The Clicker: Xbox 360's battle for the rest of us
posted May 19th 2005 5:10PM
Well, E3 is wrapping up. The big
three have announced their respective wares. Specs have been released and it's now time to sort the reality from the
fantasy. Was that a cut-shot? Was that game play? What did we just see?
Fear not; as you read this, gamers everywhere are voraciously digesting polygon information. They're carefully
considering how many teraflops each machine can handle, and, with all the specs in mind, they're rendering their
educated decisions on which boxes they prefer.
In short, they're boiling down the hard work of electrical engineers, software developers and researchers into such
insightful comments as "PS3 rox! MS$ bite this. W00t!" On the flip side, Xbox fans are busy praising Sony's surprising
yet visionary decision to enter the emerging refrigerator/gaming-console market.
Ill be the first to admit that Im not a gamer. I dont understand the culture. I dont understand the cult-like
support of one box over another. My gaming prowess took a severe nosedive the moment they added that damnable second
button to the joystick. My skillz are, in fact, quite weak. So why might I, and my sometime-game-playing brethren, be
the key to Microsofts success?
Whether J Allard likes to admit it or not, the
Xbox
360 isnt just a game machine. Its the first of the entertainment consoles. Call it a media hub. Call it a Trojan
horse. Call it what you like, but the Xbox 360 is positioned to become Microsofts foothold in the living room and
beyond.
It somehow seems fitting that Allard, the man credited with Microsofts infamous Internet mantra of embrace and
extend, is now leading three different versions of the strategy.
Version 1: Embrace the hardcore gamer extend to the casual user.
By all accounts the PS3s specs are better. However, even PS3 fans will begrudgingly admit that the difference in
real-world performance will be minimal. The ugly truth of the spec wars is that they dont really matter.
First-generation games wont come close to maxing out the capacity of either of the consoles. Furthermore, as both
boxes embrace high-definition, the bottleneck for many people will be their own televisions. The question then becomes:
will hardcore gamers buy one? Judging by the reaction to the unveiling, the answer appears to be yes. More often than
not I hear statements to the tune of truth be told Ill probably end up buying one of each.
But what about the rest of us? For those casual users Microsoft has developed a message: gaming on the 360 is a social
experience. Chat. Video Conference. Talk trash. Have fun with your friends. Theyve worked hard to convince the casual
gamer that gaming doesnt have to be about calloused thumbs and twelve-hour marathon sessions.
Through Xbox Live Microsoft has addressed both the desires of the hardcore gamers and the social gamers.
Sonys messaging still seems to be: were the power-option in gaming.
Version 2: Embrace the gaming extend to the multimedia
WOW, I thought, Blu-ray and 1080p now were talking. PS3 is getting serious about their HD. But thats it. While
Microsoft is busy telling everyone and their mother how, when combined with Media Center Edition, the 360 will give you
seamless access to your TV shows, your pictures, your music, etc., Sony has either remained quiet or has failed to
properly message its multimedia strategy.
If the bulk of Sonys multimedia message is a signal (1080p) that 99.9% of displays cant show and even fewer can
accept and a storage format that could be next generations Betamax, Sony isnt winning the hearts of the casual
user.
Microsoft, on the other hand, will be building its Media Center functionality into the next generation of Windows and
allowing its 360 box to remote the same user experience that todays PC-based Media Center users enjoy. Its a
compelling story.
Version 3: Embrace the living room extend to the rest of the house.
Ordinarily its suicide to hint that better products might be coming later. Traditional wisdom says that you
cannibalize your own sales. So why is Steve Ballmer all but saying that future versions of the 360 will come equipped
with either HD-DVD or Blu-ray (whichever wins)?
Could it be that hes not worried? Unlike the traditional gaming console, the 360 has been designed to be useful
outside the realm of games. With the inclusion of its extender technology Microsoft is giving users an excuse to put
one in every room. As such, its not inconceivable that users might buy one on launch and later upgrade their main
source, shifting their first-generation 360 to another room.
With a console in multiple rooms which non-exclusive game are you more inclined to buy?
Perhaps, in the end, the casual user doesnt matter, but if we do, so far the 360s messaging appears to be speaking
to those of us with the soft, buttery thumbs of occasional gamers.
If you have comments or suggestions, feel free to drop an email to
theclicker@theevilempire.com.
Until next week, save my seat!
PS3's design is ugly. It reminds me of the PC Engine Duo.
the articles author has missed the point. with 85 million sold, sony's already good friends with the casual gamer.
as for the dvd/hd-dvd/blue-ray, are M$ expecting people to buy a new drive for the 360.
and while, no doubt, sony had better listen and learn from the Xbox Live service and infrastructure, Xbox Live only accounts for 10-15% of their market penetration(I know more people with "mashed/chipped" Xbox's than play on Live)
can you see the casual gamer going to the trouble of linking their Xbox's to their PC's to watch low quality downloads on the big HD plasma.
I will, but I'm a hardcore techno-geek(already got the HD ready plasma and we dont even have HD in the UK yet). Johnny Casual wants a quick Halo3 blast on his average 28 inch tv when he gets home from work/the pub.
this is my 6th go on the "next-gen" merry-go-round and the only thing thats changed between choosing between an atari 800XL and Commodore 64 and a PS3/360/Revolution is the amount of bullsh** and plain haterism you have to wade through to get to the truth.
From the smoke and mirrors of the PS3 launch to the scarily neo-religeous rantings of Guru Allard and the Dallai Moore, you'd think that in the grand scheme of things, whatever console you choose will be a life and death decision.
It aint.
Wait - Dont Speculate.
And then make up you're own damn minds.
For those that cant wait, take a cold shower or find a woman/man. Dont pin your hopes on what a bunch of Snake Oil salesmen tell you.
to john post 36
sony also said ps2 would allow you to link your camcorder to your ps2 and let you edit videos, they said that there would be pcmcia devices, harddrives, ethernet to connect up to the internet.
some people never learn, sony is all about hype, i suggest you all wait and see how this all turns out in the end.
and media center pcs are not expensive. i bought a $60 dollar tuner and the os, total of about 200 and its on my main pc, i watch tv, surf the net and record content all on one machine, which i might ad, also serves as my sites server. such a debacle.
ps. there is no doubt in my mind you will be able to stream content from winxp machines. go to xbox360 and look at the specs yourself it says so. ms is all about entertainment.
RE: Inferno's post (#16)
I guess you never played Katamari Damacy?
Unlucky you.
There are a TON of innovative PS2 games that never came out on Xbox. Your statement just doesn't hold up.
Fanboy attitude? Back away from the Xbox Live for 5 seconds and look in a mirror.
Hi! I'm on neither side. So don't shout at me because I favor the XBOX.
I do not understand why you people talk about the superior PS3? Sony only anounced some very vague statistic, "floating point speed" for example, in comparision to the 360, and plans. There is no PS3. Did anybody see a live game on it? No? Why? Ahh.. THERE IS NO PS3!.
But they showed game videos!
No, what you so were very likely pre rendere movies, BECAUSE THERE IS NO PS3.
Their PS3 is 18 MONTHS away. That's what they say. Look, Sony had to react to the early XBOX 360 launch. It think they were very much panicing. They just want, with their UNPROVABLE facts, that you fanboys stick to your PS and that your next buy is PS.
Please, do me a favor: Never talk about the PS3 hardware again, never use it as an argument, 'til you can "touch" the PS3 or see somebody playing a game on it. Then you can talk about hardware.
So, as far as we are now, the XBOX 360 is the superior console, because it really exists. Don't argue with what maybe will be.
The XBOX.. I really get the itch to buy a console again. The Live servcie is really great. And my brother has a modified one and watches his DIVX movies on his TV, plays music, everything. How good will it be with the 360!
Don't be so stupid and close your eyes only because you don't like Microsoft. If you don't like Microsoft, then how the hell can you like big bad "robbing musicians, stealing patents, robbing music customers" Sony?
Buy the XBOX. And if the PS3 WILL BE, in the FUTURE, turns out to be better.. buy it too! You have about a year and half to save some money for it.. ;)
It's that easy.
Very well thought out article. MS knows that by putting a lot of raw power you can attract the hardcore gaming (16-34 Male) market but that will top out somewhere around 60-80 million (PS2 has sold 88M units). If you want a product/service that will extend much beyond that (J talked about a billion people), you need an innovative approach to how customers view the value proposition of a game console. and this article outlines that very well.
Sony has a good product (at least looks like one) in PS3. they have a strong legacy (in terms of games and partnerships with game studios) and a huge following. And with PS3 they have gone full steam on their strengths - the game machine and the gaming community. If that is their target, they may very well win this 'next-gen' game console battle, but still lose the war in the long run. If Xbox becomes as pervasive as J thinks it will, then it will be very easy to neglect PS. For e.g., future gamers (who are kids now) will grow up using Xbox as their PVR and music machine and will be much more amenable to use Xbox as gaming machine even if PS is better.
You may not like MS (M$ as /. like to call it) but you got to give credit where it is due. And time will tell if they get that credit or not.
I am not a gamer. My roommate has an Xbox but i hardly play on it. But with this ecosystem of solutions that 360 will enable, I am sure you will find me in line waiting to get my hands on this machine.
MS new version of windows code named Longhorn is supposedly going to have the Media Center capabilities as standard. So the Media Center Functionality is key and will be much more popular than people envision. Also MS has clearly stated that the Xbox will be able to connect to a Windows XP system. It's in their charts during their announcement demo at E3 and also on a special screening I saw.
Remember that all of your music, photos and for some people TV and videos are on the PC. So Media Center Xtender deals with all of these. This is simply a great feature that will have no equal on PS3.
Remember folks, Xbox 360 is real and not vaporware or smoke and mirrors. E3 playable demos were running of of Alpha kits which are not as powerful and finetuned as the final Xbox 360 will be and the games still looked amazing and were the best looking games at the Show by far! I was there and saw with my own eyes. The Xbox 360 is real and coming in November. So really you don't have any other choices currently for next Gen until December 2006 when Revolution and PS3 will launch. Despite what Sony says about spring 2006 launch, just look at all the launches Sony has ever done...they always have problems with supplying enough consoles or PSP's and have consistently delayed launches because of it. There is no way they are going to finish developing this console and have it manufactured with titles ready before Christmas 2006. Remember PS2 first year out...there weren't any games for almost a year. Grand Turismo 3 came out over a year after PS2 was on the market and that was considered the first must have game for the PS2. They are on track for the same mess this time around. PS3 Cell processors will be dificult to develop for as is usual for Sony and their maching is not even done yet. All developers don't even have development kits yet! Don't believe the hype. PS3's showing at this years E3 was simply to try and steal attention away from the tangible and nearly ready Xbox 360 that will be in our homes this November!
In reality PS3 specs are very similar to 360, the graphics specs are almost exactly the same as 360. The CPU has more power but not enough to make squat of a difference.
The 360 is ready now
1
I have to say, I am torn.
I have one of each from the current gen of systems, I have to play Final Fantasy, and I love halo / halo2 online. With the possibility of other Final Fantasy games coming out for the Xbox 360 (besides the already announced version of FF11 on Xbox live) I would make a permanent switch.
I really do not want to pay the projected $450 for a PS3 for ONE series of exsclusive games, but I will if I have to.
My only real dissapointment with the 360 right now is that it did not come wi-fi ready. it makes no sense to me, that if they are willing to release multiple versions of their system at launch (with / without hardrive), why not do the same thing for wifi, or provide some kind of "custom" build option if you buy directly from Microsoft online. It would seem this is the one area they are getting trumped in this time around, as Nintendo and Sony both have announced inclusion in their respective systems. While I am a big geek, and love the idea of 100gb game discs, deep down I don't care. Most game developers will design their games around the loweest common denominator, Nintendo excluded, to maximize profits. Perhaps they will be smart enough to build in functionality for multiple formats, and support Blue Ray in the future(most likely not).
I love the fact that the 360 will be able to connect to the PSP ( I am getting one the second they drop in price a little), now if only it could stream or play the games over usb as well(something mentioned or rumored I think about the PSP); it will also connect with my iPod, something some are calling "pointless", since you cant use music from the itunes music store. Not so I say, 1% of my music is from Apple's store, the rest?, CD's I bought in the store, or music I downloaded, these can all be used with the Xbox media center. This will finally allow for me to synch my music collection to my TV Stereo setup in a way that will be significantly more pleasing than my current dock situation.
I have to end this by saying, I HATE Micro$oft, and especially their OS, but damn, they are really getting gaming systems right. The Xbox 360 is an obvious LEAP in system quality from the last version, not in terms of graphics, or sound, but in playing to what they know gamers want. Microsft$ is truly successful it would seem, because they just listen to what people like myself want.
"but the 360 will get my money because of everything else it can do."
ps3 has more multimedia and entertainment features than the xbx360
haha toshiba is releasing 1080p tv's this summer http://homeentertainment.engadget.com/entry/1234000003043993
see sony thinks of the future to make their consoles last. by 06 there will be more hdtv's in people's homes
"ps3 has more multimedia and entertainment features than the xbx360"
such as? please enlighten me
i'd research both before posting something like this.
its just like j allard describe "software+services aka (xboxlive)+gratehardweare=xbox360" and supa costum machine. best all around machine
The ps3 will get my money because of cell processor which blow away every thing you never seen.
There are no commercially available 1080p screens, so who cares. And the only spec that they mentioned they did better was FLOPS. But which demos demostrated heavy use of FLOPS? Isn't that smoke and particle effects and such? How many TFLOPS do you need? Anyway, I am a gamer, I plan to buy both. But I am much more excited about the Xbox. And if the PS3 costs too much more than the 360... maybe I will wait for it.
Good article, and I like his summation of the fanboy craze. I'll admit I have a Xbox bias...my first console purchase ever. I was a computer gamer for a while, but I am getting tired of the "tweaker" culture on that side of things. I just want my games to look awesome and work with no TWEAKS! I'd have to say this is going to be one BEEFY set of hardware to play old "casual" games though, but the value of the console is going to be extremely HIGH. I actually can see people using these things for video chat and messaging alone, maybe with a few games of cards thrown in. It would be like renting an F1 racer to drive on 35MPH backroads - but I guess you would get lots of looks! :)
Outside of pure horsepower speculation, you have to admit the way the software on board the X360 was shown interfacing with games, media, and community was amazing. There was no exiting games, and loading up an online interface, or shutting down to move to the media player, or ejecting a disc to put in another for MCE functions. Just a click of a button at any time and you are in your GUI to the features of the system. Should be an amazing way to break down barriers to gameplay and seamlessly connect all different types of MEDIA!
I'm all over it like a kid near a bowl of cookie dough!
As another note, all this speculation on the "format war" (what's up with using the term "war" with everything anyways?) between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray is moot. In 3-5 years, the idea of delivering content via flimsy optical disks will probably seem archaic. Storage is growing FAST, and HD content is being encoded beautifully with H.264 and upcoming DIVX HD, along with WMVHD, and broadband connections are getting fatter pipes. The fine folks at Valve have shown us games can be delivered without discs as well. I really DO not see either Blu-Ray or HDDVD lasting very long...I am sure one will come to market, but with a shelf life of a 1-2 years, how much will it catch on?
having 1080p, bluray, card reader, hddbay, wifi, and all those ports makes the ps3 a true media center.
xbox has some of these but its media capabilities lies in its software, not hardware.
also remember that Sony has not revealed their media strategies yet. I believe that sony will have the same media capabilities as xbox360, without the dependence of media center.
why would it have so many usb ports? a card reader? 1080p? blueray? Surely Sony didn't add such elaborate hardware and make it so expensive to manufacture without making use of it.
we will just have to wait and see. we are all jumping to conclusions too quickly. The systems were JUST ANNOUNCED. hah.
and concerning #55 on bluray: Consumers will always depends on discs. DVDs have been extrememly successful for distributing movies. With the release of bluray, people will not give up discs that easily. Atleast not within the time frame that blueray will be available. You have to think more realistically.
I don't know the gibberish you speak of about them having 2 year shelf life. that is not true.
52. Posted May 19, 2005, 10:20 PM ET by dynamius
"ps3 has more multimedia and entertainment features than the xbx360"
such as? please enlighten me
which multimedia feature u need.. ps3 has got everything more and better than xbox. the ip camera option. the various memory card options. blue-ray movies when they come out, not jst dvd movies. multiple monitors to view videos or conferences at same time as playing games.( and yes the second monitor can be non-hd). much more future proof than xbox. movies, music,onlind shit... EVERYTHING.perhaps u r the one who should do a little more research
and again, what are people going to do when they start owning 1080p tvs? What are people going to do when (and if) blueray suddenly becomes the successor to DVD?
Including blueray and 1080p to the PS3 is not premature technology. It is DEAD ON the right time. Like PS1 and PS2, Sony will milk as much out of the PS3 as it can. One generation of hardware with 2 generations of games. Thanks to it having features that will prolong its lifespan.
I look at many of the 3rd party games currently out now, and notice that they are available for all three systems (xbox, ps2, and game cube). What I also notice is that the graphics do not seem to be extrodinary better or worse for either system, even though the xbox is supposlidy more powerful. I am betting that this will be the same for this generation of consoles. The game developers want to make as much money as possible so they will release thier game on every system. No matter what the specs of the console, it will most likely have the same quality of graphics.
That is why most of the good games are console exclusives. This, to me is a selling point. The console with the best games will win. I can't stand that ps2 controller also. I hope that is not the final design.
on what system will you be able to roll around in a ball sticking to everything you see? Sony has the creative and innovative games on its system. Parlty due to the Japanese game studios.
on xbox you could play lots and lots of... well first person shooters, or american games that try to be like a japanese game. there is a very fine line between the two.
Thanks for the link Sonic_Extreme!
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2423
That was a great read. Much more level-headed. I am big nVidia fan, especially with their 6XXX series GPUs (I have the 6800 in my desktop), but ATI's "from the ground up" design for the 360 sounds awesome - maybe even more so. For those that won't take the few minutes, here are some intriquing excerpts!
"Unlike any of their current-gen desktop GPUs, the 360 GPU supports FP32 from start to finish...Full FP32 support puts this aspect of the 360 GPU on par with NVIDIA's RSX."
"Because of the extremely large amount of bandwidth available both between the parent and daughter die as well as between the embedded DRAM and its FPUs, multi-sample AA is essentially free at 720p and 1080p in the Xbox 360. If you're wondering why Microsoft is insisting that all games will have AA enabled, this is why.
ATI did clarify that although Microsoft isn't targetting 1080p (1920 x 1080) as a resolution for games, their GPU would be able to handle the resolution with 4X AA enabled at no performance penalty."
"Given that the RSX is based off of NVIDIA's G70 architecture, you can expect to have a similar feature set later this year on the PC. In fact, NVIDIA stated that by the time PS3 ships there will be a more powerful GPU available on the desktop. This is in stark contrast to ATI's stance that a number of the features of the Xbox 360 GPU won't make it to the desktop for a matter of years (potentially unified shader architecture), while others will never be seen on the desktop (embedded DRAM?)."
So, it sounds like the RSX will be "obsolete" by the time the PS3 comes out. That's kind of crazy. This article makes it sound like the ATI solution is potentially more exciting, because it is such a custom made unit with some very special features. I am sure the RSX will be a very nice chipset, but being behind the PC hardware power-curve at launch isn't a good thing IMHO. The article does go on to state the Cell processor should do a much better job than conventional desktop CPUs at "feeding" the chip, but with multi-core processors on the horizon, this may no longer be a cell processor advantage. I guess time will tell here.
Bottom line, both consoles have powerful hardware, pretty much on even ground here. No one can say "Sony kicks M$'s A$$!", because, quite frankly, they don't. If anything, the custom architecture of the X360 might lend to more "future-proofing", and it also sounds like 1080P is not a PS3 exclusive either. I still have a hard time believing the PS3 can actually drive two 1080P displays simultaneously. You need more RAM! 256 MB of RAM is going to be eaten up quick at single 1080P rez folks.
Thanks Anandtech for digging for us!
My decision is quite simple. PS3, period. At first I was sold on the Xbox 360, but after reading over every piece of info I could possibly find for both Xbox 360 and PS3, I came to the conclusion that, in my opinion, Xbox 360 really freakin' sucks. It was a major let down in my eyes. I've not seen a single game announced which catches my interest that I cannot get on the PS3, yet most of the games announced for the PS3 left me drooling. I believe PS3 has a better line up by far.
I wanted to keep an open mind when it came to these, but history will always repeat itself. I remember when I picked up the Xbox because I had heard how much better it was than the PS2. That was the biggest waste of money I'd ever thrown away. I was completely unimpressed and let down by Xbox. Right now, the only Xbox games I have are Halo 2, Fable, and Burnout 3. I dont like any other Xbox games out that, once again, I dont have for the PS2 already. Even with the three I have, Halo 2 seemed like every other shooter game I've played, and the story pretty much put me to sleep. It was good for the first hour, and that was it. I'm one of the very few willing to say I thought Halo 2 sucked. Fable, well it had potential, but when you beat a game in just a few hours, it doesnt really seem worth it, does it? Burnout 3 would have to be my favorite among the three, and you can only crash so many times before that gets old.
And with history already seeming to repeat itself, I do not have the money to waste on a system which could fail me again. I've always had a nice range of games to choose from on the Playstation and Playstation 2.
That's partially why I will be spending my money on the PS3 and not the Xbox 360. The funniest thing is, I really really dislike Sony. That's why I was sold on the Xbox 360 at first.
I'm a casual gamer and the Xbox 360 appeals to me. I like the design, features, controllers, and the media center really put me over the top. I'm am very dissapointed that they did not put DVI or HDMI as output options. Therefore, the 360 cannot upscale regular DVDs to 1080i or 720p. This could have sold quite a few of these for the upscalling features alone.
Ideally I would like to get both systems. I think that if I had both, though, I would priobably use the Xbox 360 more because of Xbox Live. Depite all of the specs being thrown around, online gaming really is the killer app here. Online gaming is unbelievably cool.
#47 said my argument didn't hold water, but neither do yours. There are games on both systems that are innovative. My whole reason for posting that statement was someone who said there wasn't any on Xbox. I own both systems but I pretty much only play Xbox. I really don't get much enjoyment from playing anything against A.I. anymore. I enjoy interaction with real people. Therefore, the main games I buy are Xbox Live games and MMOs on PC. I am a techno junkie, so will buy both systems, but I am much more excited about the Xbox360. Again, cause of Live. Also, the studios under Microsoft... they are great studios. And you guys can bash FPSs and say that is all that Xbox has that PS2 sucks at, but you can say JRPGs are all Sony has exclusively as well. And that will not be the case with the 360. And #65 stated that he owns a bunch of games on the PS2 so he didn't buy them on the Xbox. If a game comes out for both systems, I buy it on Xbox, cause it looks much better on a HDTV when using component outputs. I didn't think it would be a big difference, but it is.
I keep hearing people say "HD doesn't really matter anyway, not many people have it." Or "not many people use media center so what's the benefit". Well, I'll tell you. Think back for a second to when xbox first came out. Many people were saying simular things about the broadband modem that came standard. Well, we all know that the broadband is now very common and extreimly important to making xbox live what it is. MS thinks long term in it's goals. You should think about this while formulating opinions about how important certain features are.
Yeah Utahguy, that is if the games are good and the people you play with are not 12 year old retards throwing F-bombs everytime they said something.
A lot of the game for xbox live will need to pay me to play their game. It is all about content! content! content!
I am a gamer that buys any console with "good" games. I didn't get an xbox bach when it cam out, cause the title just sucks. But finally I got it, all because of a game called "Steel Battalion". THATS IS THE ONLY GAME I HAVE FOR THE XBOX THAT ACTUALLY WHOLE MY TIME.
PSP, DS alike. They won't be getting my money if the is no software to back it up.
check this out: pretty lame trick from Microsoft if you ask me...
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2420&p=5
I am taking the path of waiting until BOTH have been released, separate non-biased reviews have been made, and REAL games have been tested and compared. It's no secret that Sony has inflated numbers before, and it would not be a surprise for things to change when they are finally released. When both systems are released that will put the arguments to an end, right now it is all speculation.
In my opinion, the winning system will have a great console, great games, and quality built to last. Without ALL of these three things, the console is doomed to fail.
On another note, I constantly hear people talking about specs, while it appears many do not have a clue what the specs mean or realize things must also work together on a whole. Not to mention games must be developed that take advantage and push the system to it's full potential. It has been said many times, the bottle neck lies with the software.. not the systems at the moment.
On a final note I spoke with someone who is not biased (does not own either brand of consoles) and is very knowledgable in terms of computer related stuff because it is not only his job, he constantly must train and retrain to stay up to date on things.
He said there is no clear winner between the two, and some of the specs from the Sony are a little misleading. He also agrees it will come down to the finished product and especially the games.
I am not loyal to either XBox or Sony, and if both turn out to be great systems I will probably get both. Here is an article I found interesting regarding how the two machines stack up:
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html?fromint=1
But, like I said, the true test will come when both sytems are released, and some real world evaluations can be done.
"Posted May 20, 2005, 5:59 PM ET by Tim
check this out: pretty lame trick from Microsoft if you ask me...
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2420&p=5"
It's not a lame trick. Just taking a shot in the dark.. the reason they didn't show the games running off the XBox 360 might be because it isn't finished yet. The game demos were running on Alpha development kits, roughly one-third as powerful as the final hardware. This wasn't some hidden secret like the geeks on that page are trying to make it seem. Micosoft openly admitted this.
I will wait until both systems are out running REAL games... and what Sony displayed was not running off their console either... and wait for an un-biased review is given before I come to any conclusions.
If they are both good I might get both, but I have to admit after reading about all the problems Sony has with the quality of their products, and the fact they have losing market share over the last few years. It's wouldn't surprise me if they decided to cut too many corners to save a buck.
"Posted May 20, 2005, 5:59 PM ET by Tim
check this out: pretty lame trick from Microsoft if you ask me...
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2420&p=5"
It's not a lame trick. Just taking a shot in the dark.. the reason they didn't show the games running off the XBox 360 might be because it isn't finished yet. The game demos were running on Alpha development kits, roughly one-third as powerful as the final hardware. This wasn't some hidden secret like the geeks on that page are trying to make it seem. Micosoft openly admitted this.
I will wait until both systems are out running REAL games... and what Sony displayed was not running off their console either... and wait for an un-biased review is given before I come to any conclusions.
If they are both good I might get both, but I have to admit after reading about all the problems Sony has with the quality of their products, and the fact they have losing market share over the last few years. It's wouldn't surprise me if they decided to cut too many corners to save a buck.
XBOX of Playstation? Why choose? Buy them both.
Is a few hundred bucks going to bust anyone?
I totally agree with Stephen here. The 360 is more about the all-around experience, not just hard core graphics. Normally, I'm the type of person that goes with specs, which the PS3 seems to have the upper hand on, but the 360 will get my money because of everything else it can do.
If I were a gay over fashion oriented non gaming instant messaging media hub humping faceplate licking lunatic the Xbox 360 would be my pick. Don't get me wrong, it's a good console. As a gamer however my hat's off to Sony and the PS3. Good games, good company.
P.S. I have an Xbox and I enjoy playing Halo and Halo 2. That's about it. Was looking for my game innovation. Fable didn't cut it.
Nicely said, But I wouldn't be surprised if sony has it's own "Playstation Live" that they are waiting to unveil after they watch Microsoft's for a while to see what works, what doesn't, and what features are lacking.
I think Microsoft's big feature in this console is what they require of all developers:
All games have to be in at least 720p
All games have to interact with XBox Live somehow
All games must have customizable soundtracks
All agmes must have Dolby Digital 5.1, etc.
This ensures that every game will look and sound as good as it can. Although I don't doubt that many PS3 games will have these features, if it's not forced will all developers make 720p games for that tiny <10% of the market?
I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Nicely said, But I wouldn't be surprised if sony has it's own "Playstation Live" that they are waiting to unveil after they watch Microsoft's for a while to see what works, what doesn't, and what features are lacking.
I think Microsoft's big feature in this console is what they require of all developers:
All games have to be in at least 720p
All games have to interact with XBox Live somehow
All games must have customizable soundtracks
All agmes must have Dolby Digital 5.1, etc.
This ensures that every game will look and sound as good as it can. Although I don't doubt that many PS3 games will have these features, if it's not forced will all developers make 720p games for that tiny <10% of the market?
I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Informative article.
Considering how much Sony grossly overexaggerated the PS2's performance before it launched, I think I'll wait and see how the machines actually perform in reality and what software libraries and 3rd party support is available before buying.
That said, the PS3 is the best on paper. Then again, Alien 3 looked good on paper, and we all know how that turned out.
i am the same way. i am definitely the causal gamer and will re-enter by getting an xbox after 15 year hiatus from the gaming world because of all the other benefits xbox can bring. i think the graphics are basically the same. i agree that sony is pushing alot of stuff i could care less about like the 1080p and the blu-ray.
In the end, I imagine both the 360 and PS3 will have almost the same non-gaming features; both systems have the hardware for everything you can imagine, it's just a matter of software and marketing focus.
Yes, Microsoft are definately pushing the "hub" idea more than Sony, but with the extra time Sony has to develop the PS3's software to match the functionality of the 360, you can bet they'll be having a good think of how they can attract some of the customers that may otherwise decide the 360 is what they want sitting under their living-room TV.
Stephen is right, I think MS won over anyone but the crazed Sony fanatics. Sony really seemed to just be trying to 1-up MS in every aspect, but they never mentioned online, they just spouted all these specs. There are no commercially available 1080p screens, so who cares. And the only spec that they mentioned they did better was FLOPS. But which demos demostrated heavy use of FLOPS? Isn't that smoke and particle effects and such? How many TFLOPS do you need? Anyway, I am a gamer, I plan to buy both. But I am much more excited about the Xbox. And if the PS3 costs too much more than the 360... maybe I will wait for it. It sounds like it will be at least $100 more cause of all the useless in and outputs.
im not sure how gayness enters into the equation here, kenton. Now please explain how sony is a 'good company' and why 90% of ps games are absolute garbage. you know its true. number one hit it right on th head - id rather have a good experience and have the console have some ... replay value? rather than buying a new 'version' of the console once some new technology comes out...ms has a plan, it seems. sony, i dont know. theyve got a name :p
I'll be getting PS3 AND Xbox 360. To hardcore gamers with disposable income like me, it's all about games.
I need PS3 JRPGs but I also need XBox 360 FPS and Xbox Live Online Community. By having both I'm getting the best of both worlds.
Ideally, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo will be engaged in perpetual battle. Keeps the quality high and prices low(er).
Great time to be a gamer.
Why doesn't Xbox just go all-in and adopt the HD DVD drive? Isn't their Windows Media technology already incorporated into HD DVD technology? Won't they have to pay a licensing fee to Sony for the use of Blue Ray? If they get an HD DVD drive into millions of homes by the end of the year that could be a big victory in the next gen DVD battle. The backers of HD DVD should cut Xbox a deal in order to get their foot in the door first.
I've been a huge Xbox fan for the current generation and initially got into the Xbox because it was the most powerful console. However, I am extremely satisfied with the graphics on CURRENT generation Xbox titles like Chaos Theory, Halo 2, and Doom 3 on my 51" HDTV.
My future plans are to get a 360 instead of a Playstation 3. I no longer care about minor differences in power (and because the 2 consoles will probably be very similar in real world performance) because online gaming is now my number one criteria in choosing a console.
I've been an Xbox Live subscriber since day one and after an rough first year or so, it has really come to be an excellent service. I don't want to watch Sony stumble to "get it right" with a comprehensive online service and still be YEARS behind MS. The alility to see your frinds in a game from a different publisher and send them a message or an invite is way beyond what Sony has offered. On the PS2 you have to remember a login and password for every single game or publisher and have no way of finding people you know because there is no unified system! This is easily worth $50 a year.
Until Sony perfects some type of unified online system, I see no reason to buy their consoles.
I think the other thing to keep in mind that most publishers will probably try to release their games for as many of the consoles as possible in order to maximize their potential revenue. In such a case games will be somewhat based off the lowest-common denominator, with some tweaks for each of the specific systems. So even if the PS3 is more powerful than the XBox 360, it may go mostly underused.
Also, to be fair on Sony, they did talk about the online community side of things (Playstation Network) at their press conference (check the full 2hr video at http://www.gamespot.com/e3/e3live.html ).
I gather from the video that their idea is you can access all the content on your PS3 from any other PS3 or PSP anywhere in the world, as well as the normal video chat etc. etc. during gameplay.
The problem is the media picked up on the specs and in-game footage for the PS3 whereas they picked up on the specs and XBox-Live for the 360.
I think Sony made a bit of a mistake there, they should have pushed their Playstation Network idea a lot more.
Personally, I'm still undecided which to go for - I'll only be getting one so I'll be waiting till both are available before deciding which to get.
incredible insight #4.. I totally agree =-}
It's true that Sony didn't say much about it's media capibilites/online. They did hint at it, and I'm sure it will be good.
Second, no offense but MS media/internet stuff suck. I still don't get Media Center PCs, they basically do the same as my Tivo, but cost 20x as much
Why would I pay for Xbox Live when I get everything on Xbox live for free on my PC? Game updates, multiplayer playing. These should be free.
Also the Xbox's game linup was a little meh. (I'm talking about current Xbox, note that I didn't say 360) I played a little Halo, but it wasn't what I would call a great game. I would say that it wasn't bad.
Half Life 2, GTA, Flat Out, UT2k4, and Burnout 3 are what I consider good games.
Overall the PS3 is more powerful, has better technology, and is the new version of a console that easily beat the last Xbox, when the Xbox had a much better online mode and much better technology.
Kenton,
Tell what what innovative things you have seen on the PS2 and not on Xbox. I have the PS2, Xbox, and gamecube. The PS2 I play least of them all. I still like it, but your statement is total Fanboy attitude. As stated before, I will buy them both, but they both have good games coming it seems, but Sony didn't impress me with more than eye candy.
P.S. Whether or not Fable impressed you, it was innovative.