Sardauk said:
Rpruett said:
Sardauk said:
That is so PS3 biased... lol
|
Not really. I prefer the PS3 to the 360. But game enjoyment is purely a matter of personal opinion. Price clearly favors the 360 in terms of entry point. Reliability clearly favors the PS3 and Value I guess 'could maybe be' a tad biased. But the PS3 does give you a Blu-Ray player, WiFi, Free Online for $400. Add those costs onto the cheapest 360 model and include XBL fees.
|
Ok but, if we are talking about a gaming machine, I don't care about blu-ray, wifi (useless for gaming) etc...
A pure gamer would rather spend money into gaming rather than electronics... 
Neither console is marketed as purely gaming machine though now is it? Both are categorized as multi-media machines.
IMO, this "value argument" is a Sony marketing spin : Real value is about getting more for less money, not getting more for more because... you just paid for it, that is no added-value... people on this forum don't understand that apparently...
No the the 'value argument' is not Sony marketing spin. Value is getting something for less than it's worth. Getting a bargain. There is a reason people by the PS3 and make clusters with them. The hardware in them is a total value. Add up what the features would cost to put onto your 360. ($100 for Wifi, $150 or more for Blu-Ray attachment, $50 a year for Live).
360 has more value : It is the most succesful HD console on the market and it is available with crazy bundles..that is value to me: You wanna play ? You get the console and 2 AAA titles for 290 € or a HALO Pack for 260 €.
I have no problem with people willing to pay more for blu-ray... but this is not gaming related..(and don't come on me with the advantage of BR on gaming...this is just storage..).
You actually get gaming advantages with more storage. Less compression is always a good thing for a gamer. The 360 wins on price, but not value IMO.
|
