Multi-platform Games - Which to buy?

[Deadman]

I finally got a PS3, and when added to my 360 and Wii, I now have all the current consoles, which is something I've never had in past generations. Now I have an all new dilemma: for multi-platform games, how do you decide which system to purchase it for? I've been thinking about it and have a few thoughts:

1. First, many games have minor differences which make one platform more desirable to you than another, like Soul Calibur IV's Yoda/Vader choice.
2. Bonus levels and unlockables - is one system providing more for your buck?
3. release Date differences? - buy the first available?

With the Wii and 360, I pretty much bought everything for the 360, as they were superior in almost every way to the Wii, but adding the PS3 is going to confuse the issue even more. Sure it's a nice problem to have, but I think the PS3 addition is going to cut down on my ability to go for the 360 complete library, as Resident Evil 5 may look better ont he PS3 for the same $$.

Ah well, who knows....:sob:

[j_factor]

As far as release date differences, I tend to prefer the version that wasn't released first, as the later release usually has less bugs n' stuff.

Are there generally differences in load times between 360 and PS3? Last gen, Gamecube games tended to load quicker, which wasn't significant for some games, but it was for others. I believe the 360's drive is a little faster, but PS3 may hold an edge in hard drive caching, as well as requiring less compression (it takes time for data to decompress). Has anyone done comparisons?

I remember when PS3 was coming out, it was supposed to become the Xbox of this generation to the 360's PS2 -- that is, having a definite edge in mulitplatform games. That doesn't seem to be the case, though.

[p_b]

Achievements :)

[dao2]

Achievements :)

the ps3 has fako achievements in the form of trophies now.

It all depends, SOME games tend to have problems on the PS3, though not a bunch. Some (though rarer) have a couple problems on the 360, but that's a game by game basis. And if you care about your gamerscore of course the 360. If you don't and both versions are identical, flip a coin :P

[j_factor]

I will never understand why anyone on Earth can possibly give one iota of a damn about achievements.

[Kitsune Sniper]

Eh, I just think it's a neat thing to have. Goals to beat. *shrugs*

Anyway, Deadman, I would go for the cheapest version, hahaha.

[Nesmaster]

At one point I'd have said 360, always, for achievements. Now, it'll be the one that runs better/ lead platform. Or if it's not a day one buy, the one I find for $20 first (which will normally be the 360 version here).

[Cobra Commander]

I will never understand why anyone on Earth can possibly give one iota of a damn about achievements.
Because it's all about points, and I can't think of a more pure idea for a game system than who has more points.

[PapaStu]

Just like before when it was an issue with PS2. How it looked/played coupled with Achievements and online capabilities.

So normally 360 for me (and will continue to be when I get a PS3).

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Because it's all about points, and I can't think of a more pure idea for a game system than who has more points.

If that's the case, I've been bitching about this since the launch of the 360 ...

... if the goal of "gamerpoints" is to prove who has the biggest virtual penis (or vagina respectively) WHY has Microsoft not implemented a "total gamerscore leaderboard"??

I'll only start caring about my gamerscore when I know who has the most in the world DIRECTLY VIA MICROSOFTS SERVICES. (I know there are probably some websites that track that stuff ... but I need Microsoft to support their innovation.)

[Graham Mitchell]

I now have all three machines as well, and there are some big edges that the 360 has over the PS3.

1) Installing. I'm not too concerned about the time it takes, but last week, after owning my 80G PS3 for 5 days and owning two games, the hard drive was half-full. (It's not really 80G, it's 72G and 32G were taken up by MGS4 and Assasnin's Creed.) TWO GAMES? HALF FULL? That's ridiculous. So, I can probably only play 3 or 4 at one time. And the stupid thing still has to load every 5 minutes, so how is this better than spooling off the disc? These games can't contain THAT much more data than their 360 counterparts.

2) Online multiplayer on the PS3 is horrible. Every publisher has their own server, and you need to come up with your own ID and password for every publisher, and then for every game. And sometimes that can take 20 minutes because the server keeps rejecting your username or password. And the headset support is shit. I can't understand a thing coming out of my bluetooth headset, and I doubt anybody hears me when I talk. I know the headset works because it's just fine with my cell phone.

3) Downloading can suck. It took my machine 2 and half hours to download the update for Metal Gear Solid Online. Maybe I was doing something wrong, and it hasn't been an issue since that one time, but that was ridiculous. I studied all weekend, it was Sunday night, and I had 3 hours to play (finally),but I spent 2 1/2 of them watching the progress bar fill at a crawling pace.

Honestly, MGS4 is really sweet, and worth getting the system for. But other than visuals, the 360 kills this thing in every other way. And there's really not many readily-available PS3 games that aren't on the 360 already anyway (with way better online support). If I bought this and didn't have a 360, I'd be pissed. So, think about that when choosing your games. If it's something you want to play multiplayer, you're probably better off sticking with the 360. I'm having the same dilemma because Bionic Commando: Re-armed is coming soon and I'm not sure which one to get.

[Poofta!]

i too have a 360 (for a while now) and just recently found a 60gb ps3. so now i have both. what i brought it down to is thus:

get the version for the system who's controller and online experience you prefer more. for me, it was 360 straight up. i hate the PSN (its confusing and annoying and lack some XBL features i take for granted). i also arent as comfortable with the ps3 controller as i am with the 360.

the graphics are the same (for all intents and purposes) and xbox seems to have an edge right now in the ways of DLC. another thing is the initial install really pisses me off (ps3)

[Chuplayer]

2) Online multiplayer on the PS3 is horrible. Every publisher has their own server, and you need to come up with your own ID and password for every publisher, and then for every game. And sometimes that can take 20 minutes because the server keeps rejecting your username or password.

I thought that was only a problem with Metal Gear Online. Every other game uses the PSN user data for online gameplay.

[Graham Mitchell]

I thought that was only a problem with Metal Gear Online. Every other game uses the PSN user data for online gameplay.

That's good to know. It's the only online multiplayer game that I have at the moment, so I assumed this was how it goes for everything else.

[exit]

I thought that was only a problem with Metal Gear Online. Every other game uses the PSN user data for online gameplay.

That's very true, the only two games I can recall needing to register for are MGO and Team Fortress. The MGO servers can suck sometimes due to high traffic, but other than that I've had no problems jumping online.

[Leo_A]

I generally go with the Xbox 360 versions for the controller (I was never fond of Sony's controllers), and Xbox Live. Generally, the 360 version is the lead version for most development teams right now, and usually has the most bonuses with things like DLC. And I like achievements and being able to keep a eye on what those on my friends list are up to.

The few PS3 releases that seem to offer any real upgrades seem to come out much later (Like Oblivion), and still strip a few things out (Oblivion doesn't offer all the DLC content, just the bigger ones). Many seem to be slightly inferior as far as things like frame rates go and the variety of DLC offered.

So so far I stick to PS3 and Wii exclusives for those two systems (Or I should say will, so far even though I've played many of the games, I've yet to buy a PS3, which I hope to fix soon). Unless something comes out for the PS3 that makes it significantly better than the 360 version, I don't see my buying habits changing anytime soon.

[dao2]

I generally go with the Xbox 360 versions for the controller (I was never fond of Sony's controllers), and Xbox Live. Generally, the 360 version is the lead version for most development teams right now, and usually has the most bonuses with things like DLC. And I like achievements and being able to keep a eye on what those on my friends list are up to.

The few PS3 releases that seem to offer any real upgrades seem to come out much later (Like Oblivion), and still strip a few things out (Oblivion doesn't offer all the DLC content, just the bigger ones). Many seem to be slightly inferior as far as things like frame rates go and the variety of DLC offered.

So so far I stick to PS3 and Wii exclusives for those two systems (Or I should say will, so far even though I've played many of the games, I've yet to buy a PS3, which I hope to fix soon). Unless something comes out for the PS3 that makes it significantly better than the 360 version, I don't see my buying habits changing anytime soon.

Also forgot about that ;p depends which controller you like better ^^

I like using the d-pad for fighting games (personal preference) but racing and other stuff I had the thumbs down on the PS controller as opposed to thumbs up on the 360 controller.

[Ze_ro]

As far as release date differences, I tend to prefer the version that wasn't released first, as the later release usually has less bugs n' stuff.
Seconded. Though there are always exceptions... Orange Box was done by Valve for the 360, and by some other EA team for the PS3. Frankly, I'd be inclined to think that Valve would do a better job on it. It seems Gabe Newell hates the PS3, so it's likely that this trend will continue (It's already been announced that Left 4 Dead will be the same).

In some cases, the Wii is preferable when the game is meant to use the wiimote. Rayman Raving Rabbids would seem to be in the category. However, the Wii's lack of downloadable content means Guitar Hero 3 and Rock Band would seem to be at an enormous disadvantage. The fact that Wii games can't be (or simply aren't?) patched online to fix bugs is a bit of a problem in my opinion.

The bottom line is that you usually have to do some homework to decide which version is the "best".

--Zero

[Borman]

PS3 if they are equal in most ways. I dont play online too terribly much unless its on PC, so that isnt an issue. My main reason nowadays is the scratch resistance coating on the Bluray disks. Living in dorms at college = more opportunity for disks to be left out.

[Sudo]

It really depends on which version runs better for me. I like achievements, but if a game runs better or has more features on the PS3 then I'll get it for that. Plus, I prefer the PS3's controller to the 360's.

[maxlords]

I get everything for the system it was originally developed for. Whatever version is the port is generally the one to ignore. Simple as that. I like both controllers fine, have no real system preference, so it's all about programmer's intent. If a game is designed for the 360, chances are it'll run better on it and vica versa.

[heybtbm]

I used to decide which version to buy based on a whole range of factors. Now days it simply comes down the fact that my friends all have 360's and if I want to play with people I know, it has to be the 360 version.

Also, I prefer the 360 controller for pretty much any game type.

[SegaAges]

For me, there are a couple factors to think about.

Price: If you want price, go PC. If you don't have a high-end enough PC, sell your 360 and ps3 and use the profit to build up your PC. You would be surprised at what 400-500 would do for a computer. Simply put, I have not seen a PC game where it was a PC/360/PS3 release that cost as much as the consoles. PC always seems to be cheaper (I am sure there are some exceptions to that, but I have not seen them, and I don't exactly work at GameStop, but I do shop for PC games regularly).

Features: Uh, from what I have noticed, most of the time the features are the same. I don't play many games online, because I suck online (cept for SWG). Many people like 360 over PS3, but me saying many means I read people's posts on here.

Controller: would you rather hold a ps3 controller, or a 360 controller, keyboard/mouse/usb controller(which could also be a 360 controller, hahaha).

The reason why I haven't gotten a ps3 is because any game that I want for PS3 comes out for 360 as well, and if not, eventually comes out for PC. I suck at MGS games and GT takes too long, so those powerhouses I am not going to get. DMC4 coming out on 360 is another reason why I can keep using it, but it also came out for PC.

[modest9797]

Xbox 360 for Achivements and DLC.

[The 1 2 P]

Xbox 360 for Achivements and DLC.

If you play games online than that pretty much sums it up. PS3 will get it's own DLC but the lack of achievements(althought they just started getting trophies) and the far superior online play from Xbox Live usually puts the 360 version in the lead. However, controller preference should also be considered. For first person shooters and racing games I prefer the 360 controller but I need the dual shock for action and platformer games.

[mnkysuit]

I used to decide which version to buy based on a whole range of factors. Now days it simply comes down the fact that my friends all have 360's and if I want to play with people I know, it has to be the 360 version.

Also, I prefer the 360 controller for pretty much any game type.

Exactly.

It comes down to your own personal preference I believe. I tend to go for the 360 version of a multi platform game just for the fact that most of the time I can play with my friends. That, and the load time differences never really caught my attention.

I'd also be lying if I said I didn't enjoy the achievements aspect.