Print

[Xbox-Scene]

Microsoft responds to Latest 360 vs PS3 Multi-Platform Comparison Posted by XanTium | March 4 22:58 EST | News Category: Xbox360

From gamepro.com: In rebuttal to a GamePro editorial suggesting that PS3 port quality is on the rise, Microsoft marketing director Albert Penello says the Xbox 360 still has "the best games," especially when considering the addictive nature of Achievement points. "For multiplatform console owners, Achievements and Gamerscore have to be listed as an influencing factor to purchase the Xbox 360 version," said Penello in an email to GamePro on Tuesday. "Their success and popularity is undeniable." "We have to disagree with your conclusion that the trend of Xbox 360 versions of games being best is changing, especially when you look at the entire catalog of multiplatform titles available," added Penello. "The cold, hard truth is that Xbox 360 has the best games - and industry reviewers and consumers agree." Full Story: gamepro.com

[davinator456]

The PS3 came out a year later.  It uses a Bluray drive and it probably seems like the more powerful machine when it's specs are compared to the 360.

It only makes sense that as time progresses there will be some games that look better/run better on the PS3.

That being said- I'll take my 360 over a PS3 any day of the week.

But seriously... who really cares about acheivement points?  I mean they are kind of cool..... but not the worlds greatest invention or anything.

This post has been edited by davinator456: Mar 5 2008, 06:14 AM

[LegendDJ]

I, personally, don’t care about achievement points at all. I don’t know many who do. They could do away with it for all I care. Really, all it is a number! Come on! It doesn't mean anything. I think that was a weak argument.

[majik655]

QUOTE(davinator456 @ Mar 4 2008, 09:14 PM)

The PS3 came out a year later.  It uses a Bluray drive and it probably seems like the more powerful machine when it's specs are compared to the 360.

It only makes sense that as time progresses there will be some games that look better/run better on the PS3.

That being said- I'll take my 360 over a PS3 any day of the week.

But seriously... who really cares about acheivement points?  I mean they are kind of cool..... but not the worlds greatest invention or anything.

Agreed.

"The cold, hard truth is that Xbox 360 has the best games - and industry reviewers and consumers agree."

Yeah until like the  GamePro editorial suggested..."PS3 port quality is on the RISE"

They came out a year apart.. sony will rise...
then of course m$ will rise with something else...

Thats how competition works.  

[HughDaHand]

Its only natural that the ps3 games are starting to look better.  with that extra year of development and a HD in all models.  I dont own a ps3 yet but i probibly will get one once the price comes down a lil more.  Mostly for bluray and the few exclusives that i'm interesed it.   But as far as multiplatfrom games,  I'm gona have them all for 360.  Its not for achievement points, i couldnt really care less about them.  Its because the 360 controler is much more comfortable for long playing sessions, IMHO.

[GerbilJammer]

Isn't this from the same publication that lied about having Gears 2 information just to sell magazines?

[i800phyco]

I'm not to worried about achievement's, But I'll have to admit I've had alot of fun getting a few of them.  
I think there main appeal is some of them challenge you, I enjoy that.

[gcskate27]

for multi-system owners, its not at all a weak argument... being multi-system adopters, they are obviously hardcore gamers which means they would almost certainly fall into the gamer-score-whore crowd... which would obviously mean theyed pick up the version that would inflate their e-penis...

[gAm3 Fr3aQu3]

QUOTE(davinator456 @ Mar 4 2008, 10:14 PM)

But seriously... who really cares about acheivement points?  I mean they are kind of cool..... but not the worlds greatest invention or anything.

Exactly what I was thinking. I see no advantage with those achievement points. If it makes people feel better with those points, then I guess... whatever floats your boat???

I really think it's silly to say that those points give the 360 an upper hand when the truth is that the system came out 1 year ahead of the PS3 and Wii (reason for poor/cheap design that causes RRoD... rush job???) and that gave them the lead in sales and supporters.

[metalcoat]

I have to say from the amount of people that beg for one game just so they can get achievements its just crazy.  They are addicting to some people and they have to have all of them.  Too many people want them, they want that tagged to their gamertag apparently.

[dokworm]

I don't think MS realises yet that the next year or so console sales will have to branch out to the second tier gamer to get any growth.

I mean the hardcore gamer market is already pretty saturated, they don't care about how noisy or unreliable or bluray or not etc. they just want killer games in a few set genres.

The real growth in the coming year will have to come from the guys and gals that like their games but need to justify the console to their partners, or to themselves.

For these poeple, things like blu-ray and quiet running and wifi etc. *are* important. It won't really matter to them which console runs the game *slightly* better than the other, only that game X is available for it.

This is where MS could drop the ball, lots of my friends are second tier gamers, and they love movies as well, most are now looking at the PS3 instead of the 360, even though most are also xbox1 owners. they like that they can put their own hard drive in it, that it is relatively quiet, that it has bluray capability, and that there isn't a lot of 'buzz' around about them failing hardware-wise.
They look at the games coming out, and most are available for both, wether it be GTA, or rockband or if they like car racing, they can still get great driving games on *either* platform. they see it as a wash as far as games are concerned. at first glance they look the same on both platforms.

If MS put a bluray in it, or had a cheapish bluray addon, and the 360 was quieter, I think most would buy a 360 now, and get the bluray player (or not) later. it would make them safe knowing there was the option.
The 360 is going to look overpriced and a bit tired features-wise soon, and a lot of second tier buyers just look at the specsheet.

Hmm this one has wireless, a bluray player, is quieter and the other one doesn't. they both have games I want. If I option the MS one up with wireless and the 120GB it comes to more money and I don't get bluray.

as long as the PS3 gets a halfway decent games library up this year, I think MS is going to struggle.
Sony has a history of making them smaller and cheaper, and more manufacturers of Bluray drives should help with that. If sony brings out a smaller, cheaper PS3 this year, then MS will have serious trouble on its hands.

[metalgear1]

QUOTE(metalcoat @ Mar 5 2008, 12:58 AM)

I have to say from the amount of people that beg for one game just so they can get achievements its just crazy.  They are addicting to some people and they have to have all of them.  Too many people want them, they want that tagged to their gamertag apparently.

 
Guilty, I own a PS3, Love Uncharted and Resistance too, That said,If given the chance to play either of those on my 360 I would, Am I an adict? NO
but I do find it quit satisfying when killing dudes online to suddenly have that popup tell me I have just killed 50 people with headshots,
Just something about it appeals to me,And many others too I'm sure. Like I said I'm not an adict, although I have called an achievement whore

[trey85stang]

ms can go on about achievments being a deciding factor.. but I think more along the lines of... do I want to play this game online for free... or will I rather not play it online.

[Ddude723]

Achievements are a deciding factor for me. I plan to buy a PS3 when the MGS4 package comes out, but all multiplatform games I will buy on 360. Am I an achievement whore? No. However, I feel that achievements increase the playtime I can get from a game because they may challenge me to do things that I normally wouldn't.

Also the argument of paying for live is getting really stale. Assuming that you pay $50 for 12 months, it's only $4.17 a month. After tax it will be a little bit more, but that's still so cheap! My lunch easily costs more than that daily. Besides, it's easy to get live for cheap. I just ordered a 12+1 subscription on buy.com and after google checkout it was only $28.75 after shipping and tax. That's only $2.21 a month!

This post has been edited by Ddude723: Mar 5 2008, 08:00 AM

[sunn02]

There were many mistakes in the article, including the PS3 version of COD4 having dedicated servers