well.... go ahead...ask

Tell me something about it first, then I can ask

well.... go ahead...ask


Are you seriously going to pay $600 for the non-crappy version on launch day or are you gonna be smart and wait for all the kinks to be worked out first?  :D

Are you seriously going to pay $600 for the non-crappy version on launch day or are you gonna be smart and wait for all the kinks to be worked out first?  :D


what kinks? there are no kinks. 

Tell me something about it first, then I can ask


alright. in the long run the ps3 is a much better investment than the xbox 360. why? because the best thing about the 360 is it's online service. (xbox live) . at the end of this year, when people will be getting their second year of service with xbox live for the 360, they will have paid $610 for the 360 and it's services. the ps3 offers the same quality of internet services for free. so $600 is all you'll ever have to pay. (aside from games)

what kinks? there are no kinks. 


There are always kinks with console launches.  Every console has them.  The Xbox 360 has them.  The Playstation 2 had them.  This is why I waited for a couple years before getting the original Xbox, and eight months after launch to get the 360. 


alright. in the long run the ps3 is a much better investment than the xbox 360. why? because the best thing about the 360 is it's online service. (xbox live) . at the end of this year, when people will be getting their second year of service with xbox live for the 360, they will have paid $610 for the 360 and it's services. the ps3 offers the same quality of internet services for free. so $600 is all you'll ever have to pay. (aside from games)


?

Oh wait, maybe you're using the Canadian price or factoring in the cost of the Live startup kit?

Live startup kit is $70 or less.  One year of Live costs $50 if you buy it off the Dashboard and even less if you get it at a retail store.  Wal-Mart sells a 12+1 card for $36, which means 13 months of Live under MS listed price.  The console itself, if you get the premium (which I did) costs around $400, and a bundle deal will cost you slightly less overall (after all the bells and whistles are added).  So for your $600 PS3, I just got my Xbox console and 6.5 years of Live.  And that's before taxes, mind you.

And PS2's online system didn't compare to Live at all.  PS3's online service needs to shape up or shut up.  I hope Sony does well, but so far I have heard nothing except "Maybe we'll just copy Live".

How many lawns are you going to mow to scrape together $600+tax to get your PS3?  How hard are you going to beg mom and dad to get you one?  The key issue with the PS3 isn't that it sucks, necessarily, but that it costs so blasted much.  And unlike Microsoft, which at least gives you a choice as to what kind of media you'd like to play on your Xbox 360 console (DVD or HD-DVD, which is a separate drive), Sony is essentially forcing you to get a Blu-Ray player that may or may not have a future. 

We shall see.  Many PS3 games look cool, and competition in the video game industry is great, but for $600, I'm going to wait for a MAJOR price drop before I even consider it.

And PS2's online system didn't compare to Live at all.  PS3's online service needs to shape up or shut up.  I hope Sony does well, but so far I have heard nothing except "Maybe we'll just copy Live".

  The key issue with the PS3 isn't that it sucks, necessarily, but that it costs so blasted much.  And unlike Microsoft, which at least gives you a choice as to what kind of media you'd like to play on your Xbox 360 console (DVD or HD-DVD, which is a separate drive), Sony is essentially forcing you to get a Blu-Ray player that may or may not have a future. 

We shall see.  Many PS3 games look cool, and competition in the video game industry is great, but for $600, I'm going to wait for a MAJOR price drop before I even consider it.


yes, ps2's online system did suck. and no one can say for sure if ps3 live will be any better. however, the ps3 will be 2x as powerful as the 360. also it will be fully backwards compatible. as opposed to the 360 which just barely passes as backwards compatible. i believe there's only some 200 xbox games compatible with the 360. did you know that although some splinter cell games were not chosen to be backwards compatible "barbie horse adventure: wild horse rescue" was. and expect to be waiting a long time. sony will be losing 200 dollars for every ps3 sold. they build them for 800 and sell them for 600. there is also a 500 dollar system which lacks wifi and only has a 20 gig hard drive. and if you think 600 is alot, look back at one atari system sold back in the ps1 era that was 400 dollars. with inflation that's as much (or more) as the ps3.  as did many other systems.   

yes, ps2's online system did suck. and no one can say for sure if ps3 live will be any better. however, the ps3 will be 2x as powerful as the 360. also it will be fully backwards compatible. as opposed to the 360 which just barely passes as backwards compatible. i believe there's only some 200 xbox games compatible with the 360. did you know that although some splinter cell games were not chosen to be backwards compatible "barbie horse adventure: wild horse rescue" was. and expect to be waiting a long time. sony will be losing 200 dollars for every ps3 sold. they build them for 800 and sell them for 600. there is also a 500 dollar system which lacks wifi and only has a 20 gig hard drive. and if you think 600 is alot, look back at one atari system sold back in the ps1 era that was 400 dollars. with inflation that's as much (or more) as the ps3.  as did many other systems.   


All the Splinter Cell games are now backwards compatible.  I know, because I can play them all on my 360.  You must have gotten your information from last December ;)

The PS3's specs suggest that it may be more powerful than the 360, but definitely not twice as powerful.

All the Splinter Cell games are now backwards compatible. 


still the 360 lacks full on backwards compatibility

still the 360 lacks full on backwards compatibility


That's why I play it with my Xbox :)  It is of course nice to be able to have a built-in launch library of games, but a lot of gamers will go right for the newest titles for the latest console, so it's not as important. 

However, for the games that ARE backwards compatible on the 360 now, they work perfectly fine. 

That's why I play it with my Xbox :)  It is of course nice to be able to have a built-in launch library of games, but a lot of gamers will go right for the newest titles for the latest console, so it's not as important. 

However, for the games that ARE backwards compatible on the 360 now, they work perfectly fine. 


true but you have to load them. i know that they didn't choose barbie over splinter cell. but i'm sure they could've made alot more games backwards compatible if they hadn't rushed it so much in order to get the early release date. now for some reason, i don't think either the 360 or the ps3 will win the console war. i think the wii will win. although it's not neccerily revolutionary, it is innovative. it's a cool idea. and it's cheap. i want the ps3 to win and in the long run it might. but at launch year, the wii will dominate.

The reason a few of the games on the Xbox are not compatible with the 360 is because of an emulator issue, and also the fact that nobody really plays the games that are not currently on the list.  All the games that I have from the Xbox that I want to play are currently playable on the 360.  So from a marketing standpoint, it doesn't matter that some games aren't compatible yet.

We won't know what the Wii and the PS3 will offer until launch date, but I would much rather get a Wii just because of Mario and Zelda and the fact that it's 50% off a PS3 :P