@ disolitude

I think it's because, Microsoft and 360 fanboys created a lot of fuss about the platform. Spreading misinformation and FUD about the platform when some things still had to be ironed out, now the PS3 experience is a lot more slick and complete and I think people want to point out why the PS3 is so much more a great platform to them than a 360.



About equal 360 to PS3 ports (some are slighly better, some are slightly weaker), the issues are well understood like Atari ST to Amiga ports during the first 3 years or so.

Nothing really major, but actually it has been the 360 fanboys who made a huge fuss about this ever since there have been multi-platform 360/PS3 games. Mostly just a storm in a glass of water.

you bunch ignorant airheads, i am not promoting any console, i am helping the people who are indicided on which console to buy because some fanboys argue over which console is better for themselves. i did a comparison of how much it would cost the consumer. thats it! i am not being a fanboy. (for once).

@ CAL4M1TY

Sarcasm indeed. Sure it's possible just like with the 360 controller, both my girlfriend and sister got cramps using that controller, unlike with the PS3 controller.

From a physcial therapy and ergonomics perspective the PS3 controller is better for most types of games. We shouldn't forget the hundreds of millions Playstation gamers out there who used similar controllers for many years.

MikeB said: @ NJ5 Value is subjective. Yes it is. It's impossible to put an exact dollar value on things like having less of a chance of your console breaking on you, having near to no chance of discs scratching, less console noise, etc. Free online play is easier to quantify its worth comparitively (although the 360 has no lag free 30 vs 30 squad battles or easy user content of the like supported by LittleBigPlanet), but some features like Wi-Fi, motion control, Blu-Ray movie compatibility, easily upgradeable harddrive, etc are worth more to some than others. What will be Home's value, is PlayTV useful to you, etc? For me console power is an important factor, cell processing power, Blu-Ray disc space, default harddrive, etc are important factors. IMO this significantly enhances console perspectives, they are important factors why I think God of War 3 and Killzone 2 will be jaw dropping (technically in addition to general design).

 

For most people, a console's "power" is irrelevant.  Most people, such as you, have no idea how the Cell stacks up to the Xenon and rightly so don't care.  They just want games to run fast and look good.  That's where they get their value.  And while that generally tips toward the Xbox 360, it's not enough for most people to really care.

The "value" of WiFi for gaming, if you are a core gamer, is nothing.  Since you'll want to use wired whenever possible.  The same can be said for BD -- if you don't want to pay $30 for your romatic comedy movies, then it doesn't have value to you.  The point that value is different for each person and for many people wireless and BD will have zero value, or will approach zero value.  You can talk about how, for you, the PS3 is a great deal until you are blue in the fact. 

That doesn't make it a great deal for everyone.

Not only are you paying more if you buy a 360, that greater cost will carry you 5 years before it gets dropped. We seen them drop their last system prematurely. PS3 spend less on hardware and that hardware will keep them gaming for 8 more years. I doubt the 360 has 2 years left in it. They choose DVD which only makes it more likely the 360 will vanish from the planet in less than 24 months. Also 360 uses propriatery accessories, that means all that stuff you had to buy because it didn't come with the system can't be used for anything else, you need to start over with their next system.

@ TheBigFatJ

LOL, it's easy to understand the Cell is much more powerful.



The potential usage of Wi-Fi can go beyond just wireless internet access, dropping this would of course have saved on entry pricing. That even entry models support this feature makes me believe Sony may have something up their sleeves for the long run, Wi-Fi is a lot faster than BlueTooth.

EdGuila said: Not only are you paying more if you buy a 360, that greater cost will carry you 5 years before it gets dropped. We seen them drop their last system prematurely. PS3 spend less on hardware and that hardware will keep them gaming for 8 more years. I doubt the 360 has 2 years left in it. They choose DVD which only makes it more likely the 360 will vanish from the planet in less than 24 months. Also 360 uses propriatery accessories, that means all that stuff you had to buy because it didn't come with the system can't be used for anything else, you need to start over with their next system.

Was that a sincere post or were you aiming for the "Nobel Prize of Misinformation"?

The 360 is not more expensive, and it won't get dropped after 5 years. The Xbox was dropped due to very special circumstances; Nvidia owned the design of Xbox's graphical card, and they didn't allow Microsoft to use it any longer. How were they supposed to make Xboxes without graphics cards?

 

Soul_tech10 said: you bunch ignorant airheads, i am not promoting any console, i am helping the people who are indicided on which console to buy because some fanboys argue over which console is better for themselves. i did a comparison of how much it would cost the consumer. thats it! i am not being a fanboy. (for once).

 

Banned ?

Thank you for your guidances but the only relevant criteria for choosing a console is its library.

What are the games you like and which console is associated to it... the rest is marketing BS, fanboyism and the (in)famous IWBH effect...

MikeB said: @ TheBigFatJ Most people, such as you, have no idea how the Cell stacks up to the Xenon LOL, it's easy to understand the Cell is much more powerful.

 

We've gone around this block before. You don't seem to have any background in processor engineering. While you can reasonably argue that in some ways the Cell is faster than the Xenon, you can just as reasonably argue that in other way sthe Xenon is faster than the Cell.  And you can be right both times.  Saying that the cell is faster is a misleading oversimplification at best.

But none of that matters to gamers.  What matters is, as I said, how games look and run.  And so far, they've looked and run a little better on the 360 overall -- particularly multiplatform games.  While this is hopefully changing to both systems running games at approximately the same level, gamers did notice that and the perception seems to be that the 360 is a bit better for gaming.

And that isn't enough for most gamers to even really take notice.  So the value of you saying, "the cell is faster" is nothing for almost everyone.  That's just reality -- you can deny it if you want, but no one will pay attention to things you say if you insist that regular people see value in the fact that the Cell can do certain computations fast.

Value comes from people saying, "how well does this do what I want it to do."  If you don't want it to wifi, there is no value in wifi.  if you don't care that it has a BD drive, no value for BD drive. 

If you care that it has SPEs in it for fast parallel floating point calculation, then the very fact that it has SPEs in it for fast parallel floating point calculations has a lot of value.  But don't pretend that even 3% of gamers think that way, because they don't.

^I thought MikeB was a world renowned programmer from the posts he gives. Is there any place on the internet where you are wanted Mike?