What Console Should I Get

Am i the only one that actually hopes new consoles won't come out for a few years yet? I'm more than happy with the graphics each are capable of at present and my bank account is still in pain from the £280 it cost for my PS3.

I wouldn't mind if a new xbox comes out next year only if it was more efficient, quieter & powerfull. Because as they stated (I think) that the next xbox was forwards compatible whatever that means (upgradable hardware?) and backwards compatible.
 
Better value ?, I'm guessing most people will have this console for the next 4/5 years, even using the cheapest price you can get live for that amounts to £100/£125 just to play on-line, and then you better not need wireless in the future, £50 at the very least least, oh, and upgrading your hard drive, 360 120gb £70, PS3 160gb £30.

Now I'm not saying that your going to be needing all these extras, but if you do it certainly adds up.

/agree

Wish people would stop saying the 360 is better value for money when it clearly is not
Its cheaper to buy initially, that is it

Hopefully this round lasts a few more years at least, they havent really even utilised this gen to its fullest yet
 
Plug n play charge kits devalue the 360s cost aswell theyre about £15 x the amount of pads you have. Or you have to buy rechareable batteries but its so much more convenient to use just plug a cable in the top if they run out something I prefer on the PS3. Plus the third part support for peripherals means you dont have to buy MS steering wheel, MS keypad, MS headset, etc.
 
It is a bit silly now, the PS3 fanboys regurgitating the same old verbatim value for money drivel..

It's quite hard to compare console prices due to many differences that can't be addressed, either side can argue scenarios under which both are cheaper..

The bottom line is, if I want to play a game, its £99 on the 360, or £200+ on the PS3.. that is all someone said, now we are making up different cost breakdowns based on worst case scenarios like play and charge kits (£4.50 delivered off the bay FYI)..

Anyway the OP has made his choice, a little misguided, but he isn't going to be disappointed..

Just some points worth noting..
The lifespan of the PS3 is not set at all, it's going to be roughtly the same as the 360, all Sony have really said, that like the PS2, they will keep producing it for many years, however the PS4 can be brought out whenever they feel like it.. and judging by the reports that both sides are entering agreements of design/supply of various parts already, I'd wager the 360/PS3 will be superseeded at around the same time.

And as for untapped power, that applies to both consoles in roughly equal measure, the 360 is still not being programmed to take advantage of it's effective 6 cores.. Just read developers comments on Beyond3D, it's clear both consoles are still untapped, however the 360 responds better to more conventional development techniques..

What the 360 lacks, and the PS3 has, is first party developers that are allowed to spend the time/money on truly excellent games.. This to me is the PS3's biggest strength, but it has the downside that you end up waiting for the damn things.. (GT5 anyone?)
 
The lifespan of the PS3 is not set at all, it's going to be roughtly the same as the 360

Going by previous trends i would tend to disagree with this part. Microsoft moved promptly over to the 360 and games for the xbox just stopped completely. On the other hand the PS2 is even today having new games released for it, Persona 4 came out in Europe this month iirc. Yes i do agree that the PS4 will come out at roughly the same time as the next xbox, but i'd be willing to wager PS3 development would continue for at least a couple of years after the release of the PS4. Time will tell though...

All this discussion about potential power is pretty much pointless, as you said, they both have potential left, just nobody really knows how much.
 
Sony have already positioned the PS3 as a ten-year console, so i think its going to be around for a while.

I do think that the PS3 has legs. Until the start of this year, i'd have always recommended a 360. But since i had a need for a new DVD/Media player, and also fancied trying LBP the PS3 filled the spot, bringing blueray and whisper quiet operation to the living room as well compared to the screaming banshee 360.

Sony are currently far from perfect and are still getting to grips with the online side of things (I think they wasted far to much time/money pratting around with Home). Whereas MS seem to have dropped the ball a bit by introducing the pointless NXE. If MS can refresh the 360 with a quieter & cooler unit I dont see any burning need to a new model any time soon.
 
Going by previous trends i would tend to disagree with this part. Microsoft moved promptly over to the 360 and games for the xbox just stopped completely. On the other hand the PS2 is even today having new games released for it, Persona 4 came out in Europe this month iirc. Yes i do agree that the PS4 will come out at roughly the same time as the next xbox, but i'd be willing to wager PS3 development would continue for at least a couple of years after the release of the PS4. Time will tell though...

All this discussion about potential power is pretty much pointless, as you said, they both have potential left, just nobody really knows how much.


You are right!, and a good point, even though the PS4 will no doubt be out sooner then people think, Sony will support the PS3 for some time, which I agree is a factor worth considering!..

It will be interesting to see what happens with the 360, as developers and install base are much higher then previous generations (for MS), and if there are roughly the same PS3's and 360's around, It would be stupid of MS to not do as Sony and just keep producing them (cheaply)..
 
(I think they wasted far to much time/money pratting around with Home)

As much as i defended the idea of Home before its release i lean more and more to agreeing with this viewpoint every day. It had potential, but it seems to have just missed the mark completely.

Hopefully one day they will implement game launching for all games, but until then i see no point. It was just a waste of time, money and effort.
 
Demon said:
It is a bit silly now, the PS3 fanboys regurgitating the same old verbatim value for money drivel..

lolwut? You call people fanboys for regurgitating info and then go and do it yourself straight after! wtf.

Streeteh said:
It was just a waste of time, money and effort.

Have to agree Home is a bit ridiculous, like the FarCry 2 and Resident Evil 5 areas! There is actually nothing to do there, you just walk around an empty space and look at a few maps. Sony really need to just focus on cross-game chat, thats all that I require on the online side of things!
 
Last edited:
It is a bit silly now, the PS3 fanboys regurgitating the
You lose the argument by default by invoking the fanboy card

But for sake of the OP
same old verbatim value for money drivel..
The ps3 is better for value, not cheaper, but bang for buck
you get more for your money, thus it is better value

The 360 over a length of time IS more expensive IF you plan on playing online a lot, this is also a fact there is no ambiguity

The bottom line is, if I want to play a game, its £99 on the 360, or £200+ on the PS3..
cheapest new using google shopping
Xbox 360 Arcade, 128mb with memory card £124.99
Sony Playstation 3 PS3 Console with 40GB HDD £208.00
Difference: £84, thats 3 yearsish subs

I dont know about you but that makes it about even for cost, but its pretty clear which is better value for money

again as i said in my original post, ignoring all features using the most basic consoles you can buy at the cheapest prices for both using a quick search on google shopping if you plan to play online a lot the xbox is not better value for money regardless what spin you put on it
 
I remember when we talked about games.

I got a 360 for Mass Effect and Fable 2 the same as I got an Xbox for KOTOR.

Where Bioware goes I follow and with the 360 dominating with rpgs it makes it the best choice console for me.

To the OP. Just think about what games you really want to play and go with it.
 
lolwut? You call people fanboys for regurgitating info and then go and do it yourself straight after! wtf.


You lose the argument by default by invoking the fanboy card


Not at all ;)

I was just pointing out that the comment made previously "To just play a game the 360 is much cheaper then the PS3" was a fair and valid fact, but clearly the word 'value' was not meant in the same way you guys do...

I think we all can agree that in certain combinations of features the PS3 can work out as excellent value for money, I certainly don't disagree with that, I just find it odd that you counter what is blindingly obvious maths with some old (and tired) argument that only works in specific cases..
 
Everyones batteries are gonna die, and Im sure a vast amount of people will want to play online, need harddrive space or require WiFi. I think the points are 'counter-balanced' simply due to the fact they arent specific.
 
Where Bioware goes I follow and with the 360 dominating with rpgs it makes it the best choice console for me.

Yeah, that is a good point. The PS3 can't compete with the 360 in terms of rpgs. In other genres, the choice isn't so clear cut.

FF 13 versus is the only thing that will make me buy a ps3, but that's a long way off yet.
 
Alternatively get a wireless access point for a £5 instead...

Come on guys, this is meant to be a technical forum :D

I can make my 360 wireless for £5 ?, I'm intrigued please tell me more becuase I geniunely would like to do this.

Yeah, that is a good point. The PS3 can't compete with the 360 in terms of rpgs.....

Maybe in volume but the PS3 already has the highest rated and most critically acclaimed RPG on it's system anyway, that being Valkyria Chronicles, the game is stunning.
 
Last edited:
no reason one would choose a xbox 360 over PS3 TBH, i have both and the most played is my PS3 for a number of reason, the biggest reason is my xbox is noisy as hell, why they gave them such naff drives is beyond me yet when im playing killzone 2 goodness there is virtually no noise at all coming from my PS3. second reason is reliability, mate of mine is on his fifth xbox 360 in the space of three years, the four before all RROD on him and he takes good care of his stuff so IMO is just unacceptable for a product to have such a crappy life, makes me wonder how microsoft are getting away with it :eek: and the third and final reason. game quality on PS3 is catching upto xbox 360 and is about to surpass, killzone 2 was a glimpse of whats underneath the shell of the PS3, its beyond any game on 360 visually, its gritty, its immersive and the online gameplay is solid. don't accuse me of being a fanboy since as i said i own and play both consoles, and sure the PS3 cost more but its worth it (built in wireless, bluetooth, you can swap your hard disk hastle free in about 5 minutes without voiding warranty) my only bad point on the PS3 is the pathetic pads, wish i could use the 360 pad on the PS3 :(
 
Back
Top Bottom