I have enough Airmiles to pick up either an XBox 360 or a PlayStation 3.
I have seen it mentioned here that the XBox will work with the Mac to stream video and such to your tv. Does the PS3 do this as well.
I really like the BlueRay in the PS3 and would consider getting it just for movie but extra features would be nice. The kids have a PS2 and a GameCube but the teenager is pulling for the XBox.
It's more expensive to buy it direct from them than to buy HBC gift cards using Air Miles and buy the console locally using those, at Zellers for example.
You'll have access to all versions of the consoles (even the Wii) as a bonus!
I've got PS3. Internet Browser, Blu-Ray/DVD, online internet community (ie friends), 6 Axis controllers(soon to be rumble pack built-in),4 usb ports, upgradable Hard drive, graphics are amazing on Widescreen 40inch Sony Bravia TV... people should be let to think for themselves! I have a buddy who has XBox 360, he loves it, I love my PS3.... go out n try both systems.... FULLY try them... meaning all the features they have. Do your homework... dont rely on some dumb **** diagram!
Own a ps2? Ps3 is natrual evolution man. I have 1-3. I like em all. Not so many games for ps3, but its only been out for a year and has few games that make it worth it (folklore, warhawk, etc).
PS3 man. Worse comes to worse, you can easily linux it and make it and 8core linux workstation, kindof like a Mac Pro except better graphics.
Hey there, my 2 cents... I sold my xbox and went with the PS3! It totally rocks... the games are great (yes there is more 360 games), but the PS3 is really coming on strong and some completely amazing games! The Blue-ray is amazing, well worth it!!!! That is one of the main reasons I switched to the PS3, so it was all in one. Just so you know though, unless you can find one of the 60gig versions.. the new 40 gig and 80gig, they don;t tell you you can;t play PS2 games on it anymore. That was a nice feature of the 60... Rumor has it they may bring it back though software emulating... but just so you know up front!
Hey there, my 2 cents... I sold my xbox and went with the PS3! It totally rocks... the games are great (yes there is more 360 games), but the PS3 is really coming on strong and some completely amazing games! The Blue-ray is amazing, well worth it!!!! That is one of the main reasons I switched to the PS3, so it was all in one. Just so you know though, unless you can find one of the 60gig versions.. the new 40 gig and 80gig, they don;t tell you you can;t play PS2 games on it anymore. That was a nice feature of the 60... Rumor has it they may bring it back though software emulating... but just so you know up front!
The 40 Gb PS3 has very limited backward compatibility but the 20, 60 and 80 Gb versions play a lot of PS2 games. There's a look up page for compatibility here: PlayStation.com
HD-DVD is effectively on life-support. BluRay won (not through technical advantages but rather brute force and studio inducements). Microsoft doesn't care as its betting on the longer term which is downloads.
Both Xbox360 and PS3 are awesome gaming platforms. Can't really go wrong with either unless you have an inherent bias for or against Microsoft or Sony. Wii is pretty darn good too. In fact, I can only survive for more than 30 secs in COD4 on the PS3 if my son controls 90% of the buttons....
* 40GB PlayStation®3 System:
This model of the PLAYSTATION®3 system is designed to play PLAYSTATION®3 format software and has limited backward compatibility. This system is not compatible with and will not play PlayStation®2 format software. Some PlayStation® format software may play on this system.
That $100 also gets you twice as many USB ports, media card support and twice as large of a hard drive.
For myself, the 40Gig was fine. I had no PS2 library. If I want, I can expand the hard drive in the future.
BTW, if you want a 40Gig, Dell may have the best deal going. It was better a couple weeks ago, but is still decent. For $400 you get the PS3 with Spiderman bundle, the Ratchet and Clank game and a HDMI cable. It was $370 when I bought it.
I have a large ps1 and ps2 collection. But, I also have a ps1 and ps2. I bought the 40 gig for 350, it was the spiderman bundle and came with a free game (also spider man ). I bought that plus component cables and a second game for aroun 420 I think it was. I thought it to be a fantastic buy.
Relax, I'm not knocking backwards compatibility or how important it is to some. It is definitely not as important these days as it was back then and your "betrayal" analogy of Sega is irrelevant. The 360, it is not backwards compatible and no one gives a hoot. So it's not like Sony fanboys will be jumping ship to another platform that doesn't have backwards compatibility either. Those that truly want PS2 backwards compatibility would of bought an earlier console or opt for the 80GB. Sony has for the first time since PS3's release, did their market research and made a cost effective marketing decision by releasing a cheap option. I would of bought a 40GB in a sec if it had stock at time of release and price drop.
Relax, I'm not knocking backwards compatibility or how important it is to some. It is definitely not as important these days as it was back then and your "betrayal" analogy of Sega is irrelevant. The 360, it is not backwards compatible and no one gives a hoot.
I just purchased a XBOX 360 (new model with falcon chip). It runs fairly quiet and is a blast to play. I chose it over the PS3 mainly because of title selection and many of my friends / colleagues are on Live. No complaints.
MACinist, I'm afraid that the betrayal analogy isn't irrelevant - Unless you buy the top-of-the-line PS3, Sony is now breaking the backwards compatibility trend a bit. As I already said, Sega was in a much worse position (and PS2 owners have gotten far more value than Saturn folks ), so it's not a repeat situation. I didn't say it was.
Everyone in the industry obviously learned lessons from that generation (including the need for model line-up simplicity). Sony is just straying a little from a couple of those principles, and I was trying to provide a little more historical context to avoid being told that I "entirely missed the point."
Sure, compatability is one piece of the larger puzzle when choosing a system... but I wouldn't say it was more important in the 90s. If anything, the reverse is true: a generation has grown up on games... they will want to re-live great oldies. The systems that can draw on the best (and biggest) library will sell better to this growing demographic. I was even just playing an old side-scrolling Ninja Turtles game on my friend's 360 last week... pretty cool (to me)
I'm not saying it's the end of the world, of Sony or even of the PS3, but it is a little odd to me that there's already 3 variations of backwards compatibility on the Playsation platform.
I agree that Sony needed a "cheap" option. I'm now thinking about buying one because it's almost within reach. It was a very smart idea on their part, no argument. But what doesn't make sense to me is that, even on the 80GB model, the emulation is now done in the software - so why not just enable it on the 40GB one?
The only reason I can see is to up-sell consumers to the high end model...
I agree that Sony needed a "cheap" option. I'm now thinking about buying one because it's almost within reach. It was a very smart idea on their part, no argument. But what doesn't make sense to me is that, even on the 80GB model, the emulation is now done in the software - so why not just enable it on the 40GB one?
The only reason I can see is to up-sell consumers to the high end model...
It's because there's hardware missing in the 40 gig model. The originals had 2 extra chips which were the old PS2 video and GPU. The 80 Gig took away one chip and emulated the other. The 40 gig took away both and there's no emulation.
I've had my 360 replaced 3X now under the Electronics Boutique warranty, and now since I have the 3rd one with all the apparent hardware issues fixed in the latest release by Microsoft (apparently September 2007 was the last), it works great.
I play mostly sports games, but also racing and some role-playing...but overall having been a Playstation guy for the past 5 years or so previous, after all the hardware replacements, the 360 is definitely worth it for the games over the PS3 imo!
I don't understand how anyone can start with saying they've had a system replaced 3 times and end saying it's worth it... I've had my 360 replaced 6 times now and my PS3 has never crashed. PS3 is the better system hands down.
It's kind of like getting an iPhone, and having the unlucky experience of a few lemons the first time its released. If you want it enough, you wont give up on your iPhone, that's all.
I was in fact very skeptical in buying an MS product for video games given Windows track record and coming from PS1/ PS2 which I never had issues with. So to explain further, sure the 360 is a finicky system; with my first 360 I had a CD tray that just wouldn't close the day I got it, and then a year later a fan issue that gave me the "ring of death". So now im on my 3rd, and no problems since (fingers crossed..!)
Hardware issues aside, i've played both and actually liked the 360 better....there are WAY more games developed (and being developed) for 360, and there is a much larger fanbase. I don't think having built in Bluray for instance makes it "hands down" better...the games are the most important thing in the end. What's a fancy machine without any games or anyone to play or trade em with?
i think the graphic was meant to be a joke..but hey maybe my sense of humuor is just warped
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac
1.5M posts
40.3K members
Since 2001
A forum community dedicated to Canadian Mac owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about collections, iOS, models, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!