PS3 vs 360

[Bojay1997]

I'm sorry, but at the time of my purchase I didn't have a time machine to go into the future and research which games would be released or in development for the PS3.

Can you use your special research skills and tell us all which games will be in development for the PS3 and 360 12 months from now?

Isn't it time for you to just admit that you started this thread because you are a PS3 fanboy and you wanted to stir stuff up? I think it's time to lock this thread down. The OP already owns the PS3, so it's not like anyone's opinion has any impact on what he or she will buy. Most of us own all three platforms or want to, so there really is no point in continuing to debate this issue.

[kupomogli]

an arguably better controller

The 360 doesn't have a better controller, it's just that the Playstation L2 and R2 buttons are a piece of shit now on the PS3. Way to go and copy Microsoft with "trigger like buttons" on a controller that doesn't need them and it's a worse design the way they did it.

Now the majority of games the controller works great for and the triggers really don't suck. Almost all games actually. Games like Armored Core 4 and For Answer need a setup in which you have to hold or press those four buttons(L1, R1, L2, and R2,) repeatedly. Because the L2 and R2 buttons have an upwards pressure on them, you might stop firing or boosting(depedning on your setup) because you're not mashing L2/R2 hard enough.

[Kid Ice]

I bought these PS3 snap-on triggers and they work well.

http://www.amazon.com/PS3-Dual-Triggers-Playstation-3/dp/B001IAOEXU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1262480573&sr=8-1

Both the 360 and PS3 have such a large assortment of controllers I don't feel the issue is relevant.

[The 1 2 P]

I'm sorry, but at the time of my purchase I didn't have a time machine to go into the future and research which games would be released or in development for the PS3.

Can you use your special research skills and tell us all which games will be in development for the PS3 and 360 12 months from now?

Time machine? So you're telling us that you aren't intelligent enough to look thru magazines and websites to read up on whats coming up for your system of choice for the next 12 months? Actually, considering who I'm talking to thats not so much of a stretch.

[garagesaleking!!]

I finally gave up on the whole ps3 vs 360 argument a long time ago, I cant believe people are still bickering about it.

[Mimi Nakamura]

Time machine? So you're telling us that you aren't intelligent enough to look thru magazines and websites to read up on whats coming up for your system of choice for the next 12 months? Actually, considering who I'm talking to thats not so much of a stretch.

No games publication can tell you what games companies will decide to start work on 12-months from now. It's impossible without the use of some sort of time machine. When I bought my PS3, Treasure hadn't announced that they were going to start on a shooter for the 360. Probably because they didn't even know that they would at the time.

We can learn about some games which are currently in development, but it's impossible to know about games that nobody has even planned to make yet.

If it really is possible, why don't you tell me about the games which will begin development 12 months from now?

[Mimi Nakamura]

Isn't it time for you to just admit that you started this thread because you are a PS3 fanboy and you wanted to stir stuff up? I think it's time to lock this thread down. The OP already owns the PS3, so it's not like anyone's opinion has any impact on what he or she will buy. Most of us own all three platforms or want to, so there really is no point in continuing to debate this issue.

Stir stuff up? Fanboy? Most replies have been free of fanboy nonsense. The only games company I would consider myself a fan of is Sega.

[Mimi Nakamura]

That's a better deal than Microsoft's insane price gouging for their proprietary HDs. For the same price as a 60 gig 360 hard drive, I bought a 150 gig drive for the PS3.

Here's my take on this whole 'Vs' thing.

I own all three systems. I've been through five 360s thus far, so I do most of my platform agnostic gaming on my launch 60 gig PS3. My Wii has been turned on five times in the last six months, though with Sin and Punishment 2 and Tatsunoko vs. Capcom coming out in the next couple of months, I expect that to change. I love all three systems for different reasons, but something occurred to me this Christmas while buying a console for my girlfriend.

Katie wanted a console with which to stream Netflix. This was just before the PS3 was capable of this function. I bought her a 60 gig 360 bundle, wrapped it, and thought nothing more of it until I was fixing her computer and realized that I'd need to get her a wireless adapter since her router was in a distant room from her main TV. I also then realized that I'd need to buy her a gold membership for Xbox live in order for her to be able to stream Netflix. Let's add that cost up:

Xbox: $250
Wireless adapter: $100
1 Year Gold Membership: $50 (or thereabouts).

That's $400 dollars. That's one hundred dollars more than a new PS3 slim, which contains all the functionality out of the box that Microsoft wants to charge me for separately. Very soon after that Netflix streaming was announced for the PS3. I took the 360 back and got her the PS3 instead, and as an added bonus, she now has an excellent Blu-Ray player too.

The 360 has a huge number of worthwhile exclusives, an arguably better controller, a wider player base, and some fun extras like 1 vs 100, but the price gouging on accessories, the unreliable hardware, and the added expense of the gold membership all turn me off more and more as this generation continues. Of course, this is all my own opinion, which does not invalidate anyone elses. Keep that in mind.

Interesting post. I never really thought about all the accessories that would need to be purchased for the 360. Having said that, PS3 accessories aren't cheap! But I guess free online play and built in wi-fi make up for it.

PS3 controllers in Japan cost ¥5500!

[Tallise]

I am actually about to buy a 360. I was debating between the PS3 and 360 for a little bit, I played games on PS3 my friend and older brother own while on vacation and really liked it. I got addicted to Little Big Planet and think the graphics may even be a bit better. However, I think I will end up getting the 360 because I already own games for it from when I dated someone who owns a 360... I reeeeally don't feel like trading in and re-buying those games. I'm not even sure if any are exclusives either x.x Maybe one day when there is a PS4 or something and everyone is trading in their old consoles I will buy one... Cuz I vulture like that o< Patience makes good deals........

[Ed Oscuro]

That's a better deal than Microsoft's insane price gouging for their proprietary HDs. For the same price as a 60 gig 360 hard drive, I bought a 150 gig drive for the PS3.
This is quite true, just forgot to mention it in my post. I have a feeling you still failed, though, because:

First, the 360's drives aren't proprietary - they're are essentially normal drives with the 360 firmware on them, but the 360 seems limited to using certain size drives.

More to the point, PS3 drives are completely normal laptop drives, and readily accepts the 9.5mm variety (and probably slightly bigger).

An official 60GB 360 drive is (I'm guessing Newegg's price is in line with what you found; Amazon is way outta whack) listed at $89 in a kit, and I did find a 160GB kit for the PS3 for $89 as well, on Amazon, which lists the 360 drive at $115 by itself. Is that what you found?

Please tell me you found the 360 drive for a price in line with [http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010150380%201309721217&bop=And&ActiveSearchResult=True&Order=PRICE]this list[/url] and that I'm just reading too much into your comment.

For extra shame, let's all consider that a PS3 can accept standard 3.5" computer drives, which are significantly cheaper for the same or even more storage capacity. All you should need is the appropriate SATA cable.

[G-Boobie]

This is quite true, just forgot to mention it in my post. I have a feeling you still failed, though, because:

See, I was hoping we could keep this civil, internet hero, but OK.


First, the 360's drives aren't proprietary - they're are essentially normal drives with the 360 firmware on them, but the 360 seems limited to using certain size drives.

Actually, they ARE proprietary. The connecting port is non-standard, they have a purpose built case that you have to get around one way or another, and yes, you CAN hack your way through, but I for one don't care to muck around with it. From where I'm standing, hacking a non-360 branded HD to work with the 360 is a FAR bigger hassle than the simple plug and play method that ANYONE can do with any off the shelf SATA laptop HD on the PS3.


More to the point, PS3 drives are completely normal laptop drives, and readily accepts the 9.5mm variety (and probably slightly bigger).

I know. I've swapped the HD on mine, and it was a completely painless procedure. What are you actually trying to say?


An official 60GB 360 drive is (I'm guessing Newegg's price is in line with what you found; Amazon is way outta whack) listed at $89 in a kit, and I did find a 160GB kit for the PS3 for $89 as well, on Amazon, which lists the 360 drive at $115 by itself. Is that what you found?

That's not out of line with what you'll find at any given Best Buy or what have you, so we'll say yes. For the cost of an official, don't need to fuck around with hacking or modding 60 gig 360 HD, you can find a laptop HD for a PS3 for half the hassle and that's twice the size or more. So far, so good.


Please tell me you found the 360 drive for a price in line with [http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010150380%201309721217&bop=And&ActiveSearchResult=True&Order=PRICE]this list[/url] and that I'm just reading too much into your comment.

I'm no longer even entirely certain you read my post before responding. And, if you did, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make anymore. I THINK you're saying that, if I pry open a 360 branded hard drive, take out the actual disc, jump on to tech forums online and figure out what size and make will work as a replacement, install THAT into the aforementioned case, and hope that I haven't fucked anything up in the process, then the 360 is just as modular as the PS3. Which for the record is fucking nuts.


For extra shame, let's all consider that a PS3 can accept standard 3.5" computer drives, which are significantly cheaper for the same or even more storage capacity. All you should need is the appropriate SATA cable.

That was sort of my point, if I understand you correctly. Though, in a tragic case of potential reading failure, I'm not even certain you understood ME before charging in, nerd guns just a-blazing.

Look, let me try again: my point was that for far less money and far less hassle, you could get a bigger hard drive upgrade for the PS3 compared to similar money and hassle with the 360. If that's what you read, then I'm not even sure what you're trying to say and I'll let you get on with being all crazy indignant or whatever. If you interpreted my post as something else, then I either need to work on my communication skills or you should seek comprehension before charging in.

That leads us to the possibility that you're ridiculing me for being annoyed at Microsoft for raping people with their official 360 pricing, just because it's POSSIBLE to hack your way around it.

Let's play a game wherein I'm not interested in doing any aftermarket bullshit to my console and, like ninety nine percent of the user base, I just want to buy a fucking hard drive and plug it in: end of story. No looking up tutorial vids on YouTube, no trouble shooting on forums, no possibility of Microsoft banning my profile or locking out my hard drive for being, in the words of Major Nelson, "grey market". I'm going to pay more of my hard earned money than I would for comparable storage space on the PS3. Yes, it's possible you get a 360 HD on sale somewhere and the gap narrows, but not enough to change my point. Sony has made an effort with the PS3 to make changing the hard drive easy and inexpensive, whereas Microsoft has elected to make it either:

1) Needlessly expensive but painless, or:

2) Cheaper and a pain in the ass. Also, in the grey area legally.

That is all. It's not a condemnation of the 360, which as I've stated has a lot going for it. It's an observation as someone who has both limited time and money to upgrade his consoles with. I need to stay the Hell out of these fanboy threads: nothing but trouble ever seems to come of them.

[G-Boobie]

The 360 doesn't have a better controller, it's just that the Playstation L2 and R2 buttons are a piece of shit now on the PS3.

Kupo, read the quote above and tell me what's wrong with it please.

[Tallise]

D: Everyone, lets stay civil please! People have opinions, state yours don't attack other's!

[kupomogli]

Kupo, read the quote above and tell me what's wrong with it please.

I know it sounded as if I was saying the PS3 controller sucked but I wasn't. I explained the PS3 triggers were fine but they apply this upward pressure that if you're having to hold those buttons it's more uncomfortable. Only mentioning how the PS3 needs to go back to the PS2 style L2/R2.

The 360 has problems like a terrible control pad, I don't like the LB and RB buttons much, or the locations of the analog sticks. On the 360 the LT and RT buttons are also great on driving games and games that you have to hold those buttons down, but not better to use in most cases where single button presses work best.

[The 1 2 P]

No games publication can tell you what games companies will decide to start work on 12-months from now. It's impossible without the use of some sort of time machine. When I bought my PS3, Treasure hadn't announced that they were going to start on a shooter for the 360. Probably because they didn't even know that they would at the time.

I don't have a PS3 but thanks to game mags, game sites and game forums(like DP) I already know what 70-90% of all the retail releases for the PS3 will be in 2010.


We can learn about some games which are currently in development, but it's impossible to know about games that nobody has even planned to make yet.

If it really is possible, why don't you tell me about the games which will begin development 12 months from now?

I'm not sure why you want to know which games will be beginning development a year from now, especially considering that "beginning development" means that they most likely won't be releasing for another 10-24 months later. But just like this year, by next January I will be able to tell you what 70-90% of PS3 retail releases will be in 2011. The few I don't know are announcements saved for trade shows like E3 and TGS or special press conferences. A time machine will never be a worthy substitute for a decent internet search an alittle common sense.

[kupomogli]

Don't forget what happened to Skaar. 360s can't use anything other than official 360 harddrive unless you want to get a possible ban later on. In this case 360 is stuck with the ripoff harddrives. To the Ed/G Boobie posts.

[Mimi Nakamura]

I'm not sure why you want to know which games will be beginning development a year from now, especially considering that "beginning development" means that they most likely won't be releasing for another 10-24 months later. But just like this year, by next January I will be able to tell you what 70-90% of PS3 retail releases will be in 2011. The few I don't know are announcements saved for trade shows like E3 and TGS or special press conferences. A time machine will never be a worthy substitute for a decent internet search an alittle common sense.

I don't want to know, I'm trying to make you understand how I didn't know what the current PS3 /360 situation would be when I bought my PS3.

How could I have known which exclusives would have been released or in development when I purchased my PS3 at a time when the games probably weren't even at the planning stage!

Is it really that hard to understand? Or are you just being awkward on purpose?

[Zoltor]

The 360 doesn't have a better controller, it's just that the Playstation L2 and R2 buttons are a piece of shit now on the PS3. Way to go and copy Microsoft with "trigger like buttons" on a controller that doesn't need them and it's a worse design the way they did it.

Now the majority of games the controller works great for and the triggers really don't suck. Almost all games actually. Games like Armored Core 4 and For Answer need a setup in which you have to hold or press those four buttons(L1, R1, L2, and R2,) repeatedly. Because the L2 and R2 buttons have an upwards pressure on them, you might stop firing or boosting(depedning on your setup) because you're not mashing L2/R2 hard enough.



You should know by now, sony as a company sucks lol, pretty much every concept Sony uses, they outright stole from other companies(mainly from Nintendo, as they are usually the first to try something new, but yea all sony does is steal ideas, It's amazing they haven't been sued yet on this issue).

PS. Also PS3's controls all around suck for fighters, visually It's hard to tell, but if you try them out, you'll notice that the praportions are ever so slightly off, which cuases a bunch of issues(blisters that a PS 2 contoller would never cause, tired hands for no good reason, and possibly brusing from using lightning reflexes).

When I go over my friends, we just hook up the PS2 to play fighters(or any other PS 1/2 games for that matter, becuase Sony decided to go with a non gaming feature over the best possible gaming feature(smart move morons).

[ScourDX]

I don't want to know, I'm trying to make you understand how I didn't know what the current PS3 /360 situation would be when I bought my PS3.

How could I have known which exclusives would have been released or in development when I purchased my PS3 at a time when the games probably weren't even at the planning stage!

Is it really that hard to understand? Or are you just being awkward on purpose?

Japanese are not into Xbox360. Microsoft brought in a lot of developers to make porn, JRPG and many others games and yet Japanese are not convince to get one. Maybe it is your culture not willing to support product that isn't made by them. So go with whatever is the most popular there.

[Mimi Nakamura]

Japanese are not into Xbox360. Microsoft brought in a lot of developers to make porn, JRPG and many others games and yet Japanese are not convince to get one. Maybe it is your culture not willing to support product that isn't made by them. So go with whatever is the most popular there.

I think it's because of advertising. Everyone knows what a PS3 is but not so many know what a 360 is. In the shops most of the space goes to the PS3 with a small area for the 360, for people who don't know about games it looks like the 360 is a very minor or insignificant console. It's not because Japan is not willing to support a foreign item - otherwise Apple wouldn't be as big as they are in Japan!

If Microsoft increased their advertising budget for Japan, they might see an increase in sales.

[Mimi Nakamura]

You should know by now, sony as a company sucks lol, pretty much every concept Sony uses, they outright stole from other companies(mainly from Nintendo, as they are usually the first to try something new, but yea all sony does is steal ideas, It's amazing they haven't been sued yet on this issue).

PS. Also PS3's controls all around suck for fighters, visually It's hard to tell, but if you try them out, you'll notice that the praportions are ever so slightly off, which cuases a bunch of issues(blisters that a PS 2 contoller would never cause, tired hands for no good reason, and possibly brusing from using lightning reflexes).

When I go over my friends, we just hook up the PS2 to play fighters(or any other PS 1/2 games for that matter, becuase Sony decided to go with a non gaming feature over the best possible gaming feature)smart move morons).

I agree completely!

[ubersaurus]

I think it's because of advertising. Everyone knows what a PS3 is but not so many know what a 360 is. In the shops most of the space goes to the PS3 with a small area for the 360, for people who don't know about games it looks like the 360 is a very minor or insignificant console. It's not because Japan is not willing to support a foreign item - otherwise Apple wouldn't be as big as they are in Japan!

If Microsoft increased their advertising budget for Japan, they might see an increase in sales.

Haha, yes, to say nothing of the downright awful ads they've run for Xbox there. They make no sense!

[The 1 2 P]

I don't want to know, I'm trying to make you understand how I didn't know what the current PS3 /360 situation would be when I bought my PS3.

How could I have known which exclusives would have been released or in development when I purchased my PS3 at a time when the games probably weren't even at the planning stage!

Is it really that hard to understand? Or are you just being awkward on purpose?

I understand what you are trying to say but even if you had picked up your PS3 when it launched in the fall/winter of 2006 you should have had an idea of the typs's of games and franchises it would be getting. As for Treasure developed games and shooters, if you didn't know which system was going to get the majority of these games(since they are apparently your favorites) you should have held off on your purchase until you had more information.

Having said all of that, now that you know which console has the games you like best, theres really no more need for debate. Go pick up a 360 and start enjoying some Treasure made games and an abundance of shooters(among other gaming experiences). You'll have both systems and will be able to have "all" of the exclusives. Surely you didn't need me and the rest of DP to tell you this.

[Ed Oscuro]

Don't forget what happened to Skaar. 360s can't use anything other than official 360 harddrive unless you want to get a possible ban later on. In this case 360 is stuck with the ripoff harddrives. To the Ed/G Boobie posts.
D'oh, I did run into something like that online but didn't factor it in. Yeah that's pretty crap.

[scottw182]

360, it's a pretty easy choice for me. I don't play very many new-gen games, Halo is almost the only one I care about, and it's exclusive. Also, I hate the PS controller and love the 360 controller. Finally, I like the choice of download games for the 360 better than that of the PS3.

[NoahsMyBro]

BOOM!




Boom to the power of boom.

This, and the reputed 360 failure rate in general, reminded me of an old B5 quote:

"No boom?"
"No boom."
"No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. What? Look, somebody's got to have some damn perspective around here. Boom, sooner or later. BOOM!"
-- Garibaldi, Sinclair, and Ivanova in Babylon 5:"Grail"

Not that this probably adds anything useful to the thread....
Carry on.

[NoahsMyBro]

Wow. I've just read through this whole thread, and want to chime in with my feelings about the two consoles.

I don't have either (nor a Wii for that matter), so mine may be an uncommon perspective.

I've played each console sparingly. A couple of years ago I played Geometry Wars on the 360, and for a few weeks decided I wanted a 360. The urge eventually passed.

A few weeks ago I played Gravity Crash, and decided I want a PS3. Since then, I've been watching DP, Craigslist, & ebay trying to score an older backwards-compatible PS3 at a price I can afford. BUT, I can't afford a realistic or fair price for a PS3, and I'm assuming this urge will pass too.

If I was going to buy one today, I'd go with the PS3. I hate to say it, especially as I dislike Sony's usual business practices, but all else being equal I'd pick the PS3 because of my fear that a 360 will spontaneously die on me due to an inherently unreliable design.

I'll most likely not get either until after the next consoles come out, whenever that happens.

That's my 2 cents.

[RPG_Fanatic]

I have both PS3 & 360. My PS3 only gets used as a DVD/Blu-ray player. My 360 gets used everyday, sure i've had three of them die but I still like the 360's live better than the PS3 online gaming.

[Mimi Nakamura]

I understand what you are trying to say but even if you had picked up your PS3 when it launched in the fall/winter of 2006 you should have had an idea of the typs's of games and franchises it would be getting. As for Treasure developed games and shooters, if you didn't know which system was going to get the majority of these games(since they are apparently your favorites) you should have held off on your purchase until you had more information.

Having said all of that, now that you know which console has the games you like best, theres really no more need for debate. Go pick up a 360 and start enjoying some Treasure made games and an abundance of shooters(among other gaming experiences). You'll have both systems and will be able to have "all" of the exclusives. Surely you didn't need me and the rest of DP to tell you this.

When I bought my PS3 there didn't seem to be a lot of difference between the two, and I guessed that the PS3 would get more support in Japan than the 360. I thought the 360 would have more first person shooters, and the PS3 would have more arcade style games.

I don't want a PS3 and a 360, it will make my apartment look messy (my place is minimal styled), and it might be a bit embarrassing if someone comes to my place! I like to keep my gaming habits as a secret! It's expensive to have two systems as well. It's one or the other...

[mezrabad]

I don't know if it is a case of "the grass is always a little greener" but, I have a 360, I've had it for almost two years now, and it is the most used console in the house. I enjoy the dozen or so games I have for it, though mostly I'm playing Fallout 3 and a few Xbox Live Arcade games I bought. (Portal, Geometry Wars, Puzzle Quest)

And yet, I wonder if I could have enjoyed the PS3 more? I know it's more powerful. I know that the games I play now (Fallout 3, Oblivion, Bioshock) are all available on the PS3, and games I would like to play (Little Big Planet, Final Fantasy XIV, Siren 3? I think) are either exclusive to the PS3 or are getting there first. I also wouldn't be living with the fear that I'm going to get a red ring again on the 360.

Mimi, my advice would be to find a friend with whom you can trade systems and games for a few weeks. If there's game rental place in Tokyo, then trade systems with a friend, rent a few games for the 360 and see how you feel. After a few weeks, you may know whether or not you need to change your system. Hope this helps.

[ScourDX]

I don't want a PS3 and a 360, it will make my apartment look messy (my place is minimal styled), and it might be a bit embarrassing if someone comes to my place! I like to keep my gaming habits as a secret!

You might as well get a portable system like PSP or DSi. Both are small and less clutter. Also why would you feel embarrassed when someone knows your gaming habit? Is it just the Japanese culture don't accept female gamers?


It's expensive to have two systems as well. It's one or the other...

No doubt gaming is expensive. If you aren't really into gaming, I would stick with portable system. It is cheaper and less expensive than the console.

[Mimi Nakamura]

You might as well get a portable system like PSP or DSi. Both are small and less clutter. Also why would you feel embarrassed when someone knows your gaming habit? Is it just the Japanese culture don't accept female gamers?

I'm guessing you've never been to Japan. We've never had the problem of "accepting" female gamers - there have always been female gamers here.
This comment, coupled with your other one, suggests you have a problem with Japan. Why?

Amongst most of my friends it definitely would be embarrassing if they knew how much I played games!



No doubt gaming is expensive. If you aren't really into gaming, I would stick with portable system. It is cheaper and less expensive than the console.

Aren't really into gaming? Yawn....

[Mimi Nakamura]

I don't know if it is a case of "the grass is always a little greener" but, I have a 360, I've had it for almost two years now, and it is the most used console in the house. I enjoy the dozen or so games I have for it, though mostly I'm playing Fallout 3 and a few Xbox Live Arcade games I bought. (Portal, Geometry Wars, Puzzle Quest)

And yet, I wonder if I could have enjoyed the PS3 more? I know it's more powerful. I know that the games I play now (Fallout 3, Oblivion, Bioshock) are all available on the PS3, and games I would like to play (Little Big Planet, Final Fantasy XIV, Siren 3? I think) are either exclusive to the PS3 or are getting there first. I also wouldn't be living with the fear that I'm going to get a red ring again on the 360.

Mimi, my advice would be to find a friend with whom you can trade systems and games for a few weeks. If there's game rental place in Tokyo, then trade systems with a friend, rent a few games for the 360 and see how you feel. After a few weeks, you may know whether or not you need to change your system. Hope this helps.

That's a great suggestion!

Thanks a lot, I'm definitely going to look into doing that.

[ScourDX]

Amongst most of my friends it definitely would be embarrassing if they knew how much I played games!

Maybe you should find new friend that appreciate your hobbies. :wink 2:

[TheDomesticInstitution]

Counterpoint: Maybe she should stop playing video games!

[Mimi Nakamura]

Maybe you should find new friend that appreciate your hobbies. :wink 2:

"Hobby" not "Hobbies". Gaming is one "hobby". I have other hobbies that I share with my friends.

I'm not looking to share my video game hobby with anyone. Sorry.

[Hari Seldon]

"Hobby" not "Hobbies". Gaming is one "hobby". I have other hobbies that I share with my friends.

I'm not looking to share my video game hobby with anyone. Sorry.

I have to ask, why it would be embarrassing?

[duffmanth]

There's a great article on ign.com: http://ps3.ign.com/articles/105/1059102p1.html, about how one of the editors went back to Sony in a way and bought a PS3 because of a combination of the 360's reliability issues and the combo of the PS3 slim and price drop. He also mentions how he just can't see himself playing FFXIII on a 360, cuz the series has always been so ingrained with Sony. I kind of see his point, there's just something that doesn't feel right about playing certain games on anything except a Sony console such as Final Fantasy and Metal Gear Solid. Although these games were on Nintendo first, their best versions were on Playstation, and they just go hand and hand.

I can see his point about the 360's reliability issues causing himself and others to have second thoughts about continuing to support it as much. It's pure bullshit that somebody who slaps down $300 for a 360 has to worry if the system is even going to last them a few months or less before it starts fucking up on them.

[Nature Boy]

I kind of see his point, there's just something that doesn't feel right about playing certain games on anything except a Sony console such as Final Fantasy and Metal Gear Solid.

Totally agree. Last gen I had all three consoles for the bulk of their life cycle, and for no real good reason I'd most games on PS2 because it felt right. And then I'd get something like Splinter Cell, play it on the Xbox first (because it was there first), and I couldn't play any of the sequels on anything else.

This gen I've got only the one console still though, and it didn't bother me in the slightest to be buying GTA IV on an Xbox rather than a PlayStation, although I'll admit that I knew it was coming to 360 prior to me jumping in, or I might've actually purchased a PS3 instead.

The other game I thought of back then was ... FF. Now I'm not even sure I'll buy it - I enjoy the WRPGs so much more than JRPGs these days that I'm not sure I'm interested in going back anyway. I was thrilled to see I'd get the choice though!

[vandy160890]

I own a PS3 & love playing my console games on it.
In some aspects 360 is of low standards when compared to PS3's excellent features.
Ps3 is technically more sound.

[mezrabad]

He also mentions how he just can't see himself playing FFXIII on a 360, cuz the series has always been so ingrained with Sony. I kind of see his point, there's just something that doesn't feel right about playing certain games on anything except a Sony console such as Final Fantasy and Metal Gear Solid. Although these games were on Nintendo first, their best versions were on Playstation, and they just go hand and hand.

Actually, it seems part of a logical progression for Final Fantasy to move to another system. FF I, II + III were on the Famicom, FF IV, V + VI were on the Super Famicom. So, first six were on a Nintendo system, three for each. FF VII, VIII + IX on Playstation, FF X, XI + XII on Playstation 2. Second six were on a Sony system, three for each. Hmm, XI was on the Xbox 360, too... so that would have to make some kind of corollary rule for MMORPGs... hmm, yeah, it's unwise to read numerical patterns where there probably aren't any, just like it would not be wise for SquareEnix to limit their options by only releasing FF XIII for one system. It's about reaching the largest audience. If the 360 can handle it, they'd be missing an opportunity. Of course if they make it for the 360 and there's frame dropping or constant loading, well, then they're making a mistake.

EDIT: I just remembered that I, II, IV, V + VI were all re-released or remade for the Playstation (and the GBA, and I think one and two were on the PSP) and III was re-made for the Nintendo DS. There's no such thing as a "right" company's system for a franchise.

EDIT 2: Damnit, at the same time, I've been jonesing for a PS3 and were I to get one... YES, I'd get FFXIII for it.... damn you Microsoft, damn you to hell!

[j_factor]

If you want to read a pattern into it, this is it: Final Fantasy I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI (discounting the 360 port), and XII were all released on what was the #1 console in Japan at the time. Of course, by that logic, XIII should be a Wii game.

[kupomogli]

If the 360 can handle it, they'd be missing an opportunity. Of course if they make it for the 360 and there's frame dropping or constant loading, well, then they're making a mistake.

From what I heard, Square-Enix developed FF13 to make it like FF7 and FF8 to where you couldn't go back to certain places after you finished a disc. This is because the limitations of the size of the DVD all the places can't fit on a single disc. So unfortunately, these limitations are added to the PS3 version. Not only that but dual audio as well, which I'm not a fan of , but I hear a lot of Japanophiles complain about it.

So while the 360 could possibly handle everything the PS3 can and vice versa. The format limitation is the only thing that is holding the 360 back and unfortunately the PS3 too when a company has to downgrade a game on the system to work properly for both systems.

[b0ub0u]

FF games lost me when they stopped having an overworld map and exploration. The thing I like most about RPGs is the exploration part. All JRPG are so linear now.. it's not even funny. FF VI is still the greatest FF of all time, no doubt about that.

For WRPG, I think the 360 and PS3 are about equal, they both have the big games.

[Mimi Nakamura]

So while the 360 could possibly handle everything the PS3 can and vice versa. The format limitation is the only thing that is holding the 360 back and unfortunately the PS3 too when a company has to downgrade a game on the system to work properly for both systems.

I think this is already happening in general production of games. Games that are released on both formats are clearly optimised for the 360 because if it were to happen the other way round, the 360 version would be significantly graphically inferior.

Sony always strive to have the most powerful console, but because game production costs are so high nowadays, games companies must make their games multi-format if they want to get a decent financial return, so having a more powerful console is irrelevant in today's market. They need both the PS3 and 360 market, so it's not in their interests to make one version far superior to the other.

Which is all good because I have a strong dislike for Sony's "let's wow everyone with powerful specs" tactics.

[Mimi Nakamura]

I have to ask, why it would be embarrassing?

Amongst my friends I would feel a bit embarrassed about my obsession with games. They know I like games, but they don't know I'm a game nerd...

I do have some friends who work within the games industry, yet not even they play games that often.

My closest friends who I spend most of my time aren't interested in games so much.

[Bojay1997]

I think this is already happening in general production of games. Games that are released on both formats are clearly optimised for the 360 because if it were to happen the other way round, the 360 version would be significantly graphically inferior.

Sony always strive to have the most powerful console, but because game production costs are so high nowadays, games companies must make their games multi-format if they want to get a decent financial return, so having a more powerful console is irrelevant in today's market. They need both the PS3 and 360 market, so it's not in their interests to make one version far superior to the other.

Which is all good because I have a strong dislike for Sony's "let's wow everyone with powerful specs" tactics.

I'm sorry, but this is just not true. Numerous articles have been written about the odd limitations of the way the PS3 handles graphics which have led both Valve and John Romero to declare that the 360 is actually a more powerful system graphically. I would agree with you that in theory the processor in the PS3 and the addition of Blu Ray could produce better games, but to date it hasn't and not just because a lot of games are multiplatform nowadays. The PS3 is still very hard to program and I am not aware of any PS3 exclusive game that couldn't be done on the 360 as well. Maybe this will change at some point as the programming teams and tools become even better, but we are already four years in and it hasn't happened yet.

[Mimi Nakamura]

I'm sorry, but this is just not true. Numerous articles have been written about the odd limitations of the way the PS3 handles graphics which have led both Valve and John Romero to declare that the 360 is actually a more powerful system graphically. I would agree with you that in theory the processor in the PS3 and the addition of Blu Ray could produce better games, but to date it hasn't and not just because a lot of games are multiplatform nowadays. The PS3 is still very hard to program and I am not aware of any PS3 exclusive game that couldn't be done on the 360 as well. Maybe this will change at some point as the programming teams and tools become even better, but we are already four years in and it hasn't happened yet.

Yeah, you're right about there not being much evidence of PS3 exclusives that couldn't be done on the 360. I think Unchartered 2 is the only one.

[Bojay1997]

Yeah, you're right about there not being much evidence of PS3 exclusives that couldn't be done on the 360. I think Unchartered 2 is the only one.

I doubt that Uncharted 2 couldn't be done on the 360. It's a great game, but there is nothing about it that is beyond the capabilities of the 360 or a PC for that matter.

[kupomogli]

I doubt that Uncharted 2 couldn't be done on the 360. It's a great game, but there is nothing about it that is beyond the capabilities of the 360 or a PC for that matter.

Nothing is beyond the capabilities of a PC. The PS360 are already outdated if you want to put the PC against them.

However. The 360 couldn't really handle Uncharted 2 solely due to the DVD limitation. Uncharted 2 uses the full 25gb of a single layered Bluray.

[Zoltor]

Nothing is beyond the capabilities of a PC. The PS360 are already outdated if you want to put the PC against them.

However. The 360 couldn't really handle Uncharted 2 solely due to the DVD limitation. Uncharted 2 uses the full 25gb of a single layered Bluray.

There is one thing I just can't understand, why don't game developers make multi DVD games, it drives me nuts(Look at all the greatness the PS1 had, just becuase developers went the extra mile, specifically Dragon Warrior 7, Legend of Dragoon, and FF 7, but I'm sure thers are other good games as well). Can you imagine how crappy such games would've been if they just said, well I guess we just cut out every thing that wont fit on one CD, and end it there.

[kupomogli]

Yeah but what happens when everything within the game are sizes larger than what's on a DVD. I'm not talking about cutscenes. I'm talking about areas you can get back to, multiplayer maps, etc, etc, etc.

For example. Final Fantasy 13 was going to have the ability to go back to all previous areas. The game itself without the CG is so large according to Square-Enix that they can't fit all the areas on the discs to go back to. This limitation also made its way to the PS3, and not because the PS3 couldn't handle it.

So yeah. Square-Enix didn't want to create it so that 360 users had to change discs to go back to areas that were earlier in the game. Honestly. Who wants to enter a town. "Please Insert Disc 1," and then once you leave the town since your current data was on disc 3, "Please Insert Disc 3."

[Bojay1997]

Nothing is beyond the capabilities of a PC. The PS360 are already outdated if you want to put the PC against them.

However. The 360 couldn't really handle Uncharted 2 solely due to the DVD limitation. Uncharted 2 uses the full 25gb of a single layered Bluray.

They could have easily used multiple discs or simply compressed the data further. There is no way that there is 25GB of properly compressed data involved in making Uncharted 2 run and certainly, it's so linear that multiple discs could be used if necessary. I own it and enjoy it, but it isn't some mind blowingly innovative game which only the PS3 can possibly ever run.

[j_factor]

Yeah but what happens when everything within the game are sizes larger than what's on a DVD. I'm not talking about cutscenes. I'm talking about areas you can get back to, multiplayer maps, etc, etc, etc.

For example. Final Fantasy 13 was going to have the ability to go back to all previous areas. The game itself without the CG is so large according to Square-Enix that they can't fit all the areas on the discs to go back to. This limitation also made its way to the PS3, and not because the PS3 couldn't handle it.

So yeah. Square-Enix didn't want to create it so that 360 users had to change discs to go back to areas that were earlier in the game. Honestly. Who wants to enter a town. "Please Insert Disc 1," and then once you leave the town since your current data was on disc 3, "Please Insert Disc 3."

I remember some old computer games were like that (on disk). I think there was a game on Playstation that did that too, but it was only two discs.

[kupomogli]

More FF13 info. These areas were cut from the game with considerations for balance and game volume. I'd take volume as another key to them really saying. "This is really another change made due to make both games alike." I wouldn't be surprised if we see a year or two after the release of FF13 another version of it with all the unincluded extras for the PS3 only.

Wasn't FF13 near completion when the 360 version was to be announced? I wouldn't be surprised if all these cuts are made in the international version since the Japanese are only getting the PS3 version.


Nora, Snow’s hero squad, at one time had a secret base within Lebreau’s shop. A full space was made for Lightning’s home, which included a park. One of the game’s amusement parks also had a zoo too.

These areas were running in an unreleased build of Final Fantasy XIII, but were cut from the final version due to considerations about game balance and game volume. Kamikokuryou says there is enough lost Final Fantasy XIII content was removed to make another title.

http://www.siliconera.com/2010/01/13/noras-secret-base-and-lightnings-home-cut-from-final-fantasy-xiii/

[JunkTheMagicDragon]

For example. Final Fantasy 13 was going to have the ability to go back to all previous areas. The game itself without the CG is so large according to Square-Enix that they can't fit all the areas on the discs to go back to. This limitation also made its way to the PS3, and not because the PS3 couldn't handle it.
link?


I'd take volume as another key to them really saying. "This is really another change made due to make both games alike." I wouldn't be surprised if we see a year or two after the release of FF13 another version of it with all the unincluded extras for the PS3 only.
pretty big assumptions there.

as for the game being cut down, if the series' last incarnation is anything to go by, a little aggressive pruning was in order. kotaku's reporting that ffxii's length is around 60hrs. personally, i was nearly 70hrs into ffxii before i got my first esper. lord knows how long it would have taken to finish. a tighter, more concise game is better than one that overstays its welcome.

aside: how did we get off on this tangent?

[kupomogli]

aside: how did we get off on this tangent?

The 360 being DVD giving limitations to multiconsole titles that would otherwise have had more content on the PS3 version. The FF13 thing is like most known about you hear a new thing being removed everyday.

FF13 was going to be in 1080p. No longer because without a fairly high amount of discs it won't be possible on the 360. No dual audio because it's not on the 360. No going back to certain towns after proceeding further into the game because they're not going to be on every disc on the 360. Graphics compression on the PS3 to the same amount that will be on the 360.

The others were assumptions. But from the fact that FF13 was pretty much done when the 360 version was announced and they announced they wanted each version the same, it's not really so much an assumption rather than that's what they most likely did.

[Ed Oscuro]

aside: how did we get off on this tangent?
It happened at least a week ago. I recall writing that I've read that some games are at the point where data for just one level can approach the size of a DVD - I think that was in relation to one of the Gears of War titles.

Actually, [360 hard drives] ARE proprietary. The connecting port is non-standard, they have a purpose built case that you have to get around one way or another, and yes, you CAN hack your way through, but I for one don't care to muck around with it.
Again, the actual hard drive isn't proprietary. Yeah, probably you'll need to get a cheap 360 hard drive or somebody's broken one to use the shell with, but you're still saving money. I don't begrudge you the convenience of just buying one at Microsoft's extortionate rates, but it doesn't serve other people well to deny that they can do this and to say the hard drive is proprietary when it ain't.

I'll just snip all the useless junk from the middle of this long-ago exchange but I'll note that you're right that the PS3 does allow larger drives than the 360 - as I understand it now (and at the time I wrote my first post) the 360 is limited to taking certain models of hard drive, which should mean that there's no dollar per gigabyte equality for the 360 and PS3 options if the known 360-compatible drives are scarce due to being sought after. If you were looking to upgrade a PS3 to 160 GB, that almost certainly could be done somewhat more cheaply.


2) Cheaper and a pain in the ass. Also, in the grey area legally.
Let's be careful - there seems to be nothing "in the grey area legally" about flashing a hard drive with firmware. Voiding your warranty (which Microsoft needn't know about) or avoiding online play with the newly-flashed drive in place is another issue, but some people are fine with that.

The "extra shame" comment isn't in defense of the 360, but rather a critique of getting notebook drives to begin with for the PS3. Everything I've seen suggests regular desktop drives will work in the PS3 just fine.

[TonyTheTiger]

pretty big assumptions there.

Considering Square Enix's track record, I think the assumption that an FFXIII International or FFXIII+ version will come out eventually is a relatively safe bet. The real assumption is why the cuts were made in the first place. I just get a sneaking suspicion that the 360 doesn't necessarily factor in much at all. It's entirely possible the cuts were made for one of the hundreds of legitimate reasons most cuts are made.

[Bojay1997]

Considering Square Enix's track record, I think the assumption that an FFXIII International or FFXIII+ version will come out eventually is a relatively safe bet. The real assumption is why the cuts were made in the first place. I just get a sneaking suspicion that the 360 doesn't necessarily factor in much at all. It's entirely possible the cuts were made for one of the hundreds of legitimate reasons most cuts are made.

Agreed. My understanding is that what was cut from FFXIII had nothing to do with the 360 and was instead due to some of the dungeons and tangential side quests being far too long and involved and therefore they slowed the game down. The game engine and actual game content of the Final Fantasy games has never been that space intensive, it has always been the pre-rendered movies which take the space. Having said that, I will probably buy the PS3 version simply because I like the convenience of a single disc, but I doubt there will be any other differences or that there was ever anything planned to be in the game that was taken out because of the 360.

[mezrabad]

I would also be more inclined to get the PS3 version if I had a PS3... I didn't know about the multiple disk format for the 360. I hope that being able to install it to the 360's hard drive makes the need to swap disks mute or moot, even, I prefer muted disks, because when they're not muted they always complain.