You're trying to say they're over-worked? Is there honestly any shred of credibility left in your claims that you are not a fanboy?
Who said it had to happen overnight? The Playstation 3 first went on retail availability in the end of 2006, that's just over two years.
Nobody expects overnight success and satisfaction, but for the stomach-churningly high price, people expect more from Sony's Playstation 3 than they have got in the two years it has been out.
It's becoming indefendable, quite honestly. This is an absolutely unacceptable return for a two year old console, when you factor in that consoles have a general lifespan of what...five years? If that? Even less now that most are backward compatible.
Would you say "You can beat him!"? I can't, and that's the point. Potential to beat him means nothing, because I can't fulfill it. I would step into the ring and he'd box mine, or anybody else's face off.
You're misunderstanding the word "Potential".
Potential is just how good something could be in theory, with the knowledge of that item. It has to be fulfilled, if it isn't fulfilled, then it's wasted.
You believe it will, two years of proof suggests it won't.
Yeah, all three games of change. Brilliance from Sony.
It's not just getting started, the thing came out in November 2006, what are you talking about?
That's acceptable to you? Having to wait two years for the console you shelled out for to reach mediocre status, and still hope that one day it'll all align?
You're deluded, sir. It's been over two years.
Read that back to yourself.
"I don't care if the game is run the same, or looks the same.".
So yes, you're a fanboy, because you just wanted it for Sony, so you could justify the failed purchase of the overhyped paperweight. I see through you better than the time I saw through Kate Moss when we used her as a Bat signal.
*Insert flashback humour*
Well, you're wrong. Resident Evil 4 was downgraded heavily for the PS2, because Sony fans kept whining that they didn't get it. Then, just like sheep, they got happy when Capcom said they were adding a new gun and a flashlight option. The former isn't even in-game, and the latter is so ineffectual it's untrue.
It's there, but if it's as miniscule as it is in this point in time, then you cannot successfully use it in this debate.
Nobody is getting worked up but you, Kaitos.
I don't "Have it in my head", sir. I've just systematically taken apart your argument, and just because you dislike THAT, doesn't mean you can ignore the fact that it did happen.
And you believe that, in all seriousness?
Are you mad? With what? Mario?
Umm Metal Gear Solid 4?
They're adjusting games to the bluray, that takes time. They could have released it in a year and wiped xbox off the market but the demand was too high.
Name me a PS2 game that touches Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Banjo-Kazooie or Conker's Bad Fur Day for quality, imagination and sheer fun (Which is what it's about).
Hell, give me a PS3 game that matches any of those games for those qualities. There are none, in my opinion.
New doesn't mean better. All the water physics on Uncharted doesn't make it a better game than the sheer mastery of Goldeneye.
Umm...no. I asked for an argument.
The demand was too high so they didn't do it? Yeah.
Reminds me of when someone I know said "If these trains weren't so packed, people would use them more.".
Seriously, just re-think and evaluate what you're going to argue here.