Ask Engadget HD: Which gaming console suits HD junkies best?
"I've got a satisfactory HDTV now that I enjoy HD programming and Blu-ray movies on, but I'm getting the itch to pick up a console as well. Obviously, the only two out there that can really support HD gaming are the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, though I'm not ruling the Wii out completely. I know the PS3 would seem a no-brainer if I didn't already have a BD player, but removing that from the equation, which is likely to suit the HD lover best?"
Drop those gamepads and get over here -- this fellow needs some advice! Does the gameplay on Nintendo's unit trump the woefully underpowered hardware? Is the Xbox 360 superior to the PS3 graphically? Sound off however you'd like, just keep the fanboy comments to yourself.
Got a burning question that you'd love to toss out for Engadget HD (or its readers) to take a look at? Tired of Google's blank stares when you ask for real-world experiences? Hit us up at ask at engadgethd dawt com and keep an eye on this space -- your inquiry could be next.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
mntwister @ May 28th 2008 11:50AM
Keep the fanboy comments to yourself? This news story is actually an invite to the fanboys who will be all over it.
I have never used an Xbox, and purchased my ps3 to play blu-rays, but now have turned into a gamer too. I love playing games on my PS3, have the 60gb model so I have purchased both PS2 and PS3 games. Games like Ratchet and Clank, Uncharted, Turok, Burnout Paradise are alot of fun, great sound and graphics. I can't say much about the other systems as I have never used them but am very happy playing games on my PS3.
genaldar @ May 28th 2008 7:49PM
If you like Turok it proves you aren't a gamer. That entire franchise is a steaming pile of shit. In fact I'm surprised you didn't suggest Haze.
In all seriousness I own the 360 and the PS3 and live somewhere with a Wii (and 2 other ps3s). Personally I think 360 is the best because their exclusives. GoW beats any of the PS3 exclusives (thus far) fairly handily. Dead Rising is a blast (though very, very hard). You can get Bioshock now, instead of months from now (maybe). Not to mention Halo 3, which while I feel it was a 7, everybody else apparently loves it to death. Ninja Gaiden 2 looks awesome as well. Granted if you love MGS you have to get a ps3. And since most big games come out for both you really have to decide on exclusives.
They both have their drawbacks though. The 360 doesn't have a browser, apparently to keep you from downloading free stuff from the internet. MS charges for damn near everything. Worse though is that you can't search for a game (or demo) unless you've already played it. You have to wade through the entire lists of downloads in each category just to find the demo for an older game. PSN breaks them down alphabetically, which is quite nice. And most of the stuff there is free (except for actual add ons and full games). But if you can't see paying for gamer pictures and wallpapers its great. Of course it stops downloading once you turn off the system meaning it has to stay on for big downloads (hence the popularity of F@H), while the 360 goes into standby to finish your downloads. Of course neither one lets you re-organize your download que, which makes no sense.
The Wii is a completely different animal. If you love games with your friends, in person, it is the one to get. SSBB may be mediocre single player (only reason to play it is to unlock stuff) but is a ton of fun if you have some Nintendo fans from way back playing with you. Ditto Mario Kart, Mario Party, etc. There are some great single player games (No More Heroes, Zelda, Metroid) but the system really is meant as a multiplayer, and family, alternative.
Davsot @ May 29th 2008 8:47PM
@genaldar:
Did u read the part where this is NOT for fanboys? HD reasons
matt @ May 28th 2008 11:57AM
Which gaming console suits HD junkies best? Well HD includes games and movies. I think this is a dumb ass question because ps3 is one only one with blue ray. So to the person that thought this up please kill yourself tonight thanks
Matt @ May 28th 2008 12:00PM
NOTE: This is not the same Matt as immediately below. I actually READ the post before commenting.
Hey! Read the question! He's basically saying, BESIDES Blu Ray playback, which is the better HD experience. Don't make yourself look stupid. Oops, too late.
M Burke @ May 28th 2008 1:00PM
Can't you read?
SimbaDogg @ May 28th 2008 3:39PM
so i'm guessing MGS4 (13 days), Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, Resistance, Motorstorm, COD4, GTA4, Assassins Creed (last three are multiplats, but they still count), Gran Turismo 5 dont count...and dont mind resistance 2, little big planet, socom confrontation, bioshock (its old, but doesn't mean its not good), final fantasy 13, killzone 2, tekken 6 because they'll surely be nothing to sneeze at ::rolls eyes::
Matt @ May 28th 2008 11:57AM
If the criteria here is a great HD experience, than you might as well discount the Wii. Not that it doesn't have some fantastic games and isn't innovative, but it's not going to be an HD experience.
Between the Xbox 360 and PS3, it's really a tossup. Go check out Gamespot's graphics comparisons to give you an idea of how they stack up:
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6191251/index.html?tag=topslot;title;5&om_act=convert&om_clk=topslot
In the end they both offer fantastic graphics. It all depends on the games, really. Some look a little better on the 360, some look a little better on the PS3 and some look identical. Look for games you want to play, whichever system they are on, buy that one.
Morgan Boyle @ May 28th 2008 12:00PM
i dont own any of the systems but i gotta say PS3
you get the BD player built in. and that should make for a cheaper option over xbox 360 and the add-on drive. also, since PS3's player is built in, i assume that it would create a better connection and have less resistence, creating a better signal that probably cant be detected by the human eye, but when you gotta have the best....
the only way i can think the PS3 could be trumped was if xbox 360 offered DTS sound codecs. this is the only true drawback of using a PS3 as your BD player. this was proably just good marking by sony to sell other high end players.
tyba @ May 28th 2008 9:51PM
actually the PS3 does decode the new DTS HD codecs that some Blu-Ray movies use. It was added with a firmware update a few months ago. The only thing the PS3 can't do is bitstream the audio to receivers, it has to decode the signal internally and send the audio as PCM.
Phour ZwanZig @ May 28th 2008 11:17PM
Oh, so you dont read either..
Sorry guys, guess this post was a waste.. Your (sony fanboy) readers cant read..
LEAVE BLUERAY OUT!
looseinthedeuce @ May 28th 2008 12:09PM
This is like asking, "Which potato chip brand suits HD junkies best?" HD junkies aren't necessarily "gaming junkies". And even if they are, the game play differentiates the Wii from the others more than lack of HD (in my opinion). Blu-ray MOVIES are the best way to enjoy HD, but the choice of games and game play should be the reason to pick one console over another.
I got a Wii first, then added Blu-ray to my HTPC. The PS3 was never in the cards, let alone an Xbox. Then again, I'm not as big of a gaming junkie as I am an HD one.
okeygrak @ May 28th 2008 12:11PM
As an owner of all three consoles, I'll try to be as impartial as I can.
When it comes to graphics, I would have to say it is a wash for the PS3/XB360. There are impressive titles for both systems, and it comes down to which exclusive titles you find more desirable.
For an HD media junkie, the PS3 is clearly a better choice. The hardware is far more flexible, and operates quieter and more reliably. The PS3 can be upgraded using an off the shelf 2.5" hard disk, in addition to external USB HD support. There is a built in flash memory reader for many different types, and gigabit ethernet with standard uPnP support for media streaming. The PS3, as well as the XB360, now supports Xvid/Divx playback. You can also encode H264 movies up to 1080p that playback perfectly on the PS3. The upscaling on the PS3 is great, and both standard dvd and divx/xvid play back in great quality.
Where the PS3 truly exceeds as a HD media center, is in the customization. The PS3 support HDMI, true 24P output, and HDMI deep color support. You can output sound over HDMI or Optical, and you can even select which formats should be decoded internally or passed bit stream to the receiver. The PS3 can interally decode DTS-HD, Dolby True-HD, and all the different flavors of uncompressed PCM sound.
A drawback, or advantage according to some, is that the PS3 uses the open bluetooth standard and thus the remote is bluetooth. This allows more flexibility as bluetooth is RF and not IR, but does not allow you to use your venerable Harmony remote. I have heard that there is a usb dongle enabling IR support, but I have not used it.
If your primary interest is primarily gaming, you cannot go wrong with either system. Some still inaccurately portray the PS3 as having a lacking library of games, but if you have a pulse and are a rational human being then you have realized that an amazing amount of material is available for both systems. The XB360 does get the edge if your thing is online gaming and getting corpse tea-bagged by newly pubescent males. At least with the PS3 they had the common sense not to include a headset device to enable everyone to catch a glimpse into the sad state of American adolescence.
andy @ May 28th 2008 12:32PM
Other than leaving out the Media Center Extender aspects of the XBOX 360 and the HD marketplace, that's pretty complete.
It's a dead heat. The PS3 is more open and extendable as you point out, but the XBOX definitely has software that includes many more features and is much easier to use.
Reggie @ May 28th 2008 1:05PM
okeygrak,
Great review appreciate your comments - and the IR2BT does work with the PS3 and the Harmony Remotes so you only need one remote and solves the bluetooth issue. Had mine for a month and it has been perfect.
Reggie
okeygrak @ May 28th 2008 1:54PM
Yes I forget to mention that the Xbox also supports Media Center extender. This is useful if you have a machine with Windows XP Media Center Edition, or Vista Premium / Ultimate. If you have a standalone NAS unit, Mac computer, linux box, you are not 100% supported.
To be honest, the xbox360 and PS3 are still a mile short of XBMC when it comes to HD media center goodness.
The XBMC project is now mature on Linux / OSX and is coming along nicely for windows. There is simply no other platform as comprehensive as XBMC, which supports nearly every network sharing protocol, video and audio codec, and pretty much every thing else you can throw at it.
It is mature, stable, and has an excellent customizable GUI.
So if you are craving the utlimate HD media center experience, and gaming is not important, skip the consoles and buy yourself a used mac mini or build a nice low power micro-itx linux machine. You will end up spending more, but in the end you will have a fully functional machine that supports anything you throw at it and is constantly evolving and maturing with the support of hundreds of open source developers. I just don't see any large bloated corporation tied to the music/movie industry developing even half what XBMC is.
Kevin G @ May 29th 2008 1:28AM
just to add to your excellent review:
sony didn't have to include a headset, any bluetooth headset works with the PS3, just like a cellphone. :)
James @ May 28th 2008 12:12PM
I currently have a PS3 and Xbox 360 and I had a Wii at one point but got tired of it really quickly so I sold it for $400 and bought a PS3 (primarily for Blu-Ray). The one system that I couldn't be without right now is the 360 because of the Media Center Extender functionality. Also, most of my friends only have a 360 so I end up buying most games that are on both platforms on the 360. Xbox Live definitely beats what PS3 has to offer in online gaming if that's your thing.
The only games I have for the PS3 are Uncharted (awesome game!) and Resistance: Fall of Man. Both are just for the PS3 and are the only games I've purchased since getting my PS3 in December. It's primarily been a $400 movie player for me but since I didn't actually pay $400 for it (paid $250 for my Wii and essentially traded it for a PS3) it's not so bad.
cclaunch @ May 28th 2008 12:13PM
I own a 360, but have zero experience with the PS3. I think the most important thing to look at is the available games. Check out the exclusives on both sides, see which game makers tend to make the exclusive games that you like. In thinking of "HD junkies" one thing I would not like about the PS3 is its lack of an IR sensor (i.e. standard universal remotes will not work with it out of the box).
1stGreg @ May 28th 2008 12:14PM
Well, I think even if we put the Blu Ray aside (main reason I picked it for), I would still probably pick a PS3, for its integrated WiFi and looks, which makes it hold its own next to my 50" TV in the living room :)
Other than that, the games I have tried (demos from the PSN) were very satisfactory, I bought DMC4 as a cheap pre-owned and the Gfx were excellent, so the HD experience satisfies, even beside Blu Ray :)
Waiting on WipEout HD for my next game, even if MGS4 looks more and more tempting as well.
Also, the mpeg4 files I watch and the mp3 I play all streamed from my PC make of this an amazing multimedia HD platform.
Now on the Blu Ray chapter, playback is excellent, even if I still lack a recent receiver to take advantage of the LPCM output.
DrXym @ May 28th 2008 12:19PM
The PS3 for most things, the 360 for a few others.
The PS3 is quiet, plays media from the HDD, external drives or via streaming (DLNA and via built-in web browser), does DIVX / AVC, DVD, Blu Ray, HDMI 1.3, MP3/WMA/AAC, etc. It also has wifi which is a boon if you don't want ethernet cable running to your TV. The use of industry standards makes it easy to whip out the HDD and stick something more substantial in. The PlayTV device will turn the PS3 into a PVR for DVB-T content. Sony keep alluding to some kind of video download service but nothing has appeared yet.
The 360 has downloadable movies but cannot play ripped movies from its HDD, only via streaming or external devices. It's also meant to be pretty noisy. The 360 is being used as IPTV in some field trials.
The Wii doesn't do any kind of HD or DVD playback so it is completely irrelevant. Even its support for MP3 playback went the way of the dodo recently. It's only a games console.
Darryl @ May 28th 2008 12:19PM
Pick the one that has the games you want to play.
I personally have all three, PS3 is primarily a blu ray player, 360 for games I will buy games on the 360 over the PS3 so I can collect achievements.
The Wii doesn't really get used much.
Devils Advocate @ May 28th 2008 12:23PM
360 has the better games and GTAIV on the 360 is preferred due to the downloadable content.
However, when it comes to other uses the PS3 wins hand down.
If we were judging the consoles strictly from a gaming perspective, the 360 wins hands down, although the PS3 will catch up once Resistance 2 and Killzone 2 comes out.
However, when using the console for home entertainment PS3 wins hands down.
At this time, Id have to call it a tie.
As for the Wii. Its not even an HD machine!!!
Reapman @ May 28th 2008 12:32PM
I have a PS3 and a Wii hooked up to my HDTV. The Wii is out of the equation I think in this since we're not talking about who has the best games. I prefer the PS3 because of BD but also because of it's other media options. I server music and movies from Mediatomb running on my Linux Server. Getting that operational took very little time (maybe an hour or two including server install) Folding@Home I find is quite impressive to "show off" your TV, and the PSP Integration with RemotePlay is pretty nifty too, especially since you no longer have to leave your PS3 on all the time.
I imagine since you have a BD Player already, either PS3 or 360 would make you happy, but personally I'd go PS3 for all of it's media integration.
Andy Anonymous @ May 28th 2008 12:36PM
The Wii isn't HD, so if we're going strictly by the question's parameters, you can leave that one out. However, the Wii's not expensive and has some good games, so it's definitely something you should consider picking up down the line in addition to whatever you buy now.
When it comes to PS3 vs. Xbox 360, I really have to recommend the 360. As of right now it very simply has a much better library of games. In addition to the games they both have, such as GTA4 and Call of Duty 4, the Xbox 360 has Mass Effect, BioShock (PS3 is getting this as well but not for awhile yet), Gears of War and the upcoming Gears of War 2, Lost Odyssey, Halo 3, the upcoming Too Human, and a large number of other exclusive titles that really flex their HD muscle. The only really great exclusive title the PS3 is getting in the near future is Metal Gear Solid 4.
Plus, the Xbox 360 has Gamertags and Achievement points, which automatically track your accomplishments in all your games -- an option not found on PS3 versions of the same titles.
SimbaDogg @ May 28th 2008 3:58PM
as a halo fan, i'm very very very surprised you referred to halo 3, and not halo 1 and 2. its to no surprise that a lot of people refer to halo 3 as umm, galo. people on xbox live are pretty brutal
J.Goodwin @ May 28th 2008 12:36PM
I have both a PS3 and 360, and I prefer playing games on the 360. The media playback on the PS3 is, in general, broken. The Media Center extender features on the 360 are similarly lacking, but streaming video to the 360's dashboard works great, and it's a lot less temperamental when it comes to loading up media from usb keys etc.
I have the 360 connected to my LCD via D-sub, and DVD upscaling is very good, and it is less finicky about things like loading PAL DVDs (as long as they aren't region coded they work, whereas on the PS3 they fail, as they do on my HD-DVD player).
I preferred HD-DVD, but it's just a fact that we're in a blu-ray world now, and that was probably the foreordained conclusion since Sony owns about 1/3 of all movie content at this point through their various subsidiaries. As a blu-ray player, PS3 does it's job, and as a games machine, it manages to hold the line with 360 in terms of the most basic functionality. It's online features such as friends lists, messaging, voice chat across games, cross-game messaging and invites, streaming audio to replace in-game soundtracks etc are either non-existent or totally broken at the moment. System updates and other network features are very slow, I typically download them on my PC and put them on a memory stick rather than wait for the PS3 to do whatever the hell it's doing because it's just much faster.
For a console that came out a year later than the 360, the PS3 has spent a lot of time and effort playing catch-up, which is a major disappointment given the way that it was advertised and anticipated to be a major advance.
If you want to play games, and you have friends in remote places that you want to play them with, and you're used to custom soundtracks etc, than the 360 is your machine, and you very probably already have one. The depth of the games library is superior in almost every way, and major cross platform titles often come to the 360 weeks or months earlier than they do PS3. Of course you also have some exceptions, if you're a Metal Gear fan, then you want a PS3, and if you're accustomed to Sony's character action franchises, you've also already made your choice, just as you would have to pick up a Wii if you intended to play the newest Mario or Zelda game. Likewise, if you're a fan of Team Ninja's games (Dead or Alive franchise, Ninja Gaiden), or Turn 10 (Forza Motorsport) or Molyneux (Fable), or Rare (Banjo Kazooie, Viva Pinata) then you really should have a 360.
PS3 so far has largely failed to deliver on the gaming revolution that it promised. 360 was an evolution of what they had succeeded at with the Xbox, and has generally been a success on all those fronts (digital distribution, streaming online video rentals, online and community features, etc).
Fortunately at this point the consoles are starting to build up independent libraries of their own that make it easier to choose one over the other based on franchises. When the PS3 was just a late-ports monster there was a lot less to recommend it gamewise.
Jimmy @ May 28th 2008 12:45PM
A lot of people on here have said that the 360 is the best for games. I look at this differently. When I look at the exclusives on PS3 and the 360 I realized that the PS3 exclusives were truly exclusive. You could not play them anywhere else. Most of the 360 exclusives that I am interested in I can play on my window's PC.
Also, I do not like paying for the Live service. It does have some advantages and is a slick interface. However, dealing with 4 million screaming teenagers does not make my gaming experience more fun.
Finally, the PS3 is significantly less noisy than the 360.
ZeitgeistXIII @ May 28th 2008 1:13PM
A lotof people want XBL for free. I think that if that happened then we would never have any recourse for failures in service. You get what you pay for and free is free because its done on the cheap. PS3 is free and it does not work nearly as well so its not too tought to figure out.
As for the little kids that play its pretty funny that no one seems to remeber when they were the same age and most likely considered pretty obnoxious in their own ways. (skateboard on busy sidewalks anyone?) The easiest way to fix it if it bothers you that much ischange your settings to mute those that are not friends as a preffered setting.
A nice update would be able to filter out users by age brackets and see if that helped. I relaize that some kids use Mom and Dads settings but still not all of them would.
JBDragon @ May 30th 2008 12:22AM
Sure a lot of the Xbox 360 Exclusives aren't exclusives because they come out on the PC, but they normally come out on the PC at a much later date, and you of course need a decent PC to play the game on, not to mention your not getting gamer points and achievements. Besides I like to sit on the Sofa and game on my 50" Plasma in Surround sound, then my 19" LCD and Stereo speakers on my older PC. Games are expensive to make these days, and the time when Games are exclusive to only one system is almost gone. The PS3 lost a lot of exclusives, most are Multi-Platform, and so even with all that extra Blu-Ray disc space, it all goes to waste because they aren't going to add a bunch of extra content for the PS3 version. I'd rather play the game on the 360 over the PC by far, so to me it's 360 Exclusive, and it's still not on the PS3 or Wii! For those Multi-Platform games, the 360 version is still better.
Phawx @ May 28th 2008 12:59PM
I would say, goto a store that has a kiosk setup and try out the controllers. Whichever one you feel comfortable with is the one you choose.
360 has a larger game library right now but their is a rumor of a price cut coming soon, so I would say wait for that at least. I prefer 3D games in all forms better on the 360 just because the analog stick is in a comfortable position for it. Think Assassin's Creed, where slightly pushing the thumbstick makes the charecter walk slowly. Xbox 360's controller feels better for analog controls. I prefer the 360's online pay though you have to pay for it. and Achievements are fun. This is my opinion.
PS3 is a nice system. But I like it better for direct input games. Think Tekken/JRPG. PS3 has FREE online play which makes it very easy to just jump in. PS3 also comes equipped with a lot of standard consumer upgrades. Like if you wanted to upgrade your HDD you can do it yourself and don't have to buy proprietary equipment.
The Wii is a really fun system, but Nintendo is the only one making software to care about.
Andy Anonymous @ May 28th 2008 1:01PM
As a follow-up to my recommendation above, I just want to give a bit of advice, and I can't stress this enough: CHOOSE A SYSTEM BASED ON GAMES, NOT GRAPHICS.
I own all three current game consoles. I have to say that while nice HD graphics are certainly awe-inspiring and definitely desirable, most games only give me about 15 minutes of "wow" time looking at the graphics when I play them for the first time. After that, as I get more immersed, I generally stop noticing the graphics very much, and it becomes a question of how much fun the game is to play. Even on some of the good looking Wii games like Super Mario Galaxy, I stop even noticing that they aren't in HD once I start having fun just playing.
If you're the sort who's looking for eye candy to show off your rig to friends, then buy an Xbox 360 or PS3 -- it doesn't matter which -- and whichever titles look best on those consoles. If you actually want to play the games and get enjoyment out of them, my advice is to look at the game library for each console and make your choice based on that.
MrLuna @ May 28th 2008 1:07PM
I understand most people on EngadgetHD own a PS3 mainly due to blu-ray and most dont have Xbox360s, well look at the question well before answering.
Can you download HD movies/TVshows/Music Videos from PS3? No, that's besides Arcade games, game videos, HDDVD support.
Considering he already has a stand-alone Blu-ray player, Xbox 360 will allow you to:
- Download HD/SD Movies and TV shows
- HD/SD Music Videos
- A bigger selection of downloadable games with XBL Arcade
- Streaming Netflix video using Media Center
- Streaming HD Content (Videos, movies, pictures) from your computer
- He already has Blu-ray, he would now be have the OPTION to add HDDVD also for legacy movies at really cheap price ($40 tops for the player, some places $19.99 and only $5.99 for HDDVD movies)
- Multiplatform games that are TRULY HD and not 640p like GTA4 on the PS3.
The guy asking the question already has a stand-alone Blu-ray player, so for anything extra in the HD department the Xbox360 truly outpaces the PS3. Sure the PS3 is a bit more open, but what can you do with all that extra HDD space and TrueHD audio? stream Divx movies? Xbox can do the latter.
SimbaDogg @ May 28th 2008 4:54PM
just about every point you brought up is somewhat flawed...
"- Download HD/SD Movies and TV shows
- HD/SD Music Videos
"- A bigger selection of downloadable games with XBL Arcade"
without a doubt, def debatable. there are tons of downloaded games, and not just the arcade type, for the ps3. the point of the ps3 was never to be a source of cheap/small downloadable games
"- Streaming Netflix video using Media Center"
really? since when...or are you saying movies downloaded to your comp can be streamed to ur xbox...if so i think any other DLNA device would work, including the ps3
"- Streaming HD Content (Videos, movies, pictures) from your computer"
same thing...
"- He already has Blu-ray, he would now be have the OPTION to add HDDVD also for legacy movies at really cheap price ($40 tops for the player, some places $19.99 and only $5.99 for HDDVD movies)"
this is def something you could do...but picking up a hd dvd add on for 20 bucks, and whats left through retailers on hd dvd is not bargain hunting IMO. what happens if that drive were to fail, even if you only spent 20 bucks on it, and 10 bucks for 10 movies. Either find another on ebay years down the road (who knows what the price would be) or kiss your 120 investment goodbye. not my cup of tea...
"- Multiplatform games that are TRULY HD and not 640p like GTA4 on the PS3."
sounds like your bias is coming in, this may have been the fact with some games, but because they're multiplats it shows its a problem w/ the developer, not the console. THINK about it...if exclusive titles can run 1080p @ 30fps...and even 60fps on some titles, it shows that the hardware id def capable of it.
"The guy asking the question already has a stand-alone Blu-ray player, so for anything extra in the HD department the Xbox360 truly outpaces the PS3. Sure the PS3 is a bit more open, but what can you do with all that extra HDD space and TrueHD audio? stream Divx movies? Xbox can do the latter."
?
Chris @ May 28th 2008 5:56PM
I call Fanboy on Simbdogg, all of his post do is cherry pick apart Xbox 360 statements.
Nfinity @ May 29th 2008 3:32AM
Chris, and Simba is not even right..
Mr Luna..once again a super wonderful post. Everything you wrote is dead on and shows again superiority in media capabilities of Xbox 360 over PS3.
Netflix through Windows Media Center is superb and the amount of plugins that work with Media Center and are totally accessible through Xbox 360.
DivX is supported so all the support on PS3 is available on Xbox 360 plus not only that but Xbox 360 communicates DIRECTLY with shared drives on your network, something that PS3 doesn't do. You have to define shared folders through Windows Media Player on PCs for example to get access on PS3. Sloppy solution to say the least.
M Burke @ May 28th 2008 1:07PM
I got a 360 Elite. I purchased it specifically as a media extender first, and as a console second. I was surprised, however that I found myself, normally a PC gamer, playing many games on the Xbox 360 and being astounded at the graphics. I was very impressed by Ghost Recon 2 as an example.
The media streaming, using TVersity works fantastic. I can grab missed episodes of favorite TV programs from Usenet and stream them to the HDTV hooked up to the Xbox. I'm not to fond of the the Microsoft Live Gold stuff, but the rest of the functionality is spot-on.
I've heard the PS3 has similar media functionality, plus the BD player, which might make it comparable. I, for one, have no use for the BD player yet, nor did I buy the HD player for the 360. I've only used the PS3 in-store and while impressed with the graphics on the games displayed, Sony just never has grabbed my enthusiasm with its policies, expensive hardware, and the like.
If you want out-of-the-box streaming of existing or downloaded media, I'd lean toward the Xbox... but I wouldn't do so without checking out the current state of the PS3's media/streaming and BD player capabilities.
Steve @ May 28th 2008 1:09PM
I own both XBOX 360 and Playstation 3. Both consoles are great, If you have a 1080p HDTV, no doubt the Playstation 3 as the interface was design 1080p in mind whereas XBOX 360 was design in 720p. There are more games in 1080p on the PS3 whereas there's only a few on 360... PS3 feels more futuristic and better quality. I already had to replace my 360, upgraded to an Elite. There are a lot of great exclusive games on the PS3, same goes with the 360... I feel the quality of the PSN games are little better then the XLA games.
Ovrerall, I would pick the PS3.
john nemesh @ May 28th 2008 1:10PM
I actually own both, although I have had the 360 for a year longer. I am not particularly loyal to either platform, I use both on a daily basis. So, no fanboy bias, just the facts and honest impressions!
First, you should know that most GAMES on either platform support 720p or less. VERY few games put out a full 1080p playable resolution. While I have heard of a game or two natively supporting 1080p on the XBOX (I think a tennis game came out that did this, and a couple Live Arcade games will have 1080p (2D graphics only), the PS3 seems to have more raw horsepower available, with new 3D games like Wipeout HD, Super Stardust HD and Gran Turismo supporting full 1080p graphics just to name a few. Sony has the edge for graphics, but ONLY when the developers make a concerted effort to make the most of the PS3's hardware...multi-platform games typically look the same with a slight edge to the 360.
Both the Xbox and the PS3 have online storefronts for selling games. Microsoft has a different approach than Sony for downloadable games, keeping tight control over the content and keeping the games small. Sony on the other hand, is trying to push digital downloads as the future of game distribution and offers MAJOR titles such as SOCOM, Warhawk, and Wipeout HD as direct downloads, as well as smaller, causal games.
Xbox has a big advantage in Multiplayer games. If you like to game online, Xbox live has a huge advantage over Sony in infrastructure. More reliable game connections and better matchmaking are hallmarks of Microsoft's Live service.
While Xbox has had movie and TV downloads (many in HD), Sony will be adding a similar service this summer. Keep in mind, that compared to Blu-Ray, video downloads look pretty grainy in comparison (at least the videos on XBOX Live.
Sony also provides a web browser, that, while not perfect will let you view web pages with streaming video such as youtube.
Sony also has the advantage of letting you upgrade the hard drive using a standard 2.5" drive. You can easily pop in a 120 or even 250gb drive for cheap. The Xbox requires a proprietary HDD that will cost you $$$.
Overall, I think the PS3 shows more "polish" than the Xbox. It has better hardware, quieter operation, better reliability, a Blu-Ray drive, native 1080p support for games, and less proprietary hardware.
Xbox is a great platform, and has more games, since its been out a year longer. Microsoft really has come up from behind this generation and Sony is playing catch up. Make no mistake however, Sony is in it to win, and I will bet that you will see the online offerings of Sony improve quite a bit before the year is out.
M Burke @ May 28th 2008 1:10PM
One more thing... if you do happen to get a 360, DO NOT, i mean DO NOT move the unit while a disc is playing.
WordSlinger @ May 28th 2008 1:13PM
Well, I do not own a 360, so I cannot speak from experience, but I've heard a lot of good things about using it to rent movies and playback streaming video from your PC network. Not to mention, you can get an HD-DVD drive for it for super-cheap now. Sure, the format is dead, but you can get some really cheap add-ons to your collection and it's not as though the drive is useless besides HD-playback.
As for video comparison, 360/PS3 are a wash from everything I've seen. Even with side-by-side video comparisons you may only notice a few dropped frames or minor artifacting here and there depending on the game, and even then they will likely not be noticable at all when playing at home. The Wii offers nothing comparable for video playback.
My Wii and PS3 are hooked up to a 50" Sony SXRD and admittedly both look great, but the PS3 looks much much better. The Wii maxes out at 480p.
@ J. Goodwin... my friends lists and messaging system work fine, but you're right, the other features on non-existant right now.
So far, I have no major complaints about my PS3. The only minor ones I have is the slow download times for firmware updates and the lack of DLC for cross-platform games. If you don't have one now, I would recommend the 80 GB if you can find it as it still offers backwards compatiability through software emulation. I was lucky and got a launch system (60GB, though I removed the HDD and replaced it with a 300GB one) The Wi-Fi setup works great, the online service is free (360 is what? $50 a year? no biggie, but free is nice), you can use it as media hub and stream video from your PC, Linux-compatible, and built in 2.0 Blu-Ray playback. Not a bad system at all.
lakersin2025 @ May 28th 2008 1:20PM
PS3 for sure. If you want to play an HD movie from the xbox it is so damn load you have to crank the volume to hear the movie.
XDragon @ May 28th 2008 1:32PM
HD Games:
either 360 or PS3 as niether has shown to be significantly better for quality yet. The more important issue is that you can play the games you're interested in so I believe that the library with more games you like is the right answer.
HD Movies:
PS3 takes it for Blu-Ray play back(I know it basically says to ignore Blu-Ray) because the PS3 is capable of delivering the same offerings as the 360 via downloads and streaming. At last count, I believe the PS3 had more codecs available for playback but I may be incorrect about that. Presently the 360 is limited to HDD storage which is a limiting factor.
Wii dosen't do anything for an HD experience as it only supports 480p so its odd to include it as part of the question. I have nothing against the Wii, I'm only saying I don't consider 480p as HD.
In the end the overall experience is simply determined by the amount of usage you get from gaming and movies. PS3 will have a larger movie library thanks to Blu-Ray and the 360 has a larger game library.
My choice it the PS3 because of the few games I want that aren't on the 360 and because I want the bigger movie library more than the 360 exclusive games. But remember that I spend a lot more time watching movies than playing games so that is a heavy influence on my decision.
LilTmac2003 @ May 28th 2008 1:45PM
I get what your saying, I actually agree. Not to bash or anything...
But the GAMING console you prefer is the PS3 beacuse it has more MOVIES than the 360, which has more GAMES?
HD MOVIES on a DISK, goes to PS3.... Majority of everything else is pointing towards the 360.
XDragon @ May 28th 2008 3:38PM
I was saying I'd prefer to have more movies then 360 exclusive games because I watch movies much more than I play games.
The 360 clearly has more games and more exclusive games but I like more of the PS3 exclusive games even though there aren't many. Its just preference, I'm not trying to bash or priase either.
The 360 also wins in online gaming but you have to pay for it. Again it comes to preference; if you don't need all of Live's features or you don't play online much then the PS3 lets you play for free.
There is no real answer to this question, its all just what's better for you based on what you need and like.
Nfinity @ May 28th 2008 1:32PM
Xbox 360 is the only logical choice based on technical specifications that offers superior graphical processing, HD online service and largest library of incredible games. These are all facts that many fanboys can't seem to accept.
In PS3s defense you have Cell processing that might eventually allow better physics processing, smoother animations of objects or bigger crowds but unfortunately for many PS3 owners this won't affect your HD experience and is pretty questionable whether or not PS3s RSX GPU will be able to process those physics results in the best light. In general Xbox 360 is also able to provide this, but PS3 is stronger in this regard on paper.
There is a very good explanation why Xbox 360 GPU is strong. It's a masterpiece in engineering and is in essence a ATI's R600 chipset that is actually faster the 8800GTX cards but is somewhat slower then R600 because Microsoft chose to cut down 1 shader containing 16 pipelines to lower costs.
On the other hand RSX GPU in PS3 is more of an equivalent to Nvidia's 7800GTX card so the difference in both console's abilities in graphics processing is quite big between Xbox 360 and PS3.
Blu-Ray aspect of PS3 is still unproven. With market at 2-3% when compared to DVD market simply says that this HD standard is still not accepted. sales numbers dropping for Blu-Ray and recession it's still uncertain whether or not Blu-Ray will manage to establish itself as a standard. On the other hand you can see that most of these entertainment devices are pushing digital downloads and have HD content as well. Xbox 360 in that regard is again superior to PS3.
But let's not get into that. You are asking about HD processing and the fact is that for proper processing you need the graphics power to do it right. In this, Xbox 360 is clearly superior.
Overall if you consider digital downloads to be the future and have seen how great Xbox Live Video Marketplace is, you want to play some of the best games of next generation consoles at their best quality, Xbox 360 should be your choice because this time around Microsoft has done a great job thinking everything through and providing both service and hardware to provide you with maximum experience from movies and tv shows and HD content to games.
If you wish to know more FACTS about both consoles and make your own decision I strongly encourage you to read this 11 page technical and unbiased explanation of both systems that will answer many of your questions.
Full article here:
http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=1
and specifically explanation of both GPUs (PS3 and Xbox 360) here:
http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=1
Don't be a typical fanboy and actually read everything. It will make you more educated about the matter.
Nfinity @ May 28th 2008 1:36PM
My other link didn't take so it pasted the same as the first one.
Here's the GPU explanation here:
RSX (PS3GPU) & Xenos (360GPU) technical comparisons:
http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=7
jsn @ May 28th 2008 2:45PM
Nfinity: Perfectly stated and completely fair from a gaming standpoint.
I would like to add some comments about the media capabilities. While both consoles have the ability to allow you to stream media from PC's, the 360 currently has better codec support and can also act as a Media Center extender, which gives you the nice 10ft interface for music, movies, pictures and even television streaming. Oh and don't forget all the plugins you can get (browser, weather, youtube, etc etc etc etc).
Not to mention the movie download service on Xbox Live. They have HD and SD movies as well as TV shows, music performances, etc. They have a lot of content and are always adding more.
To sum it up:
Gaming = 360
HD Movie player = PS3 (blu-ray, naturally, but the XBL movie service prevents it from being a total wash)
Media streaming = 360 - again, better codec support, MCE capabilities and IPTV support in the future.
Cost = 360. It's also due for another price cut which will only tip things in its favor even more.
SimbaDogg @ May 28th 2008 5:10PM
i think this is the first time ever i've read a comment from you, and not low ranked it. you seemed to be almost 100% objective in this post w/out an bias. which is why i neither low ranked nor high ranked you
but seriously, think about this...if hd downloads were really the future....do you really think a 20 gig HD is going to cut it in the premium model? even a 120 gig hd isn't all that impressive. i'm sorry...but it just doesn't add up to me. even some of the movies i have on my computer that are 720 (transformers) clock in at 8.5 gigs. so we're talking about any given point of time being able to have maybe 8-15 movies tops, in combination with a handful of episodes of any tv shows that you might download. your def going to be screwed if they're longer 42 min shows like lost or heroes, prison break etc...(all about 1.1-1.3 gigs each)
Nfinity @ May 28th 2008 6:03PM
i think this is the first time ever i've read a comment from you, and not low ranked it. you seemed to be almost 100% objective in this post w/out an bias. which is why i neither low ranked nor high ranked you
Simba,
I think about it a lot.. I work a lot closely with many media providers. I know what plans are for most of them.
I like to spit on Blu-Ray just to get fanboys riled up a bit. I like when people take things to personally online ;). But in reality we know that Blu-Ray will probably stay available and won't dissappear anytime soon.
The problem is that it might not reach mainstream as intended but that's quite alright. People who like optical media will probably be able to get stuff on it. We know that studios will release movies, if nothing the latest ones in the theaters. But the future of entertainment is indeed digital downloads, everybody can tell you this. That's why we see a surge of these devices and services. Bandwith and online thing is not really a problem. Don't even doubt it. Where there's money they will make it work and they already are. The biggest enemy of digital downloads is in fact non-standardization. The competition is getting really really heated. We see already even 1080p content hitting the digital download services and we can expect pricing to go down. All studios are on board. BUT it's a war that all of them are fighting. Who will be the standard for digital downloads. Someone wants that Apple thrown they have in MP3 music downloads. It's a huge market.
Microsoft's does things for their own interest too. There's no doubt about that. So when they started off with 20gb hard drive, they didn't really have 100% confirmation what will happen,especially since that was 2 years ago or more. As time passed by, they saw that Blu-Ray will most likely be late for mainstream adoption, so they were more clear that digital downloads, the path they wanted, was secured. This is where we can pretty much say that they did indeed cheer for format war to continue so they can establish their system and more or less they got what they wanted. Recession was just cream on top that secure Blu-Ray not succeeding for at least another 2 years. Bullseye.
They release HDDs like they do to make money. No doubt about that. They pretty much monopolize the accessory you want to buy, but that's something you can't blame them for. Every company does that. Sony does it with Blu-Ray, Microsoft does it with hard drives. The fact is that you will buy new hard drive anyway even for your PS3, but Microsoft is saying, well why don't we get people to buy OUR hard drives too. It's simple business. You are not really getting ripped off per-se (though to some extent you might be as $180 for 120gb is indeed high) but it is safe to assume that it will go down. 250gb 2.5" notebook drive is what about $150-$200? So Microsoft is indeed overcharging for htat but you get a better deal if you get a console already with it. But let's not get into that.
The problem with xbox live marketplace is that Microsoft closed up hard drives was because of copy protection not just their business sense to make money. I find this approach very bad to be honest and hope that they will change their practice because I want to be able to copy movies and stuff but if you look at iPods and what Apple did, they obviously copied that model.
This of course has very little to do with overall state of digital downloads. Just pay attention to Engadget news about these services and you will notice that it's getting more aggressive among companies. I think this was also was sped up by the fact that everyone sees that Blu-Ray is kind of slow in adoption and now everybody want's a piece of the next big thing.
I tried Vudu at 1080p and 5.1 DD+ sound and I can tell you that I'm even more confident that we will see digital HD downloads sooner then later.