Disclaimer: Yes, I am a fanboy. No, that doesn't mean I can't think straight. Fanboyism and extreme fanboyism are two different things. I'm not a blind, extreme fanboy. Thanks for your time. Read on.
When was I supposed to do this column? Yeah, a very, very long time ago. I apologize for the delay, but here I am, ready to show you what the Xbot is made of.
Today, I'm going to show you an estimated price point comparison between the PlayStation 3 and the Xbox 360. I'm going to ignore Nintendo completely, and just do an all out console war comparison between the two behemoths of the console wars. And, I'll tell you right now, a lot of you are going to disagree with me, a lot of you will agree with me. I'll be called a fanboy, I'll be labeled a genius, maybe I'll be ripped to pieces by you folks. But I'm not afraid to face the fact that the console wars are coming.
I want to share my opinions with you, be them fanboyish or not. If you don't want to hear them, you don't care, you think I'm stupid, then don't follow the jump. But if you have a slight bit interest in what I have to say, go ahead.
First, my inspiration for this column. Bert. I've promised Bert many times that I'd get around to the column, but this time I'm going to stick to it. Love ya Bert, buddy. As I was thinking of what I should do the first edition of the column about, I read an interesting post by Brian Crecente over at Kotaku. It was a price check between the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3, with some estimated figures, of course. But I thought it was completely wrong.
From a gaming sense.
Now, I'm not going to go and dissect his post, because that's a blatant attack and not a representation of my opinion in a serious manner. I also believe his intention was just to prove that Sony isn't the only one charging high prices, and not to start up another fight over the console wars. I salute you, Mr. Crecente. So I'm going to do my own comparison between the PlayStation 3 and the Xbox 360, and I hope you'll find mine much more in-depth and much more based around the gamer.
First, let us do a straight price point comparison - no games, just the consoles and maybe some peripherals. Disclaimer: I know some of the PlayStation prices are estimated. Sue me.
The Xbox 360:
Console: $399.99
Extra controller: $49.99
Year of XBL Gold: $49.99
Play-and-Charge Kit: $19.99
Second Battery: $11.99
---
Total: $531.95
The PlayStation 3:
Console: $599.99
Extra controller: $49.99*
Online Subscription: $49.99**
Battery Charger: $19.99*
Second Battery: $11.99*
---
Total: 731.95
(I know that all the items I mentioned cancelled each other out, and that the plain difference just comes from the prices of the consoles themselves. I just wanted to point out - those items are the ones that count for your gaming experience. Not an HD-DVD add-on, not WiFi, nothing like that. All this is what you need for a good gaming experience.)
* Prices estimated using the Xbox 360 equivalents.
** If you think that Sony will be offering all online multiplayer free, no exceptions (excluding MMOs), you are an idiot. It will either be Sony charging for playing online, and not for the basic services (ie. Xbox Live Silver), or some publisher taking advantage of the open online system Sony is offering. Sony said basic services, folks. Free online play won't happen, unless the multiplayer is so basic it sucks.
There you have it. With a simple console experience, with both system's higher-end editions, the Xbox 360 is exactly 200 dollars cheaper. You get the same high-definition, 720p experience. You get an extra controller for both consoles. You can charge both just the same. The PlayStation has a 40 gig hard drive advantage, and the 360 has price advantage. Advantage: Xbox 360.
But what if you get the cheaper, stripped down version of the PlayStation 3? Take a hundred dollars off the price, but loose memory stick capability, WiFi, and HDMI capability. Memory stick loss is obvious. WiFi is just another hit to the Sony "this is what we have" bandwagon. And when Sony is advertising 1080p so often, and at the same time developers are going for 720p, and yet the HDMI cables don't even come with the more expensive model, you loose it buying the cheaper version!
Then again, the Xbox 360 Core is worse than the PlayStation "Core". Advantage: Xbox 360. Yeah, that's right. I don't consider the Core a console. The PlayStation Cripple is, but it's still too expensive. A total hundred dollars more expensive than the Xbox 360. And for the lesser PlayStation! Blasphemy!
What's up next? Games. Because, you know, I don't care about the fact the PlayStation may run 1% better than the Xbox 360. It's all about the games.
PlayStation 3:
- Full Auto 2: Battlelines
- I happen to be one of the few people who liked Full Auto on the Xbox 360. It was an enjoyable experience, but it wasn't something amazing. Full Auto 2 being an exclusive to the PlayStation 3 means nothing. It's almost classifiable as a port. The only thing to look at in Full Auto 2 that reigns supreme over Full Auto, is deathmatch.
- Warhawk
- It looks like a fun little flight shooter game. But really, PlayStation 3 motion sensing is lame. I still hold to that. Unless this game does something amazing, it's just a good title, but nothing killer.
- MotorStorm
- Another game that looks like fun. I'm sure it'll be a great game, but again, it's nothing spectacular.
- Resistance: Fall of Man
- This game doesn't look amazing, this game doesn't play any way special, and it isn't worth the 22 (it was 22, correct?) gigs Insomniac claims it is. Crysis is 6 gigs. And it looks amazing. Resistance is nothing. Nothing.
- Genji: Days of the Blade
- Giant enemy crabs, for MASSIVE damage!
- Afrika
- This is the PlayStation killer app. Afrika aims to demolish Halo 3, Gears of War, and Viva Pinata all in one sweep!
- Heavenly Sword
- I have to admit, Heavenly Sword does look like lots of fun. It could be a great game. I can't wait to see what else comes of it.
- Metal Gear Solid 4
- Okay, you know what, if you think another iteration of Metal Gear is worth getting a five to six hundred dollar console for, go ahead.
- Final Fantasy Series
- When will it ever end!?
Cancelled PlayStation 3 Games (according to Technophilia):
- Killing Day - looked good, but now it's gone. I was looking forward to seeing more.
- Theseis - on the 360 still.
- Elveon - on the 360 still.
- Endless Saga - cancelled. Was apparently short on innovation.
- Condemned: Criminal Origins - this port was cancelled, the 360 and PC versions remain.
- Smackdown '07 - still on other platforms.
- Splinter Cell: Double Agent - why this isn't coming out on the PS3 is beyond me. Ubisoft is multiplatform, this one is a shocker.
- Black Blade & Dark RPG - two FROM Software games, both cancelled.
- Alan Wake - exclusive to Xbox 360 and Vista platforms.
Not only that, Atari and SNK have shown their intentions to not release PlayStation 3 games until after 2006, perhaps even further down the line.
Now, many say, what about Xbox 360 games that were cancelled?
- Fear & Respect - also cancelled on the PlayStation 3!
- Scarface - also cancelled on the PlayStation 3!
- The Sopranos - also cancelled on the PlayStation 3!
- Frame City Killer - yeah, well, this one was 360-only, and 360 cancelled.
What exciting games does the Xbox 360 have down the pipes, besides the already great titles released so far? Let me show you.
- Crackdown
- Coming to you straight from the creator of Grand Theft Auto, Crackdown doesn't look great, but the idea of GTA with a superhero sounds fun to me! Co-op for the win!
- Fuzion Frenzy 2
- Who doesn't love Fuzion Frenzy? Twisted System was great fun, especially with four players. Now, with Live, Fuzion Frenzy 2 Twisted System could be a killer app by itself!
- Gears of War
- Gears of War. If I need to explain Gears of War to you, you need to be shot.
- Rainbow Six 3: Vegas
- It's Rainbow Six, except next-gen. As long as they don't pull a "Lockdown", this should be a hit on Xbox Live.
- Small Arms
- It's like Super Smash Brothers, except with guns. And on Xbox Live? Hell yeah!
- Castle Crashers
- The classic-arcade-style sidescroller, another Xbox Live Arcade masterpiece.
- Blue Dragon
- One of the Japanese RPGs that Microsoft is counting on for success, it definitely looks like it can possibly take a hold of Japanese gamers.
- Halo 3
- The supposed final game in the trilogy, it's Halo 3. I'm shivering just thinking about it.
- Fable 2
- No matter how many promises went unfulfilled, Fable was still an awesome game. I can't wait to see what Fable 2 brings to the table.
- Lost Planet
- The demo on Xbox Live speaks for itself. The demo provided multitudes of enjoyment.
- Mass Effect
- If Knights of the Old Republic 3 isn't coming out soon, Mass Effect looks like a great substitute from BioWare.
Assassin's Creed is coming to both consoles, as well as the PC. Fight Night Round 3 and Blazing Angels have already been out on the Xbox 360, and their appearances on the PlayStation 3 are just awkward. Especially since Blazing Angels failed on the 360. Maybe not so awkward with FNR3.
Obvious advantage: Xbox 360. More quality games.
Not to mention Sony is ignoring the world, besides the US and Japan. They said the day 1 release in Europe was a vote of confidence in the European market. Yeah, that's a whole lot of confidence to delay a major console release in such a huge territory. Not to mention the fact it's everywhere, not just Europe, that's cancelled. Only us Americans and the Japanese will be getting the PlayStation 3. Way to have a world-wide launch, Sony!
Well, I think I've said enough for one column. My point today and here is, the PlayStation 3 has a Blu-ray drive you don't need for gaming, a price you don't want to pay for gaming, games that have equivalents on the Xbox 360, missing games you want that are on the 360, and is not the gaming machine you expect it to be.
Xbox Live has experience with the online field, Sony Online isn't centralized and won't be the same online experience. You can't reach the same level Live has reached with one try. It just can't happen. Especially if you aren't charging for it. Because then we'll all know it's garbage. And if you don't charge for it, publishers will, for their individual games. What a disaster that would be!
The Xbox 360 reigns supreme in these here console wars so far, with Sony delaying their system to the end of time. The choice is yours, folks. Do you want gaming now, for a great price, or do you want Sony's hyped up, hard to develop for, ultimate gaming flop? Until Sony shows me some killer games, I'm not interested.
Game on!
Psssst.. your forgot Forza 2, good compitition for sonys GT series
Gears of War. If I need to explain Gears of War to you, you need to be...
chopped up with a CHAINSAW BAYONET! Best game weapon ever?
Gears of War. If I need to explain Gears of War to you, you need to be...
..thrown into a vat of acid in a glass case, sunk to the bottom, then open the bottom of the case.
Well put my friend. I won't be getting one any time soon, but someday, when the price is right, I'll have one. But for now, Wii60 fo life.
Mass Effect: Better than KotOR3, because they have total freedom to make their own IP. More risk yes, but I suspect more reward. If it sells well, they already have a Mass Effect trilogy planned.
Rainbow Six Vegas: *Four player* coop!
Gears of War: Not only is the story fully playable through coop, but unless CliffyB is a total liar, you will actually be able to SAVE YOUR GAME early and often (I'm looking at you, PDZ).
Also, I give Crackdown for it's cel shaded, living comic book look. If the gameplay (including online coop!) stands up to scrutiny, this could be a big one (esp. since Microsoft will be promoting the hell out of it).
Sherveen, I totally agree. I am an Xbox 360 fanboy as well, but not a closed minded one. I made this decision last generation. Nothing, I mean nothing, can come even within a lightyear of Halo 2, especially on Xbox Live. I have given the other consoles a chance, but my loyalty stays with Xbox. The PS3, well the best word I can think of, is unstable. It looks like they took a bunch of random shit, put it together with tape, and called it the next playstation. See you on Xbox Live! gamertag: fanman791
I hate to be negative, but you do appear VERY biased in this article...
Basically, you put down almost every PS3 game (though, most of them deserved it). Really, I'm just surprised by what you said about Resistance: Fall of Man, because it looks pretty good to me...
Overall, the PS3 is seriously lacking in the quality games lineup. I'm pretty much with you on every point in the article (I do have a 360 and disliked the PS2, after all), but you did come across as very slanted, in the article...
On a completely different note, I agree that Forza 2 should, without question or hesitation, be on the list of Xbox 360 games. It's had me excited about the system since it was called the Xenon...
Anyway, I'll probably catch you on GoW, when it comes out, Andy... :p
Sherveen,
Replace the play and charge and extra battery with the quick charge kit.
($29.99). Its 2 dollars cheaper and works better IMO.
I don't think its fair to include the PS3 online service with a $50 price point. That is a complete unknown. You should do a comparrison as to what it will REALLY cost you to get a PS3 in the next 6 months from launch. The true cost of the PS3 will be:
Console $599 +
Store Bundle: (Controller, charger, 3 games) I estimate: $300-350
So about $900-$950 bills
That will be retail, not Ebay...
PS3 will need a Blu-Ray drive to store the 17 hours of CG animation and 36 hours of talking green heads in MGS4.
Hypertonic: He came off as slanted but you agree with his points? I think that he is just being very blunt, but not slanted. It isn't biased but a cold hard representation of the truth of Sony.
Sherveen: Awesome column. I agree with EVERY point. Can't wait for #2.
hmm, I'm having a deja-vu moment here. But anyway..
That would be a fine comparison if you were comparing equal systems. You need to add the HD-DVD drive for the 360 to equal them out and then look, the prices are the same.
First, to TwistedFate:
No, that's absolutely what I was trying to prove against. For a gaming console, you don't need unproven technology that won't be used for gaming. HD-DVD is totally unnecessary for the gaming experience. As is Blu-ray.
Second, to Maj Malfunction:
Okay, so I take away the $50 price point for Sony Online. Then we can assume that the online service for the PS3 will be a non-centralized, messy, perhaps garbage-like PS2ish service. In which case, 360 gains another advantage because of Live. I doubt that, without the proper money-making business involved, Sony will produce a spectacular system.
But the problem is, a gamer doesn't live in a vacuum. If said gamer wishes to use his 360 for more than just a gaming console, he is screwed in your comparison.
No, not at all. If said gamer wishes to use his 360 for more than just a gaming console, he can buy the HD-DVD add-on and have his fun with that. It doesn't add to the gaming experience. If you want it, get it. It's a choice. That's the issue. Sony is force-feeding Blu-ray to you.
After all, the most important thing for a gaming console to have is a good gaming experience. That's why it's for gaming.
By the way - wasn't it mentioned sometime around E3 by somebody or another that the Xbox 360 and the HD-DVD drive will sell for less than the total cost of the PlayStation 3? I don't remember where this was said or who said it, but I remember hearing about it.
Yep $399.99 + $199.99 = $599.98 which is less than the PS3's $599.99.
I can see your point, but many people also think MS is screwing them by making them buy extra stuff to get it up what a PS3 can do. Even if the math says it's equal there is a subtle public perception at work.
1) That wasn't my point. First, you don't know the HD-DVD add-on price. Second, I said I heard this, I didn't say I knew it for a fact. Third, I'm sure Microsoft wouldn't advertise it like that, even if that was the price.
2) To get up to what a PS3 can do? The PS3 is so expensive because of Blu-ray! With the 360, HD-DVD is an option, exactly how it should be. Instead of driving up the price to play HD-DVD movies, Microsoft is keeping it low and thinking of games and gamers.
Those who think Microsoft is screwing them need to be smacked, honestly. Sony is the one pushing Blu-ray into your home, and it isn't helping the gaming industry while doing so.
1) You don't know the price either, but everybody is speculating at $199.99. Miscrosoft isn't advertising that way. Somebody at a convention said something that may or may not be true.
2) Yes, to get up to what a PS3 can do. Out of the box, a PS3 is more capable than a 360. It may be functionality that is not strictly necessary for gaming, but it is more capable.
Don't get me wrong, I would rather have it an option. The PS3 is not a gaming console, it is a Blu-Ray player that has gaming tacked on.
I agree with your assessment fo what a free Sony on-line service will be. I think you can subtract the $50 and go with the realization it is NOT going to be Live
I'm glas that MS didn't force the HDDVD down our throughts. I do not have a high def tv, so to me Blue-Ray, and HDDVD are a complete wast of money for me.I'm sure that there are many others that have the same view. The high def market is still very new, and many people still have standard tvs in their homes.
Exactly where I was going Tray D.. There's tons of people out there with regular TV's (glad I'm not one of em :) ), but it's a big factor... If I didn't have an hdtv, I'd be royally pissed to buy a "gaming" machine that could've cost me 200 dollars less if it didn't have a special laser inside of it that I don't need to play the f'ing game. nice article Sherveen, best on here in a while.
Maj Malfunction: Okay, then, to even the gaming experience out, I take away $50 from the 360 for Live. Same price difference.
TwistedFate: That's exactly my point, good sir! This article was to point out the prices for gaming capability, not "play-Sony-formats" capability, nor "play-HD-DVD-capability". Therefore, the HD-DVD add-on should not be counted.
Thanks for all the comments, everyone.
Twisted Fate has a good point. You should tack on an additional 200-400 dollars to the price of a PS3 for an extra HD-DVD reader to sit in your entertainment center.
If you decide to choose to go with HD-DVDs, which have better selling points right now (but may or may not have them in the future) such as capacity, quality, and speed; then you'll have to purchase a separate unit.
So if I buy a PS3 and decide I want movies on 30GB disks as opposed to 25GB disks I am still forced to pay for blu-ray. That is where MS has it over Sony. With the 360 I have the choice of paying for one or the other (or both) as opposed to the PS3 which mandates blu-ray, whether you have decided to go with it or not.
Kalroy
Damn Sherveen, it took you forever to get that article out. How much do I have to badger you, anyway...? Nice job, from one Xbot to another.
"PS3 will need a Blu-Ray drive to store the 17 hours of CG animation and 36 hours of talking green heads in MGS4."
Maj I agree with much that you say, save for this tiny detail:
Since the beginning, the Metal Gear series has NEVER used CGI for it's cut-scenes, they have always been in-game run. Kojima is adamant about this, and proved that MGS4 was using in-game for the Tokyo Game Show 2005 trailer but doing the EXACT same demonstration that MS did for Halo 3 at E3 2006.
Let's keep it clear kids, MGS4 is showing it's in-game colors.
Fair enough Hawkes. It still doesn't make the game any less boring.
I LOVED MGS1. I loved the gameplay when you actually got to play in MGS2. But, I hated the 36 hours of talking green heads so mcuh plus the annoying long and boring cut-scenes that I will never touch another one.
I should probably save the CGI comments for the Final Fantasy series.
FANBOY!
"I should probably save the CGI comments for the Final Fantasy series."
You'll get no argument from me there.. :)
I know this section is called Xbot 360 or something, and that Sherveen started the article off by saying he's a biased Xbox 360 fanboy (though not of the extreme type), but having that said doesn't it discredit an article comparing the two systems somewhat? I mean it's obvious which system the author is going to be writing in a better light.
I mean no offense, and I agree with some of the points in the article, I just think that it's wrong to pretend to be open minded and not a "blind" fanboy when it's so obvious you want the PS3 to fail miserably.
Give 8Bucks a round of applause...
Well, I'm not sure whose side I'm taking by saying this, but I suppose his bashing on the PS3 GAMES is similar to my bashing on Sony's PR?
Well, no actually, I think you're coming down a bit hard on games that aren't yet reviewable; my gripes with Sony are their existing, tangible problems.
George: I thought he was also talking about 360 games that aren't reviewable yet. I figgure that pretty much levels the playing feild save the fact the 360 titles have had dev kits for longer.
I?m sorry to say I agree with him I think sony is to making people have HD TVs when at the end of the day a game consol which is what they are so in my view is what they should be used for yea its nice to have something extra but they want to stop competing with each other and join force I know this would never happen but just think what they both could come up have and they both make loads of money out of it well anyway sorry about that got carried away
lemme translate that for you, Andy...
"I'm sorry to say, but I agree with him. I think Sony is trying to make people buy [Their] HD TV's when at the end of the day, the PS3 should be used for gaming, [not the use of HDTV/Blu ray]. And yeah, it's nice to have something extra, but they [Sony and Microsoft] probably want to stop competing, and join forces. Although I know this will never happen, I think they both would get the advantage out of it and make loads of money.
Well, anyway, I'm sorry about that... I got carried away."
Something along those lines? It's not easy translating always, good Sir.
Anyway, My own comments...
I agree that there's something terribly wrong at Sony, as if they've lost their spirit. The amount of negative news they've received is weighing down on them as well; The threat of the Xbox 360 and it's flagship game, Gears of War releasing the same week as the PS3. They know what they did with the Dreamcast launch back in 2000/2001, where they ruined the DC's launch by releasing Final Fantasy IX (9). As we all know, the DC failed to succeed in the console wars and quickly bited the dust.
It's been suggested by many press articles that the PS3 is to fail; at my college people have been talking about how Sony puts all it's money on the PS4 already, and the PS3's power to be just slightly better than the PS2 -- Combined with the meager launch (Although I love MGS4, I want that game badly, and Heavenly Sword sounds like being quite a nice title), and the Sony PR boasting the Next Gen to start with the PS3 launch among several other things, i do think Sony has a problem.
I'm interested to see what will happen in the week of 12 November - 19 November.
- JC
This is an interesting article, not because I'm also a fanboy, but because he takes the direct negatives of the PS3. Yes, the Gay-Station released today, but who's to say the Wii won't strike it down? Also, I'd like to add another point coinciding with this article post that since the launch of the two consoles(Wii and the gaystation) have launched, I'm sure Microsoft will have to step it up to keep the spotlight on them. They've already launched Gears of War, and added the shocking details on the Halo 3 beta testing next year(which I'm already drooling over). Here's to the real beginning of the next-gen console war. Wii60 fo life and we'll be the last ones laughing when Sony takes their fall.
#gamerandy on irc.gamesurge.net
Port: 20609
Password: chapple
