ps3 and 360 detailed technical analysis

[Zabka]

Des--I don't think Ratix was intending to insult you. I don't think anybody here would do so (except in jest with your freaky ass S&M Vader outfit!).

Ratix was just citing that Jan sales numbers that were published showed that the Wii was the biggest selling next gen console, the 360 next, and the PS3 very close behind the 360. The Wii continues to sell out. When I ask local game stores about supply they confirm the same thing---PS3s sit around for a while, Wiis go right out the door, and there is a healthy supply of 360s (as there should be so long into the launch). Of course my experience and yours are too small a sample size to draw any conclusions---so the sales numbers are more reliable.

At this point, I would think the PS3 should sell better than the 360. The 360 has an installed base of over 12mm. Early adoption is complete at this point. I would also think that the PS3 should have a good year this year due to pent up demand. None of this should come as a surprise to anybody, nor should it be seen as an indication of console dominance.

As for the store returns, it seems that a lot of the launch console of the 360 were just garbage. more recent ones shouldn't have the problems, although I hear you need to give any of them 6 mos to really screw up. Hopefully the 360 and the PS3s that were sold around the holidays don't have the same issue. Consumers deserve better than overheating powersupply bricks (360) and overheating blu ray components (PS3).

I admit that I am a 360 proponent because I would love to play some of these really good games online with more DSA. But I am not averse to getting the PS3 when the games (not just one) and the network justify the purchase and need for two libraries. To each their own. I just think that a lot of the arguments everybody uses to claim superiority are usually based on misinformation or conjecture (all of these business models will evolve, and I think we will all end up paying for a lot more things going forward). These developers and console manufacturers are in the business to make money. Watch for how we will start to see a lot more ads in our lobbies and even in our games. Monetization of the installed bases beyond game sales will be a big priority.

Fanboys will be fanboys---although I think it is hard to call any of us in DSA as xbox fanboys since the clan was FOUNDED as a PS2 clan. But for non-fanboys, the games have to drive it. Most games will be multi-platform. 360 has more exclusives--but Sony claims that they have finally put out some developer tools out there that will aid in development so that developers don't bypass the concept of exclusivity to the PS3. (At GDC, a Sony head honcho explained that Grand Theft Auto IV won't be exclusive to sony because the PS3 installed base at the time of launch (fall?) won't be big enough to justify the investment in the game. It's serious business here with lots of investment capital being put to work). Each platform has some highly appealing titles coming out.

[Deslock]

PS, Just because you can influence the few ppl in your store to buy the PS3, doesn't mean overall they are selling.

In all truth, I don't push any system over any other. I strictly go by what the customer is looking for in their gaming experiences. If they have a family and are looking for a kid/family friendly system, then I direct them to the Gamecube/WII. Nintendo has a fantastic library of kid games that are just wonderful, as long as getting online doesn't mean anything to them.

If they are looking for a large library of games, and the ability to get online with others, but they don't want the monthly fee, I'd prolly direct them to the PS2. It's dated, but it's a dependable work horse. Crap for online support and services, but then again, you get what you pay for, lol.
But then again, access to a library of over 8000 titles isn't anything to sneeze at.

The regular X-Box we don't even sell anymore, because I think Microsoft isn't making them anymore, and is re-directing all of their resources into the 360. And the 360 is a damn fine machine, once they got all the bugs worked out. Their online support is fantastic. Of that, I've not heard one complaint ever. But then again, people wouldn't pay for long for crappy service. At least not for long.

I don't have any problems with the machine or it's capabilites at all. It's Microsoft business practices that I have a problem with.

All truth be told, I have given serious, serious thought on getting one.

But the main draw back to me is the overall price. Once paying for the system, cables, X-box live, and a few games, it would damn near cost me the same amount of money to get a PS3, which will alllow me access to the entire ps2 library that I've already built up, and I will be able to get online with most games for free.

The Blu-Ray players we sell go for at least $1000.00. The PS3 is $600.00 and will play game discs, DVD's, PS2 discs, music CD's, and the ability to download movies, pictures and music. All for no charge to me the consumer.

Now what concerns me is the Blu-Ray. It's basically now an untested technology. It very well could be the century's next "Betamax".
But then again, I laughed when CD's came out over vinyl. Back then CD players were over $1000.00. Now you can get one as cheap as $30.00.

Now what's funny in regards to technology, The very first VCR I bought was used, and I bought it for $300.00, and that was a damn good deal at the time. Now you can buy them as cheap as $40.00. Now the funny part.

After all the VCR's I've had that took a crap on me and died, that old 80's top loader is still going strong as ever, and My Mom uses it all the time. Hell fire, the remote is on a cable, as they didn't have infrared at the time. But things weren't meant to be "disposable" as they are now.
You even have to manually find the frequency for tv channels through little wheels you have to turn. But Damn it, it still works like a trooper.
Go figure huh?

But overall, no, I'm not the big X-Box hater that RaTix thinks me to be.

Hell, it's rough for system developers out there. Every single manufactuer loses money on every system sold. Bill Gates has said that he loses money on every X-Box sold. Sony expects to lose a billion dollars with the PS3. Nintendo has made their systems as "barebones" as possible to diffray the cost financially to them. Hence no CD's, no backwards compatability, no dvd's, no online. They simply say "Hey, it's just for games. Dangerously incompentant in my opinion, but the again, I'm not on Nintendo's board of directors.

They make their money with game sales. Hence why I posted what I did. We as gamers, for our VERY hard earned money, should demand that games work as they should out of the box. With glitches removed as they are found, new maps, mods, and new content as it is developed.

FOR FREE!.

When cars are found to have severe problems, they are re-called to be fixed. In the gaming community, we're just told to "Deal with it", or even worse like LA, we're just ignored.

My gaming time to me is my "free time". and we all know there is nothing more precious than time. Not even money. I have no desire to spend my precious free time with cheaters, teamkillers, and glitchers.

That's why we're DSA.

Vote with your wallets, and send the game developers a serious message once and for all.

[Rdaug27]

[quote="Deslock"]

After all the VCR's I've had that took a crap on me and died, that old 80's top loader is still going strong as ever, and My Mom uses it all the time. Hell fire, the remote is on a cable, as they didn't have infrared at the time. But things weren't meant to be "disposable" as they are now.
You even have to manually find the frequency for tv channels through little wheels you have to turn. But Damn it, it still works like a trooper.
Go figure huh?

I don't think its even a VCR. The old ones were called VTR lol (Video Tape Recorder) kind of like the CPU and the PC lol. Those top loaders were HUGE and if I remember correctly the one we had had was tricked out with wood grain and stuff, not the plastic things we have now lol.

[Zabka]

But the main draw back to me is the overall price. Once paying for the system, cables, X-box live, and a few games, it would damn near cost me the same amount of money to get a PS3, which will alllow me access to the entire ps2 library that I've already built up, and I will be able to get online with most games for free.

Des--not trying to argue points, but just want to make points of clarification.

There are no cables to pay for on the 360. On the PS3, if you want to use HDMI for your HDTV, you have to buy the cable (they are expensive), but the 360 sadly doesn't even have an HDMI or a DVI jack. But the supporting cables are still more than capable but for the most distinquished of tastes of AV philes. That's why the PS3 has the jacks---because of blu-ray DVD. I will hold off on getting a next gen DVD player until a standard is selected. At this point, some movies come in blu-ray and some in HD-DVD, some in both. But until there is a standard, I won't spend a penny on the next player. No betamax or mini-CD or even UMD decisions for me until all DVDs come out in one format or another.

On the economics point--part of the point of getting the 360 is that you get the system and about 4 purchased games for the price of just one PS3 without any games (or 3 games and a year and a half of LIVE). That's what settled it (that and my friends were on the 360) for me when it became clear that PS3 game offerings were going to fall behind the 360 for at least another year or two. These games are not cheap and 4 good online games can keep you enthralled for a LONG time (look at how long many of us only played SWBF2 and Socom).

As for backwards compatability---I don't understand this point as an advantage. Unless somebody is trading their PS2 in for the credit to get the next system, there is nothing preventing them from continuing to use their old system. I have both of them set up to my TV and just need to change which ethernet cord goes into the wireless gaming adapter. My 360 doesn't play PS2 games, but my PS2 does! In reality, I only play my PS2 games to hang out with DSA anyway.

Final point about pay for play (MSFT business practices). $4 a month is less than the cost of one mcdonalds value meal. $4 doesn't buy you a beer at a bar. $4 is the news stand price for a lot of magazines. To me--that is an amazingly small price to pay for the superior server quality and LIVE networking capabilities. Especially when I have spent a lot more on DSA servers in the past---for our supposedly "free" PS2 games.

Maybe people forget, but the DSA spends $125 a month in servers. Not everyone can pay (somewhat understandable), or in some cases, people are free riders---and you will hear no complaints from those that do pay. However, the Sony solution resulted in us needing to pay for our own servers and in fact the company provided servers were taken down in a matter of months after launch. if you want to talk about poor business practices, SWBF2 has been the biggest ripoffs of gaming I have ever seen. Ratix recently had hundreds of dollars taken out of his account because our server funds were low. It bothers me when people say that Sony has free online and MSFT doesn't. Sony doesn't support their games---and so we have collectively spent more on our servers than if all the active DSA players got an xbox LIVE account. And the orig xbox still has SWBF2 servers available. And to be honest, without DSA servers, I don't know if any of us would be playing SWBF2.

So the value proposition is weak to me.

[Kerry2]

Zabka - I have played GoW on a 36 inch HD and it is incredibly awesome!!!! The game looks so crystal clear it's ridiculous. Hell I go over to my friends place just to play on the HD!!

Bah, nancy boys and your puny tv screens. Every tues, thurs, and sun., my ass is planted in front of my Sony 57" HDTV. It's quite nice.

[FLATLINE]

So Sony and Microsoft put out systems I believe they both claim to lose money on or just not make a profit on. I seem to remember another company called GM who had a strategy like this. They lost money on the cars but made money on trucks. Wheres GM now? Fighting off bankruptcy. GM also had a strategy of producing cars that just plain sucked. Design was horrible and they always had quality issues. Sony and Microsoft both have issues with design in my opinion since I cant nicely fit either of thier systems in my entertainment center. My slim line looks retarded among my High powered Sorround System. And im contsantly repairing or replacing my gaming equipment. Sounds alot like a GM Car too me. Maybe Toyota or Honda can build a gaming system the way it should be. The worst part for me is now I can only seem to get excited about games that are online capable with a co-op feature as well. The problem with online gaming is everyone in the world realizes now that online gaming is here to stay except for the ISP's Upload speeds no matter who you have is way off base compared to download speeds. Those two numbers should be closer together. I have Time Warner and While I have been generally pleased with my service i dont need crazy download speeds. I be more than glad to trade off some of my download speed for more upload speed. It seeems to me too much of the work needs to be handled by the server and iff your the guy with the worst connection you can possibly ruin the gaming experience for everyone else causing lag. This is just Dumb. So its not always just about Sony Vs. Microsoft. They can both have a spot in my entertainment center if they get things right. Heres my advice to the manufacturers. Work with the ISP's tell them whats needed for gaming. Because the ISP's dont listen to us. Design a system you can live with. Make some money thats what your in business for. Dont go crazy we dont need a super computer. But we do want to see some progress. We dont want patched games. Make sure they are done before release!!!!! MORE CO-OP Please!!!!!!!. There should never be a war game that isnt Co-Op and Online capable.

[Kerry2]

GM is a long way off from bankrupcy. Their smaller offshoot companies like Delphi are going through it but remember, bankrupcy in the corporate world is a far distant cousin to personal bankrupcy. And GM's financial problems are less the result of poor quality and more the result of overextending themselves on employee benifit packages and compensations. Keep in mind, General Motors is just a parent company, they own a half dozen other car lines that you might not ever think off such as SAAB, and even are responsible for Toyota's survival in the american market. They also own several electronics companies including Hughes (SP?) also known as Direct TV. They have huge stakes in the sattelite radio market and many many other companies you would never associate with a Chevy cavalier. All of these companies have millions of retired employees that are now drawing retirement checks and still recieving medical benifits all on GM's dime.

As for the ISP's conforming to gamers needs, don't hold your breath. We are still a small concept in their eyes. Though I'm sure they have recently taken notice of the surge in online gaming you must remember that we are not thier number 1 user base. And try as we might I seriously doubt we will ever catch up to Porn on that front.

[madmax32]

Bah, I despise GM for discontinuing the camaro. Anywho.... If the price of the PS3 was the same as a 360, would that have any influence on you guys?

[Rdaug27]

I will hold off on getting a next gen DVD player until a standard is selected. At this point, some movies come in blu-ray and some in HD-DVD, some in both. But until there is a standard, I won't spend a penny on the next player. No betamax or mini-CD or even UMD decisions for me until all DVDs come out in one format or another.

Hopefully this post wont get us off topic too much, but someone did come out with a player that plays both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray 8O

http://us.lge.com/superblu/

[Zabka]

Bah, I despise GM for discontinuing the camaro. Anywho.... If the price of the PS3 was the same as a 360, would that have any influence on you guys?

Actually, not for me. The price isn't the issue for me. It was driven by two things for me---where my friends are (both DSA and non) and game titles. While I have a couple of PS3 owning friends, more of them have gone the 360 route (and some of these are old friends of mine I don't get to see often) and LIVE has been a great enhancement for people who use games also as a way to hang out with buddies. So that was a big part.

The second thing was the big playstation magazine that I was sent around the end of 2006 from Sony that highlighted all of its launches for the following year on the PS3---it was basically the PS3 launch magazine. I saw only a handful of exclusives and most were not of interest to me (RFOM and Warhawk were of interest). The rest of the titles all had release dates after the 360. I just decided the system needed more time to mature. After all, I never thought the 360 was worth it until around the holiday season which is when a lot of new titles starting coming out---but for the entire 12 months preceding, I only saw one title that seemed interesting to me (GRAW)---so I never got the 360 earlier.

The difference in cost, I could justify in terms of having a blu-ray player. I don't know if that is going to be the standard or not, and it could turn out to be a bust. But in the near term, I would view it as early adoption of Hi Def DVD for only $200 (while assigning the rest of the price to the gaming system at a rate equivalent to the 360). Value-wise, I am not one of those who thinks of what a ripoff the ps3 is--it costs a lot of money, but I understand where it comes from.

But to be honest, pricing did not impact my decision---the impact of the pricing difference (probably 3 game titles and a year of LIVE) would certainly be compelling for a year, but over a 3 year haul, it isn't that meaningful in my eyes.

[Kerry2]

Actually pricing is exactly the same when you think about it.

PS3 fully loaded $600

Xbox 360 premium - $400
360 HD DVD drive - $200

They come out the same. Most people like the 360 due to the fact that if you don't have the $400 up front you can buy the core system and upgrade it, something that Sony doesn't offer. My choice was made for me luckily but I'm glad that it was. Looking back on it, as Zabka said there just aren't enough good titles out there that would sway me to buy a PS3. Given a little time and the hope that Sony doesn't bomb this like they did Beta Max and Mini Disc I might buy a PS3. But in my situation I could not justify the $600 for the few exclusive titles they offer and the ability to play blu ray discs. I haven't even bought my HD DVD drive yet and probably wont until I see which way the High Deff DVD market goes. I can pretty well promise you that we will see only one format emerge victorious and it would be my luck that I would pick the wrong one.

On the pay to play issue, again Zabka pretty well hit the nail on the head. I honestly don't mind paying a subscription fee of $50 a year to play online so long as the service provider keeps everything working properly and patches flowing in to fix bugs. So far Microsoft has done that well, even though my 360 crashed last night I was impressed with the ease and ergonomics of their customer service system. I hadn't even registered my 360, yet they gladly registered it for me right then and processed the warranty claim. Yeah I'm out $9 to ship it to Texas but that's worth it for not having the headache of fighting with a company because I don't have the sales reciept.

They realized that the first run of 360's had major problems so the extended everyones warranty from 90 day to a year. I love the ability to download old school arcade games and have some nostalgic game time. Yeah it would be nice to have some dedicated servers but that's an acceptable loss in my book.

I'm not trying to knock the PS3 in any way, I think it's a great system with a lot of potential, it's just not the right system for me at this time.

[Deslock]

The difference in cost, I could justify in terms of having a blu-ray player. I don't know if that is going to be the standard or not, and it could turn out to be a bust. But in the near term, I would view it as early adoption of Hi Def DVD for only $200 (while assigning the rest of the price to the gaming system at a rate equivalent to the 360). Value-wise, I am not one of those who thinks of what a ripoff the ps3 is--it costs a lot of money, but I understand where it comes from.

This concerns me as well. I'll more than likely have my PS3 in a few days time. The Blu-Ray player that we sell now, goes for $1000.00 plus tax.
The PS3 will allow you to play them, play PS2 and PS3 games, surf the internet, play regular dvd's and cd's.

But the fact about the blu-Ray being a new and better format for movies worries me a bit. Let's not forget that in the 80's, in a side by side comparison Betamax was actually superior to VHS. But look who won that battle. Once again, due to bad decision makings by Sony.

Note that the touted UMD format that exploded last year for the PSP was a total, absolute flop. Once again due to bad decision making from Sony.

When gamers looked at the price tag of the PSP: $249.00 at the time, and they saw that the price tag for the X-Box 360 core system was $299.99, Which one would you go for? A Hi-def system that let's you get online with your buddies, with lots of support, or a small, hard to see hand held, that has a screen that's easily, and I mean easily, scratched or cracked? Well duh!!!!

Which is why PSP's have become dust catchers in my store. We rarely, if ever sell them. Even with the recent price drop.

Blu-Ray at this point could easily be the world's next DVD, or the next Betamax.

At my store we no longer carry ANY UMD movies, and only one Blu-Ray movie, X-Men 3. I know that a standard Blu-Ray disc can hold up to six movies, on a disc that DVD's can only hold one. Although Blu-Ray may be the next best thing, will Sony promote it right? They have some good track records, and some really bad ones. Betamax and UMD totally flopped, even though they were technically "better".

Sony's official Playstation magazine was dropped. Period. That bothers me. It shows me that Sony has turned their backs on all the players on their old system. And I think that to set up all the new PS3's for Europe now can't play PS2 games will bite them severely on the ass. In my opinion, that's a mistake of truly "Nintendo" sized proportions.

Only time will tell if Sony did the right thing. Remember, Nintendo was "Top Dawg" in the day, but due to bad, and I mean BAD corporate decisons, damn near crippled them completely and almost put them out of the market forever. It was only the Gameboy, and mostly Pokemon, that saved their asses at the time. And to this day, Nintendo is still making hugely stupid decisions.

[FLATLINE]

I love threads like this cuz I learn more about these systems from users like you guys than I do anywhere else. Ive never really considered X Box but I now have some things to think about? They have BattleFront II for X Box right? How is it? Better or worse than PS2's ?

[Zabka]

SWBF2 as a game is much better on xbox (not a 360 title) but it is playable on 360. You can download a map pack for less than $4 that includes some of the best maps from SWBF1--the two Rhen Vars, Bespin platforms, and I believe Yavin Arena. There are two new jedi in there, Kit Fisto and somebody else who have different force powers. There are multiple maps to play jedi on, not just tatooine. You can host a game with lots of AI to keep the "epic feeling" that many of us prefer despite the fact that AI aren't all that bright.

On the flip side, you also have theability as host to do a lot of things you do from a dedicated server. However, I don't know if the xbox can hold the 24 that we can get on our servers. Also, we use our servers admin msg capabilities in practice all the time to communicate the start of a match, etc--something you can't do with the xbox. Overall, it is better---it was patched and then expanded. The PS2 never even got a freaking patch. The support that SWBF2 got on PS2 is one of my big disappointments.

[Zabka]

This concerns me as well. I'll more than likely have my PS3 in a few days time.

Excellent Des. Now if we could just get you playing at normal people's time, you and Boss could get the PS3 effort going. That would put three senior DSA on the PS3 with one junior person. That's a good start. Since DH hates FPS, he doesn't play RFOM, so hopefully there will soon be a game that all of you can play together.

Both GRAW2 and RB6 will be available on the PS3 within months. GRAW2 is 3rd person, and RB6 is first person, but unlike any other I have played. You guys could consider getting on those games and then getting the DSA PS3 division cooking. GRAW2 is a very good game--very much like what socom should be, but isn't quite. RB6 is the most fun shooter I have ever played---but does not include vehicles, so for those that seek that, it is less interesting.

I hope between Des, Boss, DH, and Steven, you guys can start getting organized and playing together on some next gen titles and get into position to start some recruiting as more come into your fold.