I'm getting fairly burned out on fanboy debates about which system is "better," 360 or PS3. So, I figured I'd just write out an entry of most of my thoughts on the issue and then just make an effort to not bother jumping in the debates anymore... or just refer them to this post!

First of all, I own all three next-gen systems, so I'm not sitting here criticizing a system I don't have.

I'll try to lay this out as clearly as possible, maybe even as a guide to someone who doesn't know which to buy.

|

|

360 advantages:

1. Non-exclusive games generally run better.

This is a BIG one. The common fanboy rebut to this is "well it's because developers are lazy! The PS3 has more potential, but developers just develop for 360 and then make a crappy, inferior port to the PS3!" Okay, fine. Problem is, even if that may be true, that doesn't change the outcome. No matter what the cause is, at the end of the day most non-exclusive titles run better on the 360. That's all the average consumer cares about: the result, not the cause.

2. Noticeably cheaper.

This speaks for itself.

3. Superior online play.

More reliable network... again, this speaks for itself.

4. 1GB on a 360 hard drive means more than it does on a PS3.

On a PS3, a number of games require an install or to cache "game data" other than save files on the hard drive, which can use up space fast. Since games on 360 needed to be able to run with no hard drive, this issue doesn't exist.

5. More consistent/less confusing SKUs.

360's backwards compatibility may be nowhere close to the PS2 backwards compatibility of the 60GB PS3 model... but guess what? The newest PS3 models don't have PS2 backwards compatibility at all, which I'm still cursing Sony for to this day. It's also difficult to remember which PS3 models have which ports and how many. With 360, the only big variables tend to be whether it has an HDMI port, and how big the hard drive is.

6. Controllers are far batter suited to almost all types of shooters.

Why? Because both the analog sticks and the shoulder triggers offer more resistance that the Dualshock 3, meaning better precision. More differentiated top buttons also lessens the frequency of accidentally pressing the wrong button.

|

|

PS3 advantages:

1. Blu-ray.

I loves me my blu-ray... however, it wasn't a selling point at the time when I bought it. It was only after I bought a PS3 (which I at first bought to play Tekken 6, which at the time was slated to be a PS3 exclusive) that I tried blu-ray out and realized how awesome it was. At the same time, though, I realize many people just don't care. To each their own.

2. Superior layout.

This is bigger than you think it is. PS3's XMB is simple, intuitive, and effective. My girlfriend had no issues navigating to the downloaded exclusive game "Flower" when I wasn't home. When she tried to get to Castle Crashers, a 360 exclusive, she couldn't find it to save her life. And it's easy to see why. The gap used to be smaller, but the 360's newest layout is much harder to navigate than their original one, plus they throw even more prominent advertisements at you than they did before. Effective for sales perhaps, but grating if it's something you use every day. What's more, on PS3 it's easy and free to customize your background and icons.

3. Free online play.

Great for the people who only play online very occasionally, hence not wanting to pay a subscription fee like you have to for 360. Along the same line, 360 often locks out non-subscribers from the newest demos for several days, which always struck me as an odd practice. PS3 obviously doesn't have that issue, either.

4. Lower failure rates.

This speaks for itself.

5. Can use a wide variety of laptop hard drives.

This can be big if your game system is also your main media center. On 360 you must buy a specific type of 360 HD for many times the price per GB.

6. Controllers use internal rechargeable batteries out of the box.

For 360 controllers, you need to either buy a rechargeable pack separately, or burn through AA batteries.

7. Controllers are better for most games that aren't shooters, especially sports games and fighting games.

The same things that make 360 controllers great for shooters can hurt them with other titles. For example, Burnout Paradise functions far better with the PS3's R2 as a "pedal" than 360's trigger because the trigger's higher resistance can tire your fingers out quick... plus, it's a bit harder to make quick turns with a stick that not only has higher resistance but is also concave, which can occasionally leave your thumb in strange positions at awkward times during gameplay, where the only way to slide your thumb back in place is to take your thumb off the stick completely... which may result in a crash. And as far as fighting games, the 360's D-pad is clunky and unresponsive next to the PS3's.

|

|

Things I consciously omitted:

1. Games.

At the end of the day, this is pure personal preference. Nothing authoritative can be said about whether Uncharted or Gears of War is a more urgent priority for you personally to play. If you like one system's exclusives way better, great. But it's a silly and pointless thing to argue over.

2. Sixaxis functionality.

This has "potential," but hasn't shown me enough yet for it to be a factor. The one really great thing I've seen it do so far was force you to hold the controller steady while sniping in Killzone 2 lest your aim slip, which to me borders on revolutionary. However, that's one game, compared to the other 99% of PS3 games that make zero meaningful use of sixaxis. And now that I think of it, one version of NBA2K forced the use of sixaxis to shoot free throws, which was an awful, awful idea... so this can even be a negative.

3. Which one is "more powerful."

Again, the only thing that matters is the end result of the product. I don't care how much graphical "potential" the PS3 has if it's never realized. Killzone 2 is one of the best-looking games I've ever seen, but call me when there are more than 1 or 2 such titles.