PS3 vs X-box 360

  • Thread starter Thread starter barryl85
  • 532 comments
  • 22,169 views

Which machine will be the best?

  • Playstation 3

    Votes: 184 80.3%

  • X-box 360

    Votes: 11 4.8%

  • They will be just as good as each other

    Votes: 34 14.8%
  • Total voters
    229
code_kev
FF is being made for the xbox360. The game's vids I've seen of 360 stuff actually looks pretty damn cool, especially PGR3, that horror game by sega, the one with hundreds of zombies on screen at once, and gears of war.
Click to expand...

lol, Square is terrible too. I'll admit though, the FFXI port on 360 will be leaps better in terms of profit, but as far as technical difference between the two, draw distance will be the only improvement.

Square is struggling though, if FFXII doesn't do well then they'll seriously be hurting, FFXI was a huge hit for them (not good, I mean a financial turn for the worse). They have to pay out for their own servers etc and so forth, but they aren't making the money needed to keep it running, FFXI on 360 will make it much more accessible and profits will be better, which will be a good move.

Personally I think Square will begin to market MMORPG's for the 360 and typical RPG's for the PS3, assuming that Sony still makes online faults.
 
code_kev
When I think of Sony I think of TV's and stereos, does that mean anything?
Click to expand...

It means you are ""fanboyish"" by saying that. Or you are just not telling us how you really feel about Sony. The first thing i think of Is Playstaion when i hear or think of sony, and the same goes for xbox and MS, Windows never comes to mind when i see or hear MS. That would be very common in anyone who considers them selves a gamer on all platforms. However when i hear or think of Nintendo Only Mario comes to mind :).I think thats common too :)
 
Can you explain how associating Sony with consumer electronics is fanboyish? My point was that what the guy said before was silly.
 
I hear Sony and I think of my sound system. I hear MS and I think if Windows, thats not fanboyish.
 
Live, from anyone else no. You can search my posts i dont think I've ever called anyone a fan boy and im not calling code one either, I just thought in responce to his responce sounded lke PS2 bashing by not even considering it. But what code responed to was in deed silly. Everyone should know by now how code is.

back to my psp......
 
The problem people are having is that they are comparing them on specs. OK The PS3 May CURRENTLY have a highet spec than the 360 but look at the 1st gen consoles. The original Xbox was spec wide better than the PS2 yet people consider teh PS2 the better console as it had a wider selection of games avaliable, even teh Gamecube was spec wise marginally better than the PS2 & everyone says that sucked.

People are saying this Cell CPU will make the PS3 better but having read many a technical doc on the net this Cell technology isn't as good as Sony are making out. In fact there have been ver strong rumors this week that the PS3 will not be as higher spec as they say as they may have to lower the spec to save costs.

Hideo Kajima creator of teh Metal Gear Solid games was quoted recently as saying that the XB360 will be much easier to program for & that the PS3 will be too complex. The opposite with teh XB/PS2 where it was the PS2 easy to program games for while the Xbox was more complex.

Just because these CPUs and GPUs are in a console doesn't mean that we should throw away years of knowledge from the PC industry - performance doesn't come out of thin air, and peak performance is almost never achieved. Clever marketing however, will always try to fool the consumer.

And that's what we have here today, with the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. Both consoles are marketed to be much more powerful than they actually are, and from talking to numerous game developers it seems that the real world performance of these platforms isn't anywhere near what it was supposed to be.

It looks like significant advancements in game physics won't happen on consoles for another 4 or 5 years, although it may happen with PC games much before that.

It's not all bad news however; the good news is that both GPUs are quite possibly the most promising part of the new consoles. With the performance that we have seen from NVIDIA's G70, we have very high expectations for the 360 and PS3. The ability to finally run at HD resolutions in all games will bring a much needed element to console gaming.

And let's not forget all of the other improvements to these next-generation game consoles. The CPUs, despite being relatively lackluster, will still be faster than their predecessors and increased system memory will give developers more breathing room. Then there are other improvements such as wireless controllers, better online play and updated game engines that will contribute to an overall better gaming experience.

In the end, performance could be better, the consoles aren't what they could have been had the powers at be made some different decisions. While they will bring better quality games to market and will be better than their predecessors, it doesn't look like they will be the end of PC gaming any more than the Xbox and PS2 were when they were launched. The two markets will continue to coexist, with consoles being much easier to deal with, and PCs offering some performance-derived advantages.

With much more powerful CPUs and, in the near future, more powerful GPUs, the PC paired with the right developers should be able to bring about that revolution in game physics and graphics we've been hoping for. Consoles will help accelerate the transition to multithreaded gaming, but it looks like it will take PC developers to bring about real change in things like game physics, AI and other non-visual elements of gaming.
Click to expand...
 
stefmeister
The problem people are having is that they are comparing them on specs. OK The PS3 May CURRENTLY have a highet spec than the 360 but look at the 1st gen consoles. The original Xbox was spec wide better than the PS2 yet people consider teh PS2 the better console as it had a wider selection of games avaliable, even teh Gamecube was spec wise marginally better than the PS2 & everyone says that sucked.

People are saying this Cell CPU will make the PS3 better but having read many a technical doc on the net this Cell technology isn't as good as Sony are making out. In fact there have been ver strong rumors this week that the PS3 will not be as higher spec as they say as they may have to lower the spec to save costs.

Hideo Kajima creator of teh Metal Gear Solid games was quoted recently as saying that the XB360 will be much easier to program for & that the PS3 will be too complex. The opposite with teh XB/PS2 where it was the PS2 easy to program games for while the Xbox was more complex.
Click to expand...


You started out well, then the last two paragraphs were just terrible.

First, no one has said anything negative about Cell, however, they have said negative things in reference to development costs which is directly related to Cell technology. Developers do not want to spend the time and money to create new engines that will work on multi threaded code, etc, because they can just as easily make a mediocre game on the Cell that will run the same as PS2 technology and use the SPE's for simple things like sound.

Second, Kojima, not Kajima, never said that the PS3 was too complex, however, he said that the Xbox 360 would be the better base console to develop for, for multiplatform games etc. The way that the interview was translated, however, is very misleading, which is the fault of no one, since direct translations are difficult. What he is saying is they will work more specifically with the Xbox 360 for base, since it is the most common base to work with. PS3, however, is much more specific, therefore if anything is developed for it, it will be a certain series you will see once a year or so, because it won't be something that will be ported so easily, making it a bit more unique.

And last but not least, Xbox was infinitely easier than PS2 in terms of development. If you believe your last statement to hold any truth, I suggest you pick up some books in regards to C++ and utilization of Direct X middle ware, because Xbox is very close with each, and makes development very simple, which explains a lot of lackluster games, because the easier something is, the greater the temptation to pump out titles for cash instead of quality.
 
Exactly..Multi threading is something the gaming industry has never had to deal with before...And now having to deal with 8 cores and expecting the developers to "fix the problem" It just aint going to happen..
They are either going to have to Learn a whole new way to make games...Or just polish up old tactics....
I personally think that for a good while they're just going to polish up old things....And I think Microsoft knew sony would do that, that's why they didn't bother making a 8 core CPU because they won't have to deal with the competition right off the bat. They will sell their console's right away, and make their Game money in the long run right along with Sony's game's that up to that point(hypothetically) havn't utilized the Ps3's power
AS for development? I don't know, but from what I've read, Microsoft has integrated the online what not to make it much easier for the dev's to make a game online...Meaning they can spend more time on the game and less time on making the game work. I can't remember where I read it...maybe it was mumbo jumbo, feel free to correct me as I'm interested in knowing.

And another thing
Why are people comparing these console's based on specs?

Why in gods name would you buy a gaming console, based on benchmarks and Mhz...

I'm not going to get the PS3, because I don't like Final Fantasy, and Sword in the stone, and Onimusha...and crap games like that...

I like First person shooters, and so far the X box's selection looks a hell of alot better on the FPS side of things than the PS3's does....

As for controller...
Once again, I like FPS...
And there's only ONE thing that beats triggers and that's Mouse/keyboard....(Even though I prefer triggers)
In that case Micro wins again...To me....

Ps3 might have b05439blah hertz and what not..
I don't care, I'm not going to use it for a Media Center like Sony Expects people too...And I'm not going to use it's bananaphone Controller...

My 2 cents are as follows.....Buy a Gaming Console for the Games..Not for the specs
 
You guys seem to misunderstand something. Whoever said anything about programming for all the SPE's should be shot. Clearly they don't know what they are talking about.

Toshiba has developed an operating system to increase efficiency in the Cell software development. One of this environment's key features is that application software developers can program software without concerning about what threads will be allotted to what SPEs, because the environment has a function to automatically schedule software to SPEs.
Click to expand...

I got the above from an article that was posted on psinext.com a while ago.

As you can see,the developers will be creating software without worrying about what part of Cell will do what task. The PPE will take care of that. So it won't be as hard as people claim.

Developers will start programming for the SPE's about 3-4 years after the system launches. Maybe even longer.Depends on how the games are going to be. When the games become too heavy for the PS3 then they will have to program for the SPE's to optimize performance.By that time all the multi-core fuss will be standard.
 
Ok..but then won't that just slow down the processing time? That doesn't make much sense....

Programming a game NOT to multi thread

So something can process the data...

turn it into multi-thread..

so it..can..process the data..... 👎 :sick:
 
No, not really. I'd presume that you'd program the game, run the program through this application which will do it's thing and then distribute. Even if it does it on the fly, it really shouldn't drop much processing power at all, the PS3 isn't running with a 486SX, it'll be able to handle apps like that running in the background.
 
I'm not going to get the PS3, because I don't like Final Fantasy, and Sword in the stone, and Onimusha...and crap games like that...
Click to expand...

Thats way too much emotion for such an isolated opinion. and a worse reason to not get a next gen system then someone who does for mhz and benchmarks(at least they'll try the games). People dont buy $500 video cards just to admire them. Now thats my opinion.

Theres got to be a better reason then that :indiff:
 
La Bounti, how is that a worse reason? I know what style of games I do like and I don't like. I don't care if some asian Vixen with Triple G breasts has to save her uncle's country with the magical golden sword. I really don't.
 
Driftster
La Bounti, how is that a worse reason? I know what style of games I do like and I don't like. I don't care if some asian Vixen with Triple G breasts has to save her uncle's country with the magical golden sword. I really don't.
Click to expand...

as opposed to some metal robot saving the world from aliens? and shooting things over and over and over and over and over and over again?

seems exciting to me :yuck:

I think his point is, you are isolating PS3 to only having RPG's and such, when in reality, the mass of games are outstanding, and far exceed that of Xbox. If you are truely into FPS, then there is no way you would say that Xbox has any good FPS, because halo is by far one of the ****tiest FPS I've ever played, it's just a rehash and is only successful, IMO, because it's all that's on Xbox to be proud of.

If you only enjoy FPS then you are going to isolate yourself to having very little to play from, I mean name all these "wonderful" FPS that xbox has? Halo? Doom? Unreal?

I can promise you we'll see Quake, Doom, and Unreal on PS3. And your opinion on the controller shows your bias even more so.

Also, you have no understanding of how the Cell works, as you called the SPE's "cores" when they are not. Don't even begin to speak if you dont' even know what to say, it makes you sound like George Bush.
 
Hmmm, unless GT5, the next GTA, Kill Zone 2 and many, many, many more all turn out to be rpg's instead of following their normal format.
 
Well as I stated either in this thread or another, kill zone...blah...

360's FPS...Quake, doom, Far Cry, Half Life 2, Gears Of War, Halo, Perfect Dark, Dog Tag, Project Delta, Dark Sector.

As For Halo just being a rehashed FPS, maybe it is. But it's on a console...BIIGGG difference...

Condemned is the only one that DOESN'T look any good
 
Your negativeness twards scei is starting took look like an obsession. You dislike psp. ps2 and a system thats not even out yet. But you keep posting about how much you hate sony computer interactive.

Yes it is a worse reason, but you've made it clear that there wont be any fps on PS3.
 
Driftster
Well as I stated either in this thread or another, kill zone...blah...

360's FPS...Quake, doom, Far Cry, Half Life 2, Gears Of War, Halo, Perfect Dark, Dog Tag, Project Delta, Dark Sector.

As For Halo just being a rehashed FPS, maybe it is. But it's on a console...BIIGGG difference...

Condemned is the only one that DOESN'T look any good
Click to expand...

Quake = Will most likely be multi platform

Doom = Will most likely be multi platform

Dark Sector = Will most likely be multi platform

Half Life 2 = Will most likely be multi platform


Halo = PC as well, and it's much better on PC.


Socom = Great FPS

MOH = Great FPS series

TS = Fun FPS, extremely similar to Goldeneye

KZ = Good FPS, but clouded with technical issues



I can go on and on, but the only reason Xbox had so many FPS titles is because it was extremely similar to a PC in terms of development, thus many PC developers and other developers in general decided to take advantage of that, since FPS titles are easier to develop in comparison to RPG's and Action titles and so on.
 
I'm sorry but the halo PC Vs Halo X box thing is a 100% opinionative statement, considering A how graphically demanding it is on a PC (which makes no sense). And the complete unbalancing of everything on the game.
But I suppose if you're a modder you'd like it for PC more, although it's Xbox customization is catching on and catching up...

As for the multi platform games, you're right, but once again The 360 will have TRIGGERS.
Answers that question.

Socom's cool, but i'll take Ghost Recon over it.

KZ was a good idea (even though just like Halo is a rehashed FPS)...But so far the things that have came out to feature it just ARN'T in it's favor.

As for MOH...It's alright, not one of my top picks, nor would it be ANY deciding factor wether it's a launch title or not because I probably wouldn't play it considering i've played that war about 50 times already, and guess what.. Allies/America win(s) every time..
 
Driftster
I'm sorry but the halo PC Vs Halo X box thing is a 100% opinionative statement, considering A how graphically demanding it is on a PC (which makes no sense). And the complete unbalancing of everything on the game.
But I suppose if you're a modder you'd like it for PC more, although it's Xbox customization is catching on and catching up...

As for the multi platform games, you're right, but once again The 360 will have TRIGGERS.
Answers that question.

Socom's cool, but i'll take Ghost Recon over it.

KZ was a good idea (even though just like Halo is a rehashed FPS)...But so far the things that have came out to feature it just ARN'T in it's favor.

As for MOH...It's alright, not one of my top picks, nor would it be ANY deciding factor wether it's a launch title or not because I probably wouldn't play it considering i've played that war about 50 times already, and guess what.. Allies/America win(s) every time..
Click to expand...

Key board and mouse are infinately more useful for a first person shooter, hence, PC versions of said games are always superior in handling.

And it's funny you'd mention that you've played the war 50 different times and the out come is the same...I mean, when you pop in ANY game, do you ever have any doubts as to who is going to win given you beat it? If you are playing a first person shooter for a STORY anyway, you are seriously missing out on other games in that case, because I can't think of ONE first person shooter that has a very good story in comparison to games like MGS, GoW, DMC, FF, Jade Empire, Ninja Gaiden, Shinobi, etc etc etc.
 
well, i think that drifster is overstating an opinion, but he has a right to it and can hate those games or prefer those storylines. i don't like mystery books, that doesn't mean you can't like them or I have to like them if you do. people look for different things in different games.
 
Thank you Disco, I don't know why everyone though I was making attacks at other people, i mean I said right off the bat. "I like this kind of game, I know what I like"...
But people just feel the need to defend a console as if they were getting paid to...
 
discopotato
well, i think that drifster is overstating an opinion, but he has a right to it and can hate those games or prefer those storylines. i don't like mystery books, that doesn't mean you can't like them or I have to like them if you do. people look for different things in different games.
Click to expand...

I completely agree, but a lot of the things he say's are contradictory to his other statements.

Such as the MOH statement. How can you dislike MOH because you knwo how it's going to end, yet enjoy Halo, knowing full well how it's going to end?

I also find it interesting how he grills RPG's and such, yet seems as tho he wouldn't give them a chance anyway based on his personality traits that he has displayed thus far.

Also he takes many cheap shots that aren't justified, and sure it's not MY place to say anything, but hell, I get bored just like everyone else, and I gotta stay up on my typing skills, lol.
 
Oh i've given RPG's a chance, and some of them are fun, but they are in NO way going to be any sort of reason to me getting a particular console. I'm going to get one based on the games I KNOW i want to play. if I FIND a RPG that's fun that happens to be on that console, great...But I'm not going to be waiting in anticipation for it.
As for MOH and Halo It's not that I care about the end, it's the entire game itself.

I mean in Halo I didn't know what was going to be the next mission, I didn't know in Halo 2 that starting on a beach would lead to a barracks, which lead to another body of water and the unfolding.

MOH, I know what weapons there will be, what characteristics to expect given the war, and what the terrain will be like.
i mean it's great, but not inventive ya know what I mean?

I love my realism just as much as the next guy, but not EVERY game..

I'd rather have 5 completely different stories that are in no way realistic, than 5 games based on the same event, with the same weapons, the same country side, with just improved graphics, physics, and AI..
 
That post makes a lot more sense Driftster, I agree that MoH is a bit tried and tested now, but I still dissagree with you're overall opinion on a console thats still a year away that you don't know what games will be available for it.
 

Latest Posts

Back