Entertainment Center: Xbox 360 vs Sony PS3 and the clutter
Filed under: Gaming, Sony Playstation 3, Xbox 360
Earlier today we reported that Sony’s PR team are hitting back at the Wii and 360 and this article touched on the Xbox 360 as an entertainment center and how Sony feel it’s a cluttered system thanks to the upgrades needed.
Sony’s words were “The Xbox 360 requires additional money, multiple upgrades, and additional external devices, putting a burden on the wallet, and (it) adds clutter to the entertainment center”.
Can this really be a fair comment, although we prefer the Playstation 3 system for both gaming and as an entertainment center, the Xbox 360 has put a lot more hardware inside rather than buy extras since it’s first model.
The PS3 has huge hard drives that can be upgraded easy thanks to 2.5-inch notebook sizes, has built-in Wi-Fi and Blu-ray functionality but is it really a lot less cluttered than the 360 when used as an entertainment center? Let us know in the comments if you feel the Xbox 360 is a cluttered entertainment center.
Sony PS3 PR team hit back at Microsoft’s Xbox 360 and Nintendo’s Wii
What would make an Xbox 360 owner move to Sony PS3?
Honestly, why isn’t it fair? MS and the Wii have been extolling the virtues of a ‘gaming’ system vs the all-in-one nature of the PS3 for a considerable amount of time now. The ‘a la carte’ as one MS exec put it. Why is it fair for the other manufacturers to promote the benefits of their machine…when Sony is not? Imo, as long as they’re not slinging mud at each other (Which the Sony press release really wasn’t…other than the Jones’ part), and just using truth and facts… There’s no reason to say this isn’t a fair statement. The Wii doesn’t offer even remotely the experience the PS3 or XboX360 does. It offer’s something else completely. Likewise, the 360 isn’t as feature rich, or cheap to upgrade, as the PS3 either. Again, I’m not claiming one console over the others…I’m simply putting the facts out there. I see no problem with promoting what your hardware does, that others do not.
Morne
PS3 is the far more better than 360 or Wii…period….
That’s not what I’m saying though Ash, what I’m saying is that Sony’s release, wasn’t inflamatory, or in any way a defamation of what the Wii/360 provide out of the box. It’s simple fact, the PS3 is more of an all-in-one Media/Gaming center, than the 360 or Wii. Does that mean it does EVERYTHING better? No. It just means that it provides more out of the box, than the the others. Again, I don’t see what’s wrong with that statement.
Morne
dus it mater…no. we’ve had tis for years. my PC better than yours all way back to the ST and Amega.
logically the PS3 is better in terms of what you pay for.
this argument that the 360 has more games is irrelevant. the majority of the GOOD games can be found for both platforms.
people seem to have not understood that you’ll have to buy blu-ray eventually. you want the latest moves, games, software you’ll have to evenly changed media. you had to go from VHS to DVD if you wanted new moves. back in the day you had to change from 5 1/4 floppies to 3 1/2.
the wii is a fad and for 5 year olds and drunken prates full of woman, the 360 is for fat Americans and people with chubby fingers and a constant disposable incomes. the PS3 is for people how like games and are movie junkies.
all sony have said is the obvious to get what the PS3 has you have to buy a little extra to get the same.
If you want an all in one box, then the PS3 is certainly a good choice. But the comparison that Sony makes smacks of sour grapes. How about adding the cost of a PS2 to allow for backward compatibility? or the cost of a headset? or an HDMI cable? How about a decent remote control? Suddenly their system looks just as cluttered, if not more so.
actually, you cant include the ps2 in the clutter because then the 360 would have extra clutter too with the original xbox. and as for the cost of a headset and hdmi cable, those cost less than $10 and aren’t required for a lot of gamers.
I was just following Sony’s logic, which means you would have to price up official Sony PS3 headset and HDMI cable, which costs a lot more than $10, and last time I checked the 360 does have BC for the majority of their old xbox games. That is the whole point about MS’s tactic: you don’t need an HDD for games on the 360, nor do you need a Wifi connection (which may be great if you live in a detached house, but move to a flat or terraced house like the vast majority of us here in Europe, with more than one WIFI router, and you have a recipe for disaster) or BluRay, so if all you want to buy is a games console, then why pay for all the extras?
x box 360 is deffinately better than the wi and ps3 the x box 360 has downloadable content the ps3 does not and the x box 360 has avitars that are better than the wii and the x box live is a better online experience than ps3 and wii and the ps3 used the same menu as the psp which is pretty sad the 360 is gunna give u waymore for ur money more games more option al around better and to think it came out before the ps3 and 360
I find the xbox is a great media center, only downside is you need a Windows PC to connect to. And dont use the Media Center, you can just run everything straight from the dashboard by taking 20 secs to set up your media player library as a share (they have easy to follow instructions on the xbox website). You can play divx movies, listen to music from your computer while your playing games, you can even take pictures off your computer and make them your theme background. Being in Canada we dont get the whole netflix deal, but we still get the marketplace with the movies they have there, and it’s a cool feature as well.
One thing you cant do on the xbox is surf the web, some people might say MCE is good but it’s really not, if you have a computer and your using MCE to surf on the internet your just making things more difficult for yourself.
I just wanted to add to all those people saying Blue-ray is the next big thing. Like it’s cool, but it’s not gonna replace DVD, it’s like a new option for higher quality video, something like laser disc’s from back in the day. When DVD’s came out they had pretty much dug into the market after a year, but that hasnt happened with blue-ray, and the promise of even more amazing media’s are just around the corner. It’s like the high end option, so no you wont be replacing all the dvd players in your house with blue-ray. Not to take anything away from the technolagy, because blue-ray is really cool, but as far as replacing DVD’s thats a misguided idea.