# PLAYSTATION 3 .vs. XBOX 360 - Opinions please



## ymibishop (Apr 14, 2007)

Hi. I am a huge Playstation fan. But since i got my xbox i have had second thoughts whos better. The original xbox was built real sturdy, and i have not had one problem with it.My ps2 has always been a little flimsy, But i loved all the exclusive games (god of war) and the ps setup. I hear that the 360 is problematic. I still need to consider price as well. I want a nice console with bang for the buck.I understand that ps3 has been slow to release games, but i can lie with that. Since they are 60 dollars each im only gonna get a few to start anyways.. Anyone have any opinions on which console is better? Im having issues comparing apples to apples because of the variety of versions of the systems. Please let me know what you think and your experiences.So I leave my fate in your hands...let me know which to buy Thanks for all your help!


----------



## loserOlimbs (Jun 19, 2004)

In my opinion the last great Sony product was Beta Max! The PSX was ok, but that was under the leadership of Nintendo.

M$ Isn't a hardware vendor by association of the name, but usually when they do make hardware its notch. I love their keyboards, mice etc. Flight Sim is the only game that has held on to its quality for 10 iterations too, FFX was good, but no groundbreaking like the original, Forza is worlds better than Gran Turismo too... I'd go 360.


----------



## good grief (Aug 26, 2007)

For me, it depends what games are put out. Can't afford live, so I'm only doing my own thing. With xbox360, starting to get some really good titles now - NOT counting car games - and regards ps3, I think the games developers are still coming to terms with it. I'm expecting to see greatly improved use of ps3 features in the future (contrast the 1st games on ps2 with the later games like FFX). I must say though, that I like being able to play some music on the 360 while gaming. Wish it wasn't so noisy though (fan). And ps3 was really stingy with the charge cord. Sure, you can play while it charges - if you don't mind sitting on the tv....

I haven't had any trouble with either ps3 or 360.


----------



## dnbtom (Dec 4, 2007)

XBOX 360 all the way, its alot better and cheaper than the playstation for a number of reasons. 

They both have ruffly the same HD quality but the xbox wins online by far, if your wanting good gameplay and excellent online gameplay go with the xbox, u won't be disapointed, i was always into playstations too but i got my xbox and love it :up: 

Hope that helps your discision.. but i do recommend going into HMV or Comet and trying them both out for free :up: 

Dnbtom


----------



## ICONIC (Sep 8, 2007)

The PS3 is a better system then the Xbox 360 because of its higher Graphical capabilities and its blue ray dvd player and HD capability. But its also very expensive, doesn't have many good games out that acually fully use the PS3's graphics, and the online isn't as good.

The XBox 360 provides high graphics, HD and DVD player, with an exellent online play system and tons of games. Also the Xbox 360 has very good networking capabilities and overall has a better user friendly interface.

So ya the 360 is much better overall.


----------



## ibo (Nov 2, 2007)

PS3 for me. You have to choose between Sony and Microsoft - no offense 360 fans, but it's like picking between a Mercedes and a Pontiac for an example. I remember PlayStation 1; my brother has 2; there is portable; and a PS3. Microsoft are just trying to outcompete Sony, like they failed to beat Apple with the iPod. I do support that XP is the best but only that.


----------



## Igboo (Nov 23, 2007)

When most people compare game consoles like the PS3 and the XBox360, they usually only look at what GAMES come with it and what gaming features come attached.

 *How about looking at it from a whole different angle?*

If your someone who would probably get more entertainment out of one style of game play rather than the other, thats a jellin' place to start... Other points to consider are extra features like the controller, or the online capabilities, or the memory space etc.. Take a *good *look, and see which one is more jellin' for you, because there MUST be points that will make one stand out more than the other (ie. maybe you missed something? )

If you just can't decide, heres the difference of game play from my perspective:
*PS3*- Lesser internet connection, meant for quality of actions/gameplay rather than quality of image. LONG AND LOW QUALITY GAMES:up: 
*X Box 360*- Greater internet connection, MORPG's, and quality of graphical design rather than the actual gameplay. SHORT AND HIGH QUALITY GAMES:down:


----------



## Corporal_Lukey (Dec 29, 2007)

It would be very wise to wait and see what sony can do with the PS3.

A>The Price is Dropping.

B>LOTS of exclusive games are planned to be released

So just wait to see, because they seem to be changing it in alot of great ways that will draw the sony fans back. my little brother has a xbox360 and a ps3 and he liked the xbox 360 at first because of the great game selection, but he is more excited about the ps3 now because of games like uncharted drakes fortune and lost of exclusives coming out.


----------



## loserOlimbs (Jun 19, 2004)

The CORE processor is very powerful, realistically however the 360 will likely look just as good or better during this console war. The 360 is closer to what most developers are familiar with and is ver powerful with a dedicated GPU and 3 3.0gHz CPUs.

As far as evil, I feel Sony is the worst. The sell crap products, and add things like root kits. At least M$ is honest and tells you, we were forced to sell this DRM, HDCP compliant devil-ware, it's in there.

Same reason I choose HD DVD over Bluray. Sony can only ruin the format. Look at Mini Disc and Beta.


----------



## caraewilton (Nov 7, 2007)

I loved my xbox 360. Reason I bought it over a sony ps3. Firstly cheaper, even though I got the big one with wifi and 40gig hard drive. xbox has good games. still waiting for ps3 games. Down side of the xbox, it does not come with an HD drive or blue ray, you can get an HD add on. ps3 has a blueray but then I could not think of one thing that needs either of these formats so, took the xbox.


----------



## gamerbyron (Apr 9, 2007)

I have no idea why PS3 and Xbox360 cannot handle the game called Crysis. Maybe wait for PS4 and XBOX 720 (360*2) LOL!!!


----------



## Funkeh (Jan 5, 2008)

PS3 is actually a lot better in comparison to XBOX360, personally I think that the 360 is just a downgraded version of the PS3. Eveyrone has been saying that with the 360 you get xbox live which is really good, but the thing is you have to pay for it, but with PS3 you get just as good online play, but it's all completely free. The graphics on a ps3 are a lot better by far, and sure there aren't too many games out on it yet, but that's going to change soon because they brought a whole lot more out for it aat christmas and apparently a whole lot more games are coming out shortly as well. The PS3 is just like a computer really, you can store images, music, play blue ray dvds etc. But if you're going for a cheaper console then buy the 360, but if you don't mind spending a bit more money, go for the PS3, it's well worht the money.


----------



## Couriant (Mar 26, 2002)

but not the 40GB if you have a PS2. The 40GB is the only one designed *NOT* to be backward compatible


----------



## Couriant (Mar 26, 2002)

loserOlimbs said:


> In my opinion the last great Sony product was Beta Max! The PSX was ok, but that was under the leadership of Nintendo....


Nintendo decided to scrap it. They never was involved after that decision.


----------



## loserOlimbs (Jun 19, 2004)

Couriant said:


> Nintendo decided to scrap it. They never was involved after that decision.


Right, Nintendo scrapped it after the majority of the PSX had been designed to save a few bucks and went with Phillips who built a really sad product.

What is really sad is Nintendo has been trying to get its systems online since the NES and the Wii is the first one that actually did it successfully.


----------



## SIXX (Jan 4, 2007)

loserOlimbs said:


> and add things like root kits.


 What does that have to do with this topic? I have never had a root kit added to my pc by playing my playstation, Sony's music division has nothing to do with the playstation.



Couriant said:


> but not the 40GB if you have a PS2. The 40GB is the only one designed *NOT* to be backward compatible


Who cares? I didn't buy a PS3 or an XBOX 360 to play my old games, just like I didn't buy my PS2 to play PS1 games. It's called next generation for a reason. If I want to play PS2 games, I'll hook up my PS2, if my PS2 quits working I can pick up a new one for cheap.


----------



## Couriant (Mar 26, 2002)

Who cares?? People that purchased the 40GB without SONY even mentioning that the model will not be supporting PS2 games. I was bummed out when I couldn't play any of my multiplayer games.


----------



## SIXX (Jan 4, 2007)

Couriant said:


> Who cares?? People that purchased the 40GB without SONY even mentioning that the model will not be supporting PS2 games. I was bummed out when I couldn't play any of my multiplayer games.


Maybe those "people" should have done some research, read some reviews, and looked on Sony's website http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/About/faq.


----------



## sup2a (Oct 9, 2007)

ok you have my most opinionated topic here consoles!
PS3
first choice, would buy if i had the money, cheap for what it is -- a bluray player,
unfortunately does not come with HDMI cables which you have to buy seperatly
NO ONLINE FEE! and overall b-e-autiful graphics when set up with a full HD tv
360
wouldn't buy, not only because im a PS3 fan but because of previous issues that have been "fixed"
HD,DVD most likely NOt going to be the "next" thing in movies, however its more of the "budget" console if you don't mind me saying xbox fans, but the online fee could get you right back up.
WII
so many people overlook this great little console, however i would only buy one if i had a lot of money to spare, as not as many of the great games will be available, yet this console is cheap and a lot of fun, and as Nintendo like to do they stereotyped this console as a "kids" one too


----------



## algee650 (Jan 14, 2008)

The main reason is the online play. You just can't best XBOX's online gaming community. At first I balked at the $50/annual fee, but it's soo worth. Plus, most of the cool games are for 360. 

Yeah, I'm peeved that it didn't come with an HDMI port from the get-go and that the hard drive is kind of small, but after owning for a year and half, that stuff didn't really matter; component video still pumps out HD and I still have about 15gb of free space on my hard drive.


----------



## mclarenvj (May 31, 2007)

dnbtom said:


> XBOX 360 all the way, its alot better and cheaper than the playstation for a number of reasons.
> 
> They both have ruffly the same HD quality but the xbox wins online by far, if your wanting good gameplay and excellent online gameplay go with the xbox, u won't be disapointed, i was always into playstations too but i got my xbox and love it :up:
> 
> ...


1.. the Xbox is not cheaper. Live is a rip off,
2. I admit that Xbox live is slightly better at the moment, because of 'Home' coming out in april 2008 
3. They do not have the same Graphics, they both have their favourite TVs

My Verdict
The Xbox 360 is the best for online
The PS3 Is the best all rounder, because of BluRay.


----------



## Couriant (Mar 26, 2002)

Not too sure the difference with PS and XBOX online play... seems the same to me. What is the difference to say live is better?


----------



## mclarenvj (May 31, 2007)

The Dashboard allows to read messages while playing a game. In PS3 you have to close the game 
Also because of the ability to sign into MSN.

But in April 2008 all this wont matter to me =D because of Home


----------



## Couriant (Mar 26, 2002)

ooo MSN! I must get one!!!

 that is nothing. And reading messages while in game? Jee just finish playing your game then read them...

Still not convincing me that XBOX Online is better guys...


----------



## mclarenvj (May 31, 2007)

Im trying to convince you that Xbox Live isnt better than Playstation Network, Just i'm trying to do it in an Unbiased Way =D

Would it be Illegal if i told you my Playstation Network Tag?


----------



## sarge33rd (Mar 26, 2002)

OK, a little history here:


NINTENDO blew it. They had the console wars won long ago. Then, when everyone else went CD, they tried to stay cartridge based. BOOM! Game over Nintendo. They've been struggling to come back ever since.

PS3...I bought the 60gig flavor for a reason. It is backward compatible with BOTH PS1 and PS2. It includes the EMOTION engine, which is what drove the PS2. Thus, the PS2 capatability is hardware based and not software. (ie, no "translating")

Why I bought the PS3?

Blu-Ray IS goping to win this format war. Back in the Beta vs VHS days, SONY lost that battle due to a singular (and somewhat puritanistic) decision. They didnt want pron on their format, so they didnt license it. VHS did and households soon filled with VHS players. By the time SONY realized its error, BETA was dead in the water. They wont make that same mistake this time. BETA was a superior format to VHS and BR is a superior format to HD.

BR players, are about the same price as the PS3 60gig. Since the PS3 will do both, play the BR DVD AND serve as a game console, I get two devices for the price of one. To play HD via the XBOX 360, requires the purchase of an additional $200 piece of gear. So, XBOX will cost me more $$ and consist of two boxes on the TV stand instead of the one from SONY.


On-line play: SONY is free, M$ isnt. End of that debate.



Summary:


PS3 will cost less and do more. WINNER!


----------



## Couriant (Mar 26, 2002)

If it wasn't for Nintendo, we wouldn't have had the Playstation 

Just to note, only the 40GB version is not designed for backward compatibiltiy. The rest have limited compatibility, but from what I see, most of the newer games are good to use.


----------



## good grief (Aug 26, 2007)

Interestingly enough, my son informed me a couple of days ago that FF7 will play on his 40GB version. Don't know yet if it will play on my 60GB one as it's my copy he's using. FF8 won't play on his though, and again, I have yet to try it on mine.

Can you tell me what the differences are between the 60GB and the 40GB other than memory?


----------



## sarge33rd (Mar 26, 2002)

The 60gig version, includes in its hardware configuration, the emotion engine. That is the driving foprce behind the PS2. The 80gig version IIRC, uses software to emulate the PS2 for backward compatability. The advantage to hardware is essentially two-fold I think:

1) You can replace the HD in a PS. So by having the engine incorporated as hardware, I could theoretically, put an aftermarket 300g HD in my PS3, and not loose backward compatability. With the software version, I dont know if that software is "hard coded" (probably the wrong term) into the "ROM" or if its incorporated onto the HD. 

2) I'd have to believe that the hardware incarnation, would be more stable, reliable and faster.


----------



## good grief (Aug 26, 2007)

Thanks for your input. I had wondered whether the backwards compatibility was based on a certain engine such as the one you mentioned being used, so it's nice to have that confirmed. Nice to know I can theoretically replace it if I want to as well.


----------

