-It doesn't change the fact that it went from the PS2 having a TON of titles you couldn't get anywhere else but the playstation, to the PS3 having a smattering of titles that are only on PS. There are more titles you can't play on PS3 that you can on 360 than vice versa....but please, go on hiding behind the PC. "There are more titles you can't play on PS3 that you can on 360"... Fool. If i wanted to play a MS owned game, ill just get it for PC. And i would like you to list these 'games' on the 360 which are not playable on the ps3 or the PC/are going to be soon, last time i checked, there were none that even interest me...but please, go on hiding behind the PC, like every one else, or do you want to take this that seriously and meet me somewhere so we can duke it out? U see i have better things to do than go on gamespot system wars so i can make a topic about '360 vs ps3'. I can tell your probally still in school. 

Listing a whole bunch of games that scored lower than the two games you call rubbish later in the paragraph certainly doesn't help your argument. This is tantamount to you sticking your fingers in your ear and screaming "I CAN'T HEAR YOU"...you just showed that you are going to go by your opinion and ignore everything contrary to it regardless of the facts. O no, my point here was to show you that these games are something the PC or the 360 will never touch, there is alot more than the 360 will ever have. And all you 360 fanboys can spew out is Halo 3(which the entire internet agrees is just halo 2.5, it does suck, the hype is the only reason why such a game sold) and gears of war, all going to be on PC soon, hence thier not a 360 exclusive. So what if SOME of those game listed above scored slightly below gears, hell i would take MGS4 instead of GoW+Halo combined, or Motorstorm PR over any offroad racer the 360 has, Gran Turismo or Wipeout 10 fold over any proper racing game the 360 will ever have, Uncharted and R+C over any 3rd person action adventure game the 360 will ever have, LBP over any sidescroller the 360 can have. And when i mean the 360, i mean the 360 exclusive counterpart... God of war 3...o man. I can go on forever. This is my opinion btw and hell, ull find that alot more people will agree with me on this one. But the fact is, the 360 doesnt have  an EXCLUSIVE which is high scoring. The ps3 has plenty. And its not just the scores on GS that count. Go look at IGN or metacritic. Seeing that the 360 also had a 1 year head start in the market, Gears and Halo are all i can find really.

 

- Apparently we have differing ideas of "easily" replaceable. One you push a button and switch batteries available pretty much anywhere(nonrechargeable or rechargeable)or push a button and swap power packs. The other requires you to take apart the controller and acquire a non common battery. If the 360 controller dies you can be up and running in minutes, if the DS3 dies you're wired until you can get a battery and take it apart and replace it. Second point, that would be great if this was 1995, but in case you didn't notice it is 2008. At one time the SNES controller was considered perfect, would you want to play your games with it today? Times change, and the DS hasn't changed along with it. "..ries have a limited amount of times they can be recharged. After abuot a year, the batteries will only last about 10 minutes of use. This also happens with cell phone batteries. So you ahve to buy a new controller. At least the..." IN BOLD, EXAMPLE OF AN IDIOT....May i MENTION to you that i hav not the need to replace my batteries is the past 2 years. It still pumping out over 12 hrs of play per charge, which takes `1.25hrs hr. Yet the PS3 controller has motion, and Li ion battery, dual shock, bluetooth, smoother and more responsive anologue sticks and is alot more compact and more comfortable than the 360's controller. Back in 1995 the controller was perfect, and guess what it still is, thats the thing, it still is good, its like inventing the wheel, once invented, will always be used whilst the snes was like a square, perfect..until they found the circle..anything better than a cicular wheel? i think not, why reinvent it. The xbox controller was a POS when it came out, absolute CRAP. The PS controller/buttons was an ICON for gamers all around the world for the past 13 years and still is.

 

- As far as I know, the achievement system was the first "reward" system to track among all games on a system, and it was good enough for Sony to copy later on. Maybe MS came up with the awards system for all online games on a single system, but you seriously think that Microsoft didnt not copy anything at all? Trying to use HD DVD(which fell, bruned and died) as an answer to Blu ray, Trying to shove a (inferior version) HDMI port into thier consoles (which are all upscaled, not native at all to 720p or higher). You see, thats how the world works, copying. Its a FACT.

 

-xBl is about 100 times better than PSN...see what opinoins are like? Except you'll find more people agreeing with my statement than yours. Oh no, you see, when an online service is very acceptable, does not lag in games at all, or on the playstation store(and i mean notiably, not theoreticaly where obviously all network systems, including the bus transfer rate and latency of memory and microcontrollers ALL contain some degree of lag, a world without lag is physically impossible),  its getting a better social system, it does everything that LIVE does, its has HOME, and its..wait for ...FREE, yet SUBERB..kid, im not stating opinions im stating facts that lead anyone with a brain bigger than a monkeys to understand that PSN, is in reality quite quickly crushing live. I mean you got to fork out $12/month or $90 and year...just for the same service as PSN, and so kids can play thier Gears or Halo online, and swear the crap out of each other for dying. The ONLY people that will ever agree with you, are just jealous 360 owners who know they are just getting jipped with LIVE. Lives a gimmick. yep more people agreeing with you alright. Those who are the obvious.

 

- 3rd party games look the same or better on the 360, dead space looks marginally better than on the 360,(EA effed up the PS3 version,)they both have they're +'s and -'s. Enjoy being afraid in the future as devs devote less and less time trying to wring equal performance out of the PS3 and its slow 2x BR drive. LOL. Last time i checked a side by side HDTV 360/ps3(with full RGB and 48 bit colour (superwhite) on) comparison with deadspace, the ps3 version looked more stunning, smoother, and more responsive than the 360 version at my local jbhi-fi (this is a huge warehouse, not the small jbhifi's). And AC, avery one knows that the ps3 version was superior to it, and when i ment bethesda effed up the ps3 version, im talking about FALLOUT 3, noob. O and elder scroller oblivion4 and bioshock, all look better on the ps3, yet there was a delay with them. devs arnt devoting less time with the ps3, its all equal, the only bad example can be fallout 3. Nothing else, and as time goes by, the ps3 versions might get better and better, altho i do see that the game will ALWAYS have to be dumbed down to fit on 360's and PC's effing DVD9 Disks. Ahaha LOL. Thier such a let down to multiplatform games. 

 

- Yep, you got motion sensing that is almost completely igonored...congrats. BTW, if the PS3 isn't profitable it won't be around 10 years, and oh is there a just wait at the end of that? YOU sir a behind, several months behind. The prduction cost of the ps3 is now US$400 instead of $800. And just so you know, Sony's 2008 revenue was more than $20billion more than MS's.

 

-Anybody that claims to have NO lag, has no idea what lag is. Lag is inherent to online gaming...let me repeast lag is inherent to online gaming. You can mask it with good network code, but it is ALWAYS there.Read what i said above about networks, and lag, people dont judge lag theoretically, the judge it visually, and PSN games, do NOT have any visual lag, they are masked very well.. but i dont have to pay a CENT for it.

 

-Doesn't change the fact that for people who don't use bluray, they can game on the 360 for 100-200 less than the PS3, and get equal or better multiplats, thieir own exclusives, AND some PC titles. Whenever a cow can articulate how it's a BAD thing for the 360 to get games from two other systems in addition to its exclusives, I'll concede this point. What? ANYONE that plays a ps3 game is using blu ray. Anyone that want to play ps3 exclusives need blu ray, no exclusive that is on the ps3 is possible without bluray, there are no better multi plats on the 360, cos its multiplat, PC titles run smoother /way better on PC. GoW PC crushes the 360 version, like an ant. The hardware is the ps3, is very standard stuff for its price. o, and from blu ray movie sales, i can see that alot of people use it. 

 

-  All those "features" were what sony used to "prove" the PS3 was stronger than the 360 and worth waiting for. The PS3 isn't strong enough to do what it was claimed to do. Cell and bluray is causing problems for 95% of games, while like 2% or 3% or 360 games don't fit on a single DVD...hmmm, I wonder which one is more of a hindrance. 360 had a 1 year headstart and it's lead is at least 5.5 million(and that was before the past month or two when the 360 has been outselling the PS3 in all 3 major regions...expect that lead to be 6-6.5 million after the holidays). The PS3 was supposed to close the gap by the end of 07, then the end of 08...etc etc. Cows can claim they're catching up when the rate of sales between the two shows the PS3 catching the 360 before 2015. 95%? Sources please. All games that i play on the ps3 play very smoothly. And stilll the end product looks alot better than what i c on the 360.  U think in 5 years, people will still be making 9GB games? hardly. Super compression is the only option for MS.

 

- Hmm, most of the features the PS3 has added are ones the 360 had back in 2005. The PS3's OS's today looks nearly identical to what it did at launch, take a look at 360's OS today vs. 2005. Fastest evolving system ever? hardly. You seriously hav not read how fast the ps3 has changed since it launch, or have not seen the diffrence in its OS at initial release and now. One tech review site, arstechnica, gave the ps3 a 6/10 at launch, half way thru the year, they re reviewed it and gave it a 9.5/10. The ps3 has changed, alot more than the 360 has, the entire internet agrees with that, all tech  review sites agree with that, all electronics magazines agree with that..."Fastest evolving system ever? hardly", thats the stupidest thing i have heard you say since not being able to replace the battery in the controller.

 

- Pot, stop calling the kettle black. The PS1 and PS2 happened to be the leaders while the industry grew(which it did before Sony was the "leader" and continues to do after). The PS3 more closely resembles the Xbox than it does the PS2, so this random console just happened to give sony it's basis for the PS3. Oh really, a blinded cow somehow can't gfind anything worthwhile on the 360 even when those games outscored the ones he loves(yep what are those game again...Halo 3(s***, every one thinks its s***, its a gimmick, its halo 2+) and gears...anything else....no...all on PC anyway, any other so called 'exclusive' on the 360?...nope..)...being a blind irrational fanboy doesn't win you arguments.Its like saying, the xbox resembels the ps2, cept it had a better GPU and and HDD and online, and thats all its is. Thats what all consoles are. Even without the xbox's existance, the ps3 still would have some or most of the stuff it has today, if it was not for this competition. Competition...its a good thing.

 

-Just like we can tell you have no knowledge of it either, just irrational love for it and sony's PR substituting for knowledge. While it's your opinion, it isn't shared by most people not even most cows(who can at least acknowlege the 360 has SOME merit, which you seem incapable of doing, which in turn ruins any sort of credability you may have had.) Im not here to give merit to anything, im here to completely oppose everthing you say. Alot of the things you say, is completely stupid, u can keep comming back and debating this if you want, but in the end, your list is stupid, i accually have fun writing all this up. But you see, i have a life, a alot of things to do rather than go on GS forums, system wars and start a losing battle. So go back behind ur little PC and start typing away. A no brainer can understand my opinion, since most of the things ive typed..are FACTS.

Yet the 360 can do most of the same things, except one only has to buy what suits them rather than everything. Be happy that Joe Schmoe who didn't want all that crap helped subsidize yours by paying for what he didn't want. Ahahahahhaa. TELL ME ONE PEICE OF PS3 HARDWARE WHICH IS NOT USED AT ALL, FOR THE AVERAGE Ps3 GAMER. HDD-needed, blu ray-needed(which also reads DVD, CD and blah.), CELL- yes, definitely needed, Wifi- needed, not only for the net, but for psp/ps3 connection(its just a very usefull luxury to have wifi built in, if there was a wifi-less ps3 and a ps3 with wifi, every one will go for the wifi), Bluetooth-needed, card reader-not many ppl use it, so go buy a external USB one and connect it up. So come on, i dare you. Every single thing in the SKU being sold these days it the cost effective, its all needed. Tell me, one peice of hardware, i beg u.

As it stands right now, the 360 has a much better chance of lasting 10 years than the PS3. It's profitable and production costs can support the 100-150 dollar pricetag it will need the last few years of its life. The PS3 isn't close to profitable and will have to drop cost before it is to compete restarting the cycle, and that standard HDD is going to make it very hard for the machine to be profitable and maintain a price to appeal to people. Id rather use a nice standard laptop 2.5" drive cabable of going past 500GB instead of fork out $$$$$ for M$'s propertary S***. In terms of hardware and features...the 360 cant last 10 years, at all. With the evolution of semiconductor manufacturing, the ps3 price cutts will just keep comming, profitability is so...so close. But all those ps3 costs are atm being covered for by all other things which is sony, thier making a bigger profit than MS you know, im talking about the entire sony cooperation not just SCE, MS's newer products like vista..are just fail. The ps3 is just 2 yrs old. Thats absolutely nothing, it wasnt until the ps1's 3rd/4th/5th (97/98/99)year did the power of PS1 start to show.

 

Phazevariance

[QUOTE="e011234"]Um..just so you realized, the GC was the biggest disgrace in all of gaming history since the 1990's. It was so crap, no one wanted to develop games for it. Back then every time i looked at the GC section on the self, it shrunk year by year until it was as big as the 5th generation pre owned section. With a library LARGELY made up of crappy, lame, movie games/games no one has heard of/would not want to play. It was the biggest epic disaster.wooooode

O no, presonally, the dreamcast had better games that the GC. Its large % of its library wasnt full of crap. It got killed by the massive ps2. Thats the reason why it flopped. Maybe you should go have a read.

HOLY ****, a idiot 360 fanboy with too much time on his hands. Your list 50 reasons is absolutely stupid. 'PS3 doesnt have halo 3', HALO 3 IS S***. Its NOTHING compared to what halo one was. And gears 2 is NOT better than R2. Why is it that you 360 fanboys always say two things, and two thing only in an anrgument..."WE GOT HALO AND GEARS"...yea...THIER NOT EVEN EXCLUSIVE TO THE 360, theyll just get ported to the PC like all other microsoft owned games.

Its a huge problem when MS is finding it really difficuly to make developers shove 3rd party games into a crummy DVD9. 

From a harware perspective, Sony got it completely correct, from the ps3's internal harware, its features, the controller. I mean the 360 still uses bloody AA batteries. Wtf...To blu-ray. And FREE.. SUPERB online service. 

 O and GAMES. Why dont u go to the list of 360 and ps3 games on GS and COMPARE. Personally, the ps3's library appeals to me, quite alot more.