360 or ps3?

[darthsnake]

Ps33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333

 

[Lust]

Both. If you can't afford both then maybe focusing on your career and income instead of a gaming console should be something to consider.

Both are fun to play. I've had multiple gaming systems since I was first able to pick up a joy stick and there's never been one that just dominated. There'll be people who say otherwise, but i'm not into sucking corporate dicks. I'll never be confused for a fanboy even though I've been an avid hardcore gamer since I was 12 (17 years ago). I've played all sorts of consoles and I've played MAC and PC and they are all fun to play. Period. Equally fun, equally entertaining. Hell I have one room dedicated solely to gaming. If you knew the price per sq foot for living space in San Francisco then you'd agree that's fiscally irresponsible. But like I said, I'm an avid gamer so I'll put my opinion and gaming insight up against anyone else's who tries to tell you there should only be one console and all others suck.

I do play my PC far more than the consoles but that's mostly cos i spent over 10 times the amount of what one of the consoles cost and I get incredible graphics, no choppy frame rate, ability to mod all my games plus I'm currently involved in two different titles that I can only play on my PC. I'm basically able to personalize my PC games far more than my console games. But price is the advantage consoles have over PC. A good gaming PC is still triple the cost of a console. With that in mind: I still enjoy my PS3. I still enjoy my 360 and my GF and her friends have taken over the Wii but I remember enjoying playing it when i used to play it.

If I were forced to say what I enjoy playing with the most then I'm going to say my GF. So, get a career that can afford to entertain a GF, then and only then should you focus on a gaming console and when you reach that crossroads get two or three of them. I guess the only real drawback for me on console games is how fast I can get to the end game and their limited re-play ability. PC games have the advantage in that one area simply because of 3rd party mods.

Honestly, I've had fun playing on any of the consoles. Trying to convince me which is better is like trying to convince me that Evian bottled water is better than Fuji bottled water. They're both bottles of water, end of story. Now if we want to discuss gaming titles then yes, there's some games that are vastly superior to other games.....but that's a different story.

Multiple consoles mean corporate competition and thats a good thing. It keeps each Company on the edge to create that next step up in the gaming community. I hope different platforms continue to exist despite fanboys trying to tear down one or the other. Why? Cos then it comes down to just one console on the market. When that happens you will see a lackadaisical approach by the Manufacturer. Prices will soar, Technology will stay the same and Consumer satisfaction will fall. That's economics 101, something every fanboy out there just doesn't fucking understand.

So to answer the original question, get both. If you absolutely must go with just one then don't worry, you'll be entertained no matter which one you get and there's always that chance that you too will become a fanboy. Pucker up, corporate ass kissing has never been so popular.

 

[STDiva]

I prefer 360 exclusives, but PS3 is just so well rounded and free online play is a major factor. Get both.

 

[ForumModeregulator]

...

Multiple consoles mean corporate competition and thats a good thing. It keeps each Company on the edge to create that next step up in the gaming community. I hope different platforms continue to exist despite fanboys trying to tear down one or the other. Why? Cos then it comes down to just one console on the market. When that happens you will see a lackadaisical approach by the Manufacturer. Prices will soar, Technology will stay the same and Consumer satisfaction will fall. That's economics 101, something every fanboy out there just doesn't fucking understand.

So to answer the original question, get both. If you absolutely must go with just one then don't worry, you'll be entertained no matter which one you get and there's always that chance that you too will become a fanboy. Pucker up, corporate ass kissing has never been so popular.

- A victim of corporate and consumer ignorance.
Get both is the answer? Well yes, if you feel like wasting 1000 dollars...for two machines that are essentially the same thing. Its simple, try them both out grow some nuts and make a decision. You can't really be disappointed in either, since both consoles play video games. Exclusive titles are quite rare, when compared to the selection of multi platform games.

 

[PlasmaTwa2]

- A victim of corporate and consumer ignorance.
Get both is the answer? Well yes, if you feel like wasting 1000 dollars...for two machines that are essentially the same thing. Its simple, try them both out grow some nuts and make a decision. You can't really be disappointed in either, since both consoles play video games. Exclusive titles are quite rare, when compared to the selection of multi platform games.

There are enough exclusive games for both systems to make buying both worth it, but something tells me you don't know that.

 

[zell]

Both. If you can't afford both then maybe focusing on your career and income instead of a gaming console should be something to consider.

.

Dumbest condescending shit comment I've ever heard.

 

[Lust]

- A victim of corporate and consumer ignorance.
Get both is the answer? Well yes, if you feel like wasting 1000 dollars...for two machines that are essentially the same thing. Its simple, try them both out grow some nuts and make a decision. You can't really be disappointed in either, since both consoles play video games. Exclusive titles are quite rare, when compared to the selection of multi platform games.

it costs a thousand bucks to buy both a 360 and and PS3??? If you paid that much for both then you're the victim of corporate and consumer ignorance and not me. lots of people have both machines and both machines still don't even come close to the cost of my gaming pc. if you can afford it, buy it, why is this even a fucking debate? are you like my parents trying to tell me how to spend my allowance? I have nuts, i grew a pair and said fuck yeah I can afford both and still buy every god damn game i want! just cos you're poor don't mean you got bigger balls. it doesn't work that way. But nice try. :hatsoff:

Best Buy price on a XBOX 360 = $130
Best Buy price on a PS3 = $260

where i'm from that comes to grand total of $390, very short of a thousand bucks, not even half really. who's being ignorant? If that bothers you it falls under the category of "not my problem"

Dumbest condescending shit comment I've ever heard.

if that's the dumbest condescending shit you've ever heard then you really need to stop playing your console and get out more. just sayin........

 

[zell]

it costs a thousand bucks to buy both a 360 and and PS3??? If you paid that much for both then you're the victim of corporate and consumer ignorance and not me. lots of people have both machines and both machines still don't even come close to the cost of my gaming pc. if you can afford it, buy it, why is this even a fucking debate? are you like my parents trying to tell me how to spend my allowance? I have nuts, i grew a pair and said fuck yeah I can afford both and still buy every god damn game i want! just cos you're poor don't mean you got bigger balls. it doesn't work that way. But nice try. :hatsoff:

Best Buy price on a XBOX 360 = $130
Best Buy price on a PS3 = $260

where i'm from that comes to grand total of $390, very short of a thousand bucks, not even half really. who's being ignorant? If that bothers you it falls under the category of "not my problem"

Wow,just fucking wow.Someone doesn't sound like a spoiled pompous prick in the least.

And your math is all wrong. Sure,you can get a refurbished console for cheaper,hell,I've done it before and had no complaints,but there's one problem.WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU GOING TO PLAY?!

I guess you can also say to hell with paying for shipping,oh wait,you can't because if you don't pay for shipping,you won't get your shit,and that's aside from the fact that you have to pay for shipping.

So let's say you get a game for each console+the shipping cost,you can add another $140 to that price.And if you really want to get everything out of your 360, that's another $50 for Live.

So your $390 just jumped up to $580.While that surely is a long way from a grand,it's still a good chunk of change to plunk down.

if that's the dumbest condescending shit you've ever heard then you really need to stop playing your console and get out more. just sayin........

Alright,let's see,I need to get out more because you are obviously equating someone's ability to purchase 2 game consoles to their economic standing,or because you have more total posts than me when you join almost two full years later than I did?

Hello Mr. Kettle,meet Mr. Pot.

Get a fucking clue dude!

 

[Mr Dragon]

360 for gamnes and onlie ps3 for the console

 

[darthsnake]

That does go to show the xbox failed in trying to get more sales, releasing it earlier than the PS3 to get more sales just resulted in them having to improve what they could of already had.

MS never though they could get more sales,the goal was just to disrupt SONY PLAYSTATION brand

 

[shayd]

MS never though they could get more sales,the goal was just to disrupt SONY PLAYSTATION brand

That is categorically false. Microsoft wanted to beat Sony to the next-gen market and finally have something to beat the PS2, and pushing the 360 out early was an attempt at that. The Playstation "Brand" was at the time absolutely nothing outside the PS2.

 

[darthsnake]

That is categorically false.

how it false

do you really think they would just get infront of the biggest brand in gamign jst like that

they are slowly climbing the ladder

Microsoft wanted to beat Sony to the next-gen market and finally have something to beat the PS2,

nobody beats the PS2

you would be suprised that even the period from when 360 launched PS2 has outsold it

MS just released 360 to start before PS3 as they just couldn't compete with it at the same launch

and pushing the 360 out early was an attempt at that. The Playstation "Brand" was at the time absolutely nothing outside the PS2.

the PS brand was big in PSP at the start


and even the PS2 itself was the bigggest thing in gaming

 

[shayd]

how it false

do you really think they would just get infront of the biggest brand in gamign jst like that

Strike 1.

Simply put, that is categorically false. Sony is not the biggest brand in gaming, and never has been. Nintendo has worn that crown since the 1980s.

they are slowly climbing the ladder
nobody beats the PS2
you would be suprised that even the period from when 360 launched PS2 has outsold it

Strike 2.

Of fucking course the PS2 outsold the 360 when it launched, it cost $300 less, had a regnant array of games, and had been out for 6 fucking years. Surprise, surprise, the PS2 hasn't outsold the 360 since June of 2007, when the price discrepancy lessened. Sony, in it's infinite wisdom hasn't pulled the plug on the PS2 yet, and the fucking thing is outselling the PS3, this year.

MS just released 360 to start before PS3 as they just couldn't compete with it at the same launch

Strike 3.

That's may be the single most ignorant statement I've read. Microsoft launched early to do what Sony did with the PS2 to the Nintendo 64, that is, to dominate the market with superior technology, although this time with the signature Microsoft avarice. Microsoft talked publicly about launching the 360 contemporaneously with the PS3, but publicly acknowledged the success of the PS2 was the primary motivation behind their early launch:

"We really needed to focus on what the market wanted moving forward. There were no disillusions about what the Playstation 2 was, or what type of success it was enjoying. We needed a way to really establish the X-Box family of consoles, and it was clear that the only way to do that was to offer a product that was technologically superior to the PS2" - Peter Moore, former Vice-President of Microsoft's Interactive Entertainment Business Division in 2005.

the PS brand was big in PSP at the start
and even the PS2 itself was the bigggest thing in gaming

Strike 4.

Holy fuck, you've swung and missed on this one so hard I don't even know where to begin.

Let's see:

Playstation sales up to the launch of the PS2: 22.4 million (79% of the sales were strictly in Japan).
Nintendo 64 sales up the launch of the PS2: 30.7 million.

PSP sales: Approximately 60 million.
Nintendo DS sales: Approximately 128.9 million.

So this "brand" that Sony had set up, was that intentionally perennially outsold by the competition? Because by the numbers, Nintendo has historically kicked the piss out of them. Also, Sony did to the PS2 what they're doing with the PS3 now: not phasing out the older console. The PS went on to sell almost 75 million units during the time the PS2 was out. Microsoft didn't give a shit about the PS3 until about the time the PS3 became cheaper, which oddly enough, started the process of Sony's gaming division hemorrhaging money.

But fuck, don't let reality ruin a good story.

 

[darthsnake]

Strike 1.

Simply put, that is categorically false. Sony is not the biggest brand in gaming, and never has been. Nintendo has worn that crown since the 1980s.

oh really thats why N64 and GC bombed

i don't think you believe in reality

Strike 2.

Of fucking course the PS2 outsold the 360 when it launched, it cost $300 less, had a regnant array of games, and had been out for 6 fucking years.

i am not talking about PS2's past sales or 360 sales at launch]

i am talking abt PS2 outselling 360 since 360's launch

Surprise, surprise, the PS2 hasn't outsold the 360 since June of 2007,

you really don't believe in reality

PS2 outsold the 360 in Q1 and Q2 of 2010

Sony, in it's infinite wisdom hasn't pulled the plug on the PS2 yet, and the fucking thing is outselling the PS3, this year.

PS3 is selling more than the PS2 and no PS2 is not selling more than PS3 from a long time and not this year

and why would SONY pull the plug on PS2 as it is bringing them profit and its selling and also they have a 10years promise

Strike 3.

That's may be the single most ignorant statement I've read. Microsoft launched early to do what Sony did with the PS2 to the Nintendo 64, that is, to dominate the market with superior technology,

how the hell is it ignorant?????????????

MS pulled the plug of original XBOX just 4 years,now why was that cause it wasn't selling cause of the competitors

and do you really think XBOX could really compete with PLAYSTATION at same launch,no they couldn't

if you think brand is nothing then you are foolish

yes SONY did it with PS2 but it was because of the reason that PS1 was already 7 years on the market and it wasn't N64 but GC WITH PS2

although this time with the signature Microsoft avarice. Microsoft talked publicly about launching the 360 contemporaneously with the PS3,

if you go on believing PR then you are foolish again

but publicly acknowledged the success of the PS2 was the primary motivation behind their early launch:

no it wasn't as PS1 already was the biggest brand so PS2 continued it

XBOX had a small brand

"We really needed to focus on what the market wanted moving forward. There were no disillusions about what the Playstation 2 was, or what type of success it was enjoying. We needed a way to really establish the X-Box family of consoles, and it was clear that the only way to do that was to offer a product that was technologically superior to the PS2" - Peter Moore, former Vice-President of Microsoft's Interactive Entertainment Business Division in 2005.

so just because he said it you believe it................lmao

and this is Peter Moore is the same person who once said MS entered the gaming market to eliminate SONY's PLAYSTATION as they were taking over the entertainment part of the living room which is PC Windows

Strike 4.

Holy fuck, you've swung and missed on this one so hard I don't even know where to begin.

Let's see:

Playstation sales up to the launch of the PS2: 22.4 million (79% of the sales were strictly in Japan).

Nintendo 64 sales up the launch of the PS2: 30.7 million.

you have really gone bonkers and live in a world of your own

PS1 sales upto PS2 were way over 22.4

and N64 was nowhere near PS1

you really think PS1 sold 81million after PS2 launched as PS1's total sales as of 2006 is 103million

you are just taking numbers out of ur ass.

and i'm starting to thinking ur are a Playstation hater from ur comments.

PSP sales: Approximately 60 million.
Nintendo DS sales: Approximately 128.9 million.

we are not discussing current sales

ds is 132.04 as of June 2010

psp is 62.70 as of june 2010

So this "brand" that Sony had set up, was that intentionally perennially outsold by the competition?

it wasn't outsold by competition until PSP and PS3

PSP was outselling DS the first 1-2 years but after piracy hit and dev let go of the platform,it went downhill

and PS3 was solely because of the price.a console like PS3 which is just 3.6million behind 360 and currently oustselling Wii in Japan and very close to the Wii in Worldwide even being at a far higher price,now thats brand power

Nintendo would have a better brand if they continued with a single console name but they keep changing with every console

Because by the numbers, Nintendo has historically kicked the piss out of them.

you can be only 2 things after all those comments

a really big misinformed fool if you think PS1 and PS2 got outsold,no offense

or a fanboy hating Playstation

Also, Sony did to the PS2 what they're doing with the PS3 now: not phasing out the older console.

so???????????????

The PS went on to sell almost 75 million units during the time the PS2 was out.

wrong

Microsoft didn't give a shit about the PS3 until about the time the PS3 became cheaper,

really you think a competitor wouldn't give shit about the other company

and a company which was leading

and is that why Aaron greenberg and other MS employees just keep bashing SONY all the time.they also never bash Nintendo.it shows what their aim is

which oddly enough, started the process of Sony's gaming division hemorrhaging money.

SONY was already losing money on PS3 launch

when PS3 became cheaper their loss became lower not more

But fuck, don't let reality ruin a good story.

yeah your reality is quite a work of fantasy

 

[shayd]

oh really thats why N64 and GC bombed

i don't think you believe in reality

Since other people actually read these threads, it's probably best that your particular brand of wrongness not go completely unchallenged. According to SquareTrade, the PS2 outsold the PS3 for the months January through March of 2010. Call me a Playstation hater all you want, I've been more than fair to the Sony, but the numbers just don't agree with you. At this point, if you'd like to troll more, feel free, as again, I hope you don't let reality ruin your story.

 

[darthsnake]

Since other people actually read these threads, it's probably best that your particular brand of wrongness not go completely unchallenged.

yeah right,its your wrogness which was all over your post

According to SquareTrade, the PS2 outsold the PS3 for the months January through March of 2010.

who the hell is squaretrade????????

it just can't be the PS3 didn't outsell the PS2,if you think so then you are wishing.

it was 360 which was outsold by PS2,same was in Q2 April-June 2010.You are confused which console got outsold by PS2

PS3 is selling way more


PS3 Q1: 2.4million

PS2 Q1: 1.6million

360 Q1: 1.5million

Call me a Playstation hater all you want, I've been more than fair to the Sony, but the numbers just don't agree with you.

lmao

you have been fair??????????????


you are reporting wrong sales number,saying N64 was popular than PS1,you don't follow gaming and strategies MS,Ninty,SONY use and just blaberring out what even you think happened

that not being fair

At this point, if you'd like to troll more, feel free, as again, I hope you don't let reality ruin your story.

you need to learn meaning of both reality and troll


as you are the one hiding from reality and trolling with false info

 

[Vosslier]

Your sales figures are really off.

According to NPD Group (these are just the U.S. figures) ps2 has not even sold 500,000 units in the first quarter.

Here is a graph from NPD Group:

Full news article: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28525/Exclusive_Q1_Sales_Analysis_Illuminates_Hardware.php

 

[darthsnake]

Your sales figures are really off.

According to NPD Group (these are just the U.S. figures) ps2 has not even sold 500,000 units in the first quarter.

Here is a graph from NPD Group:

Full news article: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28525/Exclusive_Q1_Sales_Analysis_Illuminates_Hardware.php

whose figures are you talking about,me or shayd?

if me then let me tell you my figures were Worldwide

 

[imsohorny]

 

[PlasmaTwa2]

Don't really want to jump into the debate, but:

PSP was outselling DS the first 1-2 years but after piracy hit and dev let go of the platform,it went downhill

The PSP has never outsold the DS outside of the occasional month in Japan when a game like Moster Rancher or Final Fantasy is released or the console is redesigned. In those "first 1-2 years" you are talking about, the Nintendo DS became the fastest selling handheld game console in history.