JazzB1987 1 hour ago
One system sold 400% as much as the earlier iteration. The other one sold 33% less.

You decide who the real winner here is.


really though,how could this have gone any other way than this?????in no way/shape/form was sony gonna improve over 155M and no way in hell was the 360 not gonna heavily improve over 22m(or whatever the first xbox sold).. market share was gonna shift/shrink month by month and year by year in ms favor because of the massive extreme differences between ps2/xbox and there was almost no other outcome.. sony didnt want market share to come that close when all said and done,but its not as close as some think when you factor in the rrod situation for ms and the huge inflated numbers it caused when sold to actual customers.. at the end of the day,ps3 sold to many more millions and millions of customers

Wright said: estebxx said: (some of those games ended up coming with exclusive content on the PS3). All of them did. There's a policy in Playstation systems that doesn't allow games that had previously released in other consoles unless they bring extra content not found on those versions.

oh i didnt knew that, i thought Bioshock and Mass Effect had the same extra content (dlc) on both versions, but i guess i was wrong.

but now that you say it, it makes sense those games would need some extra content to incentivate the purchase of a rather "old" game.

Areym said: Wow, how hilariously one-sided and biased. I have no idea how you think the 360 was more innovative than the PS3. Literally, you said a bunch of nothing on that part. In the end though, I will say 360 because it gained a lot of ground during that gen. PS2 vs Xbox was no comparison but on the 7th gen, MS took every opportunity available and really made Xbox a powerful brand...until the giant fuck up with the Xbox One reveal. However, the PS3 comeback was real and worth mentioning. Despite being destroyed early on, Sony found its groove back and gave us some of the best games of the generation, in their respective genres. I personally prefer the PS3 obviously, from design to games and the wonderful conception of PS+ but profit and brand "Expansion" wise, I think Xbox 360 beat the PS3, hands down.

Bolded: I've noticed that when this gets thrown around, what they actually mean is "it was my first console that I personally played online".

If the OP comes back to this thread and clarifies, mark my words, it'll be something along those lines, if not exactly that.

But alas, it's an overwhelming notion that will never be curbed in the long run of history, much like the undue publicity the N64 and PS1 get for their use of analog technology and CD-Rom format respectively even today.

Zackasaurus-rex said: Who won? "Winning" is usually defined with hard sales, which means that the PS3 won in that quantitative sense. Alternative ways of looking at it: Sales: PS3 Gains compared to 6th gen: 360 Overall quality/reception at the end of the 7th gen leading into the 8th: PS3 Games: PS3 Console lifespan longevity: PS3 Innovation/impact on industry: Tied

I wholdheartedly agree with this.

saleswise, tie.
in my heart, ps3. cos ps+.

I have to say this is the most peaceful thread I've seen concerning rival consoles in a very long time.

I have to go with the consensus and say that it's a tie sales wise. The numbers are just too close for any of the 2 to claim 2nd place. They both got it.

Also I see I most certainly agree with the 360 taking 2005-2009, while PS3 took 2009-present. I got my PS3 in 2009 because I was disappointed with Sony for that outrageous price and the negative claims of the PS3 not having any games. I also love my 360 and it has tons of games for it and made the past generation very fun.

All in all, my *personal* preference would be the PS3. I enjoy that console just a bit more than I do my 360, but still love them both.

Overall, the PS3 won the sales numbers globally but lost in North America and the UK.

I owned the PS3 in 2008 and was amazed at everything it could do: games, music (including SACD), video, online, and blu ray...

Late in the Xbox 360 life in 2012, I got the 360 on for cheap and realized some of the advantages the Xbots had been previously proclaiming...

Here they are:

The 360 controller was heftier and clearly better for shooters with the big offset sticks; it also had better triggers. Although I still like the DS3 for most other games and applications, the 360 controller was also excellent. The 360 clearly had better wireless internet capability (I think it was N vs G for the PS3) and could handle apps way more smoothly than the PS3 (although, again, the PS3 was good enough most of the time).  The graphics for the multiplats were generally better on the 360 (not including FFXIII and Crysis 3 and some others on the PS3).  In the end, the 360 had slightly better textures and framerates with the multiplats.  But some of the later first party games for the PS3 were clearly more graphically advanced than anything on the 360; games like Uncharted 2 and 3, The Last of Us, and the God of War games.

But the biggest thing I liked about the Xbox was some of the exclusive content that was out of reach for a PS3 owner, namely: The Halo series, Gears of War Series, DLC for Tomb Raider Underworld (I really wanted to play the 2 DLCs for TRU), Half Life with full controller feedback, Perfect Dark series, and some XBL Arcade exclusives, and that's about it.  Every other multiplat I liked I had for the PS3 and PC.

In the end, I'll give the PS3 the overall edge for the win noting that the 360 was also good...  Anyone agree with this assessment?

In terms of sales, PS3, by like 300k

lmao
PS3 OF COURSE

Besides brand recognition (in wich microsoft invested a fortune)
the 360 with its year of advantage wasnt as near as succesfull as ps3
not even Halo neither GOW became that relevant against Uncharted, TLOU or the multi COD