Is it fair to compare the $400 dollar PS3 to the $200 360?

[QUOTE="Irick_cb"]I would not compare my iPod Touch to a iPhone overall.IronBass

If you aren't using the phone then i agree with you :P

[QUOTE="Irick_cb"]

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"] it's called coming home from workAnimal-Mother

Hahahahahahahahaha.

Real life isn't an excuse not to be on the internet.

Ghost in the Shell.

My logic is flawless.

(i'm being silly, btw ^^)

[QUOTE="stylesPS3"]compare a Ferrari with a shopping cart that has an engine while your at it. They can both do the same thing "essentially".IronBass

The differences between the PS3 and Arcade are a lot less significant :)

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"][QUOTE="Irick_cb"]

Hahahahahahahahaha.

Real life isn't an excuse not to be on the internet.

Irick_cb

Ghost in the Shell.

My logic is flawless.

(i'm being silly, btw ^^)

If you aren't using the phone then i agree with you :PIrick_cb

and forever who said it comes with a memory unit it's now internal. here look

and some people are saying the comparisons are too different, but you dont seem to be listening either :)stylesPS3

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="Irick_cb"]I would not compare my iPod Touch to a iPhone overall.Irick_cb

If you aren't using the phone then i agree with you :P

he says it depends on peoples needs, but then when he rejects an example he looks specifically at his own need.stylesPS3

[QUOTE="stylesPS3"]he says it depends on peoples needs, but then when he rejects an example he looks specifically at his own need.IronBass

It depends on what you want to do with the console. For the casual gamer - and several people I know - the 360 is just a device to play the latest Fifa/Pro Evo after a session down the pub, for which the basic model is perfectly adequate and thus rightfully compared. Of course for people who frequent this board, gaming is a little more varied and time consuming, therefore it may not suffice for their personal gaming needs...

[QUOTE="Irick_cb"]

[QUOTE="IronBass"] I would. In fact, I did. I got an iPod Touch. The iPhone is way too overpriced.stylesPS3

If you aren't using the phone then i agree with you :P

then dont say 360 and ps3 are comparable like that, say it is only for you ;)stylesPS3

Why should I add an "only for me"? It's pretty obvious that everything I say is my opinon :|

Why should I state something that very obvious?

[QUOTE="Irick_cb"]But the difference is there.IronBass

Yes that is the question.

Which is why i used the word "over all"

I can get a $400 Xbox, and a $400 PS3.

In fact, i have both.

I can also get a 200$ Xbox and give up some, for me, major features.

It is nice to have that choice but i would not give a direct comparison between the two unless I'm just comparing the functions the $200 Xbox and the $400 PS3 share knowing that i would have to give up a lot of functionality for the savings between, then judge wither i hold those features worth the money.

I know you are saying the same thing but i just want to state my standing with a different slant then yours.

[QUOTE="stylesPS3"] then dont say 360 and ps3 are comparable like that, say it is only for you ;)IronBass

thats fine, but then why argue with people whos needs are different and tell them that it should be comparable? :)stylesPS3

Ugh...

Plain and simple. 360 = least expensive console out there. Period. PS3 = best bang for your buck for features.

Games and what you are willing to spend for a console is at your own discretion. Period the end.

SemiMaster

[QUOTE="stylesPS3"] thats fine, but then why argue with people whos needs are different and tell them that it should be comparable? :)IronBass

Gamers don't want Gimmicks

They want games.

For 200 dollars, the quality and variety of the 360 is unmatched for what it offers.

Dead-Memories

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="stylesPS3"] then dont say 360 and ps3 are comparable like that, say it is only for you ;)stylesPS3

Gamers don't want Gimmicks

They want games.

For 200 dollars, the quality and variety of the 360 is unmatched for what it offers.

[QUOTE="stylesPS3"][QUOTE="IronBass"] Why should I add an "only for me"? It's pretty obvious that everything I say is my opinon :| Stating the very obvious is not my styIe.delta3074

That point is very narrow minded.

This is system wars, on a gaming forum yes but that does not limit the points made about the systems. (there would be a heart here but HTML parsing sucks)

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="stylesPS3"] thats fine, but then why argue with people whos needs are different and tell them that it should be comparable? :)Irick_cb

That point is very narrow minded.

This is system wars, on a gaming forum yes but that does not limit the points made about the systems. (there would be a heart here but HTML parsing sucks)

[QUOTE="rybe1025"][QUOTE="Animal-Mother"] Why so. I mean we've all gotten DLC and downloadable titles. You do need an HD for those dont you?Animal-Mother

I've never gotten an arcade title, I just wouldn't spend time playing them, almost all of them aren't worth anything either. Most of the stuff I have leftover on my HD is stuff I could have viewed on the internet but was too lazy to go to my computer. Game saves and xbox live account info is almost all of what I use (along with a vast amount of 360 users). The HD isn't really necessary, sure its very nice to have. I've had my HD since a couple months after launch (I've kept the same HD, but not the same box) and its just barely over half full, but only because I don't clear out old demo's/videos. (It's a 20GB one too).

Unfortunately in here 360 fanboys will tell you they dont need the HDD to play gamesor that paying for XBL cant be used when comparing costs between PS3 & 360 because not everyone plays online..

Both the above are true however the IRONY is that these same fanboys than brag how much XBL is better than PSN so they must use XBL and therefore pay the extra money, same fanboys also say how superior some multiplats are due also to extra DLC (GTA4 & also other multi/exclusives) so it must also mean they have an HDD..

they still forget to mention the lack of Wi-Fi, extra money for controller charge unit / batteries & that PS3 is also a Blu-ray player...

So while i enjoy gaming on both consoles, I still find PS3 to be the best value for money as a whole package compared to the other consoles..

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"][QUOTE="rybe1025"]You are getting confused with what you do then the gaming world. How you play games is not how everyone in the gaming world does. Some just like online which arcade does, some just like single player which arcade doesMystery_Writer

its not HD ready just cause you need a $15 HD cable? come on lets not be ridiculous... BTW you dont need an HD cable to play PS3 games, they still play on standard TV's...

[QUOTE="Irick_cb"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]the 360 and the ps3 are comparable, this is a gaming forum, they are both games machines, and you can't say the ps3 is a better games machine cos it can play blu-ray movies, because movies are irrelevant to gaming, same as you can't go to an MP3 player site and say the iphone is better than the ipod touch because you can ring other people on it, they have to be compared as games machines nothing more.delta3074

That point is very narrow minded.

This is system wars, on a gaming forum yes but that does not limit the points made about the systems. (there would be a heart here but HTML parsing sucks)

theres also not any retards arguing with one another about a friggin dvd player....its just talk about movies...arguing about the movies...not what plays the movies...ugh...people...i just get tired of everyone saying the same thing...all i hear is that PS3 has no games, blu ray doesnt matter, PSN sucks and the price is too high or 360 has RROD and e74, its a piece of crap, you guys have to pay extra for other stuff why are you so dumb to pay $50 a year online...the space isnt big enough to make a good game on DVD...okay first of all 360 fanboys, do i hear MGS, Uncharted, InFAMOUS, Heaavenly Sword, Killzone, Little Big Planet according to Gamespot PS3 is the only system with an exclusive AAAA game go look for yourself and count exclusive games on PS3 with 8.5 or higher, just as many maybe more as its 360 counter-part....Blu-Ray really is a great thing just hasnt taken off as much as it will later on....PSN runs, works, no more lag gets the job done and is free doesnt seem to suck to me sure it could be better but so could the Steelers last year, didnt stop them from winning a super bowl did it? sorry weak analogy...to go with your "you get what you pay for" argument on XBL well same goes for PS3...theres a built in wifi, 80 GB HD, Blu Ray Player blah blah blah...now to you PS3 fanboys if RROD/E74 happens it doesnt matter theyre probably going to get it fixed for free warranty, and sonys is $150...that "piece of crap" has a year ahead of you guys and pretty much can do anything it wants since its getting 50 dollars a year from at least 14 million users(im sure its higher but not everyone im sure has it so i cut it to about half) of XBL do the price 14000000 x 50....yeah thats how much MS makes a year...so they can pretty much do what ever they want with the price of the regular price of the 360 because theyre making money off that and well they seem to still do alright with people forking out extra money since they didnt had to spend 200 and as for DVD well you guys do remember what the PS2 used to make games right? and they were pretty damn good dont you think and may i say Fable, Halo, Gears of War, Mass Effect, Fallout 3 DLC, GTA DLC...

thats all im really saying is seriously can we come with something new ive been hearing since the games first came out just shut up already....what you lemmings and cows really should be worried about is how a piece of crap like the Wii is kicking both your @$$es when it has only what 2 hardcore games and its a game system that you wave your hands around like a retard and they say its working out??? i mean come on 360 and PS3 combined are losing to a system that you mammi and pappi friggin own...are you serious? well i am...

im just saying theres bigger fish to fry out there is all

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"][QUOTE="Animal-Mother"] Wait but you still need save files? Correct. So if i were to buy 10 games and then wanted DLC what would happen. Please everyone in the gaming world has gotten one arcade titles at some point in time or maybe they haven't due to lack of a hard drive. Malta_1980

its not HD ready just cause you need a $15 HD cable? come on lets not be ridiculous... BTW you dont need an HD cable to play PS3 games, they still play on standard TV's...

Some are saying it depends on your needs.

For example.. if you want HD gaming out of the box, you're out of the luck with the $400 PS3 as it's SD only. And in such case, even thought X360 arcade is $200 cheaper than the PS3.. it still offers better value to you.

[QUOTE="Malta_1980"]

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"] 10 games would be fine for 256MB (soon to be 512), as all my saves (approx 30+ games at the time) transferred fine to a 64MB memory card & I still had way more free space on that card. However the same can't be said for PS3, as most games on PS3 costs you around mandatory 5GB per each to play. X360 is more well thought out device than PS3. the $400 PS3 is not even HD ready out of the box.Mystery_Writer

its not HD ready just cause you need a $15 HD cable? come on lets not be ridiculous... BTW you dont need an HD cable to play PS3 games, they still play on standard TV's...

Some are saying it depends on your needs.

For example.. if you want HD gaming out of the box, you're out of the luck with the $400 PS3 as it's SD only. And in such case, even thought X360 arcade is $200 cheaper than the PS3.. it still offers better value to you.

Well when you buy the ps3 you can also buy a 20$ decent 1m hdmi cable.Seriously now the hd cable isn't such a big deal, sure sony is nuts for not giving us hd cables but m$ doesn't give us controller chargers or Wi-fi.

the comparison is meant to find out which one offers better value out of the box.

Some are saying it depends on your needs.

For example.. if you want HD gaming out of the box, you're out of the luck with the $400 PS3 as it's SD only. And in such case, even thought X360 arcade is $200 cheaper than the PS3.. it still offers better value to you.

Mystery_Writer

But if we are talking gaming only here and by gaming I mean everything related to it than PS3 is a better value that 360 arcade..

Let me tell you why (imo)

PS3 - USD399 offers :- HDD for installations / DLC / Downloadable titles, Free online service, rechargeable controllers (no extra batteries)

So i bought my PS3 and has everything except HD cables which i got for approx $15.00 (it offers other features but since they dont effect games am not listing them)

360 Arcade - USD199.00 offers :- Memory card for save files..

So i bought an extra HDD, I pay for XBL &I bought the HD cable (it still doesnt offer most if not all the other extra non-gaming related functions PS3 does). Also am not mentioning the product/hardware quality which is another issue..

Now you tell me which is the best value for money out of the box.. Dont get me wrong am not trying to say which console is better am just discussing value for money.

It's a matter of personal points of view regarding "worth"

A person who likes PS3 exclusives and the upcoming games for the PS3 can easily say "my PS3 is worth it".
A person who likes Xbox 360 exclusives and the upcoming games for the Xbox 360 can easily say "my Xbox 360 is worth it".

Worth does not equate to the price tag, but rather on the games and experience (blu-ray, free wifi, xbox live, etc.) you prefer and like.

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

the comparison is meant to find out which one offers better value out of the box.

Some are saying it depends on your needs.

For example.. if you want HD gaming out of the box, you're out of the luck with the $400 PS3 as it's SD only. And in such case, even thought X360 arcade is $200 cheaper than the PS3.. it still offers better value to you.

Malta_1980

But if we are talking gaming only here and by gaming I mean everything related to it than PS3 is a better value that 360 arcade..

Let me tell you why (imo)

PS3 - USD399 offers :- HDD for installations / DLC / Downloadable titles, Free online service, rechargeable controllers (no extra batteries)

So i bought my PS3 and has everything except HD cables which i got for approx $15.00 (it offers other features but since they dont effect games am not listing them)

360 Arcade - USD199.00 offers :- Memory card for save files..

So i bought an extra HDD, I pay for XBL &I bought the HD cable (it still doesnt offer most if not all the other extra non-gaming related functions PS3 does). Also am not mentioning the product/hardware quality which is another issue..

Now you tell me which is the best value for money out of the box.. Dont get me wrong am not trying to say which console is better am just discussing value for money.

The thing is; arcade doesn't need memory cards, as it has half a gig of storage (which, to be honest, is quite a lot for just save files).

However, manditory 5GB per game installs really caps the number of games PS3 owners can have instantly ready to play on their consoles.

As for the $15 extra.. should we then start comparing $415 PS3 to $200 X360 arcade? are we trying to make the comparison criteria fit ps3's favor?

or should we also consider a used hdd for X360 arcade and compare $415 PS3 to $230 X360 arcade?

I mean, if we're going to compare different arbitrary extra cost then that's a different case.

But if we're comparing what $400 vs. $200 offers, then unfortunately, the $400 PS3 would look much more gimped for its price compared to $200 arcade. (unless of course you're not interested in HD gaming or HD bluray)