Reasonable said: Newsflash - its impossible to categorically state that XMB is better than Blades or vice versa, or that one controller is better, unless you can prove consistent difference - which in this case you can't. It's personal taste for the most part. I for example hate batteries and recharging batteries and opening covers and replacing them - guess whether I prefer PS3 method or 360? Someone else might hate having to wire up the controller for a bit so guess whivh one they would prefer? Half of the latter comments sound like the conversation after 10 beers when everyone argues about somthing that has no resolution. Time to drink up and give it a rest with the 'its better because I say so' IMHO. OT nice write up. Funnily enough I'm always surprised the 360 power brick doesn't get mentioned more - it's huge and I suspect often an unexpected sight for many when they open the box!

 

1.  You must not like using a PS3 wireless controller if you hate batteries and recharging them, because that's exactly what you're doing when you connect a PS3 wireless controller to the PS3.

2.  Have you ever seen a 360 wireless controller?  You don't open up anything if you have a 360 rechargeable battery pack... you just push the little button on the top of the battery pack and the pack pops off.  Then you just snap a recharged battery pack into the controller.  Takes 5 seconds.  There is no opening a cover, etc.

 

Come on, admit it.  As far as wireless controllers go, MS actually did one thing right... you can do it.

 

MikeB said: The 360 controller is too bulky for my sister's and gf's hands.

 

I sure hope that's two people :p

Folklore. That's my favorite PS3 game.

The PS3 is running on future hopes. That's why I just boxed mine up again. It's not BC and I need the surge protector space for my PS2.

The PS3 could eventually be better than the 360 or even the PS2, but right now it's not. Until Home exists, the 360 has a better interface, a better game selection, and WAY more quality amazing to mediocre games for me to play while I'm waiting for the new ones to come out.

When you buy and play as many games as you can as quickly as you can, the PS3 and the 360 really set themselves apart on the library front, and if you're a JRPG junkie, then you just better get a 360, that's my opinion.

Reasonable said: Newsflash - its impossible to categorically state that XMB is better than Blades or vice versa, or that one controller is better, unless you can prove consistent difference - which in this case you can't. It's personal taste for the most part.

 

What he says

Legend11 said: I'm surprised about the controller comments since I think the 360's controller is much better than the sixaxis (not sure about their dualshock 3 as I have never tried one). The sixaxis feels too light and cheap, especially when you use it after using a 360's controller.

i don't have a PS3 nor a X360...but i'm surprised too: how can you compare sixaxis that's without rumble to any other joypad that has rumble? it's like taking out air conditioning from a car: sure, you can still drive and for ages people have driven cars without it, but once you drive a car with air conditioning you can't go back.

 

crumas2 said: Reasonable said: Newsflash - its impossible to categorically state that XMB is better than Blades or vice versa, or that one controller is better, unless you can prove consistent difference - which in this case you can't. It's personal taste for the most part. I for example hate batteries and recharging batteries and opening covers and replacing them - guess whether I prefer PS3 method or 360? Someone else might hate having to wire up the controller for a bit so guess whivh one they would prefer? Half of the latter comments sound like the conversation after 10 beers when everyone argues about somthing that has no resolution. Time to drink up and give it a rest with the 'its better because I say so' IMHO. OT nice write up. Funnily enough I'm always surprised the 360 power brick doesn't get mentioned more - it's huge and I suspect often an unexpected sight for many when they open the box!   1.  You must not like using a PS3 wireless controller if you hate batteries and recharging them, because that's exactly what you're doing when you connect a PS3 wireless controller to the PS3. 2.  Have you ever seen a 360 wireless controller?  You don't open up anything if you have a 360 rechargeable battery pack... you just push the little button on the top of the battery pack and the pack pops off.  Then you just snap a recharged battery pack into the controller.  Takes 5 seconds.  There is no opening a cover, etc.   Come on, admit it.  As far as wireless controllers go, MS actually did one thing right... you can do it.

IO agree with reasonable here. It's all personal prefrence. I for one find the Ps3 controller comfortable while the 360 controller bulky. But you see it the other way,

So... should I be telling you to admit the Ps3 controller is better?

 

Spectrumglr said: Legend11 said: I'm surprised about the controller comments since I think the 360's controller is much better than the sixaxis (not sure about their dualshock 3 as I have never tried one). The sixaxis feels too light and cheap, especially when you use it after using a 360's controller. i don't have a PS3 nor a X360...but i'm surprised too: how can you compare sixaxis that's without rumble to any other joypad that has rumble? it's like taking out air conditioning from a car: sure, you can still drive and for ages people have driven cars without it, but once you drive a car with air conditioning you can't go back.

 

Because not everyone cares about rumble

PooperScooper said: crumas2 said: Reasonable said: Newsflash - its impossible to categorically state that XMB is better than Blades or vice versa, or that one controller is better, unless you can prove consistent difference - which in this case you can't. It's personal taste for the most part. I for example hate batteries and recharging batteries and opening covers and replacing them - guess whether I prefer PS3 method or 360? Someone else might hate having to wire up the controller for a bit so guess whivh one they would prefer? Half of the latter comments sound like the conversation after 10 beers when everyone argues about somthing that has no resolution. Time to drink up and give it a rest with the 'its better because I say so' IMHO. OT nice write up. Funnily enough I'm always surprised the 360 power brick doesn't get mentioned more - it's huge and I suspect often an unexpected sight for many when they open the box!   1. You must not like using a PS3 wireless controller if you hate batteries and recharging them, because that's exactly what you're doing when you connect a PS3 wireless controller to the PS3. 2. Have you ever seen a 360 wireless controller? You don't open up anything if you have a 360 rechargeable battery pack... you just push the little button on the top of the battery pack and the pack pops off. Then you just snap a recharged battery pack into the controller. Takes 5 seconds. There is no opening a cover, etc.   Come on, admit it. As far as wireless controllers go, MS actually did one thing right... you can do it.   IO agree with reasonable here. It's all personal prefrence. I for one find the Ps3 controller comfortable while the 360 controller bulky. But you see it the other way, So... should I be telling you to admit the Ps3 controller is better?

 

I'm saying that the removeable battery pack on the 360 wireless controller is much more convenient than having to plug the PS3's controller in when the battery is spent. I'm not arguing that the 360's controller is more comfortable to hold than the PS3's... I'm just saying that MS got one feature of the 360's wireless controller right, and that Sony took an inferior approach... on that one feature.

This is why I don't give much credibility to most of the PS3 fanatics on this site. Why? Because you and many others will argue every point into the ground, no matter how obvious it is that you're wrong. You can never admit any feature of your favorite console might be inferior in any way to another console. I have no problem admitting that the comfort of using the controllers is based on personal preference. Can you make the simple admission that having a very easy-to-use removeable battery pack for a wireless controller is more convenient than having to turn it into a wired controller in the event its battery goes dead... or having to get a replacement controller from the manufacturer when the battery finally fails to hold a good charge (and no rechargeable battery lasts forever, so this is going to happen). How can you argue that working through Sony's support to swap controllers is more convenient than walking into Best Buy or Walmart and paying $11 for a battery that will last for at least a couple of years? Making a wireless controller's battery pack non-consumer-removeable is a rediculous design decision.

The 360 definitely has its deficiencies when compared to the competition, but so do the PS3 and the Wii. The 360s, particularly the older models such as the one I have are too loud, run too hot, and are too prone to RROD. The Wii will never be capable of HD gaming, even though this isn't important to some, it will always be an issue. The Wii can't play movies, much less Blu-ray, and neither can the 360 regarding Blu-ray... not to mention the increased capacity of Blu-ray for games. The PS3's game library is lacking in some areas, such as JRPGS (although this will likely improve over time... but not today), and the PS3's cell engine is harder to squeeze good performance out of than the 360s CPU. A good number of PS3 optical drives have failed, although the percentage is still low, but Sony refuses to extend the 1-year warranty for the customers who have had that particular failure. The Wii likely has a more reliable optical drive than either the PS3 or the 360. Also, the Blu-ray drive in the PS3 is slower for random access and makes certain games such as Oblivion more difficult to port to the PS3. The current low-end PS3 currently lacks backwards compatibility, forcing PS2 owners to either keep their PS2s (and replace them if they break) if they want to keep playing their libraries of PS2 games, hope and pray for eventual software BC, or pay for the higher-end PS3. Every Wii has BC built in, and even the lowest end 360 has software BC if a hard drive is added (yes, the hard drives are too expensive... but at least the option exists).

There... I pointed out pros and cons of each platform. Can you do the same, or will you continue to cling to the argument that the PS3 is the perfect console and has no deficiencies when compared to the competition? I challenge you to do it. But I know it won't happen. It never does when I challenge a PS3 fan to make a balanced assessment of the PS3. It's as if you and other PS3 fans are terrified that someone will read these forums and decide not to buy a PS3 because it doesn't have removeable controller batteries, so you can't accept even the most obvious statement of a downside, no matter how small, of your beloved console. But I'm guessing the opposite is true... the more a newcomer who has yet to decide on a new console notices that the PS3 fanatics are unwilling to concede even the most obvious point, the less credibility they will give them. You might want to think about that.

I read the OP's post and found it refreshing that he listed positive and negative points, and clearly stated that his post was based on his own personal preferences and point-of-view. But I knew it was inevitable that mentioning anything positive about the 360 or negative about the PS3 was going to send certain of the PS3 fans on a rampage, and I was right.

EDIT: and yes, there are 360 and Wii fans who do the same.

crumas2 said: PooperScooper said: crumas2 said: Reasonable said: Newsflash - its impossible to categorically state that XMB is better than Blades or vice versa, or that one controller is better, unless you can prove consistent difference - which in this case you can't. It's personal taste for the most part. I for example hate batteries and recharging batteries and opening covers and replacing them - guess whether I prefer PS3 method or 360? Someone else might hate having to wire up the controller for a bit so guess whivh one they would prefer? Half of the latter comments sound like the conversation after 10 beers when everyone argues about somthing that has no resolution. Time to drink up and give it a rest with the 'its better because I say so' IMHO. OT nice write up. Funnily enough I'm always surprised the 360 power brick doesn't get mentioned more - it's huge and I suspect often an unexpected sight for many when they open the box!   1. You must not like using a PS3 wireless controller if you hate batteries and recharging them, because that's exactly what you're doing when you connect a PS3 wireless controller to the PS3. 2. Have you ever seen a 360 wireless controller? You don't open up anything if you have a 360 rechargeable battery pack... you just push the little button on the top of the battery pack and the pack pops off. Then you just snap a recharged battery pack into the controller. Takes 5 seconds. There is no opening a cover, etc.   Come on, admit it. As far as wireless controllers go, MS actually did one thing right... you can do it.   IO agree with reasonable here. It's all personal prefrence. I for one find the Ps3 controller comfortable while the 360 controller bulky. But you see it the other way, So... should I be telling you to admit the Ps3 controller is better?     I'm saying that the removeable battery pack on the 360 wireless controller is much more convenient than having to plug the PS3's controller in when the battery is spent. I'm not arguing that the 360's controller is more comfortable to hold than the PS3's... I'm just saying that MS got one feature of the 360's wireless controller right, and that Sony took an inferior approach... on that one feature. This is why I don't give much credibility to most of the PS3 fanatics on this site. Why? Because you and many others will argue every point into the ground, no matter how obvious it is that you're wrong. You can never admit any feature of your favorite console might be inferior in any way to another console. I have no problem admitting that the comfort of using the controllers is based on personal preference. Can you make the simple admission that having a very easy-to-use removeable battery pack for a wireless controller is more convenient than having to turn it into a wired controller in the event its battery goes dead... or having to get a replacement controller from the manufacturer when the battery finally fails to hold a good charge (and no rechargeable battery lasts forever, so this is going to happen). How can you argue that working through Sony's support to swap controllers is more convenient than walking into Best Buy or Walmart and paying $11 for a battery that will last for at least a couple of years? Making a wireless controller's battery pack non-consumer-removeable is a rediculous design decision. The 360 definitely has its deficiencies when compared to the competition, but so do the PS3 and the Wii. The 360s, particularly the older models such as the one I have are too loud, run too hot, and are too prone to RROD. The Wii will never be capable of HD gaming, even though this isn't important to some, it will always be an issue. The Wii can't play movies, much less Blu-ray, and neither can the 360 regarding Blu-ray... not to mention the increased capacity of Blu-ray for games. The PS3's game library is lacking in some areas, such as JRPGS (although this will likely improve over time... but not today), and the PS3's cell engine is harder to squeeze good performance out of than the 360s CPU. A good number of PS3 optical drives have failed, although the percentage is still low, but Sony refuses to extend the 1-year warranty for the customers who have had that particular failure. The Wii likely has a more reliable optical drive than either the PS3 or the 360. Also, the Blu-ray drive in the PS3 is slower for random access and makes certain games such as Oblivion more difficult to port to the PS3. The current low-end PS3 currently lacks backwards compatibility, forcing PS2 owners to either keep their PS2s (and replace them if they break) if they want to keep playing their libraries of PS2 games, hope and pray for eventual software BC, or pay for the higher-end PS3. Every Wii has BC built in, and even the lowest end 360 has software BC if a hard drive is added (yes, the hard drives are too expensive... but at least the option exists). There... I pointed out pros and cons of each platform. Can you do the same, or will you continue to cling to the argument that the PS3 is the perfect console and has no deficiencies when compared to the competition? I challenge you to do it. But I know it won't happen. It never does when I challenge a PS3 fan to make a balanced assessment of the PS3. It's as if you and other PS3 fans are terrified that someone will read these forums and decide not to buy a PS3 because it doesn't have removeable controller batteries, so you can't accept even the most obvious statement of a downside, no matter how small, of your beloved console. But I'm guessing the opposite is true... the more a newcomer who has yet to decide on a new console notices that the PS3 fanatics are unwilling to concede even the most obvious point, the less credibility they will give them. You might want to think about that. I read the OP's post and found it refreshing that he listed positive and negative points, and clearly stated that his post was based on his own personal preferences and point-of-view. But I knew it was inevitable that mentioning anything positive about the 360 or negative about the PS3 was going to send certain of the PS3 fans on a rampage, and I was right. EDIT: and yes, there are 360 and Wii fans who do the same.

Agree 100% with this post. Hell I have had RRoD and can admit that M$ have made a big flaw with the original models. I dont  class myself as a fanboy(although PS3 fans definately think I am) just because I dont own a Ps3. But they will not admit that 360 has a bigger more varied multicultural library. And likewise 360 fanboys that say MGS4 sucks are plain stupid. Yes MGS4 has flaws but seriuosly guys it's one of the best experiences this gen. 3 or 4 more games of that calibur and I will start hunting a PS3 going cheap.

 

 

MikeB said: @ Bitmap Frogs Is worse only on the basis of personal preference exclusively. Because of that, many people prefer the 360's approach on the controller energy issues. Glad you cleared that up. That counts for almost everything, game preferences, outlook perspectives, etc. The 360 controller is too bulky for my sister's and gf's hands. I prefer the analog stick next to eachother like on PS controllers to play games like Super Stardust HD.

 

 

So you've got women hands? Busted! You only like the dualshock controller because it has a playstation logo stamped on it =/

Back to the thread, Mass Effect's synth style music has a lot of flavor. Very 80's style. While I was playing through ME, I felt the need after playing sessions to listen to some Jean Michel Jarre. With the wide adoption of synthetized music for videogames, the guy's been a pretty major inspiration. Many of the Psygnosis soundtracks (such as the ones from the hits Shadow of the Beast and its sequels) was heavily inspired on Jarre's early works.