Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/sessions.php on line 254
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/sessions.php on line 255
Anime-Source.Com: Forums
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/page_header.php on line 499
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/page_header.php on line 501
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/page_header.php on line 502 Anime-Source.com :: View topic - PS3 Xbox 360 or Nintendo Revolution
Joined: Oct 22, 2003 Posts: 845 Location: California
Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 2:02 am Post subject:
Well, you seem to think that most people can afford all three systems. Most people can barely afford one, hence the dilemma that we put ourselves in. If you do get all three, all the more power to you, but I really don't see much potential in the XBOX 360 anymore. I was never really an FPS fan in the first place, so most of the good XBOX games are pretty much lost to me. Kameo was dissapointing. Call of Duty and DOA 4 are the only games worth getting at this point. All the sports games are shoddy ports of their XBOX or PS2 elders. I really don't care much for the upcoming Halo 3.
So it's basically up to PS3 or Revolution. Being a starving student (and a Nintendo fanatic), I'm leaning towards Revolution. You people can go live out your fantasies of owning all three. I'll be fine playing the old school Square RPG's on my Revolution. =)
the 360 and revolution look good
the ps3 is dangerous!!! just look at that controller design its a freakin boomerang, think if ur playing someone and beat them, theyll get mad and freakin fly it at u ull get knocked out or even killed!!! _________________ Mikaboshi
Joined: Feb 20, 2006 Posts: 11 Location: Singapore
Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 3:27 am Post subject:
im nvr really a fan of nintendo... so the revolution is out... but i do like the controller thou... wif motion senser built in it....
i own an xbox n i really liked it compared to the PS2... mainly i guess its the gfx... but both consoles are released at way different times... so i dun tink i shld compare them...
but since i own an xbox... i would like to continue on wif the xbox360... since its gonna hav HALO3, PGR3, DOA4 and such... which is a continuation of the current ones...
the 1st time i saw the PS3... i really liked the design... but now... after looking at the xbox360 n PS3... i find the xbox360's design better....
also... looking at the stats n features of the PS3... i tink its seriously gonna b very expensive when its launched... so i tink ill stick wif xbox... thou im seriously NOT a supporter of microsoft... i prefer Sony...
1. mgs4 is coming for ps3 and i am an mgs/grap fan
2. the ps3 got better hardware then xbox360 and the nintendo ( even doh the nintendo got some nice games coming up)
3.Sony fan ftw ^_^
hm..
of course X'360...cuz..i love DOA..want to buy DOA 4 n xtreme volleybeach 2...damn...those game are awesome.. hot chicks with super skills that you wont find in ps3
Joined: Aug 02, 2003 Posts: 1497 Location: Alliance Military Force HQ
Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:02 pm Post subject:
ab wrote:
hm..
of course X'360...cuz..i love DOA..want to buy DOA 4 n xtreme volleybeach 2...damn...those game are awesome.. hot chicks with super skills that you wont find in ps3
but can you find MGS in 360? nope.
majority of 360 games are...FPS or Driving games that features a little or no upgrade at all.
while Nintendo and SONY have a balanced game library, from FPSs to RPGs. They have it covered...plus, why does Xbox charge for their ONLINE gameplay?! You're already paying for your ISP then get the game that's online compatible THEN charge you AGAIN for it's ONLINE play?! THAT's TOO MUCH!!! Why can't they make it free like SONY?! _________________ PS3 Trophies
as far as hardware goes ps3 may be top of the line but the price tag is just to much. Plus how many games will take full advantage of all the power it has? Look at gears of war, it comes close to using 360'sfull power but not really. It runs half assed on one core but split across 2 it runs fine and after its tweaked up itll run great across the 3 dies and wont be utilizing all the 360's processing power (of course granted at times it will).
Plus Sony is saying now that the high price tag is because they believe their ps3 is a computer (which it is, but so is 360, the wii, xbox even for that matter[Especially with a mod chip ]) and that they wish it to replace the pc line for home consumers... sounds to me Sony realizes that their price tag is bs and their just trying to hype it up some. but thats just my opinion..
Quote:
but I really don't see much potential in the XBOX 360 anymore. I was never really an FPS fan in the first place, so most of the good XBOX games are pretty much lost to me.
^well thats the problem, xbox genre has always been moreover patroning the fps and simulation side. Sony on the other hand patrons the rpg end. Both are slowly mixing into each other realms. (matter of opinion on if they are doing well in each others strong genres) [sorry if it sounds like im saying sony and microsoft is making the games because they arent but the companies that do make the games for them etc seem to be in this sort of configuration...<-did that make sense]
Anyway I much rather take the 360 over any console. I do want revolution to play zelda (im a huge fan) but other than that nothing really could stray me from gears of war over g fighters halo 3 forza 2 etc.
Quote:
majority of 360 games are...FPS or Driving games that features a little or no upgrade at all.
Im not sure what you mean by no upgrade at all. Do you mean the latter sequels dont get changed very much? because thats a lie. Take Halo 1 and Halo 2 for example, Halo 2 should have been better but many like halo 1 better because of the mechanics of the game, halo 2's shooting mechanics and movement mechanics changed completely. I can't tell you if there is a change in pgr series because I never played pgr 1 or 2. and if your going to rant on how its not realistic well I just have to say DUH it was never meant to be. As for a simulation closer to GT well you have forza 2 coming out and if youre telling me forza doesnt feature a huge amount of features on what to do with your car (not just the basic camber alignment change of exhaust tires etc) then your just blind?
Quote:
They have it covered...plus, why does Xbox charge for their ONLINE gameplay?!You're already paying for your ISP then get the game that's online compatible THEN charge you AGAIN for it's ONLINE play?! THAT's TOO MUCH!!! Why can't they make it free like SONY?!
Ok first Sony should have made there ps2 online experience free and they did which is good. They had to make it free because it sucked. Sony hyped it up really well to saying they would incorporate netscape browser and networking components to connect directly to your pc for added compatibilities and junk and they didnt deliver on any of that.
Second if you were paying attention at all, Sony's supposed ps3 online service that will top xbox live (which I highly doubt; in my eyes sony always fails to deliver, just like they claimed the ps3 to be in one price range and it easily got jacked up) will cost money. Yes Sony's ps3 online service will cost money. And I wont be suprised if it costs more than microsofts xbox live. Which currently sells around 55 dollars for a year renewal. (thats with tax<-American dollars)
So as to the question to Why can't they make it free like Sony? welll if comparing to ps2 online, simply because xbox live doesnt suck, and if you are comparing to ps3 online well then your wrong because ps3 will be charging as well. Keep in mind though both have a two tier system. Silver lets you have a version of xbox live but not to play games for free. Sony will probably deliver something similar to this.
sorry if I came out seeming angry in the post I really am not lol.
I have to admit nintendo has a really nice controller system, and itd be great to try, but most of nintendo's games have always been on the kiddier side. (minus the select few). As for ps3, the hardware specs are nice and it will have quite a few exclusive titles for it that 360 wont have, but likewise microsoft is getting on that boat and 360 will have quite a few exclusives as well [Though it bothers me that unreal 2k7 will be on ps3 and pc only, its kinda whack to play unreal on a console, I tried both ut games on console and it just doesnt fit but for pc its sweet].
Pretty much for me its 360. And the way I see it: if you play rpgs mostly than your going with Sony. If your an fps fan like me and like good sims and the occasional rpg than your going with microsoft. If your tired of conventional consoles and you like the mario games and are a die hard fan of zelda then youre going with nintendo.
I have 360 already and I am very pleased with it. Oblivion is amazing and DOA4 online is alot of fun. Gears of War, Halo 3, That new capcom game, and a few other titles have me really excited.
1) There are still some that thinks that PS2 is still hasn't reached it's full power yet.
2) Microsoft never claimed that they're close to utiliziing Xbox360's full power. And if I also remember right, they're using the 2 cores for graphics and physics, the rest like audio, network, usb, and other miscellaneous stuff on the 3rd core.
3) From the very beginning, Ken Kutaragi warned the consumers that the system [PS3] will be very expensive. He or other Sony staff never announced the price range until recently.
4) From the very beginning, Ken Kutaragi wanted to replace the widely used PC processors with Cell. He even wanted to use Cell for PS2, but there wasn't enough time and therefore you got "Emotion Engine." He wanted the idea that processors all over the network to get more processing power, thus breaking Moore's Law where it's believed that there's a limit to how fast processors could go as the frequency gets faster and faster. Today, dual-cored CPUs are in the market now to get more processing power. Ken is risking PS3's butt out there to make his promising dream a reality.
5) The PlayStation consoles has always been considered as "Computer Entertainment System." Consoles are computers; always has been. Abacus is a computer. Ken is only saying that the system is upgradeable. Microsoft claimed their system to be the same.
6) The reason PS3 cost so much because the components it's built with are really expensive. Blu-Ray drives can be considered to be $700-$1000 value, just like how DVD drives/players were back then. Also, the Cell consists 8 SPUs, a PPE, and the Rambus memory (expensive memory) to use. The chip is really huge, that's why PS3 is going to be the biggest console this generation. Not to mention the price for RSX and its local memory. Sony's even claiming that their system is a steal.
7) Sony and Micrsoft do make first-party games.
8} Sony's Playstation Network Platform will be like Sony's Xbox Live; free network, but gotta pay to play against other online players. But they want it to be better because there are still flaws in Xbox Live structure. I don't think the price for the plan is officially set yet.
9) Sony consoles excel well in FPS category. Don't think Microsoft consoles are the only ones to get if you want to play FPS. Sony might even be better at that genre, but that depends on your tastes or your friends' taste.
10) Since PS3 and Xbox360 are basically computers, expect to see mice and keyboards availability for the systems. You can still prefer to play FPS on PC, no one will stop you. Sony also made their buttons to their controller more pressure sensitive and directional response from the analog sticks to be more accurate. Will be much more suitable for FPS compared to the old controller.
Last edited by thugangel on Sat Jun 10, 2006 9:49 am; edited 1 time in total
I am contemplating either getting a ps3 or a the revolution. The PS3 is going to be expensive too. I'm not all that sure which one too ge. I know I don't want to get the xbox360 though. I don't like it. I've heard they had glicks. I really don't tlike the PS3's controller it's a frekin boomerang. I hope they change it. The revolution is going to have a really cool controller it is going to be small and not as expencive as the other two. I still not sure which one o get.
OOO that is great I'm very happy they changed their controller. Looks a lot like the ps1 controller. the new features that this controller has are pretty cool. about the motion sensetivity and all. I doesn't have the rumble feature though, but I don't think that is too bad. I just hope the PS3 isn't too much out of my price range.
thugangel I believe you direct most of the points towards me to clarify me on some things, so I feel I should respond [sorry if they arent in order ]:
Quote:
3) From the very beginning, Ken Kutaragi warned the consumers that the system [PS3] will be very expensive. He or other Sony staff never announced the price range until recently.
Yes he did claim it will be expensive, however he also claimed (article in psx magazine that I remember reading [I can probably look it up if you still dont believe me]) that it would not exceed the price range of 500 USD.
Quote:
2) Microsoft never claimed that they're close to utiliziing Xbox360's full power. And if I also remember right, they're using the 2 cores for graphics and physics, the rest like audio, network, usb, and other miscellaneous stuff on the 3rd core.
I believe youre correct on that
Quote:
5) The PlayStation consoles has always been considered as "Computer Entertainment System." Consoles are computers; always has been. Abacus is a computer. Ken is only saying that the system is upgradeable. Microsoft claimed their system to be the same.
He discreetly said in a recent interview that his and sony's wish is to have the pc replaced by the PS3. Correction though: Ken did not say that. Phil Harrison did. Microsoft never claimed they wished the xbox 360 to replace the pc; they did say however they wished it to be the center of the home theater system. (which I believe Sony also stated)
Quote:
6) The reason PS3 cost so much because the components it's built with are really expensive. Blu-Ray drives can be considered to be $700-$1000 value, just like how DVD drives/players were back then. Also, the Cell consists 8 SPUs, a PPE, and the Rambus memory (expensive memory) to use. The chip is really huge, that's why PS3 is going to be the biggest console this generation. Not to mention the price for RSX and its local memory. Sony's even claiming that their system is a steal.
That is true and not true. Blu Ray drives for the pc are currently being planned to be sold at retail value for around the 800-900 USD market. Sony's Blu Ray drives will not be costing them nearly around this price. Sony may be claiming their system is a steal, however it is not 600 dollars (for the cheaper one I may add) because the parts are expensive, Sony is planning on making a profit on the hardware (which thoroughly jacks up the price considerably) as opposed to making profit off software royalties (the route which MS is taking, [remember ms is losing quite a bit of money off every system at the current, but the amount they are losing per console is dropping])
Quote:
7) Sony and Micrsoft do make first-party games.
I never said they did not. I just wanted to clarify that it wasnt just Sony and Microsoft in my point, and that it was developers that arent under the two corporations that seem to dictate which genre fits to where.
Quote:
10) Since PS3 and Xbox360 are basically computers, expect to see mice and keyboards availability for the systems. You can still prefer to play FPS on PC, no one will stop you. Sony also made their buttons to their controller more pressure sensitive and directional response from the analog sticks to be more accurate. Will be much more suitable for FPS compared to the old controller.
I know no one is going to stop me ^_^ and I know keyboard support is already a functionality of the 360. However I also firmly believe that keyboard and mouse support for playing video games on the two consoles will not be appearing anytime soon or at all for that matter.
Quote:
8} Sony's Playstation Network Platform will be like Sony's Xbox Live; free network, but gotta pay to play against other online players. But they want it to be better because there are still flaws in Xbox Live structure. I don't think the price for the plan is officially set yet.
9) Sony consoles excel well in FPS category. Don't think Microsoft consoles are the only ones to get if you want to play FPS. Sony might even be better at that genre, but that depends on your tastes or your friends' taste.
I never said Sony doesnt have a good line up in the FPS section. They do have Red Faction and Socom as well as Kill Zone which the xbox does not. However simply put all the other fps's that you can compare because both xbox and ps2 have it, shine much better on the xbox. (of course that can still be open to opinion). I do not agree with you that Sony may be better at that genre, and Im sure the majority will also agree with me in that. (maybe not) And I do agree with you that it is a matter of tastes, but I also have to say its also a matter of the controller. The ps2 controller is not as fit for the fps genre as the xbox controller. You can argue with me all you want, but to me that fact will always remain, the PS2 controller with fps's is just ackward (perhaps because the joysticks are so far in? and that the buttons seem stiff?) This is coming from a person who played PS2 fps's for a year before considering anything on xbox mind you. (but of course this is all open ended and open for opinion)
Quote:
8} Sony's Playstation Network Platform will be like Sony's Xbox Live; free network, but gotta pay to play against other online players. But they want it to be better because there are still flaws in Xbox Live structure. I don't think the price for the plan is officially set yet.
You are right, the price plan is not officially set yet, its just that I believe that Sony's online service will be quite a bit more then microsofts service... can you blame me for that?
Dont think that I'm hammering the ps3 or anything, Im just trying to clarify things for myself and others, as im sure thugangel was doing.
*nods* I tend to do that ^_^. Anyway, it looks like you're still clouded about the reason why the PS3 is so darn expensive so I'm gonna add more of my cents.
Cell is a technology that has never built before, unlike Xbox360's Xenon (name of the cpu) which are PowerPC processors that are mainly used in Macintosh computers. Thus, Xenons are easy to produce since these processors are already in the main stream. On the other hand, Cell needs new factories to produce, meaning more money against time to spend. Also, Cell processors are HUGE, requiring more materials to manufacture thus they are expensive. And I've already mentioned Blu-Ray drives. So if you to compared PS3 with Xbox360 in terms of hardware:
PS3 has:
-Cell ($???)
-Blu-Ray drive ($800-900)
-Rambus memory (most expensive memory on the market, unless it has changed now)
Xbox360 has:
-Xenon (Macintosh processors that are cheaper and faster to produce)
-DVD drive (which practically cost about $30-50)
Yes, Sony is going for a profit, but it's a different profit from what you may be thinking of. They're going for long-term profit, which is what they did with PS2; lose a ton of money for the first two years then bounce back and make profit as manufacturing cost gets cheaper. Though, this time they're taking PS3 to another level towards the NeoGeo route. It's really risky, but it's better than damaging the company if they made the price any lower than they've announced. Unlike NeoGeo, however, Sony can decide to drop the price around $200 or more a year after PS3's launch.
Also, I still believe that Sony never claimed any price range until they announced it recently. Those price ranges that were announced earlier were only speculations from analysts and article publishers. Though, you can prove me wrong.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All images and comments are property of their respective owners, all the rest � 2002 by Anime-Source.com.
You can syndicate our news using the file backend.php.
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
and i am an mgs/grap fan 
]) and that they wish it to replace the pc line for home consumers... sounds to me Sony realizes that their price tag is bs and their just trying to hype it up some. but thats just my opinion..
