By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Better Value? Sony's PlayStation 3 or Microsoft's Elite 360

Here is some more food for thought for you all... 1. MS are overcharging for the Elite because its *new*. Lots of people WILL buy one - even at this price. Once they sell as many as they want, they can drop the price as needed. Figures already show that the premium model is easily outselling the basic model. 2. I still don't see how this *hurts* MS. Unlike Nintendo, MS have always been into the "HD generation". The HDMI option gives users that WANT a HDMI connection an option to buy a 360 - the black colour will also interest additional gamers - and the larger hard drive is nice for people using it for IP TV. The value may well suck - but I think there is an argument that the value for the Premium model (compared to the basic) sucks as well ;) And Im not even going to start on the "value" of the PS3. ... Regarding online gaming, I never have agreed with MS's model. I understand *why* they do it - so they can offer a "premium" service, manage everything themselves, and generally get more money out of it - just don't agree with it. Like anything with a $ tag attached, it adds the "illusion" of value to the deal. It also gives them the ability to generate press by "dropping" the price, making it "free" (when it should be anyway), and doing a bunch of other things. With Sony's service, its assumed that its free - and you'll get the opposite press - people bitching about having to pay for *anything* on there (and Sony will charge for a lot of things), service not being perfect, not comparing to Live, etc. 12 months of "free" gold membership is actually pretty cool - who knows what state all consoles will be in, in 12 months time - or whether gold membership still exists in a paid form at all. EDIT: Sorry, make that 1 month. That's pretty lame then ;) 3 months at least - 12 months would be cool.
1. Can't you see that's what Sony has been doing from the START??? MS is losing it's 25 mil fans to Sony everyday with this new "ELITE" shit. 2. No Wireless, no HD-DVD (Which is still worse than the BRD, which was there from the start) Why don't you start on the PS3... Please.. I BEG YOU. Show me how near-sighted you are. Premium service was thought out to give people a lag free service, but since everyone went for it.. IT STILL LAGS! And Sony gives you everything for Free... because they can afford it.. because advertisers pay for adevrtisements on Home. And you know what? 5 months in, almost 3 million users, for fairness lets only take a million who play online, and still no LAGS. Trust me, if there were, Gamespot would be all over this. I thought 360 fans were thinking of games.. what's the sudden interest in HD?



Planning on getting a PS3 sometime in July-August.

Around the Network

sieanr said: I can only assume you're just like Kwaad in the sense that irony escapes you.
Like every other assumption you made so far, you're wrong. Ironic, isn't it?



Planning on getting a PS3 sometime in July-August.

Soulxxx said: sieanr said: I can only assume you're just like Kwaad in the sense that irony escapes you. Like every other assumption you made so far, you're wrong. Ironic, isn't it?
No, that would be consistent



Leo-j said: If a dvd for a pc game holds what? Crysis at 3000p or something, why in the world cant a blu-ray disc do the same?

ssj12 said: Player specific decoders are nothing more than specialized GPUs. Gran Turismo is the trust driving simulator of them all. 

"Why do they call it the xbox 360? Because when you see it, you'll turn 360 degrees and walk away" 

So you finally agree?? Or would you still keep assuming the Wii will triumph even after, like you said, you've been consistent with wrong assumptions. Every joke has a little bit of truth in it, so if you were JOKING about it, that still doesn't mean you don't really think about it. Even just a little bit.



Planning on getting a PS3 sometime in July-August.

Soulxxx said:like you said, you've been consistent with wrong assumptions.
I didn't say that. I implied that you have yet to grasp the concept of irony, and if you need my help than I'm willing to oblige.
Soulxxx said: Or would you still keep assuming the Wii will triumph
What do you base you're assumption that the PS3 will be victorious off of? The official company line? At this point every prediction is mostly assumption, some are just better supported by facts and logic then others.



Leo-j said: If a dvd for a pc game holds what? Crysis at 3000p or something, why in the world cant a blu-ray disc do the same?

ssj12 said: Player specific decoders are nothing more than specialized GPUs. Gran Turismo is the trust driving simulator of them all. 

"Why do they call it the xbox 360? Because when you see it, you'll turn 360 degrees and walk away" 

Around the Network

shams said: Here is some more food for thought for you all... 1. MS are overcharging for the Elite because its *new*. Lots of people WILL buy one - even at this price. Once they sell as many as they want, they can drop the price as needed. Figures already show that the premium model is easily outselling the basic model.
I'm pretty sure you never said anything like this about the PS3 and made it sound good, im pretty sure you said or thought, who knows... something like "IT COSTS $600!!!!11!1! (even though there's a $500 option if you don't need wi fi or 40 GB)
shams said: 2. I still don't see how this *hurts* MS. Unlike Nintendo, MS have always been into the "HD generation". The HDMI option gives users that WANT a HDMI connection an option to buy a 360 - the black colour will also interest additional gamers - and the larger hard drive is nice for people using it for IP TV.
The thing is that not offering since the beginning and they have actually pissed lots of their fans. Let's say i bought a $400 360, but i was never able to get 1080p that i wanted. now this one comes out... Thanks MS for making me waste $400 on a not so good version.
shams said: Regarding online gaming, I never have agreed with MS's model. I understand *why* they do it - so they can offer a "premium" service, manage everything themselves, and generally get more money out of it - just don't agree with it. Like anything with a $ tag attached, it adds the "illusion" of value to the deal. It also gives them the ability to generate press by "dropping" the price, making it "free" (when it should be anyway), and doing a bunch of other things. With Sony's service, its assumed that its free - and you'll get the opposite press - people bitching about having to pay for *anything* on there (and Sony will charge for a lot of things), service not being perfect, not comparing to Live, etc.
You really don't know anything, nothing costs on the PS3 online service, except for games, are you really expecting them to be free? I'm not. It's the opposite actually, MS makes you pay for almost everything, in fact, they make you pay $70 for the firs year and $50 for the next years and they are giving you a P2P server, which is slower, laggier and overall, crappier. While Sony is offering dedicated servers with absolutely no lag (unless the player has a really bad connection, but that wouldn't be sony's fault) for free. I agree that XBL has some things that are better but i won't pay $70 + $50 every year for that difference.



Kamahl said:It's the opposite actually, MS makes you pay for almost everything, in fact, they make you pay $70 for the firs year and $50 for the next years and they are giving you a P2P server, which is slower, laggier and overall, crappier. While Sony is offering dedicated servers with absolutely no lag (unless the player has a really bad connection, but that wouldn't be sony's fault) for free.
No. Live is $50 per year, regardless if it's your first year or fifth. It's Sony who uses the P2P model for gaming, Microsoft uses dedicated servers for everything including multi-player, you just have your facts mixed up. In my experience Live is far faster downloading demos, ect off of marketplace whereas PSN has been anything but speedy. This is just my experience, but seems to be indicative of what most people experience. And don't think about claiming "it's my connection" as I have done everything to properly configure the router, and it's only with PS3 that I experience slow browsing/downloading. Again, this is just my experience and PSN has gotten faster, but it still can't compare to live for speed or online play.



Leo-j said: If a dvd for a pc game holds what? Crysis at 3000p or something, why in the world cant a blu-ray disc do the same?

ssj12 said: Player specific decoders are nothing more than specialized GPUs. Gran Turismo is the trust driving simulator of them all. 

"Why do they call it the xbox 360? Because when you see it, you'll turn 360 degrees and walk away" 

I have no Idea what company is offering what service, p2p or dedicated, but I think the stats speak for themselves... Live is laggy, PSN is not laggy... FACTS. Deal with them. Oh and Live is 70$ for the first year... 20$ registeration, then 50$ at the end of the year.



Planning on getting a PS3 sometime in July-August.

Soulxxx said: I have no Idea what company is offering what service, p2p or dedicated, but I think the stats speak for themselves... Live is laggy, PSN is not laggy... FACTS. Deal with them. Oh and Live is 70$ for the first year... 20$ registeration, then 50$ at the end of the year.
So where are yours stats that prove your facts about live and psn? Do you have access to either of them or do you just make things out of hot air, as you see fit?



I think the fact that Gamespot doesn't say anything is enough... thank you. And Live is laggy because many people said so... If you'd show me the same amount of people saying that about Sony I'd change my mind. Can you do that?



Planning on getting a PS3 sometime in July-August.