Platform Wars: XBOX360vsPS3vsPC

By soujiroseta · Mar 8, 2008 · ·
  1. The end of 2007 saw a number of spectacular games send the year off in style, which were mainly aimed at the next generation consoles. I have been in plenty of arguments over XBOX vs PS but people always seem to neglect the power of the PC. I have recently played CRYSIS, CALL OF DUTY 4, GRAW 1&2, RAINBOW 6 VEGAS and WORLD IN CONFLICT, and it seems to me that the current set of next-gen consoles are at the moment on par if not below the PC.
    With PS3 already having frame rate problems with games such as HEAVENLY SWORD, it raises eyebrows as to how much the thing can handle. For me the PS3 will be surpassed by PC within a matter of months and Sony will have a real problem on their hands.
    As for XBOX their multi player system is amazing but i have no conclusive evidence over which one holds more users online, XBOX or PC; so in that regard they are somewhat similar to me. Graphically speaking the 360 is on more or less the same level as PS3, but you must consider the release date of 360 being 2005, so for it to be on par with PS3 is something. the next XBOX is going to be something so Sony are in a bother.
    Now the PC, its power varies from user to user and is constantly upgradable so as far as this argument goes PC wins hands down, its graphically superior by far. it is with a heavy heart that i have substituted my PS2 console for a PC. Even though the PC might be the gaming centre of the future it will not be able to match the experience of sitting hours on end in front of a TV watching your third person character run around solving puzzles and pummelling bad guys or going online and delivering the business end of your weapons to players globally. In 2008 the argument shouldn't be whether PS3 or XBOX is better, but when the CONSOLES will be able to compete on an equal front with the PC.

Comments

  1. (Mark)
    What big games have come out for the PC in the last year though? Granted I'm not a big gamer, all I've heard about is WoW and Second Life. I got a 360 a while ago, and I feel it definitely has more bang for your buck than any other console out there. I'm not talking about graphics capability or anything like that, but games. It just has so many good games, where as the PS3 doesn't.
  2. DavidGil
    I don't really rate the xbox360 on a technical basis. Or would software/hardware be the correct term? *shrugs*

    They're well known for breaking down, hence Microsoft extending the warranty on all consoles by three years, repairing them for free. It's a lot of messing around at the end of the day, sending them out to be repaired.

    Don't have many complaints with the others. I concur about games with the PS3 but that'll change soon I wager or at least, it'll be better. Free online play if people are into that has to work in it's favor as well.

    I do like the fact you can play blu-rays on the PS3 also and the PC is the same as it's ever been.

    I have the three of them for the record, with the PS3 my parents for the blu-rays. Xbox is currently being fixed for the second time.
  3. Bluemouth
    Oh come on. Your analysis is very biased and incorrect. And Connolly - the PS3 has only been out just over a year now, of course it doesn't have as many games.

    I'm just going to defend the PS3 on a number of fronts here. Firstly, online multiplayer is free with the PS3, unlike Xbox Live. Secondly, have you even played Heavenly Sword? I found the game tedious but it had no framerate issues. Thirdly, since you have no idea, the PS3's superior exclusive Resistance: Fall of Man (which demolishes the heavily over-hyped Halo series) will support up to 60 players online, the most any game has been able to achieve thus far. Not only that, but the game will feature two separate campaigns - one for single player, the other for co-op. So how can a game feature so much in one package? The sheer amount of memory and cell processing must cause the machine to explode? Wrong. You'll find the PS3 has been built to annihilate the 360, which couldn't even muster up the strength to play a game like R:FM2, and would probably overheat within half an hour since it already overheats and breaks with its current selection of games ...

    I will admit the PC has astounding graphical capabilities. Far Cry 2 will display this (but since that's no longer a PC-exclusive it isn't the best example). But a majority of the gaming community prefers console gaming over that experienced with the PC. And in my opinion, consoles are just way more fun.
  4. soujiroseta
    you're right consoles are just plain fun. the joy of the pad and the tv is incomparable, i suppose its still too early to make judgements on the ps3 its still early days, but i was nonetheless shocked when i saw assassins creed split screen for both consoles, even oblivoin elder scrolls. the difference was meagre.
  5. lordofhats
    I wouldn't say Resistence Demolished Halo. Certainly was fun like most games from Naughty Dog but Halo was hardly blown away. I'm not picking one over the other. They both rock.

    As for PC's your joking right? The PC gaming market is in chaos and on the verge of collapse (No one wants to spend $1000 every two years to upgrade their PC so they can keep playing games. Heard of Crysis and UT3?). Epic has already announced their all but pulling out of PC games for now until the market becomes more stable. Other companies are following suit and many PC games have become nothing more than console ports. The PC gaming market is falling apart because of the costs invovled in participating with it.

    Why spend $1000 every two or three years on new graphics cards, processors, and the like when you can buy a new console every five or six years for $200-$600 bucks? Its not like the games are any less fun.
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice