Look, you cannot say that 360 games are superior to PS3 games because:
- Any game that's been developed for the 360 can be done on the PS3, and perhaps even improved; with the 360 being limited to DVD9 and the PS3 touting Blu-Ray, you're fooling no one but yourself if you think taking a step forward in media formats is a bad thing--or if you feel that a different form of processing is bad as well, or ridiculous to try. How is it bad to want to change the way things are done? Especially if it may end up for the better? Sticking with the tried and true gets you nowhere, fast. Besides, compression will only get you so far; you'll eventually need more space to hold information--are you truly satisfied with having to use multiple discs for a single game? It isn't necessarily bad, but why do it when there's a format that can hold everything on a single disc?
- The wider selection of titles on the 360 has simply come about because:
a) Consumers are gullible bastards; they buy the cheaper product because it's cheaper, and are over eager to get their hands on said cheaper product, regardless of it's more than obvious failings, which results in the more widely owned console garnering more attention from developers. Do you buy a cheaper TV if it's bound to fail in two years, when instead you can buy a TV 1.5x the price which could last you 2x or 3x longer as well as provide superior quality and functionality? So you have to save up a little more money or pay off the credit a little longer, and maybe even wait a bit longer too, but isn't it worth it?
b) Developing for the 360 is like developing for the PC; you put a game out on the 360, you may as well port it over to the PC... Just at a later date. That way they can "improve" the game and convince said gullible consumer to buy the same product a second time because of the extra features which ought to have been there in the first place, which unfortunately wouldn't work as the 360 really can't support some of them. So, if you buy the 360's original version, you've cheated yourself out of a better version, and if you spring for the updated PC version, you've cheated yourself out of money you could have spent otherwise. - Microsoft's console has a tendency to scratch discs, and with the DVD9's weaker layer of protection, the content on said disc will definitely suffer from said scratches. The Blu-Ray utilizes some much tougher scratch protection on their discs, making them a much wiser choice, and since they hold much more information and can perform just as well as a DVD9 it begs one to question the actual point in sticking with DVD9 as a standard format. Are you really satisfied with an older media format? Are you truly refusing Blu-Ray even when you know very well that it is a solid product? And finally, don't you want your $60 investment to last you as long as those old Nintendo cartridges have?
Everyone was all hyped for the next generation of gaming, because in the past we've seen them take leaps and bounds. So tell me, why is it that you 360 owners are playing on upgraded Xbox's? The only difference is a newer processor and gfx card, standard stuff you can find in a PC. What happened to all that wishing for the "next generation of gaming" to arrive so you can enjoy a new level of entertainment? Did you get tired of waiting a little too early? Did you figure you'd save a buck or two? Are you all REALLY satisfied with your Xbox 1.5? Would the glaring flaws be as easy to overlook with a much smaller library of games?
Come now guys, do you truly believe Microsoft is out there to make a difference for anyone but themselves? Look at Windows... It's been bug-ridden since its inception; the only reason it's so widespread now is because it was practically forced upon people as the standard Operating System, and I'm sure Microsoft is keeping all the best things about the OS to themselves through Copyright. If not, you can bet your wallet that someone would've come out with a much better Operating System by now.
Want another example? Fine. Take a look at the original Xbox; the DVD drive in it was prone to failure. Fortunately for Microsoft, my Xbox's DVD drive failed not long after the warranty ran out. Funny, isn't it? And when a new DVD drive cost half the price of a newer, slimmer Xbox, what's the point? Hey, guess what? Microsoft didn't really learn from it; they went and released a rocky console. Tell me, what have consoles been known for? They've been known for reliability as well as the ability to pop your game in and go. Microsoft only heeded half of that concept, and threw caution to the wind when throwing the PC parts in to that tiny box of theirs, and to save space and cut down on overheating they put the power supply on the OUTside! It certainly didn't take a genious to whip together THAT console now did it? No, they saved the geniouses for the marketing of said console.
Look, you want your great games on a great console? Then quit giving Microsoft your money in return for a half assed console. I'm not saying go out and buy a PS3, just don't support something from someone who's been bending you over to rape your wallet for years now. But hey, if you do swap out for a PS3, you can bet your ass those 3rd party developers are going to switch over to it once they see those numbers die.
So, grow some balls, steel your wallet, quit getting screwed, and wisen up already. Microsoft isn't out to take a leap in to the next generation; they're intent on taking babysteps to a better future so they can fortify their pocket with bricks of your hard-earned money.
Edit: The Xbox 1.5 is only competing with the PS3 because of it's game library. Honestly, can you think of anything else that would give it an upper hand?
Log in to comment