PDA

View Full Version : 360 or PS3



Agassi52
01-07-2010, 06:16 PM
So, which console do you use?
are there any differences between the two?
just thought it would be fun cuz you see some ppl giving advice with ps3 controls and some with 360 controls

Fenro
01-08-2010, 01:37 AM
PS3, i boycott Xbox 360 for several reasons.

one reason being the illegal marketing tricks microsoft uses, seariously they pay alot of fines due to this :P

second reason (pay to play online)

third, its overaly more prone to get broken than PS3

And ive played with Playstation since PS1 and ive gotten used to the good ol ps controller http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif and i never liked how Xbox controller fitted my hand :P + it sucks in Fighting games, (Street fighter is horrible with it, just horrible) = its slightly better in FPS games though but not by much.

Many had an issue with the price diference which PS3 and Xbox had, but now that ive used my PS3 for over 2 years the Free online has pretty much payed the whole console back :P

Plus few of the greatest exclusives around, MGS4, Infamous, KillZone2. and the upcoming FF XII versus and God of War III.

i have to say that the array is alot more interesting than Xbox has to offer, so far the only 2 things Xbox had exclusively which i would have wanted where Fable 2 and the DLC content for GTA4

Jahchurch
01-12-2010, 03:03 PM
He asked for playing assassins creed II specifically, not which system is better then the other. I have both versions of the game..ps3 and 360...and i feel both have their downs and ups. For one 360's graphics look a little darker and sharper then the ps3, and also supposedly has less graphical bugs. However the PS3 in my opinion runs a bit smoother from what i played of it. I've heard that people on the PS3 has more FPS drops then the 360 while playing AC2 but after what i've experienced the PS3 is actual smoother. It could be cause it has a triple core, or was it quad...i kinda forgot.

caswallawn_2k7
01-12-2010, 03:15 PM
I play on the PS3 but really from a game standpoint the only difference between the 360 version and the PS3 version is that the PS3 can link up with Assassins Creed Bloodlines on the PSP to unlock several weapons.

besides that the only thing that really matters on on choosing one version over the other is your preference of controller.

as for the problems both consoles have some problems just a lot of people are really over hyping the problems as they are nowhere near as bad as some people would have you believe, after the last patch you are very unlucky if you find a game breaking problem on either console. (is the odd corrupt save but that is the hardware)

InfernalTyrant
01-12-2010, 04:16 PM
PS3, because it's cheaper and I don't see any advantages of the 360 over it, and I highly prefer the controller.

katz_bg
01-12-2010, 05:18 PM
Originally posted by InfernalTyrant:
PS3, because it's cheaper and I don't see any advantages of the 360 over it, and I highly prefer the controller. It may be cheaper where you live, but in my country their games have the same prices.
I only have a PS3. Everyone tell me I'm crazy to not buy the 360, because I can't pirate games on this one. At least I can afford 2-3 games per year... at the cost of not saving-up for a hdtv.

the amolang
01-12-2010, 05:45 PM
Originally posted by InfernalTyrant:
PS3, because it's cheaper and I don't see any advantages of the 360 over it, and I highly prefer the controller.

ha, where I live a ps3 is nearly twice the price of an xbox (and that's after the price drop after ps3 slim was announced) and games are about a hundred bucks each on average.

InfernalTyrant
01-12-2010, 07:53 PM
Well what I meant was that for my purpose, the PS3 turns out being cheaper. I live in Australia.
The 120GB PS3 console is $500. (I got a bundle with the 250GB and Assassin's Creed 2, Need for Speed Undercover and Battlefield Bad Company for $600.) Now that comes with wireless and free online.
The 120GB XBOX costs $450, then Assassin's Creed 2 is another $100, a wireless adapter is another $120 and then 12 months of LIVE is $90.

So $600 for the PS3 with everything I wanted, or $760 for the 360 with everything I wanted, AND I get an extra 130GB.

KZarr
01-13-2010, 06:36 AM
Originally posted by amolang:

ha, where I live a ps3 is nearly twice the price of an xbox
Maybe not twice the price, but over here the cheapest 360= E150,00 and the cheapest PS3 E270,00.

InfernalTyrant
01-13-2010, 06:39 AM
Originally posted by KZarr:Maybe not twice the price, but over here the cheapest 360= E150,00 and the cheapest PS3 E270,00.
You can't really compare like that though.
Because the cheapest XBOX doesn't have a HDD, so it's going to be much cheaper.

ranma6899
01-14-2010, 03:10 AM
ps3 because my ps2 has lasted 12 years or more ,xbox got problems my orginal xbox died 2 years

i trust sony more then xbox360

TwinIltani
01-14-2010, 03:20 AM
I have the game on both systems. PS3 is my preference because of the controller - it's slimmer, and thus easier for me to handle.

Jahchurch
01-14-2010, 07:22 AM
The ps2 had an advantage over the xbox in controller wise, but since 360 i just love the new controller. It fits in my hands like a glove. The offset thumb analog sticks are put in the perfect position. The ps3 analog sticks still seems to off, i have to really reach for the left stick to use it, instead of the natural feel like the 360's. But back on the topic, assassins creed visual wise looks better on the 360 for me, and i hate how you have to install every f'n game on the ps3, whats up with that?

sgt_brent
01-14-2010, 07:26 AM
To be honest, I do 95% of my gaming on my 360.. I like it better.. I do a lot of in-game voice chatting with friends.. So that is obviously a big issue I have with PS3.. Which is ******ED..

Every game I buy is for 360 unless it's a decent PS3 exclusive.. That is a non-biased decision.. I just personally prefer the 360.. Although I love how quiet the PS3 is! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

And I KNOW - The downloads and loading on PS3.. A buddy and I were just complaining about that last night, as he just got one.. Any game you rent you have to, generally, spend an hour or 2 downloading and installing something.. I HATE that.. And I COMPLETELY agree about the controllers, Jahchurch - The 360 fits like a glove, where as the PS3 is just too small and awkward.. Eugh..

caswallawn_2k7
01-14-2010, 07:34 AM
i hate how you have to install every f'n game on the ps3, whats up with that?
it improves load times and to more heavily compress data that is later expanded onto the hard drive and is most developers biggest gripe with the 360, more so with it's DVD drive as they are struggling to fit games on the disc and cant do installs due to the base model having no hard drive.

for a good example of this take GTA4 when it launched MS slated the PS3 version for having a install, but it was later found out that after only 14 load screens the 360 users had wasted more time due to extended load times compared to the PS3 including the same number of load screens and the install. it's why MS put the optional game install option on the 360 as they were starting to get hammered on load times due to lack of the install feature and games needing much higher compression due to having a disc 1/5 the size of the PS3 media (1/6 with the new disc improvements allowing a single layer to be around 30gig instead of 25gig, 60 instead of 50 on dual layer and the PS3 is still capable of reading them) and that is just taking into account standard dual/single layer disc's on both consoles. (bluray can actually support a load of layers it just doesn't need a disc that big yet)

Jahchurch
01-14-2010, 07:49 AM
Yeah, but I for one never install my xbox games because i find it a waste of memory. The problem I see here is that ps3...when i got it...only had 60-80gb on the HD. With home, and all of my installs, i was down to a good 40-50 within a couple of weeks because of all the games installs and home. If they new this, they should have given you a larger hard drive to begin with. On the other hand, 360 gives you the option weather you want to install it or not, in the long run i never install any game on my xbox, because the loading time doesnt really phase me on the fact that it really doesnt take so long were it becomes annoying, in fact it doesnt bother me at all, the only game that did was fable II, only because the area's where so small, you had to keep going into loading screens, where as fallout 3, the map was so huge, you would never get loading screens except going into a building or city, and even when loading the outside map, it still would take what? a couple seconds? Then on top of that, what if you run out of room on your ps3? You have to uninstall your games...i find that really stupid, its like a bad version of an actual wanna be pc. You can answer this question for me then...is ps3 memory expandable like 360? Cause if it is, then i'll stop complaining, and just buy a larger HD, but until then, i'll find it ******ed.

caswallawn_2k7
01-14-2010, 08:03 AM
the PS3 hard drive is expandable and more cost friendly than the 360, the PS3 can take any SATA 2.5inch laptop hard drive, I got a 250gig for my PS3 a while back for around 30-40 compared to the 360 hard drive that is only 120gig and retails for over 100.

but the laptop drives now are up to the terabyte mark and even those drives will only set you back about the cost of a 360 120gb drive, you can get hacked hard drives for the 360 much cheaper but MS is trying to stop them and they still have a maximum size of 250gig imposed by the firmware (went up from 120gig hard cap with the firmware update to allow the super elite a 250gig drive)

sgt_brent
01-14-2010, 08:04 AM
You can always buy another HD for the 360 - But I'll tell you; I've had the Halo3 Special Edition 360 - And have had it for 3-4 years.. Whenever Halo3 came out.. It has a 20GB HD.. And I have never wished I had more.. Like it never bothered me having a relatively small HD.. But with the PS3 - I've got 120GB.. And it seems like it needs it because of installs and all this BS downloading stuff..

I have never had issues with load times on 360 - So why PS3 game devs think they need to improve on this, IMO, is pretty weird.. I mean, yeah, some games take longer to load - But who cares.. It's never going to take very long, really..

I'm not a fan of gaming on PS3 - It remains my BluRay/DVD player 99% of the time..

caswallawn_2k7
01-14-2010, 08:11 AM
I don't get why you keep saying about download's, the PS3 only gets the exact same patches and DLC's as the 360 so on that front they take up the exact same space.

if you don't want to download stuff don't use the PSN store, if your complaint is with patches for games disable PSN because just like live you cant play online with a unpatched game anyway and even then the only game on the PS3 with pretty big patches is Burnout paradise but the exact same patches are on the 360 and PC versions.

not to mention your looking at using a minimum of 2gig if you plan on getting the AC2 DLC's meaning any1 without a hard drive cant play them without shelling out for a over priced hard drive in a bit plastic with a MS logo on it.

sgt_brent
01-14-2010, 08:16 AM
I rented MGS4 and brought it home - When I stuck it in to play I had to watch Snake smoke a cigarette, while something installed.. It took literally over an hour.. And I have a decent internet connection!

That's the type of thing I hate.. That never happens on 360 - I know patches and DLC are all the same; But that's not the point.. Those are add-ons that, in reality, we aren't REQUIRED to download and install..

PS store is a different issue.. You go there knowing you're going to download something.. same with XBL Marketplace.. That's the name of the game.. But when it comes down to playing a game - I don't want to have to sit there for over an hour while something installs something..

MGS4 isn't the only game, BTM - It's simply the most recent game I've experienced this issue with..

caswallawn_2k7
01-14-2010, 08:30 AM
if you had a game that took an hour to install you have serious problems with your console, it is only a 4.6gig install (also you have to remember it was the first game ever to use a full 50gig disc)so either you have something very wrong with your system or you are over exaggerating to make it sound worse than it actually is.

as if it was a download you would get sent back to a XBM screen telling you it cant be downloaded in the background and giving size and speed information and it wouldn't show any sign of the game.

TwinIltani
01-14-2010, 08:42 AM
Originally posted by caswallawn_2k7:
if you had a game that took an hour to install you have serious problems with your console

Zing! Yep. Or serious problems with keeping time.


as if it was a download you would get sent back to a XBM screen telling you it cant be downloaded in the background and giving size and speed information and it wouldn't show any sign of the game.

That too.

For the love of all that's unholy, does every single discussion like this have to devolve into console warfare? It's a box filled with electronics, not a significant other.

katz_bg
01-14-2010, 09:54 AM
Sigh...
I guess it was inevitable.
They always turn into console wars.

Jahchurch
01-14-2010, 11:46 AM
Yeah I remember that on MGS4, not only once tho, as you progress through the game it will ask you to install some more...now that is the biggest bs ever......what we are complaining about caswallawn is that you have to install litteraly every single game you buy for the ps3, which after awhile adds up. And take note of this, I bought Naruto Ninja Storm for the ps3, and it did the whole install thing, and the loading screens took foooooooooorrrrreeeveeeeeeeer even with it installed.

itsamea-mario
01-14-2010, 11:51 AM
WHY would resurrect an age old argument???