there is no Ocarina of Time, there is no physical way it is better, that is all
back on the topic i prefer the Xbox over the PS3, i don't need bluray, the community is as a whole better imo, and i like the feel of the controllers better, and more of my friends have Live, sure you have to pay for live but i just like it over PSN, if just for the community
Only thing I must say as a coder. PS3 titles tend to be worse than Xbox counterparts as the Xbox is easier to code for. Most game makers don't spend the time to make it work for both system properly. They simply port it over and it doesn't work as well as the Xbox counterpart.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I do a fair amount of PMC building, and other stuff, like Imgur! Be sure to check out my builds!
I said LIVE was obviously better, but made points about M$'s greedy money-sucking.
Both controllers are great. PS3 has retarded trigger/bumper things, XBOX has a bad D-pad. PS3 supports most USB devices that have a practical use with it, XBOX most likely does not. Move is basically a great improvement on the Wii, and has some pretty decent titles. Kinect is cool and all, but unless you're looking at homebrew, there's nothing very special (correct me if I'm wrong).
I prefer the Playstation controller, but bought an XBox anyway, because it was about $200, including the Kinect. At the time I was comparing it to a ~$100 networked BluRay player (to have Netflix). The PS3 was hardly a consideration, because it wasn't about gaming.
Kinect is great for Netflix, which is what I use my XBox for the majority of the time. The gaming capability is there on the big screen, but I rarely use it. I like using voice commands mostly, the room is always too dark to bother trying to control with motion.
Consoles are cheaper for the price. Most good gaming computers are $800+, whereas consoles are somewhere between $200-$400. So consoles usually strike the better deal even though the computer can be better.
Most good gaming computers are made to run games made to run on good gaming computers. A game like Skyrim that was ported from the console to the PC doesn't require a $800 gaming computer. Also...can I play EvE on a console, or a real MMORPG? I prefer keyboard/mouse for shooters, so the only thing left for a console is sports games, of which I only play football games, and that's hardly worth the consideration for. I got Madden '10 for $10 at a pawn shop, so I'm good for a few years.
The article provided seems biased, but maybe I'm just not looking at it from a gaming perspective. The main draw for the PS3 is the BluRay drive, which I don't need until I get a better TV (older model 51" projection screen). The rest is opinion-based. Gaming may be better with the "Move" controllers, but they are an additional expense. And as mentioned, my XBox was $300 -$100 gift card, so essentially $200.
When ever people argue about what console is better, I jump into the conversation and say "PC beats both 360 and PS3." They don't say anything after that because they know I'm right.
I'd like to say something, as an owner of a good PC, PS3, and Xbox 360.
I have noticed that many games look better on PC than their console counterparts, if you have the computer to run it. But, if you look at just the two consoles, I see no difference when it comes to graphics. At the end of the day though, I'm playing the game because I enjoy it, not because it looks pretty, (though, looking nice doesn't hurt).
I have no issues with either consoles controller design. My PS3 controller that I've had for 4 years works just fine. My Xbox controller works just fine.
Xbox Live is certainly more stable, but I've never had an serious problems with the Playstation Network other than it occasionally signs out when I'm playing single player. Seeing as I'm playing offline, single player, that doesn't bother me.
Is one console better than the other? Not that I've really noticed. Both are decent, and both do what they were meant to do. Even if PCs can do it better.
there is no Ocarina of Time, there is no physical way it is better, that is all
back on the topic i prefer the Xbox over the PS3, i don't need bluray, the community is as a whole better imo, and i like the feel of the controllers better, and more of my friends have Live, sure you have to pay for live but i just like it over PSN, if just for the community
i5-4690K @4.6GHz ~ ASRock Z97X Fatal1ty Killer ~ EKWB Supremacy MX ~ Watercooled SLI STRIX 970s
Project RedShift
indeed
PC>All
Nintendo 64 makes a pc look like ****
Pfffft atari 2600 is better
Lol I want to get on a creative server now and pixel art nintendo 64 ****
pfftemulators.
that is what I said...
I prefer the Playstation controller, but bought an XBox anyway, because it was about $200, including the Kinect. At the time I was comparing it to a ~$100 networked BluRay player (to have Netflix). The PS3 was hardly a consideration, because it wasn't about gaming.
Kinect is great for Netflix, which is what I use my XBox for the majority of the time. The gaming capability is there on the big screen, but I rarely use it. I like using voice commands mostly, the room is always too dark to bother trying to control with motion.
Most good gaming computers are made to run games made to run on good gaming computers. A game like Skyrim that was ported from the console to the PC doesn't require a $800 gaming computer. Also...can I play EvE on a console, or a real MMORPG? I prefer keyboard/mouse for shooters, so the only thing left for a console is sports games, of which I only play football games, and that's hardly worth the consideration for. I got Madden '10 for $10 at a pawn shop, so I'm good for a few years.
The article provided seems biased, but maybe I'm just not looking at it from a gaming perspective. The main draw for the PS3 is the BluRay drive, which I don't need until I get a better TV (older model 51" projection screen). The rest is opinion-based. Gaming may be better with the "Move" controllers, but they are an additional expense. And as mentioned, my XBox was $300 -$100 gift card, so essentially $200.
Pft emulators doesn't really apply if the game wouldn't exist without the console.
i5-4690K @4.6GHz ~ ASRock Z97X Fatal1ty Killer ~ EKWB Supremacy MX ~ Watercooled SLI STRIX 970s
Project RedShift
I have noticed that many games look better on PC than their console counterparts, if you have the computer to run it. But, if you look at just the two consoles, I see no difference when it comes to graphics. At the end of the day though, I'm playing the game because I enjoy it, not because it looks pretty, (though, looking nice doesn't hurt).
I have no issues with either consoles controller design. My PS3 controller that I've had for 4 years works just fine. My Xbox controller works just fine.
Xbox Live is certainly more stable, but I've never had an serious problems with the Playstation Network other than it occasionally signs out when I'm playing single player. Seeing as I'm playing offline, single player, that doesn't bother me.
Is one console better than the other? Not that I've really noticed. Both are decent, and both do what they were meant to do. Even if PCs can do it better.
well, this threads over
i5-4690K @4.6GHz ~ ASRock Z97X Fatal1ty Killer ~ EKWB Supremacy MX ~ Watercooled SLI STRIX 970s
Project RedShift
Sorry, I couldn't help but ruin everyone's fun. It was just too tempting.
Well I guess he just *puts on glasses*
Boxed this thread up!
YEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
"PC R BEST CAUSE IT R HAV GUD GRAFICS NUBS."
Welcome to the Minecraft forums. If the only reason you like PC gaming is the improved visuals you're just embarassing.
Someone gets it! Astounding!