PS3 vs Xbox 360: Is it Worth the Wait?

[exequor]

It is true, Xbox will be coming out first (christmas this year) but is it worth it to wait for the PS3? Sony better hurry up if you ask me, I'm a PS fan so no doubt my money is on the PS3; I mean it has bluray, the cell processor (2.x TFlops), etc., etc. too much features to mention, I just want a black one right now so that I can put some neon lights on it and make it look cooler. Nintendo is coming out with the revolution too but its not on my mind :).

What do you people think about these these next generation consoles and which impress you the most. E3 is here!

 

[z-component]

It is my understanding that the Xbox 360's processor will perform a bit slower than Sony's E3, however, I think that new systems will both be extremely great. I am impressed with how real the new games look for these systems! Too bad I'm not much of a gamer anymore... :(

It's amazing how Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo seem to stay on the same page when it comes to new consoles. I guess that's what gives the consumer an edge for the console race! I do think that having new consoles every few years is a crazy system, just like computers and cell phones.

 

[exequor]

I don't think that Nintendo has been on the same page though because I was impressed with the fact that they came out with a very small console but deep down everyone knows that it can't compete with with the PS3 or the Xbox 360. Nintendo just keeps putting themselves in a deeper hole everytime.

 

[z-component]

That's true. The only thing holding it up are the Nintendo-only "classic" games such as Zelda, etc.

 

[Huckleberry]

I've seen the Game Cube system and I'm pretty impressed with it.

New XBOX this christmas huh? Darn, I bought one last christmas and don't want to buy a new one already. Oh well, they will be cheaper by the time I'm ready to buy one. Maybe I'll get the PS3 instead.

Do you know if the games from the older systems will be compatable with the newer ones?

 

[exequor]

Do you know if the games from the older systems will be compatable with the newer ones?

Yep you would be able to (smart move by nintendo).

One of the good things is that all the consoles have made their games backward compatible. The ps3 would be able to play all ps2 games but the xbox 360 would play select games from the xbox collection (most likely halo).

 

[mewmew]

The Nintendo system will be a hit I think for one reason. While it is only something on the order of 3 times faster than the gamecube you can go online and play all the games from nes onward, and that is a system worth buying.

 

[z-component]

I first thought that the Nintendo Gamecube was targeted more toward younger children than older teens/adults, but I certainly know of a 30-year-old person who has a Gamecube. I guess it's just the type of games you like. :)

 

[Pengwuino]

I'd be playen Zelda from N64 even if i were 40 :D

 

[JamesU]

New zelda this year!

 

[TsunamiJoe]

yes it really is who the market is, nintendo is aimed at younge kids, which need parents to buy it, so they can't jump too far into the technology market because they can't afford to raise the price too steep, whereas the 360 and ps3 is towards the adult generation, whom have jobs and can easily slap down cash for one

 

[Delta]

I'm keeping a close eye on this one.

I've yet to get a PS2 from playing other peoples consoles, but I will do in a week or so. I was going to wait until PS3 is release but rumours has it that it will be in March 2006. Can't wait for that long with games like Need for Speed and GTA out.

One disappointment I'm hearing is the controller is a weird elongated boomerang design that is wireless, and you won't be able to put your old controllers in.

http://www.ps3land.com/ps3-pictures/picture54.php

Still think PS3 is an easy winner though, everyone I know plays it over any other console.

 

[CtrlAltDefeat]

Poor Nintendo's demise...

Nintendo is in deep trouble it seems... I haven't seen much info on their new console, but I did hear that its going to be DVD based, which I think is a bad move. With the PS3 using Blu-Ray, Nintendo (and the XBOX 360) will again be out classed in storage capacity. I've also heard that it will be again under powered compared to sony and microsoft's consoles. It will also be made small and "cute". Sound familier? The Game Cube and the N64 had these same handicaps, and of course did poorly in the market place. So following that, Nintendo again will run a distant 3rd to the others. Nintendo needs to stop trying for "cute" and go for powerfull.

The only thing that kept Nintendo afloat during these last few years was their portable sales. Nintendo had a portable monopaly. But with the PSP out and (I believe) out selling the DS,I think Nintendo will soon go the way of Sega.

 

[Les Sleeth]

I just wanted to throw in that I'm having a total gas with the PSP. At first I thought I'd only use it when stuck at the DMV or getting my tires changed, but the feature of turning it on right where you left the last game going is great. The wireless feature of playing against other PSP owners is great too. The graphics are really good, you can download music like for the Ipod, and you can watch movies on it. Great fun.

 

[exequor]

The PS3 is definitely the winner and the price would be high too (maybe starting around $500). Microsoft has to have something up their sleeves, and although they would be launching first (in the US) that strategy wouldn't necessarily help them as it did for the PS2.

If you are worried about the controllers, no need to because there are wireless controllers for the PS2_ not sure if they would work on the PS3. Plus as soon as these consoles get out there would be tons of aftermarket components.

 

[Entropy]

It is my understanding that the Xbox 360's processor will perform a bit slower than Sony's E3, however

The 360's three 3GHz processors add up to about 1 teraflop, nothing that great. But Sony's cell processor will be running at 2.18 teraflops. Better than any processor that will be out on computers for years. Microsoft is just doing what it did before, making a computer with a fancy cover that's plagued with poor design. While Sony is actually inventing something new and not just getting a good deal on old computer parts, putting it in a box and calling it a console.

Another thing about 360 is it's controler is going to be too much like the crappy XBox controler. Three words: TOO DAMN BIG! How many freakin' buttons do you need?! Sony's PS controller is by far the best controler I've ever used.

Aside from the SNES, the greatest console of all time, the PS1 and PS2 are the best consoles I've every played. I have no dought Sony will school Microsoft yet again.

 

[gravenewworld]

From gamepro.com
Sony pulled out all stops, revealing the look of the console, specs, and launch date. Slated for release in Spring 2006, the PlayStation 3 features a PowerPC-base core running at 3.2 GHz, 256MB of XDR RAM at 3.2 GHz, 256MB GDDR3 VRAM at 700 MHz, Bluetooth wireless controllers, built in WiFi (802.11b/g), and RSX, a state-of-the-art next-gen GPU by Nvidia with a clock speed of 550 MHz. Similar to the Xbox 360, the GPU is able to freely access the 512MB of RAM, lacking the constraints seen in conventional PCs. And continuing its tradition, the console is backwards compatible--as is the Xbox 360. "

"While each effect in of itself is subtle, when all combined the added ambiance is noticeably improved from what's seen in top-end PC graphics. The PS3 also seemed to have significantly more complex polygonal models than the Xbox 360. While the 360's rather disappointing Ghost Recon 3 looked like a minor facelift from Ghost Recon 2, Killzone on the PlayStation 3 was an eyeopener--undoubtedly the most beautiful looking FPS game to date (Quake 3 and Half-Life 2 pale in comparison). When comparing the graphics between the 360 and the PS3, the latter has graphics that are true to the phrase "next-generation" while the 360 seems more like a respectable upgrade (say, the jump from PS One to PS2) from the original Xbox. "


In short PS3 hands down has much more powerful hardware than 360, but the biggest question is whether this translates into better games.

 

[Huckleberry]

Another thing about 360 is it's controler is going to be too much like the crappy XBox controler. Three words: TOO DAMN BIG! How many freakin' buttons do you need?! Sony's PS controller is by far the best controler I've ever used.

I'm not happy with the XBox controller either. It's not the size that bothers me. It's the buttons. They are too small and awkward. The black and white buttons are useless for any kind of fast reaction time. I like the triggers for the XBox. They have good pressure sensitivity and are actually useful, as opposed to the PS controller.

Hey. This thread has over 900 views and like a dozen posts. Is that unusual?

 

[exequor]

I think the xbox's controller is too big especially for kids. maybe they didn't design that controller for kids but i find it hard to believe that a 9 year old can play with it comfortably.

 

[franznietzsche]

The 360's three 3GHz processors add up to about 1 teraflop, nothing that great.

JEebus christo no they don't. Microsft CLAIMS a total system performance of 1 teraflop, and that's not all from the processor. The majority is from the GPU. Further, saying 1 teraflop is nothing great is a little short of ridiculous. Less than 500 computers in the world are faster than 1 teraflop. Not 500 models, 500 physical mahcines. Not a single one of them has fewer than 200 processors.

But Sony's cell processor will be running at 2.18 teraflops. Better than any processor that will be out on computers for years.

NO. The cell runs at 218 Gflops. total system performance is 2.18 Tflops. Again, I'm very suspicious of this number, as they are claiming the GPU hits 1.8 Tflops. And more like better than any computer with less than 200 processors for years.

Microsoft is just doing what it did before, making a computer with a fancy cover that's plagued with poor design. While Sony is actually inventing something new and not just getting a good deal on old computer parts, putting it in a box and calling it a console.

I think you're missing the irony in IBM screwing over MS by making the cell for Sony and giving MS the three year old PPCs. 10 year over due irony in fact.

Another thing about 360 is it's controler is going to be too much like the crappy XBox controler. Three words: TOO DAMN BIG! How many freakin' buttons do you need?! Sony's PS controller is by far the best controler I've ever used.

I never thought it was big. People must have really small hands because I've never had problems with it. In fact i think that the Dual Shock, while a good controller is too small. Makes the R1/R2 and L1/L2 buttons a pain in the ass.

 

[exequor]

franznietzsche you sound like a hardcore microsoft/xbox fan. Sony, IBM and Toshiba (i think) agreeded to come together and make the cell processor. Microsoft is just trying to give people a computer-console, don't you see what they stress on (xbox's Media-center). bottom line MS isn't as thrilled about the hardware as sony is.

 

[franznietzsche]

franznietzsche you sound like a hardcore microsoft/xbox fan. Sony, IBM and Toshiba (i think) agreeded to come together and make the cell processor. Microsoft is just trying to give people a computer-console, don't you see what they stress on (xbox's Media-center). bottom line MS isn't as thrilled about the hardware as sony is.

That's funny. And marginally insulting. Quite the opposite really. I despise Microsoft. And while, i do prefer the current Xbox the to the PS2, i have no intention of getting a 360 and will possibly be preordering a PS3.

I'm not sure where you get the idea I'm a "hardcore microsoft/xbox fan". I do prefer the xbox control to the dual shock, but I've got huge hands. The M controller was too big, but the S controller was the perfect size for me.

I don't believe either company on the numbers they are publishing. I've spent a lot of time looking over the Cell processor, and I'm very excited about it (the moment i can i plan on getting a workstation with one), but it does not hit 2.18 Tflops. Even Sony is not claiming that. Likewise, even microsoft, in all their lies, is not claiming that their processors hit 1 Tflop. They are claimging total system performance, including the GPU reaches those numbers. And i don't believe either of them. Especially not Microsoft. It is the company that got busted falsifying video evidence in court, twice. This would be a perfectly routine lie for them.

And again, to say 1Tflop is nothing astonishing is ridiculous. Thats why i don't buy those numbers. Again there are less than 500 machines in the world capable of 1 Tflop or more. Less than 100 break the 2 Tflop mark. I don't buy either of those numbers until i see a strict accounting of where they come from (which i suspect will never happen because those numbers are a bunch of smoke an mirrors, adding together numbers that shouldn't be added).

Yes i realize that MS is just making a computer-console. Think about it. Replacing the PC would be perfect for them--putting everyone on a hardware platform where they control the OS. Standard Microsoft tactic--and very very close to illegal I might add. Hence why i refuse to buy one.

 

[dduardo]

Right now I'm more likely to get a ps3 than an xbox 360. But that could all change depending on the games. It doesn't matter how many teraflops of cpu power a console has if the games blow.

 

[Entropy]

The majority is from the GPU. Further, saying 1 teraflop is nothing great is a little short of ridiculous.

Keeping in my this is not "current" technology, but what's planned for the near future I'd say it isn't that remarkable. Even if it's only about 6 months away.

Thats why i don't buy those numbers. Again there are less than 500 machines in the world capable of 1 Tflop or more. Less than 100 break the 2 Tflop mark.

Can you provide a source? I find that hard to believe. I'm sure they're quite a few people/companies that need more processing power than that.

 

[franznietzsche]

Keeping in my this is not "current" technology, but what's planned for the near future I'd say it isn't that remarkable. Even if it's only about 6 months away.



Can you provide a source? I find that hard to believe. I'm sure they're quite a few people/companies that need more processing power than that.

http://www.top500.org/lists/plists.php?Y=2004&M=11

 

[exequor]

So Entropy, do you think the companies are just bluffing? I don't find this hard to believe in fact it's next generation so it will be more powerful than a lot of computers. For my personal computer I certainly don't need all that processing power, plus those processors need to have software specially developed for them to take advantage of their multi-processing capabilities. Maybe servers could use that.

 

[franznietzsche]

So Entropy, do you think the companies are just bluffing? I don't find this hard to believe in fact it's next generation

'Next Generation' is a buzzword that has no real physical or technical meaning.

so it will be more powerful than a lot of computers.

The PS3 is the only one featuring any actually 'new' technology. So i see no reason for this to be true. More powerful than older desktops sure. Powerful enough to trump out all but 100 of the world's fastest computers, none of whom have less than 200 processors, I don't think so. I won't believe that till I see a published benchmark test.

For my personal computer I certainly don't need all that processing power, plus those processors need to have software specially developed for them to take advantage of their multi-processing capabilities.

Not really, multi-processing has been around since the 1940s, its just not been around for individual users because it costs so much to get so many processors. People rant about how hard it will be to program in parallel, but there is no reason for it too be. Assuming the people doing the programming actually deserve their computer science degrees.

Maybe servers could use that.

Or more importantly, scientific applications.

 

[Papa_Rocks]

Franznietzsche, as usual, you are the man! Always ready to back your stuff up. Do you think the computer geek that rigged up my XBOX to download games can do the same for the 360? Because that would make the decision for me.

 

[Jameson]

I just read in Wired that Microsoft hired the designer of the Final Fantasy series to write games for MS Xbox 360. I hope this new system has better games than the original, I'm getting bored with mine.

 

[exequor]

FF is probably the most popular adventure game for the ps2 and it is a big part of the ps2. Microsoft seems to always get what they want because here they are getting the designer, they got a fundamental gentoo programmer, etc. Money talks. So Jameson you can bet on getting some good looking games.

 

[TsunamiJoe]

on a FF note, FF12 looks so nice...its beautiful lol

but that sort of power isn't really that amazing...because within a gaming system you don't have to leave it so open ended, that system knows exactly what it needs to do and how, whereas on your home computer, it has to wait for you and then process your command and then execute it...and there's other factors - but like he said, anyone worth there comp sci. degree can get it to work

 

[Mudvaynelethaldosage]

Yep you would be able to (smart move by nintendo).

One of the good things is that all the consoles have made their games backward compatible. The ps3 would be able to play all ps2 games but the xbox 360 would play select games from the xbox collection (most likely halo).

Is it a sure thing that Ps2 games will run on the Ps3? As I understood it, Ps1 games would run on the Ps2. They didn't, however. I've tried all my Ps1 games on my Ps2 and they didn't work. Is it possible that the games were unsupported because of my Ps2's model? I haven't tried them in other Ps2's.

 

[Entropy]

PS2 will run PS1 games. Something must be wrong with your system. You will be able to play PS1 and PS2 games on the PS3.

 

[Learning Curve]

I don't think that Nintendo has been on the same page though because I was impressed with the fact that they came out with a very small console but deep down everyone knows that it can't compete with with the PS3 or the Xbox 360. Nintendo just keeps putting themselves in a deeper hole everytime.

Nintendo is in deep trouble it seems... I haven't seen much info on their new console, but I did hear that its going to be DVD based, which I think is a bad move. With the PS3 using Blu-Ray, Nintendo (and the XBOX 360) will again be out classed in storage capacity. I've also heard that it will be again under powered compared to sony and microsoft's consoles. It will also be made small and "cute". Sound familier? The Game Cube and the N64 had these same handicaps, and of course did poorly in the market place. So following that, Nintendo again will run a distant 3rd to the others. Nintendo needs to stop trying for "cute" and go for powerfull.

The only thing that kept Nintendo afloat during these last few years was their portable sales. Nintendo had a portable monopaly. But with the PSP out and (I believe) out selling the DS,I think Nintendo will soon go the way of Sega.

From videos I have seen I wouldn't be suprised if Nintendo Revolution isn't #1 ( in ground breaking technology). Don't know if you all know this but the Revolution is going to have a headset which will be virtual reality which if you walk in real life you move in the game. I saw this video on Gamespots forums. Quite a while ago and don't remember the name.

I just wanted to throw in that I'm having a total gas with the PSP. At first I thought I'd only use it when stuck at the DMV or getting my tires changed, but the feature of turning it on right where you left the last game going is great. The wireless feature of playing against other PSP owners is great too. The graphics are really good, you can download music like for the Ipod, and you can watch movies on it. Great fun.

I love my PSP :!) I can't wait for FF Advent Children. Gonna be a blast.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Entropy
Another thing about 360 is it's controler is going to be too much like the crappy XBox controler. Three words: TOO DAMN BIG! How many freakin' buttons do you need?! Sony's PS controller is by far the best controler I've ever used.
I'm not happy with the XBox controller either. It's not the size that bothers me. It's the buttons. They are too small and awkward. The black and white buttons are useless for any kind of fast reaction time. I like the triggers for the XBox. They have good pressure sensitivity and are actually useful, as opposed to the PS controller.

Amen!

JEebus christo no they don't. Microsft CLAIMS a total system performance of 1 teraflop, and that's not all from the processor. The majority is from the GPU. Further, saying 1 teraflop is nothing great is a little short of ridiculous. Less than 500 computers in the world are faster than 1 teraflop. Not 500 models, 500 physical mahcines. Not a single one of them has fewer than 200 processors.

I would like to know where you're getting that information!

 

[Entropy]

I don't think that Nintendo has been on the same page though because I was impressed with the fact that they came out with a very small console but deep down everyone knows that it can't compete with with the PS3 or the Xbox 360. Nintendo just keeps putting themselves in a deeper hole everytime.

Don't know what you're thinking. Nintendo's Game Cube is a far better console than XBox and I believe the Revolution will be better than XBox 360. The only thing worth while on XBox is Halo and the only thing good on the XBox 360 will probably be Halo 3.