PS3 or XBOX 360?

[Quicksilver7714]

I would rather have a physical copy of the game. Unless they drop the prices of games to about $30-$40 then I might go for it. I would never spend $60+ on a game I can't re-sell.

Favorite game COD4 and Halo Reach

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums App.

1.)http://www.droidforums.net/forum/re...-dummies-guide-android-terminoligy-lingo.html
2.)http://www.droidforums.net/forum/rescue-squad-guides/70875-what-you-need-know-about-rooting.html
3.)http://www.droidforums.net/forum/re...08-multiple-phones-root-them-unroot-them.html

 

[dfuser312553]

I would say ps3 but Sony banned me for my name a couple months ago.... all my paid content & my level 13 trophy score gone.... I made that name in December of 06.

 

[mewshi]

Does Microsoft have any plans on releasing a Blu-Ray drive for Xbox?

No, M$ realizes that 'disks' are dead. The current trend is digital and streaming. With the exception of my gaming disks I will have ZERO disks in my house in the next week. Ripped and burned all of them to my Media Serves. Add to the mix companies like Amazon and Vudu offering HD streaming and what is the use for disks. M$ is already testing the waters to see if they can do away completely with disks for the next gen console (personally I hope they do).

This is true but i dout microsft ever would... Sony put in blueray for two reasons, One to get blueray to take off and two their games. Ps3's have to have blueray functioning becuase their games are based off of that system. If the games wernt blueray i bet sony would have removed the blueray already to get the console cheaper. (as blueray has won the war against hddvd already) I dout Microsoft would include a blueray because that means more $$ to spend thus making console more expensive.

Not correct. For starters BRs can NOT be used 'for games' the data transfer rates are WAY to slow. That is why the PS3 MUST install content to the HDD. The only advantage they provide for gaming is storage capacity (one disk instead of multiple). As per the cost argument initially they did 'eat' the expense to get the market exposure but now the costs difference for them per unit compared to a 'regular' DVD is negligible. They also realize the marketing value of having it so it justifies the extra expense. If M$ thought it added anything to the console they would do it (it would take away the only real 'advantage' the PS3 has over the 360) but again they are moving away from physical media (disks).

You're just wrong. Most PS3 games don't require installation of data to the hard drive. Only very large games with huge files actually require HDD installation (GT5, im looking right at you). Out of all my games for PS3 (and I have 15 physical discs for it), I think maybe 6 have required install to the disk. As a general rule, large-scale RPGs almost universally require installation on the PS3. Then again, I don't mind at all, since the PS3 has an actual standard hard drive and is easy to back up if I ever run out of room.

Besides, if I order a game on disc, but the download version is 15GB, the disc will be here a few hours sooner than the download (assuming 1 day shipping). since I tend to play large-scale games (Fallout (which I know isn't that big), Star Ocean, GT5) this would get old really quick.

at any rate, don't spread mistruths, 'kay? ^^
Sent from my DROID2 using DroidForums App

 

[elvyrorie]

I prefer xbox, only because I have to pay for internet gaming. why do I want to pay? I get reliable gaming. I have never had any problems with my service the mics sound good etc. my buddy has a ps3 the mics suck, and he's always lagging, and losing connection. xbox all the way.

Sent from my DROID2 using DroidForums App

 

[ilikemoneygreen]

This is true but i dout microsft ever would... Sony put in blueray for two reasons, One to get blueray to take off and two their games. Ps3's have to have blueray functioning becuase their games are based off of that system. If the games wernt blueray i bet sony would have removed the blueray already to get the console cheaper. (as blueray has won the war against hddvd already) I dout Microsoft would include a blueray because that means more $$ to spend thus making console more expensive.

Not correct. For starters BRs can NOT be used 'for games' the data transfer rates are WAY to slow. That is why the PS3 MUST install content to the HDD. The only advantage they provide for gaming is storage capacity (one disk instead of multiple). As per the cost argument initially they did 'eat' the expense to get the market exposure but now the costs difference for them per unit compared to a 'regular' DVD is negligible. They also realize the marketing value of having it so it justifies the extra expense. If M$ thought it added anything to the console they would do it (it would take away the only real 'advantage' the PS3 has over the 360) but again they are moving away from physical media (disks).

You sure you got the correct information here? Lol, I can say that this is not correct at all. First off, How are data transfer rates too slow? You do relize this is new technology. Lets see blueray compared to a dvd:
Blu-ray.com - Blu-ray FAQ Ctrl-F - What is the difference between Blu-ray and DVD?
Do you see the data transfer rates? Please enlighten me on how this is too slow? Some games do run off the HDD, But most of my games dont. As you can see Blueray has more than just one advantage as well. Not every game has this feature. Visit: A Partial Answer Behind Why Some PS3 Games Need to Install | GameFront If you want to know the reason some games require the install. A short summary "is DVD players can read at different speeds, but Blu-ray players read at one, so DVDs being dropped onto Blu-rays causes the problems. A similar problem doesn't exist with the hard drive." Now on to the next thing you say the costs difference for them per unit compared to a 'regular' DVD is negligible. "Negligible refers to the quantities so small that they can be ignored." You do relize its still going to be a year or two before thats actually true. A blueray unit that reads blueray and dvd's definetly costs more than just a dvd reader...just sayin.

 

[Hmong_Xiong]

Blu-ray gives you better graphics than dvd as you can see...I know because I have something called an hdtv!

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums App

 

[mewshi]

The fact that games are on blu-ray doesn't mean a bloody thing when it comes to graphics. A game run from an old CD drive can have graphics equal to anything today, its just a matter of loading speed and such...

also, I will openly admit that, for a long time (up until maybe the past year or so), the XBox did have superior graphics; however, this really had nothing to do with the raw power of the machines themselves. It boiled down to two things: most developers had more familiarity with the tools for XBox (including DirectX, which is what's used for the graphics on XBox), and the fact that the XBox had a huge lead on the PS3 for quite a while. It makes more business sense to focus on the dual-platform (windows and XBox can use much of the same stuff) stuff (since its both 'easier' to work with and has a larger base) than to work on making the PS3 version perform to its full potential.

Sent from my DROID2 using DroidForums App

 

[Shabutie.]

PS3 -- hands down

Sent from my SCH-I400 using DroidForums App

 

[smokiedabong]

Any of the two will do, I have them both and the only differences to me are the exclusive titles . Personally I like Xbox exclusives better . They are both very reliable now and the graphics are crappy on both of them .

 

[tktouch12]

i say xbox definitely. there are simple things like ps3's have really bad controllers. i hate the layout of them, 360 is much more natural/easy to use, and they are really low quality, i've never had a 360 controller break, but ps3's break all the time.

also, kinect is REALLY cool, that adds a ton to xbox right there.

360 has imo generally better live play, and better internet connectivity/speed

 

[kparks]

i say xbox definitely. there are simple things like ps3's have really bad controllers. i hate the layout of them, 360 is much more natural/easy to use, and they are really low quality, i've never had a 360 controller break, but ps3's break all the time.

also, kinect is REALLY cool, that adds a ton to xbox right there.

360 has imo generally better live play, and better internet connectivity/speed

well i was not even gonna comment till i saw this message first off its up to the person to who is playing to decide what controller they like personaly the 360 made my hands hurt after 30 min..second more reliable lol both consoles break but 360 do break more than ps3 and both controllers are very well made i still use my sixaxis controller i got with my ps3 in 2007 so not sure where this guy got this info from??? better controller layout? again what are u talking about its prefrence if u can say fighting games play better on 360 thats total BS everything else is about even on both! kenect is fun so is psmove both very well made but the final thing is games and thats where ps takes it for ME heavy rain was awsome i didnt care for kz2 resistance is awsome uncharted and so on.. 360 has halo to be honest i hate halo its a good game just not for me then yea get a 360 if not go ps3.. my 360 is over my friends house sold it to him he loves it i cant stand it but i can play it whenever i want. none of my friends have ps3 but u meet tons of great ppl online that u can play with and talk to everyday for years!! its up to u but u cant go wrong with the ps3 or 360 but to me ps3 is the winner....... and 360 guys please dont give me the we have tons of exclusives cuz guess what if its on the PC its not a exclusive

 

[kparks]

and the paying for xbox live is a joke its no more reliable than the ps3 online play they both have there ups and downs thats just sumn the ppl that have xboxes say to try to justify paying every year it depends on the games and servers and the host!!

 

[eNomineZerum]

Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2. When the Javelin glitch was ruining that game, and Infinity Ward stated they were leaving it up to Sony and Microsoft to fight back, Live enabled bans to cut the nonsense. PSN had to deal with that glitch for weeks. You get what you pay for and if you want a free service that is overall lackluster that's what you get. If you want a premium servuce with clear audio and better matchmaking, you get that.

Trust me, I have both. I have at this point relegated my PS3 to a blu-ray player (which it is excellent at).

P.S. can't wait for Uncharted 3.

By the name of Zero

 

[Aram58]

3d gaming is sick. If you have a 3d tv then ps3 without question. Ps3 has better hardware (not an opinion, fact).

360 has better controllers though. So that's what I have.

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums App

 

[justin82]

I have both.. Dont know that one is better than the other it jsut depends on what your friends have and games you want.

Now for my question.. for those that have both

would you reccommend the move for PS3 or kinect for Xbox 360.. which one is better (sport games are all i forsee doing with it.. not planning on any first person shooters or anything)

thanks