Saaking's Blog 2: Xbox 360 vs. PS3

[lh_swe]

And I can't disagree but I dont see how this is worth my approval since it's stating the same thing that almost every fanboy war of N4G ends up clarifying.
Good try but its all the same as before and it'll do a lot of people good if they can stay away from this article, sorry.

[RockmanII7]

"Wow, 360 beaten again by the PS2. Why doesn't MS just take the 360 out of the market. Seriously it's pretty sad now."

"Only the bots are stupid enough to believe Paid is better than free. You seriously gotta feel sorry for those guys."

"And the bots think Flopza looks good"

"Look at these bots. HAHA, jealous bots"

"Flopza isn't even competition."

"Most games on delaybox got delayed to 2010. The bots were waiting all year only to have their precious games taken away, while we PS3 owners have been enjoying games all year."

Yea, big shocker there.

[iChaos Amongus]

As owner of both I'm gonna have to disagree Saaking.

[JoySticksFTW]

I own both consoles also, and actually agree with Saakings's assessment.

I don't think this blog was written in a flame-bait type of way...

If I were to change anything, it may be like this...

Price advantage: Winner 360

While PS3 winner with the features included. It has a high entry price. And if you're just looking for next gen gaming without all of the bells and whistles, the 360 might be the way to go with consles starting at $199 and lower depending on the deals you may find.

Multiplatform games: Winner 360

While the quality of multiplat games on both systems draw closer to each other now, that wasn't always the case. 360 multiplat games used to have the upper-hand as developers were still trying to wrap their heads around the PS3's architecture.

These days, that is much less of a concern... While there is still the occasional Ghostbusters scenario, games such as Rage reveal (as indicated by the game's developer) that the 360's hardware could actually have an adverse effect on games. And while it's true that PS3 may get a superior version of the game with added content, it's usually well after the 360 version has been released.

Going forth, multiplaform game differences is a non-issue, but for those looking at each systems back catalog of multiplat games, may want to go with the 360.

DLC: Winner 360

Me personally, I don't buy a lot of add-ons for games. But if you do, 360 is the console to turn to for DLC that is often exclusive - timed or otherwise. Sure, PS3 has it's exclusive content, but the sheer amount pales in comparison to the 360's.

But I don't think anything that Saaking wrote was incorrect...

[Saaking]

I took off my fanboy goggle for this. I actually didn't think about splitting games into exclusives and multiplats. The 360 definitely would've won multiplats and it definitely has a price advantage. You just can't say the 360 has better hardware or better features than the PS3; however, it's quite obvious XBL is ahead of PSN and Games are down to preference so I made that a tie.

[NineteenSeventyNine]

If your fanboy goggles are off then you wouldn't have completely ignored those you know the 360 wins in.

Here's how your blog should've went:

Hardware: PS3
Graphics: PS3
Exclusives: 360
Features: PS3 (Splitting hairs, this goes under hardware)
Online: 360
Games (Quantity): 360
Games (Quality): 360
Multiplats: 360
Price: 360

See what I did there? I split hairs just so I could claim the 360 has more categories won. And that's what you DON'T do when you write attempt to write an objective blog (maybe you should write that down). A crafty tactic, indeed.

[Saaking]

How am I "splitting hairs"
I rated, Graphics (important), Hardware (very important), features out of the box (important, games (very important), and Online. Games are down to personal choice so I made that a tie. Ps3 has better hardware, more features out the box and the best looking console exclusives. Xbox 360 has superior online.

[NineteenSeventyNine]

You're splitting hairs by creating two categories for the same thing just so you can try and give the appearance that SOny is a better system.

Blu-Ray, USB Drives, HDD. These are hardware and should fall under said category.

So let's clean up that messy blog of yours and really rate the systems:

Graphics: PS3
Hardware: PS3
Games: 360 (trumps everything else)
Online: 360
PRICE: 360

360 wins. End of discussion. Or am I just another "bot" as you like to call those whose opinions differ?

I hope you just learned something. You're almost completely biased towards Sony and are so blinded by your lust for Kaz Hirai that you now fall into the same category as Jinxstar, raztad, coolrah, Darkride66 and ActionBastard: completely useless.

[lh_swe]

"Games(Quality): 360" First of all thats a matter of opinion, I prefer my PS3 exclusive library more than my 360 one, but thats still a matter of opinion.

Now if its polish concerning the exclusives you were talking about I'd definetly have to give it to the PS3 since none of the PS3 have had any problems even remotely close to that which I have experienced both in Fable 2, Gears 2 and even Mass Effect (still love those games, not a critique towards the games as a whole).

But if you dont like Killzone 2, Uncharted, Ratchet & Clank, Resistance 2, MGS4, GT5 prologue, Infamous among many more then I would buy the PS3 but if even 2 or 3 of these titles interest you then I wouldn't wait (maybe for the price cut, considering the recent rumours). And considering the future line-up only a fool wouldn't consider owning both systems.

[Gue1]

when you get all crazy for a blog or a piece of opinion of somebody then you're a fanboy and depending on your console of choice then you can be called a bot, droid or whatever.

In this case you seem very upset by the fact that this blog gives the edge to the PS3 so you can be called a bot @NineteenSeventyNine. But at least you're making an argument with sense unlike the Mart that tries to make arguments with lies. =D

----------------------------- ------
A gamer does not gets upset by anything because he has every console so he always win. When you have all the console and somebody says that one of them sucks and you get so upset that start arguing like a mad man trying to impose your opinion then you my friend are a fanboy.

Being a fanboy is not that bad, as long as you're not a two face like "Colbot" or "Natsu X FairyFail" then everything is fine. Fanboyism is the nature of N4G anyway...

[NineteenSeventyNine]

While I agree the PS3 has better hardware, you don't say why the PS3 has better hardware. You just list the problems the 360 has experienced and didn't say a single thing about the PS3 in the Hardware category. So the PS3 wins by default? Or maybe you hear all this fancy talk about the PS3 Cell, don't understand it, and proclaim it the winner. Do some homework.

Now for that flawed exclusives debate. A tie? Are you serious? Allow me to break it down.

PS3 has 381 games
Xbox 360 has 682 (301 more if you needed the help right there =D)

What's that? Quality over quantity? OKay, let's look deeper!

PS3 has 113 games rated over 80% on Metacritic
XBox 360 has 156 (43 more)

So the Xbox has more games AND better games. And just for the heck of it. . .

PS3 has 12 games rated 90% and higher
XBox 360 has 20 (EIGHT MAWR!)

Yup, the 360 has much better games than the PS3. But wait, that was objective thinking so I don't expect you to understand. I mean, do you guys even play games anymore? Sure, the PS3 is a better multimedia device but when it comes to being a games console, it's number two.

The Xbox and PS3's primary function are as video game consoles, yet most PS3 fans seems to turn a blind eye to this. Better online and better games, 360 is the way to go if you want a game console. FACT.

[Saaking]

I talked about the xbox 360 problems because they're more widespread and the PS3 won because of it's reliability.Yes, the 360 has more games thanks to the year head star; however if you read what I said you'd know it's tie becuase games are down to personal preference. If you really love Halo and Gears go with the 360. I you really love MGS4 or Uncharted go with the PS3. I think PS3 has better games, but a lot of people think 360 has the better games. It's up to personal preference so I made it a tie.

[NineteenSeventyNine]

Sorry, but that "year head start" argument doesn't make sense. Do you REALLY think the 360 released 301 games in it's first year?

Also, it's irrelevant! Do the games that came out on 360 before the PS3 was released suddenly not count? Don't think so.

Sure, preference plays a part in rating games. But quality is objective and cannot be argued. Did you not read where I wrote the 360 has more quality games than the PS3? 150+ > 113, makes sense, no?

"I think PS3 has better games"

See, you're just plain wrong. It's one thing if you like more games on the PS3, but saying the PS3 has better games is incorrect and makes your opinions not worth listening to. I like Guns N Roses but that doesn't mean they're a good band. Is any of this sinking in yet?

[Saaking]

"better games" is a matter of opinion.I can't let the 360 win or PS3 win because it's down to the reader's opinion. You think 360 has better games, I think PS3 has better games etc. it's not difficult to understand.

[JoySticksFTW]

Metacritic ratings and reviews on-the-other-hand CAN be debated.

Where was everyone in 2007 for all of that baseless PS3 bashing?

Obviously, one of my systems is a 360. And I can admit that it happened.

[paul0388]

You do a lot of telling, but not a lot of explaining. Which games are "better" and why?

You're adamant about how the 360's games are "better" and have repeated it over numerous posts.

So if you have such an adamant belief, please, enlighten us all and elaborate.

You sound like just another disillusioned 14 year old fanboy that can't afford a PS3 to you constantly hate on it. Get a life. They each have their pros and cons.

And if you brought up the whole "no games" argument in 2007, it would have been a valid one, but now, in 2009, it's the PS3 fans that can say that about Xbox 360 exclusives. In that department the Xbox is beat in both QUALITY and QUANTITY. Yes, I said it.

[TheMART]

I wouldn't expect nothing else from a PS3 fanboy.

" The answer is no. Killzone 2 far exceeds Gears and takes the crown for console graphics"

Depends. THe overall graphics of Gears look better then KZ2. KZ2 graphics are 80 mln. dollar thrown in for a exclusive PS3 engine and going after the E3 2005 trailer, but the overall graphics are blend and boring generic.

"The PS2 was very reliable, but early in its life cycle it had some problems. "

Stop twisting history. It had problems the first couple of years with dying DVD lasers. The PS3 has the same problems with the introduction of the cheaper 400 bucks one and cheaper parts. My PS3's bluray died after THREE weeks of use. Thats insane.

I won't go in the wins or the ties because its written by a clear PS3 fanboy.

[Saaking]

Killzone 2 looks far better than Gears and that's a fact. Sure you may like the artstyle of Gears better, but Killzone 2 is technically superior to any 360 exclusive. You stop twisting history. First off the rumor is KZ 2 cost 60 million to make, not 80. Second, the PS2's problems weren't as widespread as the 360 problems. And third, the PS3 has an acceptable fail rate (around 1-3%) so if yours went out fast than I'm sorry but it's just a few people having problems.

[TheMART]

Nope, KZ2 doesn't look 'far better' then Gears. No fact and certainly not said by someone that doesn't own a 360 and Gears 2. I own Gears 2+360 and PS3+KZ2 both on 1080p. While KZ2 they went for the most sharpest edges of graphics/textures maybe it doesn't 'far better' and no its not only artstyle.

The PS2's problems WERE as widespread as the 360 ones. If not worse. I had a PS2 dead laser, many of my friends can't play their PS2 games anymore. Sony denied and needed 3 years and several law suits to get stuff finaly done.

The PS3 doesn't have that 1 -3% failure rate. Go down the forums and ask the most known members that own a PS3. About every single one of them had YLOD or BluRay problems. I even have a friend that had a BluRay dying laser in THREE DAYS!

Go google the internet. Many forums popping up with the BluRay error.

[Saaking]

No, mart look. First of all I do own a 360 as you can see in my bio page I have the gamer tag on it. Second, the PS2's problems were NOT as widespread as the 360. The 360 scratches disks, overheats, and gets the E74 error and it's known that that failure rate is at least 33%. KZ2 is, whether you want to admit it or not, technically better than Gears. Perhaps you like the art-style of Gears better and that's why you say it looks better.

[DelbertGrady]

"9 hours ago
There's no worse punishment for prisoners than being given a 360 instead of PS3 ahahah."

"9 hours ago
The wtf is it bot?"

"12 hours ago
Only the bots are stupid enough to believe Paid is better than free. You seriously gotta feel sorry for those guys."

"12 hours ago
And the bots think Flopza looks good. Hey bots, open you're small childish eyes and take those goggles off so you can see the brilliance that is GT5, Only on PS3"

[RAM MAGNUMS]

you got Saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaked!

[presto717]

I have to disagree with the "exclusives" section. He called it a tie. To me, the ps3 has the better exclusive line up.

Good article. Well written.

[lh_swe]

What here hasn't been mentioned at least 100 times before here on N4G, it's stupid to argue this way because it'll only bring out ignorant fool like NineteenSeventyNine who only seem to want the destruction of the PS3 because in their mind the 360 has better games, this is because MS used a very good strategy of aiming their games at a certain demographic and sticking to it whereas Sony employed an arguably more generous attitude to cater for many different demographics.

The fact of the matter is that both consoles now have such an amazing line-up and accolade of games that both consoles are must have items in your wish list (or should be anyway), unlike that console made by those greedy gnomes at Nintendo (joke... or was it).

[TheColbertinator]

WTF is this sh!t?

[Gue1]

hey what's up two face =D

[NineteenSeventyNine]

@ Saaking, Joysticks

You guys need to read a book. Quality is not subjective. Do you guys even finish reading what I write or just respond at the first hint of "anti-ps3".

Allow me to repeat myself:

360 has 150+ games 80% and higher on Metacritic with 20 of them being 90% and higher.
PS3 has 113 games 80% and higher on Metacritic with 12 of them being 90% and higher.

What don't you understand about this? The 360 has better games. This is very simple, logical and objective. Notice how my "360 has better games" statement has a base whereas "they're equal" does not. My argument has a basis, is OBJECTIVE (look it up) and the info up above speaks for itself. Almost 40 more quality games on the 360 and you guys are STILL trying to disprove that! Only a blind fanboy would see those numbers and still try and say they have equal games. Deal with it.

@ paul

You don't understand what I'm saying. I'm not saying that Halo 3 is better than Killzone 2 (even though it is) and I'm not saying that GoW is better than Uncharted. I'm not comparing games, I'm comparing the system's game libraries. I agree the 360's lineup this year is not as good as the PS3's so far, but again, look at the Metacritic numbers. Also, it's obvious you have no real opiinion on anything seeing as how you attacked me instead of my argument. That's how you know you've lost an argument. By the way, I own a PS3. Should I put that in capital letters so anyone who responds to me notices it? I OWN A PS3! I never said the PS3 has no games or that it's games aren't any good. I just said the 360 has better games and it's true. I win.

@ il swe

I'm ignorant? You're the one who's attacking me, putting words into my mouth just because I have a brain and am not controlled by the Sony Hivemind. When did I say I didn't like the PS3? Quote me. Oh wait, you can't! Not only does the 360 have better games in my mind, it has better games in practice. Those metacritic numbers say hello and they don't lie.

"Sony employed an arguably more generous attitude to cater for many different demographics"

What a load of fanboy garbage. How is SOny's lineup any more diverse than the 360's? The 360 has 650+ games and you're telling me that they all only appeal to a certain demographic? Oh, wait. I can hear it now, "650 games?! That's an opinion! 40 more quality games?! That's an opinion!" Sorry, it doesn't work like that. I'm sure out of the 301 extra games on the 360, most of them appeal to all demographics. Saying Sony is the only one doing that is just ignorant. Those are facts so learn to live with it.

If any of you were logical creatures you would see the point I'm making. I own a 360 AND a PS3. Both have great games, but I wont try to be politcally correct just to spare some of your feelings. And yes, I do prefer the 360 to the PS3 because of its superior game library (FACT) and superior online (FACT). It's not because I've pledged some allegience to Microsoft like you guys have done for Sony. PS2 was my favourite system last gen. WHy? It had the best games. Heck, I'll even go so far as to say the PS2 is the best system so far. But I wouldn't expect any of you to debate that because it's pro Sony. This gen, my preference is towards Microsoft because of the very same fact. Another thing, there is a difference between the words "preference" and "bias". I prefer the 360. If I was biased I would be spewing garbage about how GoW has better graphics than Killzone 2. Why is it so hard to admit something's better? You don't see me tyring to debate the PS3's hardware or graphical capabilities because that would silly. But I do dispute the fanboy nonsense that is this blog. Don't bother responding to this if you're not going to bubble me up, seeing as how I've run out of them. I guess I need to post more anti Microsoft garbage just to get my bubble count up. AN example? Saaking has eight bubbles and if you read his comments you will find him calling other users "bots" and trashing Microsoft in general. So answer me this, who's REALLY the fanboy here?

[Saaking]

Is it really so hard to understand. Okay, I'll say it slowly. Here's an example: I hated Haze, despised it; however some people actually like it, heck some love it. Metacritic scored Haze extremely low, but to some people Haze is the best thing in the world. As you can see, it's down to personal preference. That's why reviews of games vary from game reviewer to game reviewer.

[lh_swe]

You say 600+ games, eight more exclusives rated over 90 and yes that is true but how many exclusives do you own on the 360 that you would rate that highly yourself? How many of those 600+ games happen to be on the PS2? you say a year head start doesn't matter, well it does. How many games on average are released a year?(150-200 is the answer, including XBLA games which you in fact have thrown in the mix, most of them being being ported arcade games and classics).

You're starting to piss me off because you throw out Metacritic scores high and low but in my personal experience PS3 games have been dinged by many reviewers (example; infamous gets major critique for having pop-in and some bugs, Gears 2 doesn't receive nearly as much critique and its not like it didn't affect the experience).

Now if you say you prefer the 360 library then of course I cannot hold that against you but don't attach other people for saying that they like their PS3 games more.

I'm not going to be able to dissuade you from your opinion, and thats not my incentive but I wonder why you are so eager to change our point of view, are you trying to stop people from buying the PS3? Does it matter if you like 360 games more? How is that relevant to what we think? Does it matter if we have a different opinion?

Both systems are great, both have faults, both have very different games from one another, some appeal to you some don't. That's that, but that doesn't make either one bad, nor does it make either company the devil, so whats your point?

Edit- and on an additional note 12 games rated over 90%(PS3) vs 20 360 games being rated equally if you divide those numbers by the respective years the consoles have been on the market you should be inclined to see a trend forming, similarly in regard to 150 vs 113 being rated above 80%, so don't be stupid and think that a year head start has no effect. Of course it does!

[JoySticksFTW]

LMAO!! This guy is hilarious!! :D

Such a bitter fanboy! LOL

Did you not see the changes that I would add to the original blog in which I added THREE catagories that I feel the 360 would win?

But then you add that we can't read. Ahahahaha

That's why I truly love this site. Bitter, bawling, heart-broken moans of a fanboy that can't admit that the other systems have something to offer because they're too poor to afford them.

Ok, let me help! The first thing that you want to do is get a job. I'm serious, 1979. This is really important. It's obvious that your mom and dad are struggling to barely keep a roof over your thankless head and can't afford to give you a hefty allowance anymore... Then save up and maybe one day you could own both a PS3 and 360 also. No more need for childish drama. Yeah! You can finally dry those tears and play MGS4! :)

And STOP WHINING!!! You really make gamers of all types and consoles look bad

[potenquatro]

If you get your facts straight, maybe your oinion will be based more on reality.

PS3 is great and awsome(my second favorite platform right now), but fanboy arguments won't do it any favors.

[Halo3 MLG Pro]

blogs are always funny.

[XXX619]

u guys all forgot 1 big thing. project natal

[lh_swe]

And you don't think the Sony motion controllers are competition? Besides we're unlikely to see any major games use this tech until possibly 2011, and I doubt it'll be many.

The one good thing that can come out of the motion controllers is a RTS on a console and then the buttons on the the wands are to an advantage.

[danthaman15]

Saaking, I agree that this blog isnt TOO fanboyish...but after all the ignorant bullsh*t you've posted on this site, how can you expect us to take you seriously?