This is the dumbest thread I've ever seen or read but  I have to comment cuz its so dumb. Bluray is a disc based format that was evolved from the DVD it has more space so no need to swap discs because of the bigger space and its better its a formant that has evolved like to beta, VHS and DVD and even the now defunct HD-DVD that microsoft tried to develope. Kinect is a webcam style add on peripheral it does not even compare to the bluray its 2 different things that are not even related. Please Mods lock this thread not sure why its gotten so many posts mine included.

Yes there has, one of the big reasons Metal Gear Solid 4 never made it to 360 was because they couldn't partition it into small enough bits.

Plus games like FFXIII have to have their cutscenes significantly compressed to work on 360. Not to mention the pile of PS3 exclusives which are 40G or larger. BR was needed to optimize the power of the PS3, and yes at the start it was a bit expensive, but later on DY DVD's held back the 360 a lot.

Kinect on the other hand, is not required. It's the same idea as playing Smash Bros on the Wii, a lot of people prefer to play it with the Gamecube controller. Unlike Wii though, Kinect isn't universally accepted, a good population of gamers don't want it, and there isn't a single game out yet which needs it. So why force it?

Seriously, you seem to know something I don't. I would love for you to elaborate.

Why? I'm loving this thread.

Its great seeing people defend Bluray with no real examples of how it made 7th gen gaming better.

Storage space is not the reason MGS4 never made it to the 360. It could have been done, putting it on multiple discs was also possible considering its a linear game. For what its worth, MGS5 is coming to the 360.

Did you play the 360 version of FFXIII? It looks fine even with lower quality video. They managed to do it with only 3 discs.

Just because PS3 games have used 50GB, doesn't mean they needed to use 50GB. Look at 8th gen games, most of those don't even use 50GB with vastly superior graphics.

I would say that while the action is similar (both instances have a manufacturer adding a piece of hardware to their system offering), there is a difference. If Sony had tried splitting the system into multiple SKUs that had DVD or Blu-Ray players in them, it would have made publishing the games a nightmare and caused much frustration for their customers. If Microsoft split the Xbox One into multiple SKUs with and without the Kinect there would be little to no problems for their customers.

Aside from that, I would argue the benifits of both differ geatly. The first offered a tangible benifit to the customers in every physical game purchased and allowed them the option of buying Blu-Ray movies without having to buy a seperate player. While you may not find the lack of disc swapping to be important, I personally found it very nice to not have to change discs. Also, I like the durability of the Blu-Ray discs compared to the older DVD discs. I take care of my games, but sometimes others might get their hands on it and they're not as gentle as I.

When it comes to the Kinect, it only adds (arguably) to the experience in select titles. The others that rely on it as the main imput device could have pushed the sales of it as a seperate accessory like they did during the Xbox 360 era. There was no need to make all customers purchase a camera accessory that is not required to run the system.

Well I would say the major difference is that Sony ate up the loses for that Bluraydrive for us. They gave it away for free. I remember the 200 Dollar loss per console back in 2006/2007.

If Kinect is for free also I guess there is no difference.

I reported this topic. You are probably a journalist.

This a fucking blatant lie and manipulation process by which you compare two things which have absolutely nothing to do: an external video system that monitors and record your paroles and actions, and a core disc reader/player.

Konami designed MGS4 as a PS3 exclusive, and when 360 did better then expected, they couldn't port the game over to the 360 because of how it was designed. It would be the same story for Uncharted and The Last of Us, the structure of the game prevents equal parts of 4 from being partitioned, so it can't be played on a 360, not unless you redesign the game from the ground up. This is why MGS4 never released on 360, not even in the MGS Collection which only released what last year?

I own the 360 version of FFXIII, the cutscenes look okay, but it's not anywhere nearly the same as the PS3 version. It's a noticable cutback.

As for 50GB, sure they can design games to use less data, but that would cut back at the amount of content, texture resolution, number of objects on screen, etc. Removing Blu-Ray cannot be done without cutting back at the quality of PS3 games. You can't take the larger PS3 games and make them fit on DL DVD's without significantly affecting the game.

Removing Kinect on the other hand, doesn't affect anything in a game. Not 1 XBO exclusive requires Kinect so far, so why force us to buy it? 

No, people actually want Blu-Ray.