Why would you bother with a next gen console if you don't have a hd tv? I've tried it at uni and it looks ***** you may as well keep buying ps2 games for cheaper there's barely a difference, certainly not in 360 games that rely on HD lighting rather than geometry.



I have appreciated the fact the ps3 comes with all components included and standard, bluray alone pays off its value for me, on top of that I've really needed the built in wifi and hard disk space. I would also not even bother with online gaming if there was a subscription fee for such basic services. I had a 360 before the ps3 came out but sold it after realising the prospect of what I'd have to be buying for it to be useful in my new house. On top of that the 360 hard disk being an addon made it very fragile and had already broken on me once, not to mention the 360 always overheated.



TBH I think this is fair PR, it's just stacking up the facts, certainly much classier than microsoft's unprovoked and direct slandering.

I have both systmes, and find that I got my moneys worth with the PS3, then 360. I had to move from one room that I had my systmes in and where I could use a ethernet cord to connect to both systmes. Then I had to move to the room just a short bit way from there. I could not drag a 50 foot cord to there. I got a wi-fi router and had to get a wi-fi add on($100) for the 360, and will need to get a 120 gig hhd($150). With PS3, Wi-Fi was alreadly in the system. I am going to upgread the PS3 hhd first(350 gigs for $85) So, the PS3 is a better value. As for graphics comparisons, I saw alot of the games that came out, or are about to come out for both at San Diego Comic Con just past. And most of all the booths has side by side graphics comparisons on all the multi systmes games(nice LCD HD tvs at all the booths), and PS3 looked just like the 360. In some cases, the PS3 looked a bit better.

Love how Sony uses the $199 arcade as a comparison benchmark, but then says that HDMI is not availble on "earlier models" even tho HDMI is standard on the $199 arcade and has been for more than a year already.



I guess it just hurt them too much to put a YES next to HDMI, they had to spin it anyway they could to make it seem inferior.

I mean really I like 360 just like any other Hardcore gamer but I'm always going to be a Sony Playstation fan boy. The only reason why 360 fan boys have room to talk is because the only games they can compare to are the multi platform games. The only realy reason why they look a little better on the 360 is because the develope it for the 360 first then port it to the PS3. Compare PS3 only games to the 360.......oh wait you can't because the 360 would ***** on its self. Try to play MGS4 on 360....I dare you.....after you put it on like 5 disks. The the ***** over yourselves.

sony is actually stepping up about the competition instead of giving m$ all of the air time. One other thing they forgot to mention is the wireless controllers for every ps3.



Oh, and @ ps3ispoop, you are calling sony system junk and praising the 3fixme? Very ironic. And many smart shoppers already know that online you can find blu-ray sales and offers all the time for less than $30/movie.

...but games developed on ps3 first then ported to 360 look no better than those games developed on 360 first and then ported to ps3. so you cant make out multiformat games look the same cause they all started on 360.



mgs4 is fantastic, but it can be done on 360 in about 4 dvds. the sp game for mgs4 is 27.2GB and mgo is 2.7GB, so the full game could fit and it would work cause whats really different about waiting for an act to load or changing a disc. doubt it would come to 360, but if it did, i do think it would be equal in quality to the ps3 (can't believe i'm saying this nowadays).

The Blu-Ray does make you money worth, considering you can get games on Blu-Ray, and have the all the extras a Blu-Ray player does not have. Show a game console with a media center and a Blu-Ray player for 400 bucks ther then a PS3.

second point: you are right on this one.

third point: WOW. 10 gigabytes. MGS4 need 50 GBs. Stating yourself:" Check your ***** before you make such idiotic statements."

Try Again.

***** japs





Buy AMERICAN GAMING!

"MGS4 need 50 GBs"



people thought that cause kojima said he didn't have enough space on blu-ray. but he was talking about the normal blu-ray discs for ps3 games which hold 25GB.



after mgs4 was released, gamers looked at the blu-ray disc and saw that the mgs4 single player game takes up 27.2GB and MGO takes up 2.7GB, which is 29.9GB in total.

1) If you set up WiFi correctly, WiFi is nearly as fast as Ethernet. WLAn has a spped of 54 Mbits, I seriously think that no normal user has that fast internet.

2). And? you still don't have WLAN, Blu-Ray and Wireless Controllers with an battery integrated.

3)...and here comes the "so much better XBL"-argument again. Show me the great aspects XBL offers what PSN can't deliver. And don't come me with arguments like Cross conferences and such. I'm pretty sure 99% of all Xbox needs this feature. (sarcasm).

4) Your own opinion. I personally like the PS3 XMB more. And you can connect your PS3 to Windows as well. So the only one wothout a point here are YOU.

6) Sure you have your computer for that. But personally I like to browse on my 42'' TV. I don't want to wait always 'till my PC booted up just to check my E-mails. And my point was taht even a less powerful console like the Wii or even the PSP!( I admit the brower of the PSP is ***** but still..) can handle a web browser. Why can't the Xbox 360 do that?

5)???? after 6 comes 7. Don't you ever listen in school?

anyway, nope not "everyone knows xbox360 curb stomps PS3 when it comes to a selection of games" because it is simply false. I could begin with Metacritic showing that the average score on PS3 games is higher, but that would be ridculous.

I prefer the games of the PS3, if you prefer the agmes of the Xbox 360, fine, your thing, but don't come here saying all games on X360 are better.

forgot something



3) Try to read again: I talked about FULL HD movies which are NOT available for the Xbox 360.

And most of the "HD" movies you can get on the marketplace are not even real HD, but upscaled SD movies.



ohh and another thing: you look more and more like an ass desperately trying to defend your beloved console. Everyone should have noticed by now that you nothing more than a mindless fanboy. I tried to state facts and I did not attacked any console. I said that every console is worth to buy, you have to decide which you the like the best.

I try be neutral as possible and get flamed for that. I think that shows your credibility.

PSN is free because if it wasn't, no one would pay for it.



Sorry Playslaves, PS3 is not the XBOX-killer sony promised it would be.

HA!!!



Another comparison Sony conveniently "forgot"



Wii is BC with GameCube,

360 BC with select titles

PS3 - too bad for you, you're SOL unless you bought an older console at 499/599 which may or may NOT have built in WIFI

they didnt.. they shows arcade model, with the price of $200, plust the wifi adapter, plus the HDD, plus the online service...

Its about time Sony just laid it out like that. And to be real they didnt say evetything.



I am not a fanboy. I owned ps1 &2 but I was actually thinking about getting a 360 because it had the best games and it was cheaper. And to be real the only way I could affford an 80 gb ps3 (in Nov. 2007)was because of a Kmart 20% off coupon. My friend was with me and he bought a 20 gb 360 with the same coupon. He was telling me that the ps3 was to expensive and that the 360 had better games. He was correct about the games because it did have better games. But since then I hav'nt spent 1 exrta dollar. My friend on the other hand so far had to buy Extra control $50(I used my ps2 control for my ps3 ) a router $100 (free with ps3) the RROD and $100 for XBL (+$50 yearly for the life of the 360)not mention console fans, themes,ect. that he bought thats free or not needed with ps3 in his first whole year. Now after his first year he says he needs a more gb($100-150) and he isnt really excited about 360's 2009 lineup.



Like I said I an not a fanboy. I have actually liked a lot of xbox titles(GOW2,Cra ckdown,Dead Rising,ect). The 360 has a lot of good games but as of now, we are starting to see what the actual limitations of the consoles are. Not just the Blueray player(most people dont care much) but the ability of the blueray disc itself compared to HD-DVD gaming wise. And older 360 dont have HDMI ports. I could not fault my friend for getting his at the time(Nov.2007) because I really 2nd and 3rd guessed myself. But in in 08 the games that ps3 have been releaseing have been on par with 360's and 09 looks like it will be better than 08. I just think that now and ps3 is the better value and in the future the ps3 will only get better.

One thing I never understood was why fanboys of any console bother slandering each other. It's not going to make either of you switch sides or say "Yeah, you ARE right..."



Just stop. Seriously. If your game is better than theirs, go play it. Why are you wasting time flaming people? Enjoy your Ultima Game of Kick-assination on your Alpha-Omega Console of Outweigh without the needless trashing of others, regardless of which Alpha-Omega Console of Outweigh you own.

Yeah but let's see I can't get through a full multiplayer game (LBP or CoD World at War) on the PS3 because I always lose the connection, and you pretty much have to hardwire it because it is so slow (downloading demos on the PS3 takes about 2-3 times as long as the 360 then you have to install. What else...most games you need to install up to 4GB just to play the game. One more thing...there is a bottleneck using the HDD that comes with the PS3 and need to buy a new one to speed things up which there you go causes you to buy a HDD and yes I have swapped my HDD; downloading and load times of games is much faster ($100 later).

O that's right .. the argument is old, full of B.S., and oh, right ... I didn't wanna look like a big idiot like most of you all...



Good luck y'all...



Arguing with fangirls is as productive as screaming at the wind.

"Irrelevant responses are a good sign someone is losing an argument."

Where is this irrelevant? I proved you wrong, yet you say this is irrelevant. The only one who is loosing arguments is yet again YOU.





"Where does XBL beat PSN? How about Movies, Tv, Community Size, and Downloadable games? Oh wait that pretty much covers it.."

PS3 has Blu-Ray, that pretty muchs beats mvoies downloads. That you can watch TV with the Xbox 360 is great... oh wait, you can only do this with PlayTV, which is on PS3. Dunno where you got that from. Community Size is bigger, more morons and immature kids like you are running around there, sure, this is right. Downloadable games... Last time I checked both services offered great games....





"Yes it would as User-Reviews aren't very accurate. However you might want to look at sales..."

I was talking about Reviews from admins which are, again, higher on PS3 games. And you stopped reading again after this. I said that every console has it's personal taste, their own great games. If you can't accept that other consoles don't have great games, too, then you are even a bigger ass then everybody already thought of you.





"Again, Irrelevant responses. And Xbox 360 has had full 1080p since a month before PS3 even came out..."

Yes, the Xbox 360 has 1080p output, but I was talking about the HD movies from the marketplace, which are NOT FULL HD. Don't you get it finally? NO..FULL...HD...MOVIES...ON..XBOX....MARKETPLACE... get it now?





"No its not. 360 does AS A FACT have the best selection. You are mistaking having the Best Selection of games with having the Best games. 360 has more games, thus has the best selection."



WoW, that was stupid, even for you. After your logic, the Wii would have the best selection.

Everyone know that the Wii games are horrible compared to PS3 or X360 games.





"Hmmz so we should all have browsers on every device just incase our computer don't work..."

It's alway good to have an alternative in case something happens. But surely you won't think ahead, do you? And again, you didn't bother to read to the end. How long does it take boot a PC so You can browse? around 20 seconds if you keep your PC clean, if not even longer.

How long does it take to power up a PS3? 10 seconds max. And it's not only about the 10 seconds here, it's more convientient to power up a console and to begin browsing with it.





Again I state myself:

"ohh and another thing: you look more and more like an ass desperately trying to defend your beloved console. Everyone should have noticed by now that you nothing more than a mindless fanboy. I tried to state facts and I did not attacked any console. I said that every console is worth to buy, you have to decide which you the like the best.

I try be neutral as possible and get flamed for that.

I think that shows your credibility."

I wrote this here again, but seeing how you behaved before, you won't read this anyway...

It makes you look like an idiot.



And ShinbuSK is right. Whoever voted him down is pretty stupid... or they're just a 360 fanboy.



And please, stop making rushed excuses. That first and last points aren't even true. My connection is fine on the PSN, and I've never been disconnected from an online game due to connection problems. Also, you can buy a 500GB HDD for the PS3 for under $100, while for the 360, you have to pay Microsoft a $100 for what, 120GB?

sorry for that, it just pisses me of when fanboys spread lies. +p

All systems are great. That what's I'm trying to say. Everyone should take that system what he likes the most and play with it. Period.

THE XBOX 360 IS NOW OVER 8 MILLION CONSOLES SOLD PAST THE PS3 WHICH MEANS THE GAP HAS GROWN FARTHER SINCE THE PS3 WAS LAUNCHED. PEOPLE SAY IT IS BECAUSE THE 360 WAS LAUNCHED FIRST BUT LETS SEE IF YOU LOOK BACK THERE WERE NOT 8 MILLION CONSOLES SOLD WHEN THE PS3 LAUNCHED.

I own both of the systems and love them both a well, but there are things that each system does way better on than the other. PLEASE NOTE THESE ARE MY OPINIONS AND ARE NOT DIRECTED AT ANYONE OR ANY FANBOY/GIRL GROUP!!!



1. ONLINE: Grant it I do have to pay for Live (which sucks) if I want to play online with friends, but I Like Live a lot better than PSN. Xbox Live is designed to feel like you're apart of a gaming community and you can stay connected to it whether you're playing with friends or watching a video, but your friends can still interact with you. The PSN has home going, but I really didn't like it. Sure the game or application is in beta, but I have to say, the thing has been in development for more than three years and this is all they have to show for it? Anyway, the PS Store itself is nice, but I still wish this were better organized. It was better than Live's, but with how the NXE does things, the PSN could step it up on the next Firmware.



Now I'm in the minority on this, but online gaming isn't super important to me, so much like PSN, Core Xbox Live (Silver Account) is free and I still have access to everything a gold member would expect for Online play, Netfix, and first week run demos. PSN free all around and no restrictions- awesome, but the PSN network does seem a bit slow. They have been making strides in improving the XMB and XMB access, but I think it could be better.



2. MEDIA FUNCTIONS: Hands down the PS3 is the media house GOD! I'm also in the minority in the fact that Blu-ray can shove it and I don't care about it. Until its the ONLY format in which to buy a movie on disc, I see no reason in getting it. I do have an HD TV a damn good one too, but I just can't justify buying them. Now the difference between DVD and Blu-ray is huge I know, but I don't care... Anyway, I like the media options on the PS3. Sony gave the users more hard drive control than Microsoft and that's awesome (I think the reason for this was so that PS3 can be considered a computer and not a gaming toy so they could duck out on certain tax chargings). Being able to copy videos from you phone, PSP, memory cards (if you've got the 60 and first version 80 gig models) flash drives etc., directly to the HDD is awesome. Being able to rip music on the PS3 picking to rip it in either: MP3, WMA, Atrac 3 and then being able to mve it where you like- awesome. Same with the pictures and being able to swap out the HDD altogether- awesome! 360 not so much with the awesome on the media front.



3. CONTROLLERS: Now I like the 360's controller a lot better. Sure it's bigger than the PS series controller, but it's more comfortable to use. With the Dual Shock 3 costing more than the 360 wireless controller (360- 49.99/ PS3- 54.99) just because it has rumble in it is stupid to me, but what can I do but pay it and be happy that rumble is back in my Sony branded controller.



4. IN THE BOX: Now the PS3 is shown off to be an HD system all around. 360 is shown off to be an HD system , but mostly for gaming. Now you'd think Sony would give to HD cable to take advantage of the PS3's HD prowess right from the box... but no. Standard A/V you get. You have to go get the HD cables. on the 360 side, the Arcade has standard A/V cables. The Pro has a A/V-Component cable so it can handle both. The Elite comes with the A/V- Component cable AND an HDMI cable! It many not be the super best HDMI cable, but the fact the you even get one is awesome! I would think the system that's more media based from the ground up would be he one givng the gamers HD cables of some kind.



5. GAMES: Here's where most of the online fight come about... When it comes to which system I buy my games for, I look at these factors for myself: Do I want to playonline with it? If yes- get the 360 ver. if not the PS3 ver. When I come to single player games, I'll grab the PS3 ver. depending on the game. Some games I might want play longer than just and hour or so, so I'll get it for the 360. Sometimes I just close my eyes and eney-meany-miney-mo it. I have no

the problem is everyone is biased even me i have both a ps3 and 360 (arcade i got for xmas) but i tend to favor my ps3



ive always said all the consoles are great hell id have bought a wii by now if i hadn't borrowed my buddy's a couple months back and beaten no more heroes and galaxy



i just hate when people attempt to right out slander another system i have thigs i h8 about every system



360

online isnt free (i just wasted my last of the 48hrs i got wit fable)

controllers arent rechargable / you cant turn on the system with them



PS3

no love for canada (no psn cards , no video store)

keypad or headset should have came with the system

stop writing books people. sony is very correct and ive been telling people the same thing for years now

"If you plan on mud slinging, bring a shovel."



I approve and agree.

Very well put

all i see different is that you get a bit bigger HD 2 games, a headset, and no wifi



you can put your own hard drive in the ps3, which are the fraction of the price compared to the rip off 360 ones



you can get a bluetooth headset for cheap and the 2 games included are prob old ones which you can get for £20/ $30 each,



then if you want to play online on your elite you gotta still buy a $100 adapter



which makes the ps3 a better deal still

Yamagushi....you are very uninformed....maybe you should actually use a PS3 and play some of it's games before you talk *****....



Many of the cutscenes let you change to security cameras, or you can take control of a robot and drive it around while everyone is talking. Then there are times you can "focus" on things going on outside of cutscene which gives some extra insight into whats going on...or it could be just to check out a chicks ass when she bends over...



There is no way MGS4 would fit on one DVD. To be honestly I think 360 is a pretty powerful system with some nice architecture, but I highly doubt that 360 could handle the amount of geometry that is present in alot of MGS4.



It's a fact that 360 has better pixel shading than PS3 (bump-mapping and real time lighting) but the PS3 can render way more geometry and use many more Vertex shaders, which MGS4 takes huge advantage of....



NTM it's native 1080p, no high-end 360 game has yet to use native 1080P....not halo 3, not gears 2....they all just get upscaled, which is totally different...

Okay, little 8 year-old boy, come out of the basement and go outside for once. Judging by that little "comeback" there, I suggest you get a life.

Wii having limited online services? I have to say that's true, but it was totally off-topic! It asked how much the internet services costed, not how good they were! And the only thing PS3 is good for is as a Blu-Ray player! It's barely a game console! I can even admit Xbox 360 is at least dedicated to gaming, but the Wii wins in the end!

Yamagushi - Games and saves are available on the PS3 internal drive, which is the overall purpose i.e. Warhawk, SOCOM CA.....

Huh? Since when? I'd like to know where you heard this from.

I own both consoles as well, and I like that the PS3 comes with the charging cable, but it's like 1 ft long, so unless you actually sit less than 1 ft away from your PS3 you can't use the controller while it's charging. You can with the 360 charge kit, because it's around 8 ft

"Btw GeOW is coming to the PS3 too you know, you can't brag about it forever. It has been announced."



that was just a rumour, started by michael patcher i think it was who thought it would happen - in his opinion. epic has not announced gears of war for ps3, but i've seen lots of people mistake headlines of gow3 coming to ps3 without realizing it was god of war 3 being announced, not gears of war 3.

Meant to say they are meant to look the same, not aren't.

u guy were around the same lead when ps3 lunch wat are u talking about if u see the numbers xbox has sold about 9 mill a year for 3 years sony has sold abot 9 mill a year for 2 years......ps3 around 19 mill xbox around 27 mill

It's nice to see people add things I don't even said.



@Master chef:

"and to be fair here, since people said you can find BD movies much cheaper online than in store, the same applies to that adapter. I've seen it go for as little as $40"



And that's what I said:

"if you think that 15 bucks for a Blu-Ray is too expensive then you are a very sad person.... "



Did I state anywhere that I 've seen these prices online? No, I've seen this prices on NEW Blu-Rays, not used ones, straight from the store.

You can't get a NEW Xbox 360 for under 70 bucks.

Simple facts.

no you idiot. Launching first gave them a user base, who convince their family, friends, neighbors, etc. to also get an Xbox 360, thus causing it to grow faster than a newly-released ps3 nobody knows anything about.

It is a fact, for anyone who has read in-depth hardware breakdowns of the PS3 and 360 and also understands how how 3D graphics are Rendered/implemented.....



Basically it comes down to 360 having 48 unified pipes, which can do shader or vertex operations....the PS3 has 24 dedicated pixel shader pipes and 8 dedicated vertex shader pipes, however the Cell can be used to process vertex operations, it is also extremley good at setting up polygons.



If you have an eye for 3D graphics you can tell that MGS has more geometry in it than any other 360 game.....just look at how well detailed the motorbike is, all modeled with polygons, no texture tricks or bump-mapping....same with overall details in the environments....many things that they could have used a texture for or bumpmapping are actually modeled with polygons instead....



That is why there is no "pop-in" which happens when you rely on too much bumpmapping to fake details, rather than modeling the details with polygons (which is more intense and why bumpmapping was "invented") The biggest games you notice this in are Gears, Unreal Tourny and Socom confrontation....



I just got a 1080p monitor yesterday and reviewed some of the cutscenes from MGS and almost cried at the level of geometry....another good example is near the end with the ships, just so many polygons...

Gears will never come to PS3.....ever.....never....end of story...

I was reading all the comments because I got bored and yours makes a lot of sense.

I like bunnies!

1 foot? you have a horrible sense of length. and you can just use a different usb cable f youve got one. i have about 6 different length usb cables i could use and a usb extender, but thats just me.

People need to accept the fact that wireless is just no good anyway. Ethernet connections are 100 times better then wireless. If you've got a new house Scribe then you should have got it Cat 5e'd. Or if you really want to future proof it get Cat 6. This myth among the ignorant and uninformed that wireless is just as good is just cr4p. If I want to stream high def media across the network from my PC to my media center wireless just doesn't cut it. The N standard might but how much do you really want to spend. It's not stacking facts at all it's bending truths especially the one about HDD. If you start with an elite xbox 360 there's very little difference.



Always overheating?? Where were you placing your 360 in sealed cupboard I'd be surprised if a PS3 copped that for very long either.



I think you might be just another PS fanboy trying to save the PS3 in what he thinks is it's death throws.

It's really not necessary, you will have your niche soon the exclusives for the PS3 will be of such an epic scale that MS will have to release the xbox720 and then, the PS3 will have an underdog status then. Comparitive to the xbox720 the PS3 will seem cheap.

I feel we're seeing the xbox360 start to reach it's peak this year (2009) before the release of the xbox720 in the end of 2010 or begining of 2011.

U can put a laptops hard drive in xbox 360s too

1) If you set up WiFi correctly, WiFi is nearly as fast as Ethernet. WLAn has a spped of 54 Mbits, I seriously think that no normal user has that fast internet.



We're not talking about internet connectivity talking about LAN connectivity, you want stable network connections for streaming of media. As well as this cat5e goes up to 1 gigabit per second.



2). And? you still don't have WLAN, Blu-Ray and Wireless Controllers with an battery integrated.



You do get wireless controllers with the 360, the only thing you don't get are rechargable battery packs. Which if required don't cost that much extra $29AUD last time I looked, that or use AA batteries which last for two weeks with heavy gaming.



3)...and here comes the "so much better XBL"-argument again. Show me the great aspects XBL offers what PSN can't deliver. And don't come me with arguments like Cross conferences and such. I'm pretty sure 99% of all Xbox needs this feature. (sarcasm).



Well I don't know maybe it's better in the USA but PS3 online gameplay just varies from unplayable to just outright not working in Australia. I pay for the live service in AU and 99% of the time I get what I paid for.



4) Your own opinion. I personally like the PS3 XMB more. And you can connect your PS3 to Windows as well. So the only one wothout a point here are YOU.



He was pointing out the media center extender functionality which is better then the standard dashboard (but does require a computer with Media center, XP MCE2005, Vista Home Premium or Ultimate).



6) Sure you have your computer for that. But personally I like to browse on my 42'' TV. I don't want to wait always 'till my PC booted up just to check my E-mails. And my point was taht even a less powerful console like the Wii or even the PSP!( I admit the brower of the PSP is ***** but still..) can handle a web browser. Why can't the Xbox 360 do that?



Mostly because M$ don't want people finding another avenue to hack the 360 hypervisor is my guess. I wouldn't mind a browser sometimes but seriously, my 360 is too busy being used most of the time when I'm not using it for gaming. My wife is on it using it as a PVR in conjunction with Media Center. (Media Center Extender incidentally does allow you to use the web browser, albeit a bit clunky).



I've no arguments with your other points there Silver Fox.

You really are that ignorant....



PS3 owns your *****ty xbox and you know it. Your just too ignorant to admit it.



By the way, Blue-Ray isn't a failing format, HD-DVD is.... every commercial I see for a movie that just came out says "Now available on DVD and Blue-Ray" I've not seen 1 commercial that says "Now available on HD-DVD".





Also ***** YOU!

Yama, I made a point about graphics, and you countered it with issues regarding gameplay. Wow you've totally lost man.



I gotta tell you something. I'm a Playstation Fanboy. And I'm proud of it, because it shows I can recognize true quality when I see it.

"It is a fact, for anyone who has read in-depth hardware breakdowns of the PS3 and 360 and also understands how how 3D graphics are Rendered/implemented...."



and that's you is it? :) with all due respect shatterdome, 99.99% of gamers going by what they READ don't really know what they're talking about. i've seen enough of the nonsense spewed out by so-called armchair experts online to know that the only people you can trust to give a realistic assessment of 360 vs ps3 and those who've WORKED on both consoles to create games, not those who just read about them. i've read interviews and features from multiformat devs and listened to podcasts from them too (criterion immediately springs to mind) to know that both consoles are close to each other in power terms, with each having advantages and disadvantages.



strange how NONE of them seem to be aware of the vertex pushing advantage of the ps3 over the 360 that you claim. and going by what you've said, from my understanding then, whilst the ps3 is limited to 8 vertex shaders with cell able to add to this if necessary, then if 24 of the 360's unified shaders are used for pixels, 24 are left for vertices. Correct? So if you're sacrificing some of Cell's power to make up the deficit in rsx vertex shader performance compared to the 360 gpu, where is the massive overall advantage you're talking about. seems to me it actually balances out, which is in keeping with the opinions of devs.



you can point out all the examples you like my friend, but in the end that's only your opinion, it's not a fact. there is a difference. so to you mgs4 is pushing more polygons than the 360 is capable of, to me that is simply not the case.

MS did not "steal the PS3 blueprints". They went to the same company to manufacture their CPU.

And in fact both the cell and the 360 CPU are both based around the Power range of processors. But both employed that technology differently.

Obviously, I am not a bonified "expert", however I have read enough, done enough 2D and 3D art as well as "hung" in circles with professional CG artists, that I know a little....hell I am in school right now so that I can work as a concept artist....far from the 3D realm, but I have constructed and rendered 3D scenes in 3DSM and Maya....as well as constructed levels for CS:S and UT3...I also made it to 3rd year programming but dropped out because I didn't want to program...you can find some cheesy PSP homebrew on this site of mine from back in the day.



But Yes, I am an armchair expert indeed. Thing is I would trust an armchair expert (one that I knew was well informed) over an official representative of a game company any day.



If any cross plat-form developer goes out and says ANYTHING bad about one system or the other, it will lead to severe reprecussions. I really don't listen to what any developers say about anything, as they are being paid by both companies, and care more about where their rent and food is comming from than the saying the truth. (not to say it's a huge conspiracy, but they will not outwardly say one system beats another). Then you can't beleive the devs working for one company or the other....even if they are professionals and know the architecture....for the same reason...politics.



You listen to the people from sites like arstechnica....the uber nerds that disect the machines, and know every last working part of it and what it does and how it effects overall performance.



Then there is the straight knowledge that experience brings....i've set up many 3D scenes, I am no uber expert, but I can tell what is being rendered using polygons or what is bump mapped etc....so can therefore look at one game vs another and decern what techniques they are using, and what those techniques cost in terms of CPU/GPU power.



Now, as far as the shader pipes go...



As I said, 360 loves it's pixel shaders....in a scene from gears of war you are looking at 360 using the vast majority of it's unified shaders to do pixel operations to bump map the scene, create environmental lighting, reflections and bloom lighting....the nice thing about unified shaders is that it will balance out in realtime depending on if it needs pixel or vertex operations....but this is also bad it is a decision that needs to be made and slows down the process. Also, unified pipes are slower than dedicated ones.



When I said Cell does gemoetry and vertex operations extremly well....I meant EXTREMLEY well. When they talk about PS3 being twice as powerful as 360, these are the things that they are talking about.



In realworld applications, no, PS3 is not twice as powerful, as it has alot more than just straight math to worry about.....but it's sequential in order math operations that Cell destroys 360 at, and that is all setting up geometry is. (for MGS i am talking more about being able to setup geometry, not Vertex shaders....Vertex shaders are used for things like realtime deformation of geometry that is present in the scene, not setting up that geometry in the first place)



I could have wrote a lot more, but I tried to keep it short....Really I guess all you can do is try to gather as much objective information as possible and use logic to come to a decision. If you base all you know from what the media is telling you, than I can guarentee that you (and many others) are not getting the whole picture. Ce la vie.....anyways, as they say....time will tell.

Yamagushi, Funny I reread my post and I do not even remeber talking about blueray at all.

I was talking about Wi-Fi and harddrives. So read the right post befor replying to it.

As for the NXE, you will need to get a 120 harddrive any way to truely use X-Box live.

A memory card will not cut it. This goes back to my point to price. I will need to spend 0 to get a 120 harddrive, when I can get a 320 sata one for under 0. Alos I love how you would spend 9.99(gamestop, and that is just the systme.)for an elite just for the 120 harddrive, When I can get a 320 sata drive for the PS3 at about under 0. Where is the value there for 360?

As for wi-fi.To use wi-fi on the 360 you need to spend . On the PS3 it has wi-fi already to use.

Also, as I said in my main post, I can not drag a 50 feet ethernet cord to the room I am in at all. So wi-fi is my only option.

Plus, I have yet to have any problem with speed.

As for XMB vs. NXE. I love the XMB. It is eazyer to navaget and find the stuff I need. Also I can copy stuff to the PS3 harddrive and I can back up my game saves useing a USB dive. You can not do that with the 360. Yes you can use an USB dive with the 360, but you can not backup any thing or copy anything to the harddrive.

PS3 is a better value. I am notgoing to get go on games, as I have both PS3 and 360, and I find both have just as meany great games. And they look great on both.

and MGS4 will never come to 360, so you guys can stop being retarded

thanks, nice to read about your interests as an 'armchair expert'. :)



anyway...



"If any cross plat-form developer goes out and says ANYTHING bad about one system or the other, it will lead to severe reprecussions. I really don't listen to what any developers say about anything, as they are being paid by both companies"



i have a big problem with that viewpoint, because whilst it's true we need to be aware of conflicts of interests amongst developers and their tendancy to avoid upsetting companies (which is more applicable to console exclusive devs btw), i thinks it's bad practice to discount the views of ALL devs on this basis. these are the people who are at the frontline of game developement, they are at the cutting edge and therefore are the people who know what they're talking about from DIRECT experience. what they say about the consoles is of KEY importance and shouldn't be ignored. yes don't take the viewpoint of just ONE dev and don't take everything literally, but when you listen to enough of them, a pattern emerges. imo, you can't really be informed on console technology without listening to the devs. all it requires is a bit of judgement and common sense when considering the information they provide.



"When I said Cell does gemoetry and vertex operations extremly well....I meant EXTREMLEY well. When they talk about PS3 being twice as powerful as 360, these are the things that they are talking about."



well, i think that's pushing it a little. yes the cell processor offers twice the arithmetic power of the 360's cpu, whilst the 360's cpu offers about twice the power for running general/main code. hence picking on one aspect of the hardware is not representative of the whole.... which of course you acknowledged already.



regarding geometry setup, yes cell should be better in that respect, however that does not tell us that the level required in mgs4 is beyond that of the 360, that's just an assumption you're making.



you also mention unreal tournament 3 and in your other post appear to suggest that gears 2 is pushing the 360 to the max, by not being much improvement over gears 1. the problem with that arguement is that it's not true. ut3 and gears is pushing the multiformat unreal engine to the max on the platforms it's running on, hence gears 2 on the 360 and ut3 on the ps3 then the 360. as ut3 shows, the ps3 wasn't able to get more performance out of this engine than the 360, therefore it's a limit of their game engine on current hardware. to get more out of the hardware requires a game engine built from the ground up for that hardware, by a team with sufficient talent, resources and determination to squeeze every last drop of power available, and in this respect sony historically have a larger number of devs who fall into this category than microsoft.



lastly, I think it a bit premature to say "360 blew it's load too early", but we'll see. :)

As for the Wii, dont bother evne trying to compete with it, the Wii is not really a next gen console, it's more of a toy for little kids. It's fun, but you wont ever have to worry about it taking all the good games, it's not even capable of running most of them anyway and more than likely within 2 or less years it will be emulatable on most PC's. Just focus your efforts on the 360, let people know that they pay more and get less when they buy a 360, cause it's the truth.

M$ already have great exclusives, and the list just keeps growing. Not trying to instigate, but this seems more like an arrogant attempt to discredit M$. To each his own, but any hardcore gamer is going to have all 3 systems anyways to play all of the exclusives.



Fanboyism is for the birds.

You can post as many of the back of video games cases as you want since both MS and SONY lie about having a lot of games supporting 1080p. Most of the time they are upscaled and to be honest it doesnt even matter arguing or 1080p or 720p anyone in a video will tell you that you can't tell the difference unless you sit very close to the screen.

X-box has more Live features, but the online play is the same...I wish people would keep this in mind cause when you say X-box has better online you sound like you're saying that actual games play better online when they are the same.

@ps3ispoop



ps3 is superior due to specs(like the 8core proceesor). its also a hell of a lot quieter. and it IS capabale of 1080p. blu ray is meant to replace dvds in the long run. why do u think they stopped making hd-dvds? blu ray is the next step because the games arent going to get smaller are they? and ps3 games dont lag, just look at gta4. ps3 has a ***** load of games to give xbox360 a run for its money, like mgs4 and LBP, and upcoming titles like killzone 2 and GOW3. i bet u dont hav either system cuz the graphics on both are generally the same, and im a ps3 fanboy at that. neither sony nor microsoft care about their customers. all big companies just care about is money. nintendo is the only one i really respect because they at least try to connect with the consumers at a human level and go in a different direction than their competitors. u dont see them bashing sony or microsoft, do u? and seriously, who uses the word "sweet" anymore??? ps3ispoop, sir, i think u r the one made of *****.



@Yamagushi



most gamers do need to buy larger hard drives, since both systems give u a small amount of memory out of box so u are forced to buy a bigger one(trust me, we hav an 80 gig and its almost filled due to downloaded games, add ons, and installing games onto the hard drive, etc). its better to buy ur own 100gb (or more, i recently heard u could put a terabyte drive in it) hard drive for the ps3, then buy a one specifically made for xbox360 that wouldnt work for a computer too. free online gaming and wifi are definitely a plus, instead of paying to play a game online, a game that u already paid for. and who is gonna hard wire anymore? for now i can understand, but hardwiring compared to wifi is gonna be like cable to dtv, its just gonna be no comparison. we tried our ps3 wired and wireless, and it works a little better wireless.

"Doom 3 far surpassed anything the PS2 could put out". while this may be true, i do believe the ps2 was the better selling console than xbox (and the gamecube. lol, gamecube). plus, ps3 supports blutooth(but i'm not sure if 360 does too, so dont bash me for this one).



kudos to shatterdome

i didnt see ur rant until towards the bottom, but u made a nice argument as well.



in closing, i know im a ps3 fanboy, but sue me. im not saying 360 sucks at all, all im sayng is that u get wut u pay for. if i buy a ps3 for more than 360, i would expect it to hav more features, or vice versa, if i buy a 360 for the same prics as a ps3, it should hav extra accesories included that the ps3 does not. rant over

i just read through this topic again and noticed the following from you-



"As far as ID games go, Carmack has always expressed his favour for the PS3....

http://www.ps3daily.co.uk/20080804/john-carmack-consoles-video-interview-ps3-will-dominate"



yet to me you said "I really don't listen to what any developers say about anything, as they are being paid by both companies, and care more about where their rent and food is comming from than the saying the truth. (not to say it's a huge conspiracy, but they will not outwardly say one system beats another)."



so which is it shatterdome? or are you selective on when to listen to devs and when not to? ;)



like i said, you CAN and SHOULD listen to devs, as long as you do so using common sense. they are the people who really know what they're talking about, not armchair experts online.



you listen and quote from the programming genius john carmack, a man who does give his opinion on the latest hardware and doesn't worry about offending companies in the process. so obviously you trust what he has to say. he has always expressed preference for the 360 over the ps3 (to my annoyance in the past), and that's true even for iD's latest game where 360 is the lead format. the only issue he has with the 360 for their new game is storage space.



john carmack always says the ps3 is only marginally more powerful than the 360, where that slight extra power would be of benefit to those devs with sufficient time and resources to make use of it.



http://kotaku.com/gaming/id/id-talks-xbox-360-131667.php



so, let's watch another video of what john carmack has to say, again about rage and 360 storage limitations, 360 vs ps3 performance, game development and more;



http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/248807.html

they look the same because in power terms, both formats are practically the same, which is not what runningxbacward is saying. if there's a pc version developed at the same time, it always looks and runs better than the console version. last gen, the vast majority of multiformat games looked and ran better on xbox, even though ps2 was the lead format. so why did the xobx version look better? why does the pc version look better? answer - because when there's extra power in a gaming format, we see improvements in their version of multiformat games, sometimes subtle, sometimes huge, depending on the power difference.

WOW

sony's really DESPERATE

feel sorry for them

i never said mgs4 was a bad game (infact its great)

But mgs4 is the only game U fanboys can talk About

i never said u said mgs4 was bad, i was only saying that gamers going on and on about mgs4, blu-ray and future ps3 games is not a bad thing to do, it's a good thing. i see where you're coming from about fanboys, but what u said sounds like when people attack 360 fanboys for *only* going on about halo, gears and xbl as if those are the only good things about the 360.