Good writeup of the differences between the two systems. There's no doubt that Sony is putting a lot of technology in the PS3 for only $500/$600. Microsoft is also giving you a lot for $400. Microsoft chose not to go with HD-DVD built-in because they wanted to launch last year and wanted to keep the cost of the system down. They are also trying to recoup their loss on the system by selling several expensive accessories like proprietary wireless controllers, memory cards, and hard drives (larger than 20GB drives are expected in the future).

Also, one note on the CPU differences. The Xbox 360 CPU has 3 identical cores whereas the PS3 has a core like one of the Xbox 360 cores and 7 simpler vector processing cores. Having 3 identically capable cores on the Xbox 360 makes it easier for developers split the processing of threads across the cores where some tasks may not be suitable to the PS3 vector cores. Eventually, developers will learn to take advantage of the extra PS3 cores, but there may not be the expected difference that the 8 versus 3 cores leads you to believe.

In order to sort of compare apples with apples, you made mention that when you buy the HD-DVD add-on for the Xbox 360 that you end up spending 0.98 USD more than the cost of a PS3. This is true only when you compare the 20GB HDD model Xbox 360 with the 60GB HDD model PS3. To be more fair, you should have compared it to the 20GB HDD model PS3, since their configurations are arguably closer to one another (both have similarly sized HD's and no built in Wi-Fi). In that event, the PS3 comes out around 100 USD cheaper.

But I have to say... I am very glad about your review. It is fair and objective, and not laced with the standard sensationalism or heavy anti-Sony bias which is getting more than tiresome. ("I hope Sony dies! OMG Ponies!" et al.) Kudos to you.

As a proud owner of both the 360, PS3 and - as of next week when it gets released here in Japan - a Wii, I can say that I wish all three companies success with their consoles, as more out on the market means more competition, which is always better for the consumer. But I must confess that the PS3 is looking crisper graphically than the 360 so far for me. (With RR6 and RR7 sharing many courses, it is VERY easy to make comparisons between the two.)

Anyway, that is my 2 JPY worth...

Ultimately, your review only makes sense if you care about HD movies. Otherwise, you have a huge price discrepancy. Meanwhile, considering XBox Live with DNAS is either ill-informed or disingenuous - the two are not comparable (single sign on, consistent online presence, the whole XBox Marketplace - none of that is provided by DNAS).

The analysis of the hard drive and disc formats as they pertain to games are spot on. The XBox 360 should never have had a non-HDD option. Years of computer history (and even firmer console history) has shown that optional add-ons are not supported by developers. It's in the base (hardware, OS, etc), or it's essentially worthless.

At the same time, Sony's positioning of the PS3 to be more "computer-like" with upgradeable hard drives, supporting booting alternate OS's, standard USB, gigabit ethernet - these are all VERY interesting. Over time, I'll be very interested to see how this evolves.

The PS3 can't play HD movies out of the box, because it only comes with composite cables, you'll need to separately purchase component or HDMI cables to watch movies in high definition glory.

Also, I have an issue with your take on Paul Thurrott's quote. "First generation PS3 games are not graphically superior to [second generation games] on the Xbox 360." All this is saying is that second generation Xbox 360 games look better than current PS3 games. This isn't saying that they are equal, it isn't in any way complimenting the PS3. If he had said "First generation PS3 games are not graphically inferior to [second generation games] on the Xbox 360," than that would be complimenting the PS3, but since he didn't, I don't think you should use that as a point. For the record, I own two 360's, two Wii's, and hope to get a PS3 as soon as I don't have to camp for days.

"Paul Thurrott even gave the PS3 an uncharacteristic compliment about it."

No, he didn't. Your argument is fallacious.

Fallacious? Its more a wry aside by Rosyna based on how Paul Thurrott tends to see non-MS products (as anyone who has read both Thurrott and Rosyna for a while would get) - lighten up, Harvey. (although I would have used "inadvertent" rather than "uncharacteristic" ;p )

How is it a wry aside if it's wrong? He's not complimenting the PS3 in the slightest, he's only saying that all the supposed benefits of the PS3 aren't yet utilized enough to compare to the second generation Xbox 360 games.

"Not graphically superior" isn't the same as saying "Graphically inferior".

For instance, 1+1 is not numerically superior to 2.

Joshua Ochs, I'm a little confused. Specifically about two statements. "Ultimately, your review only makes sense if you care about HD movies." and "The analysis of the hard drive and disc formats as they pertain to games are spot on."

High Definition Movies were the least of my concern. I was trying to focus on everything but HD Movies simply because fans of the Xbox 360 use it to dismiss Blu-ray easily when there are many, many other valid reasons to have a Blu-ray disc for games.

As for Xbox Live vs DNAS, I guess I have to go the low route and dismiss the consoles as video game systems. I have iChat for a persistent online presence.

Duckalope, as far as I am concerned, HDTV cannot be had from an analog signal. To me, HD==Digital. And HDMI cables can be had for $10. Do not be fooled by high priced HDMI cables. HDMI is a digital connection. You can literally use a wet piece of string and still get the same quality connection. With digital it's all or nothing (nothing==a slideshow).

Great article. Do agree that $399 xbox is a great buy! I bought the $399 xbox and love it. I have it hooked up to my home theater system and HDTV. Totally rocks! :-)
see my raves

"Does anyone have any suggestions on how to increase the implied veracity of an eBay auction? Both me and my friend are at a loss why his auction gets no bids while others get a lot of bids."

First, place "Unopened", "Receipt," and "Free Shipping" in the title (not the subtext under the title) as people who are not interested in purchasing a used or open unit will look for these keywords. Also, buyers' thresholds are at around $900 to $1,000 at the current time, but as Christmas draws nearer that will increase.

Some of the GarageSale templates would make the site look a bit better and enticing ;)

Here is a good one that goes by the new of Placard (black).

"7 simpler vector processing cores"

Yeah, too bad grahics algorithms don't need a lot of vector calculations.

1. Ignore the 360 core system, there is only one system. This was true from day one for any informed gamer.

2. The PS3 has a better hard drive system. This doesn't improve gaming. There are other uses - but most people won't find them appealing. BTW - I consider installing games to be compensating for a slow disk reading speed or crummy programming (1/2 that of the 360).

3. Take a close look at the file size of installed games on the PC. They are not even close to coming over that of a DVD. If the space is there - yeah they'll be more lazy in coding or have multi-region disks. Personally, I abhor all use of FMV more every generation. It takes me AWAY from the game experience visually so I find in game cut-scenes to be superior. Even with this in mind, who cares if your RPG takes up a few disks.

4. Wrong: Hi-Def is offered without the $200 player. The download service is out - kinda, the tech issues will be fixed in a month. Will most people who even want a PS3 have one in a month? I think not.

5. Wireless is an option. B/G are crummy standards anyways - one day N will poop all over both. So get over it.

6. What's the point of online gameplay if its not easy to use? If you can't bring friends from one game into another? If you can't compare what you play to those on the top of a game's leaderlist? If most people don't have mics, so games don't support voice (like Marvel Alliance) and you can't use strategy with your team (Resistance). For the consistency and options I think the 42 a year is well worth it and part of what makes the 360 better.

7. Backwards compatibility? I have a PS2 and Xbox - when those don't work I'll emulate them to actually have improved graphics. Not really important anyhow - I want to play new stuff not old with ever aging graphics and gameplay.

8. One genre pony? The current 360 games out and those yet to come out don't support your statement. On the prior Xbox I'll say yah, it was primarily FPS and Racers (of exclusives) that made it good. Though the best RPG's weren't on the PS2 in my opinion (Knights of the Old Republic, Morrowind, Fable, & Jade Empire all better than any FF on PS2). In any case, there will be many less exclusives this time around and a good showing of Japanese RPG's will be on the 360.

Favorites on 360 to date: Dead Rising, Oblivion, Gears, COD2, and Need for Speed MW. Most Anticipated: Halo3, Mass Effect, Assasin's Creed, Fable2, and Forza2

9. Most of what I've read from developers has shown that the PS3 and 360 are very similar in capabilities. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses. This article's opinion is leaving out many of the details behind their relative powers - so I'd advice to ignore it altogether. Only time will tell. If 360 games STILL look better next year, I'd say that trend will probably continue or balance out by the two systems end life.

10. By the time there are either PS3 systems available or games to play with it - the 360 will probably have had its first price cut (as recent news direct from MS suggests). The two systems are close for games, but the PS3 will for a long time cost more. If the non-game PS3 features mean something to you, all the better to you. For me, they all add up to Zip and I'd rather save my cash for a Wii and extra Wiimotes.

One other correction... It is a single-layer BD that can store the equiv. of 6 DVDs. The dual-layer at 50Gb will hold 12.
All in all, thanks for the post, it's one of the best side-by-side comparisons that I've read. It also illustrates well, how Microsoft nickel n dimes you to death.

Great article! I just wanted to comment on the games issue. I think the fact that the XBox has fewer, successful games, other than FPS, will be a big deal, over the long run. Microsoft has the money to compete against Sony for however long it takes, and shows no signs of ever giving up. Hopefully, the competition will be healthy, and all us gamers will benefit.

Me, personally...I've bought my Wii, and I'm having a blast. I'll wait for the PS3 price to come down a little, and wait for any quality issues to iron themselves out.

KitDoc, I was doing Dual layer BD Max size divided by Dual layer DVD max size, rounded up since you cannot have a partial disc. How did you calculate 12 when using dual-layer formats of both?

*sigh* Some inaccuracies in the article.

DNAS is not Sony's online gaming service, which is even apparent from the Wikipedia article you linked to. DNAS is merely Sony's anti-piracy/anti-cheat title verification system.

Sony may not be charging users for their system, but they do not have a comprehensive system in place ala Xbox Live. This means the PS3 onlne world will remain fragmented like the PS2 was, for at least the first year or two of the PS3's life. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Publishers will continue to have to pay GameSpy, Quazal, or Sony to run their online infrastructure. You can bet they'll want to pass the costs along, either directly, or indirectly via in-lobby in-game advertising.

Your technicals section at the end of painfully technically inaccurate. Both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 should be described as PowerPC Derivatives. Their PowerPC core units are nearly identical. The 360 does have 3 cores. The PS3, however, only has 1. The Cell, in addition to the main PowerPC processor core has eight vector processing units. However, one of these is reserved to be bad, one is reserved for the OS, and the other six are available to gaming applications.

The reality is that the PS3 does not end up being significantly more powerful than the 360. It's an apples and oranges thing where some of the advantages of the PS3 architecture are offset by limitations in other areas where the 360 is superior. Two years from now, 360 and PS3 games will be virtually indistinguishable, all the more so since market forces will dictate multi-platform development.

"This means the PS3 onlne world will remain fragmented like the PS2 was, for at least the first year or two of the PS3's life."

Which also means I won't have to pay $30-$40/month to play online multiplayer games. Much like the Wii.

I didn't say the Xbox 360 was a PowerPC derivative, I said it was a Cell derivative. The PS3 has one processor core reserved for the OS, which means the Xbox 360 has one shared with the OS.

Oops, forgot something.

"You can bet they'll want to pass the costs along, either directly, or indirectly via in-lobby in-game advertising."

Much like EA does on the Xbox 360 by charging microsoft points for things that are free in the same game on other platforms? This just shows that game developers will do anything to make a buck.

"Which also means I won't have to pay $30-$40/month to play online multiplayer games. Much like the Wii."

This reeks on being uninformed. Live is 50 dollars a YEAR. And the online experience completely and utterly trumps anything else out there. Not giving the edge to the xbox for online gaming is being foolish.

And a few more things. Your processor comparison is inaccurate, I recommend you read the wikipedia pages for each chip. They set out to accomplish different goals and you cannot just say 8 > 3.

As for having only one genre, I agree this is partially true. However, Rare just released Viva Pinata which is getting rave reviews and Microsoft is working with the maker of the Final Fantasy series to release a whole slew of japanese RPGs. The first of these, Blue Dragon, is to be released December 7th in Japan so we'll see whether than influence the market over there. In addition to all of this, there is also the Live Arcade which has dozens of fun non FPS games. True, they aren't big production jobs, but they are enjoyable none the less.

samuel, err, yeah, I meant $30-$40/year, not month. Since xbox live is a retail product, it can usually be had for less than the $50/year MSRP.

Isn't Live Arcade a bunch of games from the 80s and 90s?

To clarify your Blue Dragon statement, it's being done by the *person* that created FInal Fantasy and other people associated with it and Chrono Trigger. It's not actually being done by Square-Enix. Oddly, it seems the company doing it was financially backed by Microsoft which is kind of odd.

"Isn't Live Arcade a bunch of games from the 80s and 90s?"

The arcade has both some classics and a bunch of new games, along with a selection of board games. You can check out the list here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_Live_Arcade#Xbox_Live_Arcade_games_for_the_Xbox_360

"it's being done by the *person* that created FInal Fantasy"

Right, that's what I meant. It's being created by Mist Walker Studios.

PS3 bias at its finest. Apparently, the 360 doesn't have advantages, only disadvantages. Very one-sided.

You mentioned:
20GB (optional for Core system), 14GB user accessible, non-upgradeable.

Uhm, the 360 hard drive snaps right off (it has a button) and can be upgraded. You can even take it to a friend's house and play your movies/arcade games there.

It's funny how your bias was glaring when you made the DNAS comment. You don't even have a clue of what DNAS is...and to compare it to Xbox Live is quite ignorant.

You also made a point about iHD vs. BD-J and how now that Java is open-source it is a win for BD-J. If you knew what you were talking about, you would understand that iHD is written in ECMAScript (Javascript), XML and CSS. ECMAScript is an open standard (ECMA-262 http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-262.htm) and there are several open source implementations.

Chris, uhm... Can you get a 200GB HD for the Xbox 360 now? If the answer is no, then it isn't upgradeable. Just because you can buy a new Xbox 360 HD from Microsoft designed for the Xbox 360, doesn't make it upgradeable. Conversely, with the PS3, you can take any off the shelf 2.5" HD from any retailer (newegg, Fry's, Best Buy) and put it in the PS3. That's the definition of upgradeable.

Furthermore, you're iHD analogy is flawed. The runtime itself for java is open source. iHD works off a series of specs, but the runtime itself isn't opensource. For example, the C++ has a specification, but every single compiler handles it differently. Same goes for CSS, every single implementation has quirks. There's a huge difference between a common runtime that is open source and everyone uses and some specs that leave out stuff that the implementors of the specs are free to "interpret". The latter is what makes the web so fragmented.

Rosyna,
It was because you wrote:

“…For example, one game that fills up the entirety of a Blu-Ray dual layer disc would require at least 6 DVD discs to hold all the same content…”

Sorry, but it would have been clearer to me if you had specified the size of the DVD in that sentence.

Yes, it is true that ECMAscript is open-source, but if you examine Microsoft’s programming guide for iHD, you will find that you can only use it to create and manipulate screens, menus, buttons and starting video clips via XML. The BD-J platform is a much more robust programming environment. It can actually connect, not only link to other sources on the internet, use web services, and download additional functionality. Future specifications allow for picture-in-picture and more.

Awwww Boooooo! I aint doggin PS3 in anyway but that shit is just to much money when the price goes down Ill be happy to buy it but on the hand 360 has better graphics. But in my opinion the 360 has the PS3, I used to hate Xbox period but now I Love It!! It has very exclusive games and features Xbox 360 Game System of The Year

Gears of War isn't a FPS (first person shooter)... It's a tactical 3rd person shooter, or "run and gun".

I do agree though, the really hyped Xbox blockbuster games are all shooters. But if you owned the original Xbox and didn't buy just the hyped blockbuster games you would know that there are and have been plenty of great creative original games for the platform.
I'm looking forward to all the sleeper hits to come to the 360.

Microsoft is releasing a larger hard drive for the 360 in 2007.

As for which system is better? Feh. I dunno. I'm a Nintendo boy first. Say whatever about that. But I've always had all of the systems. This time? Who knows? At $400 and $600 a pop I'm not buying either for a while. I'm not saying the technology isn't worth the price.. I just don't want to pay that much for a console. Like I said, in the past I've bought all of the systems.. so, now that the Gamecube/XBOX/PS2 gen is nearing it's end.. Gamecube was first in my house with the most enjoyed games. Second was the PS2. In distant 3rd was the XBOX. We could have done without the XBOX. That said, I'm thinking that the XBOX360 will be our next purchase after the Wii. Maybe after the first price drop, whenever that is. PS3? It's going to have to see at least 2 drops, if not 3, before I buy one. And then.. each will have mighty game libraries to choose from.

Who will be the "best" in power-hitting graphical achievements? I dunno. But I'm betting on the PS3.

NetworkShadow, a third person shooter is just a first person shooter with the camera behind the character.

Everyone who bought the 360 is going to feel stupid when the PS3 starts looking better in a year or so.

Everyone should read... I have both, and the Live experience makes the difference by a mile. In fact, Since the purchase of either of my systems, I am rarley not online doing something. IMO about 90% of people on with 360's are the same.

http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-348-1.htm

Bryan, that article's veracity is questionable at best. Mentioning things like the blu-ray drive failing from playing too many movies is just FUD. It's one of those things people throw out there when they're grasping at straws.

Then again, I could do the same thing and say that everyone is on xbox live all the time because most of the games are first person shooters and those types of games have very little replay value in single player mode.

"Then again, I could do the same thing and say that everyone is on xbox live all the time because most of the games are first person shooters and those types of games have very little replay value in single player mode."

Actually, it wouldn't be the same thing.
You would be making an assumption on the personal characteristics of the entire Xbox Live population.
Claiming that the BD drive is failing isn't personal interpretation. There is nothing opinionated about that statement.

To be honest, though, a console should be avoided in its infancy. Past experience has shown that both MSoft and Sony are both responsible for releasing consoles with a number of hardware and software errors.

As for the superior console. It's just personal.
Sony's PS3 has a lot of great features, at a bargain. However, I simply don't care for any of those features. Microsoft hit the mark by allowing the option of upgrading to a HD-DVD drive. It may cost more in the end, but for the majority of gamers out there without a huge HDTV sitting in their living rooms, the ability to avoid the additional cost is more than welcome. With the 360, I'm getting what I want now. With the PS3, it's more of an investment. The graphics may look better in the end, Blu-Ray may be the format of the future, and their online service may trump Xbox Live at some point. But, you know, if I want to invest in Sony, I'll do it through stock, not a damn console.

Dave, and that's my issue. People are way too quick to dismiss blu-ray. Just look at some of the games that are coming on multiple discs on the Xbox 360 already.

It's not about dismissing Blu-Ray. It's the misconception that most gamers own hi-def sets, or will soon. For many, including myself, hi-def is a VGA cable and my monitor. For most, the best quality available is a standard television running composite cables. Why else would Sony not feel the need to package HDMI/Component cables with their console by default?

Blu-Ray may be the greatest format EVAR. As it stands, however, the majority lack the hardware required to taste the eye-candies. Without HDTV, it's just a larger capacity. Then it boils down to multiple discs or HD installations. Personally, I am quite capable of changing out a disc, and I cringe at the thought of installing a game on a videogame console. Furthermore, I'd gladly change out a few discs rather than pay the additional cost associated with the PS3's Blu-Ray capabilities.

It's nothing personal against Blu-Ray, it's simply an investment I'm not willing to take for a videogame console. In my honest opinion, Sony missed the videogame market. Hell, I'm not even sure they were aiming for the same demographic. As a cool gadget with tons of possibility, the PS3 is amazing. As a videogame console, where you can grab a controller or two and hop into a game, it's horrifically bloated. Maybe that's the future of the videogame market, but the Wii's momentum is beginning to make a strong argument.

Do I believe the drive will advance videogames in the future? Yes, the storage will be vital. But multiple discs can solve the same problem, albeit with more trouble for the developers, but I'm just fine with switching out a few pieces of plastic.

BTW, good job with the review. I look forward to grabbing a PS3 after its matured and had a price-drop, but more for the Linux stuff, and maybe a few of the dedicated titles that will never make it outside of the Sony camp.

But it's not just about hi-def. The PS2 looked horrible to some people (like me) even on standard TVs. and Looked like vomit on LCDs (What marketing idiot decided to make PS2 demo kiosks connected to an LCD?!). But even with the low graphics and heavy dithering of the PS2, games still required more than one disc.

I personally just really hate it when non-linear game genres become linear due to limitations in the disc format. Square Felt the same way and that's why they left nintendo for all those years.

*["7 simpler vector processing cores"

Yeah, too bad grahics algorithms don't need a lot of vector calculations] EJ...*

This was the only comment with actual intelligence on this thread.

If you want to argue power and graphic capablility checkout this article from IGN.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html

It shows everything you need to know about the hardware specs and how they match up. But then again, power isnt everything. A 500hp Mustang gets stomped in a 1/4 mile drag by a 300hp Sti. Its all in how you use what you have to your advantage.

Personally I'm in a rut between which system I am going to purchase (probably end up getting both in the long run). PS3 will have Squeenix (as my friends and I call them) and the true FF series games as well as other populars such as Tekken and Gran Turismo. On the other hand, Xbox 360 will have it's own big names like Halo 3, Mass Effect (BioWare i think is only doing for Xbox), and Fable 2. I was raised as a PC gamer since the Rise of the Triad/ Duke Nukem days, so I'm a Mouse/Keyboard guy when it comes to FPS, so I'd rather be picking up Crysis or Hellgate: London for PC over Halo 3 anyday.

All in all, you need to decide which genre of games you prefer and buy the system that compliments those more... If you are like me and can't decide, save your milk money and buy both.

P.S. Just kinda thought of this after the fact, but as a PC gamer I've noticed a lot of Xbox games (being affiliated with MSFT) also come out for PC and are actually better IMO. But I can't say I've seen more than a few PSX games ported to PC, which would make PS3 more unique to its series.

This guy is truly a Playstation fanboy, he didn't mention any of the many PS3 flaws I've read in other reviews, and failed to mention any good about the 360(Live arcade, 160+ games, XNA, Diamond Card, and many more). This is the most biased piece of crap I've read.

Wilvin, honestly fanboys are people that mention stuff like XNA or the Diamond Card. The Diamond card is a gimmick. And you can't mention XNA without mentioning the linux support the PS3 has. And, unlike XNA, you don't need to pay $99 a year to run Linux on the PS3.

I have to agree with those who said this was a really biased review. While the PS3 is technically superior on paper, many developers have said that it is actually superior in many ways because of its efficiency and ease to program for by comparison.

The PS3 is an amazing piece of hardware, but it isn't leaps and bounds above the 360 and while in the future it may edge out the 360, it won't be by a very wide margin.

As for blu-ray, the problem with sony packaging that along with the system is that there are a lot of people that couldn't care less about having blu-ray/hd-dvd. I would much rather just pay for the system using normal dvd's and save the money, rather than spending several hundred dollars more for something I don't need and probably won't need for years.

And, while blu-ray does have more storage capacity than dvd's, you also have to consider the speed of the drives. The dvd drive in the 360 is significantly faster than the blu-ray drive, meaning that games will load faster on the 360. Sure this can be alleviated to some degree by installing alot of the game information on the hard drive, but personally, I would rather just have a game be easier to access from the get go. And I really don't mind having to change discs at all when the alternative involves spending several hundred dollars more.

Ultimately, what it all comes down to is the games and the prices.

*["While the PS3 is technically superior on paper, many developers have said that it is actually superior in many ways because of its efficiency and ease to program for by comparison."]* ...?

Where the hell did you get your information? I linked an article to the power comparison in my last post above. Obviously you didn't read anything which could backup your lame, repeated from someone else statement. The PS3 is significantly harder to program for because of its different approach to graphics/physics. Developers have not learned how to take advantage of this yet. Much like dual core isnt truly used in PC games, but it has been out longer than the 360 or PS3. Both systems are still in infantile stages, regardless of 360 having more time on the PS3.

I'm not biased either way (personally I own neither) but you kids complain about a biased review, yet all you defend is the system of your choice.

If you wanna run linux, go buy a PC. I dont buy "console" systems to install my games on the HDD so they run faster... thats called a "computer".

Very biased review. Just bought xbox 360 and is great. PS3 might also be great, i dont know yet but why must anyone post biased reviews?? I like the comment about the 500hp mustang and 300hp STi...

PS3 is a very good entertainment system. With the prices of HD LCD's approaching ~$700, HDMI cables ~$15, Netflix bluray dvd rentals, my old ps one games which can be imported to psp with ps3 and ability to play the old ps2 games which have considrably dropped in prices, the indentical interface between psp and ps3, motion sensitive controller. I think I made a wonderful choice of sticking to sony's line. I don't think any XBOX loyal customer is so lucky to have a seamless entertainment system. I do have the older xbox with all its cheap games. Just connect ps3 to a 1080p monitor play some games, watch a blue ray movie, browse the internet and then post something here. I too do not believe in what is on the papers, have a feel of it and see the possiblities that it can offer. I think it beats XBOX 360 in all respects. The looks, elegance, possiblities look endless with PS3 and I do not find that with XBOX.

This article was clearly biased towards the PS3. It is especially apparent when reading rosnya's defense of ignorant claims about such things like DNAS vs Xbox Live, HD upradability, etc. For example, just because the 360 doesnt have an upgradable HD now, doesnt mean it wont. And everybody knows that XBOX 360 already has a great service record, while playstation is still a mish mash of different methods.

Bias is when you start talking about some hypothetical future situation to defend what you prefer. The Xbox 360 doesn't have an upgradeable HD, that's how it is. This is fact. Don't talk about what Microsoft may or may not do. Talk about what's happening now.

what the hell! why u ppl go on about ps3 de whole tym? -i bought an xbox 360 and it is most jas! i love it... and from what i c is dat it beats ps3.. i hav read lyk 30 websites shit about ps3 vs xbox and the only 1with the detailed analysis of de hardware, it clearly shows dat xbox is beta! and rosyna! what de hell, everything dat someone says u jump in and say dat it is wrong bcos of ur baby, blueray or wateva u lyk 2call it... and in de long run de xbox will beat de ps3 just lyk de xbox beat de ps2.. history is reapeating itself. if u search ps2 vs xbox u will c dat ppl were super biased 2de xbox, just as day r doing now.. but in de end xbox proved top.. and microsoft is doing it again! and in what village do most of dese ppl get der infromation from about ps3 beating the xbox and its much easier 2program or wateva??

and, where can a person lyk me who has got a 360 find decent information on which console is betta? every effin site changes almost all de information! u confusing de good ppl of dis world :O

eager beaver, u are de man here 4showing ppl de microsofts analysis thingy... even tho it is done by dem, it shows dat ps3's supposedly faster stuff is not needed and dats y xbox is better, its lyk having a huge truck 2carry a small load, while xbox has many small vehicles carrying the smal loads! xbox is de efficient console between de 2! ---- and what de hell is happening 2gaming?? ppl worrying about all dis fancy shit lyk blue ray! ooooh... who de hell is so lazy dat day dont wana change cdz? -u must b one lazy and/or fat girl/guy rosyna

Wow..... I was actually enjoying the way these posts were going until kids started posting unnecessary comments. I would think that after reading, the owner of the last couple of posts would have a typical idea that other owners are mainly keeping their insults to themselves....
With that said, my two brothers and I have been contemplating on weather to get the 360 or the ps3. I personally think I’m going to go with ps3 simply because I have the extra 200 bones for it. Why not, I don’t think I’m going to be using half of the features it offers, but it’s nice to have just in case I want to.

I understand that ps3 is harder to program, I’m an amateur programmer myself, (which explains any poor spelling/grammar....) and I also understand that the 360 has a better graphics card. So I’m not going to say that ps3 is all out better because its not.... However, it does have its strengths. 360 does have a much better graphics card, but truthfully, that is not really the current 360 games look better then ps3 games(360 does look better right now though..) All visually compared games were most likely transitioned from 360 to ps3. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but aren't there were a few games that look better on ps2 then on Xbox due to this form of copying? And to take in even further, at about 30-40 fps, it would be pretty close to impossible to tell the difference between 40 fps, and 80 fps. Now, I have not had any problem with sp2 ever slowing down dramatically in fps(my experience) so I wouldn’t imagine the 360 or the ps3 would be pushed to a point where it would go lower then say 35 fps... I don’t think so. But look at it this way, having the extra power in graphics never hurts. You could actually think of it as more of a feature =). You may not use it, but it’s nice to have just in case.

Please don’t think I’m bashing Xbox throughout this post, but I really don’t need to say too much about 360 because it’s already been said.

Now on to the cpus and such. The 360 is easier to program, which in my opinion equals "better games faster." ps3 is short here due to the complicated hardware. So ps3's rushed games (like star trek lames as I like to call them...too bad) will be garbage. On the other hand, games that naturally take a while to make (rpgs, heavy space simulators I suppose...) I believe will take advantage of the extra horsepower under the hood. Besides the graphic calculations and logic passed over to the gpu, the main cpu(s) and its minions will be eating up just about everything else. I’m not sure if there will ever be games with calculations heavy enough to use ps3's full potential, but if there will be, that is a pretty big feature I would like to have....

So the way I see it is....either of the two systems would not be a bad choice with the information presented today. I would personally like a system that could keep track of the wear and tear of my weapon/ship/shoes/cloths/body through out the whole game!! The more processing power you have, the more possibilities exist for those kinds of details. For instance, I could be infected with a disease and throughout the whole game, you can see you character losing hair, getting weaker, turn your head fast and a couple hairs fall out... loll. Realism in the gaming world takes processing power. That is where I would stack my chips...

However, if you want a system that could always present a better display at a better frame rate and have an edge on short game development paired with flashy scenes and great displaying, (which is basically what games with short development times use to get customers, nothing wrong with that) that is where you should stack your chips.

Your choice, your preference.

Oh one more thing "I still consider xbox360 to be a failure in Japan" and "I don’t think a console can truly be popular unless it is popular in Japan...etc" by Rosyna

First comment.... Xbox did pretty damn good don’t you think?

Second comment....I don’t think any software is acceptable unless it’s approved/made by Microsoft (American)…... equally as unfair, equally as untrue. I believe Japan doesn’t buy Xbox simply because they don’t make it....I wouldn’t follow their bias opinion, and I won’t do the same thing either........

You wrote a very nice review, kinda hurt it with those comments.... =(

i've got 360, and it runs awesome. really like it and i've had no problems with it. just wondering: does the ps3 have any problems with overheating or noise? my 360 gets kind of hot sometimes, and the fan is kind of loud, but i've heard that the ps3 has problems with overheating. just wondering

Where are people seeing that the Xbox 360 is easier to program, the PS3 is harder? Other than that one "review" that said the Blu-ray drive was likely to fail and other such FUD. Secondly, why does it matter? You're not programming these, likely no one reading this is either.

So far all the cross platform games were ported from the Xbox 360 versions.

Have you seen the sales numbers for the Xbox 360 in Japan? I linked to them, and photos from the release in Japan. It's not doing well at all.

chris, the PS3 runs surprisingly quiet and cool compared to it's extremely large and heavy size. Where have you heard it had overheating problems?

Whoever posted that long review actually knows they are talking about for a change instead of all these bloated opinions repeated from someone else.

Roysna if you actually took a minute a did some research you would see that every site has something to say about Xbox and PS3 and all their stories are congruent (means "the same" for you children). PS3 does not have 7 cores like many ignorant people think. It has ONE CPU and 7 SPE's which are like lil helpers to do things... but they do not handle a processing load or manage threads. Just think of it like this... Instead of eating your 1 lb steak in one bite, the SPE's cut it up in 7 chunks for you to chew individually, but cutting up the chunks takes extra time and you can't eat them until you cut ALL 7 chunks. Now, on the Xbox side, it has 3 Cores, which is like having someone cut your steak, and someone feeds you a chunk while the other person wipes your mouth. It doesn't get done any faster than eating the 7 chunks, but it's EASIER to have someone cut it and someone else worry about feeding you right? I stress that last sentence A LOT because someone will say I'm pro Xbox or some crap... neither is better right now because neither is being used for what its made for, bottom line. I don't think I can dumb it down anymore for you guys.

As for sales in Japan... you have a Japanese company *cough SONY cough* who has dominated the Asian market since before most of us were born... nuff said. Let me put it like this. How many F-150's and Denali's do you see in Japan (I lived there for 2 yrs so yes I know) you might, might see one for every 100 Hondas or Toyotas. Now come to America which has more SUV's and Trucks on the road than 4 door cars... different culture guys, different results.

Rosyna, i had to post just to say that you are the stupidist, most unaccurate, and most ill-informed blogger i've ever come across, thanks for the laugh!! "Xbox Live is $30 - $40/ month" - what a moron!

Here's something of interest that some of you might like to read.. This is actually from a developer of all formats and pc games.And these are his own words..

Being a video game developer (I develop for both, Playstation 3 and XBOX 360) people ask me almost daily which platform I think is better. These are my personal feelings, in no way does this reflect my employer.

Short answer: XBOX 360.

Long answer: Price, performance, visual quality, game selection and online support. I think the XBOX 360 wins in every category.

Price: This is obvious; the XBOX 360 core is only $299. The PS3 is around $499 for the 20GB version. It comes with a hard drive, but you don’t need a hard drive to enjoy a lot of great games on the 360 so I think it’s fair to compare both core systems.

Performance: On paper, the PS3 is more powerful. In reality, it’s quite inferior to the 360. Without getting into too many details, the three general-purpose CPU’s the xbox360 has are currently FAR easier to take advantage of than the SPU’s on the PS3. I suspect a few years down the road some high budget, first party PS3 exclusive titles will come out that really take advantage of the SPU’s and do things the XBOX 360 can’t, but I don’t think the console is worth buying based on this speculation (for some it will be though, we'll have to wait and see how these games turn out).

Graphics: The XBOX 360 is a clear winner. The GPU is more powerful. It has more powerful fillrate, and far more pixel and vertex processing horsepower. Part of the reason is their choice of memory, and architecture of pixel and vertex procesing. I can’t get into details but the same vertex shader will run much slower on the PS3 than the XBOX 360. The 360 also has a clever new way rendering high definition anti aliased back buffers. To accomplish the same effect on PS3 is prohibitively expensive. For this reason I think many games will have no choice but to run in non-HD resolutions on the PS3 version, use a lower quality anti aliasing technique, or do back buffer upscaling. The end result in all cases is going to be noticeably worse image quality.

Game Selection: The XBOX 360 has a huge head start here. 1 year is an eternity in gaming. Almost all multi-platform developers have made the XBOX 360 their primary platform due to timing of release-to-market, this means the games will look and perform better on the 360. The PS3 versions will be ports of the 360 versions. (The opposite was true for XBOX 1 vs. PS2). The XBOX 360 is also far faster to develop for due to better development tools (massively popular Visual Studio .NET vs. proprietary, buggy PS3 compiler and debugger), better documentation, and easier architecture (3 general purpose CPU’s vs. 8 specialized processors that require DMA). Timing has also caused all next-gen middleware developers to make XBOX 360 their primary platform, and they will ‘add ps3 support’ as needed. This support will probably be inferior to the XBOX 360’s due to manpower and more importantly, demand. It’s this catch-22 now that will continue to drive the 360 forward and hold PS3 back.

The other obvious point here is that right now the Xbox360 already has a very impressive line-up of titles on store shelves; the ps3 just launched, and has virtually nothing of interest. Also, many 360 games are already discounted ($35 for Fight Night 3 on Amazon). PS3 games are all full price since it just launched.
Live: Microsoft’s online support with XBOX1 was phenomenal. They built in-house experience, user base, facilities, $$ commitment from executive level (since it proved successful), and most importantly, feedback from 100,000s of XBOX Live subscribers. Playstation 2’s online support sucked. They are now playing catch-up, trying to emulate Xbox’s model. But they had their hands tied just trying to make the PS3 work, it was incredibly ambitious (blu-ray etc.). I haven’t seen it yet, but I seriously doubt the quality will be anywhere to the level of XBOX 360.

HD Content: The PS3 comes with one built in (blu-ray). The XBOX 360 offers HD-DVD as an add-on for $200. You probably don’t care about HD-DVD right now. But you will soon (The quality between DVD and HD is comparable to VHS vs DVD, if you have the right TV) so I suggest paying attention to the war that’s begun. There are two formats: HD-DVD and BLU-RAY. Basically if you rent a BLU-RAY DVD from Bockbuster, it won’t play in your XBOX 360 HD-DVD, and vice versa with the PS3. The implications of this format war would require another article on its own. But as far as the consoles are concerned, the XBOX 360 wins because the DVD player is a separate unit. Playing movies is very taxing on the DVD reader, and let’s face it. In 3 years when your PS3 DVD drive goes out due to playing lots of movies (PS2 was notoriously bad about this) you will have to go buy another PS3. With the 360, you’ll just chuck your HD-DVD player, and go buy another one at the store. In 3 years standalone units wlil probably only cost about $99-150. Another point for the XBOX 360, is that I don’t know who will win the format-war, so I would rather wait with purchase of a HD player. The PS3 doesn’t give you this option.

PS3 controversy: Shootings, Wallmart fights, $15,000 Ebay sales etc. My advice is ignore it. It will pass soon.

Well with what I just left for everyone to read, I would like to say that I myself am a hardcore pc'er..And my gaming is actually on a 11'X 7' screen projected at a native 1280X720..Or actually 1280X768 or 750P.The reason that I bought a 360 is because of the fact that when you have two giants like sony and microsoft bringing their billion dollar investments to the battlefront against each other for reign over our dollars, PC games fall very short for about a year. Or when released, are released much later to help support the console benefits..Now, with DX10 around the corner, and waiting on games worth my while for the pc.. I bought a xbox 360, AFTER the ps3 came out..And something I noticed that suprised me was, the lack of the ps3 itself actually drove people to buy more 360's.. Christmas coming and a lack of puts you going to the other corner of the ring.. I actually bought the last 360 that was at the store and the last copy of gears of war, only because an employee of mine worked at the store as part time around Thanksgiving.. HMMM, Makes you wonder if sony had thought that one out very much?
As far as Japan games,I will have to classify that in a big category of "WHO CARES??" Half the games from there don't fit most us agenda, and vice versa..It has been like that since probably before the first ps1.. I will have to say that gears of war runs absolutely flawless and as far as gaming goes, EPIC's team did an awesome job of something refreshingly new and extremely addictive..I have over 700 dvd's and really use my pc and upscaling to enjoy them over the 360..Much more video control with a pc and powerdvd 7 does a great job.The ps3 upscaled still can not give all the control that comes with pc driver's and a decent video card..So, the dvd playback is fine, but NOT the reason I would buy either sysem.. That's for sure...Ironically the biggest eye candy that I have seen yet on either pc format or any other would be Call of Duty 3..I am a true gears man, but it has nothing on the raw beauty of COD3, and the amount of action actually makes you feel like a small prt in a very big and busy war... Gears on the other hand makes it more personal...Ironically, COD3 has the best water simulation that I have ever seen in a game.. Great work for a developer that DIDN'T make the first two installments of the game..
So with all said, the 360 has past my expectations in many ways.. Believe me when I say, it would take a bad ass pc to topple the action and all rendering with no frame loss at 1920X1080P.. And the 360 is easily playing the roll of the little engine that could...
It's a shame that Resistance couldn't be on the 360 as well.. It would have been fun to compare the frame rates of the two I think..
I hope that all platforms do well all in all.. Weither a game can run this resolution at this frame rate shouldn't be the question.. But as long as the games are fun and truly are next gen to me is by far more important..

Shawn28341... All I have to say is... THANK YOU. I've been trying to get this point across for almost a month now without being bias one way or another.

I too am a PC gamer at heart (like I stated in a previous post) and I got a Xbox for two reasons.

One: Games are badass for it, while PC games I want won't be out till Q4 07.

Two: My 6800 Ultra is outdated now and a new card would cost $500 easy and no DX10 yet to make it worth it.. Xbox was a $400 upgrade that will last me years, unlike my vid card would.

After owning a Xbox now and playing a PS3 at my buddy's I can definitely say Xbox is gonna be much better for at least another year with it's solid titles and great graphics. One PS3 finds it's niche, maybe it will be able to keep up, but until then 360 blows it away.

when ur intention to buy x360 is to replace you game life from ur computer then, one day when your computer graphic card is getting better and cheaper then all of you guys will go back to enjoy games at ur computer... I don't think its a good idea to upgrade ur xbox360 isn't it?

I was considering to buy xbox360, I own PS2 & XBOX, but my experience with my XBOX made me think twice to get another microsoft's product. After I'm using apple's mac os X, I realized that I've been using a crap OS all these years... I won't be tricked again by microsoft guys...
I bought the game controller of microsoft... and it really sux... I just use it once... and the time I play my xbox... I realized that they have the same problem. you can't play fighting game (like street fighter) on xbox, except you buy an extra joystick.

then I got my PS3 a few days ago... its just like using OS X for the first time...
open ur mind... don't b afraid to try something new guys...

this is just like religion... u should check everything first before you choose ur faith. or rather b an atheist. stick to ur PC.

Game: I never had an impression by US games ... guess it just different culture and perspective... Japanese game always came out with a great details, graphic and original... while US games always use the same method... (except PC games... I love PC Games like civilization, the sims... and other... like warcraft) but why should I play them on xbox?

My next console is Wii... (my wife had been waiting for it) she is not a gamer... but surely she can like wii...
360 is gonna be my last list to buy, when I have extra money, or when I want to play DOA volleyball (since you can't find on anywhere else)

HD-DVD with external device? this is a joke rite? what have microsoft think abt this? I won't buy it... even if PS3 have this kind of external device to play.... what? oh it got everything on it already...

the only things i regret abt PS3 is... they take away the "Dual Shock" feature...

I agree with this review compare to gamespot or other big name website... like the graphic comparison... its a pure joke... check out the game they compare? its all EA games... I played the NFS Carbon... the graphic is so terrible (when u compare to ridge racer 7 or evenworse to Gran Turismo HD)
I think EA just convert the game no re-master for PS3 system... I think they use 480 resolution.
its so sad, they can't appreciate their own game, how can they make a better game later...

I like Bill Gates, but I hate Microsoft.
I don't like Sony, but I love Playstations.

guys... keep cool okie~
you are confusing people who search for decisions.

btw I like your review.
Clear and Pure.

Rdali, the next time you speak, please think it over in english and actually make a valid point between all the brokeness. You have a typical one sided opinion which did nothing but bash something that doesn't appeal to your demographic. If you wanna play RTS games get a PC, don't knock Xbox because u can't play Civilization or Warcraft. Judging by the way you speak I doubt you can read, so let me sum up what our posts have been trying to accomplish. If you like what Xbox has to offer, get one. If you like what PS3 has to offer, get one. If you don't like one or the other, don't get one, bottom line.

I had actually wrote a little more from my last post here, but out of the goodness of my heart I took it out at the last minute..But after reading it again, I decided to add it anyways..

...."But as long as the games are fun and truly are next gen to me is by far more important.. And I’m sure that the ps3 and 360 will have that taken care for us in the years to come..But I personally never see me becoming a big Wii fan.. To me it’s the settling for a Monkey Vomit green 1979 chevette, in a world of high definition ferraris..Just not in the same category.And I personally think that even the name is lame…Do most men that game really wanted to buy a system named "wii"??I mean even the much anticipated Zelda, is IDENTICAL to the game cube version…If something of that nature happened to me with my 360 and my xbox, I would sell my 360 immediately and swear to every living person that I never was a fool big enough to buy their NEW NEXT GENERATION system…I think the wii is perfect for the people that have just bypassed Barney tapes and maybe Blue’s Clues..Or maybe just statred teething.Hey, give them a while, they'll have a game about teething with like Slurpy or some dumbass bubble headed character's name..Or it might be ok if you are like 80 plus and in an old home and personally never see yourself playing bowling ever again.. Or the outdoors for that matter, and would like to have some big bobbly head character to spend your little remaining time with til’ you get that big calling of bright lightstain your pants and go join Grandma.. For the rest of us,what does this system have to offer?It could have been a $30 controller added to the game cube and been done with it.. So for that matter, the price of newly named game cube with a crazy controller is way overpriced and can easily be seen as the biggest rip off pricewise of the three.If I ever had anyone ask me if I had a vga connection or dvi so they could hook up their wii in high def? I would try my hardest to not laugh while answering with.. "Why, Would it really matter?" Followed by," Go hook your Mickey Mouse game through a s-video and be done with it.." : 0) OK, no more bashing on the wii, for it surely is something that I must not understand…My gaming will be cutting edge and leave the Mickey Mouse characters that star in their games way way behind..I tell you, Not even if I owned a preschool!!! : 0)
Ok, I just had to get that off my chest..Everyone back to their bashing 360 but don't know anything about pc components,or trying to make themselves feel better for a $600 system they paid for with one game worth having.. Thank you for your time. : 0)

xbox 360 so far has way better games then ps3. all the good games for the ps3 are comming out in late 2007. xb360 already has some of their best games out already. although ps3 online is free you cant compare it to live.sure the ps3 has all the gismos with the blue ray and all but i bet ovber 85 percent of people that bought the ps3 didnt wnat to watch movies on hd. look at it like this if you bought a ps3, you got gipped for like a 100$

Been playing call of duty 3 so much the past two days on XBOX live so much and so many hours straight, that when I go to scope in and to snipe my my nerves get right jerky feeling.. It's beautiful and plays great in multiplay.. Gears is fun, and a must to go through if you own a xbox 360.. Especially in coop on inssane.. Great game.. But the maps for COD3 are versatile and changes the gaming experience quite a bit from each other..Some of the best qualities of this game is not truly seen right at the first time playing it.. But after experiencing it.. It will be the first game that you look forward to getting home from work to..Really should check this game out.. Also, there's a free map DL for it as well.. "Champs" is what's it's called..

I posted the last post but didn't show it for some reason.. Hmmm.. : 0)

commenting on the HD-DVD versus Blu-Ray capabilities: if playing high def movies is truly your concern, I would suggest HD-DVD. Please visit http://www.highdefdigest.com/feature_blurayvshddvd_firstcomparison.html for a completely unbiased comparison of movies released in both formats. Three movies are thoroughly compared and HD-DVD prevails in all of them. Not to mention the fact that the porn industry is allegedly embracing HD-DVD over Blu-Ray. Now before you PS3 fanboys begin ridiculing, think about a format war in the past: Betamax versus VHS. The porn industry exclusively chose VHS, which many speculate, ultimately resulted in a VHS victory. I would advise NOT purchasing your next-gen console based on its HD movie compatibilities.

I would also like to comment on the writer of the above article's assertion that the Xbox 360 may be a one genre pony. One, let's not forget games like Oblivion and Dead Rising: obvious potential outside the shooter realm. Two, Gears of War is NOT a first person shooter; it's a third person shooter and is played very differently from any shooter, or game for that matter, that I have ever played. Three, I think I can live just fine without games like Katamari Damacy, Okami, and Mr. Mosquito. Let's face it, I'd rather cut people in half with my chainsaw-equipped machinegun bayonet!

first!!!
f### all the concoles!!

second!!!
wouldn't it be great to have, for example: more things to kill in the came and a bigger and i mean a whole!!!! bigger map and a LOT!! of options!! when we don't look at the graphics at all??? instead of playing 5 ours of a breath taking graphics and expensive bullcrap that you can see things standing behind a wall in the other room!

third!!
do you know what is the price is of the blue-ray dvd player???? just look for it

forth!!
all the gamers with a peace of brain know that all the company's producing the consoles are selling thier console so cheap that they aint making no profits out of them!! in other words their cpu is more worth then your whole pc !!

conclusion:
never liked the XBOX!!! and now that it doesn't have the option too put 50 gigs on a cd i like it less. what you all say, I don't care!!! cause when games start coming out, with just let me say: all the cars, tracks, upgrades you can buy in real live for the cars and things you can do, you gona put that XBullSh.. away and play ya fingers off on the playstation 3 and regret ever buying it!! or just sit down and hope that Bill Fake produces a new and better thing:P:P ....SO PLEASE stop HATING the PS3. Its here, its new, and your all scarred of it :$.....

Please tell me that the fella that just posted was new to the entire English language, or is obviously trying to add some of this weeks new spelling words into this forum.. I'm not even going to take the time to put this young fella down for the points that he is trying to make..It would be kind of like picking on handicapped people.. it's just something that one shouldn't do.. But I do ask that every one please take a second and notice the name of the person that wrote this..Hopefully that will shed some light on the matter in some way form of fashion..Please try back when not quite as excited as to post online while grandma isn't looking, or better yet, just wait til atleast you have reached Junior High..Then try back.. Thanks for your time...
Sincerely, The Pres. of Unsanity.org

i think the 360 has far better grapics,Because the gpu is far more powerful im a game develiper for both 360 and ps3 the low down is xbox has better grapics!

the xbox 360 is better grapics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How is a 500Mhz GPU with 512megs of shared memory far more powerful that a 700Mhz GPU with 256megs of dedicated memory?

I never understood how people come to that conclusion. Especially since with all the SPEs the PS3 has, they can do dedicated work when the GPU is busy. Hell, it's one of the things multithreaded OpenGL takes advantage of.

I have a few problems with this "unbiased" story.

You said -

"As for Xbox Live vs DNAS, I guess I have to go the low route and dismiss the consoles as video game systems. I have iChat for a persistent online presence."

This smacks of Sony fanboyism when you said earlier that Sony was wise to make their console more of a "Computer" that boots seperate OS's and such but then use this argument to dismiss the strength of the Xbox360.

The whole point of "Live Anywhere" is that not only will you be able to play games across platforms (PC and Xbox360) and chat with people on your Friend's list from your XBox360 or PC (which you can do presently), but also from a cell phone. Nevermind the fact that your gamertag includes a constantly updated list of your gamerscore and achievments.

Also, is the ability to transfer, alter and trade gaming assets such as custom cars and characters from games through all three channels as well.

I own a PS3 and an Xbox360 ("Alfonse Capone" on 360, "Tiberius Jones" on PS3) and I fully understand the strengths and weaknesses of both consoles.

Essentially, the PS3 is stronger hardware from a pure brute strength perspective, but the 360's much-easier-to-program-for architecture negates this in many ways.

Third party exclusives, which were once the Silver Bullet that gave Sony an unbeatable edge, are now going the way of the Dodo due to increased development costs. Developers need to release their games on multiple platforms if they ever hope to make profits on these insanely expensive-to-produce games. That's why Sony keeps losing their exclusives (see Assasin's Creed, Grand Theft Auto for just the two biggest examples). Now it's rumored and speculated that the holy grail of Sony exclusives, Metal Gear Solid 4 is going to appear on the 360.

Another thing I definitely disagree with you about is your notion that Japanese sales are vital to the success of the Xbox360. Xbox1 was an utter flop in Japan in terms of sales, but they still managed to do pretty well worldwide. The more important thing this time around is that they garner some third party Japanese Developer support so they can fill the needs of North American gamers that want those kinds of games. As of right now they have done that in a big way.

What the PS3 needs to be successful is some games. Not ports of 360 games either. Where is my Motorstorm? Where is my Warhawk? I'm really sick of playing Gran Turismo HD Concept and the Motorstorm Demo.

If Sony can produce some great games and deliver them to market then they will be fine. But if they continue to Overpromise and Underdeliver, then they are going to lose a massive amount of marketshare to Microsoft over this generation's life cycle.

It will certainly be interestin got watch.

First of all, why do you think there are no "dating-sims" out? Simple Answer, they don't sell!! Btw, Gears of War is a third person shooter, not a first person shooter. With the PS3, where are all the good launch titles, Resistance is the only remotly decent shooter currently out. I'm not disputing that the PS3 is a great console, but do you think you could've made the review any more biased?!?!?!

I would like to say that I've been Gaming for years since I owned an Atari 2600. I seen Consoles for a long time. I owned every Nintendo System, Dreamcast,PS1, and still own the PS2. During the last generation of games I felt the PS2 was better than the original Xbox not because of the system it had better games. I love Nintendo and always will but when GTA3 came out on PS2 I had to have it, the gamecube had to go because no games were coming out good. PS2 was the go to system. I hated the original Xbox but I always knew it had potential Ninja Gaidem, DOA, Halo, and other games show me then but I want to wait for what MS would do next. Honestly I've played all 3 new consoles the Wii, PS3, and Xbox360. In the end I bought the Xbox 360 not to say I'm a fan of microsoft or anything but Gears of War is breathtaking and so is Lost Planet. I was wrong in the past about Xbox and they are in my heart as well as nintendo. Now to Nintendo, Wii is a gamers paradise the controller is a marvel and the games aren't bad for right now better than N64 and Gamecube launch games by far. Zelda is also Excellent it's a tie between it and Gears of War. Gears of War was my sole reason for getting a 360 I may be a year late but damn the 360 is awesome the games are getting better and I may hop on the halo bandwagon because I played it and I like it can't wait for Halo3. Now for Sony, PS3 let me down hugely, I actually wanted the PS3 first when I saw the games they were gonna have I was for sure Sony was gonna take over the gaming industry for years to come. Resistance Fall of Man is Fantastic so PS3 has potential but right now 360 and Wii are kicking PS3 ass, PS3 don't have enough games and 360 are getiing most of their past exclusives and ms have 1st party surprise this time round. Nintendo is also amazing with the third party, Sony made 3 major mistakes to me. 1.They underestimated MS and Nintendo because of the PS2 Success, 2. Blu Ray is what is really holding them back it's too far into the future and it's killing them not everyone ready for it yet but years to come PS3 will come into light because of blu-ray just not right now. and number 3 for damn sure is the price $600 for a PS3? and to think I wanted one when I hear about it, but 360 and PS3 don't have a major difference in graphics I played them both and to be honest the 360 games looked better but down the road PS3 will be the superior one in graphics. The Wii is just amazing, Nintendo did it again and made a huge comeback. Microsoft is now a force to be reckon with and I predict they may win the console war I bought my 360 for $400 and it was worth every penny. I know someone with a PS3 and he just sold it to get a 360!!! PS3 isn't as bad as people make it out to be, it just that Sony didn't listen to the needs of the gamers and is paying a huge price and Yes I see PS3 all the time, Few 360's and the wii you can't find it nowhere. I want a wii, got a 360, and maybe I'll buy a PS3 just maybe but right now PS3 will be sitting at the store because it's just a technical paperweight.

I have been gaming since Nintendo came out with mario bros/duck hunt. I owned all consoles expect xbox1. I never liked Xbox1, I absolutely loved my PS2.

Onto the present. I purchased a 360 on release day(was itching to play some HD games on my brand new 40" Sony Bravia LCD flat panel) and also got a PS3 on its release day. My opinion is the 360 blows the PS3 out of the water so far. If it wasnt for the beautiful blu-ray movies I have been wathing on my PS3 I would have regretted purchasing it.

Everything - online experience(future of gaming),graphics, game play, paddles, looks(PS3 is much too bulky/heavy),console dashboard, ability to connect computer via media center - all of these features are in my opinion CURRENTLY better on teh 360. I have probably played my PS3 for about 5 hours within the last month(not including watching blu-ray movies) vs about 85-100 hours on the xbox 360.

If it wasn't for blu-ray my PS3 would be a dust collecting, heavy paper weight. Lets hope Sony can step up the online experience and get some real games that can compare to the 360..until then its looking more like Microsoft will have the market share of the video game industry after all is said and done.

What should I do! Im a huge Halo fan so I want Halo 3 on Xbox 360 but from everything ive heard PS3 is better...

Just buy a 360 if your an halo fan and dont give ps3 a god damn shit. IT SUCKS

The Xbox 360 rocks!!

Rosyna, when you say
'How is a 500Mhz GPU with 512megs of shared memory far more powerful that a 700Mhz GPU with 256megs of dedicated memory?' you do realise that the ATI chip in the 360 uses unified shader architecture, with 40 shader pipes which can be shared out in any way a programmer wants, as opposed to the 21 dedicated pixel pipelines and something like 8 vertex shaders on the RSX? I frankly have no idea how much performance increase the unified shaders bestow, but the fact that the PC gaming industry is making a drive for unified shaders with DX10, and on evidence gleaned so far from a friend in the development industry, it seems a pretty handy thing to have.
PS I own a Wii and a 360, and may buy a PS3 as well, but frankly Microsoft seem to have taken the innovative route for a change (though not nearly as fun and innovative as Nintendo) and I salute them for that!

rubbish, dont know what this person is on. The first thing is all thae games so far avalable on ps3 takes about 5 mins to load. which knocks his comments on the hard out. Also the ps2 dvd drive did not last very long because of all the movies being played on it.

bollocks fucking wanker ps2 shit fuck weed

Finbar, you seem to miss something fundamental. There is absolutely no law that says everything has to be done on the GPU. If you have a bunch of CPUs to work with, use them all, don't just let them sit there.

Good points were raised. I happen to be the owner of a PS3 and an X-box 360. In fact I've owned several X-box 360's because the console is overrated garbage. No offence to X-box fans. Before the hate comes, I even bought my girlfriend an X-box so we could play Rainbow Six Vegas online together with my friends. After buying three X-box systems and all the supplies needed to get it online and make it a trully enjoyable experience, I've determined that the system is more expensive than the PS3 by far.

In order for the X-box measure up to the PS3, you have to buy 99 dollar network adapter pay 50 bucks for X-box live, and then spend another 50 bucks or so a memory card. Lets not forget the 40 dollar battery pack, and sooner or later I'll have to buy a bigger hard drive since the 20 gig one is out of room. By the way i also spent 200 dollars on the HD-DVD add on. Due the math and that 600 dollar PS3 dosen't seem to expensive.

Dollar for dollar the PS3 is a far superior machine and this is comming from a guy who slept outside to get both of them on launch day. X-box live is a great service, but Sony has an answer to it that is far superior. It is called "Home." and it looks amazing. The larger hard drive and the fact that Sony Console have a ten year life span ensure that I'll be playing my PS3 long after X-box only users have been conned into buying a new device from microshaft. Hell if you x-box users are lucky, maybe the next version of the X-Box, won't freeze win playing games online, and decide to have its start button turn red and stop working. Did I mention I've have three X0box 360's in less than a year. If it wasn't for first person shooters the system would be dead.

The PS3 just came out, and it has one great fighting game. VF5 a great racing game, MotorStorm, and a greap FPS, Resistance. If that is a sign of the things to come, then the console will be viable 7 years from now. Out of the box, sony stumbled, shouldn't have relied on ports of X-box games, and the system really needs games that show off the hardware, but dollar for dollar the PS3 hardware kicks the X-box on its ass. The games will come, GT. FF, and Metal Gear are all comming and they will blow X-box games away. Microsoft only has one great game left to show off its console, that is Halo 3. After Halo thier is nothing else, except maybe a new system release and Microshaft knows it. Gear os War is produced by Epic, and it can easily find itself on another console.

hahahaha you make me sik! you make the xbox sound like it has nooooo chance but YOU ARE WRONG! ive played both and i far prever the 360. you know why?? cause its got better games that are funner and its capabilities are nearly exactly the same exept for some fancey over priced blue ray crap! who cares about hi def movies and if you are then you can buy a hd def dvd add on for the 360 haha they have the answer to everything. i would like to end with one comment....... the ps3 isnt as good as the 360 was 14 months ago and gears of war rocks!!!

go 360!!! better performance smoother frame rate and cheaper!
better games better companies making games for it as well so its obviose which is better
GO xbox

Very good write up,

Both the 360 and the PS3 have their pros and cons, though I do think the PS3 is less expensive in the long run. Like others before me have mentioned, you need to spend a lot of extra money in order to get the 360 up to it's optimum performance. The load times with PS3 are atrocious and it gets very annoying quickly. However, I've had to replace my 360 once already since I bought it after the laser stopped reading discs. I haven't had this problem yet with the PS3, but we'll see. Honestly though, I prefer the Wii to both of them. It's the fun factor that is the most important, and the Wii seems to have captured that much better than either Microsoft or Sony's new system. Games like Wii Boxing will still be fun to play in 20 years, but I don't know if I can say the same for a racing game on PS3 or 360 that will look severely outdated by that time. Plus, the Wii is the best bargain of them all in the long run. Just thought I'd put my two cents out there. Carry on!

quote by"shawn 28341

",For this reason I think many games will have no choice but to run in non-HD resolutions on the PS3 version, use a lower quality anti aliasing technique, or do back buffer upscaling. The end result in all cases is going to be noticeably worse image quality."

What a load of horse shit,you x-box fan-boy,now get back to team x box all where-ever you live.

It's always going to be an age old debate. Mac vs PC. PS3 vs Xbox 360 vs Wii. Which is better? The answer: when it comes to your entertainment, they are all the same.

The two in debate offer DVD capability; the two in debate offer online capability and they both have kick ass games that are fun to play.

Personally, I have only played the PS3 and Xbox 360. And to be quite honest they looked the same, ran the same in-game and kicked ass.

Me personally, I can care less about watching movies or surfing the web with a console. I have a computer that can do that. I have a DVD player that works just fine for movies too.

One system gives you everything for a price, while the other gives you those same option to acquire when you can afford it.

Both are a plus depending on your income. Both are aimed to please and they do just that.

A true gamer enjoys gaming period. A true gamer doesn't look to bash the differences, they accept them and enjoy them.

Bottom line: What can you afford right now?

Cause I can guarantee you one thing...no matter which way you go you'll be paying out' your ass to have some good fun. lol

i got both x box360 & playstation 3 . we have to wait for about a year to see which is a better system.

while i disagree with microsofts approach to all things x-box 360(add ons, failure rates, no hd dvd inclusion...) i can undrestand where they are giong with this thing. the average lifespan of a console is about five years and with sony using brand new technolagy it may take five years before developers learn to really exploit the true potential of the cell processor. by then the it will be time for a new console. unless sony is planning on extending the life of the ps3 to 10 years or more then the decision to include the cell processor is a two edged sword at best. i personally would have waited until the cell was tried and tested on computer. we'll see how things pan out though. i perfer x-box but i know the compatition is good because no mater which format wins, we the consumers are the real winners.

Quick Note, You can buy bigger Hard Drives for the Xbox 360.

And please add the Elite System, Untill then, Xbox Data is false.

Halo 3 kills every other console so you ps3 fan boys are just gonna have to sit back and watch us play it lol its also a pity you dont get as much of GTA 4 as we do eh? owell everyone cant all ways win :)

Can i say just one thing,xbox 360 plays games on dvd s these only have 8-9 gigs of space maximum bluray has 50gigs. currently ubisoft are having problems with assasins creed on both consoles. xbox 360 problem is that it wont all fit on a dvd disc needless to say ps3 doesnt have this problem. however ps3 is having memory problems not sure about the specifics coz that was all that was said.

Conclusion: if the xbox 360 games are struggling for space now prospects dont look good for future games especially as there is no work around, if a game doesnt fit it doesnt fit full stop. whereas there is a work around memory utilizing problems the majority of the time

PS3 is teh best system in the whole world it pwns all, so go suck ur Gonads.

"Halo 3 kills every other console so you ps3 fan boys are just gonna have to sit back and watch us play it lol its also a pity you dont get as much of GTA 4 as we do eh? owell everyone cant all ways win :)"
Haha, we have a joker in the room! And it makes no nevermind to you that the ps3 is taking off on it's own? Whatever though, I love fanboys. They write great after hours reading material!

On topic: the built in hard drive that comes with the ps3 is great, but a little small IMO. Good write up though.