[socialnu2]

Nintendo Wii, Microsoft Xbox360 Or Sony Playstation3

[GG-Xtreme]

Before an argument starts, I am not a PS3 fanboy, or a fanboy of any console, I am a PC gamer who has played a great deal of games on all 3 consoles and has had time to mess with them.

Everything else aside, as a console, the PS3 is a clear winner.
Strong Points:
-Future-proof Hardware: It's hardware will outperform and outlast both of the other consoles.
-Blu-ray: The standard and only remaining HD disc format.
-Mouse and keyboard support: Control that surpasses any joypad.
-Media: The best media-center experience of all 3 consoles.
-Networking: Not only is PS3 network connectivity free, but you can stream everything from media to games to a PSP wirelessly from any hotspot in the world.
-Games: Some of the best and most unique games of any console (ie. LittleBigPlanet, GT5 - not unique, but superior to racing simulators on other platforms)
-Open platform: The PS3 is completely open to free modding -- from game add-ons to installing Linux on the PS3 hard-drive.
-Reliabilty: I know more than 10 people who have owned PS3's for almost a year now and haven't had one problem.
Weak Points:
-Multiplayer Experience: Not as many online players as the 360, online implementation is not as full-featured as XBL.
-Controller: The six-axis isn't a comfortable joypad at all. At least it has motion-sensitivity (and there's usually the mouse and keyboard option).
-Popularity: Not many of the good PS3 games are as popular as games for other platforms.

[SilentKayos]

The 360 has the best games. You'd be silly not to think it was the best console this gen.

[GG-Xtreme]

Originally Posted by SilentKayos

The 360 has the best games. You'd be silly not to think it was the best console this gen.

Many people I know, including many 360 owners disagree with that statement completely. The Halo series is overall mediocre, the only game I can acknowledge as 'good' is GoW, everything else is either available on another platform with better gameplay, or not worth mentioning.

[burner35]

Xbox 360 has topped sale records and is still topping them.

PS3 is completely stopped not many people now can afford a console that expensive. $1000+ ... :( Get real Sony. Everything sony has made is a complete disaster on opening day.

In Australia:
Xbox 360 - 800,000+
PS3 - Below an average of 120,000-

So xbox 360 i still going strong and is still the number one Gen Console out now.

[Spartan Erik]

Too many threads about this, but here are my two cents.

The 360 is the best console in terms of available games, it's selection is unbeatable.
the PS3 is the best console in terms of potential and raw hardware capability.

I consider both consoles good challengers

[unpixelatedgamers]

Originally Posted by GG-Xtreme

Everything else aside, as a console, the PS3 is a clear winner.

Respectfully, I disagree.

Strong Points:

-Future-proof Hardware: It's hardware will outperform and outlast both of the other consoles.

Outperform? In theory, yes, the CPU inside the PS3 (the Cell) is more powerful than that in the 360 and certainly the Wii. However, the graphics card (the RSX) despite what Sony would have you believe, is not as powerful, or as advanced, as the 360s Zenos. This has been proven time and time again with direct side-by-side comparisons of games which appear on both platforms. Either they are entirely equal, or the 360 versions look marginally better.

Nevermind the fact that I've heard of several instances where PS3 developers are having to nick some power from the Cell to prop up the RSXs rendering power. Thereby diminishing both the theoretical processing power lead, and actual performance.

-Blu-ray: The standard and only remaining HD disc format.

That makes it a DVD player. Not a console. In fact, for a console, it was a bad choice.

Sure, you can get more stuff on there with less compression than the standard DVD used by the 360 or the Wii. However, you're still entirely restricted by both your size of memory, and your transfer bandwidth.

In the case of transfer bandwidth, the Blu-ray spec implemented by the PS3 is overall slower, than a DVD9. Ergo: Longer loading times. Case in point: GTA IV for the PS3 has a mandatory partial-install. While the 360 version does not.

(As an aside, when MS updates the dash with the NXE interface, that will bring with it the feature to install the entire game to the harddrive, to further improve loading times)

Even if you do need the extra space, say for some long HD CGI cinematic movie sequences, (read: Eastern RPGs), multi-disc games are not unheard of. Blue Dragon for the 360 was multi-disc. And the only thing that changed from disc to disc was the cinematic videos. The entire gameworld was still present on each disc. Sims 2 for the PC, in its CD version, was no-less than 4 discs.

If the content is worth it, gamers will put up with disc-changing.

More over, its rather an odd thing to say the Blu-ray is an advantage really. Its made it far more expensive than the other two, and in terms of a democratic vote, most people obviously don't think blu-ray is all that. (2/3 consoles DON'T have it. 4/5 current gen console owners DON'T have it. and lets not even go into the whole HD penetration thing, since HDTV is still extremely niche, let alone people that actually put HD content on their HD sets).

-Mouse and keyboard support: Control that surpasses any joypad.

First point: How many games for the PS3 support mouse and keyboard controls? I'm not sure myself, but I'm guessing the answer is: "Not many".
So, if you're not going to be using it most of the time, how is it an advantage.

Indeed, the Wii has near-mouse control from the hardware up.

Second point: For many people, its not just about "control" its about having fun. *points at broad range of dance mats, steering wheels, joysticks and not to mention, gamepads available on the market*


Third point: Most games consoles are going to be in a living room or bedroom. Not somewhere with a desk. Having to use (or feeling like I have to use, simply to compete in MP) a mouse and keyboard, with a desk, in my gaming-space is not thought I'd like to persue.

Perhaps for you its different. Since as a PC gamer you're entirely accustomed to sitting at a desk to play games. But that just feels to much like work to me.

-Media: The best media-center experience of all 3 consoles.

Debateable. The 360 is certainly a close second even if the PS3 is the best. You've got ya-know, actual windows media centre integration. Streaming... anything. Movie rentals straight to your harddrive, and on some ISPs, it can act as a HDTV receiver.

But I digress, how does this make it a better games consoles as stated in your original point?

-Networking: Not only is PS3 network connectivity free, but you can stream everything from media to games to a PSP wirelessly from any hotspot in the world.

Honestly, how many people have PSPs? More people use their mobile phones to stream video and music from websites now-a-days.

Largely a useless feature I my eyes.

Oh, and network connectivity is free on the Wii. Even internet connectivity is free.

Of course, for the 360 you have to pay a premium if, and only if, you want play against/with other people over the internet. Everything else is there still free.

-Games: Some of the best and most unique games of any console (ie. LittleBigPlanet, GT5 - not unique, but superior to racing simulators on other platforms)

Lul, GT5. You're sadly deluded if you think GT5 takes the cake in terms of simulation. That goes to Forza 2 if anything.

Heck, if you wanted "some of" the best and most unique games, you should honestly be telling people to buy a pimped out PC. There are millions and millions of unique games there.

Littlebigplanet sounds interesting sure, but how many people are going to be buying it? Honestly.

360 on the other hand, has loads of good games. Many great games. Certainly more than the PS3.

-Open platform: The PS3 is completely open to free modding -- from game add-ons to installing Linux on the PS3 hard-drive.

Ever heard of XNA?

But Linux, how does that make it a better console? A more versatile machine sure. A PC even, but there aren't exactly many games for Linux now are there?

-Reliabilty: I know more than 10 people who have owned PS3's for almost a year now and haven't had one problem.

Granted, the 360 has had its problems. But nothing that a quick call to MS and a few weeks not-gaming won't fix. Certainly if you buy a newer, or new console, you might not experience these problems at all.

The Wii, has had no hardware trouble to my knowledge. Apart from some wrist-straps breaking early on. Again, those are fixed now.

Weak points:
-Multiplayer Experience: Not as many online players as the 360, online implementation is not as full-featured as XBL.

If you're serious about MP gaming, or even thinking about getting into it, this is a serious strike against the PS3. Whats the point in spend more on a system than either of the other two, if you can't even play with your buddies online easily?



Anyway, overall: considering the potential of the console, the peripherals, the online service, stuff thats coming, and most importantly; the choice and quality of games, its clearly got to be:

Xbox 360

Wait, why the hell do I always make massive posts in this forum?

[Smith6612]

Awww, there's no PC in this poll. Otherwise, I'd have to say the PS3. The hardware itself is already a lot stronger than the other consoles, and the internet connectivity is free. Not to mention, you can put Windows on a PS3 as well! Also, Blu-Ray even though it's a bit slow is the win!

[SilentKayos]

Originally Posted by GG-Xtreme

Many people I know, including many 360 owners disagree with that statement completely. The Halo series is overall mediocre, the only game I can acknowledge as 'good' is GoW, everything else is either available on another platform with better gameplay, or not worth mentioning.

The majority of the gaming community disagrees with you and the "many people" you know. That's the reality of it.

It's a fact that the 360 has the best games out for the current generation systems. It's also a fact that it's the most supported console by 3rd party developers.

If you seriously think the PS3 has better games, I'd like to hear why you even think that. Naming two games is great and all but there is a hell of a lot of games in the 360s library.

[GG-Xtreme]

Originally Posted by burner35

Xbox 360 has topped sale records and is still topping them.

Not true, you'd better check the latest records.

Originally Posted by burner35

PS3 is completely stopped not many people now can afford a console that expensive. $1000+ ... :( Get real Sony. Everything sony has made is a complete disaster on opening day.

I live in NY, and the PS3 is cheaper than the 360 where I live.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Outperform? In theory, yes, the CPU inside the PS3 (the Cell) is more powerful than that in the 360 and certainly the Wii. However, the graphics card (the RSX) despite what Sony would have you believe, is not as powerful, or as advanced, as the 360s Zenos. This has been proven time and time again with direct side-by-side comparisons of games which appear on both platforms. Either they are entirely equal, or the 360 versions look marginally better.

Nevermind the fact that I've heard of several instances where PS3 developers are having to nick some power from the Cell to prop up the RSXs rendering power. Thereby diminishing both the theoretical processing power lead, and actual performance.

That brings up the similar argument in the PC gaming universe: should future games put demand better processors or faster graphics cards? The argument can go either way. If the processor is fast enough to support raytracing, then there's no need for rasterization on the GPU end, taking off a huge load.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

That makes it a DVD player. Not a console. In fact, for a console, it was a bad choice.

Sure, you can get more stuff on there with less compression than the standard DVD used by the 360 or the Wii. However, you're still entirely restricted by both your size of memory, and your transfer bandwidth.

In the case of transfer bandwidth, the Blu-ray spec implemented by the PS3 is overall slower, than a DVD9. Ergo: Longer loading times. Case in point: GTA IV for the PS3 has a mandatory partial-install. While the 360 version does not.

(As an aside, when MS updates the dash with the NXE interface, that will bring with it the feature to install the entire game to the harddrive, to further improve loading times)

Even if you do need the extra space, say for some long HD CGI cinematic movie sequences, (read: Eastern RPGs), multi-disc games are not unheard of. Blue Dragon for the 360 was multi-disc. And the only thing that changed from disc to disc was the cinematic videos. The entire gameworld was still present on each disc. Sims 2 for the PC, in its CD version, was no-less than 4 discs.

If the content is worth it, gamers will put up with disc-changing.

More over, its rather an odd thing to say the Blu-ray is an advantage really. Its made it far more expensive than the other two, and in terms of a democratic vote, most people obviously don't think blu-ray is all that. (2/3 consoles DON'T have it. 4/5 current gen console owners DON'T have it. and lets not even go into the whole HD penetration thing, since HDTV is still extremely niche, let alone people that actually put HD content on their HD sets).

Since you can already install games to the PS3 hard drive to surpass 360 loading times, I don't see the problem. About cost and the rest of your argument, that would probably fit into my 'future-proof' point--I doubt that in 4 years from now, HD will still be such a small niche.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

First point: How many games for the PS3 support mouse and keyboard controls? I'm not sure myself, but I'm guessing the answer is: "Not many".
So, if you're not going to be using it most of the time, how is it an advantage.

Indeed, the Wii has near-mouse control from the hardware up.

Second point: For many people, its not just about "control" its about having fun. *points at broad range of dance mats, steering wheels, joysticks and not to mention, gamepads available on the market*


Third point: Most games consoles are going to be in a living room or bedroom. Not somewhere with a desk. Having to use (or feeling like I have to use, simply to compete in MP) a mouse and keyboard, with a desk, in my gaming-space is not thought I'd like to persue.

Perhaps for you its different. Since as a PC gamer you're entirely accustomed to sitting at a desk to play games. But that just feels to much like work to me.

Your points are completely valid, but mouse and keyboard support is one of the reasons you can install Linux on a PS3, and most good games do support them.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Debateable. The 360 is certainly a close second even if the PS3 is the best. You've got ya-know, actual windows media centre integration. Streaming... anything. Movie rentals straight to your harddrive, and on some ISPs, it can act as a HDTV receiver.

But I digress, how does this make it a better games consoles as stated in your original point?

The thread is not 'Best Current Gen. Console for Games', it's 'Best Current Gen. Console'. All aspects must be considered.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Honestly, how many people have PSPs? More people use their mobile phones to stream video and music from websites now-a-days.

Largely a useless feature I my eyes.

I have one, and while it's pretty unpopular, the ability to stream PS1 and even PS3 games to a PSP is unique. I use my PSP as a mobile VOIP phone as well (homebrew FTW).

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Oh, and network connectivity is free on the Wii. Even internet connectivity is free.

Actually, you have to pay to install the Opera browser on the Wii (unless you are in Europe and you have 2000 star points).

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Of course, for the 360 you have to pay a premium if, and only if, you want play against/with other people over the internet. Everything else is there still free.

Then explain why games like UT3 have no mod support on the 360.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Lul, GT5. You're sadly deluded if you think GT5 takes the cake in terms of simulation. That goes to Forza 2 if anything.

That may be subjective, but I found GT5 to be superior in terms of realism.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Heck, if you wanted "some of" the best and most unique games, you should honestly be telling people to buy a pimped out PC. There are millions and millions of unique games there.

Littlebigplanet sounds interesting sure, but how many people are going to be buying it? Honestly.

I would tell people to buy a PC instead, it would be the best choice, but it seemed OT for this thread.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

360 on the other hand, has loads of good games. Many great games. Certainly more than the PS3.

I think you meant to say that the 360 has more publicized games than the PS3. I've found that most of the 'popular' 360 games are pretty lame and overrated.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Ever heard of XNA?

But Linux, how does that make it a better console? A more versatile machine sure. A PC even, but there aren't exactly many games for Linux now are there?

If it can run Linux, it can run Windows.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Granted, the 360 has had its problems. But nothing that a quick call to MS and a few weeks not-gaming won't fix. Certainly if you buy a newer, or new console, you might not experience these problems at all.

I know 5 people that have owned 360's. 4 of them have had the red-ring-of-death once, and the 5th person has had it twice. Should a smart shopper really overlook that?

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

If you're serious about MP gaming, or even thinking about getting into it, this is a serious strike against the PS3. Whats the point in spend more on a system than either of the other two, if you can't even play with your buddies online easily?

I'm against MP on consoles completely. I find the online environment to be poisoned with stupidity and immaturity, and people tend to play more for points and ranks than for friendly competition. As a PC gamer, this isn't what I like my MP experience to be.

Originally Posted by SilentKayos

The majority of the gaming community disagrees with you and the "many people" you know. That's the reality of it.

It's a fact that the 360 has the best games out for the current generation systems. It's also a fact that it's the most supported console by 3rd party developers.

If you seriously think the PS3 has better games, I'd like to hear why you even think that. Naming two games is great and all but there is a hell of a lot of games in the 360s library.

I don't play sports games. Maybe because I'm a PC gamer, my standards for different types of games are different, but IMO, the entire Halo series sucks. The remaining games are either on other platforms, in which case I'd rather have it on the PC or PS3, or they're not worth mentioning. The only PS3 exclusive games I'd play are probably GT5 and MGS4, but I can't think of any 360 exclusives I like (GoW is on the PC too, so it doesn't count).