Xbox 360. Why? Loading times are shorter, Mass effect I and II, the controller is for larger handed gentlemen like myself, and it’s all in all a very good all rounder. Plus, it has what made the PS2 great: good third party support.
Meanwhile the PS3 has three main issues: the loading times are comparable to geological ages (Blu-ray was pretty much still a prototype when when it was launched, while the Xbox relies on the much more navigated and, thus, reliable DVD 9, which has, among other things, faster reading times.) Games made for the Xbox translate horribly to the PS3 because of this, too, because they’re designed with lots of loading “airlocks” which are bearable on an Xbox, but ludicrous on a PS3. Play Bayonetta on both if you don’t believe me.
Moving on: the Ps3’s main exclusives are mostly sequels to franchises that were extablished on earlier version of the PS. Silen hill (which isn’t even exclusive), Metal Gear 4, God of War 3, Resident evil 5 (not exclusive either), Yakuza 3 and so on.
While the Xbox has a very strong lineup of new franchises or simply standalone titles. Like Alan wake, The Mass Effect series (i know that 2 exists on ps3 but i seriously don’t give a shit about the sequel without the first episode. 99% of that game is playing the previous one again to see all the details that change in ME2) The gears of war series (which i don’t care for, but it’s objectively a good TPS) the Fable series (which is inexplicably loved by many but manages to make me pop a coronary every time i buy in its hype since the first game) and the crackdown series. In all fairness this isn’t really a weakness if you happen to have a Ps2, because then you probably have played the prequels to most of the games i mentioned.
And lastly, while the Xbox may not have many exclusive titles, it has lots of titles that are “microsoft exclusives”, meaning they’re still precluded to the PS3 even though they’re not only for the Xbox. So looking up the numbers can be a bit wonky on that.
I have bought an Xbox 360 after weighting the pros and cons. I’m no fan of microsoft or sony and i give credit where credit is due. The first Xbox was garbage, a very late attempt at jumping on a bandwagon that was already seeing the end of its journey without a telescope, while the gamecube, while being an impressive feat of compromise between miniaturization and hardware capabilities, had an incredibly poor third party support which lead to an incredibly small library of games and thus to a lot of wasted potential. The last generation’s crown jewel was without a doubt the PS2, with a gigantic library of very good games, some of which genre defining and still powerful franchises like the DMC series, Silent hill 2, God of war I and so on, and an incredibly good third party support which led to some of the gretest, if still somewhat rudimental on the PS2, innovations in the last ten years of gaming. Like the Guitar hero series.
This generation however the torch of extensive third party support and innovation has visibly changed hands, with the only remarkable innovative feature of the PS3 being blu-ray while the xbox can boast the kinect (a gimmicky toy for rich people, sure, but still innovative in its own right) and a plethora of interesting titles. Nintendo seems to have dropped out of the game, getting sidetracked in making toys and retro arcade games instead of full fledged videogames.
The optimal gaming choices for a gamer, to me, are: Xbox 360 (for most new releases), Nintendo DS (the best handheld, with some very good titles despite the lack in hardware capabilities) and a good PC (for FPS which i personally prefer using mouse and keyboard for) with a steam account (for all those indie games the PSN and XBLA like to boast about. They’re almost never actually exclusive,—Trine is on steam too, @Silence04—they run smooth on a mid-tier PC and cost next to nothing, expecially during the steam sales).
Take it from a guy who has been a gamer since he was three and never wanted to compromise.
Composing members:
0
Composing members:
0
