Better Value? Sony's PlayStation 3 or Microsoft's Elite 360

[ps3andlovinit]

Originally Posted by ProvenFlipper

Resistance was 16GB, and it was a 1st gen launch title. 360 would have required 2 discs.

Yep.

Blue dragon for the 360 is 3 DVD's I believe. It is already needed and it's early in the life-cycle.

M$ tactic is bash the competitor that actually delivered better value to deflect attention from what they didn't deliver..

PS3 was too expensive (360 ends up being more expensive at the end of the day),

then it was 1080p wasn't important,

then it was HDMI wasn't important,

now it's "unproven" formats (ie. blu-ray) aren't important/needed.

Every one so far Sony has been right and MS has been wrong.

Every single one.

[ZX-VETTE]

Originally Posted by BOSS10L

I didn't realize that. Hmm...Using that as a template, is that the reason, one could assume, that Gears of War is so short?

Exactly. Amazing game but they can only go so far with the levels due to space constraints.

[Blu Tiger]

Originally Posted by Jaren613

They both have 512mb of memory, they just split it up differently...

I guess I should have said that the 360 has more memory for graphic processing. The PS3 is limited to 256 MB for graphics processing; the 360 can use more for graphics processing because it has a unified memory architecture.

[BOSS10L]

Originally Posted by ps3andlovinit

Yep.

Blue dragon for the 360 is 3 DVD's I believe. It is already needed and it's early in the life-cycle.

M$ tactic is bash the competitor that actually delivered better value to deflect attention from what they didn't deliver..

PS3 was too expensive (360 ends up being more expensive at the end of the day),

then it was 1080p wasn't important,

then it was HDMI wasn't important,

now it's "unproven" formats (ie. blu-ray) aren't important/needed.

Every one so far Sony has been right and MS has been wrong.

Every single one.

3 friggin' discs?!?!?

I'll still get it because I'm an RPG nut, but damn, I thought we were done with multiple disc fiascos after FF VII.

It's going to be interesting to see this all pan out. I think there are plenty of people who hate on MS and Sony just because, well, they're MS and Sony. At the end of the day, if I need to switch out discs to play a great game, then so be it, but wow....Talk about taking steps forward only to step backwards.

Way to go, Billy boy.

[BOSS10L]

Originally Posted by ZX-VETTE

Exactly. Amazing game but they can only go so far with the levels due to space constraints.

Makes me wonder why they wouldn't have taken a little bit more time developing it and making it a multi-disc release.

I wonder what that means for Halo 3? Multiple discs, or really short game....

[ps3andlovinit]

Originally Posted by BOSS10L

I didn't realize that. Hmm...Using that as a template, is that the reason, one could assume, that Gears of War is so short?

Yes it could be.

[Jaren613]

Originally Posted by BOSS10L

Makes me wonder why they wouldn't have taken a little bit more time developing it and making it a multi-disc release.

I wonder what that means for Halo 3? Multiple discs, or really short game....

Does one have to ask? MS is pretty clear on the demographic they shoot for with this game. It will be a short single player game with a robust online component.

[monkeytap]

Originally Posted by BOSS10L

Jesus H Christ on a Popsicle stick, give it a rest already people....

this brings up a good point, when can we expect fletch on blu ray? :-)

[BluManta]

I think this is all bollocks. Yes the ps3 has more power and can play blu-ray games but that really dosn't matter because most games are going on both systems meaning they will both be the same anyway! Only the exclusives will show a huge difference for the ps3. If its on both cosoles then its just the same game on two different platforms. It really doesn't matter how much more power the ps3 has if its never going to use it. I have both systems and I only get exclusives for my ps3 (motorstorm and resistance). Developers piss me off because there too much of a ***** to go exclusive for the ps3. WERE IN THE NEXT GENERATION WHY CAN'T THEY MAKE NEXT GEN GAMES? You can only realy do that on a ps3 but they continue to make game for both. I think that if Sony want there ps3 take off then they should start paying more money for exclusives and if developers want to make the best games then they should start making them with the power they need and thats only possible on the ps3. And if they do make games on both consoles, why cant they put more on ps3 and make it better. Just like they do with ps2 games and 360 games. It really anoys me thinking that i spent £425 on a ps3 and no one is making games to fit its specs.

[Nismobeach]

Originally Posted by kiddtigger

Because it's true.

Actually it's not. Both systems have 512MB of RAM. The only difference is that the 360's RAM is unified where as the PS3's is divided (half for video and half for everything else).

[BOSS10L]

Originally Posted by monkeytap

this brings up a good point, when can we expect fletch on blu ray? :-)

Soon I hope...

Dr. : So where do you know Alan from?

Fletch: We play tennis at the club.

Dr. : Really? California Racquet Club?

Fletch: Right.

Dr. : That's my club too. I don't remember seeing you there.

Fletch: Well, I haven't been playing in a while because of these kidney pains.

Dr. : Right. Now, how long have you had these pains, Mr. Barber?

Fletch: No, that's "Babar".

Dr. : Two B's?

Fletch: One B. B-A-B-A-R.

Dr. : That's two.

Fletch: Yeah, but not right next to each other. I thought that's what you meant.

Dr. : Arnold Babar. Isn't there a children's book about an elephant named Babar?

Fletch: I don't know. I don't have any.

Dr. : No children?

Fletch: No elephant books.

[Blu Tiger]

Originally Posted by Nismobeach

Actually it's not. Both systems have 512MB of RAM. The only difference is that the 360's RAM is unified where as the PS3's is divided (half for video and half for everything else).

I know. Look seven posts up. The 360 has more memory than the PS3 for graphics.

[BluManta]

Originally Posted by kiddtigger

I know. Look seven posts up. The 360 has more memory than the PS3 for graphics.

Is this serious? They have the same. 512mb on each but the ps3 splits its up into two to make it run better but, it can be shared, if the ps3 needs more ram for other stuff it will take it from the graffix memory and vice versa.

[Jaren613]

Originally Posted by kiddtigger

I know. Look seven posts up. The 360 has more memory than the PS3 for graphics.

No, the 360 could have more video RAM than the PS3. Anyone who deals with electronics knows that the 360, majority of the time, will be using around 256mb of that memory for system stuff anyway, if not more.

The possibility is there, but your argument is ridiculous, the 360 would have to limit it's system capacity in order to get more video memory than the PS3, you have no point.

[Blu Tiger]

The 360 is not limited to 256mb of memory for graphics like the PS3 is.

[Deciazulado]

Stop the personal attacks

[MasterXeus]

Getting back on topic and closing the argument.

Who cares what each system has?

The better value will vary from person to person. If there are no games they like on the Xbox 360 then it has no value. If there are no games they like on the PS3 and don't want a Blu-ray player, then the PS3 will have no value.

[blitz6speed]

Originally Posted by ProvenFlipper

Resistance was 16GB, and it was a 1st gen launch title. 360 would have required 2 discs.

No xbox 360 game can be over 6.5 gigs. They are all the same size. So they are nowhere near the benefit of the full 9.4 gigs from the dual layer disc.

[ZX-VETTE]

Originally Posted by BluManta

I think this is all bollocks. Yes the ps3 has more power and can play blu-ray games but that really dosn't matter because most games are going on both systems meaning they will both be the same anyway! Only the exclusives will show a huge difference for the ps3. If its on both cosoles then its just the same game on two different platforms. It really doesn't matter how much more power the ps3 has if its never going to use it. I have both systems and I only get exclusives for my ps3 (motorstorm and resistance). Developers piss me off because there too much of a ***** to go exclusive for the ps3. WERE IN THE NEXT GENERATION WHY CAN'T THEY MAKE NEXT GEN GAMES? You can only realy do that on a ps3 but they continue to make game for both. I think that if Sony want there ps3 take off then they should start paying more money for exclusives and if developers want to make the best games then they should start making them with the power they need and thats only possible on the ps3. And if they do make games on both consoles, why cant they put more on ps3 and make it better. Just like they do with ps2 games and 360 games. It really anoys me thinking that i spent £425 on a ps3 and no one is making games to fit its specs.

There's a lot of truth to what you've written. Developers making cross platform games will go to the lowest denominator for ease of porting and to make (save) as much money as they can. But that won't fly forever because gamers will have a say when they don't buy a title if they feel they're getting ripped off. In addition, they have to face the competition. As games get more advanced and some Development teams go the extra mile, other Develpment houses will have to up the ante or they will lose out to the better games. There are other variables in play right now as well. With the PS3 fairly new, Developers have an easier time developing on the 360 than on the PS3. Sony knows their hardware is difficult to program for and is offering the Developers a host of new tools and libraries to make their lives easier. This is especially true with trying to develop games utilizing the 7 additional processors that the PS3 has. With Sony offering up this assistance, Developers will find it easier to create games specifically for the PS3 than they do today and therefore can reduce costs to create games solely for one platform.

[MSG2007]

system of the future. 360 will go the route of Dreamcast. Launch was successful for both companies, however,now that the dust has cleared,the PS3 bashing has stopped, and Sony's vision of the future of gaming will start to take shape. I own a 360. I have'nt played it since December. Why? Who wants pay to play online? Not I. I don't care what you offer, it still is'nt worth $50 a year for roster updates and such. What other purpose would MS have to release the Elite other than to say 'We know our product is inferior" but for this $ amount you can almost catch up to our competetion? Weak, feable attempt to cash in on some rabid followers....