Xbox 360 v.s. PS3

[Bnightwing]

I can't decide what system is better for me. The games I want are on both, but what is you guys opinion on which one is better?

[Sarcasmo]

In before 40 Page flame war

[Asteroid-Man]

Xbox has a better online experience - Playstation's is free
Xbox has better audio/video quality on cross-console games - Playstation has better graphics on exclusive games
Xbox supports more filetypes for media playback - Playstation supports BluRay
Xbox has a nicer gaming User Interface - Playstation has a much nicer media User Interface
Xbox has bigger controllers - Playstation has smaller controllers
Xbox has better motion control (Kinect) - Playstation's motion control doesn't make you get up.

Go down that list, pick which you like more and consider the games from each console.

[LegendaryCaleb]

I just recently bought a ps3 and I've had a xbox 360 for about 3 years now...if you like regular campaign modes and sports games...I think ps3 is the better option...definitely due to the blu ray being a major major plus and free online gaming...even if its not all that fun...less accessories are also a plus for ps3

BUT
my favorite system is xbox 360...I dont mind buying all the accessories for the 360...I prefer the game options better for 360...Its got everything I want...Gears of war 2 is my favorite game which is a plus...Online gaming is amazing on the xbox 360 and you have more communication and teamwork because of it which makes the 60 bucks a year worth it...the controller is more for me as well...more heavy duty wider, thicker, and comfortable...the visuals really arent much different between the 360 and the ps3 for me...just make sure to get a new xbox 360...DO NOT GET A 1ST GEN...

xbox 360 is more perfect for me...idk if that helps...

[Asteroid-Man]

I'm gonna break down my own post with my opinion:


Xbox has a better online experience - Playstation's is free
The way you can chat and party up and file share is so much more straight forward and user friendly. It's ideal for gaming and as stated above, worth the money.

Xbox has better audio/video quality on cross-console games - Playstation has better graphics on exclusive games
The only exclussive game I play is Halo, and that's only available on the 360 anyways... besides that I like Arkham Asylum/Arkham City, Prince of Persia, Tekken and Call of Duty and all of those games look better on the 360 because cross-console games are initially made for the 360 (as it can run developer software better than the PS3) and then ported onto the PS3.

Xbox supports more filetypes for media playback - Playstation supports BluRay
I play more films off of files than I do off of BluRay.

Xbox has a nicer gaming User Interface - Playstation has a much nicer media User Interface
For me this one's a toss up. Although the 360 is much more user friendly in terms of being a gaming unit, the Playstations looks so much more sleek as a media player.

Xbox has bigger controllers - Playstation has smaller controllers
I have big hands, so I prefer Xbox here.

Xbox has better motion control (Kinect) - Playstation's motion control doesn't make you get up.
Even though the Kinect is revolutionary, Playstation doesn't make you get up. If I wanted to dance, I'd go to the club. However, I don't care for motion control either way.


So for me the obvious choice was the Xbox.

[Kane52630]

I chose the PS3 because it's a multimedia hub and it's cheaper in the long run.

[hippie_hunter]

Xbox has a better online experience - Playstation's is free
That is rather debatable IMO. PlayStation Network offers almost everything that Microsoft does with a few exceptions like cross game chat (which is unfortunately impossible to do on the PS3) and media features such as apps for YouTube, Facebook, Last.fm, and Twitter (though you can use them on the PS3 through the Internet Browser and PS3 apps will probably come someday), Skype (though it is arriving on the PlayStation Vita, so I wonder if it will come to the PS3 despite Microsoft acquiring it).

In the end, what you're paying for on Xbox Live nowadays is the community experience. Without a doubt the Xbox Live community is better than the PlayStation Network community. Considering that they pay $50 a year to play online, there is a bit of an obligation to play online to make the subscription worth it. Meanwhile, there is no such thing for the PlayStation Network.

Xbox has better motion control (Kinect) - Playstation's motion control doesn't make you get up.Kinect is an impressive control scheme in theory but it is plagued by the fact that it is limited in what kind of games can be made for it. In the end, full Kinect games can only be limited to casual games.

PlayStation Move on the other hand, can be used in just about anything because even though it is a motion controller, it is still just a controller that allows you to fully be in the game without limitations. It is also more accurate than Kinect.

The only exclussive game I play is Halo, and that's only available on the 360 anyways... besides that I like Arkham Asylum/Arkham City, Prince of Persia, Tekken and Call of Duty and all of those games look better on the 360 because cross-console games are initially made for the 360 (as it can run developer software better than the PS3) and then ported onto the PS3.
Also false. More and more developers are opting to use the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform because they now have more development experience with the PlayStation 3 and it is much easier and cheaper to port from the PlayStation 3 to the Xbox 360 than it is to port from the Xbox 360 to PlayStation 3. Major games such as Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, L.A. Noire, Dead Space, Medal of Honor etc. used the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform. It's just more economical now. It is also predicted that eventually most games will have the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform.

Other developers use no lead platform for their games such as Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 and Bioshock: Infinite and others such as Battlefield 3 opt for the PC.

[XEdge]

I have both, but I personally prefer the 360.

I would say.......go with the system that has the most games ( especially exclusives ) that you want.

[Asteroid-Man]

When I say online experience I meant the online gaming experience, not browsing (XBL vs PSN).

And personally I hate motion control gaming. It's such a gimmick, in my opinion.

[hippie_hunter]

I have both, but I personally prefer the 360.

I would say.......go with the system that has the most games ( especially exclusives ) that you want.

Exactly. In the end things like features, online, and motion control don't matter if they don't have the games to back them up.

Just look at the games on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 and make your decision from there.

[Bnightwing]

Do they both have "apps" or whatever you wanna call em so you can get on Netflix, or Skype or any of that jass.

[hippie_hunter]

Do they both have "apps" or whatever you wanna call em so you can get on Netflix, or Skype or any of that jass.

Both the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 have Netflix and Hulu Plus apps. Skype is headed to the Xbox 360. Not certain on the PlayStation 3 though since Microsoft acquired Skype, but they announced that it was headed to the PlayStation Vita months after the acquisition was announced and Microsoft does develop products for platforms that are considered to be competition like the iOS and Android platforms, so who knows.

Other apps of interest are access to Sony's Qriocity Music Unlimited serivice, MLB.tv, NHL GameCenter, and NFL Sunday Ticket on the PlayStation 3 while the Xbox 360 has ESPN3, UFC, Microsoft's Zune Marketplace, etc.

[Kane52630]

Yeah both of them have apps. So far PS3 has Netflix, NHL, Hulu, ect under a new TV/Video Services category.

[Troy_Parker]

PS3.

Has cool exclusives like Uncharted, not to say that the 360 doesn't have any cool ones.

The online play is free, cheaper long term. No 2-3 disc crap when buying a game like L.A Noire, etc.

I got a PS3 because it's easy to setup, and a very good media center.

[Raiden]

I'm an Xbox 360 owner, and if I can do it all over again I'd choose PS3. Here are some of my reasons:

- PSN is free, and despite Live's superior network support in actuality there's not that much differences between the two. My brother has PS3 so I can see it up close & personal.
- Blu-ray was battling with HD DVD when the console first premiered, but now Blu-ray is the standard & the only option for this latest DVD format. And now more and more movies are saving the best features on Blu-ray DVD, so if you are a film enthusiast and you want to get the collector's edition, Blu-ray is the way to go, and PS3 has a built-in player for that.
- You have to purchase expensive HD from Microsoft if you want to upgrade your storage room for your console, but for PS3 you can get the HD for PC and swap it, from what I read.
- Unless you love Gears of War and Halo (which I don't), PS3 got the better library of games and more IP as well. Uncharted, inFamous, LBP, and God of War are some of the games I wish I can play as a Xbox owner.
- Despite PSN's recent setback with the hackers, PS3 owners don't have to worry about RROD nor other potential system failures. Yes, I know there's a warranty and all that, but 360's high failure rate is still a case for concerns.

Anyway, I invested too much money on my Xbox so I can't just purchase a new console, particularly since I have a family now and money is usually spent on kids, but I wish I had gotten PS3.

[Darthphere]

If I could have both I would have both, since I bought the 360 first though and already invested so much into the system (Games,accessories etc.) I'm fine with my 360. The only real advantage I see in the PS3 is the blu-ray support.

[ComicChick]

i have a lot of blu rays and for me, the casual gamer, it's a better choice for me to get the PS3 which is also a blu ray player and then i'm not shelling out cash to buy a blu ray player too. i'm essentially getting a blu ray player that I can play video games on.

also like i said, im a casual gamer and i really don't like the big xbox controller with all the buttons, i prefer the ps controller

[Darthphere]

Whats so big about the controller? I mean not to brag or anything *ahem* but I have big hands so I prefer the 360 over the PS3 in that category.

[Kane52630]

For me I don't like how the left analog stick is up on the top, I prefer PlayStation's symmetrical controllers.

[ComicChick]

yeah the symmetry is a def plus for me, and i don't like all the buttons

edit: my hands are probably not as big as some of yalls anyways

when i play video games they're usually sports anyways

[Darthphere]

I play FIFA religiously and I've never have had a problem with the 360 controller. It just feels right to me. Whenever I hold a PS3 controller it feels small and dainty. Too light as well. I don't want a 10 pound brick or anything but something with a bit more weight.

[Teelie]

It's really down to what games do you like and which system has more of them. I'd like to have both ideally but I went with the 360 and it was a good call for me. I had an early model which only red-ringed this year (after 5~ years of use) but the newer ones that have been out for a couple of years supposedly eliminate that problem.

[hippie_hunter]

Whats so big about the controller? I mean not to brag or anything *ahem* but I have big hands so I prefer the 360 over the PS3 in that category.

I hated the original Xbox due to how damn big the controller was. Even when Microsoft released the Controller S, it still felt too damn big.

But when they released the Xbox 360, I tried out the controller, and I have to say that it was very comfortable. The only complaint I have is I didn't like how the buttons felt, but that's a very minor complaint. Sure it has a ****** D-pad, but that's not Microsoft's fault since Sony and Nintendo have patented the only two D-pad designs that actually feel good. Playing with the Xbox 360 controller felt like Microsoft took in all the complaints with the original Xbox controller and fixed the problems that they could fix all while keeping the same design for people who owned the original Xbox. I give Microsoft massive kudos for making a good controller.

That said, I still suck with the Xbox controller because I have gotten so used to the PlayStation controller, which I have been using for 15 years. I know which buttons to use without even looking at the controller. When I see a button prompt for an Xbox game, I literally have to look at the damn thing to find out where the "A" button is.

I play FIFA religiously and I've never have had a problem with the 360 controller. It just feels right to me. Whenever I hold a PS3 controller it feels small and dainty. Too light as well. I don't want a 10 pound brick or anything but something with a bit more weight.
The SIXAXIS controller definitely had that problem, but when Sony released the DualShock 3, it gave the PlayStation 3's controller some much needed weight.

[Kane52630]

Yeah I have the SIXAXIS controller that came with my PS3 and I agree it felt like you could break it with one drop. I also have a DualShock 3 controller and it added the wight and the rumble so now I only use that one.

[hippie_hunter]

- Despite PSN's recent setback with the hackers, PS3 owners don't have to worry about RROD nor other potential system failures. Yes, I know there's a warranty and all that, but 360's high failure rate is still a case for concerns.

My PlayStation 3 got the Yellow Light of Death a couple of months ago :o

[hippie_hunter]

Yeah I have the SIXAXIS controller that came with my PS3 and I agree it felt like you could break it with one drop. I also have a DualShock 3 controller and it added the wight and the rumble so now I only use that one.

The DualShock 3 is also incredibly sturdy. I was getting so pissed off while playing Street Fighter IV that I ended up throwing my controller onto the ground so hard that it bounced to the other side of my room. Still works perfectly and no signs of damage either.

[ComicChick]

My PlayStation 3 got the Yellow Light of Death a couple of months ago :o

mine has a red screen :(

[Darthphere]

The only reason I would get a PS3 at this point is because I need a Blu-Ray player for my room.

[Raiden]

The only reason I would get a PS3 at this point is because I need a Blu-Ray player for my room.

You're not interested in playing any of the exclusive titles for PS3?

[Darthphere]

Not really. I mean I wouldn't be against it religiously or anything but I get everything I need from the 360 wise. I play FIFA and COD which takes up most of my gaming time. Of course I can see myself getting into some of the PS3 exclusives once I play them.

[Electro UK]

If you're a casual gamer, you're really into shooters and online gameplay etc, Xbox 360 is the obvious choice. It's easier to use and it's most likely that your friends have that over a PS3. I've got both and I really love my Xbox.

But as a super hardcore gamer type person like myself, PS3 is really the way to go, in terms of exclusives anyways. Uncharted, Killzone, Resistance, Infamous, LittleBigPlanet, Valkyria Chronicles, MotorStorm and Demon's Souls are just a very few reasons to own it now, and then Uncharted 3 and The Last Guardian are much stronger cases for owning it going forward.

[Kane52630]

To me the Uncharted series is the sole reason to get a PS3 (gaming wise). That series is just amazing for so many reasons.

[Electro UK]

To me the Uncharted series is the sole reason to get a PS3 (gaming wise). That series is just amazing for so many reasons.

Uncharted is fantastic, no doubt about that. Among Thieves is in my top 5 games of all time and Drake's Fortune isn't far behind.

The PS3 offers a lot of fantastic reasons to pick one up gaming wise though, not just Uncharted. Like I said, it's all about what kind of gamer you are. If you're into your shooters and such then yeah, you're probably all set with Gears, Halo and the superior Call of Duty.

But PS3 exclusives offer a lot of different and amazing experiences other than just shooters. The open-world acrobatics of Infamous make for the best super hero game this side of Arkham Asylum, Demon's Souls is god's answer to the prayers of old school gamers, LittleBigPlanet is the most innovative game of the generation and there's no arguing that The Last Guardian will be a one of a kind experience, much like Shadow of the Colossus and ICO before it. Even PSN titles like Flower and the PixelJunk series continue to innovate.

And plus, going forward, it looks like there are going to be more and more reasons to own a PS3 from a gaming perspective over the 360. Microsoft have realized what makes their money - Kinect, Halo, Gears and CoD, and that makes them more than a tidy sum. But that's why coming up on the exclusive side of things all we've got are two Halo games, Gears and (the amazing looking) The Witcher 2. Meanwhile Sony is buying developers left right and center, which promises a lot more exclusive content on their systems going forward.

Dunno why I wrote all that. :huh:

[LegendaryCaleb]

I play FIFA religiously and I've never have had a problem with the 360 controller. It just feels right to me. Whenever I hold a PS3 controller it feels small and dainty. Too light as well. I don't want a 10 pound brick or anything but something with a bit more weight.

I agree with this...the ps3 controller...is wayyy too light weight and small for my hands...i dont have big hands but i easily prefer the comfort and how the buttons are set up better on the xbox controller

[Bnightwing]

I know for a fact I wanna play Portal, Arkham, and Arkham City. But idk if DC Online is worth it. What do you guys think?

[PWN3R]

I really want a PS3 for the blu ray features and the Uncharted seires.

But, the 360 has my needs covered. Xbox live is great, the online community is enjoyable and most games I play go multi-platform. The only exclusive I ever cared about was Mass Effect, and now ME 2 and 3 are/will be on the PS3.

Get the system that you know your friends have. Xbox live friends are pretty much the only reason I stick with the 360. And achievements. ****ing achievements. :up:

[hippie_hunter]

I know for a fact I wanna play Portal, Arkham, and Arkham City. But idk if DC Online is worth it. What do you guys think?

Since you mention those games, I would go with the PlayStation 3.

The PlayStation 3 version of Portal includes Valve's Steam service which allows the game to be constantly updated automatically constantly, more downloadable content, cloud saving which will allow you to play the game across the PlayStation 3 and PC (you can save the game on the PlayStation 3 and pick it up where you left off on the PC and vice versa), and cross platform play with PC and Mac players.

I don't know if Square-Enix brought it to the Xbox 360, but when the game was launched, Batman: Arkham Asylum was given exclusive content with the PlayStation 3 version, it allowed you to play as the Joker and various challenge maps. Batman: Arkham City allows you to download a Sinestro Corps Batman skin for the game for the PlayStation 3 version only (if you buy Green Lantern on blu-ray as well).

As for DC Universe Online, never played it but I heard it was just alright. They say that the PlayStation 3 version is a tad bit sluggish.

[Bnightwing]

I heard you could play as Red Robin, Batman from the Antimated series, Jim Lee's Batman TDKR Batman, and Batman Beyond as well.

[Darthphere]

I remember when Heavy Rain came out I was really jealous of PS3 owners for being able to play it. Apparently though it wasn't that great?

Seems kind of random but it reminded me of this old Xbox game Indigo Prophecy which I ****ing loved. Don't know if they were similar at all.

[Bnightwing]

I don't wanna get a console and they come out with something new, would this be a problem?

[Kane52630]

I heard Heavy Rain was pretty good, Henchy raved about it to me because of how awesome the story was.

[Darthphere]

I don't wanna get a console and they come out with something new, would this be a problem?

It's always a fear, especially with rumors flying like crazy. I've been thinking of updating my Xbox to the new slim version but I'm always wary of them coming out with the Xbox 720 or whatever a year later.

[Bnightwing]

Also, what about different kinds? Like for Xbox, what is the kind that's less likely to get red ring? and for PS3 what is the most likely to not get whatever the problem is with it haha

[Darthphere]

Also, what about different kinds? Like for Xbox, what is the kind that's less likely to get red ring? and for PS3 what is the most likely to not get whatever the problem is with it haha

None of the Xbox 360's out today get the RROD (theoretically). If you buy a used one (which I wouldn't recommend) make sure it wasn't a launch one.

[Bnightwing]

Launch what do you mean by that term?

[Darthphere]

The very first ones that came out.

[Bnightwing]

Ah, how can you tell the differences in them?

[Darthphere]

You can check through the serial number on the system itself.

[Bnightwing]

Thanks for the help Darthsphere.

[B]

Personally if you are intending on getting games that are available for both, I'd go with the PS3 if you are looking for all round better value for money.

Far more reliable machine, free online, Blu-ray player, better console game exclusives, better controller for everything other than first person shooters, physically looks better (at least the non-slimline models anyway), has a better online community & is arguably a little easier to pick up/work your way through for someone new due to it being quite basic in terms of navigating through things.

Biggest thing though is the Blu-ray compatibility. Even when the next generation of consoles come along in like 2016, your PS3 will still have a use beyond playing games unless they find something that will further improve DVD quality..

[hippie_hunter]

I remember when Heavy Rain came out I was really jealous of PS3 owners for being able to play it. Apparently though it wasn't that great?

Seems kind of random but it reminded me of this old Xbox game Indigo Prophecy which I ****ing loved. Don't know if they were similar at all.

The reason why Heavy Rain seemed like Indigo Prophecy is because it was by the same developers as Indigo Prophecy. If you like Indigo Prophecy, you'll probably like Heavy Rain.

[Darthphere]

Personally if you are intending on getting games that are available for both, I'd go with the PS3 if you are looking for all round better value for money.

Far more reliable machine, free online, Blu-ray player, better console game exclusives, better controller for everything other than first person shooters, physically looks better (at least the non-slimline models anyway), has a better online community & is arguably a little easier to pick up/work your way through for someone new due to it being quite basic in terms of navigating through things.

Biggest thing though is the Blu-ray compatibility. Even when the next generation of consoles come along in like 2016, your PS3 will still have a use beyond playing games unless they find something that will further improve DVD quality..

All that is highly arguable. I've played online on my friend's PS3, a lot of the time barely a whisper from anyone. You can say what you want about the dumb 12 year old kids on Live but at least there's something going on. Everything else, like I said, arguable. What's so difficult about the 360?


The reason why Heavy Rain seemed like Indigo Prophecy is because it was by the same developers as Indigo Prophecy. If you like Indigo Prophecy, you'll probably like Heavy Rain.

That would explain it then huh.

[Paroxysm]

I own an Xbox with Live and i still think the PS3 is better. I just like being able to go online and play my games for free. It sucked having to buy all this extra **** just to play online.

[The Squirrel]

All that is highly arguable. I've played online on my friend's PS3, a lot of the time barely a whisper from anyone. You can say what you want about the dumb 12 year old kids on Live but at least there's something going on. Everything else, like I said, arguable. What's so difficult about the 360?

I actually don't mind the quiet. I usually mute everyone anyways, unless I'm in a group.

[ComicChick]

walmart has a 320gb infamous 2 PS3 bundle on sale for 299.

they also have a 160gb version with a game of choice for the same price but i think i'd probably like the other version better and maybe sell infamous, unless i should try to play it?

[Kane52630]

inFamous is a pretty good game, I only played the first one and it's basically playing like a spider-man game.

[Paroxysm]

with less web slinging and more parkour, lol

[The Squirrel]

InFamous is a very good game.

[ComicChick]

i really wanna go buy it now haha

i'm afraid i'll become lazy and spend all my time playing games once i cave

[B]

All that is highly arguable. I've played online on my friend's PS3, a lot of the time barely a whisper from anyone. You can say what you want about the dumb 12 year old kids on Live but at least there's something going on. Everything else, like I said, arguable. What's so difficult about the 360?

Just for the record there is both a PS3 & an Xbox 360 in my household & based upon my own experiences, the online community for the PS3 is alot less childish than the 360. Sure there are dumbasses on the PS3, there are just more of them on the 360.

I've played FIFA on both consoles & after EVERY single match I win I recieve some sort of stupid message from the person I've just played on the 360 ranging from from just name calling or calling me some sort of cheat because I know how to work the ball, do tricks etc. On the PS3 you hardly get any of that bullcrap. You get the odd message hear & there but not after every single match.

Happens all the time on the games that I play anyway, there is less drama & useless abuse on the PS3, hence why I feel the community is better.

360 isn't difficult at all, infact its probably more user frendly than the PS3.. however for someone new to both consoles, there is alot more you can do on 360 Live than you can on the PS3, which is why there would be naturally more of a learning curve finding out how to access things etc.

[ComicChick]

i caved and went and bought the 320 gb ps3

[Raiden]

i caved and went and bought the 320 gb ps3

I'm very jealous! I wish I can purchase a PS3 as well but my wife probably won't let me. :csad:

[Darthphere]

Do you guys think that Sony and Microsoft will release a new console anytime soon? It's really what's holding me back from getting one of those newfangled Playboxes or X-Stations.

[The Squirrel]

i caved and went and bought the 320 gb ps3

Good choice. :up: Did you use to have a PS3? I could have sworn I sent you a friend request on there before. :huh:

[ComicChick]

Good choice. :up: Did you use to have a PS3? I could have sworn I sent you a friend request on there before. :huh:

i did but it got the red screen

[hippie_hunter]

Do you guys think that Sony and Microsoft will release a new console anytime soon? It's really what's holding me back from getting one of those newfangled Playboxes or X-Stations.

No. While Sony and Microsoft are obviously investing R&D money for their next consoles, they have no intention of releasing them anytime soon. Investors would be pissed with how much money Sony and Microsoft lost with the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. Developers have come out and said that there is still a lot that they can do with current consoles (with the exception of Crytek who want lots and lots of graphical power). It's just a horrible time economically to try and sell expensive hardware to consumers. Online functionality allows Sony and Microsoft to update their consoles with new features. And the main point of Sony and Microsoft releasing the PlayStation Move and Kinect was to extend the life of their consoles to at least 2014/2015.

[The Squirrel]

People are calling are the WII 2 the first "next (next?) gen" console, but really, isn't Nintendo just catching up with the PS3 and the 360?

[Darthphere]

No. While Sony and Microsoft are obviously investing R&D money for their next consoles, they have no intention of releasing them anytime soon. Investors would be pissed with how much money Sony and Microsoft lost with the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. Developers have come out and said that there is still a lot that they can do with current consoles (with the exception of Crytek who want lots and lots of graphical power). It's just a horrible time economically to try and sell expensive hardware to consumers. Online functionality allows Sony and Microsoft to update their consoles with new features. And the main point of Sony and Microsoft releasing the PlayStation Move and Kinect was to extend the life of their consoles to at least 2014/2015.

So I should be good for about 2-3 years if I decide to upgrade my system? I can live with that.

[Darthphere]

People are calling are the WII 2 the first "next (next?) gen" console, but really, isn't Nintendo just catching up with the PS3 and the 360?

In some ways yes. The Wii for whatever you want to say was innovative because of motion controls. Graphically though, leagues behind. I don't expect their next console to be on par with the 360 or PS3 graphically but they're of course bringing in new innovations like that amazing tablet controller.

[Electro UK]

Yeah, the Wii U is not a next-gen system whatsoever.

And Hippie is right. I'm confident we'll see Microsoft's next Xbox in 2013 with release in 2014 and Sony a few years behind that. Console cycles have slowed down this generation simply because development and manufacturing costs went way up in the most recent transition.

[hippie_hunter]

So I should be good for about 2-3 years if I decide to upgrade my system? I can live with that.

Not only that but it's not like the next Xbox and PlayStation 4 will have anything worthwhile for the first couple of years. I waited a year and a half after launch to buy my PlayStation 3. And if Metal Gear Solid 4 hadn't come out, I probably would have waited longer.

[Electro UK]

In some ways yes. The Wii for whatever you want to say was innovative because of motion controls. Graphically though, leagues behind. I don't expect their next console to be on par with the 360 or PS3 graphically but they're of course bringing in new innovations like that amazing tablet controller.

The Wii U is actually pushing more power than the PS3, reportedly, but not a significant amount more. I guess it's a matter of opinion, but I wouldn't call it a next-generation system, like I wouldn't call the Wii one.

[hippie_hunter]

In some ways yes. The Wii for whatever you want to say was innovative because of motion controls. Graphically though, leagues behind. I don't expect their next console to be on par with the 360 or PS3 graphically but they're of course bringing in new innovations like that amazing tablet controller.

The Wii U is graphically on par with the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 and is technically more powerful than the both of them.

[Darthphere]

Not only that but it's not like the next Xbox and PlayStation 4 will have anything worthwhile for the first couple of years. I waited a year and a half after launch to buy my PlayStation 3. And if Metal Gear Solid 4 hadn't come out, I probably would have waited longer.

I think I might splurge and buy myself a shiny new Xbox360 for Christmas and maybe see about a deal on a PS3 on Black Friday.

[Darthphere]

The Wii U is graphically on par with the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 and is technically more powerful than the both of them.

Hardware wise yes, but I don't think it's going to look it though if you get what I'm saying.

[hippie_hunter]

I think I might splurge and buy myself a shiny new Xbox360 for Christmas and maybe see about a deal on a PS3 on Black Friday.

Actually now that I fully remember, I would have bought it without Metal Gear Solid 4 on account that the MGS4 PS3 bundle was the last PlayStation 3 model with backwards compatibility. But if Sony didn't pull that feature, I certainly would have waited longer until the price went down even more.

[Spidey-Bat]

Get a PS3. Unless you play a lot of FPS online, you'll get more out of the PS3. Since I got my PS3 2 years ago, I've bought 2 360 games, Crackdown 2 (which I traded a week later for a PS3 copy of Red Dead Redemption) and Toy Soldiers (XBLA game, mostly bought b/c I'm a WWI buff).

[Kane52630]

i caved and went and bought the 320 gb ps3

Send me your PSN ID kthanksbye!
(unless it's the same as before)

[Raiden]

No. While Sony and Microsoft are obviously investing R&D money for their next consoles, they have no intention of releasing them anytime soon. Investors would be pissed with how much money Sony and Microsoft lost with the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. Developers have come out and said that there is still a lot that they can do with current consoles (with the exception of Crytek who want lots and lots of graphical power). It's just a horrible time economically to try and sell expensive hardware to consumers. Online functionality allows Sony and Microsoft to update their consoles with new features. And the main point of Sony and Microsoft releasing the PlayStation Move and Kinect was to extend the life of their consoles to at least 2014/2015.

I think Nintendo will try to release a new console with some graphic prowess now that both PS Move and Kinect have taken some shine off Wii's motion-detection ability, but I don't see either Sony or Microsoft releasing a new console anytime soon. However, that doesn't mean they aren't working at a new console system quietly at their R&D dept, though.

[Teelie]

I'm positive both Sony and Microsoft are working on new consoles but they aren't going to start talking about them until they have a prototype they feel is ready and I'm hoping they take their time with that and avoid rushing it out.

Poor Nintendo, I hope they come up with more games than shovelware for their new console.

[hippie_hunter]

I doubt that we'll get the shovelware plague that had dominated the Wii. The reason why we had so much shovelware for the Wii was because Wii development is extremely cheap due to the Wii being recycled and improved GameCube technology. With the Wii U being more on par with the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, it's going to cost a lot more to develop games for the system. Something that shovelware publishers/developers like Data Design Interactive just aren't going to afford to do.

[ComicChick]

I'm very jealous! I wish I can purchase a PS3 as well but my wife probably won't let me. :csad:

layaway?

[ComicChick]

Send me your PSN ID kthanksbye!
(unless it's the same as before)

i haven't hooked it up yet

if i can keep the same name i had, i want to

[The Squirrel]

i haven't hooked it up yet

if i can keep the same name i had, i want to

Yeah, just sign in. Or reset your password if you can't remember it. You can sign into your account from any PS3.

[hippie_hunter]

i haven't hooked it up yet

if i can keep the same name i had, i want to

Yep, you can keep the same name and redownload your previous stuff. That information is stored within Sony and your trophies, saved data, and downloaded content are linked to your account, not your PS3.

[marvelman2006]

Im a PS3 guy, nothing against the 360 but nothing outside of halo ever made me want to buy a 360. PS3 has more games that I like, like ressistance, uncharted and free online play. I know some people bash the online because its ethier slow or kicks you out of sessions but since 2007 I have only had a handful of times where the online experience sucked. I just dont like the idea of paying to get online on a 360 then to turn around pay my cable company as well, just not good business sense.

[Darthphere]

Im a PS3 guy, nothing against the 360 but nothing outside of halo ever made me want to buy a 360. PS3 has more guys that I like, like ressistance, uncharted and free online play. I know some people bash the online because its ethier slow or kicks you out of sessions but since 2007 I have only had a handful of times where the online experience sucked. I just dont like the idea of paying to get online on a 360 then to turn around pay my cable company as well, just not good business sense.


Freudian.

[JaD]

Freudian.I'm trying not to burst out laughing at that.

[marvelman2006]

obviously a mispell but still funny on my part

[Bnightwing]

Hey Mods, can I get a poll on here of PS3 vs 360?

[hippie_hunter]

Done.

[Spidey-Bat]

Here's an easy way to answer your question.

How often do you plan on playing Modern Warfare 3? If your answer isn't "every waking minute," then get a PS3.

[Bnightwing]

Add a result for "I don't own a system" or something like that too please.

[Darthphere]

Here's an easy way to answer your question.

How often do you plan on playing Modern Warfare 3? If your answer isn't "every waking minute," then get a PS3.

Not true since I don't plan on playing MW3 every waking minute. I have FIFA 12 for that.:o

[hippie_hunter]

Add a result for "I don't own a system" or something like that too please.

So needy :argh:

[Spidey-Bat]

Add a result for "I don't own a system" or something like that too please.

Why would you want to know if people don't have a system when you're asking which one to get? :huh:

Not true since I don't plan on playing MW3 every waking minute. I have FIFA 12 for that.:o

My roommates are obsessed with FIFA. I am terrible at it, I couldn't even beat the computer when I was Arsenal and they were the Chivas.

[Darthphere]

There's a learning curve for sure but it's addictive as hell.

[LegendaryCaleb]

Not true since I don't plan on playing MW3 every waking minute. I have FIFA 12 for that.:o
FIFA is freakin addicting...that and Gears of War 2 imo are what makes me love my xbox 360 (those are my super addictive games)

[Asteroid-Man]

I you're going to get games available to both systems, I would HIGHLY recommend getting a 360 - the video quality is much better as they are first made for the 360 and then ported to the PS3.

[Darthphere]

I you're going to get games available to both systems, I would HIGHLY recommend getting a 360 - the video quality is much better as they are first made for the 360 and then ported to the PS3.

I'm no expert on the subject but I'm 99.9% sure that is highly inaccurate.

[Asteroid-Man]

No, seriously. It's because if they did it the other way around, things would not port appropriately, so they have to make them for the 360 first and then move them over (this is for games available on both consoles only - when it comes to games also available on the PC, it looks best on PC, then 360 and then PS3, as a 360 is much closer to the programing system used for a PC). Although they are figuring out how to avoid the video issues (less contrast, or brightness and colour adjustment on the PS3), it's still not 100% fixed.

Obviously, PS3 EXCLUSIVES look better (as BluRay discs can hold more data).

[Teelie]

Sony even admits as much even as it actively denies it. There's also this:

Unfortunately for Sony, from a practical business standpoint, publishers are going to cater to the lowest common denominator, which among high-definition consoles would likely be assigned to Xbox 360. So even if a developer would like to leverage certain PS3 features, it's often easier to just create the game for Microsoft's system, notes Wedbush analyst Michael Pachter.

[Bnightwing]

What's the difference in the Slim and normal 360 gb ps3?

[Teelie]

The best and most reliable differences between the two PS3's I can find are at this page (http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10313110-1.html). If you mean the PS3 slim vs 360 elite then that's another thing entirely.

[hippie_hunter]

No, seriously. It's because if they did it the other way around, things would not port appropriately, so they have to make them for the 360 first and then move them over (this is for games available on both consoles only - when it comes to games also available on the PC, it looks best on PC, then 360 and then PS3, as a 360 is much closer to the programing system used for a PC). Although they are figuring out how to avoid the video issues (less contrast, or brightness and colour adjustment on the PS3), it's still not 100% fixed.

Again that is wrong. More and more games are using the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform because it is so much easier and cheaper to port from the PlayStation 3 to Xbox 360. It's a pain in the ass to port from the Xbox 360 to PlayStation 3. Xbox 360 to PlayStation 3 ports have also suffered from quality issues which have annoyed a lot of consumers, something that publishers do not want.

Medal of Honor, L.A. Noire, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, Armored Core V, Vanquish, Army of Two, Dead Space, etc. used the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform. It's actually predicted that by 2015 almost all third party games will use the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform. It's just more economical and more efficient.

Some games such as Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, Red Dead Redemption, and Bioshock: Infinite don't even have a lead platform.

You're thinking of when the PlayStation 3 was first released and developers had little experience with it. It's now 2011 where developers have had years of experience with the PlayStation 3 and most multiplatform games are now on par with one another.

Obviously, PS3 EXCLUSIVES look better (as BluRay discs can hold more data).
PlayStation 3 exclusives look better than multiplatform games because almost all exclusives are first and second party games, not because of blu-ray. Blu-ray holding more data prevents decompression and allows gamers to stick with one disk, but the reason why PlayStation 3 exclusives look the best is because Sony gives them the tools and funding to make the best looking games possible. Sony wants to show off the graphical prowess of the PlayStation 3 through their games and third party developers aren't going to do that.

It's why the best looking Xbox 360 games are the ones published by Microsoft. And why the best looking Wii games are published by guess who? Nintendo

Sony even admits as much even as it actively denies it. There's also this:
Catering to the lowest common denominator (Xbox 360s without hard drivews) doesn't change the fact of what either the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 can do. It just means that third party publishers aren't going to push the bar as much as possible. It means that it's up to Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo to provide the best looking games graphically in order to showcase their consoles.

[XEdge]

so....what about when most PS3 games say they "support 720p" HD output on the back of the box, but the 360 version of the games say they "support 1080p" HD output on the back of the box??

does that mean the PS3 games only run in 720p while the 360 versions run in 1080p??

that's always confused me......lol

[Spidey-Bat]

MS makes all games for the 360 support 1080p. Sony doesn't have such restrictions so most are just 720p. I think they can up-scale to 1080p but don't look as good as natural 1080p. The short of it is you won't notice a significant difference unless you play on an immense TV or are a huge graphics whore.

[Asteroid-Man]

Again that is wrong. More and more games are using the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform because it is so much easier and cheaper to port from the PlayStation 3 to Xbox 360. It's a pain in the ass to port from the Xbox 360 to PlayStation 3. Xbox 360 to PlayStation 3 ports have also suffered from quality issues which have annoyed a lot of consumers, something that publishers do not want.

Medal of Honor, L.A. Noire, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, Armored Core V, Vanquish, Army of Two, Dead Space, etc. used the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform. It's actually predicted that by 2015 almost all third party games will use the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform. It's just more economical and more efficient.

Some games such as Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, Red Dead Redemption, and Bioshock: Infinite don't even have a lead platform.

You're thinking of when the PlayStation 3 was first released and developers had little experience with it. It's now 2011 where developers have had years of experience with the PlayStation 3 and most multiplatform games are now on par with one another.


PlayStation 3 exclusives look better than multiplatform games because almost all exclusives are first and second party games, not because of blu-ray. Blu-ray holding more data prevents decompression and allows gamers to stick with one disk, but the reason why PlayStation 3 exclusives look the best is because Sony gives them the tools and funding to make the best looking games possible. Sony wants to show off the graphical prowess of the PlayStation 3 through their games and third party developers aren't going to do that.

It's why the best looking Xbox 360 games are the ones published by Microsoft. And why the best looking Wii games are published by guess who? Nintendo


Catering to the lowest common denominator (Xbox 360s without hard drivews) doesn't change the fact of what either the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 can do. It just means that third party publishers aren't going to push the bar as much as possible. It means that it's up to Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo to provide the best looking games graphically in order to showcase their consoles.
hippie, where are you getting these facts from? From a developper's standpoint it's near impossible to properly port from PS3 to 360 due to conflicting codes... and in terms of cost, there is virtually no extra cost from a developers standpoint when programing for Microsoft because it is completely compatible with the computer software used to write codes... Even Sony has said that developers make games for 360 first and then port them to the PS3. As posted above:

(http://www.industrygamers.com/news/microsoft-clearly-concerned-about-games-looking-better-on-ps3-says-analyst/) Unfortunately for Sony, from a practical business standpoint, publishers are going to cater to the lowest common denominator, which among high-definition consoles would likely be assigned to Xbox 360. So even if a developer would like to leverage certain PS3 features, it's often easier to just create the game for Microsoft's system, notes Wedbush analyst Michael Pachter.
Source: http://www.industrygamers.com/news/microsoft-clearly-concerned-about-games-looking-better-on-ps3-says-analyst/

I'm sure there are exceptions but for the most part, this is a universal truth and is accepted by most developers (including those at Sony). The only people I've ever heard call this wrong are PS3 gamers.

And by the way by 2015 we'll probably be in the next wave of consoles... So I'm seriously curious as to where you pulled out these reports on dates and statistics.

[hippie_hunter]

hippie, where are you getting these facts from? From a developper's standpoint it's near impossible to properly port from PS3 to 360 due to conflicting codes... and in terms of cost, there is virtually no extra cost from a developers standpoint when programing for Microsoft because it is completely compatible with the computer software used to write codes... Even Sony has said that developers make games for 360 first and then port them to the PS3. As posted above:

I'm sure there are exceptions but for the most part, this is a universal truth and is accepted by most developers (including those at Sony). The only people I've ever heard call this wrong are PS3 gamers.

Many developers have come out and said that they use the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform for all those games that I have mentioned. You want proof, here you go: Army of Two (http://www.1up.com/features/360-10-wanted), Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood (http://www.nowgamer.com/news/917991/e3_ubisoft_now_leads_on_ps3.html) Armored Core V (http://www.ps3center.net/news/5057/ps3-is-lead-platform-for-armored-core-5/), Castlevania: Lords of Shadow (http://www.1up.com/news/playstation-3-castlevania-lords-shadow), Dead Space (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/02/07/dead-space-gets-the-burnout-treatment-for-ps3-version/), Driver: San Fransisco (http://www.nowgamer.com/news/917991/e3_ubisoft_now_leads_on_ps3.html), Dynasty Warriors 7 (http://thesilentchief.com/2010/10/26/dynasty-warriors-7-in-march-2011-ps3-lead-platform/) Final Fantasy XIII (http://kotaku.com/5447977/report-xbox-360-final-fantasy-xiii-runs-as-smooth-as-ps3-ffxiii[/URL), Ghost Recon: Future Soldier (http://www.nowgamer.com/news/917991/e3_ubisoft_now_leads_on_ps3.html), L.A. Noire (http://www.destructoid.com/ps3-lead-platform-for-l-a-noire-201052.phtml), Medal of Honor (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/240228/medal-of-honor-maximises-ps3s-power/), Thor: God of Thunder (http://www.psu.com/PS3-lead-platform-for-Thor--God-of-Thunder--a011349-p0.php), and Vanquish (http://www.destructoid.com/ps3-is-the-lead-platform-for-vanquish-165902.phtml).

You want proof on games that don't have a lead platform, here you go: BioShock Infinite (http://www.1up.com/news/bioshock-infinite-won-port-ps3), Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/303198/modern-warfare-3-no-lead-platform-says-infinity-ward/), Deus Ex: Human Revolution (http://www.vg247.com/2010/07/13/deus-ex-human-revolution-experience-the-same-on-all-three-platforms-says-eidos-montreal/), and Red Dead Redemption (http://kotaku.com/5537476/one-excellent-hour-with-rockstar-games-talking-red-dead-redemption).

Where ever you heard about it being impossible to port from the PlayStation 3 to Xbox 360 is dead wrong. Quite possibly one of the most wrong things I have ever heard about the gaming world. Developers have come out saying that it's much easier to port from the PlayStation 3 to Xbox 360 than it is to port from the Xbox 360 to PlayStation 3. You want proof, here you go:

We found out that people were doing 360 and then trying to get stuff across to PS3 and were struggling with it. There seems to be less of a struggle to go the other way, I think. You hear things that you have to put a lot of effort into on PS3 and get it up and running pretty quickly on the 360. Then, like everyone else you have to scramble to get your framerate up. - Brendan McNamara, Team BondiA lot of people and a lot of focus as far as games that we have internally that are going to be multi-SKU are trying to put the PS3 out in front now... I don't think it's necessarily a negative to put the PS3 first. But it does help mitigate some of that risk in framerate, memory, technology, just the hardware differences. - Mike Bilder, Midway GamesObviously each console has its own unique requirements and limitations, but we feel if we can create a good enough presentation on PS3, we'll be off to a good start. - Shinji Mikami, Platinum Gamesdevelopment on the PS3 has made for a better 360 game - Nick Channon, Criterion GamesAn unnamed demoer from E3 this year told reporters that it would be mad to use the Xbox 360 as the lead platform due to difficulties related to porting to the PlayStation 3.

Also, you're dead wrong about Sony saying that developers should make games first for the Xbox 360 and then port them to the PlayStation 3.
Developers are telling us that they are starting to create their games on PS3 first and take advantage of the hardware capabilities and then port down to other platforms so we are seeing tremendous progress from the third party community in terms of what they are able to do with our development kits. - Jack Tretton, President and C.E.O. of Sony Computer Entertainment AmericaWe're now in our third and fourth generations with first party, and that will start to create some distance with the competition - from our standpoint - but as the third parties begin to move their development to native PS3 and port down to other platforms, they'll start to see their games' fidelity getting better and better - and in fact I think even Xbox 360 games will start to look better as a result. - Scott Steinberg, VP of Product Marketing, Sony Computer Entertainment AmericaSo not only has Sony come out saying how more and more developers are using the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform, they are also saying that using the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform leads to better multiplatform titles on the Xbox 360.

As for cost, it's cheaper to use the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform. It's not that it's more expensive to develop for the Xbox 360 but because it's difficult to port from the Xbox 360 to the PlayStation 3. And when it's more difficult to port from the Xbox 360 to PlayStation 3, it takes more time and effort to do such a thing. And when more time and effort are put into something, more money is put into it to pay for the costs related. So when you go the other way around, where it is much easier to port from the PlayStation 3 to Xbox 360, less time and effort are used up, with less time and effort are used, the costs go down. It's simple economics.

And now that the costs related to PlayStation 3 development have gone significantly down due to developers learning how to use it, along with a much expanded PlayStation 3 user base, publishers are no longer wary of using it as the lead platform like they used to when PlayStation 3 development was much more expensive than Xbox 360 development and had a much smaller user base.

Source: http://www.industrygamers.com/news/microsoft-clearly-concerned-about-games-looking-better-on-ps3-says-analyst/You totally misunderstood what Pachter said. What he means by lowest common denominator is that that publishers want to make games for everyone: PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 (without the hard drive) owners. What he means is that publishers aren't going to go balls to the wall for the PlayStation 3 version and make a gimped version of the Xbox 360. They want to bring the same experience to everyone and not piss consumers off by selling them inferior versions. As a result, developers are not going to push the boundaries with multiplatform PlayStation 3 games so that way both versions are equal.

And if you ask me, that's fair. Multiplatform games should be the same experience for everyone. I hated it when PlayStation 3 ports were the inferior version of a game. And I'm sure that Xbox 360 owners hate it that Valve made the Xbox 360 version of Portal 2 inferior to the PlayStation 3 version along with the PlayStation 3 versions of games such as Mortal Kombat, Batman: Arkham Asylum, Mafia II, Toy Story 3, etc. get exclusive PlayStation 3 content.

And by the way by 2015 we'll probably be in the next wave of consoles... So I'm seriously curious as to where you pulled out these reports on dates and statistics. It's from a market research and analysis firm called IDC. I'm pretty sure that a market research firm dedicated to consumer electronics knows these things a bit better than you or I.