[QUOTE="Svarthek"][QUOTE="--JpR--"][QUOTE="GanonBuRAP"][QUOTE="munu9"][QUOTE="GanonBuRAP"][QUOTE="-Sir-Poof-"]2012 for ps3
2010 maybe 11 for 360
GanonBuRAP
Why less for the 360? 360 is a more powerful console with better online for 4 bucks a month. PS3 has blueray...
Yes, blu-ray, which will eventually be needed for games while the 360 would need an attachment to use. At which time microsoft should just as well release a new console...
What? Why would gaming ever need a blueray player? Blueray is for playing MOVIES you know that right? Blueray being included in the PS3 is just something to help people say; hey, the PS3 has good games and it has a Blueray player for the next generation of home movies; let's invest! Just answer the questionof why a 360 or gaming would ever need a blueray player other than to attractsales? (Of course this method of attracting sales isn't even very efficient; as proven by the success of the PS3. It costs a lot to make a game console/blue ray player in one machine and the result? 600 dollar console. They dropped the price, and are now losing even more money.)
wow, you must be like 13
Way to rebutal an opinion with an insult. You're the immature one.
I don't get it why is no one answering my question? I want to know why people think the PS3 is going to last years and years longer than the 360; just because it has blueray? Makes no sense to me someone please explain.
no because the ps3's hardware is obviously better than the 360's and it also came out a year later so it will definitely last logner.. 360 realizes their hardware sucks so chances are they will decide to try to makea new system earlier rather than later..especially since they are going to be in a distance third in a few years
Log in to comment