Quote:
Originally Posted by -=Hot|Ice=-
Since no one else has replied I will.
1. The 09 exclusives coming for the 360 will be far more enjoyable because they come with xbox live. Even if Sony brings more games for 09, they won't have the "umph" factor that the 360 does.
2. The PS3 40gb can't even play PS2 titles, It can't compete with the Xbox premium.
3. There will be NO price drop. Don't be so certain. The fallowing article clearly states it.
http://www.engadget.com/2008/10/29/s...-holiday-seas/
4. The xbox 360 will have a 6 year life cycle. While rumors of a PS4 of being in the works have already surfaced. Please read the fallowing article:
http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/04/d...nd-the-corner/
Now, The PS3 may be a great piece of machinery, honestly, it's just not a gaming machine. The PS3 was built to be an entertainment console. The only advantage I see with the PS3 is blu-ray. That's it.
Note: My cousin has a PS3. I have a 360 Elite. |
Thanks for the response, much appreciated, but I do have to offer a rebuttal. Apologies in advance for its length.
1) When it comes to multiplayer gaming what 'umph factor' does XBL have over PSN? I've played on both networks quite a bit and I honestly see nothing substantial in XBL that justifies a $50/year price tag. The two biggest things are that each XBox comes with a mic, and as such it encourages people to use voice chat. A big plus, especially with the 8 person party chat in the NXE -- though that has by extension made ingame chat with opponents crappy because people are chatting with their friends and not their opponents.
On top of that the XBL service is very centralized and fairly well administered. However the biggest drawback in the service is that it is decentralized in the most important factor in network gaming: servers. It's an absolute shame that for so many millions of people paying $50 a year Microsoft hasn't stepped up to the plate and hosts servers for gaming, rather for each match a gamer plays host which offers an unfair advantage in an online game.
Sony has central servers running for games and it makes things more even. Additionally when it comes to multiplatform games the online experience from the lobby design to game launch to in game play is virtually identical. There is nothing inherent about XBox Live that gives it more of an advantage in this respect. In fact, central servers means PSN has an advantage in this respect.
2) I agree on backwards compatibility, though the PS3 DOES play PS1 games. Given that Sony does know how to do PS2 backwards compatibility on the PS3 with both hardware and software it's a crime that they haven't included it. I think this decision is more by finances than it is by serving the customer. The PS2 is still selling, and if they were to include the Emotion Engine in the PS3 it would just jack up the cost. That being said I don't know why they didn't continue with software emulation, they still cover (IIRC) around 70% of the 2500 PS2 titles, including pretty much every major game that came out on the console.
But does backwards compatibility alone make the XBox Premium a better console than the 40GB? What about built in wireless which the Premium does not have. What about an upgradeable harddrive without having to pay a premium for a Microsoft hard drive? The PS3 will take just about any 2.5" laptop harddrive out there. I believe it can only go to a max of 350 or 500GB, and the RPM must be above 5200. But even then it is cheaper to upgrade the PS3 than it is the 360.
When Microsoft mouthpieces slammed BluRay they said it will be obsolete because downloadable content is the way of the future. They're probably correct about it, but if they believe so strongly about it why make it that much harder to upgrade your box to suit the trends the company plans to set/follow. It's probably a financially motivated decision, and they should make no apologies about it, but the 360 Premium, out of the box is an inferior console to the PS3. To upgrade it via the various accessories so that it would be on par with the PS3 would make it a more expensive unit.
You could be right, the XBox is more of a games console than the PS3 which is an entertainment unit, but that's a trend Microsoft is trying to buck. For one thing they have a movie download affiliation with Netflix, for another, where are the games for 2009? (Chad Warden wants gaaaames). If all they have to rely on is 3rd party support for games in the coming year then there is no distinct advantage the console offers. Sony Computer Entertainment is one of the largest game developers out there, it has some great IPs (such as God of War and Final Fantasy VII)
3) I'm slightly hesitant about it too, especially now that Sony is upping the harddrive size in PS3s from 80gb to 160gb, but it's become a matter of the console surviving on the marketplace, and it can't do that until the price comes below $300. My take on it is that they didn't drop the price yet because of the Christmas sales rush, try to sell as many units as they can at the higher pricepoint. Even then that article states Sony won't be dropping the price this holiday season. My position on it is that Sony will drop the price in February/March to coincide with 1)The release of Killzone2, 2)the mandatory digital tv transition which will see a rise in the sales of HDTVs, and 3)the beginning of the console's third year in Europe.
4) Just because Sony has started research and development of the PS4 doesn't mean it will be out before the XBox3. Given that the XBox has a 5-7 year life cycle it is just as likely Microsoft has begun development on their next box also. Sony has stated a 10 year life cycle on the PS3, and was launched a year after the 360 which is now been on the market for over three years -- half its life cycle. Sony will probably do what they did with the PS2: launched the PS3 in the PS2's 7th year and increase support for the PS2 in countries such as Brazil, Russia, India, and China.
It it quite possible that they launch the PS4 around the same time as the XBox3 to reestablish its market share, but it is certain that Sony will continue to support the PS3 just like they did the PS2 and the PS1 before it. With a longer life cycle and continued support I'm not afraid of Sony completely dropping the PS3 like MS did with the first XBox when the 360 came out.
You're right, the PS3 is a great entertainment machine, but it is also showing itself now to be a great gaming machine as developers learn to program for it. Don't forget the PS2 had the same sort of problem. Developers complained that it was difficult to program for, but after 8-9 years on the marketplace it sold over 125million consoles and developers still made over 2500 games for it. The XBox360 is a great gaming machine, but it is approaching or has reached the technological limit. Additionally there are no games on that console that differentiate itself and give me a reason to buy it. The biggest thing that held me back from buying a 360 was the Red Ring of Death. 60% of the consoles died on the production line and 33% of those that survived died in the consumer's home? No thanks. They've got that somewhat under control now, even though their extended warranty program is going to expire soon. But now that they do there are no new exclusive games out there for the 360 that I want to play.
For the ultimate gaming console that's a pretty tough spot to be in.