Xbox 360 Vs Ps3 What do you think is the best

[rayzoredge 2]

Im sorry for wanting hardware that does just more than play games, to me it makes sense if your gonna invest in something, better make sure its worth it. Doesnt that make sense ? why pay the 300 for an object that only plays games, when u can spend the same and do much more with it like surf the net true there are limitations, but after all its a console, not a pc. I just think that Microsoft should just do one thing....make OS other than that much of their products kinda fail, other than the 360.

Very true, but at the same time, we were comparing consoles and as a gaming console, I don't think there's much to argue against getting either one. It makes sense to go out and get a PS3 for the Blu-Ray, but the gaming library is apparently lacking. Why get a Wii when it only plays games, outputs 480p, and... what else is there? Because that's what it's for... and a lot of people agree with that philosophy when they settle for 480p, no DVD player, etc. when they go out and buy a Wii. (Either that or they got sucked into the novelty.) I snagged my 360 back when there was the Arcade and the Premium variants and back then, I wasn't willing to pay double what I paid for it for a PS3. (Today, it's more of a competitive argument.) I suffered one RRoD, returned it for service, and it's been serving my family as an entertainment powerhouse since. I can play my games on it, stream or play movies for us all off of an external hard drive, use it to listen to music, watch slideshows in conjunction to music, blah blah blah. It's been a hassle for me to figure out how to do the more intricate things, like learning about its codec support and whatnot, but it works now that I know.

I initially didn't get a PS3 because of its high cost. I won't be getting a PS3 Slim anytime soon now because I can't afford one, plus I don't see the return on investment or utility of it now that I have a Blu-Ray player. Yes, I would love to play Killzone 2, Metal Gear Solid 4, Resistance, Uncharted, and the other cool games that actually caught my eye for PS3 exclusives. However, they are not enough for me to drop a few hundred more for another gaming console.

I agree with you that there is a bit more versatility with the PS3 thanks to Blu-Ray. However, unless I have the extra cash to burn now, my situation doesn't warrant snagging one up. If your argument was for versatility, we might as well have thrown in the possibility of a pseudo-HTPC so that you can play games, watch movies, and whatnot on hardware that doesn't have a limited upgrade path.

[Mead 0]

Well I think to think of it this way, I can back up data with an external for my PS3 if my hard-drive were to fail in anyway shape or form. Now as for doing this for the 360 im not quite sure never really experimented with that, but if the 480p on the Wii really bothers someone, everything has limitations, cmon, be realistic, your asking a dog to be cat with the expectations that it will perform. Probably a poor example but a(n) example none the less. Although I was not specifically just talking about the BLU-RAY, i also state that your also allowed to download and operate another OS (though I was mistaken in which can be operated) I believe its Red Hat or Yellow Dog Linux. Theres so much more that can be done with a ps3, yet no one knows how or no one really must care. Another factor that I must admit, is the power cord that it requires, why must it be a brick, if not that then its the size of my shoe and I wear a size 15. Although a cool feature of the 360 is it'll charge the USB plugged in while turned off thats pretty much the only thing thats made me turn my eyes to a 360 and the fact id really love to take it apart and see what happens if you switch out the DDR3. Amongst other things theres not much of a difference that the fact that PS3 has wireless controllers, without the hassle of buying batteries and just charge it, as well as any 2.0 to mini will always work, unlike the 360 that has to have a certian type of cord, and if your too cheap to buy the rechargbles and buy batteries, your still spending alot and I mean ALOT of money on a 360 than what its worth in technology actually is. Sure you spend an extra 250 for somewhat needed accessories on PS3 and by that i mean controllers and maybe a blu-tooth headset. for 360 your looking at another 300 ontop of what you pay for it initially. wireless adapter = 100, basic white wireless controller 50, add the charge n play + 20, to play online + 20 add wired headset + 20(wireless + 50) and if you want XBL for a yr its 50, 3 months 30 for 1 month i believe its 20. Point being, its like the Wii, for odd reasons people go gaga over the stupid accessories and what not. Still either way ur best bet is still the PS3 no matter what angle you might take on it. Removable harddrive ps3s got it, streaming movies ps3s got it. big *bottom* bulky power supply ps3 doesnt have it.

[rayzoredge 2]

* There is an aftermarket backup solution for the 360 for $40. I'm going to assume that the PS3 has its backup feature built-in, so a plus goes to the PS3 for that. (Also, you can remove the hard drive from the 360 and even the hard drive within the proprietary attachment, although accessing its contents requires a bit of hack work to retain - or add if you're swapping - compatibility.)

 

* I don't know if the PS3 actually officially gives you that option between Yellow Dog or Red Hat, but I'm going to assume that it's built-in too. The 360 has a project working for it. Plus to the PS3 (if it's built-in) for ease of doing, since hacking is almost always a chore.

 

* I LOL'd at the power brick. Yes, it's huge. I don't really care what size it is myself, but if you're trying to move your console from house to house for LAN parties and such, it can be a pain. It can also be a pain if you're OCD like me and try to make sure there's the least amount of cable clutter in a confined space (like under the entertainment center) and when that damn brick is a third of the size of the damn console. PS3 props.

 

* With the PS3 controllers and charging them, doesn't that mean that you're out of commission if it dies in the middle of a game... unless you have another spare, charged controller? Also, apparently the PS3 controller sucks when it comes to being charge-friendly. If my 360 controller dies, I take out the batteries, swap them with another set, and keep going. I buy rechargeables, and if you go cheap, you can get Rayovac rechargeable 4xAAs for less than $7 at Wally World. (Energizer 4xAAs are $11.) If the allegations for PS3 are true, the 360 wins by a long shot.

 

If you want to talk about the cost of ownership... depending on what you do, I suppose it can be better or worse. Let's try a scenario here.

 

I bought my 360 back when the Arcade and Premium Pro variants were out... I believe I got it in 2006. For $250 MSRP, I got the console, wireless controller, Ethernet cable, headset, and hybrid video cable (for component and composite). If I were to have bought a PS3 in 2006, I would have snagged up a first-gen for $500 or $600, respectfully for the 20GB or 60GB variants. For some reason, I can't find any official information concerning what comes bundled in the first-gen PS3, but I'm sure it comes with a controller and the necessary cables for at least composite... probably a hybrid composite/component like the 360 did. If you want to factor in the Blu-Ray drive, at the time it was a steal since BR was still relatively new and stand-alone players were expensive. But as a gaming console, the 360 seemed moreso the best bang for my buck... and I didn't need to get a headset or another Ethernet cable to hook XBL up.

 

Nowadays, things have gotten cheaper and the PS3 looks more appealing with a decent drop in price. However, everyone else dropped their prices and the PS3 is still the most expensive, but for good reason.

 

For Microsoft now, it would run $200 for the Arcade, which comes with a wireless controller, composite AV cable, 512MB onboard memory, and 5 arcade games. For $100 more, you can get the 120GB hard drive, headset, and Ethernet cable, but no crappy arcade games. For a whopping $400, you get an additional controller and a 250GB hard drive, but that's just ridiculous. If you get rechargeable batteries @ $10 for 4xAA for an Elite 120GB, it'll cost $310. Yay.

 

Let's go to Sony now. For $300, you can get the 120GB Slim model which comes with a newer DualShock controller, USB cable, and an A/V cable. This is pretty damn slick for a cheap Blu-Ray player combined with a gaming console, since the 360's Elite only includes a headset to ice the cake. To match the 360 with accessories, you would have to snag a headset and an Ethernet cable... which probably would add $50 or so onto that existing price tag. We're looking at $350 now. $40 more... big whoop.

 

For actual features, both support HDMI 1.3a. The PS3 has internal WiFi whereas the 360 does not (+$100 upgrade). The PS3 also has Bluetooth, although I'm not sure how well it works with other devices since I don't own a PS3. You can't charge the PS3 controllers unless they're connected to the PS3 via USB, and you have to keep the console on since they don't charge during stand-by mode, not to mention that the batteries aren't removable, and to contend with that you can get rechargeable batteries for the 360 for an additional $7. If you want to get a Blu-tooth headset for the PS3, that's an additional $40 or so, whereas the 360 Elite, albeit wired, comes with one. The PS3 Slim supports 7.1 channel sound whereas the 360 is stuck with 5.1 (or at least my Premium Pro is... I don't see any info saying that the Elite bumped it up). Both support HD video and optical audio. Microsoft has XBL @ $50/year whereas Sony has the PSN for free, but apparently you really do get what you pay for, since people apparently don't like how the PSN handles certain features like chat and friend invites as well as the lack of content updates on the PSN. The 360 has more games available for it, but apparently the "good" titles available for both consoles are about the same (subjective to heavy debate, of course, as far as what's "good"). You can stream media to both consoles, and from what I can see, both consoles have similar codec support and limitations. Apparently you can store media files on to the PS3, which is awesome, whereas the 360 has that clunky rip-a-CD, rinse-lather-repeat deal to get music to play locally on the console (unless you opt for a FAT32 hard drive, in which you then can play media files "locally"). The PS3 Slim supports CEC, which enables you to control it as well as any other CEC-compatible device hooked up to it with just one remote control. The 360 has backwards compatibility, whereas the PS3 dropped it.

 

Gaming graphics are always debatable, but it's been said that the graphics hardware of the 360 is actually superior to the PS3, which is funny since PS3 fanboys always point out the exact opposite. This is pointed out by a handful of game developers having to tone down graphical options to allow for good frame rates for the PS3, although the differences are very minor and not very noticeable. On paper, Microsoft wins here... but most gamers won't even see an actual difference between the two (except for some titles like Bioshock, which lags a slight bit on the PS3 even after having textures toned down, and Fallout 3 and Devil May Cry 4, which lacks anti-aliasing compared to the 360 port).

 

Head-to-head in the case of the Elite 120GB and the Slim 120GB, the utility of the PS3 probably wins by a good bit (thanks to the Blu-Ray drive and 7.1 channel support), and if you really want to be a power user and play with Linux on your gaming console, that's fine and dandy. It's nice and sleek and apparently quiet. However, the 360 still reigns with gaming and online content if that's your thing, and it serves very well as an entertainment center, if you don't mind the large, warm, less-refined 360 console.

 

It's all a matter of personal preference, really, and what you plan on using it for. Back in the day when I bought the 360, it was an obvious choice. Nowadays, it just boils down to what you're looking for in a gaming console.

[Mead 0]

* There is an aftermarket backup solution for the 360 for $40. I'm going to assume that the PS3 has its backup feature built-in, so a plus goes to the PS3 for that. (Also, you can remove the hard drive from the 360 and even the hard drive within the proprietary attachment, although accessing its contents requires a bit of hack work to retain - or add if you're swapping - compatibility.)

 

* I don't know if the PS3 actually officially gives you that option between Yellow Dog or Red Hat, but I'm going to assume that it's built-in too. The 360 has a project working for it. Plus to the PS3 (if it's built-in) for ease of doing, since hacking is almost always a chore.

 

* I LOL'd at the power brick. Yes, it's huge. I don't really care what size it is myself, but if you're trying to move your console from house to house for LAN parties and such, it can be a pain. It can also be a pain if you're OCD like me and try to make sure there's the least amount of cable clutter in a confined space (like under the entertainment center) and when that damn brick is a third of the size of the damn console. PS3 props.

 

* With the PS3 controllers and charging them, doesn't that mean that you're out of commission if it dies in the middle of a game... unless you have another spare, charged controller? Also, apparently the PS3 controller sucks when it comes to being charge-friendly. If my 360 controller dies, I take out the batteries, swap them with another set, and keep going. I buy rechargeables, and if you go cheap, you can get Rayovac rechargeable 4xAAs for less than $7 at Wally World. (Energizer 4xAAs are $11.) If the allegations for PS3 are true, the 360 wins by a long shot.

 

If you want to talk about the cost of ownership... depending on what you do, I suppose it can be better or worse. Let's try a scenario here.

 

I bought my 360 back when the Arcade and Premium Pro variants were out... I believe I got it in 2006. For $250 MSRP, I got the console, wireless controller, Ethernet cable, headset, and hybrid video cable (for component and composite). If I were to have bought a PS3 in 2006, I would have snagged up a first-gen for $500 or $600, respectfully for the 20GB or 60GB variants. For some reason, I can't find any official information concerning what comes bundled in the first-gen PS3, but I'm sure it comes with a controller and the necessary cables for at least composite... probably a hybrid composite/component like the 360 did. If you want to factor in the Blu-Ray drive, at the time it was a steal since BR was still relatively new and stand-alone players were expensive. But as a gaming console, the 360 seemed moreso the best bang for my buck... and I didn't need to get a headset or another Ethernet cable to hook XBL up.

 

Nowadays, things have gotten cheaper and the PS3 looks more appealing with a decent drop in price. However, everyone else dropped their prices and the PS3 is still the most expensive, but for good reason.

 

For Microsoft now, it would run $200 for the Arcade, which comes with a wireless controller, composite AV cable, 512MB onboard memory, and 5 arcade games. For $100 more, you can get the 120GB hard drive, headset, and Ethernet cable, but no crappy arcade games. For a whopping $400, you get an additional controller and a 250GB hard drive, but that's just ridiculous. If you get rechargeable batteries @ $10 for 4xAA for an Elite 120GB, it'll cost $310. Yay.

 

Let's go to Sony now. For $300, you can get the 120GB Slim model which comes with a newer DualShock controller, USB cable, and an A/V cable. This is pretty damn slick for a cheap Blu-Ray player combined with a gaming console, since the 360's Elite only includes a headset to ice the cake. To match the 360 with accessories, you would have to snag a headset and an Ethernet cable... which probably would add $50 or so onto that existing price tag. We're looking at $350 now. $40 more... big whoop.

 

For actual features, both support HDMI 1.3a. The PS3 has internal WiFi whereas the 360 does not (+$100 upgrade). The PS3 also has Bluetooth, although I'm not sure how well it works with other devices since I don't own a PS3. You can't charge the PS3 controllers unless they're connected to the PS3 via USB, and you have to keep the console on since they don't charge during stand-by mode, not to mention that the batteries aren't removable, and to contend with that you can get rechargeable batteries for the 360 for an additional $7. If you want to get a Blu-tooth headset for the PS3, that's an additional $40 or so, whereas the 360 Elite, albeit wired, comes with one. The PS3 Slim supports 7.1 channel sound whereas the 360 is stuck with 5.1 (or at least my Premium Pro is... I don't see any info saying that the Elite bumped it up). Both support HD video and optical audio. Microsoft has XBL @ $50/year whereas Sony has the PSN for free, but apparently you really do get what you pay for, since people apparently don't like how the PSN handles certain features like chat and friend invites as well as the lack of content updates on the PSN. The 360 has more games available for it, but apparently the "good" titles available for both consoles are about the same (subjective to heavy debate, of course, as far as what's "good"). You can stream media to both consoles, and from what I can see, both consoles have similar codec support and limitations. Apparently you can store media files on to the PS3, which is awesome, whereas the 360 has that clunky rip-a-CD, rinse-lather-repeat deal to get music to play locally on the console (unless you opt for a FAT32 hard drive, in which you then can play media files "locally"). The PS3 Slim supports CEC, which enables you to control it as well as any other CEC-compatible device hooked up to it with just one remote control. The 360 has backwards compatibility, whereas the PS3 dropped it.

 

Gaming graphics are always debatable, but it's been said that the graphics hardware of the 360 is actually superior to the PS3, which is funny since PS3 fanboys always point out the exact opposite. This is pointed out by a handful of game developers having to tone down graphical options to allow for good frame rates for the PS3, although the differences are very minor and not very noticeable. On paper, Microsoft wins here... but most gamers won't even see an actual difference between the two (except for some titles like Bioshock, which lags a slight bit on the PS3 even after having textures toned down, and Fallout 3 and Devil May Cry 4, which lacks anti-aliasing compared to the 360 port).

 

Head-to-head in the case of the Elite 120GB and the Slim 120GB, the utility of the PS3 probably wins by a good bit (thanks to the Blu-Ray drive and 7.1 channel support), and if you really want to be a power user and play with Linux on your gaming console, that's fine and dandy. It's nice and sleek and apparently quiet. However, the 360 still reigns with gaming and online content if that's your thing, and it serves very well as an entertainment center, if you don't mind the large, warm, less-refined 360 console.

 

It's all a matter of personal preference, really, and what you plan on using it for. Back in the day when I bought the 360, it was an obvious choice. Nowadays, it just boils down to what you're looking for in a gaming console.

actually the ps3 controllers will *BLEEP* at you if you plug it in the 20 minute time frame it gives you. However so if your like me I kinda have a lot of devices I.E. a USB all charger, mini USB's galore etc etc. I have 4 ps3 controllers so i really dont worry bout switching them out, however you can charge n play with the ps3 controllers, however im too lazy and just rather charge it through my laptop than get up and charge it on the ps3. And if someone complains thats theres not enough USB ports on a PS3, well a trip to Wallys World and $20 should fix that with a HUB or Fry's Electronics. Yeah the power supply was huge on my friends 360, well you know if you try to get mugged while lugging ur 360 just whack em away with ur power supply and all is defeated, i will probably assure you it will do more damage to them than it will ur power supply. Another problem that I was with people who stand it up vertically then complain about their drive. i believe the only system thats meant to stand vertically is probably the Wii. Ah well anyways it boils down to what you want, kinda like SNES vs Genesis. even though nintendo bought them out.

[iGuest 3]

I loves me some PS3Xbox 360 Vs Ps3Replying to deadmad7Replying to (G)Blunt Trauma clark3783I had a 360 and gave it to my nephew. Good system but way too many problems.One reason why PS3 wins? INFAMOUS. Hands down the best exclusive of any platform (and don't come with that weak@$$ "Prototype" BS. Bought it, played it through and couldn't believe I wasted my time and money).-reply by Llama O'Rama