Xbox 360 or PS3? *flinch*

[Corrin]

I have both. The 360 is cheaper and has more exclusives than the PS3. The 360's online service is much, much better than PS3's. Personally, I really enjoy collecting Achievements (something PS3 just added....but as Sony keeps doing...they fucked it up). Sony's Trophies (Achievements) only work in certain games and don't add to an overall Gamerscore.

My personal opinion is that the 360 is this generation's best console. PS3 has Metal Gear Solid 4. Sooooo, if you're a huge MGS fan like me, then buy both! But if you aren't obsessed...get a 360!

EDIT: Another thing about the PS3, mine (40 GB) doesn't play PS2 games. It's something that I didn't know when I purchased it. I really regret trading in my PS2 now.

[Stu]

Not really. I don't play very much online anymore, but I always download the latest trailers and demoes.

Just because it's not a big deal to you, doesn't mean it's not the biggest plus to come from online capabilities. The majority of people connected to X-Box Live will tell you the biggest thing to come from it is playing online.

Sony's Trophies (Achievements) only work in certain games and don't add to an overall Gamerscore.

And where does that Gamerscore get you exactly?

[Corrin]

And where does that Gamerscore get you exactly?

This is an argument I've never understood. The "Achievements don't mean anything" argument is just beyond me. Achievements for your Xbox Gamerscore mean just as much as any virtual achievement you, or anyone else have ever made in any video game. Ever. If you like to play video games and be rewarded by whatever little "virtual achievements" they present you with, then you shouldn't say the Xbox Achievements are meaningless.

Achievements mean as much as anything else you do in a video game. They mean shit in the real world, just like everything else you do in any video game. They add to your entertainment experience just as defeating the Tyrant in Resident Evil or collecting all 493 Pokemon. Nothing in a video game means anything, unless it entertains you.

[Umon Daisuke]

Achievements mean as much as anything else you do in a video game.

Off topic.

I see people going dying 800+ times in NGII nowadays, and they've got more achievements and rank higher than anyone who doesn't even die once. If the achievement was "sucking", then they'd have my vote.

The BEST UMK3 and VF5 players out there have little of the achievements done of their respective games. So in essence, they're completely meaningless as they don't even accurately tell of the player's skill in the game nor do they add anything to the experience.

Call me old fashioned, but I'd rather have in-game easter egg hunts than tacky achievements/trophies. You have fun though.

Btw, does the 40GB unit's box specifically say that it's not BC with PS2 games? :p

[Carnivol]

Call me old fashioned, but I'd rather have in-game easter egg hunts than tacky achievements/trophies. You have fun though.

Problem is what you look for when you look at someone's achievements/gamerscore/level/whatever.

Go play Crackdown to see a game that has what I would call proper execution of the achievements.

If properly executed, achievements increase the replay value or at least encourage the less creative to find new ways to "have fun or challenge themselves" within the game world.

[Umon Daisuke]

If properly executed, achievements increase the replay value or at least encourage the less creative to find new ways to "have fun or challenge themselves" within the game world.

We had similar goals with some modes in games like Soul Edge and Calibur on the PS1 and DC respectively, ranging from juggles to GI's that the casuals wouldn't bother with. Not only those helped with your skills, they unlocked items/modes in the games.

If Crackdown's achievements setup serves the same purpose, then I'm inclined to agree. Even then, I think in some odd way, achievements serve as a way to show off.

[Corrin]

Off topic.

I see people going dying 800+ times in NGII nowadays, and they've got more achievements and rank higher than anyone who doesn't even die once. If the achievement was "sucking", then they'd have my vote.

The BEST UMK3 and VF5 players out there have little of the achievements done of their respective games. So in essence, they're completely meaningless as they don't even accurately tell of the player's skill in the game nor do they add anything to the experience.

Call me old fashioned, but I'd rather have in-game easter egg hunts than tacky achievements/trophies. You have fun though.

Btw, does the 40GB unit's box specifically say that it's not BC with PS2 games? :p

Let me get this straight, please correct me if I'm wrong. You're arguing that someone's subjective feelings towards what they deem "entertainment" is wrong because your opinion is the opposite?

[Umon Daisuke]

I think the fact that I took out that particular quote of yours and posted a reply to it says it all. And that's a no, I wasn't saying you're wrong, but took that quote, and elaborated with examples of why I think that achievements are nothing more than glorified check marks.

In the case of fighting and action games, unlocking them does not mean as much as anything else done in the game. So if by disagreeing what that quote of yours essentially means that I'm saying that you're wrong, then okay

[ZERO]

Off topic.

Btw, does the 40GB unit's box specifically say that it's not BC with PS2 games? :p

yes,it says it has limited BC and only with ps1 games,it says you cannot play ps2 games on it.

[FeurMensch]

Why not get both systems??? LOL!!

Actually since we have both systems, I can say that 360 has better games, but PS3 doesn't really crash or lock up. Plus like other members said, all multi-platform games look identical (Turok on the other hand, looks better on PS3). It's really just up to you and your preferences.

Here is something else to think about with prices:
1) PS3 has all the necessary hardware already built in, so price is naturally higher.
2) 360 is $279 w/out HDD (Add $100 for that) and even the WLAN adapter isn't included (Add another $100 to that).

So PS3 final price is $400. 360's is $279 + $100 +$100 = $479 That's how I reckon the PS3 to be a better deal.

[Stu]

This is an argument I've never understood. The "Achievements don't mean anything" argument is just beyond me. Achievements for your Xbox Gamerscore mean just as much as any virtual achievement you, or anyone else have ever made in any video game. Ever. If you like to play video games and be rewarded by whatever little "virtual achievements" they present you with, then you shouldn't say the Xbox Achievements are meaningless.

I'm not saying that the ACHIEVEMENTS are meaningless, i'm saying that the score you get at the end of them are meaningless.

Sure, it's satisfying to get the Achievements, but the score you get for them is utterly redundant.

[The Dude]

Acchievements can also lead to internet elitism like most online games and whatnot lead to.
Not to mention a good 90% of XBL users with ludicrously high Acchievements points have hacked their respective accounts to increase the values.

[TheSelfishGene]

A friend of mine is going for the 10,000 kills on Gears. I don't know if he's having fun or not, but that's the kind of the achiement where'd I think more of you for not having it than actually having it.

I was reading about the 7 day survivor on Dead Rising too. It's pretty much hoarde food, then eat so you don't die, every 10 minutes or so, for about 11 hours. Every few hours you'd have to go for a run to get Frank some food. Fuck that for a joke.

I hear some of the Guitar Hero 3 ones are ludicrous too.
And it's not like if you're playing multi-platform games, that you can't do those achievements, it's just that there is no way to prove it I guess.

[Cerberus]

All multi-platform games look identical (Turok on the other hand, looks better on PS3). It's really just up to you and your preferences.

So PS3 final price is $400. 360's is $279 + $100 +$100 = $479 That's how I reckon the PS3 to be a better deal.

Please, get your facts right.
Almost no multi-platform games look the same on different consoles and almost all to all games look superior on the Xbox 360. From what I've heard Turok looks better on the Xbox 360 aswell, source that please.
Also, I'm not from any dollar using country but the Xbox 360 Premium clearly costs 349.99$, with harddrive. That's 50$ better than the PS3 wherever you live.
Where I live the Xbox 360 is around 325$ cheaper, strangely. You havn't got a lot of price difference where you live, if it costs 400$.

Sure, it's satisfying to get the Achievements, but the score you get for them is utterly redundant.

Gamerscore serves a large purpose. Using it you can see how much of a gamer a person is, how much they have done in their games and simply compete with friends or foes.

[Stu]

Gamerscore serves a large purpose. Using it you can see how much of a gamer a person is, how much they have done in their games and simply compete with friends or foes.

hahaha, sounds like someone swallowed a PR Bullshit Sandwhich!

How on earth does it even BEGIN to prove how much of a gamer a person is when anyone with half a brain knows how flawed the system is?

The gamerscore don't show how much people have done in their games, the Achievements that go with them do that, the score for a game is irrelevant. You can rack up massive Gamerscore points without even touching the main single player element of the game.

And wow. Competing with friends and foes? For what exactly?