(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); So with the PSN down now for what seems like an eternity I've been playing Xbox. Now, I'm indifferent when it comes to the "console war" and I thought I'd share some light for those PS3 users who have never experienced xbox and vice versa.



Please note this not a fight. Your console is not better than someone else's however we can have an open discussion on the differences. We can share our favorite things on BOTH systems which hopefully will add some insight into someone thinking of making a change. :y:

Flaming will NOT be tolerated :bat:

Same thing here. Im pretty happy though with ps3.

Controller is down to preference in relation to the size of your hands, e.g. personally I prefer the Xbox controller.

Blu-ray is superior to HD-DVD no doubt about it. It's not perfect but a huge improvement.

Xbox Live is worth it quite honestly, it's heads and shoulders above PSN. And it's only pay-to-play-online

I've owned both, and the 360 download servers are faster (for me anyway).

I used to hate the 360 controller, but have grown to like it over the PS3.

On PS3 i had to restart my wifi router allot to sign in to the PSN. On Xbox it still happens but barely as much.

I would have never got an Xbox is it weren't for my friends who had it. I use to have this obnoxious view on the console war

As for my personal opinion on which is better, I really can't say indefinitely that one is superior. Both do things the other doesn't. I play my Xbox more but will always have fond memories of my PS3 days

Playstation 3 is where it's at, you get value for the money you spend on it. Xbox 360, you buy the console, buy the batteries for controllers, and buy online. All that stuff is free on the Playstation 3 because you don't need it (except the console).

But many would argue that Xbox Live is worth the money and thus to them(and to myself) and anyone else who can afford it that argument is invalid. Then with the controllers you can actually buy charger packs, although clearly the PS3's charging system is outright superior here. And you may have failed a little, free PS3 you say? :p

You're completely right and PS3 wins out there. But I bought a Charge and Play Kit but found that AA batteries are better and last a very long time.

If I remember correctly, the PS3 controller still lasts longer

OK, I feel bad for this thread after looking through it and finding that the average response is only two lines. It goes to show that really no-one has considered this topic for a proper debate and it is worthy of it.

While people claim that it depends on your gaming preferences as to which console you get, honestly that's not true. Sure if we include the other consoles we have a point. Wii is for more casual gamers, retro gamers and (strangely enough) survival horror fans. More recently with the release of Xenoblade Chronicles and the upcoming games, Pandora's Tower and The Last Story the Wii has become the go-to console for JRPG fans as the genre was all but dead this generation. The PC conversely has become the independent gamers paradise, particularly with Steam. While few big budget games are coming out for PC exclusively the indie market is booming with classic roguelikes, point and clicks, platformers and puzzle games. At the same time the PC still has the monopoly on real-time strategy and the MMO market, so some games are naturally PC only. The handheld market has been growing with classic platformers, racing games, puzzle games and traditional 16-bit styled RPGs, or even remakes of old RPGs. Whether it's the PSP or the Nintendo DS, they both serve the retro gamer, RPG fan and puzzle fan best, and the iPhone and Android marketplace, while having more casual arcade and puzzle games, has a similar styled library.

Lastly we have the PS3 and Xbox 360, which, let's face it... both appeal to the same gamers. They have a large selection of modern third and first person action games, particularly first person shooters, they both push HD graphic and neither of them seem all that bothered with retro titles, platformers, RPGs or casual gaming. They're going for the younger audience, the ones that have no need for nostalgia and don't tend towards story lines in their games. Particularly they're going for the online gamer, who really isn't a gamer at all... they have no interest in the games characters, storyline, atmosphere etc. They're interested in the multiplayer alone and to them it's the equivalent of an electronic competitive sport. These people are not traditional gamers in the slightest and as such need different things from their gaming.

But when it comes to Xbox 360 vs. PS3, which one wins out.

Well honestly, from the multiplayer competitive sport perspective. The people who own less than 10 games, most of which are FPS games, and who play them online against leaderboards... I have no god damn idea. The things important there are different. These people care about server lag, community spirit, server security and uptime, competitive edge (if the consoles have separate servers, and all the best players are on PS3, it's pointless being the best on Xbox 360, it's like being the top of the 2nd division). It's the difference between someone who has cable TV so they can watch TV, and someone who has cable TV so he can watch live sports. The second guy doesn't care about how many channels he's getting, or the range of programming. What he cares about is, does your sports channel have good coverage, is it going to cut out if there's a storm, will you make me pay for all the big matches on pay-per-view... that kind of thing.

I want to make it clear that I realise there are gamers, and "online FPS players", because, they're NOT the same thing and I can't talk for the second. I'm a gamer. I have no interest in competing in an electronic sport, as such I don't play Call Of Duty, Battlefield etc. and honestly don't care which console has the better online service. That said, it seems to me, with cross game chat, more online security, faster connection times, and considerably less downtime, Xbox 360 is a clear winner online... however Xbox Live costs a monthly fee, PSN is free. So you get what you pay for I suppose. Are the slight improvements the Xbox 360 offers really worth the money, I'm not so sure.

From a gamers perspective, it's very close.

I was an early Xbox 360 adopter. I decided it was the better option as it had better games at the time. This was back when the PS3 exclusives was small enough that I remember Gametrailers didn't have enough to fill and "Top 10 PS3 exclusives" list. The PS3 library was embarrassing. Now, if anything, it's the other way around, with the PS3 exclusives being generally better quality and there being a lot more of them, especially as practically every Xbox 360 exclusive now is a bloody Kinect game.

Xbox 360 really has the weaker exclusives list now, but that doesn't mean it has bad exclusives. RPG wise it has Mass Effect (the first one being by far the best in the series, before they dumbed it down for the console-tards and turned it into Gears Of Effect). It also has Lost Odyssey a game that I feel is a good enough reason alone to by an Xbox 360. There's Fable 2, (ie. not the train wreck that was Fable 3), which was quite good. Really though exclusive wise the Xbox 360 has the Gears Of War and Halo franchises, and if you're not a dude-bro, you're probably not all that impressed. There are a few more games such as Too Human, Ninja Gaiden 2, Bomberman: Act Zero, Alan Wake, Ninety-Nine Nights and Dead Rising, but most of these are early 2006-2008 games and some of them are really kinda crap. Too Human and Bomberman: Act Zero are bad games. Alan Wake and Ninety-Nine Nights are barely mediocre and Dead Rising was the first time I found a games console that would crash and freeze more than a PC. Xbox 360 exclusives are typically not very good. To top this off, in 2012 the Xbox 360 has.... fúck all exclusives planned. Seriously, they're ALL Kinect games. So yeah, that's it.

The PS3 on the other hand has a lot more to offer. It has Killzone and Resistance if you want a bit of shooting (or if your a dude-bro), but it also has the Uncharted series, the Ratchet & Clank series, the Yakuza series, the inFAMOUS series, and the God Of War series. On top of that there's Hyperdimension Neptunia, LittleBig Planet, Metal Gear Solid 4, Demon's Souls and The Last Guardian. Wait there's more..., Sony has realised that some of the best games EVER where on the PS2 and has started releasing HD Collections of some of their better games, I've already mentioned God Of War, but there's the Team ICO Collection (with ICO and Shadow Of The Colossus), the Prince Of Persia Trilogy, the Tomb Raider Trilogy, Resident Evil Revival (with Resident Evil 4 and Code Veronica X) and the Sly Cooper Collection released so far. Coming next year we'll get the Devil May Cry Collection, Final Fantasy X HD, the Silent Hill HD Collection, the Metal Gear Solid HD Collection and the Jak & Daxter HD Collection. In 2012 the PS3 can also expect to get a couple of decent exclusives that are not PS2 collections including Agent by Rockstar North, and Dust 514 by CCP. Let's face it, the PS3 has so much more to offer now that it's simply won already, it is the better console if you're judging it based on the games, and as it's a games console, judging it on the games as opposed to it's ability to grind coffee beans or act as a mirror is usually a smart move, but still lets carry on.

When it comes to the controller, the PS3 controller is more accurate, has the better D-pad by far and is more resilient but I much prefer the Xbox 360's controller. The triggers are nicer and the weight is much better. Honestly, if I could use the OnLive controller for either of them I would. A 360 controller with the PS3's analogue layout and D-pad... it's the best controller ever made, but it's for the OnLive so no sod uses it. Point for the 360 there.

Now it's not just games is it, on to the additional uses. These console can also be used to stream music, watch movies though Netflix and TV though Hulu etc. except NO THEY FÚCKING CAN'T! Unless you live in USA these services don't work, which means for me in the UK these services are worth as much as a large steamy shit and I wish people would shut the fúck up about them. They don't exist... outside USA anyway. If I want to watch TV or movies, I'll pirate them on Megavideo like everyone else outside USA has to do. My games console isn't a fúcking TV, it's a games console.

So, lastly we've got the storage medium. DVD for the Xbox 360, Blu-Ray for the PS3. There's no contest. The PS3 wins. Sorry, but having to switch discs mid game is so 1998... and considering you need an add-on to play HD-DVD (for which there are practically no films released in anyway), but the PS3 can be a full Blu-Ray player straight out the box, I think we know who's winning here.

Honestly, it's pretty obvious which is the better console here. It's hands down the Playstation 3. It has the wider selection of exclusive games and a built in Blu-Ray player. That said, the Xbox 360 has Fable 2, Ninja Gaiden 2, Mass Effect, Gears Of War 1 & 2 (I've not played 3 yet) and Lost Odyssey, so I still very much want my Xbox 360. Hell two of my all time favourite games; Mass Effect and Lost Odyssey are 360 exclusives, so it's a damn good console, but objectively the PS3 is simply better... and that's without even considering the Red Ring Of Death which has killed two of my 360's so far (so much so that I no longer have a working 360).

If anyone disagrees, I'd love to hear why. If anyone wants to discuss this further, great. I look forward to some actual replies... preferably some that are longer than a tweet.

Yellow Light Of Heaven FTW .

i used to think ps3 was a lot better than xbox but i hate ps3 now