Lets Assume in th next 2 years a new Xbox is presented.

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

Jaysonguy

Every single area?

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

Jaysonguy

epic fail

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

qman101

Every single area?

Considering the required hardware improvements, would you be willing to shell out 600-650 for a new Xbox system with only minor graphical improvements over the PS3?Mavrickkal

And that's giving the benefit of the doubt that the PS3 really is better at gfx than the 360 is. Sure I think it has an edge but there are plenty of people here that don't.

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

qman101

Every single area?

Yes

Head to head the PS3 can't snag a single victory

I mean the only place Sony can claim is that the PS3 has more Sony made first party games and with the way franchises like Ratchet and Clank have been performing that's slowing looking grim as well.

if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAOkillzowned24

Uh huh, and?

Gaming is expensive

300 bucks is nothing when you factor it in over 6 years.

if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAOkillzowned24

if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAOkillzowned24

[QUOTE="killzowned24"]if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAORiverwolf007

It still a bill that shouldnt even be there,thats a extra game every year for PS3 users:)

[QUOTE="qman101"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

Jaysonguy

Every single area?

Yes

Head to head the PS3 can't snag a single victory

I mean the only place Sony can claim is that the PS3 has more Sony made first party games and with the way franchises like Ratchet and Clank have been performing that's slowing looking grim as well.

The only place that I see the Xbox 360 beating the PS3 on is games.

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"][QUOTE="killzowned24"]if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAOkillzowned24

It still a bill that shouldnt even be there,thats a extra game every year for PS3 users:)

Nitpicking on small things, I suppose.

There's a difference between divided, yearly payments and one big payment.

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"][QUOTE="killzowned24"]if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAOkillzowned24

It still a bill that shouldnt even be there,thats a extra game every year for PS3 users:)

But considering that the ponly worthy PS3 game is MGS4, that doesn't mean much.

See? A fanboyish argument counters another fanboyish argument.

[QUOTE="killzowned24"]if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAOAljosa23

nobody takes him seriously..

[QUOTE="killzowned24"]

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"][QUOTE="killzowned24"]if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAOIronBass

It still a bill that shouldnt even be there,thats a extra game every year for PS3 users:)

But considering that the ponly worthy PS3 game is MGS4, that doesn't mean much.

See? A fanboyish argument counters another fanboyish argument.

[QUOTE="killzowned24"]

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"][QUOTE="killzowned24"]if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAOIronBass

It still a bill that shouldnt even be there,thats a extra game every year for PS3 users:)

But considering that the ponly worthy PS3 game is MGS4, that doesn't mean much.

See? A fanboyish argument counters another fanboyish argument.

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"][QUOTE="killzowned24"]if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAOkillzowned24

It still a bill that shouldnt even be there,thats a extra game every year for PS3 users:)

If you want to buy something with the money that you earn what is it to me that you spend money on XBL or on rumble or a $400 gfx card or whatever.

Money = lamest argument on SW.

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"][QUOTE="killzowned24"]if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAOkillzowned24

It still a bill that shouldnt even be there,thats a extra game every year for PS3 users:)

And if Sony made any games worth playing you'd have some of a point.

[QUOTE="qman101"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

Jaysonguy

Every single area?

Yes

Head to head the PS3 can't snag a single victory

I mean the only place Sony can claim is that the PS3 has more Sony made first party games and with the way franchises like Ratchet and Clank have been performing that's slowing looking grim as well.

Ratchet and clank: ToD has an 88% on gamerankings, I don't think you know what you're talking about.

No, but i doubt that would happen anyway. New technology is just round the corner with ray tracing, then there's multi-gpu technology which has improved alot for PCs since the PS3 and 360 were launched.

It dosn't really matter now though as graphics being the big sell point is slowly disappearing. You could proberbly get away with just a RAM update and a small performance boost and the 360 would be good for a good few more years.

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"][QUOTE="qman101"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

ChrnoTrigger

Every single area?

Yes

Head to head the PS3 can't snag a single victory

I mean the only place Sony can claim is that the PS3 has more Sony made first party games and with the way franchises like Ratchet and Clank have been performing that's slowing looking grim as well.

Ratchet and clank: ToD has an 88% on gamerankings, I don't think you know what you're talking about.

Amazing what a few fan sites will do to pump up a game's rating huh?

It got a 7.5 here, not that great for the console's premiere platformer.

Microsoft (drops revolver): AGGH! My friggin foot!

BANG!

Microsoft (drops revolver): AGGH! My friggin foot!

nervmeister

:|

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

Jaysonguy

mega fail lmao

[QUOTE="nervmeister"]BANG!

Microsoft (drops revolver): AGGH! My friggin foot!

souledge474

:|

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

patrickjw333

mega fail lmao

Wow, and that compelling argument really set things right

You can see things however you want. In the real world the 360 wins every contest.

[QUOTE="ChrnoTrigger"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"][QUOTE="qman101"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

Jaysonguy

Every single area?

Yes

Head to head the PS3 can't snag a single victory

I mean the only place Sony can claim is that the PS3 has more Sony made first party games and with the way franchises like Ratchet and Clank have been performing that's slowing looking grim as well.

Ratchet and clank: ToD has an 88% on gamerankings, I don't think you know what you're talking about.

Amazing what a few fan sites will do to pump up a game's rating huh?

It got a 7.5 here, not that great for the console's premiere platformer.

The reviews on this site are terrible.:(

[QUOTE="killzowned24"]

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"][QUOTE="killzowned24"]if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAOJaysonguy

It still a bill that shouldnt even be there,thats a extra game every year for PS3 users:)

And if Sony made any games worth playing you'd have some of a point.

Considering the required hardware improvements, would you be willing to shell out 600-650 for a new Xbox system with only minor graphical improvements over the PS3?Mavrickkal

[QUOTE="patrickjw333"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

Jaysonguy

mega fail lmao

Wow, and that compelling argument really set things right

You can see things however you want. In the real world the 360 wins every contest.

I still don't see how the Xbox 360 beats the PS3 in every category.

Only aspects I see the 360 beating the PS3, as stated earlier, is games. I'll also add Live to the mix.

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"][QUOTE="patrickjw333"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

qman101

mega fail lmao

Wow, and that compelling argument really set things right

You can see things however you want. In the real world the 360 wins every contest.

I still don't see how the Xbox 360 beats the PS3 in every category.

Only aspects I see the 360 beating the PS3, as stated earlier, is games. I'll also add Live to the mix.

Ok, so we have the 360 winning in...

Games

Online service

I'd throw on media once the Netflix takes hold. There's content there that cannot be viewed on a TV. Until media starts being exclusive on BluRay that's not going to change.

[QUOTE="Mavrickkal"]Considering the required hardware improvements, would you be willing to shell out 600-650 for a new Xbox system with only minor graphical improvements over the PS3?Riverwolf007

And that's giving the benefit of the doubt that the PS3 really is better at gfx than the 360 is. Sure I think it has an edge but there are plenty of people here that don't.

[QUOTE="Mavrickkal"]Considering the required hardware improvements, would you be willing to shell out 600-650 for a new Xbox system with only minor graphical improvements over the PS3?Riverwolf007

And that's giving the benefit of the doubt that the PS3 really is better at gfx than the 360 is. Sure I think it has an edge but there are plenty of people here that don't.

With the wii being so successful and the casuals flocking to the VG market by the boatload... What makes you think ANY company will opt for "teh Power" next gen? :|

I still don't see how the Xbox 360 beats the PS3 in every category.

Only aspects I see the 360 beating the PS3, as stated earlier, is games. I'll also add Live to the mix.

qman101

"Only"? I'd say that's all that counts.

snipMavrickkal

As a PC gamer I really shouldn't get involved in console Vs console, but care to list these 360 'flaws'? I recognise the heat issue, but you seem to be greatly exaggerating a few things along with performance differences between PS3 and 360.

Why would the new Xbox cost $500-600? That's Playstation style pricing. The new Xbox will probably cost $300-400. By the end of this year the 360 will have the best looking console exclusive game, so how would the future Xbox only be nominally more powerful than the PS3? If MS decided to take the route Nintendo did this gen and only release something moderately more powerful than the previous gen then what makes you think it would be expensive. If anything it would be cheap like the Wii and only $250 or so.

It's best to compare the PS4 to the next Xbox. Either way it's all speculation.

PS3 RSX - 550MHz core, 24 pixel pipelines, 256MB RAM

My guess on the next Xbox gpu...

Dual-core 750Mhz core, 2x 800 shader piplelines, 1GB VRAM, maybe 64MB on-die EDRAM. So basically a 4870 X2. Which would put it at about 4x as powerful as the PS3 or 360.

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

[QUOTE="Mavrickkal"]Considering the required hardware improvements, would you be willing to shell out 600-650 for a new Xbox system with only minor graphical improvements over the PS3?Mavrickkal

And that's giving the benefit of the doubt that the PS3 really is better at gfx than the 360 is. Sure I think it has an edge but there are plenty of people here that don't.

Plus how can any console ever match PC, seriously it's not and never will be possible.

Thirdly $600 is the kiss of death for sales you think MS is going to do that when we have all seen what it did to the 3DO and PS3?

Also forever long dev time problems is almost a PS3 exclusive (45 month KZ2 and 2010 GT5 as an example)the 360 being a gimped PC makes it easy to work on so what everyone tells me is a negative has worked out pretty well for me personally so far.

The bottom line here is not only is the 360 not losing devs it is still getting games that have been Sony mainstays for years and all this doom saying is the same stuff I have heard for the last two years and it's all still nothing but a load of hot air.

[QUOTE="qman101"][QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

That would never happen so why are we talking pretend?

The 360 is beating the PS3 in every single area so there's no reason to stop what's working.

Jaysonguy

Every single area?

Yes

Head to head the PS3 can't snag a single victory

I mean the only place Sony can claim is that the PS3 has more Sony made first party games and with the way franchises like Ratchet and Clank have been performing that's slowing looking grim as well.

You sir have failed

A) Why would it cost that much? you seem foolish just to say such a thing.

B) why would it be a minor improvement? PC's right now can destroy PS3 in graphics. 2 years from now they will be so far ahead it will be crazy.. the new xbox will be on the cutting edge of those improvement...expect a huge leap

[QUOTE="killzowned24"]if it came in 2010 lemms who had it since 2005 would have spent $300 just for online play..LMAOAljosa23

He's not making stuff up, what he said is all true.