Console wars

[SUBMAN1]

Well, I was always skepticle of the PS3, but I guess hearing from id's mouth on how much it sucks kind of convinces me on 2 things:

1. The X-Box 360 is the best platform for games as we traditionaly know them with tons of new graphics.

2. Wii is the best platform for 'fun' games if fun is what you are after.

Seems that PS3 is kind of not cracked up for what it should be. Maybe impresive for graphics in your immediate surroundings, but seems to be a limitation of size of those surroundings.

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/926/926419/vid_2078293.html

-S

[Onkel Neal]

X-box 360 has been plagued with reliability problems.

[Reaves]

I decided to get a Wii as I consider my PC better for any game that i'd want to play on an X-Box or a PS3.

Wii is a fun unit to play, especially when you have a few people around to play golf or bowling.

It does have it's problems.

1. It's ability to play flash movies from the internet was a major reason I purchased it. I wanted to be able to sit back and use the wiimote instead of a mouse. This however isn't really ideal as the system comes with a severe lack of memory, assuring that 1/4 through the band of brothers episode I was watching stalls AND due to the limitations of many online flash video players, you have to watch from the start when you reload the page.

2. Call of duty 3. Great game. But in intense fights I have frequently had problems with the system running out of juice. The controls become 'uncontrolable' frames per second drops into single digit area and it's basically un-playable. A sign that the Wii is just not as good as it needs to be hardware wise.


Still, it's a good machine but I would have been happy paying a little more for a more power. It needs more System memory and could have used a more powerful GPU, IMO they should have tried to rival the x-box with Power, that along with the wiimote would have ruled.

To me all the PS3 has going for it is the Blu-ray although i've heard it is a very poor quality drive in it.

X-Box will probably win with Wii getting a lot of sales with non-gamer markets. The PS3 will dwindle in sales causing game makers to not bother with it, causing a lack of games which causes a lack of people wanting one. The thing is too expensive.

[Stealth Hunter]

X-box 360 has been plagued with reliability problems.

Thank you, Neal.:smug: Have some of Granny Smith's cookies.

I had one... for a week. Then it melted on me and decided to burn a huge-ass hole in my carpet AND stink up my house with plastic stench for about a month. Long story, but I bought a PS3 and couldn't be happier (like the less complicated controller AND I think it's more comfortable).

And the PS3 is actually planning A LOT of exclusive games for late this year and mid 2008. They have a really cool looking one called PROTOTYPE which is a PS3-intended game and IT SOUNDS KICK-ASS (you can literally turn New York City into hell with punches that can cause earthquakes that dwarf the 1906 San Francisco quake). It's just so crazy, man. You need to look it up. PS3 actually has a pretty good take-off, so far.

[danlisa]

360 Hater here!:lol:

Right, this is the most telling stat:

The 360 is currently using 80% of it's resources with the next gen games.
The PS3 is currently using 35% of it's resources with the next gen games.

Now, this tells me that the PS3 has more developmental room than the 360. Yes, the PS3 is still slow out of the starting blocks but it's catching up.

Also, as the PS3 is using Blueray Discs (35GB) the game of the future will fit nicely on to 1 disc, aka Metal Gear Solid 4 which has been finally announced as a PS3 exclusive because Kojima will not remove content to enable the 360 to play it on HDDVD.:lol:

The PS3 also has a FREE online service, none of this monthly, quarterly or yearly payment. With the approaching release of HOME, the PS3 community is ever increasing.

As for the video posted, is that a WIP for the a latest 360 game? If so, you need to compare that to a PS3 game which is similarly at the same stage of developement, in maybe 2 yrs.;) However, for now, you could compare it to the MSG4 Gameplay Video found here - http://www.jeuxvideo.tv/metal-gear-solid-4-guns-of-the-patriots-video-40810.html
A 600mb HD downloadable version is also available from that link.

I bought a PS3 on launch day and I have not had 1 single problem with it. Infact, it's easily upgradable too.;) My PS3 now has a 250GB HDD installed (£100 GBP, how much does the additional/external HDD for the XBox cost:hmm:) & Linux (just for fun, never used it before:lol:)

Really, I feel that there is no contest, my prediction for Mid 2008 is PS3 > Wii > 360. Until mid 2008 we're not going to see the full extent of the PS3's power or games, probably later.

I suspect, we'll see the XBOX 720 in about 3 yrs time and the PS4 in about 6-7 yrs. Microsoft will want to get a jump on sales again.

LOL, at the end of the day, people will like the XBOX and others will like the PS3. We'll never agree on which is better in any aspect.:D

[P_Funk]

360 Hater here!:lol:

Right, this is the most telling stat:

The 360 is currently using 80% of it's resources with the next gen games.
The PS3 is currently using 35% of it's resources with the next gen games.

Whered you get that from? Cause I heard that the 360 had 3 cores and was only using one in the latest games. Each core being like 3.1 or something Ghz.

I'd like some literature plz.:p

[danlisa]

Partly true:
The 64-bit Xbox 360 processor is a custom chip based on three 3.2GHz Power PC cores.
Why have 3 cores and only use one?:p:hmm: What a crock. I don't believe that, where's the sense in holding back 2/3 of the 360's power?

As for my stats I posted, this is my take (& admittadely other PS3 users), drawing on the currently available games and new content available for both consoles. I don't hold much weight in what the respective devs have to say about each of their consoles respective power.

Consider this (a post of mine from another forum)
...you know as well as I do that the PS3 is more powerful. Its well known. Games like Heavenly Sword, GT5, and MGS4 prove the PS3 is more powerful.

I don't use tech specs, I just let the games do the talking. Mass Effect is the best the 360 is offering right now....some argue Gears is still the top dog, I suppose thats debatable. However, the three games I mentioned above look almost a generation beyond both Mass Effect and Gears of War.

As for the 360 peaking, I have a question for you. Why do we not see games like GT5, Heavenly Sword, and MGS4 on the Xbox 360? Surely if it isn't peaked, we should see such things, right? GT5 looks beyond anything we've ever seen in a racing game. Why doesn't PGR4 even come close?

It may not be maxed out, but I certainly believe it's using a good 80-90 percent of it's power already, and that doesn't include the DVD9 handicap.
Now, I'll agree that this isn't hard & fast facts but until both consoles are on level par as far as dev/content is concerned we could 'dance' around this subject forever.

Personally, I think that while graphics and gameplay will level off between the two consoles, I think the PS3 will eventually take the lead in terms of improved physics & environmental effects, this is where the power of the PS3's Cell will shine.

Sorry for the large Gif.;) Example
I don't think the 360 will ever do this:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y121/mitchT09/Killzone2-1-1.gif

Hehe, please come back:p

[antikristuseke]

Bah all the consoles can go to hell, all they are doing is stealing developers time away from developing games for the PC, the platform they should be focusing on.

[Rilder]

Bah all the consoles can go to hell, all they are doing is stealing developers time away from developing games for the PC, the platform they should be focusing on.

Quoted for the truest statement in the universe that even the Gods agree with. :p

[danlisa]

Bah all the consoles can go to hell, all they are doing is stealing developers time away from developing games for the PC, the platform they should be focusing on.
Quoted for the truest statement in the universe that even the Gods agree with. :p
The next round of consoles will replace the traditional PC,:yep: in about 10yrs, so you've still got time.

I can already do 1/3rd of what my PC does on my PS3. Email, WEB, Picture editing, gaming etc and with the inclusion of mouse & keyboard control it's only a matter of time until some serious games/software content are ported.;)

Relax, it won't be the consoles as we know them now, more of a complete/integrated media center. The PC & Console will become one.:D

[antikristuseke]

Pretty much the only difference in consoles and and PC's is the OS and the fact that consoles have the same hardware as in all ps3,s are the same and so on. That means that games are easyer to optimize for that system because programers dont have to deal with variables. But the fact that consoles arent as customizable and there is less to mess arround with makes them boring and since i can do anything a console can do on my PC they are allso pointless.

[P_Funk]

Relax, it won't be the consoles as we know them now, more of a complete/integrated media center. The PC & Console will become one.:D I think its like 2 races on different tracks headed for the same finish line. Already I can plug my PC into my TV and watch movies that way. Consoles are mimicing PCs essentially. The only advantage to a console is the standardized production which allows the package itself to be less expensive, but that comes at a cost of customizability and scalability. The PS3 may be the best one but its also the most expensive and its losing cash to stay close to competitive, that implies that its just as good as a high end PC with all the bells are whistles. So if the PS3 were priced how it should be to turn unit by unit profit then I might as well built a sick PC instead and use it as a media centre PC. And if games on PCs ran on Linux and OSX maybe we'd be able to get way better performance out of our machines. Windows is crap and sucks so much resource.

So will consoles really replace the PC? Or won't it just be the other way around?

[Heibges]

X-box 360 has been plagued with reliability problems.

Rumor has is this was the cause of Peter Moore "departing" from Microshaft.

And experienced programmer is 70% less productive on PS3 than on X360.

A novice programmer is 95% less productive on PS3.

[SUBMAN1]

360 Hater here!:lol:

Right, this is the most telling stat:

The 360 is currently using 80% of it's resources with the next gen games.
The PS3 is currently using 35% of it's resources with the next gen games.


Did you not bother to listen to Carmack talk about the PS3 in the above video? You are completely wrong on this point. The PS3 is out of resources when the 360 still has more to give. THis is why they develope the code to run on the PS3 first because if it runs there, then it will run on XBox 360 too since the 360 has more capability to deliver more content.

Go watch the video I just posted and then come back and re-state your opinions with fact.

-S

[Dowly]

PS kicks Xbox's butt and HARD. My main reason for that statement; The games. Xbox came to the markets with one "good" game, the Halo (Which I still dont think of as nothing else than an average shoot-'em-up.). The PS has ben delivering the most varied and simply the most addicting games I've played (including PC games). It was used to revive the Metal Gear Solid series, Silent Hills, Gran Turismo, Final Fantasy series.

I'll pick my rifle for PS in this war. ;)

[SUBMAN1]

PS kicks Xbox's butt and HARD. My main reason for that statement; The games. Xbox came to the markets with one "good" game, the Halo (Which I still dont think of as nothing else than an average shoot-'em-up.). The PS has ben delivering the most varied and simply the most addicting games I've played (including PC games). It was used to revive the Metal Gear Solid series, Silent Hills, Gran Turismo, Final Fantasy series.

I'll pick my rifle for PS in this war. ;)
I don't think there are many 'exclusive' titles this time around, so don't expect great things exclusive to PS3. I own none of the platforms mentioned though, but to tell you the truth, both PS3 and XBox-360 are targetting games that can also be found on the PC, so I'll opt for the Wii if I do buy one of these new generation consoles. Wii is offering something that can't be found on the PC.

-S

[danlisa]

Did you not bother to listen to Carmack talk about the PS3 in the above video? You are completely wrong on this point. The PS3 is out of resources when the 360 still has more to give. This is why they develope the code to run on the PS3 first because if it runs there, then it will run on XBox 360 too since the 360 has more capability to deliver more content.

Go watch the video I just posted and then come back and re-state your opinions with fact.

I've watched the video & it holds no weight with me. How can a console which has to compress it's graphics onto a HD DVD out perform/render better than a system that has uncompressed resources ready to go?:-? When you compress graphics, you loose quality. FACT. Not only that but the video you linked to shows a game that's still in development, you can't really expect the same quality from a WIP from a devs system to match that of the final release. Dev versions tend to have less being rendered than the final version.

Unfortunately, you will get always get people taking sides of the fence in the console wars.

Regardless of Carmack's accomplishments (I won't begrudge him that & applaud him for it), he is a known supporter of the 360. I would also state that the resources in the 360 are easier to 'unlock' or utilize than the PS3's are currently, which is why there are currently no major 3rd party PS3 exclusive games.

I still hold firm on the fact that by the end of 2008/start of 2009 the PS3 will be out performing the 360.

Bottom line, currently the 360 is easier for developers to produce stuff for, therefore they will favour it. A small minority outside of Sony know how to fully unlock the full processing power of the Cell Chip.

This is why they develop the code to run on the PS3 first because if it runs there, then it will run on XBox 360 too since the 360 has more capability to deliver more content.

No, this why Id dev their code on the PS3.

Explain this to me:

Why would any game developer, create a game based on the PS3's Cell processor, using a Blueray 35GB disk just to down size it to a HD DVD 15GB single layer disc with compressed graphics.:-? Makes no sense to me.

We will always disagree and we will always be able to produce an arguement for each console.

EDIT - During my response, I have read your reply to Dowly. There are many games currently in development that will be exclusive to the PS3 but we will not see them until early to mid 2008. Example - GT5, MGS4, SOCOM, Warhawk and possibly/probably GTA4 (at least at full content). However, there are game that will be exclusive to the 360.

I agree, for 'fun factor, the Wii is the way to go. It's the only one which offers a difference to the norm but the graphics are Sh1te!:p

[Heibges]

360 Hater here!:lol:

Right, this is the most telling stat:

The 360 is currently using 80% of it's resources with the next gen games.
The PS3 is currently using 35% of it's resources with the next gen games.


Did you not bother to listen to Carmack talk about the PS3 in the above video? You are completely wrong on this point. The PS3 is out of resources when the 360 still has more to give. THis is why they develope the code to run on the PS3 first because if it runs there, then it will run on XBox 360 too since the 360 has more capability to deliver more content.

Go watch the video I just posted and then come back and re-state your opinions with fact.

-S

What he is actually talking about in the video is Video Memory, which is a major hurdle you will always be up against with the PS3.

But the multicore processor for the PS3 is much more powerful than that of the 360. Unfortunately, it takes an awful lot of programming knowledge to push the proccesses out to the different cores to conserve on the shared memory of the PS3.

It's like a 64mb memory hit on the PS3 to bring up a save game screen.:lol:

I am a Sony fanboy, and I Microshaft Hater, and I still have to shake my head at PS3. Plus, they lost GTA4, and Ace Combat 6 as exclusive titles. This is shaping up to look like the Sega Saturn.

And you really to need to test on BlueRay if you want to get a true picture of how games will perform when developing for PS3. As you can imagine, this is ridiculously expensive.

[fatty]

This is a good thread... I've been contemplating buying a console as my new gaming platform because my PC is getting a bit long in the tooth (running Athlon 2500+ with Radeon 9600 PRO and 512mb), and it seems like it is becoming more expensive to upgrade and maintain a gaming-grade computer these days. Consoles have also seem to have really taken off with multiplayer and game downloads (patches etc.). The only downside I see so far is the games: the kinds of games I like, simulators, good deep strategies and such continue to make a very slim showing on consoles. And still, you can't edit photos, develop websites, or write emails from a console. I will probably upgrade my computer one more time in the next year or so and then reassess the situation.

[danlisa]

And still, you can't edit photos
Soon;)

develop websites
Sadly not yet but you might if you install Linux on the PS3.

or write emails from a console
Again, you can with Linux but the PS3 has an online messaging sevice between other PS3 users. This wiil & can be expanded.

However, I think you are correct to wait and upgrade your PC. Consoles are not at a level where they can compete with a PC, yet. Like I said the next round of consoles will probably contain all that and more.

[SUBMAN1]

I've watched the video & it holds no weight with me. How can a console which has to compress it's graphics onto a HD DVD out perform/render better than a system that has uncompressed resources ready to go?:-? When you compress graphics, you loose quality. FACT. Not only that but the video you linked to shows a game that's still in development, you can't really expect the same quality from a WIP from a devs system to match that of the final release. Dev versions tend to have less being rendered than the final version.

Unfortunately, you will get always get people taking sides of the fence in the console wars.

Regardless of Carmack's accomplishments (I won't begrudge him that & applaud him for it), he is a known supporter of the 360. I would also state that the resources in the 360 are easier to 'unlock' or utilize than the PS3's are currently, which is why there are currently no major 3rd party PS3 exclusive games.
Heibges beat me too most of the punch line, but still didn't address this. Whom exactly is going to use this space you speak of here? No one is the answer. Also, don't even think for a second that textures won't be compressed on a PS3 - not only because of the limited video memory (Which negates any ability to use RAW textures), but also compressed textures look nearly identicle and run many times faster. Its a no brainer.

The Blu-Ray portion of the system exists for only one reason - movies. The storage for textures is not going to happen ever on this console. Probably PS4 if Sony sticks around long enough to produce one.

Besides, the 35 GB capacity of HD DVD (Yes, it is 35 GB, not 15 GB - 15 GB is strictly single layer HD DVD) is plenty of capacity for any game that will ever come down the pike for this generation of hardware. It is incredibly overkill actually. Most games probably won't see the other side of 5 GB.

-S

PS. As you know from my other posts that I'm no MS fan either. I personally think Sony flubbed up PS3 though - and pretty bad.

[SUBMAN1]

Oops, I'm wrong - Toshiba expanded HD DVD to 45 GB capacity. THought it was only 35 GB, but I am behind the times.

-S

[Dimitrius07]

I`am not a big console fan, but i have my opinion.

I play all 3 PS3,XBOX360 and WII

And i liked all of them :damn: , damn what should i do :D .

All of thise consoles have they good and bad sides (sorry for that English).

But one thing i don`t like its fanboys "who looking only on one side of the stick and refuse to look to another one" :shifty:

For example i like WII but i will not start yeling on every webside "XBOX sucks or PS3 sucks":down: . Thise is retarded imho

Here is a example of how fanboy is sound like
http://youtube.com/watch?v=25LceCPO1ys

[SUBMAN1]

But one thing i don`t like its fanboys "who looking only on one side of the stick and refuse to look to another one" :shifty:

Actually - I want a Wii! But PS3 does kinda suck with its memory limitation, so I have to disagree with you.

-S

[geetrue]

I want a Wii ... I just want something simple/uncomplicated.

Fun games like Mario don't need great graphics or fast speed.

As soon as I can afford one it's going to Wii ...

My PC is great on graphics anyway ... I just want to have some quick fun, before supper, plus something for my seven year old grand daughter can look forward to playing on a rainey day.

[bookworm_020]

Well you could look at the PS3 as a cheap blue ray DVD player!

[SUBMAN1]

Well you could look at the PS3 as a cheap blue ray DVD player! Why would you want Blu-Ray over HD DVD anyway? It is nothing more than a higher capacity DVD player.

HD DVD is superior an has multiple decoders and graphics capabilities, has a 3 Ghz PIV inside, and even has 1 GB of RAM.

An example of things you can do with HD DVD in that Fast and Furious in TOkyo is to repaint the cars (I'd be putting my name on it!) and re-run the same scenes with your newly painted cars!

300 - another just higher capacity movie for Blu-Ray. There are cool features on the HD DVD version again though - like picture in picture for example - this is not found on the Blu-Ray titles.

HD DVD is cheaper to make resulting ultimately in cheaper movies for us - you can make HD DVD on current DVD pressing equipment. With Blu-Ray - the studio has to buy all new equipment! No thanks since that means $20 to $30 titles from here to the moon.

Also, with only 5 GB of actual storage seperating the two formats now, there is no real space advantage for Blu-Ray anymore. Besides Sony's excellent marketing department, why would you want it?

-S

[Heibges]

Well you could look at the PS3 as a cheap blue ray DVD player!

That's how Sony sold the PS2, as a cheap dvd player, when it too lacked a strong set of launch titles.

But the AVI declared HD DVD would be their standard, and when they declared VHS their standard they pretty much killed Betamax.

[joea]

I loved the Atari console Santa brought us for Xmas. Space invaders, my very first "flight sim" two biplanes flying around shooting single shots or two tanks runiing around in a maze. Purple and blue tanks / planes but whatever.

[tycho102]

X-box 360 has been plagued with reliability problems.

The word is they have a 30% failure rate, to date.

I'd consider a PS3 for the next Grand Theft Auto game and possibly Unreal Tournament. I've all but given up on finding a Wii any time soon.

[ReallyDedPoet]

I want a Wii ... I just want something simple/uncomplicated.

Fun games like Mario don't need great graphics or fast speed.

As soon as I can afford one it's going to Wii ...


This :up:


RDP

[The Noob]

The PS3 has good technical specifications, but it lacks good games at the moment. Xbox 360 has good games, but problems with reliability and power. And the Wii... i dont like its style and controls, but even for people that do, there are still the performance problems.

I stick with my PC.

And SUBMAN hit the nail on the head with the HD DVD vs Blu-Ray thing.

[SUBMAN1]

The PS3 has good technical specifications, but it lacks good games at the moment. Xbox 360 has good games, but problems with reliability and power. And the Wii... i dont like its style and controls, but even for people that do, there are still the performance problems.

I stick with my PC.

And SUBMAN hit the nail on the head with the HD DVD vs Blu-Ray thing.

Hasn't MS cleaned up the original XBOX 360 problems? I thought they shipped with a bigger heat sink now?

-S