It's all about options

It's all about options.  Not everyone wants one complete package.  Not everyone wants to pay for a forced add-on wireless adapter if they only intend on using the NIC.  Not everyone wants to pay for an included blue ray.  Not everyone has $600 to blow off at one time.  Some may want the console and add on options when they save enough.  Yes it is more expensive to buy everything seperately but not everyone wants to spend a lump sum of money or have an included add-on that they don't use.

Blue ray does not equal better defininition graphics, it's only a higher form of storage.  Better graphics is mainly the job of the graphics card and the Xbox 360 has a much better graphics card with almost DX10 specs.  PS3 has the old DX9.  Read the following link on how the graphic cards compare for each console.

http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=1

For the controller, I rather have rumble. I would not play for 3 or more hrs straight making every move with a controller.  I rather sit down and play with just the rumble feature.  I get enough excitement and a calorie burning experience just trying to defeat an opponent in an online match.  Again, this is only my opinion.  The PS3 controller does come with rechargeable batteries, but if it dies you need to buy a whole new controller.  If it needs recharging, you must plug a cable in.  This defeats the wireless purpose if you want to play while charging.  The xbox on the other hand cost extra for a charger kit but you could always use alkaline batteries as backup while you charge up the other and still be able to play wirelessly and you don't need to purchase a new controller when the rechargeable battery dies, just replace the batteries which in the long run is cheaper than buying a new controller.

As far as online gaming, I rather pay $50/year to have the best gameplay.  It costs money to get a good experience.  Remember, you get what you pay for.  Everyone knows that Sony has a long way to go to catch up in this area and it will take even longer since they don't have the additional revenue, like M$ gets from its live subscriptions, to get a jumpstart.  There is still a chance that games not published by Sony will require a seperate subsciption fee from the developers themselves, since it cost money to maintain servers and online experiences.  $50 is dirt cheap when compared to PC online gaming subsciptions.

The developement for both consoles probably began about the same time.  If this is true, then the technology is about the same, so I would not expect the PS3 graphics to be better or exceptionally better.

On the game developer side, I believe everyone wants to generate quick profit and the quickest way is on the xbox 360 because it's easier which equates to faster development time to ship out their games and get a head start.  The PS3 takes more time and money to develope, thus developers will probably code on the 360 then port it to the PS3 if the game is not exclusive.

The PS3 is meant to last 10 years.  In 10 years, technology changes drasticly.  I believe M$ is already making a profit on the xbox 360 and they could probably come out with an xbox 720 or so in a few years that will blow PS3 away.

As far as the Wii, it shows that price had a big advantage.  I don't think it would sell well if it cost $400-$600.  I also don't consider it a next-gen console.

Sources
This argument has no sources attached.

Posted by jn Unregistered

Views: 244     Votes: 0

Share