Why can the PS3 do this but the 360 can't?

[Andeeh]

hahaha this is funny stuff. people can get what console they like no need to argue the case, let bygons be bygons

[Firehorse]

Some edits.

How has wifi got to do with the network features? Also its still paid for (£40 a year - big ripoff). For use just to chat to friends i'd use msn which btw is also by microsoft. And music isn't exactly a big use, some ps3 games allow you to play your own music while playing and anyway i'd just play music using something called a stereo.

Whats wrong with updates? Installing just means that you will have shorter load times since it loads from the hard drive and updates fix bugs and other issues. If you don't want to update just disconnect your internet or something when you load the game.

[kk.]

Typical fan boy? ^

[Mint]

As for MW2, everyone I know who has it on PS3 couldn't even get online with it at launch.

Yes that was really annoying. There were many more people than expected online so the servers were overloaded and crashed.

Well that's it then - discussion over. Makes me laugh this 'more powerful than'.

Umm no... Even if it was a company owned by Sony that said the PS3 is more powerful, it's still a well known fact. It's a shame a lot of you 360 fan boys can't see the extras on Uncharted, there's like 5 videos running you through how they made it and they make it very clear how they took advantage of the PS3's power.

also the xbox is cheaper to run power wise

Only an Xbox owner could be bothered about the cost of electricity to run their console.

the majority of ps3 owners have an original ps3 and so the majority pays more to run. I too cannot find any statistics for the 360.

Pays more to run? The difference of running costs between these 2 machines every year could be found in a homeless persons begging cup outside of the local supermarket.

the study i read said the xbox is somewhere in between the ps3 and wii actually

What!? So you are saying that the Wii cost less to run than the PS3 and 360?! Right, I'm selling my PS3 and getting a Wii.

Fat PS3 and even so theres barely any difference in power usage on that chart. 10W difference will barely cost you 50p more to run per year.

Yeh exactly lol

Thats like asking why is halo 3 only on xbox 360?

it's an exclusive, both consoles have it, it will never change

End.

But if you asked "Would it be possible to play Halo on the PS3 if it wasn't a 360 exclusive?" You would expect the answer to be yes. Not to be "No, the PS3 isn't powerful enough".

Some edits.

In them edits, you said that the 3 minutes it can take to install parts of a game is unacceptable. Is this because of the running costs going to waste? :rolleyes: If not then I don't see how you can be unhappy about it, it's going to save you a lot of time in the future by loading levels faster.

[scottish]

Yes that was really annoying. There were many more people than expected online so the servers were overloaded and crashed.

coz ps3 network is free so sucks.

Umm no... Even if it was a company owned by Sony that said the PS3 is more powerful, it's still a well known fact. It's a shame a lot of you 360 fan boys can't see the extras on Uncharted, there's like 5 videos running you through how they made it and they make it very clear how they took advantage of the PS3's power.

if you knew there was videos bout it and stuff why the hellare you complaining bout it then, seems like a thread just trying to boost how good the ps3 is, and failing.

Only an Xbox owner could be bothered about the cost of electricity to run their console.

or anyone who pays bills

But if you asked "Would it be possible to play Halo on the PS3 if it wasn't a 360 exclusive?" You would expect the answer to be yes. Not to be "No, the PS3 isn't powerful enough".

or they coud make up some useless crap about an aspect of the xbox 360 being better than the ps3?


i don't think you've given any proof of how the ps3 is more powerful than the xbox360 yet, just the one bloke?

[Black_Apalachi]

How has wifi got to do with the network features? Also its still paid for (£40 a year - big ripoff). For use just to chat to friends i'd use msn which btw is also by microsoft. And music isn't exactly a big use, some ps3 games allow you to play your own music while playing and anyway i'd just play music using something called a stereo. ...

The thing is though, surprisingly I don't even feel annoyed that I'm paying to play online because when I use the PSN, it's just so frustrating and annoying. XBL is clearly more reliable and it's a lot more satisfying to use.

I don't chat to friends.. don't know where that one came from.

Music isn't a big use? I could say the same about Blu-Ray considering I have no Blu-Ray movies while music is a big use to me, actually. Telling me to use an alternative means to provide a basic function just screams a big flaw in your argument for which is the better console. Furthermore, Sony marketed the PS3 as a media centre rather than just a games console so you would think music was kind of a given. Oopsy.

I guess that points me towards another reason why I favour the 360, when I bought the two machines, I bought them as games consoles. The XBOX focuses on this sole aspect while the PS3 tries to be so much more, maybe Sony were just biting off more than they could chew by trying to make it do everything. Then again, maybe you prefer the PS3 because of all the singing and dancing, whereas, like I say, I just want to play games.

... In them edits, you said that the 3 minutes it can take to install parts of a game is unacceptable. Is this because of the running costs going to waste? :rolleyes: If not then I don't see how you can be unhappy about it, it's going to save you a lot of time in the future by loading levels faster.

What? :S No, it's because no other games console I've ever played on in the history of time as ever had to install the game. I would be impressed if once installed, the disc was no longer needed, but I don't expect to buy a game which I'm excited to play and have to wait for it to sort itself out. I don't see how it speeds up loading or whatever because I don't have any trouble with other games on other consoles. I've just been playing MW2 on the 360 for instance, and from turning it on, I was in a multiplayer match within a few minutes.

As for the PS3, it amazes me how Sony went from best games console imaginable with the PS2 to such an over-priced disappointment. I really regret trading in my PS2 and all the games.

[Mint]

coz ps3 network is free so sucks.

That's the type of pointless, non backed up reply I'd expect from a primary school kid. Technically you have just said that the servers reached their maximum number of players online and crashed because the PS3 online is free so it sucks. :S First of all, PS3 network were not expecting so many people to be online, if they knew how many more people would of been online they would of increased the size of the servers (or whatever you call it) and everything would of been fine. The same could easily happen on the 360 if they underestimated the amount of people online. When a server gets overloaded, it crashes, no matter what console it is on. You pay more money for a PS3 so some of that money goes towards online making it not so much free, at least it's a 1 time fee though.

if you knew there was videos bout it and stuff why the hellare you complaining bout it then, seems like a thread just trying to boost how good the ps3 is, and failing.

I played on Uncharted 2 yesterday and was watching some of the videos. I made this thread to ask that if they are so "similar" then how come the PS3 is so much more powerful?

or anyone who pays bills

The difference is like 50p per year for god sake lmao.

or they coud make up some useless crap about an aspect of the xbox 360 being better than the ps3?

If they came out with something that was actually true then why not?

i don't think you've given any proof of how the ps3 is more powerful than the xbox360 yet, just the one bloke?

It's a fact that the PS3 is more powerful, I think you are the only person in this thread that won't accept it. I don't have a clue about teraflops, cells, threads, processors etc so I'm hardly going to come out with all the facts so take a look at all the specs yourself. I have had it explained to me, watched videos comparing the official specifications, compared the specifications myself and have read things from official, reliable sources to find out that the PS3 is more powerful. Hell, we even have Xbox 360 fan boys in this thread admitting that the PS3 is more powerful.

[scottish]

coz ps3 network is free so sucks.

That's the type of pointless, non backed up reply I'd expect from a primary school kid. Technically you have just said that the servers reached their maximum number of players online and crashed because the PS3 online is free so it sucks. :S First of all, PS3 network were not expecting so many people to be online, if they knew how many more people would of been online they would of increased the size of the servers (or whatever you call it) and everything would of been fine. The same could easily happen on the 360 if they underestimated the amount of people online. When a server gets overloaded, it crashes, no matter what console it is on. You pay more money for a PS3 so some of that money goes towards online making it not so much free, at least it's a 1 time fee though.

Shame i'm in uni then... 'non backed up post' you're still not given any proof that its more powerful etc? just some guys word?

PS3 network is known to suck, obviously XBL you pay for it and evidently get better service.

Obviously the the most awaited game of the year or whatever it was came out ALOT of people would be getting it and playing multiplayer.

So anyone with sense could tell ALOT of people will be online, yet they still never done nothing, somehow every other platform managed to cope, lol

if you knew there was videos bout it and stuff why the hellare you complaining bout it then, seems like a thread just trying to boost how good the ps3 is, and failing.

I played on Uncharted 2 yesterday and was watching some of the videos. I made this thread to ask that if they are so "similar" then how come the PS3 is so much more powerful?

i still have no proof tha its MUCH MORE powerful?

or anyone who pays bills

The difference is like 50p per year for god sake lmao.

And you notice the extra power? clearly :S

or they coud make up some useless crap about an aspect of the xbox 360 being better than the ps3?

If they came out with something that was actually true then why not?

Proof i'm waitin

i don't think you've given any proof of how the ps3 is more powerful than the xbox360 yet, just the one bloke?

It's a fact that the PS3 is more powerful, I think you are the only person in this thread that won't accept it. I don't have a clue about teraflops, cells, threads, processors etc so I'm hardly going to come out with all the facts so take a look at all the specs yourself. I have had it explained to me, watched videos comparing the official specifications, compared the specifications myself and have read things from official, reliable sources to find out that the PS3 is more powerful. Hell, we even have Xbox 360 fan boys in this thread admitting that the PS3 is more powerful.

Link me to specs. link me to videos comparing the specs. Link me to realiable sources to find out that the PS3 is more powerful.









On another note to finish this;

PC is the best.

[kk.]

You say it's more powerful and so more powerful = using more power. A ps3 if left on (they never did clear up how ie standby etc) can cost £70 a year. On top of that you have things on standby.

And I actaully own both so I wouldn't even bring that into it, I also owned a ps3 first so you know, you can tell I prefer/ed ps3 to 360. In all honesty, they're both the same for gaming and that's all that matters

[Inscribe]

people buy ps3's just to show of they have money, imo.