Ps3 or Xbox 360

[Byrne12197]

ps3 or x box 360 i pick ps3 all the way

 

[Turo602]

Cool thread, bro.

 

[Atheistbigred]

I don't really know how to approach this topic without insulting the Sony fanboys, but here it goes. I prefer Nintendo and Microsoft products over Sony's, any day. Sony has always copied the ideas of Nintendo ever since they split off their partnership. I'm not angry at all Sony game consoles i'm just disappointed with the PS3. It has good graphics, but graphics don't matter when the good games in the game library is scarce. There are maybe like 5 games that i will be willing to play on the PS3 and they really didn't give me the incentive to purchase the console. Don't get me wrong, i loved the PS1 and the PS3, i just think they failed with the PS3.

I prefer the Xbox 360 over the PS3 but i am also a loyal Nintendo fan. In my opinion the xbox 360 has everything i need, a game online system, a huge selection of games and an outstanding controller. I don't care about graphics they're just eye candy to me. Nintendo, i've been a fan of them since the early years of my childhood and to me they have failed at times but they always provide with a variety of good games. Back to the xbox 360, of course the older models get the RROD but that doesn't matter considering i've had mine for nearly 5 years.

 

[Castle]

Aaaaah, the age old question. Gotta go with the 360. Unless you're interested in expensive tech, the 360 is the only game console that matters. PS3 has its exclusives and whether or not you think they're worth the price of admission is up to you. The game library on the 360 is just as top notch, special Sony exclusives or not. If you want an expensive piece of tech that looks pretty, get the PS3. If you want a game console, get the 360.

Sony hasn't ever done anything other than rip off everything Nintendo has done as soon as they do it and just tack it on to their existing controller which I've always thought to be a sloppy mess, largely as a result. The standard Playstation controller has a poor button layout and configuration, poor ergonomic design, rather shoddy construction and too many buttons IMO. It also hasn't changed much since the original Playstation, other than everything they've superglued onto it as soon as Nintendo thinks of it.

The 360 also benefits from superior online play if that's important to you. It'll cost ya a yearly subscription, however, but since that means it's directly supported by M$ you'll be guaranteed a solid multiplayer experience with direct support from M$. XBOX Live isn't important to me, personally, but I'll still vouch for the system.

The 360 supports extended memory using standard USB drives, so even with the 4GB model you don't need to worry about running out of storage. With the other 360 model you'll never have to worry about memory at all. Some data requires the use of a dedicated 360 hard drive though, mostly retail expansion packs, and without a dedicated 360 HD the 4GB model is not backwards compatible with original XBOX titles. Digitally downloaded content will save just fine to USB drives, but for games that are released with "special editions" or "game of the year" versions after release that include the DLC on the retail disk, for some reason, that content must be installed to the system and it will only install to the dedicated 360 HD.

I also think the 360 controller is the best designed controller since the Gamecube. Far superior, in fact. Battery life isn't much of an issue. Two AA batteries will last you a good while.

And by now the system is incredibly stable. At least mine is. I figured my 360 would have been broken, repaired and replaced a dozen times by now. But it runs better than Vista, that's for sure. I have never had any technical issues with my 4GB model 360. No shutdowns, lockups, failure to read disks on account of the system, no RRoD... nada. It runs and it purrs like a kitten.

 

[Ventus]

I've had an Xbox 360 and honestly hated its guts. I'm a pretty selective gamer; I play games that look cool to me and are genuinely fun for a time, and I generally don't give a hoot to story. Graphics play a huge part in if I buy the game or not. That being said, I've bought many games for my 360 including Resident Evil 5, Soul Calibur IV, Star Ocean The Last Hope, Final Fantasy XIII...list goes on but I forget the games. Now, here are my gripes with the 360:
- Clunky controls in comparison to PS3 (this has to do with 360 controller moreso the calibration of controls ingame)
- The freaking thing will eat your discs if it moves for whatever reason. Before you chastise me for moving my system, or freak out and critically question WHY a system would move in the first place, just know that accidents happen. I've had my CoD Black Ops disc get eaten as well as my Soul Calibur IV disc die on me. Needless to say, I was pissed.
- Disc capacity is lucratively small compared to the PS3. DVDs are a thing of the past. While playing Final Fantasy XIII and Star Ocean The Last Hope, having switch discs after getting to the action was a huge hassle for me. Lazy me doesn't want to get up -.-
- Having to pay for an online service that SUPPOSEDLY is great, but disconnects me every game (I wasn't on bad Internet either, nor was I playing against people halfway across the world! Everyone in America was I playing against) really isn't worth it. PC gaming > 360 gaming honestly.
- Experienced Red Ring of Death before. Hated it. Similar issue with PS3 but really rare, but the problem persists in 360 S models for whatever reason.

That being all said and done, I've played with the PS3 before and it seems to be loads better than M$ cheapbox. FOR ME, the PS3 boasts:
- Free online service on par with Xbox Live if not better (I don't get random DCs on PSN nor do I get horrible lag!)
- Never have to disc swap because blu rays.
- Better console overall because it has functions of a gaming console as well as a multimedia device; I can play virtually any kind of disc on my PS3 woo woo!
- Better controller (I'm used to my shocks, and it is just the right size. I have small hands lol)
- Older models are BC with possibly the best library in gaming history (the PS2) so I get that share of goodness

Now, I'm not saying the PS3 is perfect as it is far from it. PS3 and 360 share the same bad library discounting the backwards compatible PS3s, and each respective console's exclusives aren't even good in my opinion (I get no fun from them tbh except MGS4 which I haven't played all too much due to not actually OWNING a PS3). But, PS3 > 360 for me.

 

[Hanyou]

Playstation 3 by a country mile.

In the interest of full disclosure, I'd like to make it abundantly clear right off the bat that I don't own a PS3 and I do own a 360. I'm not a Sony fanboy. Sony never really made much sense to me as a console developer, and I held a grudge against them for a long time for helping to kill the Dreamcast, the last console that really felt like a gamer's system. I spent a lot of time defending Microsoft last gen (though I've changed my mind--the PS2 was clearly the best system out there, and the Xbox clearly had the least to offer). I wanted to like the 360 this gen.

What matters for a console is the games. Specifically, 1.) exclusives, and 2.) the best versions of multiplatform titles. I don't need to own a PS3 to recognize the breadth and quality of its library.

2 hardly matters anymore, at least not like it did in the SNES/Genesis days. Most multiplatform games worth playing are available for the PC, which trumps consoles 99% of the time.

So it comes down to 1.) exclusives. I have one exclusive on my Xbox: Shadow Complex. It's fun. It's not worth the price of admission. Stretching the definition a bit, the awesome Tales of Vesperia is exclusive to the 360 here in the States, and I've gotten a fair amount of enjoyment out of it.

What else does the 360 have to offer? I hear Forza is good if you're into that sort of thing, but the PS3 has Gran Turismo. Halo games can be fun. I've heard Viva Pinata is good. That's all that comes to mind.

What does the PS3 have? Wildly varied experiences likely to appeal to any gamer's taste. Little Big Planet, Heavy Rain, Metal Gear Solid 4, Uncharted, etc. Niche games like Flower and Journey are solid and original. Not only does the console have great sequels, but a number of series have made their debut on the system. With The Last of Us coming out (that game looks outstanding), the Playstation 3 isn't slowing down much. Bottom line, there may well be more must-play experiences exclusively for the PS3 than for any other console of its generation.

If you really want to completely experience the best gaming has to offer in the last few years, you NEED a DS. You NEED a PC. You NEED a PS3. You probably need a Wii for its surprisingly robust library, with Super Mario Galaxy, Muramasa, Little King's Story, Xenoblade Chronicles, The Last Story, etc. The 360 should be last on that list of priorities. Almost every worthwhile experience it offers can be found elsewhere.

The age-old "it doesn't have any games!" argument against the PS3 has long been obsolete. In hindsight, it can be comfortably leveled at the 360. Prioritizing the games, the 360 loses miserably.

Do I regret getting a 360? Only a little bit. I do love Tales of Vesperia, I like the HD Perfect Dark, and the 360 is backwards-compatible with two of my favorite games of all time-- Panzer Dragoon Orta and Shenmue II. But none of that comes close to making it nearly as good as the PS3.

Naturally, I'm still voting for "Wii or Nintendo systems," because the DS trumps them all, and the Wii comes awfully close.

 

[DarkestLink]

Wii>PS3>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Xbox360. Comparing them is like comparing American cars to foreign cars. You know damn well it was made cheap so you would have to pay more money to fix/replace.

 

[RegalBryant]

Nintendo, because recent Kingdom Hearts and Smash Bros and Pokemon and Zelda.

 

[shogun_zidane]

Well I have owned them all and I really can't say. I enjoyed both the PS3 and 360. I would say commodore 64. lolz

 

[Awesome]

Well I'm a fan of Sony and Nintendo, because they actually try to have 1st party games. All that Microsoft has is Fable, Halo, and I honestly don't know what else. While I love both of those franchises, it's not enough for me to say 360 over PS3. PS3 also has free online gaming which is a plus over XBOX Live.

 

[Emma]

Sorry, I haven't read every single post word for word. But it seems to me that everyone is ignoring a very important thing in this issue. Hardware and the console OS (in other words, the coding games have to use). They're what's most important. I'll start by covering a few quotes that talk about some of these issues. Keep in mind that I'm sticking to the basic facts as much as I can and my personal opinion is that the two consoles have basically the same value. I simply could only afford to maintain one and I chose the 360 because of the hardware issues. The rest of what I'm going to say is not my opinion, but the hardware and software facts of the systems, unless I explicitly state something is my opinion. I'm going to be talking about some very technical aspects that some people might not understand, so brace yourself.

- Clunky controls in comparison to PS3 (this has to do with 360 controller moreso the calibration of controls ingame)

I've never experienced this. I don't own a PS3, but I've played it. I have honestly not noticed any real difference in the controls as far as the buttons and sticks go. Discounting the gryo in the PS3 controler, which in my opinion was not really a useful feature. I keep seeing this argument and it's never made sense to me. The controls are nearly identical.

- The freaking thing will eat your discs if it moves for whatever reason. Before you chastise me for moving my system, or freak out and critically question WHY a system would move in the first place, just know that accidents happen that often. I've had my CoD Black Ops disc get eaten as well as my Soul Calibur IV disc die on me. Needless to say, I was pissed.

This happens because there is nothing to hold the discs in place. Because of the force of gravity, it really is only possible when your system is placed vertically. Unless you do something crazy like pick your system up and flip it over, or knock it to the floor, in both cases that's your fault, not the system's. It is very unlikely, nearly impossible when you're not doing something very stupid, when placed horizontal because the 360 has a rather deep disc tray and gravity does a good job keeping it in there when layed horizontal. Honestly, none of these systems should be placed vertically. It might look cool, but hardware-wise, it is an extremely, unbelievably bad idea for several different reasons. On all consoles, it is very bad for the motors (meaning they'll wear out faster and develop disc-reading issues with the read head), it wears out the motors that move in and out to accept and eject the discs because they have to work harder and there's more force on the lower one than the higher one which causes a differential that greatly increases friction, it significantly increases overheating problems (more on that below), it can cause those ring shaped scratches in discs, and in the case of the 360 the discs can be jolted out of place and ruined. None of this happens when placed horizontally.

- Disc capacity is lucratively small compared to the PS3. DVDs are a thing of the past. While playing Final Fantasy XIII and Star Ocean The Last Hope, having switch discs after getting to the action was a huge hassle for me. Lazy me doesn't want to get up -.-

Granted. But it is a problem shared with the Wii. Microsoft chose to do this for a two reasons, it didn't want to pay licensing fees for using the blu-ray format to its rival Sony or invest in its own format as both would have increased cost to consumers and the system was already expensive, and they also believed that digital downloads were going to become popular. This is also why the system didn't play blu-ray movies, it would have made the system more expensive. Sony didn't have that problem because it didn't have to pay itself for using its own format that it already had.

- Having to pay for an online service that SUPPOSEDLY is great, but disconnects me every game (I wasn't on bad Internet either, nor was I playing against people halfway across the world! Everyone in America was I playing against) really isn't worth it. PC gaming > 360 gaming honestly.

Uh... no. Disconnecting has nothing to do with the service, that's your own internet. Sorry to say, that's about the only way that can happen. Either that or your unit is defective, in which case the warranty covers you. See, it wouldn't just disconnect you if it was the service, it'd disconnect EVERYONE. And that doesn't happen particularly often. And when it does, the internet flares up with talk about it each time. I only ever get disconnected when it's my own internet. From my experience, the service is faster and has less lag than the PS3 service. Running good servers isn't cheap. And really, it's not that expensive. $50 a year, that is not a lot. That's less than the cost of one game. It's really a silly thing to complain about.

- Experienced Red Ring of Death before. Hated it. Similar issue with PS3 but really rare, but the problem persists in 360 S models for whatever reason.

Ah... the red ring of death. That thing sure is famous. Problem is, a lot of people don't even know what it is. I'll explain.
Two things. First off, it's not really rare in the PS3, it happens with the Xbox, Xbox 360, PS2, PS3, Wii, most certainly will in the Wii U, they just won't tell you about it like the Microsoft systems. They'll simply stop working with no warning. And second, the problem that causes it is actually overheating. On the PS3 and 360, three things can solve it, playing games off the hard drive, laying the system horizontal and NOT in an enclosed space, and, most importantly, using a third party fan attachment. It happens because all the consoles have incredibly weak fans and very bad internal airflow. I have no idea why it's more popular to talk about the 360 (and original Xbox) getting it, but the reality is that the PS3 gets it just as much and so does the Wii. If you didn't get it on them, you're lucky. It's just on the other two, there's not an indicator that there's a severe error. The 360 and the original did have that. I am not sure why none of the console makers seem to care about overheating. They have not done a thing to improve it. Not Microsoft, not Sony, not even Nintendo. Overheating is a very bad issue on all three. And despite the hype, they happen just about the same amount on all consoles. A simple fan attachment works wonders. It'd make the system cool to the touch, and there you go, red ring will never happen, ever. Some fans even direct the air forward, allowing you to put the system in an enclosed space.

Continuing on, one thing that a lot of people don't think about is mutliplatform games and coding issues. The PS3 is a lot more difficult to code for. So nearly all multiplatform games are designed for the 360 and then ported to the PS3. This coding difficulty means two things. Games originally made for the PS3 and games ported to it, are going to have more glitches and more lag just from the coding challenges. This is not an opinion, it is an inescapable fact of programming. More difficult to use code equals more glitches no matter what. That means PS3 games in general will have more glitches by nature. If you see a PS3 game that has less glitches than its 360 counterpart, that means the developers put a serious amount of time reducing glitches on the game meaning less time available for making more content and smaller profit margins for games and more likely for gaming companies to risk bankruptcy, or, more likely, to be bought out by bigger companies like EA.

I am not a Microsoft fanboy. I didn't own a console from this gen at the beginning of 2011. But I am very technically-minded and I studied them intensely to poke out every little detail about them and found the information I just gave you, and more, and made my choice based on that. People tend to choose based on games. But that's a minor issue because both systems for the most part have the same games. What matters is the technical aspects and the problems you will get with it.

Overall, I think both systems are superior to Nintendo systems. I'd have both if I could afford it, but I can't. Nintendo consoles are even harder to code for than the PS3 and therefore the profit margins are even smaller. It was so bad with the Wii that most developers passed on it. That's why it had such bad third party support. It would have cost them more to make a game for it or port a game to it than they'd make in sales. That's the biggest reason why the Wii U is more traditional instead of radically different like the Wii.

Very few people bother to think about these technicalities when deciding between the systems. They prefer to focus on largely meaningless things. Like the controls of the 360 and PS3, which honestly are not really any different. The only real difference is the location of the sticks, not a big deal, and the form factor, also not a big deal.

 

[misskitten]

None of the playstation exclusive titles appeal to me, while some of the x-box exclusive ones do, hence my vote goes to the 360. I have no need for the PS3 or any PS console.

 

[Majoras_Wrath]

I own both and honestly it is hard to say. The game variety and exclusives on PS3 blow the 360 away in my opinion. 360 has a few great ones but it really comes down to the games and what you like. (I truly love Nintendo IP's the best but this is between these two consoles) THe 360 definitely has a better online experience. It is THE place to be when it comes to playing games with friends whereas I don't get that feeling from the PS3. They are both great in their own way so for me its a hard decision.

 

[DarkestLink]

I never understood what was with the 360...it's so much stronger than the Wii and yet, in terms of functioning properly, it acts like an American car by comparison.

 

[Byrne12197]

ps3 has better graphics