First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next  Last
XBOX 360 Likes/Dislikes
Posted 3/11/08

ojsinnerz wrote:


a1q2s3 wrote:

I heard plans of Microsoft switching to Blu-ray since HD-dvd is or is predicted to be a failure, I personally respect the fact that Microsoft has some great business leaders, they are making an practical decision, I'm also wondering if the change is made will it be a true change as in installing a blu-ray player in the 360 not some other piece of hardware like they did with HD-dvd, anyway consider this a rumor and don't flame me please. Also if the HD-DVD add-on cost $200 how much will a Blu-ray add-on cost, I'm guessing significantly more. The fact that the PS3 is cheaper than the 360 is becoming more and more evident.

http://www.psu.com/UPDATED--Sony-to-profit-off-of-the-Xbox-360-with-Blu-ray--a0002990-p0.php


"We've already been working on, for example, in Windows, device driver support for Blu-ray drives and the like, and I think the world moves on. Toshiba has moved on. We've moved on, and we'll support Blu-ray in ways that make sense."


Warner-bros is also dropping HD-DVD.

epic win for the Blu-ray and PS3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywWfmRdOmJ0


Firstly, seriously old news. They've said this like... 2 months ago...

Secondly, they're not switching to blueray. They did say that they'll make a blueray DVD add-on if there's enough requests for the 360.

Thirdly, in Canada, 360 is still cheaper than PS3.

Forthly, the PS3 still has the lowest sales, and Sony refuses to count how many PS3's they've sold, and gave them a number of the PS3s they've actually shipped.


what do you mean in Canada....the 360 IS cheaper than the PS3....and now in Europe....the 360 Arcade version is cheaper than a Wii....
11704 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / TN
Offline
Posted 3/11/08
i like everything about it except the fact therez lag in the games at times, but idk maybe that cant ever be helped even if ya got the best internet connection
233 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / planet earth
Offline
Posted 3/12/08
I like everything but my xbox360 is broken because overheat.
and then they put a fan or something like that so it won't overheated again but man, the sound of the fan is very annoying. It makes my head ache
1487 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / next to my pc
Offline
Posted 3/12/08

xero44 wrote:

xbox 360 red ring of death
halo 3 is overrated
gears of war sucks

playstation 3 has better games


fanboys should'nt be posting here, they are anoying

ok my list is

good shooters
great controlers
tonnes of exclusives (more than ps3)
great graphics (on par wtih ps3)
gaining more great rpgs
hard drive
3 year warninty(sp?)
all mates ave it
great online (but you pay for it)
cheeper than ps3 and value for money(£230 ish now, this is uk value in GBP)

cons
3 red lights
lack of jrpg (not into to em too much) and regular rpgs
lack of family and party games
paying for live (but this could be a pro too as it means better live services)
noise




34159 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 3/12/08
i dunno, i never tried one before
303 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 3/12/08
i have only 1 question which is powerful in terms of processing 360 or ps3 because im planning to buy but i cant choose hope you guys can help.
5891 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Imagination Land
Offline
Posted 3/12/08
Likes: Destroying pride. And playing online with friends of course. Plus a certain game or 2.

Dislikes: Reliabilty. It sucks; it seriously adds up against every good feature it has.

Is it worth buying an Xbox 360 nowadays??? NO, Unless you haven't got much to lose, or just wanna play Halo 3 and Gears. You only live once.

My advice for someone that doesn't want to feel ripped off: Get a PS3. HD DVD is also going down the drain, and upgrading an xbox costs tons. Its f**king stupid.

3564 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / NYC
Offline
Posted 3/12/08
the only thing i fear is the red ring.. nuf said
80215 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Seattle
Offline
Posted 3/13/08
Hmmm me personally, I like the gamerscore system. I think that is a cool little system. I also like games that are specifically developed for the system, not just general ports to every system.

Things I dislike, the system failure rate. The lack of backwards compatibility, well complete backwards compatibility. The lack of Wireless net connection being built in. The lack of easily upgradeble harddrives. The general targeted audience. The fact that I have to pay for online games.

For all who are saying that the PS3 is better. Well it is on SOOO many levels. The very first being the processor. The PS3 has an experimental 8 core server processor in it. As where the XBox only has a 3 core processor in it, I am not even sure it is one processor. Second the PS3 has Blu-ray as its main medium. As where XBox only has DVD, to add insult to injury the xbox can only read one layer of the DVDs. For those of you who do not know blu-ray holds 25 gigs per layer as where DVDs only hold 4.7 Gigs per layer. Older PS3s, the first batch of 60 gigs and 20 gigs have near perfect backwards compatibility, because it is built into the hardware. The PS3 uses bluetooth, meaning you can hook up any blue-tooth device to it. As far as I know the PS3 can use any for of solid state drive to save data too. The XBox I think can use flash drives?

More FYIs the PS3 sold 1 million units faster than the xbox. The PS3 has a lower failure rate. And finally Sony is planning on riding the PS3 for another 10 years. As where the XBox is going to die in the next year or so.

As for talks about games. Yes the XBox has more games than the PS3, then again in the PS3 was released 2 years ago it would not be far behind, probably even ahead. As for who wins with games. That is a matter of opinion. But in my humble opinion the PS3 wins. You see the XBox is basically full of FPS games. It is hard to find variety for the system, granted there are more coming out. While I doubt the PS3 will have anywhere near the library of the still living and going strong PS2. I have no doubt that in 2 years the PS3 will easily overtake the amount of games that the XBox has.

Overall if I the XBox is an acceptable system. It is probably not worth buying if you are not hardcore into gaming, or if you don't like FPS. In reality when you look at it the XBox has only one thing over the PS3 and that is XBox live. And well if Sony charged $15 a month for online service I know they would have passed XBox live. Seeing as how Sony actually cares about the people who buy it. Everyone knows Microsoft is just in the console wars because they want to make a buck. And they are making plenty of bucks off most of the morons who think the PS3 sucks. I mean hell their demographic is the kind that sues them everytime XBox Live goes down for Maintenance.
1487 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / next to my pc
Offline
Posted 3/14/08

anti-freeze wrote:

Hmmm me personally, I like the gamerscore system. I think that is a cool little system. I also like games that are specifically developed for the system, not just general ports to every system.

Things I dislike, the system failure rate. The lack of backwards compatibility, well complete backwards compatibility. The lack of Wireless net connection being built in. The lack of easily upgradeble harddrives. The general targeted audience. The fact that I have to pay for online games.

For all who are saying that the PS3 is better. Well it is on SOOO many levels. The very first being the processor. The PS3 has an experimental 8 core server processor in it. As where the XBox only has a 3 core processor in it, I am not even sure it is one processor. Second the PS3 has Blu-ray as its main medium. As where XBox only has DVD, to add insult to injury the xbox can only read one layer of the DVDs. For those of you who do not know blu-ray holds 25 gigs per layer as where DVDs only hold 4.7 Gigs per layer. Older PS3s, the first batch of 60 gigs and 20 gigs have near perfect backwards compatibility, because it is built into the hardware. The PS3 uses bluetooth, meaning you can hook up any blue-tooth device to it. As far as I know the PS3 can use any for of solid state drive to save data too. The XBox I think can use flash drives?

More FYIs the PS3 sold 1 million units faster than the xbox. The PS3 has a lower failure rate. And finally Sony is planning on riding the PS3 for another 10 years. As where the XBox is going to die in the next year or so.

As for talks about games. Yes the XBox has more games than the PS3, then again in the PS3 was released 2 years ago it would not be far behind, probably even ahead. As for who wins with games. That is a matter of opinion. But in my humble opinion the PS3 wins. You see the XBox is basically full of FPS games. It is hard to find variety for the system, granted there are more coming out. While I doubt the PS3 will have anywhere near the library of the still living and going strong PS2. I have no doubt that in 2 years the PS3 will easily overtake the amount of games that the XBox has.

Overall if I the XBox is an acceptable system. It is probably not worth buying if you are not hardcore into gaming, or if you don't like FPS. In reality when you look at it the XBox has only one thing over the PS3 and that is XBox live. And well if Sony charged $15 a month for online service I know they would have passed XBox live. Seeing as how Sony actually cares about the people who buy it. Everyone knows Microsoft is just in the console wars because they want to make a buck. And they are making plenty of bucks off most of the morons who think the PS3 sucks. I mean hell their demographic is the kind that sues them everytime XBox Live goes down for Maintenance.



your talk about the processor is complete bull shit, the ps3 cells are nearly usless as programmers dont nave the time to process on all 7 and 6 of them are abolsulty shit, xbox has more GAMING power, whereas the ps3 has mor e power in general (but most of it is wasted on the the wrong type of things) also the ps3 hasnt slod faster but allot slower as the concol advertised incorectly and is known to be a major FLOP, also PS3 will not have more exclusive in the next couple of years as it is FLOPPING meaning. devlopers will not choose them ,just like ubisoft didnt make the new splintercelll on the ps3 as it is not powerfull enough (gaming wise),"Overall if I the XBox is an acceptable system. It is probably not worth buying if you are not hardcore into gaming" in all honestly 360 has the most hardcore fanbass and the PS3 tries to sit inbetween in tyhe family market and hard core, most hardcore gamers have a 360 and people who lack knowledge about concols in generals PS3 or people who prefer sony. Granted the 360 has alot of shooter but know a new influx of rpgs and games are coming in.Sony is also in it to make a buck, which company wasted millions og millions of pounds-all i know not sony.



p.s, i like the PS3(360 just about tops it) but nearly all of your points are invallid and the games will be better for 360 as ps3 will be getting the 360 port overs.

360<ps3<wii
1524 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / where life's fina...
Offline
Posted 3/14/08
love the graphics and how you can talk to your friends download contents for your games, but i ahte it when anything technical goes wrong with it theres either the red rings of death or your disc tray gets messed up
80215 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Seattle
Offline
Posted 3/14/08

ali1238 wrote:

your talk about the processor is complete bull shit, the ps3 cells are nearly usless as programmers dont nave the time to process on all 7 and 6 of them are abolsulty shit, xbox has more GAMING power, whereas the ps3 has mor e power in general (but most of it is wasted on the the wrong type of things) also the ps3 hasnt slod faster but allot slower as the concol advertised incorectly and is known to be a major FLOP, also PS3 will not have more exclusive in the next couple of years as it is FLOPPING meaning. devlopers will not choose them ,just like ubisoft didnt make the new splintercelll on the ps3 as it is not powerfull enough (gaming wise),"Overall if I the XBox is an acceptable system. It is probably not worth buying if you are not hardcore into gaming" in all honestly 360 has the most hardcore fanbass and the PS3 tries to sit inbetween in tyhe family market and hard core, most hardcore gamers have a 360 and people who lack knowledge about concols in generals PS3 or people who prefer sony. Granted the 360 has alot of shooter but know a new influx of rpgs and games are coming in.Sony is also in it to make a buck, which company wasted millions og millions of pounds-all i know not sony.



p.s, i like the PS3(360 just about tops it) but nearly all of your points are invallid and the games will be better for 360 as ps3 will be getting the 360 port overs.

360<ps3<wii
It is true the PS3 is still new and not yet 100% optimized. But that is part of the process of learning how to program on new Hardware. The PS3 has 8, technically 7, 3.2 Ghz processors. The problem is a general understanding of how to program for the hardware. In reality you do not have to have each processor doing much. One core is more than enough to run the Graphics engine. The other six cores can be used for other smaller task, such as, reading and writing from the drive, running the network card, handling sound, and reading controller input.

As far as games go, you make it seem like I find the fact that splinter cell is not on the PS3 to be a lose. Sadly I am not your typical XBox fan. I do not need to constantly be killing something to enjoy the game, plus that franchise is a crappy franchise anyway. All consoles target specific audiences. All game developers know the audiences that the various game platforms target. The PS3 does not target the general kind of player that splinter cell targets. But in the end the XBox 360 is doomed. With the levels of data storage that the PS3 has the 360 is going to have a terrible time keeping up. To be honest I am still suprised that the 360 is still getting exclusive titles. The 360 is SEVERELY limited on their storage medium. Which is what is going to kill them. As much time is spent actually programming the game as it is spent compressing all the game data so it can fit on 4.7 gigs. As where with the PS3 they are still having trouble just taking up one layer of the disc. I believe the main reason that Grand Theft Auto 4 was delayed for so long was because the developers could not figure out how fit the game on one disc, most things I read said that the needed 3 minimum. As far as ports, yes most of the newer PS3 games will be ports. Because most companies started making their XBox games years before the PS3 came out. And it is easier to port a game then it is to redevelop it. Plus is it just me or do the ports look better on the PS3. Overall the PS3 is a new system. Just like the 360 was back in 2005. And if I recall the 360 had about as many exclusive titles on it as the PS3 does now.

As far as fan base goes. Let me just point out that I do not recall anyone being killed over and 360, correct me if I am wrong, but the 360's release was just a little wilder than the Wii's release because of the demographic the 360 was trying to sell too. Second I have noticed that when it comes to the XBox there is not really fans of the system. You are one of the first I have met. Most are fans of the individual franchises.

Sadly the 360 does not have the same potential the PS3 does. But hey if the 360 can last till 2017 and still be going strong, hey it is the better system. But more and more it is looking like this is the last year of the 360, even rumors fly around the industry that the 360 might be abandoned sooner. But lets see if good old MS proves me wrong.

1487 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / next to my pc
Offline
Posted 3/14/08

anti-freeze wrote:


ali1238 wrote:

your talk about the processor is complete bull shit, the ps3 cells are nearly usless as programmers dont nave the time to process on all 7 and 6 of them are abolsulty shit, xbox has more GAMING power, whereas the ps3 has mor e power in general (but most of it is wasted on the the wrong type of things) also the ps3 hasnt slod faster but allot slower as the concol advertised incorectly and is known to be a major FLOP, also PS3 will not have more exclusive in the next couple of years as it is FLOPPING meaning. devlopers will not choose them ,just like ubisoft didnt make the new splintercelll on the ps3 as it is not powerfull enough (gaming wise),"Overall if I the XBox is an acceptable system. It is probably not worth buying if you are not hardcore into gaming" in all honestly 360 has the most hardcore fanbass and the PS3 tries to sit inbetween in tyhe family market and hard core, most hardcore gamers have a 360 and people who lack knowledge about concols in generals PS3 or people who prefer sony. Granted the 360 has alot of shooter but know a new influx of rpgs and games are coming in.Sony is also in it to make a buck, which company wasted millions og millions of pounds-all i know not sony.



p.s, i like the PS3(360 just about tops it) but nearly all of your points are invallid and the games will be better for 360 as ps3 will be getting the 360 port overs.

360<ps3<wii
It is true the PS3 is still new and not yet 100% optimized. But that is part of the process of learning how to program on new Hardware. The PS3 has 8, technically 7, 3.2 Ghz processors. The problem is a general understanding of how to program for the hardware. In reality you do not have to have each processor doing much. One core is more than enough to run the Graphics engine. The other six cores can be used for other smaller task, such as, reading and writing from the drive, running the network card, handling sound, and reading controller input.

As far as games go, you make it seem like I find the fact that splinter cell is not on the PS3 to be a lose. Sadly I am not your typical XBox fan. I do not need to constantly be killing something to enjoy the game, plus that franchise is a crappy franchise anyway. All consoles target specific audiences. All game developers know the audiences that the various game platforms target. The PS3 does not target the general kind of player that splinter cell targets. But in the end the XBox 360 is doomed. With the levels of data storage that the PS3 has the 360 is going to have a terrible time keeping up. To be honest I am still suprised that the 360 is still getting exclusive titles. The 360 is SEVERELY limited on their storage medium. Which is what is going to kill them. As much time is spent actually programming the game as it is spent compressing all the game data so it can fit on 4.7 gigs. As where with the PS3 they are still having trouble just taking up one layer of the disc. I believe the main reason that Grand Theft Auto 4 was delayed for so long was because the developers could not figure out how fit the game on one disc, most things I read said that the needed 3 minimum. As far as ports, yes most of the newer PS3 games will be ports. Because most companies started making their XBox games years before the PS3 came out. And it is easier to port a game then it is to redevelop it. Plus is it just me or do the ports look better on the PS3. Overall the PS3 is a new system. Just like the 360 was back in 2005. And if I recall the 360 had about as many exclusive titles on it as the PS3 does now.

As far as fan base goes. Let me just point out that I do not recall anyone being killed over and 360, correct me if I am wrong, but the 360's release was just a little wilder than the Wii's release because of the demographic the 360 was trying to sell too. Second I have noticed that when it comes to the XBox there is not really fans of the system. You are one of the first I have met. Most are fans of the individual franchises.

Sadly the 360 does not have the same potential the PS3 does. But hey if the 360 can last till 2017 and still be going strong, hey it is the better system. But more and more it is looking like this is the last year of the 360, even rumors fly around the industry that the 360 might be abandoned sooner. But lets see if good old MS proves me wrong.



actually, if you knew anything about processors you would know that the ps3's power had been channeled very poorly(it also bottle necks slowing down all processes) and is not very well suited for a concol,splintercell is an example of ps3 losing exclusives and/or titles that come on both concoles,ps3 lack of ram is the reason why gta was delayed not the 360(you need to check up on this again as i am sure i am correct) also does a game really need to be on one disk (lost oydssey-4disks), yes i believe it is a pro but it does'nt matter too much.The ports will certainly continue for about 2/3 years which is when i will most likely get a PS3. People where killed over PS3 as it was so very hyped and didnt live up to it, i have seen many fans of the 360 but generraly hate microsoft. Potensial of both concoles have not been tapped and both will last for at least 4 years. Why should devlopers make games for a conclole with a smaller fans base and lose out of profits. 360 games have a better colours and are generally most appealing(look wise) to me, juat look for screen shots form nboth concols and compare

Posted 3/14/08

photonroger wrote:

i have only 1 question which is powerful in terms of processing 360 or ps3 because im planning to buy but i cant choose hope you guys can help.


the ps3 technically has more processing power....but for games the 360 and PS3 is equal


the PS3's cell processor has higher "floating point" compared to the 360, but floating point isnt used much in games, its more usefull in processing for HDTV's and stuff

and if you view comparison videos, the graphics are equal

in the end you should get a 360 if you like shooters/action and you should get a PS3 if you like RPG's/Adventure
303 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 3/14/08

mangoku wrote:


photonroger wrote:

i have only 1 question which is powerful in terms of processing 360 or ps3 because im planning to buy but i cant choose hope you guys can help.


the ps3 technically has more processing power....but for games the 360 and PS3 is equal


the PS3's cell processor has higher "floating point" compared to the 360, but floating point isnt used much in games, its more usefull in processing for HDTV's and stuff

and if you view comparison videos, the graphics are equal

in the end you should get a 360 if you like shooters/action and you should get a PS3 if you like RPG's/Adventure


well thanks but i want rpg and adventure games games coz it makes me imagine that im part of the game, so your saying i should go for ps3 if i want rpg games?? and why is that?? is xbox360 dont have good rpg games???

First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.