Printable View
I've never understood this or asked anyone about it. :confusedshrug:
I mean, I know you can find a debate in anything... Pepsi vs. Coke, McDonalds vs. Burger King, etc... etc...
But most major titles come out for both systems.... I've owned both systems and enjoy both in their own ways. What is the big deal about it?
Most people can only afford one system, so they'll back it up to justify their purchase.
Who really plays video games enough to need more than 1 system anyway?
I think I play 5 hours of game time per week. Maybe 2 hours 1 day, 3 hours some other day.
As I said I've owned both and understand the differences. 360 is more of a gamers system. PS3 is a better value, and more of an entertainment system. I sold my 360 for a PS3 because I knew I would never buy Halo, Gears or any of that other kiddie sci-fi exclusive stuff cause I'm simply not into that genre, and that happens to make up the majority of exclusive games.... so no need to continue paying $60 a year. But say by some mishap my PS3 is completely trashed or stolen and I only have enough to afford an Xbox 360, I'd have no problem going back.
I don't know why some people need to throw dirt on the other system, when half of them never even owned both of them. They are just going off hearsay and speculation.
You consider Gears of War "kiddie"? In that case games like Mario Kart must be down right infantile.
[QUOTE=ShannonElements]You consider Gears of War "kiddie"? In that case games like Mario Kart must be down right infantile.[/QUOTE]
Maybe kiddie was the wrong word... but it's just sci-fi games in general seem like they are made for teens and overgrown nerds. Don't mean to offend anyone, just speaking my mind.
I'm a Playstation fanboy.
[QUOTE=beasted86]Maybe kiddie was the wrong word... but it's just sci-fi games in general seem like they are made for teens and overgrown nerds. Don't mean to offend anyone, just speaking my mind.[/QUOTE]
Generalize much? If you like to do that, there's also the generalization that video games in general are for teens and overgrown nerds, so it's not good to go there when talking games.
I prefer X-Box. The controller is better(for my hands at least), I like the games better, and I couldn't care less for Blu-Ray and other features the PS3 has to offer. X-Box Live is only 50 a year, that's about 4 dollars month, so paying that for a better service doesn't bother me. I have had experience with the Playstation 3, it's just not for me.
I liked PS2 over the original X-Box. I actually planned on getting a PS3 when I heard about the two systems back when they were released. After I actually experienced both, I changed my mind. I'm no X-Box fanboy, I just liked the 360 better.
[QUOTE=Undisputed]I actually planned on getting a PS3 when I heard about the two systems back when they were released. [B]After I actually experienced both[/B], I changed my mind. [/QUOTE]
You mean after you actually experienced the 600$ pricetag on the PS3? Be honest.
[QUOTE=bdreason]You mean after you actually experienced the 600$ pricetag on the PS3? Be honest.[/QUOTE]
Why jump to conclusions? He probably just tried both out through friends etc.:confusedshrug:
[QUOTE=bdreason]You mean after you actually experienced the 600$ pricetag on the PS3? Be honest.[/QUOTE]
Price had nothing to do with it. Completely honest. By time I actually went shopping for a console, the 360 and PS3 had just been out about a year and a half.
[QUOTE=beasted86]I've never understood this or asked anyone about it. :confusedshrug:
I mean, I know you can find a debate in anything... Pepsi vs. Coke, McDonalds vs. Burger King, etc... etc...
But most major titles come out for both systems.... I've owned both systems and enjoy both in their own ways. What is the big deal about it?[/QUOTE]
It's mainly because the third console in the industry (the Wii) isn't at their caliber. btw, I own a Wii and I am saying this. The Wii isn't inferior to the two, but it has isn't niche. 360 and PS3 are both more appealing towards the hardcore and gaming aficiando markets with their superior hardware. Wii is more Disney-like (the annoying Family Friendly approach Nintendo has been approaching since the GC). Keep in mind the stupid ESRB (gaming censorship) was first published by Nintendo for monitoring the 'inapproriate' content in games.
[QUOTE=Undisputed] X-Box Live is only 50 a year, that's about 4 dollars month, so paying that for a better service doesn't bother me. I have had experience with the Playstation 3, it's just not for me. [/QUOTE]
What better service? That ability to report people... only for Xbox to do nothing about it?
Xbox doesn't really have dedicated servers (atleast on the games I liked playing)... so you're basically comparing one P2P network to another P2P network... so all that's left is to speculate that Xbox 360 owners generally pay for better internet services which is way false.
[QUOTE=AJ2k8]Why jump to conclusions? He probably just tried both out through friends etc.:confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]
Just a guess. The PS2 dominated XBox... and most people that I know wanted a PS3 badly when they came out. Then they saw the 600$ pricetag and limited availability and decided to get a 300$ XBox360 instead.
At this point, I don't think most people would pick a XBox Elite system over a PS3 Slim (with 120G HD, BluRay player, and free online).
Maybe I'm wrong. My brother and best friend both own XBox's and all they do is talk shyt on it all the time (and they've both had to send it back multiple times). Both are buying a PS3 Slim now.
People like to "debate" (more like flame) the other side because they feel the one they have is better.
Both consoles have their pros and cons and neither are perfect or with out flaws.
I have every one of them (Video games is my hobby) and I favor the Xbox for these reasons:
[QUOTE=beasted86]Who really plays video games enough to need more than 1 system anyway?[/QUOTE]
Developers.
And..
[QUOTE]Most people can only afford one system, so they'll back it up to justify their purchase.[/QUOTE]