gamer help

[chrisb07]

Originally Posted by Gimpdiggity

If you really want racing, Forza 3 looks like it's going to very seriously give Gran Turismo 1.4 a good run for it's money.

That's true. I'm waiting for Forza 3 to come out, it looks like its going to be the next best thing. I just don't know if it's going to be able to hold its own in the graphiocs section against GT5.

I've been playing Dirt and Forza 2 all weekend since I had a day off to relax.

[bodydropcbr6]

i was watching the preview for forza 3 and it looks good and playing 1 and 2 i liked the series

i would love to have a pc to game with but i cant justify the price right now. i really wanted to use iracing.com but the system requirements and controls needed would cost me almost 1200 bucks

[baldheadeddork]

Originally Posted by Gimpdiggity

Not even close. The only gamers out there that say that racing on a PC is better than on a console are the ones that don't have a console.

Really? Show me one console game that can match this:

[mojo1094]

If you are still looking at this, I can lend a little light.

Get the 360. I have both, and really don't use the PS3 anymore. Gran Turismo 4 was so boring and un fun compared to ... well ... any other racing game on the market. I went back to 3 and even 2 and had loads more fun.

GT5 looks good, don't get me wrong, and prologue was neat, but Forza 3 is just a more polished game, that makes an effort with it's players to bring them what they want, VS GT ... GT doesn't see that they have competition so they just make the same game.

Although ... with the release of Prologue, maybe they are trying to do something more. We shall see.

BUT, you also like shooters. I just like how the whole online system works, the online ranking the voice chat/team chat systems ... the party system is fun and easy also. I like that my headset plugs into my controller and not a bluetooth thing I have to worry about syncing. I like Xbox hardware.

Ps3 - the new slim is very neat looking, and i like the way it was put together (i've seen the take apart photos on Kotaku). I DON'T like that you can't put linux on the new slim, but whatever, that's a small thing. The blu ray is awesome, the PS3 network games are REALLY damned cool. BUT ... microsoft has been making huge strides recently on their Live games ... so they are about equal.


OH ... yeah ... the ps3 does these annoying update things, whenever they release an update it takes about 40 minutes and then it has to install. Sheesh, for the love of god man just LET ME PLAY! Same thing when you download an add on ... new tracks new whatever ... you download then have to install then have to update. Ugh.

BUT ... the PS3 does have Little Big Planet.

I'unno. Man, the new Xbox is really sweet, quiet and runs like a hardcore champion. It takes a lot more to break one of the newest gen systems than the older ones. (I have been repairing these damn things for 2 years now.) I can also tell you there is no permanent fix for the RROD, just replacement.

Microsoft is pretty good about the RROD fixes, they are MUCH fewer now and get them done in a couple weeks. Usually they just replace them. Stores are pretty good about it too, usually just swapping out the unit.


I have both, I like both, but I use my 360 more. Out of all my hardcore gamer friends, it's all 360 ... then a ps3.

[skyjumper88]

It's the 360 with out a doubt! I have never liked the PS3 or PS2 controlers.

[Anthonyd5189]

If you want racing and shooters, go 360.

Forza 3 is coming out here in a little over a month...and it's going to be epic, over 400 cars over 100 tracks. Also, not sure if it's your type of racing, but Dirt 2 comes out later this week and from playing the demo, this game is going to be pretty sick.

As far as shooters go, you have the COD series with Modern Warfare 2 coming out in November...and you also have Halo(not my thing but people seem to love it).

I think overall the 360 will provide yourself with more entertainment and enjoyability than the PS3

[King Cobra]

Why ANYONE would spend money on a 360 when the failure rate is OVER 50% is beyond me. The PS3 is the superior hardware; doesn't require batteries in the controller, you can replace the stock hard drive without paying out the dickhole, has better/more exclusive titles, built-in wireless, linux support in the fat model, etc. Online connectivity is great on the games I have played and continues to get better, and is free unlike the 360.

Big corporations suck and all, but it's obvious that Sony is providing their customers with far more value than Microsoft.

[Rhetorik]

Fuck it. Just play Super Mario Galaxy.

[Royal Tiger]

I had a PS2 and XBox. When the PS3 came out, I traded both old consoles in at Gamestop. The Blu-Ray player is AWESOME on my Sony 1080 LCD TV. Most games are cross platform anyway. GT5 will be amazing judging by prologe. The PS2/3 controller is WAY better then the XBox one, and Sony on-line is FREE!

How is Forza 3 a "new" game and not just an update like GT5? I didn't see much difference between Forza and Forza 2.

[Anthonyd5189]

Forza 3 is taking Forza 2 and raising the bar huge. They are tweaking the physics and taking into account other factors of racing that the previous games haven't, and they are finally including roll overs(something that game has always lacked and IMO something every racing game should have). But I'm assuming the GT series does the same thing, so really I wont say Forza is better than GT.

As far as the 360's failing...we have 4 Xboxs in the house I live in, none of us have had any problems with them. Everyone I know that has had the 'Ring of Death', Microsoft has been VERY quick about getting them a new box.

For me, I think Xbox has better games, better online play(yes it costs money, but it's worth it to me), and overall is just a better system.

[dturpen]

Originally Posted by King Cobra

Why ANYONE would spend money on a 360 when the failure rate is OVER 50% is beyond me.

The 50% failure rate was from an independent survey conducted by Game Informer, later posted by IGN (as Gimp said earlier).

Originally Posted by King Cobra

PS3 is the superior hardware

All kinds of tests have been done on this. And all of them said that the difference in hardware is negligible. Yes, it has Blu-Ray. Yes, it has wireless, but other than that, the hardware differences are not noticeable. In fact, many people prefer 360 versions to PS3 versions. Check out Ghostbusters, one of the Need for Speed games, etc. They said the 360 version was slightly better.

Originally Posted by King Cobra

better/more exclusive titles

This is highly debatable. Xbox has Halo, Mass Effect, Gears of War, Alan Wake, etc. PS3 has Metal Gear, Little Big Planet, Gran Turismo, Uncharted etc. If you are a shooter fan, Xbox seems to have more of those titles. Sony seems to have more of the RPG market cornered.

Originally Posted by King Cobra

Online connectivity is great on the games I have played and continues to get better.

You admit yourself with that tone that online isn't great. Sure, it's free, but it doesn't offer nearly as many features as Xbox Live does. Matchmaking on Live, integrated Netflix, party support, upcoming Facebook and Twitter, Headset support w/out dropping like bluetooth does, Windows Live Messenger support, etc. are alot of features to go without on PS3. Totally worth it IMHO.

Originally Posted by King Cobra

Big corporations suck and all, but it's obvious that Sony is providing their customers with far more value than Microsoft.

This is just ridiculous. With recent price cuts, the "value" of the both consoles are the same. Plus, before price cuts, Sony had almost no "value" because it was always so much more expensive. Plus, the new PS3 is not backwards compatible at all. WTF? At least Xbox 360 lets you play most of the best regular Xbox games. That definitely factors in with the "value" of the 360.

I will say that I am strongly considering buying a PS3 very soon, mostly for Blu-Ray, but there are a few games I wouldn't mind playing. I also must say that built-in wireless and the ability to upgrade the hard drive with an off the shelf laptop hard drive are very cool features.

I don't consider myself a Microsoft fanboy, and I will end up buying a PS3 someday. But for my taste in games, the Xbox as a gaming console, just makes more sense. In fact, I have 2, 1 for me and 1 for the wife.

[King Cobra]

Originally Posted by dturpen

The 50% failure rate was from an independent survey conducted by Game Informer, later posted by IGN (as Gimp said earlier).

That may be so, but no need to try and debate that point. The failure rate is high as fuck.

All kinds of tests have been done on this. And all of them said that the difference in hardware is negligible. Yes, it has Blu-Ray. Yes, it has wireless, but other than that, the hardware differences are not noticeable.

Nah, the PS3 has superior processing power. Also, not having wireless capability is an expensive difference if you plan on buying an adapter later on, 100 dollars from what I remember.

Originally Posted by dturpen

In fact, many people prefer 360 versions to PS3 versions. Check out Ghostbusters, one of the Need for Speed games, etc. They said the 360 version was slightly better.

Graphically yes, but barely. Not that important of an issue in my view. On the other hand, many of PS3 versions of those multiplatform titles have added content not being offered for the 360. Something to think about.

Originally Posted by dturpen

This is highly debatable. Xbox has Halo, Mass Effect, Gears of War, Alan Wake, etc. PS3 has Metal Gear, Little Big Planet, Gran Turismo, Uncharted etc. If you are a shooter fan, Xbox seems to have more of those titles. Sony seems to have more of the RPG market cornered.

None of those 360 games you listed are exclusives since they are also for the PC. Yeah, which games are "better" is debatable, but the PS3 clearly has more exclusives.

Originally Posted by dturpen

You admit yourself with that tone that online isn't great. Sure, it's free, but it doesn't offer nearly as many features as Xbox Live does. Matchmaking on Live, integrated Netflix, party support, upcoming Facebook and Twitter, Headset support w/out dropping like bluetooth does, Windows Live Messenger support, etc. are alot of features to go without on PS3. Totally worth it IMHO.

Granted the PS3 doesn't have some of those features, but you aren't paying for them either. I don't care for Netflix or Facebook nonsense anyway. Seems like fluff to me. Maybe not to some though, I just think people hype Xbox Live too much.

Originally Posted by dturpen

This is just ridiculous. With recent price cuts, the "value" of the both consoles are the same. Plus, before price cuts, Sony had almost no "value" because it was always so much more expensive. Plus, the new PS3 is not backwards compatible at all. WTF? At least Xbox 360 lets you play most of the best regular Xbox games. That definitely factors in with the "value" of the 360.

A system that is prone to chronic failure isn't "good value". No need to look at the past now either, they are both 300 dollars now, lets stick with the present. Sony streamlined the console AND lowered the price, Microsoft added nothing. Backwards compatibility was lost, but you can still find the original model if you really care for it.

[dturpen]

Originally Posted by King Cobra

That may be so, but no need to try and debate that point. The failure rate is high as fuck.

I agree that the failure rate is too high, which is why Microsoft extended their warranty to 3 years. They also started including much rarer and different issues into their warranty, i.e. E74 errors. I have had 1 Xbox fail on me, and the customer experience could not have been any better. It takes about a week to get a new Xbox, and you don't have to pay for shipping or anything else. Plus, if you know what you're doing, you can fix it yourself. With the newer hardware, which is what we're comparing now, anyways, the Xbox will have a much better failure rate due to the newly designed heatsinks and CPU/GPU technology.

Originally Posted by King Cobra

Nah, the PS3 has superior processing power. Also, not having wireless capability is an expensive difference if you plan on buying an adapter later on, 100 dollars from what I remember.

A. What kind of comeback is that? No proof to back it up at all. Look at all the articles about Xbox 360 vs PS3 when they were both new consoles. They all said that when PS3 barely edged out 360 in the CPU processes, the Xbox GPU barely edged out the PS3. They also say it's much harder to program games for the cell processor, than it is with the Xbox processor, although they have come a long way since then. Again, the difference is negligible.

B. The microsoft wireless gaming adapter is $100, but whoever buys it is stupid IMO. Linksys and other companies make wireless gaming adapters that are half as expensive and work just as well, if not better. Yes, the PS3 has it built in, but in all honesty, I would much prefer to have my console hardwired to the router anyway.

Originally Posted by King Cobra

Graphically yes, but barely. Not that important of an issue in my view. On the other hand, many of PS3 versions of those multiplatform titles have added content not being offered for the 360. Something to think about.

A. What happened to the PS3 being more powerful? You admit that they are better graphically, but still hang on to the fact that the PS3 is more powerful. That doesn't make sense at all.

B. Many multiplatform titles have added content not being offered for the PS3. Something to think about.

Originally Posted by King Cobra

None of those 360 games you listed are exclusives since they are also for the PC. Yeah, which games are "better" is debatable, but the PS3 clearly has more exclusives.

Seriously, you're arguing that because a game is for the PC and the Xbox that it's not exclusive? Those games are not on PS3, that's my main point. If you take that into account, there aren't that many exclusives at all for the PS3. Plus, Microsoft is grabbing a lot of the former PS3 exclusives, namely Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy (which is pretty huge).

Originally Posted by King Cobra

Granted the PS3 doesn't have some of those features, but you aren't paying for them either. I don't care for Netflix or Facebook nonsense anyway. Seems like fluff to me. Maybe not to some though, I just think people hype Xbox Live too much.

Yes, Xbox Live is a paid service, but as stated before, you get a lot of features for the price. You may not care for Netflix or Facebook, but there are millions upon millions of people who do, so I would say that those two things are quite huge for Microsoft.

Originally Posted by King Cobra

A system that is prone to chronic failure isn't "good value". No need to look at the past now either, they are both 300 dollars now, lets stick with the present.

You say in this very post, "No need to look at the past now..", but the chronic failures of the Xbox were past versions of the console. Ironic, huh?

Originally Posted by King Cobra

Sony streamlined the console AND lowered the price, Microsoft added nothing. Backwards compatibility was lost, but you can still find the original model if you really care for it.

Microsoft has continually lowered their price to keep the demand high as well as adding new features to the newer versions. The original Xbox was 20 gigs. You can now buy 60 gig versions or 120 gig versions. They have also added HDMI. How is that nothing?

I'll go back to the past now, since you can't decide if you want to go with the past or present. Sony has just now lowered their price for the first time. Until now, there were only 2 price points, and they have gone through just as many, if not more, versions than Microsoft has. Price plays a very big part in deciding which console to buy. Well, up until now, Microsoft's console was cheaper. What happens when you make a console that is quite comparable to another console at a cheaper price point? You get more sales. Who has sold more consoles? Microsoft. Does that tell you anything?

I'm not arguing with you just for arguing's sake. The OP wanted to know opinions on which console to buy now that they are the same price. I was just giving my opinion, as were you. I want to reiterate that I am not against Sony's console at all, in fact, as I posted earlier, I will be purchasing a PS3 sometime in the near future. What you are posting is not backed up by any sources and is an extremely biased opinion. I like both consoles, and if I were in the OP's situation, it would be a hard choice to make. It really comes down to which features you want, and what games you like to play. Obviously, you chose PS3 and I chose Xbox. The best thing for us to do is list our reasons for purchasing our console and try not to down the other one.

[King Cobra]

Originally Posted by dturpen

A. What happened to the PS3 being more powerful? You admit that they are better graphically, but still hang on to the fact that the PS3 is more powerful. That doesn't make sense at all.

Lazy developers.

Originally Posted by dturpen

Seriously, you're arguing that because a game is for the PC and the Xbox that it's not exclusive?

That's just what exclusive means.

Originally Posted by dturpen

Those games are not on PS3, that's my main point. If you take that into account, there aren't that many exclusives at all for the PS3. Plus, Microsoft is grabbing a lot of the former PS3 exclusives, namely Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy (which is pretty huge).

Yeah that's what sucks. In the case of Final Fantasy, they are dumbing down the graphics on the PS3 version so that the 360 version will look identical. Microsoft is a cancer to everything it touches.

Originally Posted by dturpen

You say in this very post, "No need to look at the past now..", but the chronic failures of the Xbox were past versions of the console. Ironic, huh?

Past versions that were never recalled and are still either sitting on shelves somewhere or sitting in someones living room ticking away towards their final hour. I hope everyone continues to enjoy whatever systems they have and I hope their console never breaks, but if it does, the solution is the same as it is with everything else: buy Japanese.

[dturpen]

Originally Posted by King Cobra

Yeah that's what sucks. In the case of Final Fantasy, they are dumbing down the graphics on the PS3 version so that the 360 version will look identical.

Final Fantasy XIII PS3 and Xbox 360 versions compared

I did some research and found where people were blaming the 360 version for downgrades in graphics and other things. I really hope it doesn't adversely affect the PS3 version for everyone's sake. I don't think that they should let that happen, and I don't think they will. I guess we'll have to see what happens when the game is finally released. Either way, Final Fantasy coming to 360 is still a huge blow to Sony, since people won't have to buy the PS3 to play it, even if the 360 version is slightly downgraded. You just said earlier,"slight graphical differences don't matter."

Originally Posted by King Cobra

Past versions that were never recalled and are still either sitting on shelves somewhere or sitting in someones living room ticking away towards their final hour. I hope everyone continues to enjoy whatever systems they have and I hope their console never breaks, but if it does, the solution is the same as it is with everything else: buy Japanese.

Good thing there's an awesome warranty to cover that exact problem.