360 vs. Wii
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:03 pm
been thinking lately about getting one of them. never owned an xbox and have usually been about nintendo.
which do you guys think is better and why?
which do you guys think is better and why?
CD reviews, music reviews, music discussion, horror discussion, movie discussion
Oof wrote:Dont listen to them 360 fan boys. PS3 is the way to go. Lets see our checks and balances: 360 = 33% failure rate, PS3 = less than 1%.
As far as the Wii, if you can actually find one, get it!
I guess you wouldn't know about must have games because I've played Uncharted: Drake's Fortune and that is a MUST HAVE exclusive for the PS3. I've yet to see a bad review on this game and I LOVE IT. IGN gave the game a 9.1 rating, and Gamespot gave it an 8.Chris Slack wrote:The question was Wii VS 360, the PC3 wasn't a part of the equation. Latte summed it up very well as far as I am concerned. I will eventually end up with a PS3 but as of right now there isn't a must-have exclusive that warrants the purchase.
Additionally I would be willing to put money on the new Metal Gear Solid game coming out on the 360 within 6 months of the PS3 release.
I rememeber you talking about backwards compat, is it true the new PS3 is not backwards compat at all?Vocaltremors wrote:I guess you wouldn't know about must have games because I've played Uncharted: Drake's Fortune and that is a MUST HAVE exclusive for the PS3. I've yet to see a bad review on this game and I LOVE IT. IGN gave the game a 9.1 rating, and Gamespot gave it an 8.
Yes, the $399 sku has no backwards compatibility.4G wrote:I rememeber you talking about backwards compat, is it true the new PS3 is not backwards compat at all?
That is correct, the 399 version (aka 40 gig version) is not backwards compatible, but do you really buy the new next gen console to play your old gen games on it??? It also doesn't have as many of the USB media ports that the 60 or 80 gig versions have (they have 2 instead of 4). Again, no big deal.... if you are smart, IMHO, buy a 60 or 80gig version that is refurbished/remanufactured. They've gone over it with a fine tooth comb before they resell it. Trust me on that one...I got my 60 gig PS3 on ebay that way and paid $415 with s&h. That's what you'll pay for the brand new 40 gig once you figure the tax in with it. Here's a link to the ebay store I bought mine from...http://search.stores.ebay.com/Worlds-Be ... sbestdeals Also, see how many refurbished 360's they have on there...if that doesn't give you a clue about the failure rate.... it's plainly obvious.Chris Slack wrote:Yes, the $399 sku has no backwards compatibility.
Vocaltremors wrote:That is correct, the 399 version (aka 40 gig version) is not backwards compatible, but do you really buy the new next gen console to play your old gen games on it???
Just being a smartass, please forgive meVocaltremors wrote:I know this question has been asked before, but since I'm ready to make a purchase, I wanna get some opinions. Here's my take....I already have an extensive PS1 and PS2 collection, and I know the PS3 is almost fully backwards compatible. My Xbox collection is quite large as well, but hardly, if any, of my games will run on the 360.
Call me a "Bill-Bot" because I love the 360, Xbox Live and the large number of awesome games I have to play on it. Keep in mind, however, that I own pretty much every cartridge/disc based consoles system since the dawn of time with the exception of the PS3 as it does not have enough killer exclusives for me to justify the price point. I also don't have a 1080p TV yet so the high definition DVD war doesn't really concern me at this time. DVDs still look awesome played back on my up converting DVD player on my 46" 720p TVVocaltremors wrote: Oh, by the way Bill-Bots..... why have the majority of developers started to switch to the PS3 developers kits from the 360 kits..... I know why... let's see if you do...
No forgiveness needed Chris, as I was not offended. However, I didn't buy the PS3 to play my PS1 & PS2 games on it, as I find that it is a bonus reason on why I would purchase a PS3 over the 360. My biggest factor is the reliability of the 360 system, then secondly is the additional cost of having to buy a HD DVD player, if I want to play HD movies. My second issue that developers are going to have it storage issues with the 360, since they run games on DVD format. Unisoft had BIG issues getting all the info on the 360 version for Assasin's Creed since they were limited on how much they could put on the DVD. Even if they move to the HD DVD format, they still may have storage issues, as the Bluray disk can hold more info that an HD DVD disk (15 gigs vs 25, and DL HD DVD holds 30 vs DL Bluray holds a whopping 50 gigs). With that said, the only option a 360 holder has is to buy the HD DVD player to play games or MS has to start using multiple dics to upload info to the hard drive, with of course takes up additional space on the drive. Neither option really seems that great to me as a potential customer, especially knowing that I have to buy a proprietary drive from MS if I need to increase my hard drive, of which the largest is only 120 gigs.Chris Slack wrote:Just being a smartass, please forgive me
Ok, this comes straight out of Wikipedia... "A 51 GB triple-layer spec has been approved, however no movies are currently scheduled for this disc type."Chris Slack wrote:HD-DVD capacity is now up to 55 gigs
Thats did not stop you from blasting the Xbox for only having 300 backwards compat games.. Sounds like you are making the same argument I did to you beforeVocaltremors wrote:No forgiveness needed Chris, as I was not offended. However, I didn't buy the PS3 to play my PS1 & PS2 games on it
That argument was before Sony decided to remove the "emotion engine" in the 40 gig, which kills backwards compatibility. I can understand why they did it, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with it. As a 60 gig PS3 owner, I like having the backwards compatibility, but it isn't a deal breaker. The whole backwards compatibility thing started with the PS2, and it seemed as gamers, we have almost expected that with every new system. The main issue that I have is the failure rate of the 360. I don't wanna pay good $$$ for a system and take the chance that it's going to be one of the 33% of them that crap out. Also, I like the fact that with a PS3, I'm good to go right out of the box, and I don't have to buy an additional HD DVD drive to play HD movies or once they stop producing games that fit on a single DVD. Also, I hate the proprietary HD system that MS has.....it's either none, 20 gig or 120 gig...that's it... With the PS3, the sky is the limit because all I have to do is buy a larger notebook drive and that's it. I don't have to worry about voiding my warranty at all.4G wrote:Thats did not stop you from blasting the Xbox for only having 300 backwards compat games.. Sounds like you are making the same argument I did to you before
And as Chris stated, I also work in the industry and know for a fact that it is harder to dev to the PS3. If a game is to be multiplatform, developers have to start on the PS3. The Xbox can be easily ported over after. I have had many conversations with Developers I work with on this very subject.
This is no different that the last Gen, though. You dev to the Xbox and the PS2 was an easy port. It is funny how the sides have flip-flopped.