Comparing the PS3 and 360

Yahoo! Games is running a piece comparing the PS3 and 360. They look at the hardware, software, and HD offerings for Sony and Microsoft's next-gen consoles. From the article: "Unlike the last generation, where Sony clearly held a commanding lead, the next generation of gaming is going to be a much closer race between the behemoths of Microsoft and Sony. Though there were many skeptics last fall, the past eight months have shown the Xbox 360 to be a very capable system and more than powerful enough to challenge the PlayStation 3. Microsoft also believes it will have 10 million units in the global marketplace before Sony even leaves the gate. So the question becomes: Which system do you buy?"

Comments

Simple Answer

[Jokerz17]

I already own a 360.

Re:Simple Answer

[MyDixieWrecked]

In my opinion, the 360 had a completely uninteresting launch. The lineup of games weren't so good, but it didn't really matter. M$ had plenty of room for error. The units sold out anyway, and they still had nearly a year to come out with something interesting before Sony even has a chance to threaten them.

Personally, I didn't think microsoft had it in them to put out a decent piece of hardware. The first month my friend had his, the most impressive thing I found about it was the controller. It really felt nice. Aside from that, I was disinterested in the console as a whole. It was big. It crashed a bunch (until we put it on a better platform), and it didn't have any decent games.

Now, they've got an impressive lineup. Fight Night, Burnout, Table Tennis, and Geometry Wars (o, how I am e'er addicted to you, geometry wars) make the system worth it. Although, I still think my friend is an idiot for justifying the 500$ he spent to get the system when it was still sold out everywhere.

so, being that you already own a 360, are you implying that you wouldn't purchase a ps3, no matter how strong the offering of launch titles?

Re:Simple Answer

[vandon]

Which do I plan to buy first?
A Wii

Re:Simple Answer

[RoadDoggFL]

Well silly me for assuming that a gaming machine's launch should be evaluated on its performance as a gaming machine. Also, unintentional uses can't really be credited as successes on Sony's part.

But I'm quite disappointed with the 360. The Xbox really appealed to me and it just seems that the 360 represents another step in the loss of the charm of console gaming. If the PS3 gains significant popularity, that'll be another few steps but at least Nintendo knows what it's doing.

But yes, anything is possible.

This is pointless!

[Anonymous Coward]

The PS3 is vaporware until it hits final production status in the ramp up to release. Let's compare today's Honda Civic hyrbrid with the future hyrbrid offerings of GM based on speculation of performance values pulled out of someone's ass! huzzah! Look! Honda wins! But GM catches up well! Full story on Dvorak's blog tomorrow!

One word...

[no_opinion]

Wii!

Multiple Choice

[roguenine19]

I'm going with c) None of the above.

I think it's interesting that the Wii isn't included, especially because the current best guess is that it will be launching before the PS3. I wonder if it's because the writer recognizes that it's truly something unique and different, or if he's just discounting it because of Nintendo's image problems in the previous generation.

Re:Multiple Choice

[Rydia]

That argument is silly. The only market segment Nintendo is actually abandoning is the "hardcore gamer" segment, which is really small anyway. Nintendo can say all they want about how they don't want to compete directly, but at the end of the day, they are, and perhaps even using the non-competition rhetoric to insulate themselves from any putative slugfest.

Which One? Simple

[Anonymous Coward]

The one with the most impressive "jiggle physics" in Dead Or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball 2

From the article

[jugglerjon]

This means that unless you pre-order, chances are good the only place you'll be able to find the PlayStation 3 in November is on eBay (at an insanely high cost)

So they'll have them at retail cost?

I can answer that

[skam240]

"So the question becomes: Which system do you buy?"

That's easy. You buy the one that isnt ridiculously over priced.

The one

[mgabrys_sf]

That renders GTA4 in the best possible fidelity with the least possible load-times and disk swaps.

Unless they release it for the Wii with nunchuck controller support for the baseball bat. Then all bets are off.
But I'm not holding my breath - because - well, I like oxygen...

Chainsaws and 1080p. Mmmmmmmalllllarghhhhdrool.

Re:The one

[oahazmatt]

Unless they release it for the Wii with nunchuck controller support for the baseball bat. Then all bets are off.

So you're saying that EB was lying to me when I paid $20 to reserve Grand Theft Auto: Animal Crossing?

Re:No blu-ray

[harrkev]

This assumes that one WANTS to buy blu-ray. I, for one, do not welcome our HDCP overlords that come riding in on the back of HDMI.

Thanks, but I'll pass for this lifetime.

Re:No blu-ray

[j00r0m4nc3r]

This makes sense if:

1. You can afford $600
2. You have an HD tv
3. You are in the market for a game console
4. There is a catalog of available movies for BR
5. You are in the market for a HD video player

I think a very small segment of the population fits these criteria. Personally I would only buy a PS3 to use as a video player if I knew for a fact that BR would be the winner. BR could bomb and you would have to go buy a standalone HD-DVD video player anyway.

Don't bother with TFA...

[Hamster Lover]

The article is next to useless if you've done any reading about the PS3 or 360 in the last year; you'll know it all anyway. You can basically sum up the advantage of the PS3 over the Xbox is that the Bluray drive is able to store quite a bit more data. The 360 does have the advantage of a mature on-line experience with Xbox Live, besides the price advantage.

There is a much better article at Ars Technica that goes into a little more detail about the visual differences from the point of a game developer. Visually, what does a game designer say the difference is going to be between a 360 and the PS3? None. Hardware wise, the 360 and PS3 are actually pretty evently matched, and considering that there are still going to be a lot of cross platform games even if one machine had a decided advantage over the other game studios aren't going to push that advantage given the time and cost involved in just getting a game out the door in the first place.

According to game developers, side by side you aren't going to be able to see a difference between the two systems playing the same game. Pretty much what I expected.

Re:Don't bother with TFA...

[CastrTroy]

If the hardware is pretty much the same, then how come Sony is putting uber-expensive cell processors that nobody knows how to program for? If MS hardware gets the same power, is cheaper, and is easier to develop for, then doesn't that make the 360 a lot better?

All of the above

[Nightspirit]

Well, sort of. I don't live in my parent's basement, so I can afford all of these systems. I will most likely be getting a Wii if it does not turn out to be too gimicky.

I'm guessing for anyone not obsessed about japanese RPGs that the 360 and PS3 will be very similar with their scope of games, so for most people it will be a Wii plus either the 360 or PS3.

While I can afford it, $500-600 is still a large chunk of change, so Sony better be putting something up OTHER than blu-ray to get my money. Perhaps something similar to live arcade, but with much more content.

Most people likely won't care about blu-ray. Most people I've talked to stated that they would buy 1, maybe 2 movies in blu-ray format if they had a player. Plus, I can't be the only one waiting for $50-$100 combo HD-DVD/blu-ray players (after seeing sony's implementation of DVD on the ps2, I think I'll pass on having the ps3 as my sole player).

Re:No blu-ray

[masklinn]

Because Blu-Ray will go the way Betamax went and you'll end up with a useless Blu-Ray player that you'll have to replace every 6 months cause it'll be as reliable as the PS2's DVD player?

(and 25GB per layer? Who cares when the access times and transfer speed don't even reach DVD's. )

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Ah, that would be the PS3 then?

[SmallFurryCreature]

If you look at what is in the PS3 vs the 360 then the 360 seems to be a bit expensive for its hardware. At least spec wise the PS3 delivers a lot more.

A 100.000 dollar mercedes is more expensive then a 20.000 dollar lada but it is still the lada that is overpriced.

Off course this has nothing to do with gameplay but for now it seems that if you want gameplay you are in luck, the cheapest console will be the one with the better gameplay. Offcourse that is not saying the Wii is not overpriced. Nintendo has the most overpriced consoles of all, the proof? MS and Sony subsidise the early consoles, Nintendo does not and makes a profit on them, if that isn't overpricing them I don't know what is.

Perhaps you meant "That's easy. You buy the one that isnt ridiculously expensive."

In that case,might I introduce you to the humble PC. Cheapest console of them all, you already got one after all since you post here. Can't get much cheaper then 0 dollars. Oh and you it is fully backwards compatible with other consoles even. Strange enough neither the 360 or the PS3 or the Wii allow me to play old games not off their brand. Silly.

Under the hood?

[miikrr]

Sony's comanding lead in last generation had nothing to do with the PS2's hardware prowess, it was the software that gave it the comanding lead. The Gamecube and Xbox were far more powerful than the PS2, so why isn't this a comparison of the Wii and the 360 as to fit in with the analogy?

Now just wait a minute

[Icepole4]

Saying the 360 wins because the PS3 doesn't "exist" might be the dumbest thing I've heard all year. That's like being a millionaire and saying I'm gonna get that new Honda Civic because the new Porche 911 hasn't come out yet. :-/ Come on, as in every console war the games will decide the winner...PERIOD! Do not pass go, do not collect $10,000, the games will decide. If I had my guess, MS and the 360 is going to get trounced by Sony and Nintendo. Not that it is a bad system, but where are the must have games? I'm not talking about the games we slasdotters/PC gamers/techies enjoy. I am talking about games that the general public will buy a system to play. There are none, and the 360 sales figures reflect that. Beyond release day and a month after the 360 became an afterthought. Love 'em or hate 'em Sony is right in their assumption that no matter what the price the first 5 million are going to sell just because it's a playstation. MS had a chance to cut into that market with the 360 and they haven't even dented it. Myself and most everybody else will plop down their 500-600 and get the playstation. Let's be honest guys, the only reason people are complaining the price is because they know they are getting the PS3 and didn't count on parting with that much money to have one. The Wii will pick up the Nintendo fanboys and the 13 and under crowd, leaving MS with.... Their only hope IMO is to get Halo 3 out on PS3 release day or at the very least before MGS4 and make sure that it is one of the best FPS of all time. If not I don't see how they can compete in the long run. Which is sad because competition is great for us consumers.

Re:My solution is the best

[bigman2003]

My family is also addicted to 'food' and 'housing'. That's why we have 'jobs'.

Re:No blu-ray

[Trogre]

That's $500, dude.

$600 just gets you a flash reader, Wi-Fi, HDMI and a silver logo.

None of which (not even HDMI) are necessary for HD on the PS3.

Re:Non Fan-boy opinion

[lochlan m]

But at the moment, the Wii does not strike me as being next-generation when it is only now approaching the pixel-power of the Xbox, a current-generation console.

Are you serious? The Wii's controller is going to revolutionize gaming. It is going to open new markets and change the way we think about video games. In my opinion, the Wii is, in a way, the only console that should be considered "next-gen". Polygon counts and massive storage do not make games any more fun. The thing that makes a game console good is the software and the way that you interact with it. Just look at the Nintendo DS, which is outselling the PSP 8:1 right now in Japan. It has less processing power, an inferior graphics processor, and far less storage capacity. And, yet, it is (in my eyes) the clear victor in the handheld market. Your post really spoke to me, particularly this line:

However, the cold hard facts are that graphics sell games. A game that looks good will be talked about, and purchased.

I think a great deal of gamers would agree with you. However, IMHO this is because the gaming market hasn't really been cracked in the way that it potentially could be. Console games today are marketed to an 18-24 year old, because 10 years ago the PS1 found success in that market which until then didn't really exist. Before then, video games were thought of as more of a kid's toy. You know who isn't playing console games? Women, young or old. Anyone over 40. (sure there are exceptions but generally speaking, this is true). Yet, a lot of these people are buying cell phone games or playing minesweeper. I think that when the Wii comes out it's going to have an effect somewhat similar to the PS1, opening new markets and broadening the "gamer" demographic.

Easy answer

[AmiMoJo]

Which ever one has the games you like.

If you like western style games (very easy FPS, racing, movie tie-ins) get an XBOX 360. If you like Japanese style games (difficult RPGs, 2D/3D fighting games, anime tie-ins) get a PS3.