PS3 or Xbox?

[Gazjs]

I am looking into the possibility of buying one of either the PS3 or Xbox. What do you all recommend?

The "red rings of death"??? puts me off the Xbox and the one i tested in GAME seemed a bit slow at loading.

Not tried the PS3 yet.

What are others views?

[DanGull]

The only use my PS3 gets at present is as a Blu-ray player.

If I could only have one of the three (I have all three) next gen consoles, it would be the XBox. I have never had a red ring of any type (get a cooling fan extension when you buy it).

XBox Live is far, far better than PSN - plus you can get going on Forza and join in on our Fiesta races

[JohnP]

i'd say PS3, i much prefer it to the wii (which is why i traded that in) and i like the whole way it operates compared to the xbox. although to be fair the differences between the xbox and ps3 aren't that big and both are really good consoles, its just the newer slim line ps3s have big hard drives and the ability to play blu ray.

[vinnyvangough]

PS3 all day every day

Only good thing for XBOX is Forza.

Ps3 has wireless rechargable controllers, need batteries for the Xbox ones

Ps3 has blu-ray

Ps3 is by far more reliable

Graphics are better on Ps3 IMO

[Dave-2912]

Definately get a PS3. Beats xbox in every area IMO.

[DanGull]

PS3 all day every day

Only good thing for XBOX is Forza.

Ps3 has wireless rechargable controllers, need batteries for the Xbox ones

Ps3 has blu-ray

Ps3 is by far more reliable

Graphics are better on Ps3 IMO

On the controllers there's no difference really - in fact I prefer having the batteries removable in the XBox. I have four controllers for XBox and four for PS3 - and often do four player gaming. If one of the controllers on the PS3 runs out, it needs to be plugged in to carry on - with the XBox you can do that, but alternatively you can also grab a battery which has already been charging on the station and keep going no problem.

Everything else - you're right, but Gaz needs to bear in mind that there are barely any PS3 exclusive games.

[vinnyvangough]

But the batteries are crap. My PS3 ones last a LOT longer than my little bro's XBOX ones

[DanGull]

But the batteries are crap. My PS3 ones last a LOT longer than my little bro's XBOX ones

Really? Mine are on a par...

[thesilverfox]

If you don't have a Blu Ray player, the PS3 is tempting.

That said, the online experience generally is much better for me on the 360. Graphics don't alone make a game, but when it comes to cross-platform games (GTA 4, Fallout 3 etc), developers seem to favour the 360 for development and as a result seem to have slightly better visuals.

As I already had a Blu Ray player, I opted for the 360. I've since decided that the controller is actually far better for my larger hands. People say the analog stick should be elsewhere, but only because that's where Sony did it first! The new Razer Onza is set to blow the stock controller out of the water - I've had the pleasure of testing one out and it was absolutely superb.

[Gazjs]

Anybody able to compare the loading times of each?

I currently have a Wii and PS2 so any graphics will be much improvement

[thesilverfox]

Anybody able to compare the loading times of each?

I currently have a Wii and PS2 so any graphics will be much improvement

Well, once a game is installed, the 360 loads games pretty quickly. The PS3 should be the same.

[DanGull]

Anybody able to compare the loading times of each?

I currently have a Wii and PS2 so any graphics will be much improvement

Yes - because I have Fifa 09 and 10 for both platforms (I have friends who own one console or the other and like to play them all online...)

XBox wins it by a mile for loading times - which is odd as the PS3 is the technically superior console. The look of the PS3 is somewhat slicker on the identical TV, and the XBox does rarely crash claiming 'the disc is dirty' (it does this even on brand new discs and after the bay has been cleaned...) I can't help thinking that the PS3 takes longer because it produces a better end product...

[thesilverfox]

I can't help thinking that the PS3 takes longer because it produces a better end product...

Unlikely. The end product is mostly down to the GPU, which in theory, the 360 has a superior GPU to the PS3. Loading times are down to the CPU and ahrd drive seek, as well as the RAM etc. That said, the cell processor in the PS3 is better than the 360's offering, yet developers are struggling to make full use of the cell processor at present.

The biggest plus to the PS3 other than Blu Ray playback, should be the capacity of the discs for newer games, like FF XIII. Mulitple disc games should be no more, yet sadly, they will be on the 360.

[Gazjs]

Looking today i was surprised how much cheaper the Xbox was.£209 for the super elite forza pack inc another game.

Am i correct that it cost money to use the xbox online and that it cannot be done through wireless?

[DanGull]

Looking today i was surprised how much cheaper the Xbox was.£209 for the super elite forza pack inc another game.

Am i correct that it cost money to use the xbox online and that it cannot be done through wireless?

An year's XBox Live membership can be had for around £25 on eBay - access to the PSN is free.

It can be done through a wireless network - with the additional purchase of the wireless access pack.

By the time you add on the extra bits you have to buy to bring an XBox up to PS3 spec, they're around the same price.

[Gazjs]

Thanks for all the help.

I think i will start saving for the PS3 :D

Is it best to go with the biggest hard drive?

[DanGull]

Yes - and if you're saving save longer and get both

[thesilverfox]

You can bridge your Xbox connection to a PC to avoid having to buy a wireless adaptor. I do this and it's perfect :) Saves the rip-off adaptor.

As for the online services, try them both out. Allegedly, the Xbox Live service is meant to be better, but I have not yet used PSN. You'd hope paying for it made the service what it is. Mine has been fine so far :) Anyone on XBL here?

[Paul D]

You can bridge your Xbox connection to a PC to avoid having to buy a wireless adaptor. I do this and it's perfect :) Saves the rip-off adaptor.

As for the online services, try them both out. Allegedly, the Xbox Live service is meant to be better, but I have not yet used PSN. You'd hope paying for it made the service what it is. Mine has been fine so far :) Anyone on XBL here?

ok had a read of all comments,

Xbox will take you roughly 30 mins to 50 mins to set up with all updates. PS3 took me 10 mins to set up

Also, Xbox will charge for the online Experinece. PS3 you buy the game, away you go!

Xbox is using a HD drive, of which only Xbox support whereas PS3 is future proofed with a Recognised Blueray format drive.

If you want wireless, Xbox will pump you for 45 quid for a dongle that they rebranded and made for probably 5 quid

PS3 its built in.

Xbox allows Sky content, for a price, PS3 BBC Iplayer is there, for free.

Ohh and if someone can confrim this last comment, PS3 you can stream your films etc from Server to PS3 to watch (I know this is correct), Xbox, cant?

i get my 2nd PS3 on Friday, and will be set up in bedroom where the other is used more as a player in livingroom from Streaming.

PS3 winS!

[thesilverfox]

ok had a read of all comments,

Xbox will take you roughly 30 mins to 50 mins to set up with all updates. PS3 took me 10 mins to set up

Also, Xbox will charge for the online Experinece. PS3 you buy the game, away you go!

Xbox is using a HD drive, of which only Xbox support whereas PS3 is future proofed with a Recognised Blueray format drive.

If you want wireless, Xbox will pump you for 45 quid for a dongle that they rebranded and made for probably 5 quid

PS3 its built in.

Xbox allows Sky content, for a price, PS3 BBC Iplayer is there, for free.

Ohh and if someone can confrim this last comment, PS3 you can stream your films etc from Server to PS3 to watch (I know this is correct), Xbox, cant?

i get my 2nd PS3 on Friday, and will be set up in bedroom where the other is used more as a player in livingroom from Streaming.

PS3 winS!

Certainly some extremely valid points. May I respond?

1. Updates never took me long - about the 10 minutes or so you mentioned for the PS3 was the same in my experience for the 360.

2. The XBL service is indeed £26 a year, but as some have mentioned, it still has very high subscription rates which would suggest it's a good service. No doubt PSN is good too - not really heard anything bad, other than whiney kids (they're everywhere)

3. The Xbox doesn't use an HD DVD drive - it's a DVD-ROM drive. The HD-DVD drive was an optional extra, which I won't hesitate to say - sucked donkey bits. The 360 plays DVDs and music/data CDs just fine though.

4. Built-in wireless was a naughty one to miss off - totally 100% agree with you there! I however, have never had an issue, as I game via ethernet or at worst, an ethernet bridge - wireless gaming is not ideal on any system, as it increases latency and ping times to the point games like COD are noticeably lagging. Connection dependent, but the times don't lie. Home plug is a good alternative too for all consoles, as latencies are practically nil and no cables around the house - all done via the electrical system!

5. iPlayer would certainly be nice on the 360, but that's been put back again. I don't use it much on my PC anyway, because a lot of stuff is only available for a limited time period, which I always seem to miss! Pretty sure this is a loss for the 360 though, as the Sky player is rubbish!

6. Xbox 360 works as a media centre extender much like the PS3. Reports now too that with the Divx 7 updated, streaming 1080p content (even mkv files I hear), is more or less perfect. The PS3 still can't deal with mkv files without splitting them I think - it has some problems, but is on the whole rather decent too.

That said, if you are thinking of playing your music back over HDMI into your TV/amp, it sucks. music over HDMI from a console is awful compared to my modified X-Fi, which I use in a spare PC.

7. The Blu Ray player was a very smart move from Sony. Regardless of the fact it's not in the 360, Microsoft were never going to bend over to Sony and use their technology in their consoles. Not to mention Sony would never permit it - it's their game winner! Much how Microsoft never used the HD DVD drive as standard - they probably knew full well it would be the lesser technology at the end of the day.

So while both have their merits, I too would choose the PS3 if I didn't already have a Blu Ray player and a WDTV player. I have 4TB of mkv files now, and the Blu Ray player rarely gets used sadly - should probably give it to my parents. So with that in mind, I'd buy the cheaper format, which coincidentally, is the format multi-platform developers choose to develop games on (apparently because the Sony cell processor is hard to get on with and the 360 is a glorified PC).

What is interesting though, is that the 360 has sold more units to date - I suspect because of a) earlier release and b ) the PS3 was more expensive for a long time.

[Paul D]

Certainly some extremely valid points. May I respond?

1. Updates never took me long - about the 10 minutes or so you mentioned for the PS3 was the same in my experience for the 360.

2. The XBL service is indeed £26 a year, but as some have mentioned, it still has very high subscription rates which would suggest it's a good service. No doubt PSN is good too - not really heard anything bad, other than whiney kids (they're everywhere)

3. The Xbox doesn't use an HD DVD drive - it's a DVD-ROM drive. The HD-DVD drive was an optional extra, which I won't hesitate to say - sucked donkey bits. The 360 plays DVDs and music/data CDs just fine though.

4. Built-in wireless was a naughty one to miss off - totally 100% agree with you there! I however, have never had an issue, as I game via ethernet or at worst, an ethernet bridge - wireless gaming is not ideal on any system, as it increases latency and ping times to the point games like COD are noticeably lagging. Connection dependent, but the times don't lie. Home plug is a good alternative too for all consoles, as latencies are practically nil and no cables around the house - all done via the electrical system!

5. iPlayer would certainly be nice on the 360, but that's been put back again. I don't use it much on my PC anyway, because a lot of stuff is only available for a limited time period, which I always seem to miss! Pretty sure this is a loss for the 360 though, as the Sky player is rubbish!

6. Xbox 360 works as a media centre extender much like the PS3. Reports now too that with the Divx 7 updated, streaming 1080p content (even mkv files I hear), is more or less perfect. The PS3 still can't deal with mkv files without splitting them I think - it has some problems, but is on the whole rather decent too.

That said, if you are thinking of playing your music back over HDMI into your TV/amp, it sucks. Music over HDMI from a console is awful compared to my modified X-Fi, which I use in a spare PC.

7. The Blu Ray player was a very smart move from Sony. Regardless of the fact it's not in the 360, Microsoft were never going to bend over to Sony and use their technology in their consoles. Not to mention Sony would never permit it - it's their game winner! Much how Microsoft never used the HD DVD drive as standard - they probably knew full well it would be the lesser technology at the end of the day.

So while both have their merits, I too would choose the PS3 if I didn't already have a Blu Ray player and a WDTV player. I have 4TB of mkv files now, and the Blu Ray player rarely gets used sadly - should probably give it to my parents. So with that in mind, I'd buy the cheaper format, which coincidentally, is the format multi-platform developers choose to develop games on (apparently because the Sony cell processor is hard to get on with and the 360 is a glorified PC).

What is interesting though, is that the 360 has sold more units to date - I suspect because of a) earlier release and b ) the PS3 was more expensive for a long time.

If i was being ultra honest, i would say if you;re going to play games online, get a decent PC, much better overall.

But i agree with your points, i think its like PC vs Mac everyone has their preference, and will bring good points to the table, its purely down the user and their needs and what their friends have too

[thesilverfox]

If i was being ultra honest, i would say if you;re going to play games online, get a decent PC, much better overall.

But i agree with your points, i think its like PC vs Mac everyone has their preference, and will bring good points to the table, its purely down the user and their needs and what their friends have too

I actually converted from PC gaming, as I was fed-up of frequently needing to update GPUs in order to play new games as intended. It became an expensive hobby and there were far easier ways for PC gamers to cheat than consoles (which do have their issues too).

FPS games are still a bone of contention, but otherwise, I know games will work right away and not need hardware patches and work-arounds or new GPU drivers to fix bugs half-way through a game unprompted (consoles tend to update instantly).

Sure, a PC is more versatile, but everyone's got a PC to work on. Consoles are just convenient and fairly low cost :) Suits me!

But the biggest thing to forget is that most people play PC games at a desk, and play console games on a sofa (or equivalent). I know where I would rather be!

[vinnyvangough]

I have streamed 1080p films from my external hard drive, through usb to my laptop, wireless to the router, and ethernet to the PS3. It struggled but did it on one film, the other 2 i tried no joy. But streaming normal films its just so DAMN GOOD

[thesilverfox]

I have streamed 1080p films from my external hard drive, through usb to my laptop, wireless to the router, and ethernet to the PS3. It struggled but did it on one film, the other 2 i tried no joy. But streaming normal films its just so DAMN GOOD

Yeah, there are kinks to iron out on both consoles to be fair and unbiased.

Most of my mkv files are between 10GB and 15GB with non-scene bitrates, so it can get slow at the best of times from a USB 2.0 hard disk being software decoded. Thankfully, the WDTV uses a Sigma processing chip that is used in a number of Blu Ray players, and it's perfect with USB devices. There is unofficial wireless support too for streaming, but I digress

[vinnyvangough]

To be honest, a lot of it is just peoples preferances from years ago.

IE, I had the PS1, PS2 etc etc Just a bit of company loyalty

Both got advantages. Both got disadvantages.

I see what you say though