# xbox 360 or ps3



## innate

Which is better xbox 360 or ps3?


----------



## TheTomG

Go by the software - choose what exclusive titles you must have, and get the one that matches best. Must have Halo, or Gears of War? Then XBox for you. Must have Uncharted and Gran Turismo? Then you're a PS3 guy.


----------



## Cayal

Since my 360 died, PS3.


----------



## biodroid

Cayal said:


> Since my 360 died, PS3.



Exactly the same happened to me. PS3 all the way for me. Plus PSN is free but Xbox Live you have to pay to play online.


----------



## Nerds_feather

i think the first observation to make is that this isn't a choice like it was a couple generations back, where what you choose determines 50+% of your experience. these two consoles--in terms of what they can do and what games you can play on them--are about 80% the same. so you'll probably be happy with either. 

that said, there are some differences. ps3 has slightly better graphics, but 360 runs a bit smoother. ps3 can play blu-ray DVDs, but 360 has generally better online and media options. ps3 has problems keeping its online service running, while 360 (at least the old ones) has problems keeping the hardware running. ps3 is more expensive but you have to pay for XBL.

and there are still a few exclusives. 

so i'd say, just ask yourself what you primarily do on your console: single or multiplayer games? DVDs or streaming movies? how much cash do you want to spend? which exclusives are the most enticing to you?


----------



## Shane Enochs

Here's the real question: where are the nextgen systems?  PS2 came out six years after PS1, and PS3 came out six years after PS2.  It's been six years since PS3 came out, so where is my PS4?

Xbox360 came out after only 4 years in relation to the Xbox, and it's been seven years since they've released a new one.


----------



## Nerds_feather

the feeling is that xbox 720 will be released in spring 2014, and ps4 the following holiday season.

as to why it hasn't come sooner, there's a simple explanation for that: consoles are "loss-leaders" that only make profits once they become cheaper to manufacture. until then, sony and microsoft make their money through game licenses and their makers get licensing fees for third-party. because consoles grow cheaper to manufacture over their lifetimes, that loss contracts over time, while licensing fees increase due to larger and larger game libraries and user bases. in other words, consoles are much more profitable towards the end of their cycles than at the beginning.

so if there's stability in the market, in terms of who is making consoles and how many they're selling, you'll see little reason for manufacturers to churn out new ones every 5 years. 

really, the only reason it moved so quickly before is that virtually every generation had an up-and-coming competitor in the console space, who forced the existing leading manufacturer's hand. This time, there's some parity in the market, and both Sony and Microsoft are making money, so neither has any interest in taking big risks and going back to big losses.


----------



## Cayal

Nerds_feather said:


> i think the first observation to make is that this isn't a choice like it was a couple generations back, where what you choose determines 50+% of your experience. these two consoles--in terms of what they can do and what games you can play on them--are about 80% the same. so you'll probably be happy with either.
> 
> that said, there are some differences. ps3 has slightly better graphics, but 360 runs a bit smoother. ps3 can play blu-ray DVDs, but 360 has generally better online and media options. *ps3 has problems keeping its online service running*, while 360 (at least the old ones) has problems keeping the hardware running. ps3 is more expensive but you have to pay for XBL.
> 
> and there are still a few exclusives.
> 
> so i'd say, just ask yourself what you primarily do on your console: single or multiplayer games? DVDs or streaming movies? how much cash do you want to spend? which exclusives are the most enticing to you?



It's had one problem.


----------



## Nerds_feather

a very big problem.


----------



## Cayal

Nerds_feather said:


> a very big problem.



3 weeks out of 6 years isn't a big problem. Regardless that doesn't mean it has problems keeping it running.


----------



## Python

PS3 has better exclusives and it's free. 

It's an easy decision. 

Although I hate the PS3's download service, it's so slow.


----------



## Miggy

PS3 online has been more than fine. People automatically assume that because you have to pay for xbox live that makes it better...

I had both consoles, my 360 obviously died but generally there a very few "next-gen" games that I like. The PSN games however are really ******* good. Flower/Journey, Fat Princess, Super Powered Rocket Powered Acrobatic Mega Ultra Super Mega Monster Rocket Powered Battle Cars are a joy to play.


----------



## Brian G Turner

I bought a PS1, then PS2, then PS3.

Frankly, I think I should have bought an Xbox 360 instead of a PS3. 

The failure of the PS3 to be backwards compatible with previous games was an intentional insult, and frankly I find more exclusive titles available on the Xbox. Additionally, once exclusive PS titles (such as Namco titles) are now available on the Xbox.

When the nextgen consoles come out, I doubt I'll have much reason to buy Sony.


----------



## Karn Maeshalanadae

Not to mention the security hack on PSN, Brian. For my brother and I, the lack of backwards compatibility for PS3 was reason enough not to buy it.

The PSN fiasco just confirmed our wise decision to get Xbox 360.


----------



## Kylara

PS3 (if you get the right model) is backwards compatible, all the way to original PS games...to be fair, they were hacked successfully once in six years, then they shut down the PSN and fixed all security issues, beefed it all up and then let people back on, rather than doing all that whilst still keeping the PSN up, which I think was the right thing to do, and told people what to do if you had had details stolen, many people I know weren't bothered because they always used those top ups you can buy rather than putting card details on there.
XBox graphics are no where near as good, and they have numerous hardware issues and you have to pay for XBox Live. PSN is free, and my PS3 has never suffered any issues, I can watch DVDs, Blurays, listen to CDs, whack a tonne of videos and photos on it...the UI is incredible with direct access on the Home Screen to internet, BBC Iplayer, LoveFilm, C4 player, and many more. You get much more than a gaming console with the PS3...I could go on but I won't...I've already written quite a lot!


----------



## Miggy

I actually have a backwards compatible one so it was pretty nice being able to play FFX again.

Although saying that, you can buy a good chunk of PS1/2 games on the PSN which is pretty handy for me because I have virtually none of those CDs around anymore.

It's also a nice chance to play the games that you never played before. In my experience, this was Vagrant Story which is pretty coo.


----------



## Karn Maeshalanadae

Kylara said:


> PS3 (if you get the right model) is backwards compatible, all the way to original PS games...to be fair, they were hacked successfully once in six years, then they shut down the PSN and fixed all security issues, beefed it all up and then let people back on, rather than doing all that whilst still keeping the PSN up, which I think was the right thing to do, and told people what to do if you had had details stolen, many people I know weren't bothered because they always used those top ups you can buy rather than putting card details on there.
> XBox graphics are no where near as good, and they have numerous hardware issues and you have to pay for XBox Live. PSN is free, and my PS3 has never suffered any issues, I can watch DVDs, Blurays, listen to CDs, whack a tonne of videos and photos on it...the UI is incredible with direct access on the Home Screen to internet, BBC Iplayer, LoveFilm, C4 player, and many more. You get much more than a gaming console with the PS3...I could go on but I won't...I've already written quite a lot!




Except for the fact, Kylara, that the 80g model, which was the only one that was backwards compatible, they don't make anymore. I'm not a graphics whore-hell, if I could, I'd prefer to plug in a SNES and play the great games on that rather than most of the crap they have out now. The only memorable titles in the last decade, to me, were the later Breath of Fire games, Kingdom Hearts, Bethesda's games, and some of Valve's stuff. Final Fantasy had gone to manure after X, and there hasn't really been any real RPGs since then. That's not counting PC because PC isn't in this debate. And I don't use Xbox gold. I am a free silver member for downloading games, but I don't do multiplayer. I find there's no point to most multiplayer because there's no story to it. Any multiplayer with story I've gone through has been couch co-op with my brother, and you don't necessarily need Xbox gold for that.

Not to mention I wouldn't want to have to go through the hassle of having to recover sensitive information in the first place. As far as I know, in a longer period than PS3 has been out, Xbox servers themselves have never been successfully hacked. Games have been hacked, but nothing that stored sensitive information.


----------



## Cayal

I said:


> I bought a PS1, then PS2, then PS3.
> 
> Frankly, I think I should have bought an Xbox 360 instead of a PS3.
> 
> The failure of the PS3 to be backwards compatible with previous games was an intentional insult



It's not an intentional insult, it's moving forward. The purpose of the PS3 is the play PS3 games. Same with the 360, it's BC is only available for less than 50% of XBox games.

If you want to play PS1/2/Xbox games, get the console for it.



> and frankly I find more exclusive titles available on the Xbox. Additionally, once exclusive PS titles (such as Namco titles) are now available on the Xbox.



Sony has infinitely more exclusives than the 360. 



Karn Maeshalanadae said:


> Not to mention the security hack on PSN, Brian. For my brother and I, the lack of backwards compatibility for PS3 was reason enough not to buy it.
> 
> The PSN fiasco just confirmed our wise decision to get Xbox 360.





> Not to mention I wouldn't want to have to go through the hassle of having to recover sensitive information in the first place. As far as I know, in a longer period than PS3 has been out, Xbox servers themselves have never been successfully hacked. Games have been hacked, but nothing that stored sensitive information.



I can tell you haven't done any research on the subject.

No sensitive information was lost. None. No one had any legitimate reports of money stolen after the hack.
It was the single most overblown gaming news this generation.

As for the 360:

https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sou...&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&biw=1197&bih=804

Heck, the head of Live, Major Nelson, had his account hacked.
You know what's worse. Microsoft ignore it. At least Sony had the decency to repay it's consumers on a service that is completely free. They didn't even have to do anything but they admitted they screwed up and repaid the fans.

Microsoft, as long as they get their money, simply do not care one bit if your account has been hacked.

If you think Live is more secure, you live in a fantasy land.


----------



## Kylara

Cayal said:


> I can tell you haven't done any research on the subject.
> 
> No sensitive information was lost. None. No one had any legitimate reports of money stolen after the hack.
> It was the single most overblown gaming news this generation.
> 
> As for the 360:
> 
> https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sou...&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&biw=1197&bih=804
> 
> Heck, the head of Live, Major Nelson, had his account hacked.
> You know what's worse. Microsoft ignore it. At least Sony had the decency to repay it's consumers on a service that is completely free. They didn't even have to do anything but they admitted they screwed up and repaid the fans.
> 
> Microsoft, as long as they get their money, simply do not care one bit if your account has been hacked.
> 
> If you think Live is more secure, you live in a fantasy land.


 

Ah Cayal, you got there first! I was mighty impressed by the shutdown actually - so what, I lost a couple of weeks of online play, gave me more time to finish play throughs and boost skills on the non multiplayer games. 

The backwards compatible PS3 (which I have) is b/c all the way to original PS games, but now, most people will have moved onto PS3 games, and I only very rarely use b/c games (mainly racing ones which I just LOVED).

My bf recently got given an XBox (which we both hate) and the graphics in comparison are terrible (and I don't like the controller, but that's a totally different reason) we only use it to play Gears online with mates, other than that, PS3 - graphics, especially in the japanese games are just incredible...


----------



## biodroid

Kylara - As far as I know any PS3 is not backwards compatible unless you chip it?


----------



## Kylara

Nope, mine is a first gen PS3 totally backwards compatible - it is the highest GB model (80 or 160 or something) I think they stopped making them after a few years, assuming all who wanted b/c had bought them, and people had moved onto PS3 games...all I have to do is whack a disc in, and it plays, it even tells you what model the disc was made for and improves the graphics a little (most noticeable on PS games heh - I would be lost without Tank Racer...best PS game EVER)


----------



## Brian G Turner

Cayal said:


> If you want to play PS1/2/Xbox games, get the console for it.



I did - the PS2 was backward compatible with PS1 games. And for a short time, the PS3 had a degree of backwards compatibility. 

Then they dropped it, because they figured there was a still a market in selling PS2's. So if we wanted to play those games, we had to keep our PS1 and PS2 consoles out beside the PS3, and if they stopped working, replace them.

That's not a very good attitude for Sony to take with their customers.




Cayal said:


> Sony has infinitely more exclusives than the 360.



Good ones? Great ones? Which ones?

I can see the Little Big Planet franchise, which is great for kids. Nothing else of note.

But the Xbox has the biggest share in the console market and so gets more attention (ie, the recent official expansion for Skyrim) on top of MS's dedicated attention with franchises such as Halo and others.

Sony used to have exclusivity with Namco. That was a selling point. Now they don't.


----------



## biodroid

I said:


> I did - the PS2 was backward compatible with PS1 games. And for a short time, the PS3 had a degree of backwards compatibility.
> 
> Then they dropped it, because they figured there was a still a market in selling PS2's. So if we wanted to play those games, we had to keep our PS1 and PS2 consoles out beside the PS3, and if they stopped working, replace them.
> 
> That's not a very good attitude for Sony to take with their customers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good ones? Great ones? Which ones?
> 
> I can see the Little Big Planet franchise, which is great for kids. Nothing else of note.
> 
> But the Xbox has the biggest share in the console market and so gets more attention (ie, the recent official expansion for Skyrim) on top of MS's dedicated attention with franchises such as Halo and others.
> 
> Sony used to have exclusivity with Namco. That was a selling point. Now they don't.



Uncharted series is brilliant, Killzone is also amazing. GT5 is excellent. I think games shouldnt be exclusive to a console but to all platforms


----------



## Cayal

I said:


> Good ones? Great ones? Which ones?



That's a matter of opinion. But realistically, the 360 lives on Halo, Gears and Forza. They don't develop their own studios or look at pushing new IPs.



> I can see the Little Big Planet franchise, which is great for kids. Nothing else of note.



I'm not going to list the exclusives because I'd be wasting my time. It really depends on what you like.



> But the Xbox has the biggest share in the console market and so gets more attention (ie, the recent official expansion for Skyrim) on top of MS's dedicated attention with franchises such as Halo and others.



Nintendo has the biggest share.

The attention to Microsoft is due to them paying for it. They buy a lot of timed exclusivity for DLCs (Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto IV for example) but don't invest in their own games.



> Sony used to have exclusivity with Namco. That was a selling point. Now they don't.



I would say that has to do with development costs.


----------



## Karn Maeshalanadae

I said:


> I did - the PS2 was backward compatible with PS1 games. And for a short time, the PS3 had a degree of backwards compatibility.
> 
> Then they dropped it, because they figured there was a still a market in selling PS2's. So if we wanted to play those games, we had to keep our PS1 and PS2 consoles out beside the PS3, and if they stopped working, replace them.
> 
> That's not a very good attitude for Sony to take with their customers.




No it's not. And what if we still want to play our hard copies of PS2 games later on down the road, but we can't find a working PS2? Say I had a new PS3, no backwards compatibility. I don't want to shell out more money online for games like Up your Arsenal, FFX, or the Kingdom Hearts games since I still have hard copies I can put my hands on that work just fine. Would have been nice to get an 80g PS3, but that never came to pass, I'm afraid. Hopefully with the next upgrade there can be straight through backwards compatibility.

I think this conjecture is all moot anyway. What I'd really like to do is find a working SNES. Yeah, yeah, I know, you can buy Nintendo classics on the Wii, and find the classic style controllers, and that would be good enough, I suppose...I just grew up with the SNES and loved-and still love-the games it had. The ones I played, anyway...


----------



## Cayal

If you are that hard done by you cannot afford a $100 console (or whatever it is worth now), get an emulator and play it on your PC.

It's not illegal since you own the hard copies, they just play off the DVD anyway.


----------



## Karn Maeshalanadae

Cayal said:


> If you are that hard done by you cannot afford a $100 console (or whatever it is worth now), get an emulator and play it on your PC.
> 
> It's not illegal since you own the hard copies, they just play off the DVD anyway.




Yes, always a good idea to try to try to play console games on a keyboard. I don't know how to map my brother's Xbox controllers to my laptop, or if it can even be done. *shrugs* It's not so bad with something like FFX, but something like Up Your Arsenal...ugh. I tried doing it with Super Mario World and where I'm usually a master at that game, with the keyboard I wasn't able to get past Yoshi's Island 3. And it's not just a question of being able to afford the console. As consoles age and break down, it can get harder and harder to find a working one, until it's damn near impossible. Still, it is a good point that the PS2 is still relatively new (as opposed to say, the SNES, which was introduced 20 years ago) and good used ones can still be found.


----------



## Cayal

I know you can connect your PS3 controller to a computer and play PS2 games on it. I am sure you could do that same for any older console, just need a controller that will connect to the PC.


----------



## Karn Maeshalanadae

You can use Xbox 360 controllers with PCs, but I don't know how to get them to work at all.


----------



## Darth Angelus

PS3.

Box looks better, is more silent, and can play Blu-Ray. Better all-around.

360 is probably a better bargain if you want it solely for gaming, though.


----------



## Kylara

We have a working SNES, but it is in our room at the folks place in cornwall heh...Hardware on PS3 is far superior, hacks happen frequently on XBox (my boyfriends account was hacked again and someone bought Fifa and a whole team, luckily as this has happened a few times before to my boyfriend (not great in itself) he knew how to fix it, but Microsoft couldn't care less about the hacks) and the b/c models were sold for a good couple of years, by which point I think they assumed that everyone who wanted b/c models would have bought them. A lot of the old titles are on the PSN too, if you don't have a b/c model, the disk, or can't run them through your computer...


----------



## Karn Maeshalanadae

Thing is, I'm not a graphics whore, and really don't care about Blu-ray. DVD quality is fine for me for movies and shows, and as such, I have my laptop and the Xbox for movies.

My PS2 still works but isn't hooked up, but I think it is on its last breaths of life. And as I said, download servers, on both Xbox and PSN, don't consider the fact that you might have bought a hard copy of a game before, and I don't want to have to pay for a game I paid for before. Hmm, I think that's part of the reason I don't go for subscription-based MMOs...(The multiplayer is another reason, but that's another thread.) Also, the backwards-compatible model of PS3 they don't sell in retail anymore. Haven't for years. That's the reason we got the Xbox over it in the first place.


----------



## cyrusDCmonster

i'm an xbox guy, i'm a sucker for Halo.

i'm also running working PS2, Super Nintendo, Nintendo 64 and an original Attari.


----------



## nubins

Kylara said:


> We have a working SNES, but it is in our room at the folks place in cornwall heh...Hardware on PS3 is far superior, hacks happen frequently on XBox (my boyfriends account was hacked again and someone bought Fifa and a whole team, luckily as this has happened a few times before to my boyfriend (not great in itself) he knew how to fix it, but Microsoft couldn't care less about the hacks) and the b/c models were sold for a good couple of years, by which point I think they assumed that everyone who wanted b/c models would have bought them. A lot of the old titles are on the PSN too, if you don't have a b/c model, the disk, or can't run them through your computer...


 

The hacks are due to poor passwords, not any inherent poor security from the live service. I found my WoW account hacked, then my twitter account and hotmail. Reason why? No viruses, never used a dodgy site. Someone simply brute forced my password, because it was short. Change of password, use caps in it etc now and all fine.

You dont actually have to pay for XBL, most of the functions are free. TO play competetive games on it, then you pay £5 a month.. when ive actually got a game I want to play competitively, i pay the fee. Then I cancel it and go back to the free membership. Result is paying about £10 a year. You can pay a £50 annual sub I think. Either way, with the average ps3 costing considerably more than the average 360, cost wise, it still works out the same. And you do have to pay for some PSN stuff as well.

When it comes to graphics.. on ps3 exclusive titles they are usually superior. On 99% of other titles, the 360 is either better or smoother, or both. This is because the 360 is easier to program for (its basically a PC, whereas the ps3 is a complicated cell processor) and has a larger user base, meaning it's the priority machine for the developer. PS3 versions of cross platform games are usually "Ports", which is often why they come out later or with serious problems when they do launch (see Skyrim, no 1 game of last year and it was unplayable on the PS3 at launch and i understand still has problems). 

I do own a PS3, but I really dont use it. I loved the Uncharter series (but was dissapointed by uncharted 3). The other exclusive games i tried.. wasnt fussed. Thought Killzone was dull, LBP was fun for a while, god of war 3 was too shallow. MGS4 was ok, but hugely overhyped and very sulf indulgent. There were some others i played over the last few years but really cant remember what they were. I dont like how every time i turned on the ps3, there was a system update that would take about 30 minutes to install. I prefer the 360 user interface.. thats a purely personal choice though. I also prefer the 360 controller, i find the ps3 one too small. 

I find myself playing console games less and less recently, i'm returning to the PC gaming scene more, especially with the advent of good F2P games (mechwarrior online, league of legends, planetside 2) and the fact the pc can do better graphics and more variable game design because it has more toys to play with.

I signed up to LoveFilm and for £6 a month I get one game sent to me each month.. pretty good deal considering they cost £30-£50 each. Just finished Dishonoured, felt that was more of a console game than PC. But I'm still finding I sometimes have to force myself to play these game rentals in order to get my moneys worth.

The Wii-U looks interesting. I never bothered with the wii, it wasnt a proper games machine. But the new has potential I think, will probably trade in my ps3 for that.


----------



## Kylara

My bf is a PhD electronics engineer...his passwords are insane, I'm sure he uses every single key on the keyboard twice over heh...

I'm not a fan of the Xbox controllers, they cause big issues in my tendons, and I do have tiny hands, so the PS3 is better...

I have a lot of japanese friends, so I get a lot of fairly cheap beautiful games, much better graphics than xbox, but then I think it depends what you want to play really...also the added bonus of bluray player is nice, and it's HDMI connector...


----------



## nubins

Kylara said:


> ...and it's HDMI connector...


 
So are all the xbox's since about a year after it was launched 

To actually hack and pick out a password on most services would be next to impossible, which is why when the ps3 hack came out, very little came of it. I think the big scare was that they werent sure if they had taken an insecure old database of passwords. Begs the question why they still had a databse of old passwords, that was insecure, but that was it. The files they got were 128bit encrypted, the same as any secure site and unbreakable currently (simply isnt the computing power available to do it, but they believe it will be possible within the decade). So most of the time when peoples accounts get "hacked" .. they havent really been hacked, they have just been caught on a dodgy website or with some kind of keylogger or virus or they had a poor password that was easily susceptable to a brute force attack. 

I think the stuff with the ps3 hack was completely over the top, but people love a good scare story 

The PS3 is a LOT more popular in Japan, so it stands to reason there would be some quality games for it, sadly most of the time they arent released in the west. It also requires that you like Japanese style games.. personally.. I really don't. JRPGs bore me to tears, for other games I often dont get on with the art style - I prefer realisim over flashiness but a lot of Japanese games and animation are good quality, but overloaded with "special effects" that I think ruin the immersion. Personal opinion, I know lots of people love Japanese games, just not for me


----------



## Cayal

nubins said:


> You dont actually have to pay for XBL, most of the functions are free. TO play competetive games on it, then you pay £5 a month.. when ive actually got a game I want to play competitively, i pay the fee. Then I cancel it and go back to the free membership. Result is paying about £10 a year. You can pay a £50 annual sub I think. Either way, with the average ps3 costing considerably more than the average 360, cost wise, it still works out the same. And you do have to pay for some PSN stuff as well.



Huh?

Cost wise the 360 is way out on top for the same basic services (playing a game and online).

You buy a PS3, that's it. You don't need to pay to play online.
You buy a 360, you HAVE to pay to play online.


----------



## biodroid

If your PS3 hard drive crashes you can get a generic one and install it, Xbox you have to get an MS Xbox one.


----------



## nubins

The average price of a new ps3 is around £30 higher than the average price of a new xbox 360 (just checked it and the ps3 has just had a price drop). It costs £30 for an annual subscription to xbox live gold.

Not all games require gold for online play. 

You dont have to pay an annual subscription, you can pay monthy at around £5 per month. Allowing you to dip in and dip out as and when you have a game you are actually playing online. Most games, for me, dont have more than a months life in them even with online play, so I end up paying around £20 a year for gold. And I bought my 360 when it was £200 cheaper than the PS3 was at that time. So.. in about 3 year stime, I will have finally broken even. Not adjusting for compound interest and inflation on the initial saving of course. 

The 360 has alarger back catalogue of games to choose from and its games are generally slightly cheaper (although not by much and less so recently). All the positives and negatives for both consoles in terms of cost, pretty much even themselves out to make it as good as no difference. Especially as each one has about 18 months of prime life left in them.

I dont really understand the point about the hard disk.. if it crashes.. you can buy a pc hard disk to use instead? I know they are cheaper than the 360 ones.. but is HDD rashing a big problem for the PS3? I've not had any issues and ive got one of the old crappy 20gb HDD's on my 360 (all ive ever needed) and ive not had any friends who have the console suffer an HDD crash either?

The differences between the consoles pretty much dont matter, it's all about personal opinion based on how the console feels when using it. Some people like ps3 more, some 360 more, the only way to decide if you are thinking of getting one is to try and find one to use and see which you prefer.


----------



## Kylara

I think the whole HDD thing is more, if you exceedingly unlucky and had the HDD crash, then it is easier and cheaper to fix it if you have a ps3 than if you have an xbox...


----------



## Cayal

nubins said:


> I'm pretty sure they do but even if not, the majority do.
> 
> You dont have to pay an annual subscription, you can pay monthy at around £5 per month. Allowing you to dip in and dip out as and when you have a game you are actually playing online. Most games, for me, dont have more than a months life in them even with online play, so I end up paying around £20 a year for gold. And I bought my 360 when it was £200 cheaper than the PS3 was at that time. So.. in about 3 year stime, I will have finally broken even. Not adjusting for compound interest and inflation on the initial saving of course.
> 
> The 360 has alarger back catalogue of games to choose from and its games are generally slightly cheaper (although not by much and less so recently). All the positives and negatives for both consoles in terms of cost, pretty much even themselves out to make it as good as no difference. Especially as each one has about 18 months of prime life left in them.



I'm pretty sure you're just making stuff up now.


----------



## nubins

Nope. Look at games website - ps3 total games to choose from 1160, xbox 360 - 1287. If youw ant to take a different source.. wikipedia has it as:

PS3

There are currently *760* games (multiplatform: *615*; exclusive: *137*; console exclusive: *8*) and 15 cancelled games on this list as of July 25, 2012.

XBOX 360:

There are currently *930* (multiplatform: *721*; exclusive: *127*; console exclusive: *82*) games on this list as of September 27th, 2012.

PS3 price ranges:
£0.01 - £9.99 (167)
£10.00 - £19.99 (536)
£20.00 - £29.99 (209)
£30.00 - £49.99 (214)
£50.00 - £99.99 (35)
£100 and over (9)

Xbox 360:

£0.01 - £9.99 (230)
£10.00 - £19.99 (594)
£20.00 - £29.99 (230)
£30.00 - £49.99 (207)
£50.00 - £99.99 (31)
£100 and over (7)

PS3 has less overall games and more higher prices games than the 360.

Their standard 320gb ps3 bundle includes a bluray for £240

Their standard 250gb 360 bundle includes skyrim, forza4 and medal of honour warfighter and its £200.  You only have to walk into a games store to see that the 360 games section is given more shelf space than the ps3's. 

The other stuff in the first paragraph is exactly what I do .. are you suggesting that I in fact, cannot switch from gold to silver on a month by month basis? Are you suggesting that 5 years ago, when i got my 360, the PS3 was not far far more expensive? well..  if you think im making that up.. fair enough, suggests that actually you just dont have anything to say that conforms to the whole "ps3 is superior in every way" thing you have going on.


----------



## Cayal

You really want your entire post to be shredded dont you?


----------



## biodroid

Agreed Cayal, PS3 and Xbox 360 games are pretty much priced the same even when they go Platinum or Classic.


----------



## Brian G Turner

Cayal said:


> You really want your entire post to be shredded dont you?



You could always respond to the points made, rather than quips directed at the poster.


----------



## Kylara

A lot of the cost of the PS3 would have been the huge 320GB compared to the 250GB of the xbox, plus a decent bluray player is expensive anyway, so again, makes sense for the price. The xbox only gets extra games, fewer GB and no blu-ray...


----------



## nubins

Yea, the blu-ray is a bonus thats for sure. But I bought about 6 blu-rays in 4 years so unless you are prolific buyer of films (instead of a buyer via online rental or your sky/virgin box) it's not that big a deal, if you are desperate you can get a blu-ray player for £50. 

The extra hard disk space.. well.. like I said, i have a 20gb hdd on my 360 and i have the original 40gb ps3 model and have never needed more on either of them.. what exactly do people use all that extra space for anyway? The difference in cost between a 250gb HDD and 320gb is not a huge amount. The difference in usefulness on a console is ... well lets say questionnable.. in my opinion.


----------



## Kylara

It works as an external HDD for me, I have a load of music, tv series, anime, films etc stored on it...stuff I'm likely to use with a tv, svaing my other externals for stuff like work...


----------



## nubins

Ah I see. I stream them through the 360 over the network from my PC .. so thats why I never use the HDD except to isntall the game im playing currently and for saved games etc.


----------



## Assaultrofl

TheTomG said:


> Go by the software - choose what exclusive titles you must have, and get the one that matches best. Must have Halo, or Gears of War? Then XBox for you. Must have Uncharted and Gran Turismo? Then you're a PS3 guy.



Totally agree, now that both products have been around for sometime and various issues have been more or less ironed out. Personally I am a ps3 man but I don't have anything against a 360. 

Feel free to add me on the psn btw, same Id as my username


----------



## Reivax26

I've had both but I like the 360 better. Maybe its a personal preference issue but I just feel more comfortable with the 360 controller. I got tired of 4 buttons on top too.


----------

