Now I know this has probably popped up on this site a couple times befor but I don't care.I want to see as of right now a year after PS3 launch and a little over 2 years after 360 which is better in your opinion. I want real reason and not just your fanboyism on this forum. Things like game line up, rumble vs sixxaxes, graphics, sound quality. Not that Sony or that Microsoft is stupid of lame or waterever I want real reasons. And please I know the wii is also an option but I want to here about Sony and Microsoft we all know Nintendo is there as well, but its kind of going a different direction then these other two who are in the process of slugging it out for supremacy. Lets keep it clean and fair, if you are going to say something thats not obviously true then you need to back it up site a source.If you say my ps3 had sex with my girlfriend and thats why I hate it,I am sorry we are going to need proof(lol),so if you are going to quote some one do it legally.
That being said I will kick things off. Personally I think for one the games not just in number but in quality are better on the 360 this happened last time around with the ps2 it always had more titles and a better quality which help them out last time as they had the weakest system out of the three(thats not to say the 360 is any weaker then the ps3 in total stats there are pretty much level). Do the research yourself see the rating the ps3 games have gotten vs the one on the 360, there are allot more highly rated titles on the 360 vs the ps3.
Rumble is sooo much more satisfying then sixxaxes. Sorry Sony but no physical feedback really hurts when you are playing a FPS and especially a dirt racing game i.e. Motor storm and your controller just sits there like a dead fish,it just feels so lame and fake. And one other questionI have always had maybe somone on here can answer it for me but why can Nintendo do rumble and motion and Sony cant ?
Graphics and sound are for all intentional purposes the same to me I have seen both with the same game in and on HD 1080p TV andI cant tell the difference. If any thing is kinda odd its that a couple of the games look slightly more jagged and fugedon the ps3 and in things like madden. Ps3 uses a depth of field allusion to help their graphic along where as 360 doesn't as shown here http://www.gamespot.com/users/frederikfrey/video_player?id=IHI7wjX95b8PvTbZ this video show all the little corners that Sony cut so make them selves look better Also the fram rate why cant sony do 60fps .
Now for the the new format. Microsoft really won me over her andI may go HD-DVD because of it Sony packed in there Blue ray player in there console and drove their price through the roof $600 when it first hit and now $500 still allot more then I am willing to pay and especially to much for parents of kids that want a next-gen system. When ps2 came out there was no real competition for the DVD formate so it was just good sense to bundle it together and it still wast too expensive at $300 thats about right for a new console and people have gotten use to it, but Sony doubled that in one gen of their console scaring off allot of people right away. Microsoft didn't do to much better, but with what the system came with made it more reasonable. All those accessory's added on afterwords would put you past $500 so just pay $400 and save yourself the extra 100 bucks. As for HD-DVD and BluerayI will go HD-DVD because its a hell of allot cheaper to do then blue ray especially sience i already have a 360 and all i have to pay is 150 buks for the HD-DVD drive. So you have $350+$150 and you are at $500 and youcan do it as you need to so if you have a ps3 and a standard TV its totally pointless where as if you have an xbox and buy a HD TV youcan now go and get that HD DVD drive and see allthose HD movies. Options is whatIand Microsoft give you options.
So thats my rant plesse feal free togo on you'r own one way or the other.
Log in to comment