[QUOTE="MortalDecay"] Let's be realistic...The 360 is proof that people will put up with crappy harware to play the best games, just like you cows did with the PSOne, and PS2. You all went through the same exact thing.
I know it's the cows only valid argument against the 360, but it is a very weak arguement, since it makes you guys look like hypocrites, so can we put it rest?
Thanks.
u8muhrice
its just a lame of an argument saying that PS3 has no games.. true for 07, now its 08
Exactly.
If you are one that cannot afford multiple systems, you have to pick one to give you the best overall experience for the longest time. Simple. Most bang for your buck.
You buy a 360 at launch, you have a decent 2006 of titles. Best thing about it, no other console giving you HD gaming at the time. You have risk of RRoD. 2007 comes, you get great second year titles. By the end of 2007 you have Gears, Bioshock, and Mass Effect as highly touted games. And you have the ease of dev use that propels devs to give your version of multiplats and edge.
You buy a PS3 at launch, you have decent 2007 titles. Best thing about it, no reliability issues. By the end of the year you have matched the 360 in system power. You have devs realizing that if they use the PS3 to dev first, you get a better game for both platforms. You finish 2007 with good games like Heavenly Sword, uncharted, and Ratchet and Clank. Multiplats start to even out. 2008, your second year, shows a lot of promise. Just as 360 did with 2007, some new IP's along with PS classics look to give the console a boost.
Anyone with some thought can see the PS3 and 360 have very similar quality over lifespan.
Yes, 360 has an edge thus far. No PS3 titles match the scores 360 titles have received. But that 360 strength, as we all should know, isn't much of a strength for the long haul. Nothing done on any of those big 360 exclusives couldn't be done on the PS3. i challenge you to find one thing, tehcnically, that is done in a 360 game to make it great that the PS3 couldn't do. Therefore, its only a matter of time before the right dev makes a hit on the PS3. Maybe its MGS4, I dont know. But there is no indication with PS' history that the titles won't be there. Just as most console have, the PS3 had a intro year where a lot of learning needed to be done. But the box is now open and great games are to come.
And there is every indication that PS3 will last for a long time. Look at the great support for the PS2. Why wouldn't Sony support the PS3 for just as long? On the other hand, MS still has to prove it can last an entire gen. And most educated guesses say that MS will come out early again, only cutting the 360 short.
With all of that said. I can see why someone would think 360 would be a great console in 2006, 2007. But I cannot see where an undecided buyer would see it that way now and beyond. PS3 is the wise and most "bang for your buck" console for this gen from 2008 on.
Log in to comment