A fair comparison. PS3 vs 360 price.

Mr Men said:
so the 360 is better then, you agree, what are you getting your knickers in a twist about :D

games make the console, so 360 is better in your own words :)
Click to expand...

--

I agree the games catalogue is better on the 360.

I do not agree the xbox 360 is a better console than the PS3.

You are twisting my words, I've untwisted them now.

From what you've said, That would mean the Sega Mega drive is a better system than the PS3, It would mean the Super Nintendo is a better system than the Xbox 360, It would mean the Playstation is better than both.
 
wannabedamned said:
--

..
From what you've said, That would mean the Sega Mega drive is a better system than the PS3, It would mean the Super Nintendo is a better system than the Xbox 360, It would mean the Playstation is better than both.
Click to expand...

I agree on the first two counts tbh. :p
 
Bonjour said:
You are right in saying JSR was better on the DC, much better in fact.

The other games are games that I very much enjoyed on the Xbox and would like to enjoy on my 360.

Have you even played Panzer Orta? It is class.
Click to expand...

yeah was not my cup of tea and never really understood the fuss surrounding it, but you probably dont like some of the games I do, so for me the 360 delivers better gaming than the xbox does, I kept my Xbox just in case, but have not used it since.
 
I never really post on these things, and forgive me as ive only read the start of this thread.

But why cant people just be happy with the fact that they have two GOOD choices?, instead of having to justify it to themselves what they are buying?.
 
wannabedamned said:
From what you've said, That would mean the Sega Mega drive is a better system than the PS3, It would mean the Super Nintendo is a better system than the Xbox 360, It would mean the Playstation is better than both.
Click to expand...

No your confusing yourself now

Compare 360 to PS3, in your own words 360 wins, now lets leave it as obviously we both agree the 360 has better games than the PS3, so therefore is clearly the better GAMES console to own right now.
 
The ignorance on here is unbelievable.

The 360 may be the king at the moment, but purely because it has better titles currently available. The PS3 is much more powerful on paper but lacks, at present, the games that justify these higher specs. It is technologically superior, and such can be expected from a console released a year and half after the one everyone is comparing it to. Is that not blatantly obvious?

Gears Of War was what I saw on the 360. I was quite impressed, but it was nothing I hadn't already seen on the PC. The game I was shown on the PS3 was some boxing one, and it absolutely and completely blew me away. At first glance I thought it was showing a video clip because the pure detail on the models (sweat, hair, blood etc) was stunning. HOWEVER, I agree with that the 360 fans are saying. We probably got more enjoyment out of Gears Of War. Hence there is a strong case to argue that the better console is a reflection of the "better" games.

In summary, The PS3 is definitely more up to date in terms of technology, this is irrefutable. (Have a look at the Getaway thread and I'll laugh at anyone who tells me otherwise) However, as you all point out, there are very few games out at the moment which can justify the PS3 as a "better" console. I do however believe the PS3 will enjoy more exciting titles in the future as it enjoys market dominance in Japan, where a lot of the games developers are based.

This whole argument ****** me off more than PS1 vs N64. The nerds used to go on about how the N64 was better because it was "64 bit" and there were "no loading times" yet the PS1 turned out to be so infinitely superior it wasn't even funny.
 
Last edited:
Tommy B said:
The ignorance on here is unbelievable.

The 360 may be the king at the moment, but purely because it has better titles currently available. The PS3 is much more powerful on paper but lacks, at present, the games that justify these higher specs. It is technologically superior, and such can be expected from a console released a year and half after the one everyone is comparing it to. Is that not blatantly obvious?

Gears Of War was what I saw on the 360. I was quite impressed, but it was nothing I hadn't already seen on the PC. The game I was shown on the PS3 was some boxing one, and it absolutely and completely blew me away. At first glance I thought it was showing a video clip because the pure detail on the models (sweat, hair, blood etc) was stunning. HOWEVER, I agree with that the 360 fans are saying. We probably got more enjoyment out of Gears Of War. Hence there is a strong case to argue that the better console is a reflection of the "better" games.

In summary, The PS3 is definitely more up to date in terms of technology, this is irrefutable. However, as you all point out, there are very few games out at the moment which can justify the PS3 as a "better" console. I do however believe the PS3 will enjoy more exciting titles in the future as it enjoys market dominance in Japan, where a lot of the games developers are based.

This whole argument ****** me off more than PS1 vs N64. The nerds used to go on about how the N64 was better because it was "64 bit" and there were "no loading times" yet in the real world the PS1 was so infinitely superior it wasn't even funny.
Click to expand...

I think you should be annoyed by your own ignorance..

The PS3 is NOT more powerful on paper at all, you have been mislead somewhat.. it is not even more uptodate then the 360, again you've been mislead...

Simple 'facts' about the 360/PS3
1. PS3 has 2-3 times the floating point ability of the 360
2. the 360 has 2-3 times the integer abilitity of the PS3
3. The 360's GPU has 10-20% more power then the PS3's GPU
4. The 360 has 512Mb of unified memory available to all with 10Mb of lighting fast EDRAM for graphics frame buffers
5. The PS3 has 256Mb for the GPU, 256MB for the CPU's, they can 'share' the memory with some added latency, it has to use the GPU memory for frame buffering but is faster memory then the 360


The outcome? although both are very different architectures, and 'boast' large numbers over their rivals in different areas, the 'system' performance is very similar.. all the developers are saying it, all agree that we haven't seen the best from either console..

Go to the forums on beyond3d, where developers and educated people discuss the merits of both, and you'll see that your marketing regurgitation is very far from the truth..
 
Well at the moment both PS3 and 360 with the current games relelased both consoles are at the same level hardware wise...

Both able to handle GTA4
Both able to handle Assasins Creed
Im sure PS3 could handle GoW
Im sure PS3 could handle Mass Effect
Im sure 360 could handle Resistance
Im sure 360 could handle Heavenly Sword

Its down to what you are a consumer wants, becuase from a hardware point of view, the console are very similar.
 
Tommy B said:
The game I was shown on the PS3 was some boxing one, and it absolutely and completely blew me away. At first glance I thought it was showing a video clip because the pure detail on the models (sweat, hair, blood etc) was stunning.
Click to expand...

Err, you talking about the multiplatform fight night 3 that's graphically superior on the 360?

Fight Night Round 3 was one of the first games to really show off the Xbox 360's graphics power with fantastic lighting and incredibly detailed player models. The PS3 still has great looking player models but the crowds are less detailed and the lighting effects are definitely inferior. If the graphical losses weren't enough, the PlayStation 3 version takes almost twice as long as its 360 counterpart to load into the menu screen, and a third longer to load a quickplay.
Click to expand...

http://uk.gamespot.com/features/6162742/p-6.html
 
And you're typical, average consumer will still assume the PS3 is better because it is more recent than the 360. In fact that's the logic behind most of my (dare I say it non-geek mates) who are contemplating buying the PS3. We also forgot to mention how Xbox stole a lot of games from Playstation.

I'm not sure what the game was called. I'll find out and get back to you. Although, regarding that comment, it is well known that the PS3 is harder to programme for and thus a lot of the release titles were rushed.
 
Last edited:
Tommy B said:
And you're typical, average consumer will still assume the PS3 is better because it is more recent than the 360. In fact that's the logic behind most of my (dare I say it non-geek mates) who are contemplating buying the PS3. We also forgot to mention how Xbox stole a lot of games from Playstation.
Click to expand...

Stole? It's more or less, using their brains and getting games that people bought playstation's for. If that makes them sell more of their consoles due to people getting the game they want and also playing others they can't then that can only be a good thing for either of the consoles.

I think you'll find more people warrant the idea of consoles taking other consoles exclusive games as it puts more competition between the two. In the end both consoles are similar, in the end it's what the console can offer them games wise which will make them part with their cash or make them stick with the console.
 
cu3ed said:
I never really post on these things, and forgive me as ive only read the start of this thread.

But why cant people just be happy with the fact that they have two GOOD choices?, instead of having to justify it to themselves what they are buying?.
Click to expand...

Agreed!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom