i know there might have been a topic or thread posted about these 2 consoles already, but imma bring my own to see what all of you have to say about the xbox360 and ps3 and which one you like better.


As long as consoles have existed, discussions, debates, arguments, fights, and all out WARS have taken place over who makes the best video game units. Growing up, I was always a Nintendo fan boy; I didn't want to hear anything about Sega Genesis... In my mind, Nintendo had Mario, Zelda, and other great first-party titles. Sega had Sonic, and red blood.

Things are slightly more complicated these days however. Console makers are taking different approaches to designing their products; some go for hardcore processing power, others focus more on online gaming.So what i think is a better console is the Xbox360. And why i think it is , is because Price, performance, visual quality, game selection and online support. I think the XBOX 360 wins in every category.

Price: This is obvious; the XBOX 360 core is only $299. The PS3 is around $499 for the 20GB version. It comes with a hard drive, but you don’t need a hard drive to enjoy a lot of great games on the 360 so I think it’s fair to compare both core systems.

Performance: On paper, the PS3 is more powerful. In reality, it’s quite inferior to the 360. Without getting into too many details, the three general-purpose CPU’s the xbox360 has are currently FAR easier to take advantage of than the SPU’s on the PS3. I suspect a few years down the road some high budget, first party PS3 exclusive titles will come out that really take advantage of the SPU’s and do things the XBOX 360 can’t, but I don’t think the console is worth buying based on this speculation (for some it will be though, we'll have to wait and see how these games turn out).

Graphics: The XBOX 360 is a clear winner. The GPU is more powerful. It has more powerful fillrate, and far more pixel and vertex processing horsepower. Part of the reason is their choice of memory, and architecture of pixel and vertex procesing. I can’t get into details but the same vertex shader will run much slower on the PS3 than the XBOX 360. The 360 also has a clever new way rendering high definition anti aliased back buffers. To accomplish the same effect on PS3 is prohibitively expensive. For this reason I think many games will have no choice but to run in non-HD resolutions on the PS3 version, use a lower quality anti aliasing technique, or do back buffer upscaling. The end result in all cases is going to be noticeably worse image quality.

Game Selection: The XBOX 360 has a huge head start here. 1 year is an eternity in gaming. Almost all multi-platform developers have made the XBOX 360 their primary platform due to timing of release-to-market, this means the games will look and perform better on the 360. The PS3 versions will be ports of the 360 versions. (The opposite was true for XBOX 1 vs. PS2). The XBOX 360 is also far faster to develop for due to better development tools (massively popular Visual Studio .NET vs. proprietary, buggy PS3 compiler and debugger), better documentation, and easier architecture (3 general purpose CPU’s vs. 8 specialized processors that require DMA). Timing has also caused all next-gen middleware developers to make XBOX 360 their primary platform, and they will ‘add ps3 support’ as needed. This support will probably be inferior to the XBOX 360’s due to manpower and more importantly, demand. It’s this catch-22 now that will continue to drive the 360 forward and hold PS3 back.

The other obvious point here is that right now the Xbox360 already has a very impressive line-up of titles on store shelves; the ps3 just launched, and has virtually nothing of interest. Also, many 360 games are already discounted. PS3 games are all full price since it just launched.

Live: Microsoft’s online support with XBOX1 was phenomenal. They built in-house experience, user base, facilities, $$ commitment from executive level (since it proved successful), and most importantly, feedback from 100,000s of XBOX Live subscribers. Playstation 2’s online support sucked. They are now playing catch-up, trying to emulate Xbox’s model. But they had their hands tied just trying to make the PS3 work, it was incredibly ambitious (blu-ray etc.). I haven’t seen it yet, but I seriously doubt the quality will be anywhere to the level of XBOX 360.

HD Content: The PS3 comes with one built in (blu-ray). The XBOX 360 offers HD-DVD as an add-on for $200. You probably don’t care about HD-DVD right now. But you will soon (The quality between DVD and HD is comparable to VHS vs DVD, if you have the right TV) so I suggest paying attention to the war that’s begun. There are two formats: HD-DVD and BLU-RAY. Basically if you rent a BLU-RAY DVD from Bockbuster, it won’t play in your XBOX 360 HD-DVD, and vice versa with the PS3. The implications of this format war would require another article on its own. But as far as the consoles are concerned, the XBOX 360 wins because the DVD player is a separate unit. Playing movies is very taxing on the DVD reader, and let’s face it. In 3 years when your PS3 DVD drive goes out due to playing lots of movies (PS2 was notoriously bad about this) you will have to go buy another PS3. With the 360, you’ll just chuck your HD-DVD player, and go buy another one at the store. In 3 years standalone units wlil probably only cost about $99-150. Another point for the XBOX 360, is that I don’t know who will win the format-war, so I would rather wait with purchase of a HD player. The PS3 doesn’t give you this option.


ok for now that is all i have to say hahah. so what do you think about the 2 consoles and what do you think is best?

This debate is just stupid. We all know the 360's library is superior to the PS3's. The only noteworthy game for the PS3 right now is MGS4.

I wouldn't say its stupid Lieutenant Lollipop, I think the PS3 is the superoir console. It has more cpapbilities, Sony has made some major mistakes, granted, but it has massive potential. Its more powerful than the 360, although, it ripped Nintendo off with the motion sensing, or as they call it, the sixaxis.

How is the PS3 superior? Because of its lack of great games, all its unnecessary space (80gig), etc. For that matter, how is it exactly "more powerful" than the 360? It's actual difference in virtual graphics isn't really THAT visible, you know? I'll admit, the PS3's graphics are indeed better, but that's just it.

Secondly, what's the main reason why you would actually buy a console? For its games, obviously! Now, that is what the PS3 lacks horribly. This is partly the reason why 360 sales are SO much higher in comparison to the PS3's, or as we could say, superior.

Finally, I'm also loving how you simple-minded that last statement of yours was. I'm loving how you think the Wii is the first console with motion senses. Surprise! The NES already required motion senses for quite a popular game called Duck Hunt.

Yes, I said, Sony Ripped off Nintendo, who made the NES? Suprise! Nintendo

The Elite version is for exclusively designed for the real hardcore fans who are really into Microsoft. The more casual gamer can still stick to the low capacity 360, the 20gig.

Incedentally, are those the only games you can think of? The 360's library is literally twenty times as good and big. It's just for the fact that most of them are above mediocre? You apparantly have never seen a top-notch game? The only "top-notch" game the PS3 currently has is MGS4. That said, Devil May Cry 4 is also released on 360, so will Resident Evil 5 have a 360 release. That said, your precious Sony is that depressed, they're even going to port BioShock to the PS3, for a release a year later than the 360's.

Personally, I've played Resistance: Fall Of Men, and believe me, this title isn't even worth of getting my socks out of the laundry.

That said, I'm not even going to start counting all massively sold and great titles the 360 really possesses.

Well, I can name many games, the only reason 360 has all those "great titles" is because its been around long enough, 2/3 years is it? PS3 has not been out that long, due to this, I can conclude that we have yet to see the best of the PS3. I have seen and played and reviewed many top notch titles in my time, hardly any of which are on the 360. I have played Resistence Fall Of Man and I think its an excelent game. With anything, its personal preference. It's what you look for in a console. If you look for game play over graphics, fun and inavitive gaming and a family console, you choose the Wii. If you want a brand spanking new console to show off, you buy a PS3. If you want a simple console with a massive fan following that has been out long enough to secure some quality titles, you choose the 360. So, I assume you go for the 360, which is fine. I was going to buy one at some point and I probably will, infact, knowing me, I'll end up with all 3. When I do, I'll let you know which one I prefer. Maybe DMC4 and RE5 are/will be released on the 360, but that doesnt change the fact that it will be on the PS3 aswell. So if they are truley great games, it doesnt matter which console they are on. What about Home? Have you heard of that? or Jak 4, if it is ever made. Wipe Out HD, all I have to do, is look at the PS3 game list and say, yep they are all great. Haze, GTA4, MGS4 I could go on. When the time is right, Time Splitters 4 will be released on the PS3 aswell.

I have all three and I personally prefer my 360 over my PS3.

Moreover, 360 > Wii > PS3

My list is this
Wii>360>PS3

Since you editted your post just recently, I'll concur. You seem to state a lot of games who aren't just exclusive for the PS3, thus leaving you closed for potential arguments.

Alright, list of kickass 360 games:

BioShock
GTAIV
Call of Duty 4 (originally for 360)
Gears Of War
Fable (I/II)
Halo (1/3)
Battlefield: Bad Company
Oblivion
Wolfenstein
Tales Of Vesparia
Dead Or Alive 4
Lost Planet
Mass Effect
Blue Dragon
Perfect Dark Zero
Kameo: Elements Of Power

Etc, these are just fewer examples.

Where's your precious PS3 library now?