Quantcast
Playstation 3: An Under Rated System

Forums - Sales Discussion - Playstation 3: An Under Rated System

I have been reviewing some of my previous threads, and it appeared that I was bashing the Playstation 3 in favor for the Nintendo Wii, and Microsoft Xbox 360. That is unfair to Sony Playstation 3, because it is a really good system, despite a few flaws.


I've bashed the Sony Playstation 3 enough. It is about time I say some good things about it.

I've been reading more about the system, and the truth is, it is a very under rated system.

The Playstation 3 is only $200 more expensive than the Xbox 360. However, because Sony is losing more money, per console, than Xbox 360 is on their consoles, you are getting a better deal when you purchase the Playstation 3.

The system itself is one of the finest Blu-Ray players in existence. It offers amongst the clearest visuals ever seen in home television screens.

The hardware itself is superior to the Xbox 360. Don't kid yourself about it. If the system is more expensive, and Sony is losing more money, per console, than Microsoft is with the Xbox 360, that tells you the supremecy that the Playstation 3 has over the Xbox 360.

The Playstation 3 is graphically superior to the Xbox 360. The games that are comming out right now may look equal, or slightly lesser quality than the of the Xbox 360's, but, within a year, or two, the games will be showing better visuals than Xbox 360's. If you compared Playstation 3's first games, with Xbox 360's, you will see that Playstation 3's game are slightly nicer in visuals. Developers are underestimating the power of the Playstation 3, therefore, they aren't using its maximum power.

Its controller may not vibrate, but unlike the Xbox 360's controller, it has similar function to that of the wiimote. However, the Xbox 360's controller still wins, because it isn't the same as its predecessor's controller, and it vibrates. If only Sony put vibration back into its controllers, it would beat the Xbox 360's controller, but still not beat the wiimote.

One thing about the Playstation 3 that nobody ever mentioned was its touch-sensative buttons. Its On/Off button, and Reset button are both touch-sensative. Also, unlike the Xbox 360, doesn't have a CD tray. Instead, you put the CD in a slot, and it gets sucked right into the system. I don't know what its called, and I'm too lazy to look up the proper name of the mechanism on the Internet. So I'll just call it the "CD sucker thingy."

The Playstation 3 has 40 GB more than the Xbox 360. The Elite, has 60 GB more than the Playstation 3, but, it's even more expensive than the original Xbox 360.

The Playstation 3 is about 4 pounds heavier than the Xbox 360. But, unlike the Xbox 360, its AC adapter box (I forgot what it's called. It's that big black box thingy that the Gamecube had in the middle of the power chord that connects to the T.V. The Nintendo Wii has it too) is inside the system, and its Blu-Ray player is built insidle, unlike the HD-DVD player, that is sold seperately from the Xbox 360.

Xbox 360 + Ac Adapter + HD DVD player may =, or > the size of the Playstation 3.

Now what about games? Sure, many of the PS3s exclusives are going to the Xbox 360, but people are acting as if the games are moving only to the Xbox 360, when in reality, they are going to be on both systems. And the games wont look as nice on the Xbox 360. Blu-Ray can hold 20GB more than HD DVD. Blu-Ray is better than HD-DVD. Even Microsoft fan boys know that, so instead, they say "I don't need Blu-Ray."

Who knows, maybe some of Xbox 360's exclusives will move to the Playstation 3. Both consoles will have good games. The Playstation 3 will pick up within a year. It may not surpass the Wii, but may surpass the Xbox 360.

The Playstation 3 has been out for only half a year, and it has already sold 3 million consoles. The Xbox 360 has been out for one and a half years, and it has sold 9 million consles. Therefore, multiply the Playstation 3's sales by three, and you have the equivilent of Xbox 360's sales. Also, the Playstation 3 has already surpassed the Xbox 360's sales in Japan.

I must say, the Playstation 3 is one of the nicest looking consoles I have ever seen. Just because it may look like a grill, doesn't make it ugly. I've seen some really nice looking grills before. Actually, it doesn't even look like a grill. If it wasn't curved on the top, nobody would ever make that connection. One negative about the design is that it scratches as easily as the iPod Nano.

Also, going online is free, unlike the $70 yearly fee for Xbox Live. Therefore, in three years, that's $210 extra (add that to the price of the console and you've spent more money thant a Playstation 3).

Also, you can look at it this way: A used 20 GB Playstation 3 is cheaper than a brand new Xbox 360 Elite, or a brand new Xbox 360 Premium with the HD DVD add-on, and even more cheaper when you add Xbox Live to either Xbox 360.

Sure, some of the Playstation 3's game trailors might not look as nice as they turned out to be. However, you must remember that the trailors show mostly movie clips of the games. I've seen movie clips in Playstation 1 games that look nicer than Playstation 3 game phootage. Even if you look at the back of a Playstation 3's game case, you will see that the pictures are of the game are actually from the movie clips.

All in all, the Playstation 3 has its advantages over the Xbox 360, and this is expected, seeing that it is $200 more expensive than the Xbox 360.

$200 isn't that much. It's only two days of working. Maybe even one day, if you have a really good job. And, you are getting $300 more of value, from that $200 extra, spent. Also, if someone can spend $1,000 on one month rent (which I personally think is money down the drain), $1,000 on one month insurance (which is more money down the drain), taxes (more money), parking (more money), and all of those other intangible things, then 16 hours more of working, to own a far superior piece of technology, is going to be absolutely nothing. 


Around the Network

I dont even have to read your entire post to agree with you. It is just fun to hate on Sony right now, because they were so cocky pre-launch. That is not to say they wont do good in the end, it is just a matter of when. I say: mid 2008 on.



its ahead of its time and most people are not rich.

 

its far the most superior system of the 3 in every way. 



True that, but that could lead to its downfall as well.



a.l.e.x59 said:
Developers are underestimating the power of the Playstation 3, therefore, they aren't using its maximum power.

Stop making stuff up please. That is just plain nonsense.

The PS3 GPU is pretty much crap compared to the 360 GPU and during the console's lifetimes it will show. It doesn't mean there's not going to be very nice, well made titles for PS3. It just means that if you put an equal amount of effort and talent (which is what matters the most) in developing a PS3 and 360 title, the 360 title is going to look better. The Cell isn't going to save it when it comes to graphics.

 



Around the Network

Whether it's graphically superior to 360 is very arguable. In fact most multi-platform titles to date have run better on 360 leading to the opposite conclusion.

 

If you want to say it's the most high tech system because of built in hard drive, it's quieter and more reliable, Blu Ray, or built in wireless feel free. But just to say it's technically superior because it's more expensive is foolish. In fact, the PS3 is nothing but a $399 console with an extra $200 to pay for Blu_Ray. A $399 console is the same as 360, so even your own flawed argument is proven false.

"If you compared Playstation 3's first games, with Xbox 360's, you will see that Playstation 3's game are slightly nicer in visuals."

 

This isn't valid because 360's alpha and beta dev kits which launch software was mostly developed on were severaly underpowered compared to the final hardware. PS3 dev kits had no such restrictions, so PS3 titles looked better from the start, however 360's graphics have improved more because of it.

 

Just look at 360's early lineup. The system didn't really get a graphical next gen game until GRAW in March 06. Now it even has dozens of games that blow away GRAW. PS3 games will likely improve (Drake, Heavenly,  Ratchet) but not to the degree of 360. PS3 games came out of the gate using most of the system's power (Motorstorm).

 



Taz42 said:
a.l.e.x59 said:
Developers are underestimating the power of the Playstation 3, therefore, they aren't using its maximum power.

Stop making stuff up please. That is just plain nonsense.

The PS3 GPU is pretty much crap compared to the 360 GPU and during the console's lifetimes it will show. It doesn't mean there's not going to be very nice, well made titles for PS3. It just means that if you put an equal amount of effort and talent (which is what matters the most) in developing a PS3 and 360 title, the 360 title is going to look better. The Cell isn't going to save it when it comes to graphics.

 


 LOL

 Cell can do graphics, so xenon is some how more capable then Cell/RSX

 BAHahhahahahahhaha.

 



For people that doesn't have to worry about money. $200 more is just spare change to them. For majority of others, that can cover a lot of bills.



Nobody in this website is capable of developing a console superior to the Playstation 3, let alone, the Atari 2600. Therefore, all consoles should be appreciated for what they are, and their marvels of their technology. Many people put a lot of work into the Playstation 3, and we have no right to insult it. The games, however, are different, because you can identify a bad game by comparing it to a good game. But consoles should never be judged. They only play the games. And each console has at least one marvelous game.



It is true, however, that the difference in graphics of multi-platform games is small, sometimes favoring PS3 over 360 and vice versa.