|
PS3 vs. X-Box360
|
|
|
DamonDash
Suspended permanently
|
5. December 2006 @ 03:13 |
Link to this message
|
I dont think some of you remember but back when Sony said they was making the PS3 they said that Blu-ray was going to be part of the makeup.Sony just didnt wait til over night to say" Hey it would be nice if we add Blu-ray.This was like 4 years ago.They are not force anything on anyone tell me would you like to have a complete system or have a console maker take money out your pocket every so often like Microsoft is doing or like the path Sony took with the PS2 and they got ripped to no end.Sony is in a no win battle when they made the PS2 they sold everything as add-on and people ripped them for this and i was one of them.But when they made a complete system now they forceing things on people.Any 360 owner that say that the add-on give your a choice is a liar i own a 360 & this makes me mad as hell because Microsoft could have added the HD-DVD in the 360 makeup but they was in so much of a rush to get the 360 out.Plus if you go back Microsoft ripped Sony for haveing the Blu-ray saying it was not needed,But guess what who made a HD-DVD add-on for there system Microsoft.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
TwoHitter
Suspended permanently
|
5. December 2006 @ 09:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
I use my consoles for GAMING only. I don't want to watch HD DVD or Blue ray movies. That won't catch on for at least half a decade. Why would you start investing in a movie library when either format could be the next betamax? If someone does want to watch HD movies, they can shell out the 200 for it, they are not forced to pay 600 for crap they don't want, just because they want to play games. That is ridiculous. The DVD format is perfectly fine for this generation of consoles. Sony is using gamers now, in hope that blu ray takes off so they can makes piles of cash down the road.
|
|
Fninja
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
5. December 2006 @ 10:18 |
Link to this message
|
|
ok, what i am trying to say is that although its not a bad thing to have a blu ray player in the ps3, it is also in my opinion not exactly needed. i mean, blue dragon which comes out this december in japan on the 360 with great graphics for an rpg and from the reviews i have read an overall great game, but it will be on 3 disks, but considering it will be around 60hrs of game play which means that you would have to change disk every 20hrs and in my personal opinion i would rather do that then have wanted M$ to add an internal hd dvd and have to pay another 200.
PS3 specs may look better than xbox 360 but i am yet to see a game on the PS3 that looks better than any of the top end xbox 360 games such as gears of war, mass effect and halo 3.
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
5. December 2006 @ 11:27 |
Link to this message
|
If Lamborghini decided to sell you a new Murcielago for $50,000 below MSRP, would you get one? Most likely not, because it would still be well above $250,000, and most people wouldn't bother to spend that much on a car. I realize the ps3 hardware is impressive and is considered a great bargain piece-for-piece, but the overwhelming majority of people don't even have the necessary electronics or finances to really make the purchase worth their while (again on a piece-for-piece mentality).
Do I want the ps3? Absolutely. I love gaming. Do I want a Blu-ray player? Not really. I don't even have an HDTV yet, let alone a preference for either HD movie format. Do I want to pay for the Blu-ray even if I don't want it? Absolutely not, no matter what kind of "deal" I would be getting.
|
|
CrisKahn2
Senior Member
|
5. December 2006 @ 22:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
People are forgetting that PS3 games are also bluray. Its meant more for games than for movies....why is everyone acting like the Bluray inside the PS3 are for movies only?
PS3...it only does everything(that Sony allows it to)
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
6. December 2006 @ 04:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hmm, then is it fair to say that it would be better if xbox and ps2 played cassets?
Gameing systems should not use old technology, but new ones. HD and Blueray is our future, i am certain that there are more HDTV's than tube TV's in homes to date.
>_<
|
|
emachine
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
6. December 2006 @ 08:58 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KoOkOo67:
Hmm, then is it fair to say that it would be better if xbox and ps2 played cassets?
Gameing systems should not use old technology, but new ones. HD and Blueray is our future, i am certain that there are more HDTV's than tube TV's in homes to date.
Wow I am sure there are not! LMAO You must live in a rich town, because most Americans don't own a hd tv yet.
|
|
xXxBG
Member
|
6. December 2006 @ 13:03 |
Link to this message
|
Well emachine its time to start living in the 21st century stop living in the past. I mean if u can afford these consoles then u can afford an HDTV
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
6. December 2006 @ 16:22 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KoOkOo67:
Hmm, then is it fair to say that it would be better if xbox and ps2 played cassets?
Gameing systems should not use old technology, but new ones. HD and Blueray is our future, i am certain that there are more HDTV's than tube TV's in homes to date.
You are certain?
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA62...y=Breaking+News
http://www.instat.com/press.asp?Sku=IN0603204MBS&ID=1728
By 2010, the HDTV penetration is projected to be %55-%63 of households. Any rapid growth of HDTV sales are in only select high tech countries. As of now, there are only 15-20 million households with an HDTV, and I would really like to see how many of those can display full 1080p.
Basically, by the time HDTV penetration is eclipsing SDTV in the high tech countries, we most likely will have gotten wind about the new systems Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, and anybody else will be making.
As for games on Blu-ray, I doubt it will be that big of a difference, and if it is, it will only be at the expense if inserting another disk. I'd rather take a few seconds to do that than to spend an extra 2-3 bills for that minor inconvenience.
Also, HD-DVD and Blu-ray may be "our future", but one of those will also be the new betamax. And right now I'm not willing to bet 600 dollars on the winner.
|
|
CrisKahn2
Senior Member
|
6. December 2006 @ 18:00 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
As of now, there are only 15-20 million households with an HDTV, and I would really like to see how many of those can display full 1080p.
only? Hd tv prices are dropping like no other you can get a decent 1080i for under $500. Alot of ppl are buyin HD LCDs nowadays.
Quote:
As for games on Blu-ray, I doubt it will be that big of a difference, and if it is, it will only be at the expense if inserting another disk. I'd rather take a few seconds to do that than to spend an extra 2-3 bills for that minor inconvenience.
Technology doesnt dwell in the past. 10 years ago the biggest games were 100 mb or so. Today its easily 10+ gigs for next gen games. 10 years from now are we still gonna be using DVD's or HD DVD's? I think not... Id rather pay the PS3 price and have bluray than pay the PS3 price and have HD DVD on the 360.
PS3...it only does everything(that Sony allows it to)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 6. December 2006 @ 18:01
|
|
emachine
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
6. December 2006 @ 18:50 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by xXxBG:
Well emachine its time to start living in the 21st century stop living in the past. I mean if u can afford these consoles then u can afford an HDTV
I can afford one yes. But I don't have one yet. I have a 360 and a 2 ps3s(selling) plan to get a wii in awhile. So not everyone has a hd tv. The reason I don't have one is I just got my 360 and we didn't have hd cable out here so thats the main reason. BUT I KNOW THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE WITH TUBES THAN HD TVS!
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
7. December 2006 @ 09:29 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Technology doesnt dwell in the past. 10 years ago the biggest games were 100 mb or so. Today its easily 10+ gigs for next gen games. 10 years from now are we still gonna be using DVD's or HD DVD's? I think not... Id rather pay the PS3 price and have bluray than pay the PS3 price and have HD DVD on the 360.
360 games are less than 10 gigs...
I agree with you though that 10 years from now we won't be using DVD's. But that's exactly my point - it's a decade away.
And while clearly you have your mind made up as to who will be the winner of the format war, the fact of the matter is that it hasn't been decided yet, and may take a little while to finally be decided. Like I noted earlier, I'm not willing to bet over 500 dollars on it here in 2006.
Quote:
only? Hd tv prices are dropping like no other you can get a decent 1080i for under $500. Alot of ppl are buyin HD LCDs nowadays.
I am aware, but as my source stated, any rapid growth is only occuring in a few countries.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 7. December 2006 @ 09:30
|
|
Bigperm88
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
7. December 2006 @ 12:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ok, First.
All those screens for PS3 on page two are prerendered. Or from debunked sources. The killzone picture is from the E3 trailer last year and has been debunked even by sony as just be a concept render, nothing more. And the MGS4 picture is from the dev kit.
Each system is on par. The PS3 looks better on paper, but doesnt perform as well due to its memory limitations. The 360 on the other hand looks less on paper, but is a much more efficient and elegant system. Each system is lucky if they can perform 1 TFLOP in real game processing.
The 360s GPU really shines in comparison to the PS3s GPU, since it was custom built for the 360 and is closely tied to directx 10 technology. Also 4xAA is performed much easyer on the 360 GPU due to its archetecture.
Now, everyone is debunking the side by side comparisons of various games. Ill use COD3 in this example.
First, both games were developed seperatly for there respective systems. Everyone uses the argument that they are just ports. This is rubbish. COD3 had equal development time for both platforms.
Now somme comparisons.
The 360 version has much nicer textures. This is due to the memory archetecture used in the 360 vs the ps3.
The PS3 version has nicer particle effects due to its Cell and multi SPE archetecture used vs the 360s general purpose cores.
Some people use the argument that the PS3 version looks more washed out. Which it does, but, you have to understand that this is going to be because of the difference in lighting effects used. It looks like the PS3 version is using more of a bloom type effect, while the 360 version uses a HDR effect.
Anyways, each system has its strengths and weekeness. To say the PS3 is more powerful than the 360 is obsurd, and vice versa. This was all casued by Hype, and i think Sony is a little bit more to blame for this than MS. (Heck they have done this every generation)
And i wont even touch the blueray argument, becasue IMHO it was just a marketing ploy for Sony to compete if a format war.
So i guess i say this. Dont buy into the numbers game, dont buy into the hype, and buy the system you want to play on. I have a 360, and can tell you that noone is biased. But i will have a PS3, but with supplies so short, it wont be this year. As a gamer, to wait blindly for one system; is totally retarded. Becasue you are the one who will miss out. Its not like your console choice is set in stone right?
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
7. December 2006 @ 13:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hmm, ps3 does'nt lack memoery, XDR memory is how fast?
psr's memory is 256MB
XDR Main RAM @3.2GHz
256MB GDDR3 VRAM @700MHz
while 360's is
? 512 MB of GDDR3 RAM
? 700 MHz of DDR
-unified
yea, sure the 360's is unified, but it still won't match of the speed of 3.2GHz.
Not to mention that the loading time's for ps3 is much quicker in comparison
>_<
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 7. December 2006 @ 13:22
|
|
gwazi
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
7. December 2006 @ 13:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
which is better is a subjective view and it's too early to tell. but since i'm a sony boycotter. there won't ever be a ps3 in my place.
gwaz!
|
Member
|
7. December 2006 @ 13:52 |
Link to this message
|
|
the ps3 is on par with the 360 now but in a couple of years the ps3 will rip the 360 in shreads
|
|
xXxBG
Member
|
7. December 2006 @ 14:36 |
Link to this message
|
|
Not even Years! Maybe a couple of months
|
Senior Member
|
7. December 2006 @ 14:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
I agre with months no more then a year or so because devs will be educated with ps3's technology.
I also agree with bigperm on missing out on games for both consoles being that I am a gamer and plan to a 360 sooner than later without the hd dvd add on.
|
|
TwoHitter
Suspended permanently
|
7. December 2006 @ 15:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
With Halo 3 coming out, the only "shredding" Sony will be doing, will be to documents.
|
|
CrisKahn2
Senior Member
|
7. December 2006 @ 20:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
omfg Halo is so overrated its not even funny.
PS3...it only does everything(that Sony allows it to)
|
|
gracie17
Junior Member
|
8. December 2006 @ 02:58 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Bigperm88:
Ok, First.
All those screens for PS3 on page two are prerendered. Or from debunked sources. The killzone picture is from the E3 trailer last year and has been debunked even by sony as just be a concept render, nothing more. And the MGS4 picture is from the dev kit.
Each system is on par. The PS3 looks better on paper, but doesnt perform as well due to its memory limitations. The 360 on the other hand looks less on paper, but is a much more efficient and elegant system. Each system is lucky if they can perform 1 TFLOP in real game processing.
The 360s GPU really shines in comparison to the PS3s GPU, since it was custom built for the 360 and is closely tied to directx 10 technology. Also 4xAA is performed much easyer on the 360 GPU due to its archetecture.
Now, everyone is debunking the side by side comparisons of various games. Ill use COD3 in this example.
First, both games were developed seperatly for there respective systems. Everyone uses the argument that they are just ports. This is rubbish. COD3 had equal development time for both platforms.
Now somme comparisons.
The 360 version has much nicer textures. This is due to the memory archetecture used in the 360 vs the ps3.
The PS3 version has nicer particle effects due to its Cell and multi SPE archetecture used vs the 360s general purpose cores.
Some people use the argument that the PS3 version looks more washed out. Which it does, but, you have to understand that this is going to be because of the difference in lighting effects used. It looks like the PS3 version is using more of a bloom type effect, while the 360 version uses a HDR effect.
Anyways, each system has its strengths and weekeness. To say the PS3 is more powerful than the 360 is obsurd, and vice versa. This was all casued by Hype, and i think Sony is a little bit more to blame for this than MS. (Heck they have done this every generation)
And i wont even touch the blueray argument, becasue IMHO it was just a marketing ploy for Sony to compete if a format war.
So i guess i say this. Dont buy into the numbers game, dont buy into the hype, and buy the system you want to play on. I have a 360, and can tell you that noone is biased. But i will have a PS3, but with supplies so short, it wont be this year. As a gamer, to wait blindly for one system; is totally retarded. Becasue you are the one who will miss out. Its not like your console choice is set in stone right?
Amen. Everyone bar the biggest 14 year old fan boys would have to agree with this.
9-11 was an inside job.
www.infowars.com
Learn the truth before it's too late.
Governments do this.
Google "Operation Northwoods" and see for yourself.
|
|
DamonDash
Suspended permanently
|
8. December 2006 @ 03:18 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
With Halo 3 coming out, the only "shredding" Sony will be doing, will be to documents
See this is the problem i have with MS they only had one blockbuster title they can call there own in what 4 or 5 years that sucks.Thats what every MS Fan say wait til HALO...LOL oh my bad they got GOW now to..MGS4,RE5,DMC4,GT5,J&D,R&C is just some of the killer titles Sony have out there that haven't even droped.So its safe to say MS move over in 07 because you spotlight is gone.It all start March when Eup get there PS3'S.
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
8. December 2006 @ 03:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
Final Fantasy will "shred" halo, just like it did last time.
>_<
|
Newbie
|
8. December 2006 @ 11:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
In recent interviews, the game developers for Sony's PS3 are now realizing the potential of the console. They found out that they could produce even better quality for graphics and gameplay due to the Cell Processor.
As for the 360, Microsoft released it a year earlier than Sony because they know that Sony sell more units than them if they released it on the same day.
Everyone is preaching that the 360 is so much better than PS3, it's only better because Microsoft had the extra year to make improvement on the games. Sony will always come out on top because they think of the future not just the present. As for the 360, in a less than a year, Sony will sell more PS3 than Microsoft in a shorter amount of time. The 360 will be become old technology compared to the potential of the PS3.
As you know, Microsoft is king of designing softwares that will crash and contain viruses. What do you think the 360 is going to do if it can be become a media player. Crash and Burn.
Also for comparing games, 360's owners say that the Gears of War is better than PS3's Resistance. That might be true but Microsoft and the game developer did have sometime to improve the quality of the game that are being release on the 360 now. Wait till PS3 comes out with Final Fantasy XIII or Metal Gear Solid or Lairs or Heavenly Sword. People will be rushing out to get their own PS3 so that they can play these games.
In a year, people will be saying "What is a Xbox 360?"
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
8. December 2006 @ 11:42 |
Link to this message
|
ok guys im back lately alot of people are sayin the 360 looks better , I thought they looked pretty much the same but the 360 is gettin better reviews I found some good stuff but I say give the Ps3 time its really to early to duke it out but I found some good news about the Ps3 I dont think we will start to see what the Ps3 can do until Metal Gear or Final Fantasy comes out but here is a trailer of FF XIII verses it looks pretty cool
http://www.gamebrink.com/news/727-Final_...er_Emerges.html
here is a Devs point of view on both it would seem they both are great in there own ways its pretty good check it out
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archiv...per_speaks.html
here is some info from Gamer tv UK stating the Ps3 is startin to show its self in Motostorm thats why I say give them time to play with it
http://www.news4gamers.com/ps3/News-17113.aspx
Kitty Kung Fu Hustle ! This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. December 2006 @ 11:44
|
