The Debate to end them all.

[J]

Sooo we always seem to have small debates on which system is better Ps3 or 360. As has been said Wii deff goes in its own catagory but fans can never seem to stop arguin over who better out of the other two. So I figured a forum debate would be awesome.

First off we need to split into sides. Weather or not you like both systems you must pick a team to be involved with.

Next were going to pick teams of 3 as there will be 3 catagories.
-System itself (Dashboards/Ps3 home, Controllers, All that good stuff)
-Games
-Online play.
Each team will assign 1 person to each, this will be choosen by the team of 3 themselves, if they can't agree will be left up to the other members of the sides choosen that did not make the team.

Next a thread will be created for each system. Only rule is people from opposing team ARE NOT ALOUD to post in others discussion thread.
-Ps3 Debate Discussion
-Xbox 360 Debate Discussion
I wish there was a way that the threads would be only viewable by the people on those sides but no idea if that's even possible.

The rest is simple. Each topic will be debated between the person representing each team. They will be able to get help by only in the discussion thread. They are not aloud to post in the topic thread itself.

The topics thread will be a simple back and forth dispute between those 2 members in doing there best to cut the other down and make there team look better.

The winning side will be choosen by a simple best of 3 which is the 3 catagories.

I'm looking for 1 to 3 judges. I'd prefure they be unbiased judges. Maybe someone like This Guy if he has the time cause I never really see him take a side in the whole console war and maybe he could choose 2 co judges.

Sorry if it sounds confusing its alot to explain but trust me it will work, I just am not good at explaining shit. Also if you need clarification just ask in this thread.

Team Ps3
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

Team Xbox 360
- J
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

CHOOSE YOUR SIDE~!

 

[Ronnie Gardocki]

I don't care what side I'm on, as long as I can play video games. Choosing a side is stupid, and for fanboys.

 

[monkeystyle]

PC beats any console any day of the week.

 

[Wordlife]

I'll join 360 then

 

[Quintastic One]

You've basically turned a simple Gaming Console Debate and turned it into an over complicated underground team based fighting event. I feel like I'm in Best of the Best all over again. lol.

I'm a Sony fanboy at heart, I merely have an Xbox 360 because of economics. When I could purchase the Xbox, hard drive, 3 month subscription to LIVE, and my first video game for the price of just getting the PS3 console itself, the choice was easy.

However, from my own research, PS3 just wins. And I'll state why below. Screw the debating rules I have money!/Kaiba.

System is a no brainer. PS3 at the LOWEST possible option have far more memory available than the lowest possible option of Xbox, and you have to basically get the top of the line 360 product to even match that much space you get for going for the cheapest PS3. The PS3 internet services are for free, no subscriptions or pay servers. PS3's don't have half the problems Microsoft has in terms of the dreaded Red Ring Of Death. PS3 overall is a far more stable and efficient investment. The only thing that Xbox has is price reduction and customer support. But that's expected, because if I'm going to pay for my internet I better have some quality customer support.

As for games, you could ALMOST say that XBox takes this one. As they have the most consistent exclusives available as they ALWAYS get first dibs on most next gen console games. But then you consider the fact that if PS3 is not involved in some way or another right out of the gate, that they will EVENTUALLY gain rights to the game, and when they do, they make sure to sweeten that deal by making the developers offer them exclusive downloadable content and extra game features that the XBox wouldn't see until the Gold Edition of the game is released. That's been the strategy that Sony has adopted since the beginning though. XBox does it first, PS3 waits a couple months and does it better. That's just the way it is.

I can't comment on the online play too much since I don't hang around with the elitists, the trolls, the power gamers & the lagging cheaters that run rampant in any online environment today. But when you ask me and I conclude that PS3 wins 2 out of 3 categories, they've already won this debate.

 

[Moonlight Drive]

Don't know if I'll join the debate, but at this point I'm throwing my support behind Team 360.

 

[Nation]

Team PS3 obviously. I'll be the captain.

 

[Ronnie Gardocki]

PS3 at the LOWEST possible option have far more memory available than the lowest possible option of Xbox, and you have to basically get the top of the line 360 product to even match that much space you get for going for the cheapest PS3.

I love this argument. The fact is unless you're downloading every game, demo, video, and movie while uploading the games to your hard drive you'll NEVER run out of memory with a 20 gig hard drive. I've had mine two years already, and have never had a memory issue. Granted when I stop playing Arcade games, I delete them. I also don't spend thousands of dollars on games and movies, and since the average gamer doesn't as well, they won't have a problem with storage space. Weak sauce for the debate bro.

The PS3 internet services are for free, no subscriptions or pay servers.

That's true.....for now. Sony has been using surveys to get a feel on how much people would be willing to pay to play online. It's coming for PS3 players soon enough, and with the crap they have for online gaming it'll be a better day for PS3 players when they do get the chance to pay for better servers.

PS3's don't have half the problems Microsoft has in terms of the dreaded Red Ring Of Death. PS3 overall is a far more stable and efficient investment.

Old news, and the PS3 has it's own share of problems (and I'm not talking about last weeks debacle). They have what is it called? The Yellow Light of Death? While the RROD struck a lot more people, many have been burned by Sony's inability to produce a console with a set price, or set memory for the device. There have been so many models and price drops with missing features it's hard to keep up. Rumor is last weeks crap was to weed out the PS3 owners who didn't have a slim console, since those were the consoles that weren't affected by the issue....that's just a rumor though. MS has also (and this is what more Sony fanboys ignore) pours millions into fixing people's systems. The 360 also isn't he first system to come out of the box flawed.

The only thing that Xbox has is price reduction and customer support. But that's expected, because if I'm going to pay for my internet I better have some quality customer support.

More selection (and better I might add) arcade game, downloadable content, then there's extra features like Blip, Facebook, 1 Vs. 100. Don't forget faster online servers, far more gamers to play against and faster downloading speeds.

As for games, you could ALMOST say that XBox takes this one. As they have the most consistent exclusives available as they ALWAYS get first dibs on most next gen console games. But then you consider the fact that if PS3 is not involved in some way or another right out of the gate, that they will EVENTUALLY gain rights to the game, and when they do, they make sure to sweeten that deal by making the developers offer them exclusive downloadable content and extra game features that the XBox wouldn't see until the Gold Edition of the game is released. That's been the strategy that Sony has adopted since the beginning though. XBox does it first, PS3 waits a couple months and does it better. That's just the way it is.

Yeah right man. :roll1:

I can't comment on the online play too much since I don't hang around with the elitists, the trolls, the power gamers & the lagging cheaters that run rampant in any online environment today.

The same could be said for PC and PS3 online. I love that you're debating about the systems when you don't have a clue about the biggest component they both have, online play.

Your opinion is now void, thanks for getting that out of the way early on.

 

[Nation]

It's just funny to even compare the 360 to the PS3 currently. Right now the PS3 has a huge lead. Also Facebook is not exclusive to the 360. The PS3 has a web browser so you can go on Facebook.

 

[biggs]

Other than the fact that the 360 seems to continue the trend of being the gun game machine like the original X-Box was, PS3 wins out for one simple reason, that reason being the the controller is better. Sony's been real smart to keep essentially the same controller throughout all the iterations of the Playstation.
Also, from a hardware perspective, PS3 has X-Box 360 beat in reliability and processing power. ApocolyPS3 withstanding, there haven't been really any massive issues with the PS3, while the red ring is still something that plagues the 360 a couple of years after it was discovered. Also, the issue of the 360 scratching disks is inexcusible, considering that Microsoft has several low cost options that would prevent that from happening, the cheapest being rubber bumpers in the console that would only add 15 cents to the production cost of each system. There's so many flaws with the engineering behind the X-Box 360 that I wouldn't even considering buying one.
Also, PS3 has Blu-Ray.

If you need somebody else on the PS3 team, let me know, as I'll like to help if I can, but with FFXIII coming out next Tuesday, I'm not sure how much time I'll actually have.

 

[Quintastic One]

I love this argument. The fact is unless you're downloading every game, demo, video, and movie while uploading the games to your hard drive you'll NEVER run out of memory with a 20 gig hard drive. I've had mine two years already, and have never had a memory issue. Granted when I stop playing Arcade games, I delete them. I also don't spend thousands of dollars on games and movies, and since the average gamer doesn't as well, they won't have a problem with storage space. Weak sauce for the debate bro.

This is just a lie. You obviously have no clue what you're talking about when it comes to space. As I've witnessed several in person testimonials from friends, family, co-workers ect. ect. ect. where they have had to spend long times clearing out memory from their hard drives when they buy new games. And as a gamer, I know where they are coming from with not wanting to delete old info. If you actually spent several hours of your life getting a perfect completion score on ANY game you've ever owned, you would realize this.

That's true.....for now. Sony has been using surveys to get a feel on how much people would be willing to pay to play online. It's coming for PS3 players soon enough, and with the crap they have for online gaming it'll be a better day for PS3 players when they do get the chance to pay for better servers.

Even if they do eventually upgrade to having to pay for the server, it only serves to strengthen my position that Microsoft does something first, but PS3 does it later and does it better. Thanks for aiding my point though.

Old news, and the PS3 has it's own share of problems (and I'm not talking about last weeks debacle). They have what is it called? The Yellow Light of Death? While the RROD struck a lot more people, many have been burned by Sony's inability to produce a console with a set price, or set memory for the device. There have been so many models and price drops with missing features it's hard to keep up. Rumor is last weeks crap was to weed out the PS3 owners who didn't have a slim console, since those were the consoles that weren't affected by the issue....that's just a rumor though. MS has also (and this is what more Sony fanboys ignore) pours millions into fixing people's systems. The 360 also isn't he first system to come out of the box flawed.

The red ring of death is NOT old news. They are still going through several class action lawsuits that have been taking up their time and money to satisfy all the hundreds of customers they screwed by having an ill prepared system. They were in a rush to beat Sony, and how did that work out for them? Several unsatisfied customers, virtually being ignored in Japan in favor of the hometeam, and PS3 has caught up to them and are even beating them in just about every category in terms of sales & reliability. The fact that you are even trying to debate that the PS3 has more problems than the 360 is a joke.

More selection (and better I might add) arcade game, downloadable content, then there's extra features like Blip, Facebook, 1 Vs. 100. Don't forget faster online servers, far more gamers to play against and faster downloading speeds.



Yeah right man. :roll1:

Faster Online Servers because you are paying for it. I already acknowledged this point, because Microsoft BETTER have better online experiences if you're paying for it. This is a non issue.

The same could be said for PC and PS3 online. I love that you're debating about the systems when you don't have a clue about the biggest component they both have, online play.

Your opinion is now void, thanks for getting that out of the way early on.

Translation "I'm going to ignore your opinion because my opinion holds no water and I would rather discredit you over one section of the debate instead of actually knowing what I am talking about and being capable of defending myself properly"

A great game is a great game FIRST, replability SECOND, multiplayer options THIRD and Online Play and Content FOURTH. Online experiences do not make a great game. This is what makes games like Madden and COD completely overrated. Because as a stand alone game it's the same old shit, and in COD's case, ridiculously short campaign modes. Because they count on the Online Communities to keep their sales up. This tells me you are not a true gamer, because if the most important thing to you is the ability to lag out your server so you can glitch the game online in order to beat the 12 year old across the country then you my friend, have no place in this debate.

This is another reason why Sony is king. XBox 360 counts on "DA GRAFFIXZ" and the Online Community of their "Same Old Shit" First Person Shooters and the neverending sequels to those First Person Shooters. They have no flavor outside of that market that is exclusive to them. While Sony has exclusive RPG's from America & Japan. And any proper RPG that has earned it's salt in the gaming world will take you at least 40+ hours to complete. Like Tales of Vesperia, Final Fantasy, Suikoden & Dragon Age. Rather than the crappy six hour speed runs of games like Army of Two, Halo, COD & Gears of War.


And once again, this is coming from a guy who bought the XBox > The PS3 in the first place. I take nothing away from the Microsoft guys as a stand alone system. They have their niche markets and make a shit ton of money off of those markets. But to compare them to Sony at this point is a joke. It's like Microsoft is the annoying Villain at the beginning of your game that you get to enjoy beating the crap out of at random intervals throughout your adventure before you finally beat the game. Microsoft will never be in danger of being bought out by Sony, but they will never come close to being the Top Dog of Gaming.

 

[Ronnie Gardocki]

This is just a lie. You obviously have no clue what you're talking about when it comes to space. As I've witnessed several in person testimonials from friends, family, co-workers ect. ect. ect. where they have had to spend long times clearing out memory from their hard drives when they buy new games. And as a gamer, I know where they are coming from with not wanting to delete old info. If you actually spent several hours of your life getting a perfect completion score on ANY game you've ever owned, you would realize this.

Hahahaha, a lie? I've had a twenty gig hard drive since 2008, with forty six game save files on it, along with about ten arcade games and even got Fable 2 (the full game) on it WITHOUT running out of memory. That's a fact, and you will not run out of space with a twenty gig hard drive if you're deleting arcade games you don't play, and aren't spending tons of money on all kinds of bullshit. Your argument on not enough space is bullshit.

Even if they do eventually upgrade to having to pay for the server, it only serves to strengthen my position that Microsoft does something first, but PS3 does it later and does it better. Thanks for aiding my point though.

How does that help exactly? This is yet another point where you make zero sense. If the PS3 were to do the online gaming better, wouldnt they have the same amount of features and games without charging you a dime? Having to pay for online is yet another blow to Sony fanboys.

The red ring of death is NOT old news. They are still going through several class action lawsuits that have been taking up their time and money to satisfy all the hundreds of customers they screwed by having an ill prepared system. They were in a rush to beat Sony, and how did that work out for them?

It is in fact, OLD news. It's been around since 2006, and the number of systems still failing has rapidly decreased over time. Even with the RROD, only 3% of customers say they wouldn't go back. Three percent....out of a hundred, so yes beating Sony to the punch did work out for them in spades.

Several unsatisfied customers, virtually being ignored in Japan in favor of the hometeam, and PS3 has caught up to them and are even beating them in just about every category in terms of sales & reliability.

It's well known that western developers rarely get any ground in Japan, making your point useless. I wish you'd say something smart already.

The fact that you are even trying to debate that the PS3 has more problems than the 360 is a joke.

Yet, you own a 360....

Faster Online Servers because you are paying for it. I already acknowledged this point, because Microsoft BETTER have better online experiences if you're paying for it. This is a non issue.

Huge selling point for all the PS3 owners who can't find online games or ones who actually get to play and have slowdown or constant loss of connection.

Translation "I'm going to ignore your opinion because my opinion holds no water and I would rather discredit you over one section of the debate instead of actually knowing what I am talking about and being capable of defending myself properly"

I've discredited everything you've said, and only gotten fanboy responses in return. Thanks for making the debate easy for me.

A great game is a great game FIRST, replability SECOND, multiplayer options THIRD and Online Play and Content FOURTH. Online experiences do not make a great game. This is what makes games like Madden and COD completely overrated. Because as a stand alone game it's the same old shit, and in COD's case, ridiculously short campaign modes. Because they count on the Online Communities to keep their sales up.

The highest rated and biggest selling titles have online play, and since you don't play online (you've stated that before), you wouldn't have a clue about them being over rated. You're basically talking straight up out of your ass.

This tells me you are not a true gamer, because if the most important thing to you is the ability to lag out your server so you can glitch the game online in order to beat the 12 year old across the country then you my friend, have no place in this debate.

Hahahahhaha, I have a gamerscore over 20K, I play the games online and offline, so I experience every single portion of a game to give it a fully educated opinion. That makes me a true gamer ya moron, while you're ignoring online because it's "over rated". Also, I never glitch or lag, I'm not a cheater. I love how you're now claiming I'm not a true gamer and cheater while ignoring my gamerscore and never playing against me online.

Let me know when you've got a clue about the subject.

 

[Kassidy]

Hahahaha, a lie? I've had a twenty gig hard drive since 2008, with forty six game save files on it, along with about ten arcade games and even got Fable 2 (the full game) on it WITHOUT running out of memory. That's a fact, and you will not run out of space with a twenty gig hard drive if you're deleting arcade games you don't play, and aren't spending tons of money on all kinds of bullshit. Your argument on not enough space is bullshit.

100% true I had a 20 gb for 3 years with no problem and then i upgraded cuz my gf started to use my 360.

 

[Ronnie Gardocki]

100% true I had a 20 gb for 3 years with no problem and then i upgraded cuz my gf started to use my 360.

Thank you, at least someone on here knows what the hell they're talking about.

 

[Kassidy]

In actuality PS3 needs the bigger hdd because its not a option to install games its a must. B4 you play a game you have to install them, my friend has a 40 gb hdd and he can only have like 5 games installed and games saves and at that point he doesn't have enough free space to even enter the ps store lol. Which idk if this is a good thing or not so hdd space shouldn't even be brought up.

I am not taking any side on this though, I have both, I love both, I am just a gamer. thanks for the rep Ron