[QUOTE="Apathetic-Irony"]

You just love throwing in stuff as you go, don't you?

If you were throwing in the play time of games like Heavenly Sword and Uncharted to "counter" the bigger storage point, that was a moronic way of doing it. Storage =/= game length. Development cost and time factors into that. Blu-ray allows for more quality and variety, not length.

OhSnapitz

Those are facts my friend.. Those games are short. As are alot of games this gen. But the fact of the matter is bluray has done NOTHING for games on the PS3 that couldn't be done on the 360. Obviously that's just speaking for the here and now. Anything else is mere speculation.

I never denied that, or said otherwise. I just think it's stupid to say Blu-Ray has no benefit to games. As I said, Blu-Ray has nothing to do with length. You brought up game length for no reason, which was what I was saying. I wasn't arguing that they were not indeed short.

Also I think it's very moronic to think Sony included br into the PS3 to "help out games".. They're trying to corner the market on the next media. If br succeeds then EVERYONE will have to go through Sony to incorparate it into their products.. Stevie Wonder can see that.

OhSnapitz

When did I say or think Sony included BR to help out games?

[QUOTE="Apathetic-Irony"][QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"]

Don't forget to factor in all the games your going to buy since the 360s library is larger and more varied.
Besides It only costs $280 to play games on 360..it costs $400 to play games on a PS3:o

Pro_wrestler

Library is subjective. Some people honestly do think Folklore, Lair, Heavenly Sword, Uncharted, Warhawk, and Ratchet & Clank are superior to Halo 3, Bioshock, Gears of War, Mass Effect, and Forza 2.

No arguing there though: for the basic needs of playing video games, the $280 XBOX 360 is the best meathod. But that can't do live, unless the 512mb memory card allows the use of XBOX Live.

Nope, library is only subjective if you have a set preference. 360 having more higher rated games is a fact and can be proven.

And The 360 Arcade comes with a memory card and a free month of XBL.

That was what I wasn't sure about: whether the memory card included has Live compatability.

And library is subject, always. But yes, the XBOX 360 does have higher rated games. As I said, some people just think Folklore, Lair, Heavenly Sword, Uncharted, Warhawk, and Ratchet & Clank are superior to Halo 3, Bioshock, Gears of War, Mass Effect, and Forza 2, despite all of the latter getting higher scores and higher sales.

[QUOTE="Apathetic-Irony"][QUOTE="OhSnapitz"]

[QUOTE="gamenux"]I think you guys are wondering too off with the dvd, hddvd, br movies.... I buy a ps3 primarily for gaming purchase and dvd to replace my crappy standalone dvd player too.

Anyway for a $400 40GB ps3, I get a console, hard drive, and free online gaming.
Is there a 360 to match this at a lower price?


notice I did not add wifi, bluetooth, or br into that... OhSnapitz

I disagree.. If fanboys will continue to harp on Live then I will continue to harp on BR movies... Because as I've already stated... If you didn't buy the PS3 to play br movies then you just paid $100-$200 dollars extra for a system that's the same as the 360. And it completely negates the point of bashing Live's cost..

The PS3 cost $50 more than the XBOX 360 Premium. And it's not like the Blu-Ray player is limited to movies. The extra storage is also beneficial to games as well.

Oh you mean like 7 hour Heavenly Sword? or 10 hour Uncharted? Or how about featureless Motorstorm... ANd the $350 360 is BC with XB games the PS3 is NOT BC with PS2 games.. so you'd have to add the cost of a PS2 in there..

You just love throwing in stuff as you go, don't you?

If you were throwing in the play time of games like Heavenly Sword and Uncharted to "counter" the bigger storage point, that was a moronic way of doing it. Storage =/= game length. Development cost and time factors into that. Blu-ray allows for more quality and variety, not length.

[QUOTE="Apathetic-Irony"]

Fine then:

XBOX 360 + Live = $400 for one year.

PS3 + PSN = $400 for a lifetime.

Pro_wrestler

Don't forget to factor in all the games your going to buy since the 360s library is larger and more varied.
Besides It only costs $280 to play games on 360..it costs $400 to play games on a PS3:o

Library is subjective. Some people honestly do think Folklore, Lair, Heavenly Sword, Uncharted, Warhawk, and Ratchet & Clank are superior to Halo 3, Bioshock, Gears of War, Mass Effect, and Forza 2.

No arguing there though: for the basic needs of playing video games, the $280 XBOX 360 is the best meathod. But that can't do live, unless the 512mb memory card allows the use of XBOX Live.

[QUOTE="gamenux"]I think you guys are wondering too off with the dvd, hddvd, br movies.... I buy a ps3 primarily for gaming purchase and dvd to replace my crappy standalone dvd player too.

Anyway for a $400 40GB ps3, I get a console, hard drive, and free online gaming.
Is there a 360 to match this at a lower price?


notice I did not add wifi, bluetooth, or br into that... OhSnapitz

I disagree.. If fanboys will continue to harp on Live then I will continue to harp on BR movies... Because as I've already stated... If you didn't buy the PS3 to play br movies then you just paid $100-$200 dollars extra for a system that's the same as the 360. And it completely negates the point of bashing Live's cost..

The PS3 cost $50 more than the XBOX 360 Premium. And it's not like the Blu-Ray player is limited to movies. The extra storage is also beneficial to games as well.

[QUOTE="Sully28"][QUOTE="Apathetic-Irony"]

Yes, $50 isn't just "nothing".

But I would take live and spend $50 a year, over PSN and not pay at all.

LTomlinson21

i wouldnt, i cant easily wait for a patch to allow in game XMB. Once that happens live wont be much better.

The best part, Xbox Live won't get any better for the rest of this generation. It has become stationary in features! Zero improvements.

Great for making the opposing service look bad.

The power of logic.

[QUOTE="Apathetic-Irony"][QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"][QUOTE="Apathetic-Irony"]

Blu-Ray also = bigger storage space for games. PS3 also has better audio, wi-fi, and the option to play Blu-Ray movies.

OhSnapitz

I thought we were talking value, considering you're saying it defeated the purpose of having a Blu-Ray player when all you use is DVDs. I was saying the lossless audio, wi-fi, and the option to play Blu-Ray movies make up for not using it.

If you're not going to use bluray then why spend $400-$600 for a VG console? You basically paid $100 or so extra for a system just for the hell of it.. And if that's the case then why bash Live?

He'll be spending $400. For $400, even if he doesn't use Blu-Ray, he gets the PS3 and online. If he plans on owning the PS3 for more than one year, he'll be ahead by another $50.

this is one of the reasons i won't get a 360 its not that 50 is a lot it really isn't but paying for something that i could free somewhere else isn't something i like to do. people say that 360 online is better i don't know for sure if its the best but i doubt i still pay. jessie5788

XBOX Live is to World of Warcraft as PSN is to Guild Wars.

WoW is a much better experience and justifies the $15 a month if you want the superior experience, just like XBOX Live (only it being about $4/mo). If you want the minimum basics of online play, Guild Wars fits your needs, just like the PSN.

[QUOTE="gamenux"][QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"]

It ballances out once you factor in that BD movies are a minimum of 50% of the price regular DVDs and the PS3 is atleast $50 more..so.

Pro_wrestler

Using that same argument, you don't need XBL to enjoy it's games and no one is forcing you to purchase it. Completely voluntary as is purchasing BD movies.

Halo 3, Gears of War, and Forza 2, while not needing XBOX Live, are a MUCH better value with it. And I don't understand why you keep bringing up Blu-Ray movies.

[QUOTE="Apathetic-Irony"][QUOTE="OhSnapitz"][QUOTE="Apathetic-Irony"][QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"]

It ballances out once you factor in that BD movies are a minimum of 50% of the price regular DVDs and the PS3 is atleast $50 more..so.

Pro_wrestler

PS3 owners aren't limited to Blu-Ray movies. They can purchase DVDs too, and I believe it upscales them.

If there is one thing the PS3 does well, it's Blu Ray. Trying to argue against that feature is like trying to argue against XBOX 360's game library. If you want a Blu-Ray player, PS3 is a great deal. If you just want video games, XBOX 360 is the system for it.

No PS3 owners aren't limited to just blurays... But if they don't purchase them, then they just spent $400-$600 for a videogame console. :? A console that has no more compelling software than it's cheaper competition... :|

Why are you trying so hard to change the subject?

We're discussing the cost of XBOX Live being justified when compared to the free PSN. If you want to discuss the quality of the PS3 in comparison to its price, start a new thread.

No you/we're are not. The TC is talking ones ability to afford XBL and since there is no way to experience it without a 360, logically you factor in what it costs to purchase a 360. Thats not even the basics ofeconomics, thats common sense.

Fine then:

XBOX 360 + Live = $400 for one year.

PS3 + PSN = $400 for a lifetime.