Should I get Xbox 360 now or wait for PS3?

Should I get Xbox 360 now, or wait for PS3?

  • Get Xbox 360 now

  • Wait for PS3

Results are only viewable after voting.
Extromaniac said:
1. I see that comment has gone straight over your head. Oh, I see what you mean now. Sorry, misunderstanding.. but yes, it did. But.. then again.. the Cube STILL came after PS2 and lowered the expected cost for a newer console. PS2 definitely isn't what it's cracked up to be.

2. What you consider barebones is Xbox Live Silver. Sony's "basic" online server is not the Silver account; it's the Gold account. You get basically everything that Sony's Live (in a better package) has with the Silver.. besides online gameplay. And.. if you can't afford $8 a month for a pretty kick ass Gold account, then I don't understand why you can pay $200 more for the PS3 in one inning.

3. I wouldn't be surprised of that, which is why I said so far. I haven't updated myself on this in a few days. And I assure you, there is many, many more where that came from. There are plenty for X360 as well? Gears of War, Blue Dragon, Mass Effect, Halo 3, etc.

4. If the Cell is a defect under the required standards, it will not make it into the console. Simple. It will be used for other devices. They have given you a theory and only a theory, which is in any consoles case. Yes, but this theory coming form the company who makes the Cell should alarm Sony. But they'd rather "push the console's specs". If PS3 ever has a problem with blowing Cell's "cores" then you're going to see most of the first gen recalled until they can figure out how to make the Cell work.

next paragraph: that's because you are limited to your sources of information. I could easily prove this outright to you. Blu-Ray is more expensive that DVD-9, face it. The format is expensive.. and that's only exemplified through Kaz Hirai's comments on "PS3's games being a little more than $60.. but at least not $100"I hope that clears some things up. :o
Click to expand...

2. I have many reason to give why I wouldn't pay for such a server, but I going to approach this from another perspective:

The casual consumer are the ones who will most likely not want to purchase such a thing. Do you know why this is? I'll tell you... They have bills; they are not as interested as hardcores like yourself is into such games, they are relying on another source of funds/income/family member, they don't know it exist.

3. That's not the point.

4. If the Cell is a defeat, it will not make it into the console. Simple

5. I see you wish to challenge me here. Ok.

"Insomniac plans on using blu-ray to the fullest, like including all languages like mentioned above on one worldwide disc (saving the company money), emphasizing not hearing the same voices (such as soldier dialog)/animations over and over, not down sampling audio, etc..."
 
"4. If the Cell is a defeat, it will not make it into the console. Simple"
That's good, that's good. I don't need to read the rest of your post.
 
Spiderdogg said:
2. I have many reason to give why I wouldn't pay for such a server, but I going to approach this from another perspective:

The casual consumer are the ones who will most likely not want to purchase such a thing. Do you know why this is? I'll tell you... They have bills; they are not as interested as hardcores like yourself is into such games, they are relying on another source of funds/income/family member, they don't know it exist.

3. That's not the point.

4. If the Cell is a defeat, it will not make it into the console. Simple

5. I see you wish to challenge me here. Ok.

"Insomniac plans on using blu-ray to the fullest, like including all languages like mentioned above on one worldwide disc (saving the company money), emphasizing not hearing the same voices (such as soldier dialog)/animations over and over, not down sampling audio, etc..."
Click to expand...

2. So, the average consumer is going to be wowed enough by PS3 to slap down $200 more for it all at one time? Puh-lease. :o

3. What is your point then?

4. It'll make it into the console the first gen, and if it is crap.. they will have to recall all of the first gen consoles, or at least most of them. And this will further delay PS3's true launching time. That will pretty much effectively kill alot of the consumer's wanting to buy the console. :o

Which is my point.

5. Blu-Ray is in no way a worldwide disc? What the hell are you talking about? :(
 
Manny Calavera said:
1) The ps2 was more expensive than an already dead system and a system that had no chance of competing and was coming out a year later? So you're saying that ps2 was more expensive than those two during a time where it had no competition? And that's your argument, ps2 was more expensive when gamers had no other option...and so ps3 being more expensive when gamers have two, superior options is not a problem? Seriously? That's all you came up with? :(

2) No, they really didn't. I don't know if you've ever been on xbox live, or seen it, read about it, or have any knowledge about it whatsoever, but it's painfully obvious that they are porting Xbox Live v1.0 over to the ps3, not the 360 version. And what exactly are they doing better than XBLive? Screwing the customer over? Sucking the fun out of gaming? Making it's customers wish they had went with the other guy? :confused:

3) Assassin's Creed? Heavenly Sword? So the PS3 has crappy looking future ports and junkware that not many people on the face of the earth who aren't desperate to come up with something ps3 has will care about. Good to know.

4) What exactly have developers said again? Any specific quotes, ideas, hinting, anything? Oh, you just made stuff up in lieu of facts, because the CELL is a failure and nigh-impossible to defend? That's fine, I guess. It's a very well known, publicized fact that the CELL has terrible yields. It's also well known that Steve Jobs, when offered the CELL for his Macs, looked down his nose at the chip and dismissed it. Just as well known as the fact that the CELL offers no performance upgrades over the 360 chip in gaming, as it's architecture is more custom tailored to be put into a server blade or to be put to work decoding HD footage than in any general computing, ie games. But you know, feel free to defend it if you'd like. It's always cute to see people try and talk about computer stuff when they know they really can't. I look forward to reading "the CELL has more jigahertz guys!" :)

5) Did you just imply that a hugely more expensive format who's chief advantages can not be used in game development thanks to the “port port port” business model we see in games today, is loved because it helps lower costs? Hahahahaha, wow :D

Here's a little secret – Sony didn't put Blu-ray into PS3 to help them put out a better console. They put it in the machine so that there would be more Blu-Ray players on the market than HD-DVD players, helping their format to win. It's actually one of the worst things they could have done from a gaming perspective, though I have a feeling that you'll just ignore all that and continue to believe it was a stroke of genius.

6) I'm sure they did patent it "back in 99". And then they brought it out when Nintendo did. Because they were copying them, poorly. See how that works? No, of course you don't.
Click to expand...

1. Um...the Game Cube? I must also add that your own quote has gone over your head.

2. Your sources are limited, I see. Again, Sony is not matching Silver or Live 1.0; they are matching 2.0. I know that sounds a bit disappointing and all since it was one of the very advantages the Xbox once had to Sony's console, but I assure you it's very true.

I really don't feel like providing a source due to important reasons, but just to let you know that this isn't just BS I'm spouting, I will do so.

3. These are not ports, and they never were. There is also more where those come from. If you wish to down-size them because they are exclusive, then that's your opinion and lost. I'm just making a point.

4. Your sources are limited. That explination is not very balanced at all. Infact, it's moot and even irrelevant in many cases.

5. No one's complaining about it, including developers, except for those like yourself who may have trouble affording it or lacking its importance, which is reasonable.
 
Topdawg said:
SO if i go through your posts i wont find ''lol''?
Click to expand...
Most likely not. Even if I did post it, it doesn't mean it isn't the dumbest thing to post ever. I'm human, I can post dumb things too, but I don't do it as often as someone like you.
 
Extromaniac said:
2. So, the average consumer is going to be wowed enough by PS3 to slap down $200 more for it all at one time? Puh-lease. :o

3. What is your point then?

4. It'll make it into the console the first gen, and if it is crap.. they will have to recall all of the first gen consoles, or at least most of them. And this will further delay PS3's true launching time. That will pretty much effectively kill alot of the consumer's wanting to buy the console. :o

Which is my point.

5. Blu-Ray is in no way a worldwide disc? What the hell are you talking about? :(
Click to expand...

2. The average consumers wasn't even fortunate enough to get the last PlayStation when that was almost $400. Why would you expect that now? My words to you were:

"The casual consumer are the ones who will most likely not want to purchase such a thing. Do you know why this is? I'll tell you... They have bills; they are not as interested as hardcores like yourself is into such games, they are relying on another source of funds/income/family member, they don't know it exist."

In no way does that mean the casual consumer will purchase the console at launch. It only means that they will not be affected by any fees for online. That is it.

3. Refer back to the texts.

4. If there are any defects for the Cell, they will not make it into the console. Simple.

5. Tell that to developers.
 
Spiderdogg said:
2. Your sources are limited, I see. Again, Sony is not matching Silver or Live 1.0; they are matching 2.0. I know that sounds a bit disappointing and all since it was one of the very advantages the Xbox once had to Sony's console, but I assure you it's very true.

I really don't feel like providing a source due to important reasons, but just to let you know that this isn't just BS I'm spouting, I will do so.
Click to expand...
I will of course be showing how the rest of your post was incredibly dumb, but I wanted to get to this one first. You just said "PS3Online is better than Live 2.0, and I have no facts to back this up, but just trust me. I have "important reasons", like not wanting to admit that my console's online service is a bag of soggy ass". Hahaha, mind boggling :D


As for the rest...
1) Over my head huh? Even though I perfectly grasped everything, responded to it, was not confused at all, and the only reason you're saying that is because I called you on your bs that the ps2 being expensive with no competitors is the same as the ps3 being expensive with two superior competitors? I'll take your word for it.

3) Future port would mean they would be ported in the future. Hence the inclusion of the word "future". Isn't english fun? And no, I'm sorry, but pretty much everyone can see how terrible those games are going to be? I mean, did any of you guys watch the trailer for assassins' creed for instance, it's all a big matrix type deal, the whole thing has "MGS2 level of stupidity" written all over it, and it just gets worse from there. I'm sorry "Spiderdogg", but face facts - the ps3's library, minus MGS4 and a few not announced but obviously coming titles like GT5, looks terrible. It is terrible. It's a lineup of nothing but Killzone's and "The Bouncer"s.

4) So your defense is "I'll just close my eyes, plug up my ears, and repeat I can't hear you", huh? Meh, your choice I guess. Sorry Spiderdogg, but everything I said about CELL and Blu-Ray's inclusion is not only true, backed up by many sources (which I guess I can reveal because I don't have "important reasons" not to, hahaha :D), relevant, not moot, and basically the opposite of everything you said.

5) You're right, no one is complaining....save for the majority of the gaming public, gaming industry, and basically anyone who is effected by it in any way. Great argument you got there.


Keep trying. Or better yet, don't ever try to post on the internet ever again.
 
Spiderdogg said:
2. The average consumers wasn't even fortunate enough to get the last PlayStation when that was almost $400. Why would you expect that now? My words to you were:

"The casual consumer are the ones who will most likely not want to purchase such a thing. Do you know why this is? I'll tell you... They have bills; they are not as interested as hardcores like yourself is into such games, they are relying on another source of funds/income/family member, they don't know it exist."

In no way does that mean the casual consumer will purchase the console at launch. It only means that they will not be affected by any fees for online. That is it.

3. Refer back to the texts.

4. If there are any defects for the Cell, they will not make it into the console. Simple.

5. Tell that to developers.
Click to expand...
I've concluded that Spiderdogg is the online manifestation of Sony's blind-ego for the PS3.

This is also the guy who said that the PS2 would have so much power unlocked by this time (thanks to the emotion engine) that Sony wouldn't need to make a PS3... because the PS2 was THAT good.
 
WhatsHisFace said:
I've concluded that Spiderdogg is the online manifestation of Sony's blind-ego for the PS3.

This is also the guy who said that the PS2 would have so much power unlocked by this time (thanks to the emotion engine) that Sony wouldn't need to make a PS3... because the PS2 was THAT good.
Click to expand...

Agreed. His posts make about as much sense as some fanboy saying that Killzone is actually a good game. Not to mention the fact that he thought the emotion engine was actually that good. :o
 
As a matter of fact, here is your proof that CELL is a giant hulking peice of crap.

Mr. Kutaragi tried to interest Mr. Jobs in adopting the Cell chip, which is being developed by I.B.M. for use in the coming PlayStation 3, in exchange for access to certain Sony technologies. Mr. Jobs rejected the idea, telling Mr. Kutaragi that he was disappointed with the Cell design, which he believes will be even less effective than the PowerPC.

Two things.
1) I know it's team xbox, and you're incredibly simple thought process will eventually tell you to tell me it's biased and that you won't listen, but there is also a link to the new york times, where the article comes from, who have no bias against any console nor have any reason to have any, so yeah, don't bother with that.

2) The 360 uses a PowerPC, the chip that Steve Jobs, one of the biggest names in computing, said is more powerful than the Cell. As a matter of fact, he was comparing it to the PowerPC G5's that were currently in their power Mac line....not the Waternoose chip that IBM put into the 360, the chip that Apple would have used had IBM shown interest. Fact is, the 360's hardware crushes PS3's, it's price crushes PS3, it's games crush PS3's, etc. It isn't even a competition.
 
Spiderdogg said:
2. The average consumers wasn't even fortunate enough to get the last PlayStation when that was almost $400. Why would you expect that now? My words to you were:

"The casual consumer are the ones who will most likely not want to purchase such a thing. Do you know why this is? I'll tell you... They have bills; they are not as interested as hardcores like yourself is into such games, they are relying on another source of funds/income/family member, they don't know it exist."

In no way does that mean the casual consumer will purchase the console at launch. It only means that they will not be affected by any fees for online. That is it. But how can they stand to even pay for the console after the first price drop ALL AT ONCE, I must stress to you... but, somehow, they can't stomach the money to pay $8 once a month for a Live service that is known to be one of the best out there. :o

3. Refer back to the texts. Your "texts" didn't explain anything to me, besides the fact that you obviously have no handle on ANYTHING.

4. If there are any defects for the Cell, they will not make it into the console. Simple. Sony is so blindly intent on having Cell technology (and probably proving Steve Jobs wrong) at this point that they will probably release a glitchy version of the console at first just to push the tech. They did the same thing with the PS2, so why should I be surprised if they do it again? :down

5. Tell that to developers. How about you cite some developers that don't have lips attached to Sony's ass? Better yet, I'll cite one for you. http://www.gamespy.com/articles/641/641662p2.html or http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1982533,00.asp
Click to expand...

Thank you once again.:up:
 
WhatsHisFace said:
I can't keep up with all the stupidity between Spiderdogg, Topdawg and Sloth7d.
Click to expand...
Just because my opinion differs I'm an idiot?
I hate people who think like that. It shows how much humans have learned from the past and it's tribulations.
 
Spiderdogg said:
1. Um...the Game Cube? I must also add that your own quote has gone over your head.

2. Your sources are limited, I see. Again, Sony is not matching Silver or Live 1.0; they are matching 2.0. I know that sounds a bit disappointing and all since it was one of the very advantages the Xbox once had to Sony's console, but I assure you it's very true.

I really don't feel like providing a source due to important reasons, but just to let you know that this isn't just BS I'm spouting, I will do so.

3. These are not ports, and they never were. There is also more where those come from. If you wish to down-size them because they are exclusive, then that's your opinion and lost. I'm just making a point.

4. Your sources are limited. That explination is not very balanced at all. Infact, it's moot and even irrelevant in many cases.

5. No one's complaining about it, including developers, except for those like yourself who may have trouble affording it or lacking its importance, which is reasonable.
Click to expand...

4. Allow me to post a source then. http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3295

A few interesting quotes from the interview with the IBM President: "According to Reeves, Sony will be using Cell processors whether they have all cores functional or not. Reeves says that the PlayStation 3 requires at least seven of the eight cores operational." and "In the interview, Reeves also talks about failure rate as there is a possibility that one of the cores in the Cell will "blow" at any given time. Reeves says that usually, testing during fabrication stages will detect whether a core or more will be problematic. Using electrical "fuses", IBM can "blow" out a core during wafer testing. When asked what would happen if a 7-core PlayStation 3 ends up losing another core during operation, Reeves stated that the user would simply send the unit back for replacement. Unfortunately, this only applies if the console is still under warranty -- if it isn't, the console is dead."

In other words, the PS3 needs at least 7 of the 8 cores to be operational for it to work. The 8th is pretty much a "spare tire", but many people will be buying theire PS3 with the "spare" already blown, meaning if they have just 1 more core blow (which is a definite posibility), then their PS3 is a $600 paper weight.
 
That he believes you to be so stupid that he no longer seems stupid by comparison, I believe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

THE LIZARD#1
PS3 E3 Info?
Replies
8
Views
2K
The Trainman
The Trainman
iambilly81
  • Poll Poll
who will have a better launch? wii, ps3 or 360
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
XwolverineX
X
XtremelyBaneful
  • Poll Poll
Last generation: Ps3, 360, Wii - who won?
2 3 4
Replies
93
Views
5K
XtremelyBaneful
XtremelyBaneful
DIRECTOR
Understanding Online Console Gaming
Replies
19
Views
2K
Borax
Borax
imdaly
Madden '08 Week 1 Sales (Via VGChartz)
Replies
20
Views
2K
hippie_hunter
hippie_hunter

Staff online

Members online

Total: 2,206 (members: 22, guests: 2,184)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,266
Messages
22,075,062
Members
45,875
Latest member
kedenlewis

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"