ps3 or xbox360

[rowech]

I've finally decided I'll be getting one of these....I'm wondering what the opinion of anyone here is as to which is better. It seems PS3 might be better but it seems like Sony is going to nickel and dime you a bit on extras and it might not be as stable as the Xbox. I know the Wii is getting positive vibes but I don't think that one's for me.

In addition, is there any sense as to if Blue-Ray or HDDVD is going to win out?

[Eaglesfan27]

I own a 360. I haven't played a PS3, but I've seen them in stores. Both seem like solid machines. The 360 has a significantly better lineup now, but the PS3 should catch up in time. There are quite a few good 360 games that I want, but just don't have the time to get to. I'm loving College Hoops on the 360 right now, along with a few other games. I don't think you can really go wrong with either of them, but I'd get an extended warranty on either of them. I doubt anyone has a real firm sense of whether Blu-Ray or HD-DVD will win out.

[Deattribution]

I'd take a look here and make your own preference concerning the HD/Blu-ray

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Blu-ray_releases
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HD_DVD_releases

They both have about the same amount of releases, but they are varied in taste.

And I'd agree with EF, you can't really go wrong with either one, unless there is a particular exclusive title (final fantasy, halo 3, gran turismo, gears of war ect) that you feel like you really want.

All consoles nickel and dime you. You get a little more choice in what you want to buy with the 360 , but PS3 has the advantage of the blu-ray format being heavily supported by Sony since it's on every console, where as the 360's HD-DVD is for movies only.

[twothree]

I would get the one that has the most games that interest you, including games in development. Or, get the system that has the most "must have" games.

For me, it's neither of these systems at the moment.

[Fidatelo]

Avoid the PS3, that thing is a lame-duck. 360 or Wii are safe bets at this point, the choice simply depends on game-style preference.

[Deattribution]

Avoid the PS3, that thing is a lame-duck.

You have to be kidding?

[Eaglesfan27]

One really cool thing about the Xbox 360 (I think the PS3 has the same thing or something similar) is that you can download shows and movies. My wife is mad because the DVR or I messed up a week or two ago and didn't tape Supernatural, one of her favorite shows. Well, I'm downloading the episode of Supernatural to the 360 right now for a minimal fee while I play College Hoops :)

[Fidatelo]

You have to be kidding?

No, but don't worry, I'll defend my Dreamcast to the death so I understand where you're coming from.

[rowech]

I too have heard things that the PS3 simply isn't the machine it's supposed to be. Something like a 22% malfunction rate in Japan??? I don't know if these are things I just hear or if they're facts.

[Deattribution]

No, but don't worry, I'll defend my Dreamcast to the death so I understand where you're coming from.

Yes, because every system Sony has released has been a total failure. Damn that PS2, what a terrible idea that was, only a 100 million sold, psssh. :rolleyes:

Feel free to lay out some real facts, non-hearsay and something other than 'I speak the truth bs'

[Cringer]

I too have heard things that the PS3 simply isn't the machine it's supposed to be. Something like a 22% malfunction rate in Japan??? I don't know if these are things I just hear or if they're facts.

Well, I can tell you that when I was returning mine at Wal-mart earlier tonight, there was a guy two spots behind me in line returning his because after 20 minutes it would freeze and go to a blue screen. Every time he used it I guess.

I would lean towards the 360 myself. I have one, and just returned my PS3 because I saw no need for it right now. Down the line I may pick one up when they have some games I want.

As for HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray, no telling who will win. Blu-Ray is the superior technology, but many people say BetaMax was too, and it lost it's war.

[stevew]

IMO HD-DVD drives out right now are garbage. The toshiba unit we sell at work has broken down quite a bit, and it was actually the second player they sent us, an updated model if you will. Seems like i'm messing with it every time I work to enable it to play. The BD Player on the other hand, works like a champ. Still not worth a grand by any means, but it(ours at least) has already gotten quite a bit of usage with no signs of breakage.

Granted if you're buying a console, we're talking different machines of course.

[DanGarion]

I have diehard on getting a PS3 until I read this article.

http://arstechnica.com/articles/headstart.ars

Key points, the PS3 has no hardware scaler for HD, and the PS3 makes you buy a HD disc format, when no clear winner has been made in the battle of HD-DVD vs. BlueRay.

I've only had my Xbox 360 for 3 days but I'm not regretting this purchase.

[Cringer]

IMO HD-DVD drives out right now are garbage. The toshiba unit we sell at work has broken down quite a bit, and it was actually the second player they sent us, an updated model if you will. Seems like i'm messing with it every time I work to enable it to play. The BD Player on the other hand, works like a champ. Still not worth a grand by any means, but it(ours at least) has already gotten quite a bit of usage with no signs of breakage.

Granted if you're buying a console, we're talking different machines of course.


Yeah, the Toshiba units are not supposed to be anywhere near the best HD-DVD players. Funny since they are the main backer of HD-DVD. The 360 HD-DVD player is supposed to be one of the better ones.

The PS3 player is supposed to be one of the better BD players too though, especially for the price and the 'extra' of being able to play games.

[stevew]

Yeah, the Toshiba units are not supposed to be anywhere near the best HD-DVD players. Funny since they are the main backer of HD-DVD. The 360 HD-DVD player is supposed to be one of the better ones.

The PS3 player is supposed to be one of the better BD players too though, especially for the price and the 'extra' of being able to play games.

That was the thing that threw me...Toshiba and MS are the biggest pushers of the HDDVD and the Toshiba player is junk.

[Cringer]

That was the thing that threw me...Toshiba and MS are the biggest pushers of the HDDVD and the Toshiba player is junk.

And of course people could easily bitch about using the 360 as their hd-dvd player because even if it is a decent player, the 360 still has no hdmi support. Now, rumor is thay may correct this sometime soon but that would be by adding it to new units. That screws over guys like me who bought mine 8 months ago and has no plans on buying another one just for that.

[twothree]

And of course people could easily bitch about using the 360 as their hd-dvd player because even if it is a decent player, the 360 still has no hdmi support. Now, rumor is thay may correct this sometime soon but that would be by adding it to new units. That screws over guys like me who bought mine 8 months ago and has no plans on buying another one just for that.

HDMI support plus a $100 drop in price would actually, make me take a look at buying an XBOX360. So, maybe in a few years that will happen.

Right now, I will stick to the Wii.

[oykib]

One thing that should concern people that are seriously looking at the PS3 is the fact that despite the fact that they've only shipped about 100,000 of them in Japan, I could walk down the street here and buy one with no problem-- either new or used.

That's really disturbing considering the fact that the Wii has shipped at least three or four times as many here and there isn't a used Wii to be had-- and I live about five bliocks from the second largest electronics are in Japan. It's tough to pick up a new one too.

That may change when we get big titles out. But the Metal Gears and the like my be too little too late considering how deeply the Wii will be embedded both here and back home by then. It may be too late for Sony to make a real mark back home because how many households are really going to be three console households.

For example, in the last generation I bought the PS2, Xbox, and GC. But I was a late adopter with the GC. I really only got one to play Viewtiful Joe and GBA on my TV. I, maybe, bought twelve games and only VJ was a game that wasn't either used or heavily discounted.

I wonder if the PS3 will be the same in America.

[rowech]

I have a question about the XBox 360 then....what's the difference between this silver and gold live? You can't play online for free?

[gstelmack]

I have a question about the XBox 360 then....what's the difference between this silver and gold live? You can't play online for free?

Correct. Silver basically gives you access to Marketplace to download demos, buy downloadable content, etc. Gold gives you all of the matchmaking functionality for online gameplay.

[fenrrris]

It's a shame that you can't play for free, but an entire year of gold service is something like fifty dollars. That's pretty cheap as far as I'm concerned. Also, when the service is as tremendous as X-Box Live it's hard to complain.

[Raiders Army]

With Vista coming out soon, I think the integrated functionality between the 360 and your PC will far outweigh anything that the PS3 will do. Even at this point (even though I haven't set it up), you should be able to stream video and music to your 360.

[Fidatelo]

Yes, because every system Sony has released has been a total failure. Damn that PS2, what a terrible idea that was, only a 100 million sold, psssh. :rolleyes:

Feel free to lay out some real facts, non-hearsay and something other than 'I speak the truth bs'

Past success does not indicate future success in this market. Sega had a pretty good thing going with the Genesis, but that didn't stop them from messing things up with the Saturn. Nintendo owned the show with the NES and SNES, but they made a couple bad decisions with N64 and fell behind the pack real quick.

The PS3 is too expensive, has a terrible launch lineup, and aside from Blu-Ray it doesn't provide anything compelling to sway people from the 360.

[Mota]

Yes, because every system Sony has released has been a total failure. Damn that PS2, what a terrible idea that was, only a 100 million sold, psssh. :rolleyes:



Just because a past product was successful doesn't mean that the sequel will be. Look at Hollywood for the biggest example of that.

Look at their attitude, Sony feels like they're entitled to own the #1 spot, they don't ever express how they feel they need to earn the spot. Look at their launch titles, there's only 1 exclusive game worth buying, and the rest are ports from 360.

I think that Sony took some big risks by putting some highly specialized items in their console (Cell, Blu-Ray), and when they went a full year behind the 360 were forced to dumb things down and make a lot of cuts to get the product out this year. Look at the manufacturing problems, they barely even got the product released this year.

Lack of HDR solution makes for better lighting effects on the 360, lack of scaler creates problems if your TV doesn't natively support the resolution the games were programmed in.

I'll probably get one, but only when it's $299 or less, I just don't see the value in this console at this time when you can get an equally powerful console with a bigger library for $200 less.

[Arles]

I own both, if I were going to guess at who wins the console/DVD wars, I would choose:

XBox360 over PS3
Blu-Ray over HD-DVD

The XBox360 seems like a better option for gaming since it's cheaper (without HD-DVD) and has more titles and a more refined system (after a year of updates).

However, a lot of people are going to buy the PS3 (and get Blu-Ray). But I doubt many people pay the extra $200 for the HD-DVD meaning more and more console owners will own Blu-Ray as time moves on. While it may end up making Sony and Microsoft swap places in the console wars from the PS2/XBox prior competition, including the Blu-Ray may help Sony win the High Dev DVD battle.

[sterlingice]

I could have sworn we had a 360 vs ps3 sitting around but I guess now. Just a couple of ps3 vs Wii threads

SI

[Joe]

I own both, if I were going to guess at who wins the console/DVD wars, I would choose:

XBox360 over PS3
Blu-Ray over HD-DVD

The XBox360 seems like a better option for gaming since it's cheaper (without HD-DVD) and has more titles and a more refined system (after a year of updates).

However, a lot of people are going to buy the PS3 (and get Blu-Ray). But I doubt many people pay the extra $200 for the HD-DVD meaning more and more console owners will own Blu-Ray as time moves on. While it may end up making Sony and Microsoft swap places in the console wars from the PS2/XBox prior competition, including the Blu-Ray may help Sony win the High Dev DVD battle.

With the decision for Blu-Ray to not release any porn titles, I don't think they can win.

[SteveMax58]

With the decision for Blu-Ray to not release any porn titles, I don't think they can win.

Since when does the creator of a format determine what content is shown using that format...when presumably, many commercial studios will have access to it? Do you have a link, or a source for this information?

I'm not doubting your statement as much as I'm curious as to how/why this could the case.

A side note...I dont follow things like this too closely...but it would seem to me that neither format will "win", if "win" is defined as eliminating the other from mainstream usage, or long-term usage in general. But if I had to pick one...Sony's Blue Ray standard would seem to have an advantage due to the obvious studio & media ties it has. Not that MS & other HD-DVD supporters do not have ties in their own right...it would just seem that Sony would be percieved as the subject matter experts on the topic...based on how media companies actually determine their relationships. Just my 2cents.

[gstelmack]

Since when does the creator of a format determine what content is shown using that format...when presumably, many commercial studios will have access to it? Do you have a link, or a source for this information?

Since the studios pay licensing fees to get their discs burned in that format (at least copy-protected discs, not DVD-Rs you burn at home).

[SteveMax58]

Since the studios pay licensing fees to get their discs burned in that format (at least copy-protected discs, not DVD-Rs you burn at home).

I stand corrected...I wasnt really thinking about that. :o

[sterlingice]

Ultimately, I think we know how this plays out. It reminds me a lot of DVD-R vs DVD+R (and DVD-RAM). There is pretty solid support for both sides so soon, in the next year or two, there will be a lot of dual format players. Heck, I even saw someone already had a dual format player out at CES.

What this means is that the company banking on solo control has the most to lose, comparatively (Sony). And the winner will be whoever had their financial model based on the most money out of a licensing agreement where all mainstream players are dual format and movies come out on whichever format the studio has chosen to support (not sure who wins that). Microsoft is really only in this game to make sure Sony doesn't get their Trojan horse exclusive PS3 so I'm guessing this makes them a winner as well.

SI

[Joe]

Since when does the creator of a format determine what content is shown using that format...when presumably, many commercial studios will have access to it? Do you have a link, or a source for this information?

I'm not doubting your statement as much as I'm curious as to how/why this could the case.

A side note...I dont follow things like this too closely...but it would seem to me that neither format will "win", if "win" is defined as eliminating the other from mainstream usage, or long-term usage in general. But if I had to pick one...Sony's Blue Ray standard would seem to have an advantage due to the obvious studio & media ties it has. Not that MS & other HD-DVD supporters do not have ties in their own right...it would just seem that Sony would be percieved as the subject matter experts on the topic...based on how media companies actually determine their relationships. Just my 2cents.


It was announced at this year's AVN by There Joon (Digital Playground) that he was asked by Sony to pubish his films on HD-DVD, after he had publicly supported Blu-Ray.

http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/83552

[SteveMax58]

It was announced at this year's AVN by There Joon (Digital Playground) that he was asked by Sony to pubish his films on HD-DVD, after he had publicly supported Blu-Ray.

http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/83552

Ahh, I see...thanks for the info.:cool:

Sounds silly to encourage a multi-billion dollar industry to go with your competitor.

[Joe]

Ahh, I see...thanks for the info.:cool:

Sounds silly to encourage a multi-billion dollar industry to go with your competitor.

Sony will probably blame Disney if this decision leads to the format's downfall.

[Cringer]

It was announced at this year's AVN by There Joon (Digital Playground) that he was asked by Sony to pubish his films on HD-DVD, after he had publicly supported Blu-Ray.

http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/83552


And every other studio picked HD-DVD at CES......

h--p://www.tgdaily.com/2007/01/11/ces2007_hddvd_blu_ray/

[MizzouRah]

Right now, the 360 has a GREAT lineup of games and costs less. I love my 360, but I always say go where the games you like are... it's just that right NOW, the 360 has been out for some time, so they have an impressive lineup of games.

[rowech]

So to clarify...even with this Silver (read that free) membership with the 360, you still can't play online?

[gstelmack]

See Post #20 where I answered that question pretty directly.

[Cringer]

So to clarify...even with this Silver (read that free) membership with the 360, you still can't play online?

Silver= you no play game

Gold= you play game

[rowech]

Their website makes it seem like you can play some games but not all.

[gstelmack]

Their website makes it seem like you can play some games but not all.

Link? Quote? Maybe then we can clear this up for the third time in this thread.

(I believe you'll find that the exceptions will be games that don't use Live for matchmaking but instead run their own matchmaking service).

[rowech]

hxxp://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/memberships/?WT.svl=nav (http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/memberships/?WT.svl=nav)

I guess I don't know what massively multiplayer games are. Those are the games I took as being able to be played with the silver membership.

[Eaglesfan27]

hxxp://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/memberships/?WT.svl=nav (http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/memberships/?WT.svl=nav)

I guess I don't know what massively multiplayer games are. Those are the games I took as being able to be played with the silver membership.


Those are games like Everquest that charge their own monthly fees. There are a few of them on the 360. I think all other games require a Gold Membership, which I think is well worth the 50 dollars a year even though I play online rarely (a few friends in NJ when your schedules sync and guys from FOFC is it.)

[Arles]

I think the porn industry supporting HD-DVD and major groups like Disney supporting Blu-Ray will end up with a slight advantage to Blu-Ray. This isn't the 1980s where video tape is the only "home" method to see video porn. Given the explosion of online porn, I doubt high-res DVD is going to be much of the porn market (especially compared to video tape in the 80s).

On the other hand, having the exclusive rights to major DVD commercial hits by Disney and Pixar may start swaying the market a bit. In the end, it comes down to who can get enough sales of units to generate a demand and reduce their production costs. At this point, it's a toss up but I think the PS3 will be much more valuable to Blu-Ray's case than the 360 to HD-DVD since you *MUST* buy it to own the console.

[Cringer]

On the other hand, having the exclusive rights to major DVD commercial hits by Disney and Pixar may start swaying the market a bit. In the end, it comes down to who can get enough sales of units to generate a demand and reduce their production costs. At this point, it's a toss up but I think the PS3 will be much more valuable to Blu-Ray's case than the 360 to HD-DVD since you *MUST* buy it to own the console.

From what I have read, Blu-Ray sales have caught up to HD-DVD sales and they say that's in large part because of the PS3's being sold.

[spleen1015]

With Vista coming out soon, I think the integrated functionality between the 360 and your PC will far outweigh anything that the PS3 will do. Even at this point (even though I haven't set it up), you should be able to stream video and music to your 360.

With a Media Center PC it is definitely possible. I DVR shows on my PC and watch them on my tv(through the 360) all of the time.

[dawgfan]

I think the porn industry supporting HD-DVD and major groups like Disney supporting Blu-Ray will end up with a slight advantage to Blu-Ray. This isn't the 1980s where video tape is the only "home" method to see video porn. Given the explosion of online porn, I doubt high-res DVD is going to be much of the porn market (especially compared to video tape in the 80s).

On the other hand, having the exclusive rights to major DVD commercial hits by Disney and Pixar may start swaying the market a bit. In the end, it comes down to who can get enough sales of units to generate a demand and reduce their production costs. At this point, it's a toss up but I think the PS3 will be much more valuable to Blu-Ray's case than the 360 to HD-DVD since you *MUST* buy it to own the console.
I would agree with this assessment. However, the ironic thing here is that the same reason that sales of fixed media porn isn't as big a deal anymore may also mean that ultimately, the battle between Blu-Ray and HD-DVD is also not a big deal - if things like the Xbox Live initiative for downloading movies & TV shows and similar services take off, the fixed-media battle may ultimately be a moot point.

Why get locked into a particular fixed-media format when you can just download your movies on demand? Of course, with fixed media you already have the media readily accessible and stored, whereas with downloaded media, you have to worry about connection speeds and finding hard drive space, so there is an advantage to fixed media, but is it outweighed by the convenience of not being locked to a fixed media format and the ability for on-demand purchasing and viewing?

Either way, I think Microsoft is smartly positioned - while they have some stake in the success HD-DVD, they also have a very strong alternate plan that may prove to be the long-term winner.

[Deattribution]

The PS3 is too expensive, has a terrible launch lineup, and aside from Blu-Ray it doesn't provide anything compelling to sway people from the 360.

The 360 had an even worse launch lineup, they didn't even have a single exclusive title worth anything, their best title a 8 months in was a port of a PC game (Oblivion).

Now they have an edge after a year, a large one, but they should be light years ahead and they're not. There are only a handful of 360 titles that are must-haves. All the sports titles are as good, or better on the PS3.

You lost all of your argument before it ever started by calling a two month old console a lame-duck system (even though it can't be, look the word up).

I was by no means shitting on the 360, and I still am not, at the moment it's the best choice unless you're getting a system for HD movies more than simply games. It's a toss up then, with Sony likely having the long-term edge since they can't afford to fail.

Price is a big seperation right now, but in terms of value in the long run they're both going to be around for several years - to say they won't is ridiculous and crazy talk.

[Joe]

another thing to consider is if the TotalHD discs take off.

[MizzouRah]

I'm always reserved about the ps3, even though I have an Xbox 360 because our ps2 has had so many hours played on it.

MLB The Show should be one excellent ps3 title unless they are just porting it from the ps2 and enhancing the graphics... and that still wouldn't be that bad.

[14ers]

And every other studio picked HD-DVD at CES......

h--p://www.tgdaily.com/2007/01/11/ces2007_hddvd_blu_ray/
What exactly does this mean?

One of the big problems they have with Blu-ray is its expense, followed by its market share. "Blu-ray has superior quality, yes," said a spokesperson for porn studio Bangbros, "but HD DVD is easier to produce, cheaper to produce and there are more HD DVD players in homes than there are Blu-ray players, for example in the Xbox 360."


Pink Visual heavily complained about the fact that Blu-ray discs cannot be replicated
Seems to me, this hard to replicate, "Pirate", feature of Blu-ray discs would encourage the big movie studios to support their format.

[stevew]

I can't find the exact article, but I believe that BD's can only be produced on replication lines run by members of the Blu Ray coalition, whereas HD-DVD can be produced on currently existing lines by anyone willing to pay the slight licensing fees.

[Fidatelo]

The 360 had an even worse launch lineup, they didn't even have a single exclusive title worth anything, their best title a 8 months in was a port of a PC game (Oblivion).

Now they have an edge after a year, a large one, but they should be light years ahead and they're not. There are only a handful of 360 titles that are must-haves. All the sports titles are as good, or better on the PS3.

You lost all of your argument before it ever started by calling a two month old console a lame-duck system (even though it can't be, look the word up).

I was by no means shitting on the 360, and I still am not, at the moment it's the best choice unless you're getting a system for HD movies more than simply games. It's a toss up then, with Sony likely having the long-term edge since they can't afford to fail.

Price is a big seperation right now, but in terms of value in the long run they're both going to be around for several years - to say they won't is ridiculous and crazy talk.

Fair enough, we each have different view points and obviously we aren't going to sway the other. In 5 years one of us can dig up this thread and mock the other with quotes of the original posts. :P

[Raiders Army]

The 360 had an even worse launch lineup, they didn't even have a single exclusive title worth anything, their best title a 8 months in was a port of a PC game (Oblivion).

Now they have an edge after a year, a large one, but they should be light years ahead and they're not. There are only a handful of 360 titles that are must-haves. All the sports titles are as good, or better on the PS3.

You lost all of your argument before it ever started by calling a two month old console a lame-duck system (even though it can't be, look the word up).

I was by no means shitting on the 360, and I still am not, at the moment it's the best choice unless you're getting a system for HD movies more than simply games. It's a toss up then, with Sony likely having the long-term edge since they can't afford to fail.

Price is a big seperation right now, but in terms of value in the long run they're both going to be around for several years - to say they won't is ridiculous and crazy talk.

You're right in many aspects, but in this generation of consoles it's not just the games that will make or break the consoles. I would attribute about 65% of the success of the console to the games and probably about 25% of the success to online support or multimedia support. To use your wording, the 360 is light years ahead of the PS3 in terms of downloadable content, match-making, and online support. The last piece of the consoles' success will be next-generation DVD capabilities.

Anyhow, I am very much fearful that console games will go the way of PC games by enabling patching and downloadable content. The advantage to console games is that they were (for the most part) pretty solid out of the box. The advantage PC games had was that there were communities dedicated to mods. I'm a little doubtful that Call of Duty 4 will be modded by a community so that you can play Jedis vs. stormtroopers in a starship.

[CraigSca]

Did anyone read the issue surrounding Blue-Ray (I think it was posted on Dubious Quality) manufacturing? I don't fully understand it, but it sounded like there would be perpetual issues surrounding the manufacturing of the product at the physics level, and that the technology itself is bleeding edge, therefore they have no idea what the attrition rate will be. This is for the laser itself, not the PS3 (that utilizes it).

Sounds to me an awful lot like "the sky is falling!", so I can't really make a statement regarding the accuracy. Bottom line, however, is that they said the process to make blue-ray only has a 10% success rate (or only 10% of the material used to make the product survives the process) and there's nothing that can be done to improve that process.

Any electrical engineers here able to explain what the heck they're talking about?

[sterlingice]

Anyhow, I am very much fearful that console games will go the way of PC games by enabling patching and downloadable content. The advantage to console games is that they were (for the most part) pretty solid out of the box.

That was already starting last generation and is only going to get worse. So long as people still go out in droves and buy unpatched games, devs will rush them and release as is.

SI