PS3 or XBox 360

[Gordon Fearman]

And the fact you couldn't tell the difference helps prove the point. Graphics on both systems are so good that the differences are truly negligible.

More sort of proof that I've never played either one. Perhaps if I had, I could. Or it just proves that the makers of FarCry 2 didn't utilise all of the PS3's polygon-drawing power, unlike, say, Naughty Dog. Personally, I'm not that concerned with graphics because my bottleneck would likely be my TV, so that's that.

Also, I think platformers lean more towards PS3. Or entirely. I don't know. What I do know is that Ratchet and Clank is awesome. And so is inFamous.

[Beta-guy]

Beta, how much research have you done on the 360 failure rate? If it's anything more than googling those links...

I've been helping a friend repair his xbox 360 that is also suffering from RROD, but I doubt that matters to you I'm still just a fanboy right?

I'm sure.

My point is you came rushing in here with "OMG 360 WILL RAPE YOUR KITTENS AND USE THEIR BONES TO SCRATCH YOUR DISCS. HERE'S A BUNCH OF DISJOINTED PROOF."

Yeah, 360s had a RROD problem. It's not like PS3s have had their own version. Oh wait...

And in either case the issue is pretty much solved now.

Older 360s scratched discs if repositioned while the disc was spinning. Older PS3s had their lasers drop out of place and could not read any discs.

Both systems have and continue to have problems. Live goes down sometimes, true. PSN went down and people couldn't even play half of their single player games.

You attacked the 360 talking about how bad it is and left out everything that's happened with the PS3 in order to make the PS3 seem better. You are, in fact, being a fanboy.


And he never asked "What system is better?" he asked which would cater to his tastes based on the games he likes.

So, here Myrph:
360 - Shooters and Computer Ports (Especially RPGs)

PS3 - Adventure games and JRPGs

Puzzle games can pretty much go across the board especially with the arcade and PSN.

---

Yes, Gord. Always with the 'ou'

And the fact you couldn't tell the difference helps prove the point. Graphics on both systems are so good that the differences are truly negligible.

it's a matter of severity, the xbox 360 HAS (not had) a more severe issue regarding the RROD as far as I know. The PS3 has YLOD (yellow light of death) but from my experiences and from what I hear is far less likely to occur.

I'm not deliberately hiding anything, there are 2 main issue that prevent me buying an Xbox 360:
1. RROD as I understand it it's still very frequent to see this occur, you might not have seen it but I've talked to people that never had issues with windows ME or Vista as well but that doesn't mean there is no problem with those OS's just as because you personally haven't dealt with RROD or other problems that the problems don't exist and or aren't severely impacting others.
2. paying to play multiplayer games, I mean here I am having tons of fun playing MAG a game that lets me play with 256 real human players online for free, but with Xbox I have to pay Microsoft for the privilege to play with my friends or total strangers.

Everything else I mentioned are also things I've found and hold them to be concerns as well like the disc scratching issue. my original post was both a suggestion (pointing out Blu-ray has scratch protection that you deny is there and pointing out it can play Blu-ray).

you've mentioned the problem is pretty much solved PROVE IT, here's the thing when I was in the Blu-ray HD-DVD format war the HD-DVD side where saying things like TL51 (a tiple layer version of HD-DVD that would have 1 more GB than Blu-ray) would be released anytime now, they were saying Warner Brothers were going to switch to HD-DVD (they sided with Blu-ray) they made claims that couldn't be proven and ended up being total crap, it's obvious you don't like what I say in fact you are now saying things that out right disagree with what I say, I'm fine with that but FOR THE LOVE OF GOD PROVE IT.

all this time my problem with you hasn't been that you are argumentative, or abusive (calling me names) but it's because you make statements and refuse to show anything that'll back up your story. others have pointed out that you haven't refuted what I said but you argue with me fine, show me where I am wrong if the xbox 360 has solved the issue, I might get one after I buy my macbookpro, but you could be telling my that the moon is made of green cheese for all the good your doing because YOU DON'T BACK UP YOUR STATEMENTS

[Arius]

What statements?

And when did I say prove it?

And what story?

What the fuck are you talking about?

[Myrph]

So, here Myrph:
360 - Shooters and Computer Ports (Especially RPGs)

PS3 - Adventure games and JRPGs

Puzzle games can pretty much go across the board especially with the arcade and PSN.

That's pretty much what I figured. I guess I can always go get an Xbox as well when the opportunity arises!

[Beta-guy]

What statements?

And when did I say prove it?

And what story?

What the fuck are you talking about?

you stated Microsoft pretty much fixed the problem allow me to refresh your memory "And in either case the issue is pretty much solved now." PROVE IT

when you make statement prove it, I have been proving what I said and you did nothing but call me a fanboy for my trouble, I'm asking you to come clean and show me links that'll tell me that microsoft has solve the RROD problem like you claim, because I'm tired of listening to CRAP from people that think the way to combat the truth is to make shit up, all I'm asking is that you PROVE IT, you made the statement and I want you to show me and everything reading that it's true. I don't think it's asking too much. For some reason it's not getting through to you, and you haven't posted 1 god damn link to back up your statements.

[Gordon Fearman]

Yeah, I agree with Beta. You haven't really backed up anything you've said. But I also haven't looked at anything Beta said. So he could be a hypocrite.

[Arius]

The Jasper systems. They use a different motherboard and they don't RROD nearly as often under 4% last I read. Google it your fucking self.

And all of this doesn't change the fact you came in here and attacked the 360 while offering nothing to the actual conversation. You are being a fanboy. A fanboy is you. You are fanning as a boy.

Attacking a system based entirely on making another system seem better is what a fanboy does. That's what you did. And it had nothing to do with the initial post. I'm not trying to prove anything, I'm just saying "Stop trolling around and being a fanboy. That's why threads like this are locked so often."

I'm done with you, repeating myself this many times is driving me insane.

[Beta-guy]

The Jasper systems. They use a different motherboard and they don't RROD nearly as often under 4% last I read. Google it your fucking self.

And all of this doesn't change the fact you came in here and attacked the 360 while offering nothing to the actual conversation. You are being a fanboy. A fanboy is you. You are fanning as a boy.

Attacking a system based entirely on making another system seem better is what a fanboy does. That's what you did. And it had nothing to do with the initial post. I'm not trying to prove anything, I'm just saying "Stop trolling around and being a fanboy. That's why threads like this are locked so often."

I'm done with you, repeating myself this many times is driving me insane.

You may have heard there are more Xbox 360 retail units coming soon. Probably with it, you may also be hoping that Microsoft has finally figured out the Three Red Light failure, also known as Red Ring of Death (RROD). Don't count on it. If you thought the Xbox 360's problems were solved with the recent "Jasper" Xbox 360 unit (reduced power consumption 12.1 amp unit with 65nm CPU and 65nm GPU), they were not.

I can tell you from my firsthand experience, the Jasper Xbox 360 has been my 8th Xbox 360 system to fail, only after 3 months from purchasing it. I had purchased it in hopes of using an Xbox 360 unit that wouldn't fail after returning seven Xbox 360 units back to Microsoft, all for the same Three Red Light Failure. Yes, I am about to head into my 9th Xbox 360 unit since I purchased the Xbox 360 at launch on November 22, 2005. My experience isn't an isolated one and as time goes on, it seems like it's only snowballing for Microsoft.

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=82175 hmmm sounds like Jasper solved the problem I thought that was what you were referring to but I wanted to be sure. Again is you have a link that'll prove me wrong go for it.

[Gordon Fearman]

I doubt you're gonna get an answer, Beta, but as far as consoles go, what is going on with PS3's backwards compatibility?

[Beta-guy]

I doubt you're gonna get an answer, Beta, but as far as consoles go, what is going on with PS3's backwards compatibility?

First Gen was like 2 consoles built into 1 with having the PS2 CPU/GPU built in along with the PS3 stuff, but that was pretty expensive so Sony removed the PS2 CPU causing some compatibility issues but you could still play most PS2 games, third generation (and last of the fat PS3's) Sony got rid of the PS2 GPU and with that no more PS2 playback (PS1 playback still exists for all PS3's as far as I know) the thin PS3's got rid of a feature some people on here might care about the thin PS3's can't have Linux installed on it, I don't know exactly what Sony did but they change their system yet again, it seems like with every new generation it has fewer and fewer features, quite disappointing. some people have asked about when we could see backwards compatibility again, but it sounds like Sony isn't even interested in looking at it.

I wish that if that was Sony's approach they they'd at least release a new PS2 that would upconvert PS2 games and have a HDMI port...

[Gordon Fearman]

So, I was engaged in my least favourite hobby, thinking, and I remembered something that Ar said and how it's a very bad generalisation.

I'm not talking about framerate drops. I'm talking about there being a better way to spend time making a game.

Yeah, that's the one. See, there was recently an article in the Escapist on visuals in some weird ass-Russian game. Called Outcry. It's important you know that for this next quote:

At least year's Develop Conference in Brighton, England, one debate reared its head again and again: where should the focus lie on a scale between graphics and gameplay? I didn't understand the question. To argue for one or the other seems to demonstrate a deep misunderstanding of how game design works, and how those final products are experienced by the end user. I came away troubled by developers who claimed enjoyment was solely in the mechanics, and even more baffled by those who argued in favor of putting artistry first. Both viewpoints seemed conceptually flawed.

Then I played Outcry, and I understood a bit. Sometimes, a game works despite neglecting a fundamental aspect of its design. And Outcry does work, in its own, unfathomable way. I played through in a single sitting, eyes glued to the screen, hand affixed to the mouse. I don't do that when I'm not absolutely caught up in a thing of sheer brilliance. I was frustrated. I snarled at the monitor. Outcry is a terrible game.

Focusing on visuals can be as powerful as having a balanced game. Now, I never said it would be as fun, but powerful...or compelling (a word I am reluctant to use). Visuals can draw the gamer into the world and get them emotionally involved despite bad or simple gameplay. An example of the latter (simple gameplay) still being effective is (as some of you may have read earlier) one of my favourite games for the PS3, Flower. Flower's gameplay is exquisitely simple; it's a racing game with no time limit. Hell, all of the buttons do exactly the same thing; accelerate, while you steer with the Six-Axis. The premise of the game is the gamer plays as the wind in 6 (I think) flowers' dreams and the dream of a picture of a flower (credit level). The goal is to touch all the flowers (well, I say all, it's really just specific ones, but it's most of them) and have them bloom, each one giving off a petal which will join the trail of petals being carried in the wind. The more petals you have, the faster you can go. As you progress through each level, you end up brightening and colouring a previously dull world. So, given the game's simple gameplay, it's carried through by it's brilliant soundtrack (which I really wish I could get my hands on) and it's detailed, vibrant visuals. The grass looks and behaves realistically (until it changes colours and stuff...that's not so realistic). The aesthetic gives off such an atmosphere that you become emotionally involved without realising it. At first you just think "oh, making flowers bloom and hey that music's really cool" but you feel sadness (or at least disappointment and definitely shock) and happiness (or at least accomplishment). Some games strive to tell a story, whereas Flower strives to tell a poem (thatgamecompany actually said that in an interview) which is done brilliantly with there use of imagery (best literary device ever) and acoustics (quick, I'm running out of words! Send me a thesaurus).

Yududududa. Hey, graphics can even come in handy when you have an award winning franchise based around clever puzzle solving and unnecessary evisceration. That's right, I'm talking God of War III. Now, admittedly I have not played GoW3...or any God of War (well, I played the 2 levels of 1, but I'm pretty sure the second level was just banging those chicks), but I have played the demo and seen at least one review. Fortunately, both of these showcase GoW3's graphics, so I should be good as long as I don't make too many bold claims. Speaking of bold claims: THE HERCULEAN (literally) SCALE OF GOD OF WAR III ONLY WORKS BECAUSE THE PLAYSTATION 3 HAS THE CAPACITY TO RENDER SUCH HUGE SCENES WITH SUCH DETAIL! See, I wouldn't make that claim. (Yes I would (No I wouldn't)). I mean for one, Shadow of the Colossus exists and I...don't know anything about that game either. Anyway, even though I wouldn't make the above claim (yes I would (not really)), I would say that the story and the...experience is really strengthened by the sheer size and detail the game uses in its graphics. It draws you into the story and the environment with just how detailed everything is and overwhelms you with the size of everything (how many times have I said 'size' and 'detail'?). You can really relate to how a Greek hero...or anti-hero or...villain(? Seriously, what the hell is Krato) would think of Mount Olympus.

I mean if graphics weren't important, why would James Cameron be able to construct a new Titanic out of rhubarb? Seriously, I ain't seeing no one slitting their wrists over Dancing with Wolves.

Yeah, but enough on that. The point I'm getting at here is that the Wii version of these games would suck.

Disclaimer: I'm not actually debating whether or not the PS3 has better graphics, so don't think the fact that I am only mentioning 2 PS3 games means that. I mean, the PS3 does have better graphics and that really shouldn't be up to debate, but even if it was, I wouldn't care...because I would be right.

[Matt]

I know that this isn't the point you were arguing, but I'm going to throw out here that the fact that the PS3 has "better graphics" is, actually, debatable.

It certainly has a higher top end than the 360 does - but that top end is almost -never- used. In fact, by and large, in head to head comparisons, the 360 version of a multiplatform title typically has the better visuals (by some small, and relatively meaningless metric). This is due largely to the fact that most games are built on the 360 and ported to the PS3, a process which the PS3 doesn't take kindly to.

In the few cases where a game has been ported down, (FFXIII, for instance which we know for a fact is better on the PS3) the differences are barely noticable unless you're running them side by side - and even then, while the image quality is better on the PS3, the framerates are actually better on the 360. Furthermore, thanks to an in-depth analysis of the actual differences between the two by digital foundry - we know that most of those differences are attributable to a sloppy port and limitations of the optical media itself rather than on any specific technical failing of the system.

Since games developed solely for the PS3 are not easily comparable to games developed solely for the 360, and since the 360 normally stands head to head with or ever so slightly ahead of the PS3 in comparisons of multiplatform games, the fact that the PS3 has better graphics is very much up for debate.

In terms of what one can expect to see in the overwhelming majority of games they play, the systems are graphical equals.

[Gordon Fearman]

Well, I meant capable of better graphics. I just didn't say that because I wasn't thinking about it at the time. And you did agree with me on that, so it's not debatable?

[Matt]

I agree with you in theory, not in practise was my point.

-m

[Gordon Fearman]

Right. I agree with you agreeing with me and disagreeing with me simultaneously. By which I mean, I understand.

[Myrph]

I guess the issue now will be finding somewhere that I will be able to actually buy a PS3 with FF13...

[Gordon Fearman]

The internet.

[Myrph]

Yup! Just found this deal then I can find somewhere cheap to pick up FF13! I just hope I can persuade my parents to let me get it in time for my birthday...

[Rikadyn]

It certainly has a higher top end than the 360 does - but that top end is almost -never- used.

You're definitely right there.

And it's also part of why GT5 is delayed so much, cause PD has been the one trying to milk the most out of the hardware, and always being made by Sony to do tech demos.(Not that I'm giving PD any goddamn leeway with the damn posturing and bullshit)

(GT4's cars, had 5000 pixels per car, GT5's boasting someplace around 500k pixels per car

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2768/4427301242_ee0751eeba_b.jpg

take note that the High Beam indicator is on, and shown)

[Arius]

Damn it Matt!

[Gordon Fearman]

Pretty.

[Smeghead]

To me the choice actually pretty much came down to the exlcusives (I got my 80GB PS3 just befor the larger model was released. So I can still play PS1 games off discs on it), which back then was pretty much MGS4. this was also back when the 360 was still having major problems with RROD (and with a jetengine powering the cooling system).

Even to this day I look at the 360 exclusives and just find them to be interesting (Ok I would love to play Sadowcomplex) while as the PS3 has LBP, MGS, Uncharted among others. Sure the PS3 had a slow start (but you kow, that's a classic Sony tradition with the PS consoles), but it has made up for that in my opinion. Although the PSN still sort of sucks in my opinion. I call each week's PSN update "This week's dissapointment", How hard would it be to start putting up more PS1 titles (Especially PS1 games that didn't come to europe ).

Also, having had a PS1/2 I had come to love the PS controller, and I just didn't like the xbox/360 controllers

[unknown gamer]

I say go for PS3. I have both consoles and I am getting more fun out of my PS3 but I don't play that much online so if your looking for online then the 360 is a better choice.