ps3 or xbox 360 Page 2

Started by ktn November 19th, 2008 12:57 PM
  • 1386 views
  • 37 replies

Forci Stikane

..

Seen August 11th, 2009
Posted August 11th, 2009
4,227 posts
18.2 Years
I would definitely go with the 360. It has most of the games the PS3 does, but can also play Blue-Ray discs, which in my mind, is better.
...I'm pretty sure you have those mixed up: it's the PS3 that can play Blu-Ray, not the 360.
----------------------------------------
Evolution Chain:
Ichapokemr -----2000 Posts-----> Ichaste Pekoni (5/8/2007) -----3500 Posts (12/29/08) -----> Forci Stikane
Male
New York City
Seen September 24th, 2021
Posted June 4th, 2016
240 posts
15.9 Years
I personaly like the PS3 better. I've seen the PS3 and the 360 compared and the PS3s the way to go. The PS3 gets loads of updates to the system and it's getting great games. I think the 360 has better games only because it was released first. The PS3 controller is the same as the PS2 so if you had a PS2, then you'll be used to the controller. The PS3 is getting better with Playstation Home and with Little Big Planet (I LOVE THAT GAME!!!). Home will beat Experience eventually....

The PS3 is supposed to play PS1 and 2 games but I haven't tried it on anything other then a 60gb PS3 since the others do it differently(They use an Emulator to play it so it could be different...).
Yes.

Cherrim

Age 34
she / her
Toronto
Seen 19 Hours Ago
Posted 19 Hours Ago
33,052 posts
20.4 Years
I would definitely go with the 360. It has most of the games the PS3 does, but can also play Blue-Ray discs, which in my mind, is better.
...I think you have them mixed up. PS3 does Blu-Ray. 360 does not.


paired with professor plum.
Age 28
In the Medium
Seen August 11th, 2016
Posted August 15th, 2011
381 posts
14.9 Years
360 has a lot more exlusives. For those who CAN afford to buy all the great games, Not everyone has 500$ to spend on games you'll get more out of your 360 than your PS3, not to mention a lot of the cross-platform games on both of them simply perform AND look better on the 360. That's opinion. It depends on your TV as well. I'm not just saying all that either; I've played the same games on both systems at times and so I can compare them first-hand. The ones I played all looked better on 360 and lagged less. :/ Since when did PS3 games lag?When developers start fine-tuning games for the PS3 better, maybe then I'd change my tune.

The PS3 has much more power than the 360; the developers will take some time to use all of it. The first few games on the PS2 were scarcely better than those on the PS2

Anyway, buying a Pro console for 360 gives you the ethernet cable, not to mention they're about $15 anyway. It's just if you go for the wireless adapter that it gets pricey (and that brings it up to the price of a PS3, I guess). But why even mention the HD-DVD drive? That's dead; I'm not even sure why you'd buy it, let alone pay more than $20-30 for it.

PS3 has Blue-Ray. A PS3 itself if much cheaper than stand-alone Blue-Ray players. As I said before, the developers are not harnessing the full processing power of the PS3 or the capacity of Blue-Ray disks.

The main arguments, to me, in the whole 360 VS PS3 battle are the games and the online features--and the latter kind of depends on how you'd prefer to play.
Live is amazing; I'm not saying it isn't. It's just that the PSN is new. It'll take time to get to the level of Live. Home was a disappointing, but you have to keep in mind that the version released was only the beta, not the full pack.

The point I am trying to make here is that Sony bides it's time. They make consoles which last for a long time in the market. The PS2 is an example; it was released ten years ago but it's still being manufactured, is still popular and is still outselling every other console on the market.

Microsoft is different. They want to make quick profits. The XBox lasted for less than five years in the market before it was pulled out to make room for the 360. I'm betting than in another two to three years, the next XBox will come out and Microsoft will dispose of the 360 the same way they did the original.

The PS3 has a Blue-Ray player built in it because the world is slowly converting to high-definition. In three years or so, HDTVs will become common and Blue-Rays will become the next DVDs and Sony will finally be able to make full use of the PS3s capacity to play 1080p games.

The games will get better. PSN will get better. All the PS3 needs is time.

So my advice is that, if you want to get the most of your games now and you have the money to buy the next XBox that'll come to the market in the next few years, get the 360.

If you want a console that'll last for a good ten years in your household or if you want to get the most out of your HDTV, get the PS3.
someday, someone might just best me
but it won't be today, and it won't be you
cosmo | justinguitar

Cherrim

Age 34
she / her
Toronto
Seen 19 Hours Ago
Posted 19 Hours Ago
33,052 posts
20.4 Years
Not everyone has 500$ to spend on games
I know... I said that for people who do have the extra money to spend on every blockbuster, the 360 is probably better. Regardless, most people don't have $500 to spend on a console period, let alone games. 360 wins there anyway.
That's opinion. It depends on your TV as well.
Not entirely. I know Gamespot did a feature recently where they took a look at several cross-platform games (CoD5, SC4, Fallout 3 to name a few) and shared full screenshots of both with the same settings; in most, the 360 looked significantly better or else you could tell it was better. It's not the console's fault, but until developers start properly developing games for PS3 instead of just porting or doing whatever they're doing, games still look/play better on the 360. Of course, it's not really an issue unless you really care about a few pixels, but it makes it pretty hard to buy PS3 games when you have both. (If I know a game looks better on my 360, why get it for PS3?)
Since when did PS3 games lag?
Assassin's Creed liked to lag slightly in more populated areas or during sudden turns. Textures took longer to load sometimes too and the general loading times were much slower as well. :( It plays (and looks significantly better) on my 360.
The PS3 has much more power than the 360; the developers will take some time to use all of it. The first few games on the PS2 were scarcely better than those on the PS2
They haven't so far, but I'm hoping they'll start to. Right now, since the 360 is doing substantially better everywhere except Europe and Japan (though as far as I know, it's catching up in Europe), I don't think we'll see properly tuned games on the PS3 for a while. I do really want to rent the PS3 version of Bioshock, though. They spent so much time with it and I'm pretty sure they actually bothered tweaking it specifically for PS3 instead of making a crappy port, so I'm curious to see how it looks/plays.
PS3 has Blue-Ray. A PS3 itself if much cheaper than stand-alone Blue-Ray players. As I said before, the developers are not harnessing the full processing power of the PS3 or the capacity of Blue-Ray disks.
I know, that's why I own one. ♥ It has excellent DVD up-conversion too. I just wrote a paragraph on developers up there but... saying "the developers COULD harness the PS3's power and make great games" isn't the same as saying that they do. Until they do, the PS3 will probably be lagging behind a bit as it is now. :/
So my advice is that, if you want to get the most of your games now and you have the money to buy the next XBox that'll come to the market in the next few years, get the 360.

If you want a console that'll last for a good ten years in your household or if you want to get the most out of your HDTV, get the PS3.
That is an interesting way to look at it, but I'd still side with the 360. With the PS3, if you really aren't looking for a Blu-Ray player (it's honestly rather pointless if you don't have an HDTV), then the only big reasons to get it are MGS4, LBP and Resistance. (There may be some other exclusives I'm forgetting here but oh well.) There are the cross-platformers too, and if you aren't going to be getting a lot of games, hte PS3 is a good investment.

Buuut if you can't afford the initial pricetag and don't need an XBL Gold account? The 360's not a bad choice. I feel its exclusives far outweigh the PS3's. Then later down the road, maybe the PS3 will be cheaper choice while you wait for Microsoft to perfect their next console and throw a price cut at it. :P


paired with professor plum.

Eruption

Age 27
Male
North East England
Seen April 4th, 2020
Posted November 17th, 2017
6,316 posts
17 Years
If you want constant FPS games and LittleBIGPlanet go with the PS3.

But if you want constant FPS games that are slightly better and a few more games that arent actually shooters go with the 360.

The 360 has a bigger library of games and a much better online.

360 is the way to go.

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness

Age 33
Male
Temple of Light
Seen November 25th, 2017
Posted October 21st, 2016
8,122 posts
19.1 Years
Not entirely. I know Gamespot did a feature recently where they took a look at several cross-platform games (CoD5, SC4, Fallout 3 to name a few) and shared full screenshots of both with the same settings; in most, the 360 looked significantly better or else you could tell it was better. It's not the console's fault, but until developers start properly developing games for PS3 instead of just porting or doing whatever they're doing, games still look/play better on the 360. Of course, it's not really an issue unless you really care about a few pixels, but it makes it pretty hard to buy PS3 games when you have both. (If I know a game looks better on my 360, why get it for PS3?)
Depends what console its actually developed for. A lot of developers make it for the 360 and then port it to the PS3. The few that are they other way around look better on the PS3. But, that alone should show what the focus of the developers is - 360.
Age 28
In the Medium
Seen August 11th, 2016
Posted August 15th, 2011
381 posts
14.9 Years
That's mainly because the 360 was released a year and a half earlier; most of the major developers started making games for the 360. It's also why it has more exclusives.
someday, someone might just best me
but it won't be today, and it won't be you
cosmo | justinguitar

Razer302

Three Days Grace - Break

Age 32
England
Seen November 22nd, 2022
Posted December 13th, 2018
3,368 posts
17.1 Years
I am a big fan of the PS3. I had an Xbox360 but when I got my PS3 I found that the 360 was just gathering dust so I sold it. I think for online play 360 beats PS3 easily with the gamer points and how unlaggy it is, but I preferred the quality of the games on the PS3.

The PS3 exclusives haven't been to great though. The only good one I can think of right now is Metal Gear Solid 4, but with the new exclusives coming out like FFversusXIII I am happy with my PS3 as that game looks amazing. I know a fair few people that have a 360 that saw the latest trailer and wished they had a PS3 instead.

If you want online play go with the 360 as the online play is far superior to that of the PS3 but if you want good story based games I would personally go with a PS3 with next year having so many good story based games coming out.

(I haven't played fable and I have heard it is a really good game but to me it looks a lot like oblivion which I hated I am not including that in my story based games.)