Questions for the New XBOX 360 Owners..

[ICEBERG]

I was in some forums today talking to the people who just got the new XBOX360. Some of these people where not that happy with the quality of this machine. Do you think MS rushed this machine for the Holiday season?

From some of the research i did, they say PS3 with the Cell processor will be much faster with better graphics. Any truth to this?

Also is the Xbox PAL compatable? or is it just NTSC? Would like to know from people who has one?

Are some of you guy's waiting for the PS3 instead of the Xbox360? If so why?

Also After using this machine for a day or so, What are some of the PROS and CONS you can tell us about the new XBOX 360?

Thanks,

[rage2]

My question for XBOX 360 owners... how does it play video files off your PC? Do you install server software? Or do you have to use a Media Center XP PC?

Mine's not here yet hehe.

[b_t]

The system only says it will connect to a Media Center XP on the dashboard, but I thought the box said it would work with home edition as well. Oh well, I'm not going to use that part of it.

And who cares if the PS3 has better graphics, its not out yet, and the Xbox 360's graphics blow away anything I've seen so far (except Far Cry on super-high-end systems). They could stay like this for a good while and I'd be happy.

[Sharpie]

Originally posted by b_t
The system only says it will connect to a Media Center XP on the dashboard, but I thought the box said it would work with home edition as well. Oh well, I'm not going to use that part of it.

And who cares if the PS3 has better graphics, its not out yet, and the Xbox 360's graphics blow away anything I've seen so far (except Far Cry on super-high-end systems). They could stay like this for a good while and I'd be happy.
The ps3 is out isn't it? I do believe you can get one from Japan... making it out...:dunno:

[ZEDGE]

Originally posted by Sharpie

The ps3 is out isn't it? I do believe you can get one from Japan... making it out...:dunno:

LOL wtf

[googe]

Originally posted by ICEBERG

From some of the research i did, they say PS3 with the Cell processor will be much faster with better graphics. Any truth to this?


no. only ones saying that are fanboys.

[heavyD]

Originally posted by googe
no. only ones saying that are fanboys.

There is a distinct possibility that the cell processor will be the next beta for Sony. They were banking on Apple using them in their future computers but Apple pulled a 180 and went with Intel. Now Sony has this cell processor that they invested heavily and only PS3 & their consumer electronics to use it as they have no other takers. Even Blue Ray is not a slam dunk for Sony as the smoke hasn't cleared in the HD media battle. Sony is already losing money and the future doesn't look to bright at the moment.

The lack of any realtime game footage running on PS3 is also not a good sign. Remember that the demos shown at E3 weren't even running on PS3's, they were created at graphics studios and ran on different hardware. Sony is very good at creating hype so I would expect the PS3 to be a success unless it's priced ridiculously high as it is rumored to be.

Remember also that Xbox was at least 3x more powerful than the PS2 but games didn't look 3x better on Xbox.

[googe]

Originally posted by heavyD


There is a distinct possibility that the cell processor will be the next beta for Sony. They were banking on Apple using them in their future computers but Apple pulled a 180 and went with Intel. Now Sony has this cell processor that they invested heavily and only PS3 & their consumer electronics to use it as they have no other takers. Even Blue Ray is not a slam dunk for Sony as the smoke hasn't cleared in the HD media battle. Sony is already losing money and the future doesn't look to bright at the moment.

The lack of any realtime game footage running on PS3 is also not a good sign. Remember that the demos shown at E3 weren't even running on PS3's, they were created at graphics studios and ran on different hardware. Sony is very good at creating hype so I would expect the PS3 to be a success unless it's priced ridiculously high as it is rumored to be.

Remember also that Xbox was at least 3x more powerful than the PS2 but games didn't look 3x better on Xbox.

the success of the console is a different issue entirely. i am just addressing the issue of processing power from a technical standpoint. the general processing power and memory bandwidth greatly excedes that of the ps3.

the xbox wasnt 3x morepowerful than the ps2 though. i suspect youre comparing clock speed, which is a totally inaccurate metric across different architectures. means nothing in terms of performance.

[heavyD]

Originally posted by googe
the xbox wasnt 3x morepowerful than the ps2 though. i suspect youre comparing clock speed, which is a totally inaccurate metric across different architectures. means nothing in terms of performance.

Means nothing???? Are you trying to say that the PS2's 233 mhz processor and emotion engine stacked toe to toe with the 733 mhz & geforce 3.5 graphics card of the Xbox?

I know clock speeds don't tell the whole story but it is an indication of beefier hardware. The architecture may be different but the means to an end is the same. It's like comparing a 250 hp turbocharged 2.0L 4 cyl. engine to a 5.0L V8 250hp engine. Sure they go about making the same power different but at the end of the day there is no replacement for displacement and the larger displacement engine turns out to be more flexible and a better performer as a whole.

[Pee_Sack]

Originally posted by ICEBERG
I was in some forums today talking to the people who just got the new XBOX360. Some of these people where not that happy with the quality of this machine. Do you think MS rushed this machine for the Holiday season?

From some of the research i did, they say PS3 with the Cell processor will be much faster with better graphics. Any truth to this?

Also is the Xbox PAL compatable? or is it just NTSC? Would like to know from people who has one?

Are some of you guy's waiting for the PS3 instead of the Xbox360? If so why?

Also After using this machine for a day or so, What are some of the PROS and CONS you can tell us about the new XBOX 360?

Thanks,

People have to realise that to get the most out of the 360 you need to use High Def, it for it will look not much better then the xbox

The PS3 and the 360 have comparable processing units, in my opinion the 360 takes the lead here but not mby much. WHen it comes to graphics and video the PS3 stands way out there using a dual core GeForce 6800 chip. I can't wait to see this thing go. Also with PS3 you can have dual monitor hookup with both of them running up to 1080p :drool: :drool: :drool:

It would be useless to have a PAL system in North America

Some people just dont have the money to buy them both and have like Sony more in the past. Some people are just huge fan boys and want only Sony.

and for Rage2's question

It is supposedly very easy for it to connect to XP Center PC but nothing was ever said about XP home or Pro....atleast that I could find. I am sure with a little bit of tweaking and such it will happen but it will take more work and wont be quite plug and play as media center is.


also I should point out I do not have a X-BOX 360 this is just all information I have gathered on the internet. I recently (last night) did a 15 page report on the next-gen consoles, so I know as much as I can and will anser anyones questions.

[seer_claw]

Originally posted by heavyD
I know clock speeds don't tell the whole story but it is an indication of beefier hardware. The architecture may be different but the means to an end is the same.

Not quite, AMD has a much slow clock speed on their processors yet they function better in some programs. Clock spped don't give much indication of beefier hardware, just longer piplines which require a boost in speed. Compare the architecture in the AMD and the Intel processors and you will see how the different speeds really make a processor better or worse. My AMD 2500+ processor runs at 1.8 Ghz which is comparable to Intel 2.5 Ghz P4 processor, very different speeds but comparable in performance. Which is the same as the Xbox to PS2 comparison.

[hedge]

Originally posted by rage2
My question for XBOX 360 owners... how does it play video files off your PC? Do you install server software? Or do you have to use a Media Center XP PC?

Mine's not here yet hehe.

apparantly you can download a service via windows update 'media connect' I belive it's called. then a new icon will show up in your control panel. It suppozedly allows you to share pictures and music but it's unclear if it allows sharing of videos.

AFAIK no connection available for linux/unix :(

[googe]

Originally posted by heavyD


Means nothing???? Are you trying to say that the PS2's 233 mhz processor and emotion engine stacked toe to toe with the 733 mhz & geforce 3.5 graphics card of the Xbox?

I know clock speeds don't tell the whole story but it is an indication of beefier hardware. The architecture may be different but the means to an end is the same. It's like comparing a 250 hp turbocharged 2.0L 4 cyl. engine to a 5.0L V8 250hp engine. Sure they go about making the same power different but at the end of the day there is no replacement for displacement and the larger displacement engine turns out to be more flexible and a better performer as a whole.

well, that is just plain wrong. clock speeds do mean nothing if the architecture isnt the same. its 32 bit x86 vs 128 bit MIPS, you cant get more apples to oranges than that.

MIPS processors have been used forever in SGI supercomputers that are dedicated to graphics rendering for high-budget military organizations and such. theyve always had very low clock speeds, yet grossly outperformed an x86 equivalent.

not saying the xbox and ps2 were dead even, but the difference wasnt near that big.

[ICEBERG]

Originally posted by Pee_Sack




It would be useless to have a PAL system in North America


I go to Europe almost every summers, i thought it might be compatable over there also. Like playing DVD's and stuff.

Thanks,

[heavyD]

Originally posted by seer_claw


Not quite, AMD has a much slow clock speed on their processors yet they function better in some programs. Clock spped don't give much indication of beefier hardware, just longer piplines which require a boost in speed. Compare the architecture in the AMD and the Intel processors and you will see how the different speeds really make a processor better or worse. My AMD 2500+ processor runs at 1.8 Ghz which is comparable to Intel 2.5 Ghz P4 processor, very different speeds but comparable in performance. Which is the same as the Xbox to PS2 comparison.

1.8 to 2.5 is only a 28% difference in clock speed. I was talking about over 3x the clock speed. And having an apple I know of all the "different architecture" comparisons that apple used with the dual motorola 1.2 ghz G4's were equivalent to a 2.5 ghz pentium because of different architecture but since I own one I can say at the end of the day, the intel PC is faster.

[benyl]

Originally posted by ICEBERG


I go to Europe almost every summers, i thought it might be compatable over there also. Like playing DVD's and stuff.

Thanks,

Nope.

The only things that I know that do both are VCRs and DVD players.

You might look into some sort of converter, but I found they are lousy.

[heavyD]

Originally posted by googe
well, that is just plain wrong. clock speeds do mean nothing if the architecture isnt the same. its 32 bit x86 vs 128 bit MIPS, you cant get more apples to oranges than that.

MIPS processors have been used forever in SGI supercomputers that are dedicated to graphics rendering for high-budget military organizations and such. theyve always had very low clock speeds, yet grossly outperformed an x86 equivalent.

We are talking about consumer electronics not military. Nice try though.:thumbsup:

[GoChris]

Originally posted by benyl


Nope.

The only things that I know that do both are VCRs and DVD players.

You might look into some sort of converter, but I found they are lousy.

the current xbox plays both pal and ntsc games, it has an internal chip for the conversion. they only made one box for worldwide basically.

I wouldnt be suprised if the xbox 360 is like that, saves on design and manufacturing costs to just build one box I would think.

[googe]

Originally posted by heavyD


We are talking about consumer electronics not military. Nice try though.:thumbsup:

its the same processor and the same application (graphics rendering). you obviously dont understand computing architecture and why clock speed on a 128bit mips vs a 32bit x86 cant be compared by any stretch of the imagination:thumbsup:

[nambis]

anyone have both the old and new xboxes?

it looks like the 360 is shaped (curved) to fit on top of the first one...

has anyone tried this out? any pics?

:thumbsup:

[saiyajin]

Originally posted by heavyD


There is a distinct possibility that the cell processor will be the next beta for Sony. They were banking on Apple using them in their future computers but Apple pulled a 180 and went with Intel. Now Sony has this cell processor that they invested heavily and only PS3 & their consumer electronics to use it as they have no other takers. Even Blue Ray is not a slam dunk for Sony as the smoke hasn't cleared in the HD media battle. Sony is already losing money and the future doesn't look to bright at the moment.

The lack of any realtime game footage running on PS3 is also not a good sign. Remember that the demos shown at E3 weren't even running on PS3's, they were created at graphics studios and ran on different hardware. Sony is very good at creating hype so I would expect the PS3 to be a success unless it's priced ridiculously high as it is rumored to be.

Remember also that Xbox was at least 3x more powerful than the PS2 but games didn't look 3x better on Xbox.


i believe the MGS4 demo was shown in realtime so its a good demo to be used in comparitive to what PS3 graphics can do :dunno:

[heavyD]

Originally posted by saiyajin
i believe the MGS4 demo was shown in realtime so its a good demo to be used in comparitive to what PS3 graphics can do :dunno:

You are free to believe but according to sites, no PS3 game has been shown realtime or running on PS3 hardware.

[treg50]

Xbox has always stood way above PS2 in terms of hardware performance. I'm saying that based on playing the two systems and my opinion of that experience.

I also think that it depends on the technology and programming of the games as well. There were some late games on the Xbox that absolutely blew me away, and all I could think was 'Holy crap, these games are on a new level better than anything previously on console. Why would they intro a new console when the current Xbox still has so much potential?' The hardware in the Xbox didn't change but the programming to take advantage of that hardware did --- so much so that it felt like the Xbox was new system again.

The PS2 topped out long ago, but the Xbox showed that it still HAD tremendous untapped potential. Sadly we'll never see the Xbox's full power, as MS has launched 360.

Kind of a bad move, I'd say. They could have spent more time on 360 (or at least creating more units for inventory) and at the same time Xbox could have continued to grow and amaze gamers, and thus build anticipation of 360. Oh well, hype, marketshare, and beating the competition to market matter too I guess.:dunno:

[saiyajin]

Originally posted by heavyD


You are free to believe but according to sites, no PS3 game has been shown realtime or running on PS3 hardware.


FROM IGN

The stage event started with an airing of the E3 trailer, which originally offered confirmation that MGS4 was in development for the PS3 and that Kojima would be directing, but otherwise ran on PS2 hardware. This was followed with that trailer's continuation, a new clip called "Metal Gear Raiden Snake Eraser." In the new segment, which Kojima later joked required more development time than MGS4, Raiden goes back in time to take out Big Boss, his ultimate goal being to rob Snake of his role as lead character of MGS4. Raiden ends up traveling back to the MSX Metal Gear 2, with the trailer visuals switching to NES-style graphics, before ultimately failing in his quest.
Sony Computer Entertainment president Ken Kutaragi appeared via video message, stating "I'm not usually one to be taken back, but upon seeing the MGS4 video that was running on actual PS3 hardware, I was shocked by the overwhelming expressive power." Praising the skills of Kojima and his development staff at Kojima Productions, Kutaragi finished with "Directory Kojima has arrived. I want to play MGS4 soon."

Following an airing of the TGS trailer (the same one that was being run in Sony Computer Entertainment's PS3 theater) booth, Kojima and the MGS4 staff ran a demonstration of MGS4 running off an actual PS3 development kit with a PS2 Dual Shock used for control. The demonstration consisted of one segment from the trailer -- a scene of Snake wielding a gun as he prepares to take shelter in a ruined building -- but midway through, a member of the development staff paused the action and began zooming in and out and rotating the camera.

This alone would have been a clear demonstration that the clip was running in real time, but the demonstration didn't end there. In order to further show off some of the technology behind the game, Kojima demonstrated some of the lighting and effects possible with the new PS3 engine. "I've always wanted to do self shadowing, but couldn't," Kojima explained, touching upon an effect known as self-shadowing where characters cast shadows onto themselves. The lighting in the scene shifted to show off the game's new self shadowing routines. "I can finally do it!"

Art director Yoji Shinkawa was on stage along side Kojima and both he and Kojima took the opportunity to explain a filtering effect that will be used in the game. Referring to the trailer, Kojima stated, "There's no sense of atmosphere, so on top of this we add a metal color and make it look like a movie on film. Using various effects, we dirty it up." Shinkawa then demonstrated the filtering effects in real time.

Kojima's discussion touched upon some of the non-technical aspects of the game as well. If you've seen the trailer or screenshots for MGS4, you might have noticed a creature whose upper body is mechanical while its lower body is organic. This is the new Metal Gear. "Half machine, half living -- perhaps this is how weapons will progress from here," Kojima commented. The name for the creature is formed two Japanese characters: one for moon and one for light.

---------------------------------------------

FROM GAMESPOT
We don't need to tell you that Guns of the Patriots looks utterly incredible--the screenshots certainly speak for themselves--and unlike what we can say about some other PS3 games shown back at the Electronic Entertainment Expo, we can say with confidence that enough aliasing and pixelated textures were evident in this trailer to indicate that it was running smoothly in real time, and further live demonstrations from Kojima on the show floor at TGS confirm this to be the case.

-----------------------------------

FROM EUROGAMER

The question, of course, is whether this is all truly real-time. The answer is a resounding yes; not only does the trailer itself make that claim in no uncertain terms ("Forget Pre-rendered Stuff!" it instructs viewers at the beginning, during an FPS game spoof section where you see through the eyes of an enemy soldier being taken down by Snake) but it also shows off a number of small hallmarks of real-time footage like occasional low resolution shadows, odd filtering on some textures and a depth of field effect which looks great but not quite as good or accurate as could be achieved simply in 3D Studio Max or the likes.

Besides, Kojima has never shown off pre-rendered footage in a trailer - in fact, to the best of our knowledge, he's simply never used pre-rendered footage in that way at all. Paranoid conspiracy theories about the power of the PS3 aside, there's no reason why this would be any different, or why one of the world's best-known game developers would compromise himself just to support Sony's claims about its next-gen hardware.




:dunno:

[rage2]

Originally posted by treg50
Why would they intro a new console when the current Xbox still has so much potential?'
Because the XBOX didn't have enough HP to do anything in HD. The XBOX can't even play HD MPEG2 streams which is not very CPU intensive compared to HDTV resolution 3D rendering. The next gen consoles are aiming at the huge base of HDTV owners out there.

[googe]

you know, i wonder how redundant the power difference between the ps3 and the 360 will be anyway. there has to be a point where the development time/skill is beyond that which is feasible to fully take advantage of the processing powers. games can only look so good...

i kinda doubt theyll even look any different, but maybe.

[b_t]

Originally posted by googe
you know, i wonder how redundant the power difference between the ps3 and the 360 will be anyway. there has to be a point where the development time/skill is beyond that which is feasible to fully take advantage of the processing powers. games can only look so good...

i kinda doubt theyll even look any different, but maybe.

They definitely do look different, this is far far beyond even the best looking games on the Xbox and PS2 right now. Perfect Dark Zero looks 100 times better then Resident Evil 4 on the GC (IMO the best looking previous gen game) and Project Gotham Racing 3 looks like the trailer for Gran Turismo Vision except in real time.

[Das_Amaretto]

Nintendo will win this round

Mario and the rest of the gang have never met the internet yet!

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by Das_Amaretto
Nintendo will win this round

Mario and the rest of the gang have never met the internet yet!

DS WiFi Mario Karts

[Seanith]

Originally posted by Das_Amaretto
Nintendo will win this round

Mario and the rest of the gang have never met the internet yet!

Being able to play all the previous systems games on a new platform is very appealing to people in their 20s growing up on the classics ;)

[aln]

i have more cons than pros for this system imo...

pros:
- even though this system is just using one core atm, the graphics are amazing. from rumors, both xbox 360 and ps3 haven't gotten more than one core to process (which kinda explains why the ps3 is delayed) someone verify this.
- loading is amazingly fast.
- hook it up to windows vista or media center edition and you got streaming video. rumors also say you can connect to the harddrive and transfer music/videos to play on your tv
- works with any portable music player. ipod, psp works instantly

cons:
- huge power supply. takes up too much space. its a giant brick or gods sake
- many people are having troubles. either freeze in the middle of the game or it just messes up on dashboard
- its super loud. i think theres at least 4 or 5 fans in that machine
- harddrive! microsoft ripped me off. its only 13gigs instead of the "20gigs" bullshit. YES IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
- dashboard looks like shit. yes you can download new ones but all of the ones out right now still makes the xbox 360 look like a 5 year olds toy.
- some people have reported that their games were scratched after inserted into the maching. my games look fine though.


imo, this system isn't worth more than what you pay in stores. if you are thinking of getting the bundle for more than 550, end your life. there is so much you have to go through. people are even having troubles hooking up the controller because microsoft did such a bad job putting these systems together. i only got mine because ps3 isn't planned to be released till the next holiday season. even with all those cons. its a must by for 535 including gst. i would give it 7.5 out of 10?

[hampstor]

Saw this over on hardocp...

http://xbox360.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3145847

http://www.hardocp.com/images/news/1132788748GGUwxShFEQ_1_1_l.jpg

Quality control on the initial batch part of the reason why i'll wait until a later revision before buying :D Still, the company assembling it and the graphics provider are both Canadian companies. Go Canadian quality!

[aln]

i don't know...my controller is squeaking now :cry:

[b_t]

Perfect Dark Zero's sound messed up real bad after playing for a couple hours, in multiplayer, it was unbearably loud and scratchy while in-game but the menus were fine. Then I rebooted and it was 100% again. Hum. Well, fuck :D

[googe]

Originally posted by b_t


They definitely do look different, this is far far beyond even the best looking games on the Xbox and PS2 right now. Perfect Dark Zero looks 100 times better then Resident Evil 4 on the GC (IMO the best looking previous gen game) and Project Gotham Racing 3 looks like the trailer for Gran Turismo Vision except in real time.

i said ps3 vs xbox 360 though. obviously theyll look better than current gen because they do HD.

[Hash_man]

I spent a couple minutes playing PGR3 at Best Buy today, and IMO I wasnt overly impressed at all. I felt it was a good game, but by no means great.

I personally think that the ps3 is going to have some excellent titles, but I will probably end up caving and buying a 360 in the near future... mainly for amped 3 :thumbsup:

[djayz]

so does the xbox360 output 1080p or just a 720p?

[sabad66]

1080i and 720p. The PS3 is supposedly going to do dual 1080p

[b_t]

Originally posted by googe


i said ps3 vs xbox 360 though. obviously theyll look better than current gen because they do HD.

Actually come to think of it the biggest edge the 360 has over anything else right now is how well it does HDR lighting... there was this one scene in Perfect Dark, when you get to the dock at the end of the 3rd mission, where everything was lit so perfectly and of such clarity I actually thought it could have passed for CG scenes out of Advent Children. The characters from Half Life 2 look better, especially the fisherman from Lost Coast, then the ones in PDZ by a lot though.

[GoChris]

so...the gameplay is all the same as previous console, theres nothing revolutionary, but everything has better graphics?

$500 for better graphics is all you get, do I have that right?

[natejj]

Originally posted by GoChris
so...the gameplay is all the same as previous console, theres nothing revolutionary, but everything has better graphics?

$500 for better graphics is all you get, do I have that right?

Gameplay has little to do with the system, but mostly with with the games. As time goes on, games will naturally get better gameplay. Systems are made to basically, improve the graphics and sounds.... so better graphics.... basically thats all xbox 360 is.

[googe]

thats like comparing an original xbox or ps2 to a nintendo 64 or ps1

[GoChris]

Originally posted by googe
thats like comparing an original xbox or ps2 to a nintendo 64 or ps1

no it would be like comparing a nintendo 64 to a snes, which the n64 had totally different gameply due to 3d and a different controller, which was more than just a graphics improvement.

or a ps2 to a ps1 which was way better graphics, plus online play.

xbox360 to xbox is just better graphics, from what I gather so far.

[googe]

Originally posted by GoChris


no it would be like comparing a nintendo 64 to a snes, which the n64 had totally different gameply due to 3d and a different controller, which was more than just a graphics improvement.

or a ps2 to a ps1 which was way better graphics, plus online play.

xbox360 to xbox is just better graphics, from what I gather so far.

nah, a bunch of snes games had 3d. just worked and looked better on the 64. its just more advanced technology all around, which always adds new opportunities. far more advanced physics, lighting, AI, far bigger worlds, detail, etc...theres a lot you can do with more power. nba live 06 for example now has smooth 3d models for every single spectator in the crowd, previous gen systems only allowed for a small number of 3d models on the screen at a given time before it would slow to a crawl. also dont know if you noticed, but maps and such on xbox and ps2 have to be relatively closed in because it cant render much in terms of distance. some games that tried to push it you would have objects and characters just appearing in the distance when you got close enough.

[aln]

Originally posted by natejj


Gameplay has little to do with the system, but mostly with with the games. As time goes on, games will naturally get better gameplay. Systems are made to basically, improve the graphics and sounds.... so better graphics.... basically thats all xbox 360 is.

it had amazing graphics...but its not that great when it freezes on you haha. i'm not sure if there is a new firmware out but if it keeps freezing...it doesn't matter how good the graphics or games are

[googe]

Originally posted by aln


it had amazing graphics...but its not that great when it freezes on you haha. i'm not sure if there is a new firmware out but if it keeps freezing...it doesn't matter how good the graphics or games are

haha, yours is one of the freezing ones? if you call microsoft theyll send you a box to ship it back in and theyll give you a new one.

[aln]

Originally posted by googe


haha, yours is one of the freezing ones? if you call microsoft theyll send you a box to ship it back in and theyll give you a new one.

bleh too much of a hassle. i've been playing for 3 days now and it only froze on me once. it was only with PGR3 and there are rumors that most people have that problem. now i'm waiting for dead or alive 4 :clap:

[/////AMG]

PS3 > XBOX 360

90 Million PS2's sold VS. 25 Million XBOX's
Article:
http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/21/technology/playstation_fortune_112805/

Those figures prove it's about games not the system. Even though the PS2 had an extra year, they still sold 4X more.

[aln]

the ps3 will be a hundred times better. the only reason why i bought the xbox 360 was because the wait for the sony is way too long. while waiting for the ps3, i'll have my xbox to play :thumbsup: the psp doesn't cut it anymore. the games suck and its too heavy to carry around.

[b_t]

I mostly just want to play Halo 3, because of all the games to come out last generation, it kicked the most ass and had just about infinite replay value. PDZ is a good stand-in I suppose, but it will be impossible to top Master Chief, even though Joanna Dark is hot as hell.

[ZEDGE]

Originally posted by /////AMG
PS3 > XBOX 360

90 Million PS2's sold VS. 25 Million XBOX's
Article:
http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/21/technology/playstation_fortune_112805/

Those figures prove it's about games not the system. Even though the PS2 had an extra year, they still sold 4X more.

lol



:drama:

[ZEDGE]

Originally posted by aln
the ps3 will be a hundred times better. the only reason why i bought the xbox 360 was because the wait for the sony is way too long. while waiting for the ps3, i'll have my xbox to play :thumbsup: the psp doesn't cut it anymore. the games suck and its too heavy to carry around.

Can I quote you on the ps3 being 100 x better?

:nut:

[ZEDGE]

NBA o6 demo.. which you can download via xbox live. :thumbsup:

http://xboxphreaker.com/360/live1.jpg
http://xboxphreaker.com/360/live3.jpg
http://xboxphreaker.com/360/live4.jpg

[Seanith]

Those are actual game shots? that looks incredible!

[rockym20]

Who cares if the Sony does 1080P? There virtually no HDTV's available on the market that does 1080P, they only do 1080I.

As far the technologies go: is the Sony PS3 more advanced than the XB0X 360? Probably, but who cares? It ultimately comes down to the games. The fact is that the Sony is much more difficult to program for than the XBOX 360. By the time developers have fully figured out what a PS3 can do, Microsoft will have already introduced the successor to the XBOX 360.

[ZEDGE]

Originally posted by Seanith
Those are actual game shots? that looks incredible!

yep

no smoke and mirrors ala sony

[962 kid]

well I just played the call of duty 2 demo on what I'm guessing (hoping) was a TV that was not HD-compatible... what an incredible letdown. Even my PC blew it out of the water on the very same demo. I basically never saw anything better than this (look at the shadows on the buildings and the jaggies all around, especially on the other characters)

http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/606/606045/call-of-duty-2-20050419045953520.jpg

*edit* for comparison, I took this screenshot:

http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/9091/cod8he.jpg

[ZEDGE]

Originally posted by 962 kid
well I just played the call of duty 2 demo on what I'm guessing (hoping) was a TV that was not HD-compatible... what an incredible letdown. Even my PC blew it out of the water on the very same demo. I basically never saw anything better than this (look at the shadows on the buildings and the jaggies all around, especially on the other characters)

http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/606/606045/call-of-duty-2-20050419045953520.jpg

*edit* for comparison, I took this screenshot:

http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/9091/cod8he.jpg

I can tell you it does not look anything like that on an hdtv.

[likwid]

Originally posted by saiyajin



i believe the MGS4 demo was shown in realtime so its a good demo to be used in comparitive to what PS3 graphics can do :dunno:

I was at E3 with my company and no PS3 game demo was shown in Real Time. Like Heavy D said, Sony is great at creating hype, and by showing these fake CG demos, the fanboys had something to "brag" about. Also, you have to understand that 360 games that were also made for previous gen systems will not be as impressive as the games made solely for the 360.

[saiyajin]

Originally posted by likwid


I was at E3 with my company and no PS3 game demo was shown in Real Time. Like Heavy D said, Sony is great at creating hype, and by showing these fake CG demos, the fanboys had something to "brag" about. Also, you have to understand that 360 games that were also made for previous gen systems will not be as impressive as the games made solely for the 360.


buddy did you read those quotes i posted? MGS4 was indeed in realtime and good for you that you went to E3 and you are right there werent any that were shown in realtime but the MGS4 trailer was shown at the Tokyo Game Show and they even said that E3 didnt have anything in realtime :dunno:

[Kavy]

First off it wasen't Ps3 hardware and that where the argument is. Sony was using 4 G3's to produce that demo. I can guarentee there will not be 4 G3's in the PS3

Way to many fan boys in this thread.

Seriously graphic for graphic both systems will be on par, how do I know? because its the game developers who make the games. They decide how a game looks, plays ect. Your crazy if you think a company like EA is going to spend 6 million to develop a game (like tiger woods 2006 on the 360) and then spend another 6 million to make another version for the PS3. Everyone knows sony is really strapped for money and they wanted to release the PS3 for christmas but could not develop it financially in time.

Unlimited funds and a stubborn Bill Gates will be the turning factor.

I am hoping the Ps3 will be killer but i know it will not have the overall networking and compatability that the 360 will.

[heavyD]

Originally posted by saiyajin
buddy did you read those quotes i posted? MGS4 was indeed in realtime and good for you that you went to E3 and you are right there werent any that were shown in realtime but the MGS4 trailer was shown at the Tokyo Game Show and they even said that E3 didnt have anything in realtime :dunno:

The MGS4 demo was all cg. Didn't show any gameplay unless you actually belive the 30 seconds of fps view was realtime. Even the cg didn't look any better than some xbox or PC. Gears of War in realtime still looks better than that demo.

You guys will be setting yourself up for disappointment if you think that the initial PS3 games will be leaps and bounds better than 360 or PC. In fact I doubt that any launch PS3 games will look better than Morrowind, Gears of War, or Halo 3.