Video game console flame war, er...advice
- Thread starter Jimbo
- Start date
ShagginWagon
New member
I think you'll find more people on XBL. And playing with others is more fun than playing with yourself. Usually. Plus some of the titles are amazing (Halo 3, COD4, FORZA 2, GOW).
Either way, check out www.2old2play.com
Either way, check out www.2old2play.com
What he said, which is exactly why I prefer my PS3. When I feel like playing a game, I feel like doing just that. Not being forced to interact with a bunch of assholes to get to the meat of a game, I do that enough at work. Plus, a lot of the x-box exclusive games that interest me usually end up on PC as well (Halo, Mass Effect, GOW, etc...).
Oh, and no Metal Gear love on 360. That, and my extensive PS1 and PS2 collection were the deciding factors for me. It really just boils down to what interests you.
ShagginWagon
New member
+1 Unless you want the PS3 to be a BluRay player as well. I got an xbox because my buddies have them, and because I am a closet halo dork. My assumption is that both online experiences are more or less equally full of douchebags. That's why I only play with folks about my age.
Pick the platform for the titles and who you want to game with. I don't think either one of these is going away anytime soon.
I have a X360, a Wii, and a really high end PC, And I really wish I had a ps3, lol...
If I had to go back and pick between the two, though, I think I would still pick the x360 first with the intent of picking up a ps3 later on.
My only reason for this is that the number of playable titles for xbox outweighs ps3's at the moment... and if you DO wanna play online, there's more ppl on the xbox servers (since less kids can afford a ps3)
Just for fun:
Yeahhh, that's like 9ft of Halo, baby. :tard: :tard:
I'm not even a huge Halo fan, I'd have rather been playing Gears... but it was still AWESOME.
If I had to go back and pick between the two, though, I think I would still pick the x360 first with the intent of picking up a ps3 later on.
My only reason for this is that the number of playable titles for xbox outweighs ps3's at the moment... and if you DO wanna play online, there's more ppl on the xbox servers (since less kids can afford a ps3)
Just for fun:
Yeahhh, that's like 9ft of Halo, baby. :tard: :tard:
I'm not even a huge Halo fan, I'd have rather been playing Gears... but it was still AWESOME.
I disagree. Runnah brought his 360 over to my place this past weekend to update it, since he hadn't been online with it in a while. Now, I may not play online a whole lot, but I heard more profanity and brat children in GTA online in 1/2hr on his 360, than I have in my entire 4mos or so with GTA in PS3. It's like Geist said, younger people can more easiler afford the 360, and in my experience that shows.
The other thing that has always bothered me about the 360 is the price. Yes, I realize the console itself is cheaper, but when you factor in an HDD, WiFi, wireless controllers, and a hi-def movie player, the 360 cost you more. Not that I really give a damn about Blu-Ray, I have a whole different problem with it that I'm not getting into here.
They're actually pretty much the same on price, nowadays... I didn't realize this myself until I just overlooked it...
X360: (elite)
120gb hard drive
HDMI Cable
1 Controller
1 Headset
2 Games (Gamestop offer right now, kid games, though.. Lego Indiana Jones and Kung Fu Panda... regardless.)
For $400.... But you have to tack $70 onto that for XBox Live subscription
PS3:
80gb hard drive
HDMI Cable (I think?)
1 Controller
Blue Ray disc drive
For $400
Comparing "New Hot Titles:"
Xbox has: Fable 2, Gears of War 2, New Banjoe Kazooie, etc
PS3 has: Little Big Planet, Resistance 2, Valkyria Chronicles, etc
BOTH have: Fallout 3 (Issues on ps3), GTA4, Call of Duty: W@W, Mirror's Edge, blah blah blah.
Hope it was semi-helpful!
ShagginWagon
New member
I hate myself for loving that :drool:Just for fun:
Yeahhh, that's like 9ft of Halo, baby. :tard: :tard:
Wow! I would not have guessed that. Good to know!
[tinfoil hat]
I personally think that the movie industry is purposely degrading the quality of current DVD's in order to push Blu-Ray (and at the time, HD-DVD).
In early June, I bought myself a new Samsung 46" LCD, a PS3, and a new Sony upconverting DVD player. Both the PS3 and the DVD player are connected directly to the set by the same HDMI cables. Early on in my medical leave, we rented a couple movies, Alien vs. Predator: Requium on BD, Spiderwick on BD, and some throwaway chick flick on DVD (27 Dresses, I think). During the day or 2 we watched these, I also broke out my copy of a true classic, The Fifth Element, first edition DVD.
The 2 BD movies looked noticeably better than the rental DVD, as they should. But The Fifth Element was vastly better than any of them. It just plain looked better. So, how can a 5yr or so old DVD be better than a current DVD or BD? I could forgive the DVD quality for being a chick flick were quality isn't as important, and AvP:R for being just plain crap. But a blockbuster like Spiderwick on BD should be superior than an old DVD, and any current DVD should look at least as good regardless of the genre.
So, in my mind, the only logical answer is that they're purposely degrading the quality to push Blu-Ray. Do I have an evidence? Of course not. Could it simply be the movies I watched? Of course. This is only my personal experiences. But I haven't bought or rented a BD since, and was completely satisfied with watching Iron Man on DVD.
[/tinfoil hat]