Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

PS3 vs. Xbox 360

Posted by Zonk on from the content-vs.-form dept.

The Guardian Gamesblog has a point by point breakdown of the Xbox 360 and PS3 spec sheets, comparing and contrasting the two consoles based on what we know about them so far. In the end, they come to the rational conclusion that for gamers what will end up deciding the battle is the gameplay. From the article: "We've pretty well reached the point of complexity with dual analogue sticks, analogue triggers and four face buttons, so while you can expect to see more content in terms of things happening, not much originality was on display. Gameplay advances will come from peripherals and Sony really showed that off with their kooky EyeToy games. Nothing wrong with controlling two bondage-clad Japanese spy chicks via videoconfering in my mind :)"

6 of 115 comments (clear)

  1. Peripherals are the downfall of Nintendo by trueneutral · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's funny that when Microsoft and Sony say that innovation will come from peripherals, people suddenly start to listen. But if Nintendo suggests the idea, everyone starts calling their downfall.

  2. Why Worry by Godman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1) They won't be publicly available for a while yet 2) They don't use all available power from the instant the system is put out. Differences in speeds will really only become apparent when the higher end games start coming out towards the End of Life of the system, since they've been working on it for the life of the system. That's why the X-Box suddenly leapt ahead fairly recently. The PSII hit its stride before the X-box did. That's when the spec sheets will matter. And anybody who really cares will have both. 3) Sometimes, power isn't everything, if you can't use it. It becomes exponentially harder to squeeze more power the closer you come to the limits of the chip/computer/whatever. That's why new consoles generally come out before they have been completely drained and make it easier to make better games.

    --
    I have this really funny quote that I like to put here. Unfortunately, there's this really annoying thing called a char
  3. Re:huh? by tolan-b · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Graphics aren't that insignificant.

    I bought both, and ended up ditching my PS2. A significant part of that decision, in the light of relatively similar lineup of games that I actually wanted was the graphics. That and having a modded xbox running xbox media centre playing divxs from my home server..

  4. Re:Well , before we compare videos read this: by bluk · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Give gamers a week or two, and I don't think anyone will have any doubts as to what's prerendered and what's not. However there's a huge stark contrast between the Sony and Microsoft presentations, and I think it's best summed up best in the IGN Xbox editorial reactions. Sony makes you want to have their console while Microsoft tries to make you need their console as one of the editors puts it. I think a lot of people are rooting for Sony (especially on /.) because MSFT for the first time is losing so badly in hype. They finally found someone else that can hype just as much and now they are on the receiving end.



    BTW, you still pretty much have to pay for Xbox Live to play against other players anytime you want. I don't expect there to be no fees with PS3 online games (EA will probably start collecting fees as soon as they can). PS3 has built in WiFi (Xbox 360 is only WiFi ready), Xbox has HDD, PS3 does not have HDD built in. PS3 generally has more hardware features but Xbox has more connectivity to Windows and a unified online interface.

  5. Couch Theories by niker · · Score: 2, Interesting
    FTA:
    Fifth, controllers.
    For some reason, Sony will support the odd number of seven controllers on its PS3. A theory going around my house is that they suddenly realised they had more Bluetooth-width than expected and bumped up the number of possible controllers to seven. An alternative view is that they oversubscribed with eight and are now having to make the best of the limitations. Whichever, the PS3 supports more players in the same room than the Xbox 360 which only offers four. Really, though, with internet access on both machines and the new HDTV taking up most of the space in the living room why have so many friends in person; just play with them online.
    I believe this is a bluetooth piconet. I picked this up last time PS3/Xbox360 appeared on slashdot.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piconet
    --
    Moderators: Don't agree? pray tell why.
  6. Re:huh? by b0r0din · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Something's gotta be in the gaming news cycle, and both products were announced at just about the same time. This is your basic gamer pundit wankfest.

    I don't care which platform has better pixeltextureshader crap and which has wifi/bluetooth integrated 10-terabyte storage systems.

    It's all about the software. Are the games going to be any good? Are they going to be fun to play? Is Sony going to release games which are mostly based on the same semi-feminine anime-based spikey-haired protagonist model which has been in vogue since FF VII was released? Will it consist of the same rehashed genres and retreads of old games? Let's face it, there hasn't been that much innovation in video games in the past 10 years, aside from the now mega-long video sequences I have to sit through for 20 minutes while the narrative is scrolling across the screen in action genres. The stuff which was released in 1996 is comparable to the stuff being released in 2005. Yes, graphics have improved since the PS1. And there are some innovative games. But let's see, Mario is from the Atari age. I remember playing original Metal Gear on NES. FPS, RPG, fighters, racing games, sports games, stealth games, they're all retreads. Games based on playing cards are now somewhat popular, as if people couldn't sit down and play Magic with each other.
    I know it's old age talking, but I'm still waiting for something really amazing and enlightening. AI, maybe. New peripherals, maybe. But until I see something spectacular I'll probably opt out of dishing out 300-400 bucks for either one of these babies. Not very many games push the genres they are pigeonholed in. I think the gaming industry is really stagnating. Why not make a good FPS rpg, or a game that puts together action, racing, and stealth?

    Much like Hollywood, the game industry has reached that mature phase in the business where mass product sells and indies and innovative genres are pulled off the shelves. Unlike games of old, the large budgets required to pull off a console make unique games more and more rare, which adds to my own trepidation about blowing a load of cash on a new system.

    Xbox360 vs PS3? Who cares?