Quantcast
Least liked console from each of the big 3 and why

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Least liked console from each of the big 3 and why

Burning Typhoon said:
Rafie said:

Really no different than both the Xbox One and the Switch. Right?! I'm also confused as to the overall bad performance. How was the vanilla PS4 performing poorly?

Sub-1080p and frame dips, constantly?  I have both a PS4, and a PS4 pro, and every playstation for that matter.  PS4 is a shame, as well as the pro model.  Guilty Gear Xrd, Dead or Alive 5, Grand Theft Auto 5, Tomb Raider, The Last of Us, Uncharted 1-3, God of War 3, Beyond: Two souls.  The PS4 is basically PS3.5, and still crap at 1080p gaming.  Frame rates are better with the pro, but even still...  It's shameful.  So, when I want to play Tekken 7, or any other multi-plat, I do it on PC.

My PS3 gets more use than any of my other consoles. 

I do not understand what you mean about the Switch.  It's a handheld device, and I'm not playing multi-plats on it.  It's my first Nintendo console, and I've been Sony/Sega biased my entire life.  I've never been a Nintendo fan, but the switch is great.  I use my PS3 more, than my Switch, but my Switch more than my PS4.  I use my Sega Genesis more than my PS4.

I'm not getting Doom on switch, I have a PC for that.  I'm not playing any multi-plat on console.  I have a PC for that.  I'm using consoles specifically for the exclusive content/features.  If I get a game for the switch, it's because I can't get it for anything else, or I want the added ability to play away from the TV.

And as for Xbox, I'm not forgetting the BS microsoft was doing.  I have forza, gears of war, killer instinct, etc.  I play them on PC.  Xbox live is free on PC.  The xbox catalogue is on PC.  I have no use for one.

The original Xbox introduced features that consoles until it didn't have, like hard drives.  The 360, had it's massive failure rate and RRoD issue.  Literally everyone I knew with  360, all my friends, siblings, a few cousins, they all got RRoD.  I forgot about that when I was coming up with my list but I'm not touching another microsoft console again.  The original Xbox is just the one I disliked the least.

I also find it weird that people claim the PS3 was overprice, despite the price of that console dropping considerably since release.  If they included backwards compatibility, the same PS4 console would be 600 dollars too, with the added benefit of playing older games.  It didn't STAY 600 dollars, and there was always a cheaper model.  Why complain about the flagship model when there were other variants that did almost the same exact thing?

Sub 1080p?! The machine runs most games at 1080. Sure the Pro is a little bit better, but hardly anything significant. Not that big of jump like the Xbox One to the One X. The regular PS4 seems to handle games just fine in my opinion. I don't really hear complaints from gamers about hardware performance when it comes to the PS4. My "it's really no different than Xbox One and Switch" stance was in response to how you made all of the hardware gripes about PS4 when for the longest time was the strongest console in the world. I was just surprised you didn't make the same claims towards the other 2.

Trust me when I say I love the Switch. It's a phenomenal console that's creative, innovative, and just downright enjoyable. If I had to say anything negative about the Switch, it would have been that joy-con drift issue. Which is being taken care of. So I don't have anything against Switch. Again, I was just wondering why you chose the strongest hardware (at the time)out of the 3 for hardware limitations and didn't list it for the other 2. It was just baffling for me. Your preference is your preference. I'll never argue why you like a console better than another. That's not why I replied to you.

I do agree with you about the pricing of the PS3. I don't see it as a negative because they had other models down the line that had a much less considerable price. However, I understand that there are few who have been turned off completely by that price and decided not to touch the PS3 at all. So maybe some of those same folks are here. Same situation with the Xbox One. Pricing and forced Kinect bundling. Although there are other models with a much reduced price and no Kinect...some gamers just got turned off from that.

Anyway, please don't take my reply to you as to questioning your preference. I was just curious about the hardware view for one, but not all of them. Also I was wondering about the remaster thing when the other 2 consoles have just as many. That's the whole gist of "no different than Xbox One and Switch" bit. Hope that clears it up.



PSN ID- Rafie27

XBL Gamertag- RAFIE82

NNID- RAFIE82/ Friend Code: SW-6006-2580-8237

YouTube- Rafie Crocheron

Around the Network

Sony: The PS1, a lot of 2D fighting games were cut-down, audio & FMV skipping. The PS3, goodness it was pricey & the third party developers couldn't optimize their games.

Microsoft: The OG Xbox, for god sake the case is heavy & thicc

Nintendo: The Wii, GCN controller don't work on Wii menu. SIGH



Battletag: Quakecore89#1866 / GOG: AMDFX89 / PSN: QuakeCore_89 / Xbox Live Tag: QuakeCore89 / NS: SW-7937-5976-6855

Current PCs: -PC 2017(Ryzen 7 3700X/32GB 3200MHz DDR4 RAM/GeForce RTX 2060 6GB/Crucial 250GB M.2(Boot) Kingston 1TB SSD(Storage))

Nintendo: In terms of when I my experience when it was a current gen console, the GameCube. In terms of hindsight, the N64. I bought a Gamecube at launch, and a lot of people seem to forget just how vast the software droughts for the thing were. It’s third party support was scant, and it often got the worst versions of multi platform games despite being more powerful than PS2. Nintendo games were few and far inbetween, and could vary wildly in quality, from game of the year contenders like Metroid Prime, to trashy disasters like Geist. It’s still a damn good console with some amazing games, but it had the worst combination of third party and first party support of all of Nintendo’s consoles. While its controller is great for Nintendo games, it was infamously ill-suited for certain genres, especially fighting games.

N64 is the worst in hindsight. Its controller is awful, and most of its games, being early 3D games, have aged poorly. But for the time, I also can’t deny just how groundbreaking and innovative many of its games were.


Sony: PlayStation TV (HA, LOOP HOLE, I DON’T HAVE TO CHOOSE PS1). I will never understand the thinking behind this thing: let’s make a microconsole out of the Vita that can play MOST Vita and PSP games, but not all, including some pretty major games that should have been functional on it.

Putting that aside, I guess I’d go with PS1, if only because, again, many of its biggest games aged poorly (though it does have more sidescrollers than the N64, which aged better)

Microsoft: I’ve only loved their Xbox consoles, but I guess I’ll go with Xbox One. I love the services on it (Xbox Live and Game Pass) and I enjoy being able to run my cable box through it, which effectively makes the Xbox One my default TV interface. It’s SUPER convenient. But I only got this thing as a Christmas gift to begin with, and while it had superior exclusives to PS4 early on, at this point its hard to recommend the system based on its exclusive software. Unless you want Game Pass, there is simply no reason to own this thing if you already have a PS4 or PC, which have everything the Xbone has plus loads of great exclusives. Soon, even Game Pass won’t be a selling point anymore.

SEGA: Hey, they’ve been in as many console gens as Sony and Microsoft, so I’m gonna include them! Anyway, worst from SEGA was Master System. On top of 8-bit games not really aging great, and much of the library being made up of significantly scaled-down arcade ports, the Master System definitely falls short of SEGA’s other console efforts.



PS3 - High cost at launch, suffered performance issues compared to 360.
X1 - Little reason for me to play anything on it as most of what I play is either on PS4, Switch, or both.
WiiU - Biggest software droughts of any Nintendo console. Still prefer it over X1 however.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Rafie said:

Sub 1080p?! The machine runs most games at 1080. Sure the Pro is a little bit better, but hardly anything significant. Not that big of jump like the Xbox One to the One X. The regular PS4 seems to handle games just fine in my opinion. I don't really hear complaints from gamers about hardware performance when it comes to the PS4. My "it's really no different than Xbox One and Switch" stance was in response to how you made all of the hardware gripes about PS4 when for the longest time was the strongest console in the world. I was just surprised you didn't make the same claims towards the other 2.

Trust me when I say I love the Switch. It's a phenomenal console that's creative, innovative, and just downright enjoyable. If I had to say anything negative about the Switch, it would have been that joy-con drift issue. Which is being taken care of. So I don't have anything against Switch. Again, I was just wondering why you chose the strongest hardware (at the time)out of the 3 for hardware limitations and didn't list it for the other 2. It was just baffling for me. Your preference is your preference. I'll never argue why you like a console better than another. That's not why I replied to you.

I do agree with you about the pricing of the PS3. I don't see it as a negative because they had other models down the line that had a much less considerable price. However, I understand that there are few who have been turned off completely by that price and decided not to touch the PS3 at all. So maybe some of those same folks are here. Same situation with the Xbox One. Pricing and forced Kinect bundling. Although there are other models with a much reduced price and no Kinect...some gamers just got turned off from that.

Anyway, please don't take my reply to you as to questioning your preference. I was just curious about the hardware view for one, but not all of them. Also I was wondering about the remaster thing when the other 2 consoles have just as many. That's the whole gist of "no different than Xbox One and Switch" bit. Hope that clears it up.

I have no idea why you're defending a lie.  The PS4, like the Xbox One, does sub-1080p gaming, and dropping frames.  Just because you dont notice it, doesn't mean it's not happening.  I have both a PS4, and a PS4 Pro, and I also have a PC.  I have games across all three.  I notice pretty easily when there's frame dropping.

And here's a list of PS4 games that are sub-1080.  Most are actually 900p, and all it took was a quick google search.  Thanks, IGN.

Ark: Survival Evolved = 680p/Detailed Graphics runs at 1280x720p (TAA)
Assassin's Creed: Syndicate = 1600x900p (FXAA)
Assassin's Creed: Unity = 1600x900p (FXAA)
Battlefield 1 = Conquest ran between 1100x620p and 1807x1014, campaign runs between 1422x795 and 1807x1016; DICE did note that they adjusted the resolution scaler, so the lowest pixel count could be a lot higher, but I have yet to look (TAA)
Battlefield 4 = 1600x900p (FXAA)
Battlefield: Hardline = 1600x900p (FXAA)
Batman: Return to Arkham = 1344x1080p up to 1920x1080p (FXAA)
Batman: The Telltale Series = 1600x900p in a 2.40:1 aspect ratio (no AA)
Call of Duty: Black Ops III = 1360x1080p up to 1920x1080p/split screen runs between 1080x1080p up to 1536x1080p (Filmic SMAA T2x)
Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare = 960x1080p up to 1920x1080p (Filmic SMAA T2x, appears to be a temporal technique used that improves the resolution over time for parts of the frame that are similar to previous frames)
EA Sports MMA = 1600x900p (4x MSAA)
Final Fantasy XV = 1600x900p up to 1920x1080p (TAA)
Lichdom: Battlemage = 1600x900p (Post-AA)
Paragon = 1600x900p (TAA)
Nier: Automata = 1600x900p (no AA)
Nioh = 1280x720, occasional spikes up to 1600x900p and 1728x972p (no AA)
Shadow of the Beast = 1600x900p (post-AA? Not sure as I don't plan on getting it.)
Star Wars: Battlefront = 1600x900p (FXAA)
Uncharted 4 multiplayer = 1600x900p (TAA)
Wash_Dawgs = 1600x900p (SMAA T2x)
The Witness = 1600x900p (2x MSAA)
Titanfall 2 = 1280x720p

About the PS3s costs.  What really costs more?  Do you know how many people I knew that went out and paid for multiple xbox 360s with their own money?...  It was foolish.  I had 1 PS3 from 2009, until like 4 months ago.  No, it didn't break.  I still have it.  I bought a SECOND one for the backwards compatibility, since my original didn't have PS2 backwards compatibility.

And, about the Switch, it's meant to be portable.  How can you knock it for power when having more power would mean it wouldn't have been a portable console.  You're getting something out of it.  With the PS4, it's just... weak, and a one-trick-pony on top of it all.  It can't play PS1 games, for some odd reason.  Every version of playstation except PS4s can play PS1 games.  PS3 games are understandable, but it's just odd that the PS4 can't do much of anything else.  The PS3 has more features that the PS4, but PS4 has better graphics.

Last edited by Burning Typhoon - on 09 August 2019

Around the Network

Nintendo: Wii U only a handful of quality games compared to previous generations.

Sony: PS3 $600 at launch and weak start although it got better later.

Microsoft: Xbox One lack of compelling exculsive games and always online policy when it was announced.



I legit want to know why people say PS3, and then list issues that were remedied during the lifespan of the console, yet the PS4, has issues, with games being sub 1080p for 2 generations in a row, and a Pro model is release and still doesn't fix the issue.



Burning Typhoon said:
I legit want to know why people say PS3, and then list issues that were remedied during the lifespan of the console, yet the PS4, has issues, with games being sub 1080p for 2 generations in a row, and a Pro model is release and still doesn't fix the issue.

It mainly has to do with the Jaguar CPU holding it back. Unfortunately they had to use the same CPU in the PS4 Pro, same goes for the Xbox One and X. It is literally bottlenecking the GPU in both the Pro and X models. These people believe a GPU is the be all end all for graphs and performance. It doesn't matter how good your GPU is if your CPU is crap.



Sogreblute said:
Burning Typhoon said:
I legit want to know why people say PS3, and then list issues that were remedied during the lifespan of the console, yet the PS4, has issues, with games being sub 1080p for 2 generations in a row, and a Pro model is release and still doesn't fix the issue.

It mainly has to do with the Jaguar CPU holding it back. Unfortunately they had to use the same CPU in the PS4 Pro, same goes for the Xbox One and X. It is literally bottlenecking the GPU in both the Pro and X models. These people believe a GPU is the be all end all for graphs and performance. It doesn't matter how good your GPU is if your CPU is crap.

Yeah, I know.  They were cheap, and it shows.  That's exactly what I mean.  Prices can drop, (and they did) and games can be released (and they were).  There is no fixing the games that can't hit 1080p, without removing something from the game itself.

Thank goodness for Ryzen, or the PS5 wouldn't hit 1080p either, given the track record.



Nintendo: WiiU. Just a culmination of increasingly worse consoles starting from the N64. I know it will ruffle feathers that I think since N64 Nintendo hadn't done a quality console, but that's just my opinion. The Switch reverses trend that entirely. I just wish there were a TV only version for $199.

Sony: PS3. I still love the crap out of every Playstation, mainly because it they always have crap tons of RPGs, but it is my least favorite.

Microsoft: XBONE. I don't even know why I still own the thing. The only game I have is the Master Chief collection. It literally does nothing I would want it to do.



A warrior keeps death on the mind from the moment of his first breath to the moment of his last.