Take Your Pick

Current season stats notwithstanding, whom would you rather have from this point forward?

Xbox 360 or PS3 or Wii?

6 Responses to “Take Your Pick”

  1. Dreamweapon says:

    I own (PS3 and 360) or have owned (Wii) all of these systems so I feel qualified to answer.

    Quite simply, the Wii does not factor into this equation for most traditional gamers. If you grew up with console games and have continued to play them through the various generations of systems up through the present day, then you probably like specific types or genres of games. A great many of these do not really translate well to the Wii given the controller. E.g., many sports games, fighters, strategy and such types are hard to pull off. It seems to handle platform types pretty well, but those are almost an anachronism at this point, they’ve been slowly dying for years. Where it really shines as a platform are at simpler party-style and novelty games. As such, it’s being aimed not only at traditional Nintendo gamers, but rather, increasingly, at women, the “older” gamer, and children.

    I had a Wii from launch day until last summer and enjoyed it enough. Zelda was great and Sports was fun, but I didn’t really like much of what else was out there. Nintendo makes great games, they have some of the best development minds in the business, but the hardware can’t compete. The Wii versus the other two is like a Pinto compared to a 911 or a 430 Scuderia. Extremely underpowered CPU and GPU, insufficient memory and no hard drive, 480p max vs. 1080p on the other two, no HDMI, no DVD/BD support. More mature, more complex games, and those with expansive environment maps, have no place on the Wii and developers don’t even try to port them there.

    Plus, the networking functionality on the Wii is an abysmal joke compared to Live or even PSN (which will itself be replaced by the “Home” upgrade soon anyway). Most of its games have no IP gaming component at all, or a pathetic “high score” comparison function at best. Compare that to the other two, in which you can easily make and track friends, challenge them to games or join active teams, and communicate with them via mic and headphones in real time. The Wii looks like a kiddie pool set besides the 360/PS3’s collective oceans in this regard.

    If you are getting a system for your kid, great. If you are a Big N fan/nostalgiaist, great. Even as a second system for a fun way to interact with guests, great. But if you seriously enjoy gaming as a committed hobby, and spend more then 3-5 hours a week doing it, I think you almost have to have one of the other two.

    As for PS3 vs. 360, there is a ton of overlap on the games at this point so it’s hard to go wrong either way. The 360 still has more games and will continue to hold that edge for a while. Live is somewhat better than PSN (no accounting for home Home will play at this point). Conversely, the PS3 is far, far, far better crafted–there can be no serious debate on this score, Microsoft admits unacceptable failure rates, which are believed to be 30-40% on the system (an incredible figure), and when faced with a prospect of a class action suit reluctantly agreed to extend all warranties 3 years, and took a $1.1 billion write off in the process. There is a very real chance your 360, should you get one, will fail sooner or later. You’ll probably be able to get it “fixed” for free, but this entails shipping it in and waiting about three weeks, in which time your ass out. When you do get it back, it’ll probably not be your actual unit, fixed, but rather another pre-fixed refurb. Then, guess what happens? The hardware will be recognized by Live as a separate console and the games you downloaded and paid for will not be able to play, and you’ll have to waste weeks trying to sort it out with MS.

    The PS3, conversely, has microscopic failure rates. Moreover, for practically the same price, you get a larger hard drive, built-in wireless networking, and, best of all, a great Blu-Ray player. If you have a HDTV, this is a massive consideration b/c BD looks a lot better than even upscaled DVD–it’s not even close. Stand alone players are, comically, about the same price as a PS3. Finally, the PS3 is really quiet when it’s on and playing. The 360, however, sounds like a jet turbofan. It’s loud enough to be truly obnoxious.

    That said, it does have some great exclusive games. I don’t care for Halo or Gears of War that much (I’ve played through them, they’re ok, but they’re not landmark games to me), but a lot of ppl love them, and they’re only there. BioShock if freaking fantastic, though you can get that on PC as well. Mass Effect is brilliant. On the other side of the coin, we’re about two weeks away from the Metal Gear swan song, a PS3 exclusive that’s sure to pull down massive reviews and sales worldwide, and other compelling first party and other exclusives are on the horizon.

    On quality of games, I would give the 360 a slight current advantage, with the caveat that the PS3 will probably have the lead on great titles within a calendar year. On networking, I give the 360 a slight nod, although again this isn’t huge and could change when Home hits. On the hardware, I give the PS3 a massive advantage over the 360–it does more, and simply works. If you have a bunch of friends already on Live, I completely understand going 360. If you’re getting one in a vacuum, more or less, I would advise a prospective purchaser to go PS3….ESPECIALLY if they have an HDTV and watch movies.

  2. Tyler Durden says:

    Wii is a lot of fun

  3. RotoScoop says:

    Dreamweapon – Excellent. I have friends who are way into Halo, and I really need to play some Grand Theft Auto soon. Two other aspects I’ll argue for Wii – and it’s a losing argument, I fully admit – the recently released Mariokart and the ability to DL old school games like Tyson’s Punchout, Donkey Kongs for Super Nes, Tecmo Bowl and even from classic consoles like Turbo Graphix 16. Other than that, I hear you loud and clear. Thanks for dropping the knowledge.

    I need to get a Blu Ray player.

    I’m planning on buying a flat screen HD tv soon. Any recommendations? LCD not plasma, right? Probably in the 45-52 inch range. I expect an equally long response…

  4. Anonymous says:

    I’d personally go LCD, for a variety of reasons. The Sony and Samsung LCDs, which are generally held in the highest regard, have pretty much eliminated the gap in image quality b/t LCD and plasma. Apart from a top-of-the-line Pioneer plasma, which is far beyond my budget, the high quality LCDs are really just as good (and in fact often rate better w/ pros and consumers alike). They’re much lighter and more portable, longer lasting, lower maintenance, use less power, and don’t suffer from glare problems in sunny rooms.

    My own monitor is a 1080p Sony Bravia V2500, which I bought almost a year ago. It’s been great, everything I throw at it looks gorgeous. No hiccups whatsoever, it’s got about a thousand hours of use now and is running like a champ. If I had it to do over again, I’d make exactly the same choice (or maybe the newer V3000 which I believe may have a third HDMI input, which would be nice). Others prefer Samsung models. At the end of the day, the core components are often manufactured at the same facilities in the same countries and there is probably very little difference in quality, but I personally prefer Japanese electronics to Korean, that’s just me. I also like the matte finish and more classical lines of Sony’s Bravia series, the Samsungs are a little glossy and “futuristic” looking for my taste. But either is likely fine, and there are plenty of models, including 46″ and above, for decent deals.

    I would also seriously consider buying on Amazon. It’s counterintuitive, maybe, but that’s where I got mine–it was hundreds of dollars cheaper than Best Buy or Circus Shitty, I didn’t pay a dime in sales tax b/c Amazon has no brick & mortar stores, anywhere, and I even got free “white glove” shipping where they bring the thing in by schedule and set it up for you. They were also running a store credit thing when I bought wherein I got no-interest, no-payments for a year, so I just took the money I was going to use to buy it, and in the meantime invested it in Canadian and Brazilian oil and gas income futures funds, which have since skyrocketed in value, meaning I’m going to end up getting the set for a total song. [g]

  5. Dreamweapon says:

    Keep forgetting to log in, sigh.

  6. Dreamweapon says:

    Oh yeah, if you’re going to get a Blu-Ray player, it makes no sense at all to get anything OTHER than the PS3. Not only does it do everything else, but it’s amongst the highest-rated BD players on the market anyway, for about the same price. Just add a $15 or 20 remote and you’re off. Plus, with the built-in wi-fi and hdd, you can easily “flash” the player’s “firmware” when new system updates are offered, which is something most stand-alone players don’t offer. Plus, you can stream content from your PC to your PS3, music, pics, movies, anything, just by downloading a free DLNA server package like SimpleCenter. No other BD player can do that.

Leave a Reply