Other Gaming Forum

Topic: Why the PlayStation 3 is better than the Xbox 360.

Showing 61 to 80 of 342

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Supermarioman

61. Posted:

In my personal opinion the PS3 beats the 360 in too many fronts to even count and I'll mention some (Happy to see BlackBustercritic outside of youtube for once)
#1: Pricing is much better on the PS3 then 360, I can easily prove it:
Xbox 360 Pro $300
Wireless Adaptor $100
One Year Xbox Live Subscription $50
Rechargable Batteries or Charge Station $10-$30
Now your looking at somewhere around $460-$480 in cash for the full experience, thats more than the PS3 which is complete right out of the box and all first party controllers charge with the system.
#2: Online, not nesscearly better than 360 but rather the fact that you have to pay to play online every year which is $50 every year and it has wireless internet intergraded right in the console. Also unlike the 360 it has a web browser in which you can do everything that the 360 has to have special features intergraded in order to use them such as twitter and facebook. Even though it's online service of downloadables isn't as robust as the 360, almost all of its titles are quality titles and very unique games only playable on the PS3.
#3: Blue-Ray, Linux, and Other Compatible Components: The PS3 is compatible with several things that have only previously avalible with computers such as Linux which allows the PS3 to have a very large amount of potential. Also Blue-Ray is a major selling point for the system and allows it games to take up to 50 GB of space so that the games are longer, more detailed graphically and are overall a much better quality.
#4:Unique Exclusives: Now I'm not going to say it has better exclusives because yes I like Halo and Fable and a few other games on the 360, but the following list of exclusives are unique games that could only really be played on the PS3 or done on the PS3 or are just good games in general:
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
Little Big PLanet
Killzone 2
Valkyria Chronicles
Infamous
Resistance
Resistance 2
Ratchet and Clack Future: Tools of Destruction
Uncharted: Drake's Fortune
Flower
and much much more.
I think this where I am going to stop for now but I have many more ways to prove the PS3 is superior to the 360.

Edited on by Supermarioman

Supermarioman

AuthorMessage
Avatar

The_Fox

62. Posted:

Supermarioman wrote:

In my personal opinion the PS3 beats the 360 in too many fronts to even count and I'll mention some (Happy to see BlackBustercritic outside of youtube for once)
#1: Pricing is much better on the PS3 then 360, I can easily prove it:
Xbox 360 Pro $300
Wireless Adaptor $100
One Year Xbox Live Subscription $50
Rechargable Batteries or Charge Station $10-$30
Now your looking at somewhere around $460-$480 in cash for the full experience, thats more than the PS3 which is complete right out of the box and all first party controllers charge with the system.
#2: Online, not nesscearly better than 360 but rather the fact that you have to pay to play online every year which is $50 every year and it has wireless internet intergraded right in the console. Also unlike the 360 it has a web browser in which you can do everything that the 360 has to have special features intergraded in order to use them such as twitter and facebook. Even though it's online service of downloadables isn't as robust as the 360, almost all of its titles are quality titles and very unique games only playable on the PS3.
#3: Blue-Ray, Linux, and Other Compatible Components: The PS3 is compatible with several things that have only previously avalible with computers such as Linux which allows the PS3 to have a very large amount of potential. Also Blue-Ray is a major selling point for the system and allows it games to take up to 50 GB of space so that the games are longer, more detailed graphically and are overall a much better quality.
#4:Unique Exclusives: Now I'm not going to say it has better exclusives because yes I like Halo and Fable and a few other games on the 360, but the following list of exclusives are unique games that could only really be played on the PS3 or done on the PS3 or are just good games in general:
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
Little Big PLanet
Killzone 2
Valkyria Chronicles
Infamous
Resistance
Resistance 2
Ratchet and Clack Future: Tools of Destruction
Uncharted: Drake's Fortune
Flower
and much much more.
I think this where I am going to stop for now but I have many more ways to prove the PS3 is superior to the 360.

#1-No, you don't need the wireless adaptor. Some do, no doubt, but I'm in the dark as to why some seem convinced its a critical issue

#2-Again, the gold service isn't something everyone is going to use. Beyond that, I don't really see how $4 a month is such a crippling fee. And as for the browser, sure I'd love to the 360 get one, but how often is someone going to rely on it if they have a computer to begin with?

#3-Wow, Linux!? That's awesome! With that you could do things such as ..Zzzzzzzzzzz... Oh, sorry, I must have fallen asleep. Only the nerdy fringes are going to care about that.

#4-Not a single game you listed couldn't have been done on the 360.

These are some flimsy reasons as to why the PS3 is better.

"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

-President John Adams

Treaty of Tripoly, article 11

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Adam

63. Posted:

Whether games "could have been done" on the 360 is entirely irrelevant when they haven't been done on the console. I'm not exactly going to buy a 360 so I can imagine playing all those PS3 games. What an argument.

$4 a month adds up over the years. How Microsoft has managed to fool so many into thinking otherwise, I can't imagine. That's $50 a year, and the console has been out for quite awhile with no signs of being retired soon thanks to Natal. If online play is important to you -- and considering the lack of local multi-player games on the console, it would be to me -- it's a significant set-back.

Wireless is important to a lot of people. Everything is moving to wireless these days, so for the many who do rely on it, that's a big setback, too. No one said everyone needs it.

Linux would be cool if I had the room on my console for it, but even if you don't use it, the fact that it is an option is great when the 360 doesn't even have a web browser (or does it? I forget).

So yes, the 360 can be slightly cheaper, but only if you don't want a lot of features the PS3 has for a little bit more.

Edited on by Adam

Come on, friends,
To the bear arcades again.

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Lanmanna

64. Posted:

I have both 360 and PS3, and regret my PS3 purchase. Anyone who says the 360 costs more in the long run is sadly mistaken. If you actually do some good price searching, you can find a wireless adapter for 40 dollars, like I did. Xbox Live does costs money, no escaping that, but you CAN get it cheaper if you look. Any quick search and you will see that you can buy 12+1 months for 30 dollars.

Lanmanna

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Stuffgamer1

65. Posted:

@The Fox: You missed the last paragraph of my last post, apparantly. Y'know, the one where I said I'm comparing the systems under the assumption that you want the best experience they can possbily provide? Consider, for example, the Xbox 360 game install option. It takes a ton of memory to install an entire DVD, enough that you WILL want a bigger hard drive lest you find yourself deleting and re-installing, which is too much of a flashback to the Wii storage issues of the past. And don't tell me there's no point installing games. Not only does it make your system run cooler (which, for a system known for overheating, is a MUST), games run better from the hard drive in many cases.

As for the games you say "could have been done on 360:" Yeah, and MGS4 would've taken at least six discs (I remember Kojima said that). That Game Company said the 360 isn't powerful enough to render the grass like that. And so on. Point is, these games would take a SERIOUS hit to quality running on 360.

My Backloggery Updated sporadically. Got my important online ID's on there, anyway. :P

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Supermarioman

66. Posted:

The+Fox wrote:

Supermarioman wrote:

In my personal opinion the PS3 beats the 360 in too many fronts to even count and I'll mention some (Happy to see BlackBustercritic outside of youtube for once)
#1: Pricing is much better on the PS3 then 360, I can easily prove it:
Xbox 360 Pro $300
Wireless Adaptor $100
One Year Xbox Live Subscription $50
Rechargable Batteries or Charge Station $10-$30
Now your looking at somewhere around $460-$480 in cash for the full experience, thats more than the PS3 which is complete right out of the box and all first party controllers charge with the system.
#2: Online, not nesscearly better than 360 but rather the fact that you have to pay to play online every year which is $50 every year and it has wireless internet intergraded right in the console. Also unlike the 360 it has a web browser in which you can do everything that the 360 has to have special features intergraded in order to use them such as twitter and facebook. Even though it's online service of downloadables isn't as robust as the 360, almost all of its titles are quality titles and very unique games only playable on the PS3.
#3: Blue-Ray, Linux, and Other Compatible Components: The PS3 is compatible with several things that have only previously avalible with computers such as Linux which allows the PS3 to have a very large amount of potential. Also Blue-Ray is a major selling point for the system and allows it games to take up to 50 GB of space so that the games are longer, more detailed graphically and are overall a much better quality.
#4:Unique Exclusives: Now I'm not going to say it has better exclusives because yes I like Halo and Fable and a few other games on the 360, but the following list of exclusives are unique games that could only really be played on the PS3 or done on the PS3 or are just good games in general:
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
Little Big PLanet
Killzone 2
Valkyria Chronicles
Infamous
Resistance
Resistance 2
Ratchet and Clack Future: Tools of Destruction
Uncharted: Drake's Fortune
Flower
and much much more.
I think this where I am going to stop for now but I have many more ways to prove the PS3 is superior to the 360.

#1-No, you don't need the wireless adaptor. Some do, no doubt, but I'm in the dark as to why some seem convinced its a critical issue

#2-Again, the gold service isn't something everyone is going to use. Beyond that, I don't really see how $4 a month is such a crippling fee. And as for the browser, sure I'd love to the 360 get one, but how often is someone going to rely on it if they have a computer to begin with?

#3-Wow, Linux!? That's awesome! With that you could do things such as ..Zzzzzzzzzzz... Oh, sorry, I must have fallen asleep. Only the nerdy fringes are going to care about that.

#4-Not a single game you listed couldn't have been done on the 360.

These are some flimsy reasons as to why the PS3 is better.

I can prove that most gamers are expectant of wireless if you want me to, every other console on the market has free internet and built in wireless. I can also prove that almost all of 360 owners and potential buyers are looking in to the internet as a major selling point do to almost all game have that in it, I don't know many people without the wireless adaptor and internet and there are a lot of people I know who have 360's. Also as for that the games I mentioned, look at the last thing I said before listing them and also there is no way MGS4 could make it to 360 without at least 4 or more discs and Killzone 2 would not have been as beautiful on 360 due to techniogical limitations and Flower would not have been as innovative or unique if it was on the 360. As for Linux that just depends on you!

Supermarioman

AuthorMessage
Avatar

KDR_11k

67. Posted:

The reason I got a 360 over a PS3? 200€. That's the price difference between a 360 Pro (60GB) and a PS3 (and don't start with stupid comparisons like "you'll need 100€ for a wireless adapter" or "you'll need 200€ for 4 years of live", the only accessory I bought was a 6€ HDMI cable to free the component inputs up for the Wii). Plus the 360 had games I wanted at the time, namely EDF2017 and SotN (the latter was kinda disappointing but meh). So far my top games on the 360 were EDF2017, Saints Row (got that for 10€, way cheaper than SR2), Red Faction Guerilla, Prototype and Banjo-Kazooie Nuts & Bolts, possibly soon adding HAWX to that list once I play it more. Only two of them are exclusive, the rest even had PC ports (but shoddy ones AFAIK) but that's still a third of the list and I didn't pay 70€ for ANY of the games, the most expensive one was Prototype at 45€. I did play Halo 3 but all I got out of that was an example to hold up why dual analog controls don't work well unless the game is very slow and why the Wii should take the xPS genre for itself. IR controls work SO much better than dual analogs...
The 360 is pretty crippled here because of the recent trend towards ultra violence in games, while the Wii has suffered as well it was mostly with games noone gave a damn about anyway like Madworld or House of the Dead. The 360 is missing (AFAIK): Gears of War 1 and 2, Dead Rising, Condemned 1 and 2, Crackdown and Prototype (I imported that one though it was available on Amazon as well but no retail stores). Unnecessary violence gets a game blocked from release here.

With the HD consoles (well, the 360 but most games are multiplatform anyway so the difference is pretty small) finding good games is like pulling teeth, especially since I'm averse to browngray. Almost all games are plain repulsive at first and I need a lot of encouragement to even consider them.

Chrono+Cross wrote:

1: The Playstation controller is far more superior than the 360's due to the fact that it virtually has not changed at all over the past 15 years or so.

The 360's is better precisely because it has adjusted to the changing times while the dualshock is still a relic from a time when analog inputs were hastily bolted onto a digital controller. Not much better but at least the button names aren't as retarded. The Gamecube trashes both.

Raincoat whore!

AuthorMessage
Avatar

The_Fox

68. Posted:

@Stuffgamer
Well, I wouldn't really say installing games is that important. It's nice, and I do it for the more demanding titles such as Fallout 3, but you'll be O.K without it for the most part. It's also nice to have the option to choose unlike the PS3 (before anyone complains I know thats not that big of a problem, just pointing it out).

@Adam
I think you kinda read too much into and missed the point on my reply to Supermarioman, but no worries. Regarding Xbox Live, I don't feel the cost is that big of an issue. I've never paid anywhere near $50 a year for the service, anyway.

"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

-President John Adams

Treaty of Tripoly, article 11

AuthorMessage
Avatar

The_Fox

69. Posted:

I just want to say I don't have anything against the PS3, really, even if I feel the 360 is better. They're both good systems and all, I just saw the title and felt the need to stop in to make sure it didn't become a Sony fanboy circle jerk.

"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

-President John Adams

Treaty of Tripoly, article 11

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Adam

70. Posted:

I didn't read anything "into" it. It was a very straightforward and literal post. $4 a month adds up to about $50 if you play games online throughout the year, and PS3-exclusive games aren't on the 360, whether they could be or not. It's not an opinion or something to be read into. Perhaps you read into my response me reading into your response? :D

Edit: And regarding your double post, yea, I don't understand the point of saying one console is "better" than the other, myself. I was mostly commenting on the cost factor, which is often what's most important to me in choosing a console.

Edited on by Adam

Come on, friends,
To the bear arcades again.

AuthorMessage
Avatar

apocalypse217

71. Posted:

No red ring of death ? But, I honestly do not know I have only played ps3 once and a 360 a dozen or so times.

apocalypse217

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Zenman

72. Posted:

The+Fox wrote:

I just want to say I don't have anything against the PS3, really, even if I feel the 360 is better. They're both good systems and all, I just saw the title and felt the need to stop in to make sure it didn't become a Sony fanboy circle jerk.

agreed. both systems are great it is hard to place one that is better

my deviantART backloggery!
nL chatroom BETAness
my pwnage channel
check out my fanfic!
im not dead...just in college...aka worse
all hail lord veigar!

AuthorMessage
Avatar

warioswoods

73. Posted:

KDR_11k wrote:

With the HD consoles (well, the 360 but most games are multiplatform anyway so the difference is pretty small) finding good games is like pulling teeth, especially since I'm averse to browngray. Almost all games are plain repulsive at first and I need a lot of encouragement to even consider them.

Ha! Well said. I know that there are a few notable exceptions out there, but you described exactly my reaction when I walk through the aisle of HD games. To be fair, I suppose gamers on the other end of the spectrum might feel nauseated by the Wii aisle...

Twitter is a good place to throw your nonsense.
Wii FC: 8378 9716 1696 8633 || "How can mushrooms give you extra life? Get the green ones." -Lakitu 64
Join us in the epic Nintendo Life Wii Music Thread

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Adam

74. Posted:

This might have been a more concise original post for this thread:
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2009/07/27/fat-princess-worth-...

Come on, friends,
To the bear arcades again.

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Supermarioman

75. Posted:

The+Fox wrote:

I just want to say I don't have anything against the PS3, really, even if I feel the 360 is better. They're both good systems and all, I just saw the title and felt the need to stop in to make sure it didn't become a Sony fanboy circle jerk.

I don't have any grudges against the 360, with the exception of Technical Problems, buts that beside the point, sorry if I in any way made you feel like all the hate has been going towards you.

Supermarioman

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Bahamut_ZERO

76. Posted:

Quick question: What the hell is Linux?

Bahamut_ZERO

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Zenman

77. Posted:

Bahamut+ZERO wrote:

Quick question: What the hell is Linux?

its a computer operating system

my deviantART backloggery!
nL chatroom BETAness
my pwnage channel
check out my fanfic!
im not dead...just in college...aka worse
all hail lord veigar!

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Stuffgamer1

78. Posted:

KDR_11k wrote:

The 360's is better precisely because it has adjusted to the changing times while the dualshock is still a relic from a time when analog inputs were hastily bolted onto a digital controller. Not much better but at least the button names aren't as retarded. The Gamecube trashes both.

But the DualShock didn't NEED to adjust in any huge way, because it's already so great! That's my opinion, anyway. I'd like to understand yours better, such as what this is all about with "retarded" button names? But one thing you have to admit is that Sony's controller setup is REALLY convenient for backwards compatibility. :D

My Backloggery Updated sporadically. Got my important online ID's on there, anyway. :P

AuthorMessage
Avatar

MetalMario

79. Posted:

I just want all 3. There are games I want on all consoles.

Mario is my homeboy! It matters not how you play. What matters...is how you fall.[00:49] PhoenixSage doesn't understand what's so hot about Metal's momFor friend codes, check my backloggery.VGM Bronze Medal - 37 Points
My Backloggery

Nintendo Network ID: MetalMario64

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Adam

80. Posted:

360's controller didn't really change either, except to become slightly less horridly ugly, and I'm not about to pat Microsoft on the back for such an obvious change.

PS3's controller added motion-sensing, which is a much more significant change than anything the 360 controller did. Not to mention the PS3's D-Pad is significantly more responsive. How the Dualshock is a "relic" is beyond me.

Edited on by Adam

Come on, friends,
To the bear arcades again.

Sorry, this topic has been locked.