which console is better?
polycounter lvl 17
i'm getting sick of all the arguments. i want to know once and for all which console PS3 or Xbox360 is technologically superior? since this forum is visited by people who are in the industry and are required to know, i thought this would be a good place to get a definitive answer. btw is OpenCL relevant at all to PS3? is Gabe Newell (one of the most important game makers) correct that the PS3 should essentially be thrown in the trash?
Replies
Xbox360: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_hardware
PS3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3_hardware
2) I don't know what openCL is, nor do I really care at this point, I'm an artist, not a programmer
3) Gabe Newell, like all outspoken "spokespeople" tend to be (and I "quote" because he isn't a designated spokesperson, just someone at the forefront of game design currently), is a loud ass at times. While he may have some good points regarding game design and the industry in general, he comes off (at least to me, in the slightly-more-than-inebriated state that I am currently in) as an individual who tries to do new tricks to keep our attention/affection. In other words, he's like a small child with self-involved parents, who performs a trick that they find mildly amusing, so he tries frantically to come up with more shit to keep their attention focused on him, regardless if the new shit is any good or not. However, all people in the spotlight are the same-- no one is perfect, they can't all say or do the right thing at the right time all the time; plus, this is all drunken conjecture, so take it with a grain of salt: I did no research before answering any of your questions, and am honestly more inclined to agree with Jimmies: No.
ditto
Also study the console's policies for content too, such as custom content. That matters to me more than some hyped up internal specifications.
Stability also matters, the xbox360s are known alot for their Red Rings of Death(tm).
oOOOOHHH YAAAAAAA!!!!!!
Its like asking which is better, holden or ford, pizza or burgers, mcdonalds or KFC, tits or ass. There are too many factors to call one "better". Just look into what games are coming on what platforms, what features you want etc. Your gaming experience has little to do with the difference in technical specs.
Right now I would might get a PS3 if I were to choose, I have to turn my 360 on atleast twice to get it to go, it regularly stops reading the game I'm playing etc. though those are minor things. I like the look of the PS3 line-up right now. Though 360 has some better features like nicer controllers.
When I log onto my PS3, theres about 5 random people wanting to play GTA4 multiplayer
The PS3 has a superior processor, but only when properly utilized. It only has one general purpose core with 6 specialized cores. The 360 has 3 general purpose cores. When properly utilized, the PS3 processor will offer more, but it can fall behind on many uses.
Think of it as the GPU vs CPU argument. An 8800gt can calculate graphics related equations so much faster than a Core2Duo, but if you needed to do other types of arithmetic, you'll need the general purpose CPU.
I think it was stupid of Sony to put the Cell in the PS3. It IS really hard to program for, and you don't get the performance boost to justify the extra difficulty and cost of developing for the platform. The CPU itself costs more as well. I think they tried too hard to be different and lost sight of what was important.
GPU wise, they are very close. The Xbox 360's GPU is superior in a few technical ways, and a few ways that are just personal preference. One of the amazing things Microsoft did with the 360 was to add an onboard device to scale the output of the GPU to any resolution without any delay. This allows you to get anywhere from 480i to 1080p on any game. That way, developers can actually render the game at a slightly lower resolution than 720p sometimes in order to gain a performance boost, but the scaler will automatically upconvert with no lag. You can't do that on the PS3 because there is no such chip.
As far as included hardware goes, the PS3 kicks ass. Wifi, user replaceable 3.5" HDD, the ability to run Linux out of the box, and more.
So, after reading all that, which one is better? The 360 makes way more sense, but the PS3 is a better advancement in technology. Neither one is better. Pick which one has the games / online community you want. I only own a 360 at the moment, but I will get a PS3 as soon as Blu ray movies drop in price a bit and it gets a nicer lineup.
Either way, the average console generation lifespan is around 4-5 years. Microsoft said they expect this one to last around 10. That makes me happy
To date, I can honestly saw the Xbox 360 simply because of the games available. It's had a head start on the PS3 and has a much bigger games library. It's also cheaper than the PS3 and the online integration is great (and yes, you have to pay extra for that), but for a games console it's all about the games.
That said, the PS3 is picking up steam from a games point of view - last yea rI had no intention of buying one, a few months ago I said I'd have one by Xmas this year. I bought one a few weeks ago. The games library still doesn't come close to the Xbox (and my 360 is partly backwards compatible whereas my PS3 isn't in the slightest).
These console pissing contests are leaving the Wii out of the equation, a console that it is utterly dominating in all markets from a sales point of view. A console with a solid range of often inventive games.
I think that Sony are going to make a massive impact this Xmas, it'll be able to compete with the 360 with its games lineup and if they were were to make another price concession (I don't see that happening to be honest) it'll fly off the shelves.
Very true.
As it stands, the only game I currently REALLY want to play on the PS3 is MGS4 (plenty more fantastic games, but none so far that would motivate me to buy the system for it). God of War 3 will likely tip me to finally buy one if an impending price drop dosen't.
Anyways, maybe this is a better response to the original question:
90% of multiplatform games look and run better on the Xbox 360.
Until a company can pull out a PS3 exclusive that can actually PROVE with results that one is clearly better than the other, it's pretty moot.
As crisp and amazing as MGS4 is, I don't think it visually holds a candle to Gears of War.
These two questions are not the same. Try again later when you're less of a troll.
what games are coming out for it that'll make it sell that well? aside from the multi-platform stuff, all i see is lbp and resistance
Id add GT5 and FFXIII maybe God of War.
Im just waiting for the right moment to get a PS3
haha. One of my co-workers refers to his PS3 as his "Blu-ray player" since that is all he uses it for.
When the console first came out, that's all it really was to most buyers. Sony even planned on that. At the time it was either $400-600 for a PS3, or rather, a Blu-Ray player that can also play games-- or $600+ for a straight Blu-Ray player, most of which didn't even have the quality of video that the PS3 has. That's also a large part of why Sony won the "format war" over HD-DVD-- with PS3 sales come Blu-Ray sales, whereas HD-DVD players had to be purchased separately from the 360, be they add-ons or independent media players. Plus, Sony said they would put games on Blu-Ray. Microsoft vowed never to put their games on HD-DVD, so as not to alienate their consumers who had not bougt the HD-DVD add-on...
are those out this year though? rick said this christmas
*shugs* I dunno ..
I have 3.
Technically superior? PS3. But IMO, the 360 has a better line-up at the moment.
I have both 360 and PS3. I tend to play my 360 a lot more because well the online community to me is more streamlined and easier to use and I just like it better.
I haven't picked up MGS4 because I have no interest in that game and visually it doesn't even make me want to buy it. Gears 2 however will be having me wait in line.
Resistence 2? Blah...It would take a lot for me to get another one of those titles. The first one was just so blah and looked unfinished.
Meh just my rant but right now I would stick with the 360 and with another price drop coming this month who could resist?
Ps3 have some great titles, and xbox 360 too, buy BOTH if you can :P
here it is... http://youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU
If you are going for the 360 just be prepared for the "Red Ring" scenario. Most of my 360-owning friends have had this happen to them at some point. Otherwise it seems to have an awesome library of games and good online facilities from all accounts.
PS3 (which I own) has a poor selection of games for hardcore types at the moment. Online is not great at present but is steadily getting better (and it's free). I hardly play online so that doesn't matter much to me. As mentioned before, being able to swap out/upgrade your hard drive to a larger capacity non-Sony branded one is a plus. Being able to install another OS could be useful but again I'm not bothered since I have a PC. Blu-ray is obviously good if you intend to watch movies in the format.
I have over half a dozen friends with a 360 and many more who play on those 360s. I don't know anyone with a PS3. The 360's sell out pretty fast.. Wii's instantly. I don't think anyone has bought a PS3 in the past few months at the local dept store.
The ONLY game I see on PS3 that I uber want is MGS4. But I can wait for the Substance/Subsitence/whatever release... which you know they will do.
Resident Evil 5 went multi-platform a long time ago. (actually most of the ads are for the 360 version).
Little Big Planet looks fun, but not in the OMG-HAVE-TO-OWN way....
Uh... yeah, that's the end of my list.
(Still a little miffed that Force Unleashed release was 'delayed because the PS3 is so hard to program for'.)
Haven't had a red ring but my video died on me in May. Quick replacement though, a little under 2 weeks. But that was okay, we had no internet at the time either, so we actually went outside, to the lake and places. Most people I know who have had major console problems take horrid care of them.
My roommate and I have talked many times about the whole 360/PS3/Wii competition... and we think it's stupid. They are all for different types of audiences (judging on the GAME selection). 360 is definately for more hardcore gamers (good god the number of shooters is insane). PS3 is intermediate with action adventure style games and for the people who like the newest tech(Blu-Ray). Wii is for the casual gamer and those less adept at the twitch/intense action in current games.
And give me backwards compatibility or give me death!!
Anyone can spew all this crap about how the PS3 is SOO much better, yet we see that every multi platform game has the PS3 with lower resolution, blurier textures, and slower framerates (I don't think any of them are even at 1080p either, with GTA4 even churning out merely 620p on the PS3).
I'm going to buy a PS3 soon, but only because I sold my dust-collecting PoS Wii.
To me that argument just sounds silly.
A comparible in my mind is:
Someone telling me that True Space 3D is more powerful than 3DS Max. But it can't handle as many polygons, shader complexity, or texture space. Then argues the only reason True Space hadn't produced the same quality of art as 3DS Max (despite being more powerful): is because I just haven't figured out how to use the interface or tools yet.
I'd call BS.
The 360 has done well - very well. In more techy circles, and I would use Polycount as an example, the 360 has reached saturation point. The PS3 has been largely ignored. Now I believe that we want more tech and the PS3 has reached the tipping point of Price and Content.
I'm reckoning that the PS3 has reached a level of price and games that may only be equal tot he Xbox, but that so many of us have the 360 and are looking for a tech hit that the PS3 is stepping in.
That is of course assuming that the PS3 is technologically inferior to the 360. Which I believe it isn't. There are many lazy game ports to the PS3, true. I find that games like MGS4 designed with the PS3 in mind are easily as graphically sophisticated as any 360 offering. The major problem seems to arise when companies want to create a lowest common denominator solution for both platforms. This is crazy since the two systems have such radically different architectures.
I probably don't know enough on the technical side to enter any kind of debate about this.
Sorry Arsh
V V
Each system fufills a different niche right now, and you should prioritize them based on what is important to you. Focusing strictly on games, the 360 is probably the cheapest system with the most games(The Wii is technically cheaper but buying up 4 remotes and nunchucks costs a hefty pile and a lot of the fun of the Wii is playing local multiplayer). But every platform offers a lot more than just playing games, so it really comes down to personal preference.
Turbo Grafx 16
5 players on one console, 5 man! that's 1 better than your 4
And naturally, there is the discrepency of the drives. The Blu-Ray drive of the PS3 is great for playing high-definition video. But its read speeds hamper it in loading information for games. The 360's DVD drive is much faster at reading information off the disc, which is great for loading in-game assets quickly, and streaming information off the disc while the game is in action. But the much smaller capacity of the discs is a drawback when you have very large assets, like pre-rendered high-definition video. That's why games like Blue Dragon take up multiple DVDs.
Ultimately, the balance between the two system's hardware capabilities is going to come down to a matter of personal preference. Each system simply does certain things better than the other. Oddly enough, I really think that Sony produced a system that is more of an "entertainment hub" while Microsoft designed a more focused game player. Going into this hardware cycle, I had assumed that their goals were the other way around.
If you want a media hub for streaming and playing back music, video, pictures, etc...I'd actually say that the PS3 is the way to go. It can stream media from pretty much any computer connected to a wireless network, and its built-in wireless adapter makes this very easy to pull off from wherever you set it up. It will play most video formats you throw at it without having to re-encode them. (including open codecs like Xvid)
If you want a more "pure" gaming machine, than the 360 is probably your best bet. It's on-line and multi-player offerings are a lot more standardized and efficient. It's loading times will probably always be shorter than the PS3's. And its selection of titles for play is currently much larger.
if you want to play them six months later