nextgen console question again(woot i know)
 

I just sold my priest account on wow for $750, and after deciding between liqiour clothes and console, i finally decided to get a console, and have been torn between the different consoles, and i know this question has been asked a million times, but after all the debating in my head, theres only one concern that worries me the most.


the one thing im afraid of is xbox will slowly get all rights to the games i want to play atm, madden '08 is coming out for ps3 and xbox, so im safe with that, but im afraid that with time the popularity of the xbox will drive games i love like dmc4 or metal gear solid to be xbox only, and that would suck hardcore style if i got a ps3, wondering if theres any hints of this happening in the future.


the only battle i have is xbox has a better selection of games atm, but millions of stories of fires and loud fans and karate chops n chicken sauce kind of drive me away, and paying to play online is kind of frightening. the ps3 has a blu-ray (w/e i dont know if itll be the next big thing or not) has the only game ill really play (madden '08 and maybe guitar hero) and wii has a small argument in the corner of the room, just cuz it looks fun.

i know the ps3 costs more, but if i pay for xbox live gold then wouldnt the price catch up eventually? and i heard BOTH sides about the capabilities of the machine, some say ps3 has more potential and is better graphics wise and others say that the 360 is more advanced n what not..

again like the 9032840 post before me, looking for some feedback, mainly on the first question (games being only for xbox later) and the last (which machine is better)


thanks in advance-
mike

PS3 = 500-600 USD. Xbox Core = 270-300 USD. Year long subscription to Live = 50 USD. So yes, it would eventually catch up, but it would take 4-6 years to do so.

I recommend you refer to this thread. It will answer plenty of questions, lol.

BTW, the 360 is more powerful graphics wise. It has 512 mb's of dedicated video memory, with the GPU core clocked at 500 mhz, paired with a 3.2 ghz tri-core processor. The PS3 only has 256mb's of video memory, with a similiarly clocked core.

thanks for the input, ive read every thread i could find on this forum about it, but the main concern is


xbox- my shit will catch fiyah, not cool


ps3- scared that down the line, it wont get games like gta n shit cuz of xbox popularity

thats basically it

Those were only launch console models. Your xbox won't suddenly burst into flames and burn down your house :rolleyes:.

You'd be fine with one of the newer models out though.

thats kind of good lol, that was a big concern, but eb games is giving away 5 free bluray dvd's w/ the ps3 lol

But you said yourself that there weren't many good titles or exclusives for the PS3, and the cost will never justify itself. On the topic of online services, the 360's Live is worth the 50 USD a year when you compare it to the "free" service for PS3. Some game companies may charge you anyway to play online for their games. Plus, you can only play games online on the PS3 after you jump through 5 flaming hoops, stand on one finger, while balancing a 5 course meal from a 5 star menu on the tip of your nose, while wearing a harry-potter-look-a-like costume. Then you get to enjoy all the shotty-ness of the PS3's online service.

And I've had my 360 since launch, and I have never had any problems. And yes, the newer models are much more, um, refined.

Yeah, because after a month or so your Xbox wont even turn on to get hot...
seriously, if your gonna buy an Xbox, just go for the Elite model, anything else and your just throwing your money away. Secondly, dont expect for a moment that any game made by a major 3rd party cross platform company like Capcom or Rockstar would be exclusive to any system. It kills the profits margins. Resident evil 4 came out for every system under the sun because exclusivity deals in the long term kill a companies profit lines. same reason they even started making GTA for the X-box so it stands to reason that they arent going to make the same mistake in reverse.

Honestly. i would just save the money and put it towards a high end PC.

Xbox gets my vote for you.

I remember posting a thread not too long ago about how microsoft had lost a fair bit of money because of replacing peoples xbox's under the purchase warrenty. This sounds bad. Its not it means Microsoft are being good and replacing xboxs should anything go wrong. Mines fine never had any trouble with it . (hope im not tempting fate)

is madden '08 going to be 30 fps on the ps3? and 60 fps on the 360? i will shit myself

Umm...where did you get that idea?

And I'm pretty positive thats a no.

That's never going to happen.

PS3 News: EA: Madden 08 PS3 "Will Not Run At 60fps"

i just died a bit on the inside.. talk about ps3 getting owned :( totally not cool

Not cool indeed.

Thats strange :uhm:

how do you mean?

Yes. Explain yourself SteVen!

A difference of 30 FPS is freaking huge. If that fact were to become widely known for potential Sony customers.. I don't think it would be too good.

Seriously, doesn't that say something about the hardware? 30 freaking frames behind?

Says more about lazy programming from EA since the PS3's hardware has been proven to run high detail games at over 50 fps constant.

Course i really hate EA with all of my heart and soul so i might be bias.

the jerks.

I have to agree, EA used to be a prime developer of games, but over the years they have rapidly declined with the polish and attention to detail they used to portray. Look at CNC3 for example, meant to be a brilliant competitive RTS, I got bored after a few hours of game play. Finished the campaigns and haven't touched it since.

But then again, while the PS3's hardware is good, the software that runs that hardware isn't so much. All it really comes across to me as is a giant black box that held together mashed pieces of hardware.

Nice paperweight though.

it hurts i was leaning one way and the next minute i was leaning the other, i got a ps3 and afterwards i come home and find out about the fps issue, that just killed me, mostly because madden '08 is probably the only game ill be playing for a while, im now relying on the hope that if ever ps3 should fall behind and is uncapable of running games as effectively as an xbox that they will updgrade the software for free, or do some sort of thing similar to what they did w/ the old ps2's and the newer slimmer ones, or something :(.

in the end what drove me to get the ps3 is because im not much of a fps guy and it just didnt "feel" right to get a xbox, since ive played playstation since the days of ff7 and castelvania, and all those good times, its hard for me to let go, weak ass argument to decide upon in the end i know, but when i bought it i was thinking , both consoles are getting madden '08, cool im set lol, now i feel like i got owned, again. story of my life no joke lol




pardon the wall of text



edit: Madden NFL 08: Xbox 360 vs. PS3 news from 1UP.com <--- watched that video quite a few times, lol, waiting for tommorow at midnight to experience it myself, the reveiws of ncaa '08 on ps3 were poor compared to the xbox 360 simply because of the framerate, scary stuff :(

Side note about online play. Sony have made it so that game developers can charge you to play their games online on the Ps3.


So online play isn't going to be free on the Ps3.

Thats what was strange ;).

Mine was a core system and I've not had a problem with it since buying it over a year ago.


(Note it's fully upgraded now)

Ive always favored my Xbox to my PS (both iterations) when it came to owning a game that was available for both consoles simply because of the Xbox better average performance (i also like the controller better). Sports games have ALWAYS been Xboxs domain, its what made live popular when the console first came out. EA knows this and practically purpose builds their sports games to rain silky on the hardware.
Now if GTA rolls and sucks balls on the PS3, well. you might as well sound the salute cause that console will be dead.

Sony has as of late pissed me off, first with removing the Dual Shock and replacing it with the atrocious 6 axis and then trying to force games to utilize its gimmicky nature. Im all for violently swinging my gamepad to buttstroke some noob in Resistance but i prefer using a button because it doesnt delay my tactile response for the NEXT guy charging around the corner. the upcoming warhawk i hear is going to make heavy use of the 6 axis joystick and this makes me shudder.

Lets keep this on topic please. I don't know where the Madden 08 stuff came from.

It IS on topic. Asking about a comparison between the 2 consoles and then engaging in a direct comparison between 1 of the most popular game franchises around that is available for both systems kinda lends support to one side of the argument.

just humor me for a sec could you post a list of all your upgrades including live and your base system and all their cost next to each upgrade and the just tally it up for me

I actually did the same thing...they were out of the Platinum models during release so I ended up getting a Core and upgrading it. So..lets see...

Core system = $300
HD = $100
XBL = $50 a year.

And a grand total of $450.

Later on I also bought 2 wireless controllers and another wired one. Which came out to about $140. If you wanna add that in its $590. That gives you 360, HD, Xboxlive, and 4 controllers. Pretty much good to go.

see theres my point to all the people saying how much more expensive the PS3 is. the PS3 already has the HD-DVD player in the form of blue ray, online is free and i don't see any company charging for it any time in the future. and after the price drop and trading in my old ps2 and 14 ps2 games with plenty left over that i could have traded in i actually paid less for my PS3 and i still have the extra controllers, online, and I'm up to 4 games.

Now and frankly lets face it both systems are damn similar. Yes people are going to say you don't have to upgrade it but lets face it from what I've seen almost every one is making the cost about the same for both systems

Also why are people so upset about losing the duel shock? All it was was a little vibrating feature that i personally never payed much attention to nor found very important?

The Dualshock made you feel like you were in the game! You can feell all the carnage you were making.

For a number of reasons. It was very well implemented. The first time i held a dual shock was when i was playing MGS and the hind helicopter flies over head. It starts as a gentle rumble, peaks to a good roar and then gentle peeters out. it was very cinematic and cued perfectly with the game.

Now we got a pissant motion sensing array that doesnt take into effect that not everybody plays with the damn gamepad facing vertical, i play with the thing horizontal as if it were laying flat on the table, so when i play certain games (COD3 among them) it requires me to position the joystick in an uncomfortable manner in order to proceed. its aggravating.

Plus lacking the centre weight kinda throws off the balance of the thing. but some people like really light joysticks so i wont fault it there.

forgot how that little vibration = say kraitos being trough trough the wall in the beginning to god of war 2 :rolleyes:

Oh but i thought the PS3 was ment to do everything and still be able to produce high end graphics at 60 fps, looks like $ony f***** up on that one, as usual.

Still does far more than the 360 can or will ever be able to do. The issue at hand now is that programming for it is a bitch. When you get lazy, sloppy ass games are the result (such as EA's PS3 versions). When they take their time, outstanding and smooth games such as Resistance and Lair are the result.

I'm curious, what can the PS3 do that you would consider "Far more" than the Xbox 360 capability? I don't intend to sound patronising, just curious.

it serves as a better paperweight. i bought a ps3 and although im bummed out that its 30fps for madden '08, ninja gaiden is 60fps and its pretty beast thus far, and i think im ok w/ my decision

A paperweight. Hah.

I don't consider myself biased towards any console or system, but prefer to to weigh up the pros and cons of each system and then decide for myself on what is better.

While the FPS difference for Madden on the PS3 or 360 is enormous, it is one game. But that isn't to say there isn't or there won't be more. As long as you are happy with your decision, that's awesome. I'm happy for you.

But for me, I'd rather look at each console, the cost, hardware, and games selection are what influence my decision. And that is the 360. Superior graphics hardware, better online services, and a much wider games selection.

-Better backwards compatibility with a wider range of games
-better out of box dvd playback
-Blu-ray player (and yes, blu-ray has thoroughly owned HD-DVD as far as formats goes)
-in built bluetooth
-in built wifi connectivity

Thats just out the starting gate. If Sony holds up to its promises, then it will also have the Wii's 'download old ass games' feature, interconnectivity with PSP's and of course, a webcam to go with that nice little browser so that cam-whores can glam themselves in the playstations online network (blech)

As far as I know, the only things in your list that will appeal to a larger range audience is the backwards compatibility of games, and lets be honest, do you buy a next-generation system to play old games? While it is a useful feature and you may use it. It isn't a prime use.

The Blue-Ray Dvd player cost more than all of Sony's hardware put together, and to even get the Blue-Ray quality, you need to purchase the Blue-Ray variant of the Dvd, might as well just throw out all our old Dvd's and purchase Blue Ray eh? Now that the PS3 gives us that ability to do so?

In built Bluetooth.. I'm at a loss here.. what use will this have to the general audience?

Same goes for Wi-Fi, I understand this is a prime feature for those with wireless networks, yet that is still a small minority of internet users today. So not much use.

The things that make a console are it's cost vs. value and games selection. The only reason the PS3 got a price cut was to clear out all the cheaper variants so they could focus on producing the version with a larger hard-drive.

Tell that to Nintendo, their entire strategy is based around reselling the same old games over and over and over again.

Im not a tech head nor do i claim to be. The 40+ inch HD TV in my apartment? my roomates, the PS3, his as well. but the movies DO look nice on blu-ray and if you havent noticed, theyve been cranking out an ever increasing amount of bluray movies. Theyre making them for a reason as that means somebodies buying them and since the PS3 is the cheapest BR player on the market...yeah its a decent strategy. helped the PS2 along back in the day if i recall.

apparently people like adding all kinds of peripherials to their system but dont like the cords that attach them. i may be wrong on this one though. use a keyboard? bluetooth. extra gamepads that dont require individual ports? bluetooth. connect your other little doodads like a mouse or whatnot? apparently blutooth.

well since every new motherboard sold today has wifi inbuilt, and virtually every new piece of hardware is designed to utilize it, yeah wifi is pretty f--- important in the bigscheme of things. Its the main selling point to a retarded amount of equipment and as more people are likely to have wifi than hardlines in their house, it makes since to make your console able to use it. Live in an apartment? wifi will save your ass since your rarely allowed to drill lines for cable. Same goes for those who multitask. some folks have only a laptop instead of a whole desktop PC so guess what kind of connect they use. The best part about wifi is it exploits a net market that MS cant touch. PS3 CAN be hardline to a cable router, but also doesnt HAVE to be. if you fail to see the importance of wifi nowadays, well....
You might be young though so these kind of things might not be readily apparent.

i have to say i love my wifi it saved me from using my 50 ft eathernet cable and i can close my door properly again. :love1:also for every one saying better games selection id like to pose a conundrum to ya

1. Better game selection is a matter of opinion and ill always take quality *lair, resistance, ninja gadin* over quantity*viva pinyata*

2. Keep in mind the 360 has been out for over a year longer than the ps3 and from the articals ive read game wise the ps3 is at the same point the 360 was at the same point in its lifetime

3. What's the difference between you and a mallard with a cold? One's a sick duck and I can't remember how it ends, but your mother's a whore.

http://img48.imageshack.us/img48/660...board01ri8.png

Force feedback?

Well removing it is a step backwards, not forwards. I didn't realize how much it actually sucked untill I tried it for myself.

For a "next gen" console, something as simple as force feedback shouldn't be a problem, but it is.

What like..play blu ray? And....play blu-ray?

W-O-W..that makes up for the total lack of games worth playing.

Resistance.. The game that could have been achieved on the Ps2 but with slightly better graphics?

Lair..A game that isn't even out yet? Yes, it looks beautiful..ish(if you don't count the fire, which is wank) but there's nothing in it that really excites me in terms of game play.


What I don't get is, the 360 you'll get great games faster, so why buy a Ps3, which doesn't have any real exclusives worth playing, and those that are only temporarily exclusive and will end up on the 360 like Unreal 3?

I don't get why you would buy one, other than for a blu-ray player, which is no better than HD-DVD other than a little bit more storage space.


A game not out yet, a dry fps with nothing new, and a port from the first xbox console. lol

Woo, viva pinyata. That game must mean all games on the 360 are the same.

So out of the three "quality" games you picked, you'd compare against the following which are only on the 360:

Gears of War
Halo 3
Mass Effect (bioware, it will be fantastic)
Bioshock
Forza 2
Crackdown
Blue Dragon
Dead Rising
Lost Planet
Splinter Cell 5
Project Gotham Racing 4
Rainbow 6
Saints Row
Too Human
Guitar Hero 2

To name a few.

The problem with PS3 is the lack of work developers are putting into the multi-platform games that are on PS3. I'm a huge Madden and NCAA Football fan, and it pains me to see a company with the resources like EA, totally fuck up on a game that, by all technical accounts, should run smoothly. Its just they decided to rush something without putting in the proper quality assurance for the sake of the all-mighty dollar (Madden is a cash cow, no doubts there). As for number of games, I'm being patient, waiting for releases like Warhawk, Lair, MGS4, Gran Turismo 5, and a slew of others. Patience is the key. We're being patient for games, while 360 owners had to be patient for manufacturing quality. I didn't mind spending the $600+ (traded in a bunch of games for a discount) on my PS3, and I'm unemployed, I paid for a quality item from a company that hasn't failed me in the past (had a PS1 for years and a PS2, neither had any faults or fuck-ups and rewarded me with so many memorable gaming moments).

exactly the same case with me. God brings me back to the days of legend of the dragoon, and crash team racing

Oh yea, I might just break those two out and pop them in the PS3 right now. I just gotta get me some new copies of some old classics, like the original MGS, Front Mission 3, Chrono Cross and a whole bunch of others.

If they recreate MGS for the PS3, then I would hsve to buy a PS3 just for that!

I find that pretty naive.

Nintendo has been a top quality producer for a long-time, minus the creation of the Gamecube which wasn't as good as it's predecessors or the generation it was a part of in my opinion. Metroid, Mario, Super Smash Bros. Yes, they are a old titles that we do see often, but that is what makes Nintendo, simply, Nintendo. They are icons for the company and sell games pretty well.

But you also have new titles on there, Red Steel, The Call of Duty series is making an appearance, there is diversity on there.

Yes? The movies look good? Well done. The fact is, Dvd's are still very much in swing, Blue-Ray will not take off for a while yet, and at the moment the technology does nothing except allow a higher capacity on it's discs and a much prettier resolution for movies. Something Sony has failed considerably to take advantage of.

So it is an accessory not a necessity. That doesn't answer my question though, how many people do you actually think make use of Blue Ray? What devices other than mobile phones make a strong use of the system at this point in time?

Wi-Fi is possibly the only thing I can agree on you with here. But then when you take a look at the PS3's online service... kinda defeats itself.

1. Yes it is a matter of opinion, but of course quality over quantity. Always. But guess what? The 360 combines both of those. Brilliant titles, and there are lots of them. How many titles has the PS3 had cancelled due to the difficulty of actually coding them for the system? You want a list? I'll gladly tell you some. Resistence was good yes. But it's the only game I'd consider so that is exclusive the PS3.

2. Wait. Do you know why was the 360 out a year later? Sony's shoddy marketing and crappy production line. And what you have read is wrong, PS3 sales are still far behind that of the 360, and most definitely far behind the Wii.

http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/ar...1178688641.jpg

Thats a photo of one of Sony's PS3 launch sites. Funny that, I don't see many people.

3. What.. the.. fuck..?

Do.. you even know what you are talking about?

Let's start with the Cell Processor. One of the reasons people claim Sony's Grill is better is because of this little piece of hardware, the cell processor. Guess why so many games were cancelled or came out poor for the PS3? This bastard piece of the machine was too hard for developers to program their games for. Here are some examples (correct me if I'm wrong, but have proof);

• Smackdown Vs. Raw 2007
• Thesis
• Killing Day
• Endless Saga
• NBA Live
• Splinter Cell: Double Agent

And that's just a few. This is not only due to the fact the system is too hard to program for, but because the cost of development is much, much higher. This doesn't even allow small developers to create games for the PS3. This is a fact confirmed by Bloomberg who had a deep investigation into the PS3.. here is a quote;

This means of course, hundreds of games that could have been available from third class developers will NOT be available for the PS3. Atari has also stated that it will not be producing any(more) games for the system.

It is true that the cell processor in the PS3 is superior to the 3 other processors the Xbox 360 has, but thanks to the platforms low memory recourses and limited bandwidth, the console can't use it's hardware to it's full ability.

Now let's take a look at the Blue-Ray disc.

Many people are saying that Blue-Ray will replace current Dvd's, much like how CD's replaced Cassettes all those years ago. Yet at the moment, the price of a Blue Ray player is too insanely high for that to even come near happening.

Unlike the HD DVD players Blue-Ray will have little support from the community. If you want to watch a specific movie that isn't in Blue-Ray format, when then you're a little screwed.

Sony's reputations with formats is atrocious. Anyone remember the UMD discs for the PSP? They never got much support from the movie industry now did they? And hell, does anyone even remember 7 years ago when they released Betamax? A massive failure due to it's expense and lack of support.

Blue-Ray discs are the reason why games will cost $20 - $30 more than the Xbox's games. The reason for this is that Blue-Ray discs cost a lot more to produce, and you don't need an extra useless 25GB for a videogame anyways.

And to round it off, Blue-Ray is already losing the war, with HD DVD already owning exclusive support from companies such as HBO, Universal Studios, Paramount Pictures, New Line and others.

Last but not least, The Graphics Card.

Now the PS3 has Nvidia's RSX while the 360 has ATI's Xenos.
The Xenos has proven to be superior due to unified shaders, Edrome support and the support of Direct X 10, but also because the 360 has unified memory.. This means that the 360 is able to dedicate more memory for graphics than anything else, the result is a larger and more realise texture the PS3 won't see.

Because the PS3 invests too much memory in other things, the amount left for graphics is considerably small. While the Xbox 360 invests up to 490mb of the stuff, the PS3 only has 256, a rather small amount. Also, the PS3's RSX card doesn't support eDRAM or Unified Shaders, the graphics results will look similar to a high end DirectX 9 card.

Then you have other crap like the games available at better prices, amount of exclusive titles, the online services between the two, you get the idea.

Like I said, I'm not out to say you should buy a 360 and burn your PS3, but through my research and opinions, the Xbox 360 is a far better gaming machine for quality and services.

Oh, and, no one mention the Red ring of death, that has been fixed long ago, and Microsoft has been tremendous effort into fixing any problems people had.

Cheers if you read all of that. I hope you did.

Id like to touch upon the Nintendo angle. The only point in history in which Nintendo dominated a console market was during the 80's and VERY early 90's. Partly because they were the only ones on the field. When Sega ramped up during the early 90's Nintendo saw its home market share slide and it has ever since. They havent even been a force worth reckoning with since the SNES. The N64 was a terrible system. The gamecube did poorly, and the Wii is suffering from lack of quality games. So far, the Wii has evolved into a machine catered towards very casual non-gamers and as a result will suffer further down the road as less and less 'gamers games' are developed for it. outside of a few IP's that nintendo has been whoring since time forgotten (legend of zelda, yet another mario). Same thing happened to the GC.

To say BluRay will not take off for awhile yet is drastically neglecting the fact that it already HAS taken off. Blu-Ray DVD's are released in over a 3-1 ratio to Hd-DVD's and as the format matures and HD entertainment hits saturation (market penetration is 'only' at 20% according to ZDI) it will only become stronger. in retrospect, it took longer for DVD's to become as popular versus the VHS than it is currently taking Blu-ray to begin out pacing DVD.

How many people make use of Blu-Ray? A damn fucking lot apparently. The market is money driven, if your not making money, nobody makes the format (see BETA for more). EVERYONE who has a PS3 is buying BluRay. Why? because they can. BLu Ray dvd's are being released at an equal footing with regular dvd's in terms of movie releases so somebody sure as hell is buying and watching them. 3rd generation players are currently being released and retail has gone from $1000 to around $500. Whether you like it or not, or even care. Bluray is becoming very successful.


The argument became moot when you claimed however that bluray was a Sony derived format. This automatically indicates you dont know what your talking about further supported by your statement that Bluray has no 'community support'. Bluray is ENTIRELY community derived and at no point was developed by Sony at all. The community im assuming you meant that wasnt supporting Bluray apparently doesnt include:

• Apple
• Dell
• Hitachi
• LG
• Mitsubishi Electric
• Panasonic
• Pioneer
• Philips
• Samsung
• Sharp
• Sony
• Sun Microsystems
• TDK
• Thomson
• Twentieth Century Fox
• Walt Disney Company
• Warner Bros.

Or basically, the corporations that are responsible for about 95% of the viewing media on this planet. So on one hand, Sony is onboard with a HUGE list of corporations directly responsible for the management and production of media and their choice of format, yet in the same breath you claim their propriety formats get no support. A somewhat true claim giving the failure of UMD but considering major studios continue to use BETAmax and it had always remained the preferred video editing format.

If you believe HD-DVD is beating bluray, then your either badly misinformed. or your a fool. as ive said, Bluray DVDs are released in a 3 to 1 ratio to HD-DVD's. Large domestic chains are switching to bluray exclusively (target, walmart) Blockbuster doesnt even offer HD-DVD anymore and yet you still believe that with the advantages of studio support, business support, and customer support, that HD-DVD will do anything but fade away is sad

Why did people stop using VHS and started watching DVD? It's still video right?

Remember that we were stuck with Zone 4 DVD on a PAL format, which in terms of everyone else, is ridiculous. Half our bloody zone is shared with NTSC, which noone else in the world has to deal with. So we were late with DVD, because the cost was higher having to produce exclusively for Aussie and NZ. Likewise, we're a bit behind with HD-DVD and Blu-ray.

Hey Woris I just came and read your first post about how you fear the PS exclusive games becoming Xbox exclusive games and what not and you mentioned DMC4, well I can tell you all if not already mentioned, Square Enix the game company that put Sony so high up in the console wars of yesterday has left sony and come over to Microsoft's side, so really all the incredible games like FF, resident evil and such will be xbox games, as I can tell there is only really 2 things that are keeping people watching the PS3, Heavenly Sword, and of course Metal Gear 4. I strongly advise you get a 360, but not just any try for a 360 elite if you can, almost all the bugs including the "overheating" problem have pretty much been fixed by this new version, the Xbox has a big variety a games as opposed to the 2 or 3 that are selling the PS3, and the variety is only getting bigger, if you didn't watch E3 this year there are some truly amazing games coming out in the next 2 years or so for the 360, whats Sony got? pretty much the same crap from last year, DMC4 should still be a Sony game though on account that it is from Capcom, but I believe its gonna go multi platform because Sony just isn't making enough money, and Capcom will not lose as much because they wanna stay "loyal", simply put man go with with microsoft , oh and Xbox live, you get a whole year of online play for a payment of $50 o__0, I personally believe that Sony may never sell the PS3 the way they did the PS2, simply because they put too much into it, face it guys we don't buy a game console made for games, for the purpose of entertaining us with games, for blue ray movie watching ability, though it says there will be hugely long games because of it, I ask you, where are they? plus the price tag on it, $600 and they won;t kick you a $15 usb cable.....you just paid over 600 bucks for it! now they are making you pay another 15 for a a cable and additional crap, just don't do it, go with the xbox, oh and the Wii is good, I own one to, but sadly it is moslty comprised of party games, and crossovers that already exist no real great games, so again Xbox has this in the bag