PS3 or Wii?

In my view, i've just switched from an X360 to a PS3 and at first my g/f said "You idiot you are going to regret that", because people in the shop said i was crazy for trading in a 360 for a PS3. I was pleasantly surprised, and still am, by how well made the PS3 is in comparison to the 360. The overall finish of the PS3, in terms of the "XMB" features, over the "Dashboard" of the 360 is a lot nicer. The Dashboard in my eyes is very "kiddy" like, whereas the PS3 has a more professional feel about it. The PS3 also allows greater customization over the themes which is a welcome break, since i for one will be staring at the XMB for a very long time!

The games from what i have downloaded from the PSN store, a lot of the demos run better on the 360. Whether this is because they have all been optimised on the 360 and then ported over to the PS3 i don't know. But there is a lot of difference between graphics, in my eyes, between games like Fifa 08, Skate, and other titles. However, these are only demos and like PC demos a lot can changed on the finished title.

The PS3 games i have: Resistance: FOM, and F1 championship edition look lovely on my tele, and are an absolute dream to play and i can only imagine it's like that for other Sony made games. Hopefully, other titles from the likes of EA will improve on the PS3 as they get to grips with the system.

As for an online community, i like both. Although xbox live in comparison to PSN is "different". The functionality of being able to invite friends to the game whenever is a lot better than the PSN, and also verbally talking to people seems to be a lot easier on xbox live than the PSN. However, i have found from my experience the PSN crowd to be a lot nicer and better to play with than my experience on xbox live (having said that i have more friends on xbox live atm :P). I would say though that in terms of user functionality the xbox is a lot more user friendly in a sense.

The media capabilities of the PS3 are far superior to the 360 in my view. The fact the 360 for me sounded like a hoover put me off wanting to watch and stream films. However, the PS3 is quieter than my laptop and watching DVD's is an absolute dream on it. Being able to stream/save films onto your PS3 HDD is wonderful as well and has been a big plus for me over the 360 (streaming on that became a constant nightmare). Blu-ray in-built to the console is very nice, as i can tell you now you will want to buy some! The HD feeling still hasn't left my system and SD is becoming annoying to watch :p.

Overall, i found the PS3 to be a better experience for me. It feels more like a media/gaming centre which is what i wanted, and it feels more comfortable to me than the 360 did. In terms of build design, the XMB and other features such as the web browser (which surprisingly comes in handy!).
 
nokkonwud said:
I'd agree if you swapped the first 2 answers around, particularly because PC's are primarily not Games machines, but Consoles are. That and the fact PC gaming hasn't been as good as console gaming for around 2.5 years IMO.
Click to expand...

Your sig says you love the PS3. So perhaps we should just edit what you said

nokkonwud said:
I love my ps3.
Click to expand...

But seriously i cant see how you think consol gaming is better then pc gamign for the last 2 and ahalf years. perhaps you havn't played i enough pc games.
 
nokkonwud said:
Over-rated, graphics fest. Supreme Commander isn't my kind of game. Stalker was a massive disappointment. The rest are on consoles.
Click to expand...

but all of them are more fun to play on a pc anyway where you dont have to pay to play online and can play against moer people online and with less lag. How can you rather use a controler over a keyboard and mouse unless you have bad aim in the first place and need the assisting in consol games. Console games ruin pc ones because they dumb them down/ change menus to make them easyer for a controller to navigate and screw them up for keyboard and mouse etc ad it really annoys me.
 
nokkonwud said:
Xbox360 is graphically more powerful than the PS3 (technically).
Click to expand...

Based on what exactly?

You can't just compare GPU to GPU and make blanket statements like "Xbox360 is graphically more powerful", PS3 architecture does not work like your typical PC/360 where all graphics are rendered on the GPU, PS3 is very much centred around its 7 SPU's.

Naughty Dog (developers of Uncharted) claim they are only using around 30% of Cell's potential.

The main thing about the PlayStation 3 is the Cell processor and more specifically the SPU's. We are only using 30 percent of the power of the SPU's in Uncharted. We've been architecting a lot of our systems around this and we were able to take full advantage of that power. A big part of our systems is running on SPU's: scene bucketing, particles, physics, collision, animation, water simulation, mesh processing, path finding, etc. For our engine, the cool thing about having the SPU's is the fact we can minimize what we send to the RSX (the graphic chip), it allows us to reject unnecessary information and get the RSX to be very efficient.
Click to expand...

I fully expect PS3 to be up against 360's successor eventually as was PS2 with Xbox (providing there is one).
 
8igdave said:
but all of them are more fun to play on a pc anyway where you dont have to pay to play online and can play against moer people online and with less lag. How can you rather use a controler over a keyboard and mouse unless you have bad aim in the first place and need the assisting in consol games. Console games ruin pc ones because they dumb them down/ change menus to make them easyer for a controller to navigate and screw them up for keyboard and mouse etc ad it really annoys me.
Click to expand...
That's because, when the options for a game developers are:

a) Release on a single platform where tons of people will pirate your game and give you nothing for it.
b) Release both on that platform AND on one where you might make some money from it.

They're going to go for the option that actually keeps them in a job.

Consoles are where gaming is now. PCs aren't dead, but they're fast becoming a specialist/niche market for super spec eye-candy-fests and the occasional interesting indie game.
 
My Wii gets used, well er never, my PS3 is used regularly for all manner of things.
The Wii is a blast for the first few hours, then it will get turned off and left. In fact the most my Wii gets used for is playing NES games downloaded off the VC. I would have rather buy an old NES tbh.

As for the 360 being graphically better technically then meh if you all say so, i don't see it. And it is an arguement that has gone on for 2 years and wont top for another 2 years. My 2cents is, People say the best looking game on the 360 is GoW, yet it looks no better than UT3 on the PS3, same engine same benchmark. The 360's GPU might be slightly more powerfull, but when you offload some of the rendering onto the cpu then the 360 isn't more powerfull. I think 2 of the best looking games so far this gen are R&C and Uncharted. But i am a platformer fanboy. But how many times do i hear the same people justify the 360 being better than the PS3 by saying the graphics are better, yet when they try to argue a case for the Wii then it's all about the gameplay. Yet with the CPU in the PS3 it improves gameplay, so go figure.

Also FWIW if you play online the PS3 has online play which is Free and simple to use. Neither of the other 2 online services can bost both of them.
 
nokkonwud said:
Based on comments from people more informed than you or me.
Click to expand...
He's kind of right though. You can't compare them as though they're like for like. The 360 has (I believe) more texture memory, but the PS3 supposedly has (again, also I believe) faster bus speeds, meaning you could basically push smaller textures quicker than the 360 can push larger ones through, thus evening them out really.

The PS3 is a big, complicated, weird machine that's technically capable of being an absolute beast of a rig, it's just how well the programmers can get to grips with it that stops it.

Now, whether making your console a confusing-as-hell thing to write on was a good idea, that's a different question.
 
8igdave said:
But seriously i cant see how you think consol gaming is better then pc gamign for the last 2 and ahalf years. perhaps you havn't played i enough pc games.
Click to expand...

Battlefield 2 was the best game in the last 2.5 years that was exclusive. Other than that we've had Crysis (over rated), Supreme Commander (not a fan of RTS), Football Manager 2008 (same game, new interface), Stalker (massive disappointment). Battlefield 2142 (not as good as Battlefield 2), World In Crisis (Looks fantastic, but I don't like RTS).

I'm already struggling to think of anything else.
 
8igdave said:
but all of them are more fun to play on a pc anyway where you dont have to pay to play online and can play against moer people online and with less lag. How can you rather use a controler over a keyboard and mouse unless you have bad aim in the first place and need the assisting in consol games.
Click to expand...

Not quite. I was a very, very good CS/CSS player (though I hated the latter) with some of the best clans in the country (proper clans, none of that Enemy Down nonsense). So no, aim isn't a problem, far from it in fact.
And it's your opinion that they are more fun on PC, personally I don't think they are.
 
Weebull said:
That's because, when the options for a game developers are:

a) Release on a single platform where tons of people will pirate your game and give you nothing for it.
b) Release both on that platform AND on one where you might make some money from it.

They're going to go for the option that actually keeps them in a job.

Consoles are where gaming is now. PCs aren't dead, but they're fast becoming a specialist/niche market for super spec eye-candy-fests and the occasional interesting indie game.
Click to expand...

I fail to see how that shows consoles are where gaming is at? Youve totaly missed the main points of my post. About how the online play is far superior with more players and no lag, how games are always more fun to play with a keyboard and mouse.

The only games that are suited to console are sport games, which i find very repetitive and boring.
 
nokkonwud said:
Battlefield 2 was the best game in the last 2.5 years that was exclusive. Other than that we've had Crysis (over rated), Supreme Commander (not a fan of RTS), Football Manager 2008 (same game, new interface), Stalker (massive disappointment). Battlefield 2142 (not as good as Battlefield 2), World In Crisis (Looks fantastic, but I don't like RTS).

I'm already struggling to think of anything else.
Click to expand...

Does it matter if they are exclusive? The games are still better with a keyboard and mouse, with more players online with less lag. The only reason to get a console is for exclusives like Mass effect, which will probably come to pc eventually anyway. What games are better on console then pc exacly?

JUMPURS said:
Battlefield 2 wasn't really exclusive since BF2:MC came out.
Click to expand...

which is nothing like bf2 which is all about online play. The console version have nothing on the pc version.
 
8igdave said:
Does it matter if they are exclusive? The games are still better with a keyboard and mouse, with more players online with less lag. The only reason to get a console is for exclusives like Mass effect, which will probably come to pc eventually anyway. What games are better on console then pc exacly?
Click to expand...

Imo sports, racing & platformers will always be better on a console, but fps, rpg's and rts's are better on the PC.

Especially RTS games, why are so many coming to the 360 this year, are MS insane?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom