If The PS3 and 360 Launched Together....(POLL)

If the PS3 and 360 both launched together at the same price, with the current library of games, which would you buy, if you could only pick one?

I'd still get both no current attitudes change that.
though we'd likely have seen a far less buggy 360 if Microsoft had waited and they may just have put hd dvd in the system it self. thats what happens with any hypothetical situation every thing changes so we'd have to take into account what we know now we'd likely have seen quite a few differences in the systems.

So you're really asking which system we prefer.

PS3 for the better exclusives albeit I would miss Halo, Alan Wake and Tales of Vesperia.

Edit:

I think if the PS3 had launched at the same time and price as 360, current gen gaming would be very different. For one all the JRPGS and other Japanese games wouldn't have migrated to handhelds. Japan was all about dat PS2 (and some PSP/GBA) but when development costs arose and with the lack of a decent userbase , Japanese companies kissed that brand loyalty goodbye. If there was something I could change about this gen itself, it would be the high price that the PS3 launched at. I'm very curious as to whether or not WRPGs would have still dominated this gen over JRPGs (sales wise) and what exclusives Sony would have pumped out instead as they wouldn't be forced to use them now to stay competitive.

Considering my initial reasoning for purchasing a PS3 was for its blu-ray capabilities, I would have still purchased it at launch.

If the PS3 was to launch a year earlier I believe that its price would be even greater than its initial $600, and probably would have made it challanging to gather a significant amount of sales in that 1 year time period, but if both were the same price like suggested I would argue that the PS3 would most likely have sold much more just due to the inclusion of a blu-ray player, making it a better value hardware wise than the 360.

Great question for the Cowspot audience (the majority). If the PS3 and 360 would be released together the PS3 would still be a 600 dollar, overpriced piece of beep without any good games. I'd go for a 360 all over again.Sgt_Crow

TC asked if they were released at the same price and with the same catalog of games... so either you're cherry picking, have poor reading skills or you do not think that the PS3 has any good exclusives as of right now.

Considering your passionate response though, I can comfortably assume you would still say 360, which is a fine choice nevertheless.

I'd get both.

Great question for the Cowspot audience (the majority). If the PS3 and 360 would be released together the PS3 would still be a 600 dollar, overpriced piece of beep without any good games. I'd go for a 360 all over again.Sgt_Crow

[QUOTE="Sgt_Crow"]Great question for the Cowspot audience (the majority). If the PS3 and 360 would be released together the PS3 would still be a 600 dollar, overpriced piece of beep without any good games. I'd go for a 360 all over again.commonfate

TC asked if they were released at the same price and with the same catalog of games... so either you're cherry picking, have poor reading skills or you do not think that the PS3 has any good exclusives as of right now.

Considering your passionate response though, I can comfortably assume you would still say 360, which is a fine choice nevertheless.

If they launched at the same time for the same price, I would totally get a PS3. The only reason why I didn't buy a PS3 is because an Xbox 360 is cheaper ;o

PS3 , but I'd miss forza , geow and lost odissey.

[QUOTE="commonfate"]

[QUOTE="Sgt_Crow"]Great question for the Cowspot audience (the majority). If the PS3 and 360 would be released together the PS3 would still be a 600 dollar, overpriced piece of beep without any good games. I'd go for a 360 all over again.WilliamRLBaker

TC asked if they were released at the same price and with the same catalog of games... so either you're cherry picking, have poor reading skills or you do not think that the PS3 has any good exclusives as of right now.

Considering your passionate response though, I can comfortably assume you would still say 360, which is a fine choice nevertheless.

PS3. But in reality, it costs more :?

If it was possible, I'd like to buy a high-end gaming PC for that price.

Yeah , the ps3 had to improvise a lot to leave the failure status behind and be a respectable console again, mostly because of how better was the 360 library , how cheaper it was and how ripe is its network service.So yeah , this unlikely scenario would only have happened if they weren't arrogant at first , thinking people would ignore all of that to buy their console.

RoOodriGowW

I wouldn't confirm all of that I'm just trying to get the point across that in any hypothetical scenario one cannot set down a defined criteria there will be many changes in a hypothetical scenario because something is being changed that will lead to other changes.

The law of unintended consquences reigns supreme the least of anything If the 360 and ps3 were released at the same time and price the 360 would have had to been pushed back a year and they would have had to cut stuff out of both systems to meet the 400 or less price point unless we are talking about the 600 dollar price point then the 360 would have had more in it then it did and the sheer push back of date would have likely cleared up or lessened the whole RROD thing. too many scenarios would come up just based upon this single change of same relase date and same price.

360 for Forza and console multiplats then keep gaming primarily on my PC.

If I could go back in time I would never of purchased the PS3, I don't like any of the exclusive series out of the ones I've tried.

I'd get them both, but if I had to pick one I would have got the Xbox..no way would I pay $500 for a console.

edit....ooops missed the same price part of the original message....ok I'd probably still get the Xbox if I had to choose. Other than Uncharted 1 and 2 and Ratchet and Clank most of the other PS3 exclusives are pretty forgettable for me.

Although I suspect this is nothing more than a what system do you prefer poll which of course on Cowspot will garner much more votes for the PS3.

I'd get them both, but if I had to pick one I would have got the Xbox..no way would I pay $500 for a console.

edit....ooops missed the same price part of the original message....ok I'd probably still get the Xbox if I had to choose. Other than Uncharted 1 and 2 and Ratchet and Clank most of the other PS3 exclusives are pretty forgettable for me.

Although I suspect this is nothing more than a what system do you prefer poll which of course on Cowspot will garner much more votes for the PS3.

coasterguy65

How was the PS3 over priced.? Stand alone Blu-ray player on 2006 were $1,000 + Next gen console $400 that = $1,400 for just $600,and if i count xbox live is $50 dollars more $1,450. On 2005 the PS3 would have not release with Blu-Ray,it would have been release with DVD probably,Blu-Ray did not made it out until 2006 even that development started on 2000,and the first player was finish on 2003,the tech was even less cost effective and more expensive on 2005. With DVD alone the PS3 would have been on par with the xbox 360 in price or less. And to finish the xbox 360 on launch had a far from great line up of games,the best games was basically COD2 which was also available on PC,in other word a non exclusive game that would have also landed on PS3 as well at the same time. The outcome would probably had been very different from the one we have now,especially with the 360 dying all over the place.tormentos

[QUOTE="tormentos"] How was the PS3 over priced.? Stand alone Blu-ray player on 2006 were $1,000 + Next gen console $400 that = $1,400 for just $600,and if i count xbox live is $50 dollars more $1,450. On 2005 the PS3 would have not release with Blu-Ray,it would have been release with DVD probably,Blu-Ray did not made it out until 2006 even that development started on 2000,and the first player was finish on 2003,the tech was even less cost effective and more expensive on 2005. With DVD alone the PS3 would have been on par with the xbox 360 in price or less. And to finish the xbox 360 on launch had a far from great line up of games,the best games was basically COD2 which was also available on PC,in other word a non exclusive game that would have also landed on PS3 as well at the same time. The outcome would probably had been very different from the one we have now,especially with the 360 dying all over the place.WilliamRLBaker

I would have gotten PS3 cos I always had the sony brand and the playstation gave me some of my fondest gaming memories. They are great systems. So I was always a "Fanboy" I guess. But I think the PS3 learned a lot from the 360 and gained some valuable advantages over it at launch. But now I game on PC and neither console can touch that :P

At launch nothing could beat Gears so Xbox first, however i'd still have gotten a PS3. Then after a while i'd notice that XBL was forced payment to play my own games so i'd soon stop paying for it and only buy the good ones that have decent storylines like Gears.JohnF111

[QUOTE="tormentos"] How was the PS3 over priced.? Sgt_Crow

I think most people would have bought a ps3 because of the run the ps1 and ps2 had. They wouldn't have had to jump to the 360. Eventually I still would have had both.

[QUOTE="tormentos"] How was the PS3 over priced.? Sgt_Crow

But it was also a blu-ray player :P

And for someone like myself it was either an inexpensive BD player with above average playback, or start saving for an Oppo BD player.

I regret not saving for the Oppo :|

How was the PS3 over priced.? tormentos

It´s not overpsiced if you are looking for a gaming console AND and bluray player. As a gaming console only, i find 360 to be a better deal (personal opinion of course). It has a bigger and more diverse library of games, same tech/graphical quality, it´s a safer option for most games and i prefer the controller.

On topic, i would still get the 360 (for the reason listed above) but understand how PS3 would be a good deal for some (free online and bluray).

[QUOTE="commonfate"]

[QUOTE="Sgt_Crow"]Great question for the Cowspot audience (the majority). If the PS3 and 360 would be released together the PS3 would still be a 600 dollar, overpriced piece of beep without any good games. I'd go for a 360 all over again.Sgt_Crow

TC asked if they were released at the same price and with the same catalog of games... so either you're cherry picking, have poor reading skills or you do not think that the PS3 has any good exclusives as of right now.

Considering your passionate response though, I can comfortably assume you would still say 360, which is a fine choice nevertheless.

that doesnt make any sense...and i dont think the question was stupid. a bit unoriginal and unimaginative but not stupid. you just overlooked the fact that he stated "WITH THE CURRENT LIBRARY OF GAMES" thus you made your mistake and are now trying to pass the buck so you dont look as ridiculous. no that wasnt a stupid answer....you justoverlooked a key phrase in the sentence

[QUOTE="Sgt_Crow"]Great question for the Cowspot audience (the majority). If the PS3 and 360 would be released together the PS3 would still be a 600 dollar, overpriced piece of beep without any good games. I'd go for a 360 all over again.tormentos

PS3 for me, it's just more suited to my tastes. The 360 is a good system too but the RROD is what killed it for me and I got the RROD after warrenty so I couldn't send it in. Also I didn't like paying for xbox live and I prefer PSN, I'm not saying xbox live is a bad service or anything (it does some things better than psn) but I just want to play my game that I bought online without hassel, and psn let's me do that. I don't care about cross game chat or any of that other stuff, but some people do and that's perfectly cool, neither service is really "better" than the other it's a prefernce.

Also there are more PS3 exclusives that I enjoy than 360 exclusives, the only two 360 only games I enjoy is Halo Reach and Alan Wake (very underrated btw) PS3 only games I enjoy are God of War, Uncharted 1 and 2, MGS4, LBP 1 and 2, Heavy Rain, Demons souls, Rachet and Clankect...

But other people like 360 exclsuives better and that's perfectly fine, no one is "wrong" in their opinion.

[QUOTE="tormentos"] How was the PS3 over priced.? PAL360

It´s not overpsiced if you are looking for a gaming console AND and bluray player. As a gaming console only, i find 360 to be a better deal (personal opinion of course). It has a bigger and more diverse library of games, same tech/graphical quality, it´s a safer option for most games and i prefer the controller.

On topic, i would still get the 360 (for the reason listed above) but understand how PS3 would be a good deal for some (free online and bluray).

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"][QUOTE="tormentos"] How was the PS3 over priced.? Stand alone Blu-ray player on 2006 were $1,000 + Next gen console $400 that = $1,400 for just $600,and if i count xbox live is $50 dollars more $1,450. On 2005 the PS3 would have not release with Blu-Ray,it would have been release with DVD probably,Blu-Ray did not made it out until 2006 even that development started on 2000,and the first player was finish on 2003,the tech was even less cost effective and more expensive on 2005. With DVD alone the PS3 would have been on par with the xbox 360 in price or less. And to finish the xbox 360 on launch had a far from great line up of games,the best games was basically COD2 which was also available on PC,in other word a non exclusive game that would have also landed on PS3 as well at the same time. The outcome would probably had been very different from the one we have now,especially with the 360 dying all over the place.tormentos

If you had your way in the debate the ps3 would have evolved under the hypothetical to be a super computer that bathed the world in forever warm light and fed the world and gave us world peace the 360 would have evolved to have a 100% failure..rate..etc In short there is no point in debating with you.

If you had your way in the debate the ps3 would have evolved under the hypothetical to be a super computer that bathed the world in forever warm light and fed the world and gave us world peace the 360 would have evolved to have a 100% failure..rate..etc In short there is no point in debating with you.WilliamRLBaker

If the PS3 and 360 had launched at the same time with the same games, the PS3 WOULDN'T have all these exclusives.

These recent exclusives, enjoyable though they are, are nothing but Sony's attempts at staying competitive. They have to keep pumping out all these titles and buying all these studios in order to keep their head afloat. If the PS3 had been released at a competitive price to the 360, I feel like it would have been just a super PS2 (which would have been awesome), with a stellar lineup of third party titles. Not only that but the games we play today would probably be completely different. Many people, including myself, bought the 360 over the PS3 because it was cheaper and brand loyalty only exists on internet forums, not in the real world market. Everyone wonders where the Japanese side of gaming has gone this gen. They haven't magically decreased in quality or disappeared from gaming just because... they've migrated to handhelds because PS3 was too expensive to dev for, people weren't buying it and Japan would never make the 360 their main platform. It is silly to think about it but I've always wondered what kind of JRPGs and other Japanese games on consoles we would see had Sony played their cards right at the beginning.