XBOX 360 or PS3

[InternetTherapist]

dudutz18, I ask that you consider the opinions of individuals who own both Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 above those who only own one.

I own both.

 

In my opinion it comes down to if your brother likes online play or not, the Xbox 360s online features and overall community is much better than that of the Playstation 3. Xbox Live does cost $5 a month however I believe it is more than worth it.

 

However if he's not much into online gaming then he might like the PS3 more as it has more good offline games than the 360.

You should also consider which console(s) he has owned, if he had owned an Xbox then I'm sure he'd be thrilled to receive an Xbox 360, and vice versa with the PS2.

I disagree with the first statement (why?), and as much as I love (not loved) the PS2, of the current gen systems, I only own the XBOX 360. Game preference is more important.

 

It was an opinion not a statement, and unless you've played a lot of the PS3's many great mostly single player titles then your opinion doesn't mean much if anything.

 

Also note that the PS3 having a lot of great games isn't an opinion on my part, it is a fact, as overall the PS3 has higher rated video games above that of the Xbox 360 and Wii, although I do like online play and I like the Xbox 360 more than the PS3.

 

I would also like to point out that I am in fact a certified internet therapist, I know what I'm talking about.

[dudutz18]

Thx for the replies ^^

Truly gave me more ideas for what are to be considered (duh, more than what i thought)

 

I'll take comprehensive approach in this matter

and hoping my brother will love it xD

[Tomlong54210]

dudutz18, I ask that you consider the opinions of individuals who own both Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 above those who only own one.

I own both.

 

In my opinion it comes down to if your brother likes online play or not, the Xbox 360s online features and overall community is much better than that of the Playstation 3. Xbox Live does cost $5 a month however I believe it is more than worth it.

 

However if he's not much into online gaming then he might like the PS3 more as it has more good offline games than the 360.

You should also consider which console(s) he has owned, if he had owned an Xbox then I'm sure he'd be thrilled to receive an Xbox 360, and vice versa with the PS2.

I disagree with the first statement (why?), and as much as I love (not loved) the PS2, of the current gen systems, I only own the XBOX 360. Game preference is more important.

 

It was an opinion not a statement, and unless you've played a lot of the PS3's many great mostly single player titles then your opinion doesn't mean much if anything.

 

Also note that the PS3 having a lot of great games isn't an opinion on my part, it is a fact, as overall the PS3 has higher rated video games above that of the Xbox 360 and Wii, although I do like online play and I like the Xbox 360 more than the PS3.

 

I would also like to point out that I am in fact a certified internet therapist, I know what I'm talking about.

I can tell you are very sure of yourself. There are gamers who are not into the whole online aspect, and I do not think you should disregard others opinions so quickly, but you're the professional or whatever... The people who do not have (and many who cannot afford) both systems or lots of games, their opinions count too. One person cannot be the only judge. I like the look of the PS3 and the games it tends to have, but certain games for the XBOX 360 stood out for various reason, hence I bought that console. The PS3 does not have a higher rating than the Wii though. I do not like the Wii, but the sales give it all the support it needs...

[InternetTherapist]

dudutz18, I ask that you consider the opinions of individuals who own both Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 above those who only own one.

I own both.

 

In my opinion it comes down to if your brother likes online play or not, the Xbox 360s online features and overall community is much better than that of the Playstation 3. Xbox Live does cost $5 a month however I believe it is more than worth it.

 

However if he's not much into online gaming then he might like the PS3 more as it has more good offline games than the 360.

You should also consider which console(s) he has owned, if he had owned an Xbox then I'm sure he'd be thrilled to receive an Xbox 360, and vice versa with the PS2.

I disagree with the first statement (why?), and as much as I love (not loved) the PS2, of the current gen systems, I only own the XBOX 360. Game preference is more important.

 

It was an opinion not a statement, and unless you've played a lot of the PS3's many great mostly single player titles then your opinion doesn't mean much if anything.

 

Also note that the PS3 having a lot of great games isn't an opinion on my part, it is a fact, as overall the PS3 has higher rated video games above that of the Xbox 360 and Wii, although I do like online play and I like the Xbox 360 more than the PS3.

 

I would also like to point out that I am in fact a certified internet therapist, I know what I'm talking about.

I can tell you are very sure of yourself. There are gamers who are not into the whole online aspect, and I do not think you should disregard others opinions so quickly, but you're the professional or whatever... The people who do not have (and many who cannot afford) both systems or lots of games, their opinions count too. One person cannot be the only judge. I like the look of the PS3 and the games it tends to have, but certain games for the XBOX 360 stood out for various reason, hence I bought that console. The PS3 does not have a higher rating than the Wii though. I do not like the Wii, but the sales give it all the support it needs...

 

I'm not a fan of the Wii, I own one and it's just gathering dust, I wouldn't recommend the Wii to anybody.

I still believe that people who own both consoles, have played a lot of each consoles exclusive titles and overall have a good feeling for each of their strengths and weaknesses can better judge their value when compared to each other.

 

I agree with you that the Xbox 360 is better than the PS3 overall, but I will admit I have had more fun with offline PS3 games than most offline Xbox 360 games, although the exception to that would be Fable 2 and Crackdown, which were a blast.

 

The PS3 can play Blu-Ray movies, is better suited to storing photos and music and video than the Xbox 360 is and it overall seems to have a better offline experience than the Xbox 360, if I weren't into online gaming then I think I would've liked the PS3 more than the Xbox 360.

[Tomlong54210]

dudutz18, I ask that you consider the opinions of individuals who own both Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 above those who only own one.

I own both.

 

In my opinion it comes down to if your brother likes online play or not, the Xbox 360s online features and overall community is much better than that of the Playstation 3. Xbox Live does cost $5 a month however I believe it is more than worth it.

 

However if he's not much into online gaming then he might like the PS3 more as it has more good offline games than the 360.

You should also consider which console(s) he has owned, if he had owned an Xbox then I'm sure he'd be thrilled to receive an Xbox 360, and vice versa with the PS2.

I disagree with the first statement (why?), and as much as I love (not loved) the PS2, of the current gen systems, I only own the XBOX 360. Game preference is more important.

 

It was an opinion not a statement, and unless you've played a lot of the PS3's many great mostly single player titles then your opinion doesn't mean much if anything.

 

Also note that the PS3 having a lot of great games isn't an opinion on my part, it is a fact, as overall the PS3 has higher rated video games above that of the Xbox 360 and Wii, although I do like online play and I like the Xbox 360 more than the PS3.

 

I would also like to point out that I am in fact a certified internet therapist, I know what I'm talking about.

I can tell you are very sure of yourself. There are gamers who are not into the whole online aspect, and I do not think you should disregard others opinions so quickly, but you're the professional or whatever... The people who do not have (and many who cannot afford) both systems or lots of games, their opinions count too. One person cannot be the only judge. I like the look of the PS3 and the games it tends to have, but certain games for the XBOX 360 stood out for various reason, hence I bought that console. The PS3 does not have a higher rating than the Wii though. I do not like the Wii, but the sales give it all the support it needs...

 

I'm not a fan of the Wii, I own one and it's just gathering dust, I wouldn't recommend the Wii to anybody.

I still believe that people who own both consoles, have played a lot of each consoles exclusive titles and overall have a good feeling for each of their strengths and weaknesses can better judge their value when compared to each other.

 

I agree with you that the Xbox 360 is better than the PS3 overall, but I will admit I have had more fun with offline PS3 games than most offline Xbox 360 games, although the exception to that would be Fable 2 and Crackdown, which were a blast.

 

The PS3 can play Blu-Ray movies, is better suited to storing photos and music and video than the Xbox 360 is and it overall seems to have a better offline experience than the Xbox 360, if I weren't into online gaming then I think I would've liked the PS3 more than the Xbox 360.

Hmmm... I am not sure that the XBOX 360 is better overall. It had a leaping start coming out with its signature titles in a more timely manner, not to mention the more timely release, but the Sony was able to get the Blu-Ray device on there. I thought it was a bad business move, because of the delay, but they do have that advantage of the XBOX 360's HDTV add-on whatever they did with that. The PS3 seems to have better specs in many areas, at least with processing power. I a game developer talk about how they have to rewrite a ton of code for the PS3 because it substitutes its lack of GPU power with processor computations. I guess the performance would depend a lot on the type of games in those cases. Obviously, PS3 can support nice graphics because it will have at least three beautiful FF releases. However, those games are not fast-paced action games. The PS3 is really outselling the XBOX 360, but I could hardly venture to say that that has anything to do with performance. There are a bunch of dedicated PlayStation fans out there, especially the FF people. It might be easier to tell where the two consoles stand as more titles are released for the PS3. Its still lagging there...

[InternetTherapist]

Hmmm... I am not sure that the XBOX 360 is better overall. It had a leaping start coming out with its signature titles in a more timely manner, not to mention the more timely release, but the Sony was able to get the Blu-Ray device on there. I thought it was a bad business move, because of the delay, but they do have that advantage of the XBOX 360's HDTV add-on whatever they did with that. The PS3 seems to have better specs in many areas, at least with processing power. I a game developer talk about how they have to rewrite a ton of code for the PS3 because it substitutes its lack of GPU power with processor computations. I guess the performance would depend a lot on the type of games in those cases. Obviously, PS3 can support nice graphics because it will have at least three beautiful FF releases. However, those games are not fast-paced action games. The PS3 is really outselling the XBOX 360, but I could hardly venture to say that that has anything to do with performance. There are a bunch of dedicated PlayStation fans out there, especially the FF people. It might be easier to tell where the two consoles stand as more titles are released for the PS3. Its still lagging there...

 

I believe the 360 has a larger install base than the PS3, well, I know it does in the US, but I know nothing of its current sales speed, I would assume the 360 has sort of slowed down in sales as it has a large install base as it did come out first.

 

Developers for the PC can more easily port their game to the 360 than the PS3, as the 360 has more of a PC like design when it comes to RAM, GPU, CPU balance.

 

Blu-Ray disk are slow reading, and as far as Blu-Ray players go the PS3 is not a very good choice if you were to compare it to stand-alone ones.

Disk based storage is great but there is a large move towards the cloud and also internet distributions, so a super massive ROM system like Blu-Ray isn't necessarily going to help gaming, although like I said, people who aren't into online gaming are more likely to want some more general purpose use to their console, so the PS3 has that.

 

But really, PSN is pretty terrible, the community, mic owners, numbers of properly configured mics, number of new users who are new to online gaming, general conversational skills of its users, lack of private chat, lack of party chat, poor invite system, lack of a large online game library, the list goes on and on and for online gaming the PS3 isn't that great.

 

And Home is more of a casual user type of thing, which is another reason why I say if he's into online gaming he should pick the 360, Home isn't that much fun.

[Thor.]

Lol reading these fan biased comments kind of make me laugh, both systems are equally good i say, Each also have there problems to. Also i wouldn't call the 360 next gen either, since its already 5 years old. If you know what i mean. Still the games are still jugging along. Its actually quite amazing if you think about it. Its a shame they get away the bugs and rrod's, at least the sony's trying to fix the Ylod issue.

 

Its not nearly as large as MS's 360 either, coming from actual numbers.

 

http://gameolosophy.com/consoles/ylod-vs-rrod/

 

I think the Bluray speeds are just fine, they even increased the speeds of the bluray drives recently with a FW update to 3x , and i do notice some speed up as well when it comes to loading times.

 

Borderlands loads scenes in 5 to 6 secs. now 4 secs in some area's.

[InternetTherapist]

Lol reading these fan biased comments kind of make me laugh, both systems are equally good i say, Each also have there problems to.

With as many variables as there are in which console is the better console I highly doubt they somehow all even out perfectly.

Obviously the issue isn't black and white, none of them "suck" or would really be a bad buy, but some are better than others, and that often comes down to personal opinion. The best way to figure out what somebody will like more is to look into prerequisites, such as if they buy movies often or if they like online gaming.

 

Also i wouldn't call the 360 next gen either,

Its 3.2 GHz PPC Tricore (Six thread) is hardly that outdated, but I agree that the 360 isn't "next gen", although neither is the PS3, it's already out, the PS3 is not the generation after the PS3, thus it can't be next gen. And it goes without saying that the Wii isn't next gen, set your monitor to 800x600, and look at how horrible it looks, that's a higher resolution than the Wii.

 

Its a shame they get away the bugs and rrod's, at least the sony's trying to fix the Ylod issue.

 

Its not nearly as large as MS's 360 either, coming from actual numbers.

 

http://gameolosophy.com/consoles/ylod-vs-rrod/

PS3 has a 1 year no dust warranty, 3 month with dust warranty.

360 has a 3 year RROD warranty and 1 year warranty.

 

Also note the PS3 has disk read errors which cost $150 to be repaired from Sony unless you're under the 3 month no dust warranty, in which case you're covered, but if you're past the 3 months but under the 1 year then you need to open up the case to clean the lense which is pretty much always caused by dust, thus voiding your 1 year warranty.

 

I think the Bluray speeds are just fine, they even increased the speeds of the bluray drives recently with a FW update to 3x , and i do notice some speed up as well when it comes to loading times.

 

Borderlands loads scenes in 5 to 6 secs. now 4 secs in some area's.

Well, it's not so much that the read speed is a huge problem, the problem is more in the amount of data they have to get off of the massive disk.

Although the only way this would really effect somebody is possibly longer load times or forced installs, which can be a minor pain, but it's not a game breaker.

[Tomlong54210]

Hmmm... I am not sure that the XBOX 360 is better overall. It had a leaping start coming out with its signature titles in a more timely manner, not to mention the more timely release, but the Sony was able to get the Blu-Ray device on there. I thought it was a bad business move, because of the delay, but they do have that advantage of the XBOX 360's HDTV add-on whatever they did with that. The PS3 seems to have better specs in many areas, at least with processing power. I a game developer talk about how they have to rewrite a ton of code for the PS3 because it substitutes its lack of GPU power with processor computations. I guess the performance would depend a lot on the type of games in those cases. Obviously, PS3 can support nice graphics because it will have at least three beautiful FF releases. However, those games are not fast-paced action games. The PS3 is really outselling the XBOX 360, but I could hardly venture to say that that has anything to do with performance. There are a bunch of dedicated PlayStation fans out there, especially the FF people. It might be easier to tell where the two consoles stand as more titles are released for the PS3. Its still lagging there...

 

I believe the 360 has a larger install base than the PS3, well, I know it does in the US, but I know nothing of its current sales speed, I would assume the 360 has sort of slowed down in sales as it has a large install base as it did come out first.

 

Developers for the PC can more easily port their game to the 360 than the PS3, as the 360 has more of a PC like design when it comes to RAM, GPU, CPU balance.

 

Blu-Ray disk are slow reading, and as far as Blu-Ray players go the PS3 is not a very good choice if you were to compare it to stand-alone ones.

Disk based storage is great but there is a large move towards the cloud and also internet distributions, so a super massive ROM system like Blu-Ray isn't necessarily going to help gaming, although like I said, people who aren't into online gaming are more likely to want some more general purpose use to their console, so the PS3 has that.

 

But really, PSN is pretty terrible, the community, mic owners, numbers of properly configured mics, number of new users who are new to online gaming, general conversational skills of its users, lack of private chat, lack of party chat, poor invite system, lack of a large online game library, the list goes on and on and for online gaming the PS3 isn't that great.

 

And Home is more of a casual user type of thing, which is another reason why I say if he's into online gaming he should pick the 360, Home isn't that much fun.

I think home is fun. I am not really a fan of internet gaming. I would rather play with friends I know and talk in person that chat and play with strangers, all the lack of respect and general social etiquette aside.

 

I agree with the Blu-Ray thing though. As I said before, I think it was a bad reason to delay. I also think that Sony, as Nintendo did with the Wii, should have stuck to games instead of trying to make a computer on the floor, as Microsoft has done. My desktop is sweet, and I certainly do not need two of them. The consoles in our house are used to play video games, and only that. It is nice that there is a relatively cheap way (when compared with PC gaming) to get a good graphics and fast-paced action. Sometimes you want to just sit down and plop in a disc, instead of worrying about which programs need to be turned off in the background. The users should not have to do work before getting to enjoy their game. I didn't even like setting up a local account for the XBOX 360. I understand that a large portion of the gaming community enjoys online gaming and whatnot, and I have not heard anything in support of the PS3's online capabilities. Your assessment is probably in line with many users' opinions in that respect. I do not think Sony should follow the XBOX. Create a game system with good online support, instead of backup computer. Microsoft has a huge head start in that department, and I do not think Sony needs to compete there anyway. It just seems to me that there should be a way to introduce the online piece without the rest of the home computer stuff...

[Thor.]

Hey the Blu ray player on the ps3 is Fantastic, even 3d capable with those 3d tv's coming out, i doubt those stand alone ones can do that yet.