I need HELP deciding.... PS3 or Xbox 360

[Crimson92]

Originally Posted by endofanera7

lol PS3 of course. Bluray and you dont have to sign up for xbox gold live account shit. microsoft is a rip off!

i dont see it as a ripoff...xbl is much more reliable than psn

[Year's_End]

Originally Posted by endofanera7

lol PS3 of course. Bluray and you dont have to sign up for xbox gold live account shit. microsoft is a rip off!

you're driving a car that (with all those mods) probably amounts to about $70k+. why the fuck would you complain about $60 a year.

[endofanera7]

Originally Posted by Bimmer Loyalist

you're driving a car that (with all those mods) probably amounts to about $70k+. why the fuck would you complain about $60 a year.

Im just saying!

[Year's_End]

Originally Posted by endofanera7

Im just saying!

it's not a rip-off fool.

[endofanera7]

Originally Posted by Bimmer Loyalist

it's not a rip-off fool.

Still

PS3

[Year's_End]

Originally Posted by endofanera7

Still

PS3

yeah that's logical

[Crimson92]

Originally Posted by endofanera7

Still

PS3

fanboi

[darkphantom]

Originally Posted by Crimson92

fanboi

+1

360>wii>ps3

[Crimson92]

Originally Posted by darkphantom

+1

360>wii>ps3

thats a bit harsh but ill agree with you

[endofanera7]

-_-"

[TwistaStick]

Originally Posted by Gripster

I have both. I only own 1 game on PS3 and that's Gran Turismo - I bought it for blu-ray.

As a gaming platform the 360 is awesome. That said, the PS3 hardware is amazing and developers are finally learning how to make use of the hardware.

That didn't help really did it?

+1 PS3 will only have superior graphics for its exclusive titles. Cross platform games are virtually identical. Xbox Live is what makes the 360 a real winner.

[ska///235i]

The only people that watch bluerays is the people that has the ps3...who the hell uses blueray

I now have both ps3 and xbox (PS3 was a gift, now collecting dust)
Xbox gold live is only $35 a year and it is the best online exp. for a game consule by far.

PS3 owners always try to say that the PS3 is better cuz its got blueray, cuz thats all it is....

If you want a system/consule to watch your stupid blueray movies...fine, get the ps3
but if you a gamer and want the best gaming exp....hands down Xbox

Please let this topic RIP cuz the only arguements are that the PS3 has blueray..ok ok, blueray wins

Originally Posted by endofanera7

lol PS3 of course. Bluray and you dont have to sign up for xbox gold live account shit. microsoft is a rip off!

[bling_singh]

Originally Posted by ska325xi

The only people that watch bluerays is the people that has the ps3...who the hell uses blueray

I now have both ps3 and xbox (PS3 was a gift, now collecting dust)
Xbox gold live is only $35 a year and it is the best online exp. for a game consule by far.

PS3 owners always try to say that the PS3 is better cuz its got blueray, cuz thats all it is....

If you want a system/consule to watch your stupid blueray movies...fine, get the ps3
but if you a gamer and want the best gaming exp....hands down Xbox

Please let this topic RIP cuz the only arguements are that the PS3 has blueray..ok ok, blueray wins

So if the only pro for the PS3 is the BluRay drive, what are the pros for the 360 that differentiate it from the PS3 and are indicative of value added into the console?

And if you think the only benefit of BluRay is in movies you're sorely mistaken. Metal Gear Solid 4 used almost a full double layer BluRay disc (50GB). If MGS4 is to come out for the 360, to get that much content on an equal version of the game you would need at least 5 or 6 DVD-9's

If you look at the game of the year contenders for 2008, 2-3 of the games (Metal Gear Solid 4, LittleBigPlanet, Resistance 2) are PS3 exclusive. Only one is for the 360 (Gears of War 2) and the other two are multiplatform (Fallout 3, Grand Theft Auto 4).

If you look at the games coming out in 2009 The PS3 has a much stronger stable of exclusive titles than the 360....Off the top of my head I can list Heavy Rain, God of War 3, Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, Infamous, Killzone 2, MLB The Show 09, White Knight Chronicles, and (possibly) MAG. There's also a Team ICO game supposedly on the way in 2009 (makers of ICO and Shadow of the Colossus) as well as a David Jaffe project -- supposedly the next Twisted Metal.

The 2009 exclusives for the 360? Halo Wars, Mass Effect 2, maybe Bioshock2 if it's a timed exclusive, and Star Ocean 4. I must be missing some games so please feel free to list any (for either console), but the PS3 is easily going to outpace the 360 in terms of exclusive content.

The PS3 has the benefit of having the PS2 as its predecessor and Sony Computer Entertainment as the first party developer. There is an embarrassment of great titles in its back library. Given the fact that the PS3 game development has a much longer learning curve, and given the fact that developers are just now starting to get past that curve we're about to see some really good titles come down the pipe.

On top of all that, you have the mandatory Digital TV transition in February 2009. Killzone 2 will be coming out around the same time, and I'm almost certain that there will be a pricedrop coming out. IMO the PS3 already represents tremendous value at $399, but then again I buy BluRay movies, I play games, I use the DLNA all the time, as well as the Remote Play with my PSP. Once the PS3 drops below the $300 psychological barrier people will stop hating on the PS3. It will be better priced for consumers, and it will actually have a stable of great exclusive titles for the year. Microsoft's 3 year warranty program on the RROD is on the verge of expiration and I wouldn't be surprised if in 2009 they announce an XBox 3 that's in development and slated for release in 2011.

[EZ_TUR90]

buy both she wont know.

[E92AXM]

Honestly . I just sold my 360 for ps3, 360 was a great system no complaints . Just would have costed like 300 dollars just to play online so i said the hell with it n went with ps3. On normal 480p shitty tv, graphics are identical on 720p or higher i see my ps3 looking much better . Overall menu styling n user freindliness 360 was better. But online is perfect almost never get connection interruptions, u get playstation home whihc is a cool little feature , and playstation store where u can download demos n shit which is just liek xbox so i dont really see what people with xboxs pay 50 bux per year for. 0OO and ps3 has internet . And its fast good always works so overall i likee my ps3 alot more. Youporn works too PS3 FTW!!!

[Indenial]

Originally Posted by SiNiStErE92

Honestly . I just sold my 360 for ps3, 360 was a great system no complaints . Just would have costed like 300 dollars just to play online so i said the hell with it n went with ps3. On normal 480p shitty tv, graphics are identical on 720p or higher i see my ps3 looking much better . Overall menu styling n user freindliness 360 was better. But online is perfect almost never get connection interruptions, u get playstation home whihc is a cool little feature , and playstation store where u can download demos n shit which is just liek xbox so i dont really see what people with xboxs pay 50 bux per year for. 0OO and ps3 has internet . And its fast good always works so overall i likee my ps3 alot more. Youporn works too PS3 FTW!!!

People pay $50/yr because the online portion is smoother and full of content. Netflix, Movie Rentals, Event invitations, demo's, arcade games, user friendly interface.

Don't get me wrong I am not a fanboy as I have a ps3 as well, but the only game that I play on it is Little big planet. Which I havent played in a while. Plus I like achievements, makes me feel like im not wasting my time lol.

[-=Hot|Ice=-]

Originally Posted by bling_singh

So if the only pro for the PS3 is the BluRay drive, what are the pros for the 360 that differentiate it from the PS3 and are indicative of value added into the console?

And if you think the only benefit of BluRay is in movies you're sorely mistaken. Metal Gear Solid 4 used almost a full double layer BluRay disc (50GB). If MGS4 is to come out for the 360, to get that much content on an equal version of the game you would need at least 5 or 6 DVD-9's

If you look at the game of the year contenders for 2008, 2-3 of the games (Metal Gear Solid 4, LittleBigPlanet, Resistance 2) are PS3 exclusive. Only one is for the 360 (Gears of War 2) and the other two are multiplatform (Fallout 3, Grand Theft Auto 4).

If you look at the games coming out in 2009 The PS3 has a much stronger stable of exclusive titles than the 360....Off the top of my head I can list Heavy Rain, God of War 3, Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, Infamous, Killzone 2, MLB The Show 09, White Knight Chronicles, and (possibly) MAG. There's also a Team ICO game supposedly on the way in 2009 (makers of ICO and Shadow of the Colossus) as well as a David Jaffe project -- supposedly the next Twisted Metal.

The 2009 exclusives for the 360? Halo Wars, Mass Effect 2, maybe Bioshock2 if it's a timed exclusive, and Star Ocean 4. I must be missing some games so please feel free to list any (for either console), but the PS3 is easily going to outpace the 360 in terms of exclusive content.

The PS3 has the benefit of having the PS2 as its predecessor and Sony Computer Entertainment as the first party developer. There is an embarrassment of great titles in its back library. Given the fact that the PS3 game development has a much longer learning curve, and given the fact that developers are just now starting to get past that curve we're about to see some really good titles come down the pipe.

On top of all that, you have the mandatory Digital TV transition in February 2009. Killzone 2 will be coming out around the same time, and I'm almost certain that there will be a pricedrop coming out. IMO the PS3 already represents tremendous value at $399, but then again I buy BluRay movies, I play games, I use the DLNA all the time, as well as the Remote Play with my PSP. Once the PS3 drops below the $300 psychological barrier people will stop hating on the PS3. It will be better priced for consumers, and it will actually have a stable of great exclusive titles for the year. Microsoft's 3 year warranty program on the RROD is on the verge of expiration and I wouldn't be surprised if in 2009 they announce an XBox 3 that's in development and slated for release in 2011.

Since no one else has replied I will.

1. The 09 exclusives coming for the 360 will be far more enjoyable because they come with xbox live. Even if Sony brings more games for 09, they won't have the "umph" factor that the 360 does.

2. The PS3 40gb can't even play PS2 titles, It can't compete with the Xbox premium.

3. There will be NO price drop. Don't be so certain. The fallowing article clearly states it.

http://www.engadget.com/2008/10/29/s...-holiday-seas/


4. The xbox 360 will have a 6 year life cycle. While rumors of a PS4 of being in the works have already surfaced. Please read the fallowing article:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/04/d...nd-the-corner/

Now, The PS3 may be a great piece of machinery, honestly, it's just not a gaming machine. The PS3 was built to be an entertainment console. The only advantage I see with the PS3 is blu-ray. That's it.

Note: My cousin has a PS3. I have a 360 Elite.

[bling_singh]

Originally Posted by -=Hot|Ice=-

Since no one else has replied I will.

1. The 09 exclusives coming for the 360 will be far more enjoyable because they come with xbox live. Even if Sony brings more games for 09, they won't have the "umph" factor that the 360 does.

2. The PS3 40gb can't even play PS2 titles, It can't compete with the Xbox premium.

3. There will be NO price drop. Don't be so certain. The fallowing article clearly states it.

http://www.engadget.com/2008/10/29/s...-holiday-seas/

4. The xbox 360 will have a 6 year life cycle. While rumors of a PS4 of being in the works have already surfaced. Please read the fallowing article:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/04/d...nd-the-corner/

Now, The PS3 may be a great piece of machinery, honestly, it's just not a gaming machine. The PS3 was built to be an entertainment console. The only advantage I see with the PS3 is blu-ray. That's it.

Note: My cousin has a PS3. I have a 360 Elite.

Thanks for the response, much appreciated, but I do have to offer a rebuttal. Apologies in advance for its length.

1) When it comes to multiplayer gaming what 'umph factor' does XBL have over PSN? I've played on both networks quite a bit and I honestly see nothing substantial in XBL that justifies a $50/year price tag. The two biggest things are that each XBox comes with a mic, and as such it encourages people to use voice chat. A big plus, especially with the 8 person party chat in the NXE -- though that has by extension made ingame chat with opponents crappy because people are chatting with their friends and not their opponents.

On top of that the XBL service is very centralized and fairly well administered. However the biggest drawback in the service is that it is decentralized in the most important factor in network gaming: servers. It's an absolute shame that for so many millions of people paying $50 a year Microsoft hasn't stepped up to the plate and hosts servers for gaming, rather for each match a gamer plays host which offers an unfair advantage in an online game.

Sony has central servers running for games and it makes things more even. Additionally when it comes to multiplatform games the online experience from the lobby design to game launch to in game play is virtually identical. There is nothing inherent about XBox Live that gives it more of an advantage in this respect. In fact, central servers means PSN has an advantage in this respect.

2) I agree on backwards compatibility, though the PS3 DOES play PS1 games. Given that Sony does know how to do PS2 backwards compatibility on the PS3 with both hardware and software it's a crime that they haven't included it. I think this decision is more by finances than it is by serving the customer. The PS2 is still selling, and if they were to include the Emotion Engine in the PS3 it would just jack up the cost. That being said I don't know why they didn't continue with software emulation, they still cover (IIRC) around 70% of the 2500 PS2 titles, including pretty much every major game that came out on the console.

But does backwards compatibility alone make the XBox Premium a better console than the 40GB? What about built in wireless which the Premium does not have. What about an upgradeable harddrive without having to pay a premium for a Microsoft hard drive? The PS3 will take just about any 2.5" laptop harddrive out there. I believe it can only go to a max of 350 or 500GB, and the RPM must be above 5200. But even then it is cheaper to upgrade the PS3 than it is the 360.

When Microsoft mouthpieces slammed BluRay they said it will be obsolete because downloadable content is the way of the future. They're probably correct about it, but if they believe so strongly about it why make it that much harder to upgrade your box to suit the trends the company plans to set/follow. It's probably a financially motivated decision, and they should make no apologies about it, but the 360 Premium, out of the box is an inferior console to the PS3. To upgrade it via the various accessories so that it would be on par with the PS3 would make it a more expensive unit.

You could be right, the XBox is more of a games console than the PS3 which is an entertainment unit, but that's a trend Microsoft is trying to buck. For one thing they have a movie download affiliation with Netflix, for another, where are the games for 2009? (Chad Warden wants gaaaames). If all they have to rely on is 3rd party support for games in the coming year then there is no distinct advantage the console offers. Sony Computer Entertainment is one of the largest game developers out there, it has some great IPs (such as God of War and Final Fantasy VII)

3) I'm slightly hesitant about it too, especially now that Sony is upping the harddrive size in PS3s from 80gb to 160gb, but it's become a matter of the console surviving on the marketplace, and it can't do that until the price comes below $300. My take on it is that they didn't drop the price yet because of the Christmas sales rush, try to sell as many units as they can at the higher pricepoint. Even then that article states Sony won't be dropping the price this holiday season. My position on it is that Sony will drop the price in February/March to coincide with 1)The release of Killzone2, 2)the mandatory digital tv transition which will see a rise in the sales of HDTVs, and 3)the beginning of the console's third year in Europe.

4) Just because Sony has started research and development of the PS4 doesn't mean it will be out before the XBox3. Given that the XBox has a 5-7 year life cycle it is just as likely Microsoft has begun development on their next box also. Sony has stated a 10 year life cycle on the PS3, and was launched a year after the 360 which is now been on the market for over three years -- half its life cycle. Sony will probably do what they did with the PS2: launched the PS3 in the PS2's 7th year and increase support for the PS2 in countries such as Brazil, Russia, India, and China.

It it quite possible that they launch the PS4 around the same time as the XBox3 to reestablish its market share, but it is certain that Sony will continue to support the PS3 just like they did the PS2 and the PS1 before it. With a longer life cycle and continued support I'm not afraid of Sony completely dropping the PS3 like MS did with the first XBox when the 360 came out.

You're right, the PS3 is a great entertainment machine, but it is also showing itself now to be a great gaming machine as developers learn to program for it. Don't forget the PS2 had the same sort of problem. Developers complained that it was difficult to program for, but after 8-9 years on the marketplace it sold over 125million consoles and developers still made over 2500 games for it. The XBox360 is a great gaming machine, but it is approaching or has reached the technological limit. Additionally there are no games on that console that differentiate itself and give me a reason to buy it. The biggest thing that held me back from buying a 360 was the Red Ring of Death. 60% of the consoles died on the production line and 33% of those that survived died in the consumer's home? No thanks. They've got that somewhat under control now, even though their extended warranty program is going to expire soon. But now that they do there are no new exclusive games out there for the 360 that I want to play.

For the ultimate gaming console that's a pretty tough spot to be in.

[-=Hot|Ice=-]

Originally Posted by bling_singh

Thanks for the response, much appreciated, but I do have to offer a rebuttal. Apologies in advance for its length.

1) When it comes to multiplayer gaming what 'umph factor' does XBL have over PSN? I've played on both networks quite a bit and I honestly see nothing substantial in XBL that justifies a $50/year price tag. The two biggest things are that each XBox comes with a mic, and as such it encourages people to use voice chat. A big plus, especially with the 8 person party chat in the NXE -- though that has by extension made ingame chat with opponents crappy because people are chatting with their friends and not their opponents.

On top of that the XBL service is very centralized and fairly well administered. However the biggest drawback in the service is that it is decentralized in the most important factor in network gaming: servers. It's an absolute shame that for so many millions of people paying $50 a year Microsoft hasn't stepped up to the plate and hosts servers for gaming, rather for each match a gamer plays host which offers an unfair advantage in an online game.

Sony has central servers running for games and it makes things more even. Additionally when it comes to multiplatform games the online experience from the lobby design to game launch to in game play is virtually identical. There is nothing inherent about XBox Live that gives it more of an advantage in this respect. In fact, central servers means PSN has an advantage in this respect.

2) I agree on backwards compatibility, though the PS3 DOES play PS1 games. Given that Sony does know how to do PS2 backwards compatibility on the PS3 with both hardware and software it's a crime that they haven't included it. I think this decision is more by finances than it is by serving the customer. The PS2 is still selling, and if they were to include the Emotion Engine in the PS3 it would just jack up the cost. That being said I don't know why they didn't continue with software emulation, they still cover (IIRC) around 70% of the 2500 PS2 titles, including pretty much every major game that came out on the console.

But does backwards compatibility alone make the XBox Premium a better console than the 40GB? What about built in wireless which the Premium does not have. What about an upgradeable harddrive without having to pay a premium for a Microsoft hard drive? The PS3 will take just about any 2.5" laptop harddrive out there. I believe it can only go to a max of 350 or 500GB, and the RPM must be above 5200. But even then it is cheaper to upgrade the PS3 than it is the 360.

When Microsoft mouthpieces slammed BluRay they said it will be obsolete because downloadable content is the way of the future. They're probably correct about it, but if they believe so strongly about it why make it that much harder to upgrade your box to suit the trends the company plans to set/follow. It's probably a financially motivated decision, and they should make no apologies about it, but the 360 Premium, out of the box is an inferior console to the PS3. To upgrade it via the various accessories so that it would be on par with the PS3 would make it a more expensive unit.

You could be right, the XBox is more of a games console than the PS3 which is an entertainment unit, but that's a trend Microsoft is trying to buck. For one thing they have a movie download affiliation with Netflix, for another, where are the games for 2009? (Chad Warden wants gaaaames). If all they have to rely on is 3rd party support for games in the coming year then there is no distinct advantage the console offers. Sony Computer Entertainment is one of the largest game developers out there, it has some great IPs (such as God of War and Final Fantasy VII)

3) I'm slightly hesitant about it too, especially now that Sony is upping the harddrive size in PS3s from 80gb to 160gb, but it's become a matter of the console surviving on the marketplace, and it can't do that until the price comes below $300. My take on it is that they didn't drop the price yet because of the Christmas sales rush, try to sell as many units as they can at the higher pricepoint. Even then that article states Sony won't be dropping the price this holiday season. My position on it is that Sony will drop the price in February/March to coincide with 1)The release of Killzone2, 2)the mandatory digital tv transition which will see a rise in the sales of HDTVs, and 3)the beginning of the console's third year in Europe.

4) Just because Sony has started research and development of the PS4 doesn't mean it will be out before the XBox3. Given that the XBox has a 5-7 year life cycle it is just as likely Microsoft has begun development on their next box also. Sony has stated a 10 year life cycle on the PS3, and was launched a year after the 360 which is now been on the market for over three years -- half its life cycle. Sony will probably do what they did with the PS2: launched the PS3 in the PS2's 7th year and increase support for the PS2 in countries such as Brazil, Russia, India, and China.

It it quite possible that they launch the PS4 around the same time as the XBox3 to reestablish its market share, but it is certain that Sony will continue to support the PS3 just like they did the PS2 and the PS1 before it. With a longer life cycle and continued support I'm not afraid of Sony completely dropping the PS3 like MS did with the first XBox when the 360 came out.

You're right, the PS3 is a great entertainment machine, but it is also showing itself now to be a great gaming machine as developers learn to program for it. Don't forget the PS2 had the same sort of problem. Developers complained that it was difficult to program for, but after 8-9 years on the marketplace it sold over 125million consoles and developers still made over 2500 games for it. The XBox360 is a great gaming machine, but it is approaching or has reached the technological limit. Additionally there are no games on that console that differentiate itself and give me a reason to buy it. The biggest thing that held me back from buying a 360 was the Red Ring of Death. 60% of the consoles died on the production line and 33% of those that survived died in the consumer's home? No thanks. They've got that somewhat under control now, even though their extended warranty program is going to expire soon. But now that they do there are no new exclusive games out there for the 360 that I want to play.

For the ultimate gaming console that's a pretty tough spot to be in.

1. The thing that I LOVE about XBL is that people are actually on it. You can host your own game, and join centralized servers. At least, I could.

2.No, it won't. The 360 will be 350+ while the PS3 comes out to be 400+ I don't need Blu-Ray, I don't watch movies(so why should I pay for it?)

3.Actually, it will. Microsoft still doesn't have plans on replacing the 360 because well, it's succeeded. The PS3 on the other hand, was a complete and utter failure. Sales are slowly growing, though. Developers can't figure out how to make a proper game for the PS3, plus I don't see any PS3 games that I would want except for GoW3 KillZone. That's about it. Plus Forza owns GT.I recently got a 360 Elite and went online to do a little research. The New xbox 360's have in fact have been fixed, they no longer have the RRoD. The 360 has only been out for 2 years(09 being the 3rd year) the PS3 is only a year behind(09 being it's second year) I will agree with you. The Xbox has been marketed for hardcore gamers. The Xbox 360 in fact is superior to the PS3 in gaming, only because it has a wider selection of games and is more fun and more interactive. That's the way Microsoft has marketed it. The PS3 on the other hand has been marketed to people who want an everything in one. A movie player, somewhat of a gaming machine, and some other tid bits here and there. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate the PS3. It's fun. It's just doesn't have the games that I want. 09 may not be a good year for the Xbox, but you can't judge a console just by one year of games that are being released. The Xbox already has an outstanding number of games out, This gives the PS3 time to play catch up and who knows, maybe even rise in sales even more.

The PS3 is an entertainment unit. While the Xbox is geared more towards gamers.

[bling_singh]

Originally Posted by -=Hot|Ice=-

1. The thing that I LOVE about XBL is that people are actually on it. You can host your own game, and join centralized servers. At least, I could.

It may have changed, and I could be wrong, but as far as I know XBox Live gaming still doesn't operate on centralized servers. I know some games are 'enhanced' for xbox live.

2.No, it won't. The 360 will be 350+ while the PS3 comes out to be 400+ I don't need Blu-Ray, I don't watch movies(so why should I pay for it?)

(all the prices off Amazon) XBox Pro (60GB) + Wireless Adapter = $387. If you add the HD-DVD Adapter (though essentially pointless now, but for the sake of matching up feature set) the price jumps up to $447.

An 80GB PS3 with built in wireless and a built in Bluray player is $400.

BluRay has already proven its worth with MetalGearSolid 4. The game used only one disc....a double layer 50GB BluRay disc. The same space on DVDs would mean at least six 9GB DVDs. As far as I know the XBox doesn't support the 18GB dual layer DVD, while the PS3 will be able to support the 400GB BluRays that Pioneer developed earlier this year. Ratchet and Clank used almost a full 25GB BluRay Disc, which would equate to three DVD-9s.

3.Actually, it will. Microsoft still doesn't have plans on replacing the 360 because well, it's succeeded. The PS3 on the other hand, was a complete and utter failure. Sales are slowly growing, though. Developers can't figure out how to make a proper game for the PS3, plus I don't see any PS3 games that I would want except for GoW3 KillZone. That's about it. Plus Forza owns GT.I recently got a 360 Elite and went online to do a little research. The New xbox 360's have in fact have been fixed, they no longer have the RRoD. The 360 has only been out for 2 years(09 being the 3rd year) the PS3 is only a year behind(09 being it's second year) I will agree with you. The Xbox has been marketed for hardcore gamers. The Xbox 360 in fact is superior to the PS3 in gaming, only because it has a wider selection of games and is more fun and more interactive. That's the way Microsoft has marketed it. The PS3 on the other hand has been marketed to people who want an everything in one. A movie player, somewhat of a gaming machine, and some other tid bits here and there. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate the PS3. It's fun. It's just doesn't have the games that I want. 09 may not be a good year for the Xbox, but you can't judge a console just by one year of games that are being released. The Xbox already has an outstanding number of games out, This gives the PS3 time to play catch up and who knows, maybe even rise in sales even more.

If sales are growing the PS3 is hardly a failure. That means there's still room on the marketplace. Is the PS3 a failure? Yes if the expectation was that it would sell 125million consoles. It most likely won't, the Wii is the sales king. But if you examine sales from a global standpoint the PS3 has done fairly well even though its entry point is higher than the 360's (before mods, of course). The PS3 has sold consistently across all three major markets (Japan, US/Canada, Europe) yet its price is higher, and that speaks to a much more global appeal that Sony has as an electronics manufacturer and entertainment leader (movies, games, music etc). The XBox has only sold extremely well in one market (US/Canada) and sales have been generally tepid elsewhere. For example the 360 has been on the market for longer, yet the PS3 has already outsold the 360 in Japan a few times over. Sales in Europe are alright, though the PS3 was catching up (up until the 360's price drop). Yet it sold the lion's share of its units in North America, and they'll slowly be approaching its saturation point. The PS3 based, on historical figures, is nowhere close.

Again, that's not to say the PS3 will sell 125million units. But the Playstation has had much more appeal worldwide than the XBox ever had. If they do drop the price in February/March (which I'm of the opinion they NEED to do to survive) then you'll see sales start picking up again.

The PS3 is an entertainment unit. While the Xbox is geared more towards gamers.

yet MS gave the 360 an HD-DVD drive, offers a movie download service, DVD movie playback, instant messaging among other non-gaming related features.

at $400 compared to a relatively well spec'd 360 at $387, you're getting more value in the PS3. Unless BluRay movies don't matter....then it becomes a matter of games. Fact of the matter is that BluRay is helping game development, while DVD-9 is holding developers back because they have to compress data to fit on the disc, and subsequently reduce the quality of game audio/video. Now compression technology has improved vastly over the years, but the basic premise of compression persists, and defies the current trend of High-Res textures, HD audio and video.

If the PS3 and the 360 both had Metal Gear Solid 4 and I had to decide between the consoles, I'd choose the PS3 and pay the extra $13 because I don't want to swap discs 5 times. Just look at Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, and Tales of Vesperia....all three games on the 360 require multiple discs. Even Forza 3 will require disc swapping.

Plus every single PS3 out there has a hard drive. The same can't be said about 360s. Sure it makes the 360 Arcade model cheaper, but it also hamstrings game developers. If you remember the PS2/Xbox days, the XBox had the advantage of having a hard drive which gave developers so many more options that the PS2 just didn't have. Now the tables have turned...by not including a hard drive in each and every 360, developers have to create games with the assumption that NO 360s come with a hard drive.

Now you can say that MS is focusing on downloadable content, but again I bring up the fact that MS is focused on proprietary hardware so that they can charge more (think of the Gillette business model) for needed accessories and generate even more profit. On top of that, downloadable file sizes on XBox Live are limited to 350MB. On the PS3 there is no limit. When I downloaded the demo of Warhawk a few months back the file size was over one gigabyte.

MS thinks downloadable content is the future, but they'll hamstring the consumer by charging more for proprietary hardware and limit filesizes. It doesn't make sense.

And again, if it's all about the games, what are MS's upcoming exclusive titles for 2009? Halo Wars, Forza 3, maybe Bioshock 2, maybe Mass Effect 2, maybe Alan Wake. The pickings are slim for a forward thinking consumer.

Also comparing Forza 2 to Gran Turismo 4 is hardly a fair comparisson. Even GT5 Prologue (in my opinion a glorified demo which I will not buy) vs Forza 2 is unfair as GT5 Prologue does not represent the finished product. I can't compare physics and gameplay, which are supposed to be Forza's strength, as GT5 isn't out. Likewise I can't compare graphics and simulation, Gran Turismo's strengths as Forza 2 was released well before GT5 will be. A fairer comparisson will be GT5 vs Forza 3, and I'm reserving judgement on both games til then. Forza is a great game though, can't hate on it.

And Red Ring of Death has not yet been erradicated. Marginalized to a large degree? Yes, through the developments in the Falcon and Jasper chipsets and the introduction of the 65nm processors and GPU. But the basic problem with RROD was an architectural/design flaw, not manufacturing. Unless the architecture is changed the problem will still exist.

[-=Hot|Ice=-]

This could keep going on forever. To each his own. It depends on your needs.

[FStop7]

I have both, I say 360 all the way. Many more games, much better online service. The only reason I still have my PS3 is because of Blu Ray.