[QUOTE="Sgt_Hale"][QUOTE="XYZVector"][QUOTE="Sgt_Hale"][QUOTE="XYZVector"][QUOTE="dcm06"]ps3 well worth 600 for me. i could give tons of reason but no need to the likes of you. XYZVector
Yeah makes a great blue ray player, but they forgot the infra red sensor. Umm you can load unix on it makes a great unix box, but they forgot the keyboard. You can surf the internet, but flash support is buggy. Hey did I mention it does come with blue tooth, and wireless, for your entertainment pleasure. The PS3 is not that great the cost of the components do exceed 600.00 but that isn't the point, if you wanted to by a console to play great games you deffinatly don't want to by the PS3, and to try and sell me that the PS3 is on top is an insult to my intelligence.
lol, what are you talking about? It doesn't need an infra red sensor. The remote control operates on bluetooth. You can use ANY usb keyboard and mouse. The support for the internet is excellent & matches the support of my laptop and desktop. Having Motorstorm, R:FOM, VF5, RR7, & blu ray are well worth paying $100-$200 more for a PS3 instead of settling for a 360 when you look at the 2007 lineup.... PS3's lineup this year is far superior. Anyone with an HDTV will tell you that having a blu ray player is worth the extra money all by itself. If you don't have an HDTV yet, then yes, you have an inferior t.v. so an inferior gaming system might fit you.... otherwise the easy choice is for the PS3.
Yeah but let's disect this a little bit, okay I can have a HD-DVD for my 360 for the same price as a PS3, and have great games that are OUT NOW!! R:FOM okay but there are a dozen of these games that exist elsware. VF5 can get my DOA2 which is the same. RR7 have you tried PGR on 360, or Burnout HD? See the PS3 doesn't stand out, and to claim superiority on games that are not released yet is no justification for a 600.00 console, sorry if the console was like 300.00 I would consider it based on it's release schedule, but no it's not that cheap. Yeah Sony is the better value when you consider it's hardware, and costs of purchase compared to equiping a 360 with simular hardware. However it's not all that great of a value when you consider the games you will be playing are crappier than the competition. That cost less, yes you can go for the PS3 20gb but still it doesn't change the fact that the PS3 doesn't have any compelling software right now. Most people look at the PS3, and say yeah it looks cool but man the whole library of games on the PS3 is not worth the price of admision. If I wanted a blue ray player I would by the PS3 since it is the cheapest blue ray player out there. But that is not the case the PS3 was supposed to be a console, not a blue ray player.
I had a 360. The only part of your assessment that is correct is that RR7 is pretty much on the level with PGR. But R:FOM & VF5 are better than any of thier competitors on the 360. The only disappointment with VF5 is that there's no online.... but the fighting experience is still much better than DOA.
And yes, I could have owned the 360 with the hd-dvd drive to access a smaller library of HD movies for the same price of a PS3 which has access to a larger library of HD movies and a MUCH more diverse line up of games than just a bunch of shooters. So the 360 was hardly worth the same amount of money as the PS3 b/c it offers so much less in functionality and gaming.
I bought a 360 to tide me over until the PS3 coming out. I went through two of them in a year... by itself that probably wouldn't have been a big deal since I got them replaced for free. But after a whole year on the market, the only must have exclusive was Gears. Yes, the 360 had a lot of games... but not a lot that were worth owning vs. renting.... they all felt too similar. For anyone that appreciates a higher quality console, that has more functionality, with the diversity in their games that Sony is known for.... they will appreciate the PS3 more, period.
So after growing tired of LP, I saved Gears, Chromehounds, & Dead Rising and sold the 360 and my other games. Now, I have no problem buying another one when Ninja Gaiden 2 comes out, or maybe even Lost Odyssey... but I want a system that I can play more than different variations of shooters on in between that time.
Where is the diversity of the games?? I'm not seeing it I will take my lemming/sheep blinders off for a second just show me the games. I have $600.00 laying in the bank board, oh wait there are no games becuse I was looking the other day in best buy. Diversity how many games are out on the PS3? 40+ how many are on the 360 140+ lets see there is 10x the diversity of games on the 360. Dude what planet you from?
There is NO diversity on the 360. There are 140 variations of the same 2-3 games. We all know this, get over it. You have sports titles, racing games, and shooters... period. If the 360 had creative titles such as Lair or Heavenly Sword come out within that first year, it would have been much more appealing. But Dead Rising really was the only creative title to break the mold of what it meant to be an xbox game. PGR was a pretty awesome game... but no where near as engaing as Motorstorm is, even with its faults the gameplay is just way more fun. 360 games just stick to the same tried formula for their respective genres. The 360 library hasn't improved since the xbox library.... which is a shame b/c the xbox really should've been the best console last gen. Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, no way. PS3 on the other hand is continuing the legacy of an awesome library which includes the likes of R:FOM, Heavenly Sword, Lair, Warhawk, Motorstorm, Rachet & Clank, Jak & Dexter, Eight Days, Uncharted: Drakes Fortune, DMC4, MGS4, White Knight Story, etc.... and that's not even all the games for this year. Lems are satisfied having less games to look forward to, that's cool. But there's no reason to spend my money on a system that's not getting most of the games I want just b/c it has more games out at the moment.... especially when all of those games are the same, lol. 
Log in to comment