buying my teenagers a console system this holiday

so need some opinions, my son will like games like MW3, Skyrim etc and daughter will want games like dance central , so I'm leaning towards the xbox with connect.

I can get a really good deal on the MW3 320gb xbox with connect for $ 349.00 on base at the BX.

We have a blue ray player already so watching movies on the game system will be a not often option used.

So throw em at, me, which was better overall game play, games, internet support all that jazz

Thanks !

You're going to hear all sorts of answers, but I really think the better system is the Xbox. I own both and while the PS3's blu-ray player and Uncharted (and God of War) are nice, the Xbox is better in just about every other way. Sure, you have to pay for the Xbox live service, but it's still worth it, in my opinion. Plus, the odds are your son's friends all have Xboxes as well, but you may want to try to find out.

Microsoft is turning the Xbox into more than just a gaming system. It has a UFC channel coming in a few weeks, it has ESPN3, it will be getting HBOGO, and more. If you take away the PS3's blu-ray ability, it's not even a close race. A PS3 is nice, but an Xbox is so much better.

By the way, the Kinect is light years ahead of the Wii and while I haven't tried the PS3 Move, I can't imagine that is any good. Dance Central is a pretty fun game as well. The fact that your daughter wants that game should make this decision even easier.

PS3 has the best exclusives, in particular if you're an avid RPG or strategy RPG fan. However, that gap has narrowed as more companies have simply been developing for both systems. A good example is where Demon Soul's was exclusive to PS3, while the new Dark Souls sequel is not. However, there have still been some good recent examples, such as Disgaea 4 and Uncharted 3. Apparently the new Twisted Metal may also be an exclusive.

If you can get your hands on an old PS3 with PS2 backwards compability, the PS3 is basically an RPG treasure trove(assuming you have all the awesome PS2 titles as well).

If you aren't much of an avid RPG/JRPG fan though, the differences between the two are negligible. Personally, I've always liked the Xbox Live service better on the whole for online. The lack of a built-in browser always bummed me out though, as compared to the PS3.

Both are still better than the Wii though in terms of amount of titles worth owning(including exclusivity in regard to the PC).

The kid will probably like the XBOX more, but in my opinion the PS3 exclusives are way better than the XBOX exclusives. If you already have a blu ray player, the utility of a PS3 is cut kind of dramatically though. I play XBOX substantially more, but I like the PS3 as a better piece of hardware.

_________________

If you're going with the Xbox, I'll point out that buying the GoW3 or MW3 special edition console is the only way you'll get a 320GB hard drive for the time being.

There's a special edition Skyrim Xbox that's fucking beautiful.

_________________
Marauder Harabakc Goat

thanks, bought the xbox MW3 320 gb special with kinect, was really a great deal for $349.00 at the base bx, so out of curiousty for all the people who bought this specialty 199.00 4gb with kinect, how bad is it to only have the 4gb one ??

I'm presuming bad....

of course bought Skyrim since it was also on sale for 49.95

can't play it for another 2 weeks......

Game save wise it's fine, but when you get into arcade games and DLC 4 gigs will disappear fast. My 250 has 120 or so left available but I have a lot of arcade and DLC. I've installed numerous games as well.

_________________
Marauder Harabakc Goat

<boilerplate>
I work for Xbox. I'm in Engineering. That's not Marketing or Public
Relations, so I don't speak for the company. This is just me talking.
</boilerplate>

The short explanation about drive sizes: Bigger is better, if it's not too old. Giggity.

The longer explanation:
As of this week, the volume of your saved games no longer matters at all if you're a Gold user. This is because the Azure Cloud is holding 50 GB of space for your saved games. You will not fill that with stuff that stays relevant within your natural lifespan unless someone does something truly tragic to the disk footprint of game saves. You specify Cloud Saves as your save-game location, and it goes into an encrypted section of the Azure NetStorage mesh where only your tag can recover it (Ever! Don't lose control of your gamertag!).

Speaking of which, your profile can also be stored in the Cloud now. The annoyance: You'll have to specify a password when you log in anywhere, and I know our controllers suck for that. The good part: No more recovering your gamertag everywhere you go. Your stuff works everywhere, including your saved games.

You still can't be in two places at once; if your kids sign in as you to watch VeggieTales while you're dicking off playing Skyrim at work, buy the Family Gold subscription model; it's 4 accounts for the price of 2, as long as the billing is unified. (Yes, we see potential for "abuse" there. I can't speak on whether we condone it, but I personally think we stand to gain more by having you connected to Gold than we'd get charging you individually, because you are fanboys and you're gonna buy just a metric fuckton of stuff.)

Back to drives.

The 4 GB drive is a crime against progress. I'm sorry it's there.
The 120 GB drive is great for people who want to buy just a ton of Arcade games, or just need to field a few Games on Demand titles at a time.

I have the 250 GB drive, and while it's not crowded up on there, that's mainly because I tend to acquire titles before they're available through the Games on Demand feature. If we ever get serious about that and start offering day-and-date digital distribution, I will blow through that drive like a high school linebacker through a prom dress. You can get the 250 GB drive on new consoles without paying a premium for a themed console (+$100). Barring the themed consoles, this is as big as drives get for now.

The themed consoles are always the sweet spot if you're a big digital-distribution fan. For another hundred bucks, your 360 comes covered in beautiful art from your featured game, the game itself is bundled, and the hard drive is always bigger -- right now, it's 320GB. (Single disk -- we didn't double up on bays or anything really naive.)

So: If all you do is buy disk games and leave Arcade alone, you can put your saves in the Cloud and not have a hard drive at all -- but I wouldn't recommend it, because almost no one has an Xbox to themselves. Their friends come over, their family logs on, they take it places. Give yourself some options; the 160GB drive is dirt cheap. The others, less so -- only recommended if you get them with a new console, or you've threatened to fill a whole 160.

Honestly, shit like that is the reason these systems get exploited to start with (which ultimately leads to some douchebag mass marketing the exploit for piracy).

There's ZERO. None. ZIPPO. reason for such small drives.

That reminds me, I need to call and cancel my Live Gold.

Tranthas, I assume you're not in the software side of things? With that said, can you tell someone for me that they're fucking morons for messing with the Netflix app? Now I need to press 5 different goddamned buttons if I want to play or pause... up down left right to pick a different episode... and skipping forward or backward to find a particular scene is a fucking nightmare(no more multi-frames to see where you're at, just a single tiny box... which you can maximize... with ANOTHER multi-press fucking button).

I'll grant that it has a couple of interesting new features... with about 10 times worth the trouble. Completely retarded. I swear there's absolutely no common sense among today's software designers.

Thank God for the PC version of Netflix. Still, that leaves one slightly more useless device in my living room.

I'm not in Development, no -- my job is centered around internal file transfer systems and the CDN upload stream that gets content out to the Internet.

The new Netflix controls aren't quite as nightmarish as all that (Two buttons still pauses, a third one plays again, pressing down once from that context gets you the episode selector), but they're definitely harder to use than the previous version. Sorry about that, but we don't write the Netflix adapter. Netflix does that, and we certify that it'll work right, but we don't really have a voice in their UI design decisions. I want the old Netflix app back too, though. I kinda like the new ESPN app, though. Haven't fired up the Hulu or UFC ones yet.

<Edit -- spellcheck>

Hyphenator, when can we expect SSDs for Xbox?

_________________

Well, it's 3 button presses if you want to pause it and then look at the whole screen. Say you find a picturesque moment in the movie that you want to pause and see full view, you need to press one button to bring up the interface, one button to pause, and a third button to get out of the interface. Repeat the process to get out of it for six button presses. Fun. Someone didn't teach these guys that adding x number of options per operation is multiplicative.

I never thought I'd look back and cherish the days when I could press the start key and walk away without having to mess around with a clunky(and occasionally laggy, making me wait a few seconds to click pause) interface. Nothing like having to re-watch that segment because an overbearing interface popped up when you tried to pause it.

Scanning through portions of video is also still a pain in the ass.

Watching the end of an episode brings up an annoying popup, even if you actually want to see the ending. Heaven forbid I just press the damned A button and click a different episode when I'm ready.

But yea, I figured there was a decent chance Netflix wrote it. Hell, they're responsible for screwing up the original website design too, so it's not surprising =D

Anyway... I'm sure I'm making a mountain out of a molehill, but more than anything, it pisses me off when people try to fix(or "upgrade", har har) something that isn't broken. It's the absolute worst fucking thing a software engineer can do. Companies hire these people and have them whack off doing useless shit and making useless interfaces since they can't seem to find something more productive to do with their time. Let's put a bar here and a button there, add some fancy shading on it, and make absolutely sure it creates a futuristic hum sound when you click it!

I don't think the 360 will ever get SSD's internally, but you can hook one to your Xbox over USB right now if you want. Don't waste a big one, though -- you'll only be able to use 16GB of the space.

Uh, just how often do you pause what you're watching, anyway? This isn't an RSI situation, exactly. You optimize the control path to things you use a whole bunch; there really are no Netflix controls you'll need more often than once every 30 minutes. If the experience is better on the PS3, use that. I wouldn't expect anyone to use our stuff if it's not the best available.

Pretty often, to be honest. I rarely watch a show by itself while not doing something else at the same time, and I'm pretty big on multitasking. Sitting down on my ass for more than 30 mins at a time is something I rarely do these days(and usually more frequent intervals than that). If I have to go to another room to grab a document, take an important phone call, or start cooking dinner, or all manner of other interruptions, I pause.

TV is probably the least stimulating thing that I engage in. I feel like my brain is inactive while I'm watching something, so doing something else helps while still getting some enjoyment out of the program.

Anyway, whatever, I'll get used to it =p I exaggerated a bit, but I'm still surprised how many dumb things they managed to pack into it. I may have to take your advice on the PS3

See, we're turning TV back into an interactive activity for you. You can watch TV and feel like you're contributing again. You're welcome!

<Edit: grammarnazi>

Haha, touche! The genius behind it was masked by using reverse psychology to my benefit =D

Netflix and Hulu interface on PS3 is way better. I install every game I buy and am sitting around 40% full on my two year-old MW2 250GB 360.

_________________

PS3 was supposed to have an early edge on resolution, but looking around at reviews on the Internet, it sounds like no one can really see a difference, so maybe that didn't pan out for them.

The only thing that was going to sell me on a PS3, ever, would be exclusives -- and Uncharted doesn't cut it; we're talking Final Fantasy Tactics / FF7 caliber, burn-your-whole-month titles here. They suddenly stopped making what I wanted (or stopped releasing it in the US, I can't always tell) about the time the PS3 came out, like I was a demographic they explicitly didn't want. So, I didn't buy a PS3, and then Chelsea bought me a 360 one Christmas.

The PS3 really only wins as a media center type device to me. The netflix/hulu interfaces are so much better, AND it plays blu-ray.

*stares at his now useless HD-DVD drive for his 360*

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

I prefer PS3 by a wide margin.

The interface is quicker...
I don't have to be logged in to Xbox Live to play...
It has blu-ray...
A very few games seem to perform better on it...
It has better exclusives...

Just a personal preference, though. I'm not negative on my 360, but I usually get the PS3 version of a game if both are available.

I'll give the Xbox this -- Xbox Live is worlds ahead of the PSN.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

This.

I don't own one but I'd say Xbox if you plan on doing any online gaming. Xbox live is simply set up and functions better. All my COD bros went back to Xbox for MW3 and they're constantly crowing at how much better the Xbox live is to the PSN, and these were all hardcore PS3 fanboys.

_________________
Larreth Wolfsong (long retired)
Lanys T'vyl, Everquest

Zinky, Lvl 60 Warlock
Thunderhorn, WoW

For most single-player games PS3 is the best choice. For online games, no.

_________________

I dunno, I prefer single player games on Xbox over PS3 because I like the achievements better than the stupid trophies that were implemented 3 years too late.

Yeah achievements are better than trophies, but for the most part stuff looks and sounds better on PS3.

_________________

In a semi-competitive sense, achievements are more fun to earn on the 360 because they're not only more streamlined and interesting to earn, but I also enjoy comparing them with what my friends have.

There's something intangibly cooler about the interface and satisfying unlock sound and popup that you get on the 360.

For me though, achievements don't quite enter the equation when it comes to good games. I agree with Randy's sentiment for one primary reason: I've arbitrary designated my PS3 as my single-player machine because it has a lot of single-player exclusive titles that I enjoy, so I simply buy a lot of single-player games for it specifically.

I like to categorize my systems =p

Then there's the whole PSN being down for what, 2 months?

Either Sony has bad marketing or I'm way better at not buying into hype then even I thought I was but the only exclusive I've ever seen on PS3 that I sort of wanted to play was Little Big Planet, and that wasn't close to a system seller.

I just don't have any complaints about Xbox, the new dashboard update even seems to have improved on things. Especially on the Live party aspects, I also just like the horizontal arranging rather than the vertical.

_________________
Marauder Harabakc Goat

I can play Final Fantasy Tactics on the PS3 (and on my computer through an emulator but I like the console play). For me that was all that I needed.

Like previously stated, more RPG titles available for the PS3. I don't have a family though and I respect the original posters decision.

_________________

Musnicki

I can play Final Fantasy Tactics on my PS2. When I was deciding whether or not to spend $600 on a PS3 when they came out, their limited, selective legacy support wasn't really on the list of considerations because I already had the console those games were built to run on. (Actually, I think FFT was a PS1 title, but I still had one of those too.)

Yea, don't the newer PS3's still run PSX titles, just not PS2? This is why everyone awesome should own an old fat PS3. They do pretty much everything. It's just nice not having to lug another unit around that takes up space.

PSX had some fantastic RPGs, but I don't think they really match the PS2 selection. FF Tactics stands in a crowd of its own, though.

Okay, couple things.

Stop saying the PS3 does everything. Officially, Sony supports about a third of the PS2 catalog, and none of the PSX catalog, on the PS3. If it runs at all, it's an accident.

I thought the PS2 had the best selection of games at the quality level I'd buy, but FFT was the best single game of that era for Sony, and it was PSX.

EDIT: I'd forgotten the HD-DVD comment from earlier. We haven't implemented another optical medium because we're working toward a state where you don't need one. Digital distribution is going to try to kill physical media sooner or later. We're betting on the killers in the long run.

Really? A third? I've played through my entire PS2 collection and have never once had a compatibility issue. I'd like to see some examples of games that aren't backwards compatible with the original fat PS3(60/20 GB). I know there were originally some issues where PS2 games didn't play well and the resolution was fucked up, but they fixed that with a patch. Some of the later models also had emulation issues, but my understanding was that that didn't apply to the original fat PS3.

I'd merrily agree that FF Tactics was the best of the bunch, but my point is that there are countless PS2 titles to choose from. One 100 percent title doesn't really imply that 20-ish 90 percent titles aren't going to leave you with more enjoyment over the long run =p Good luck getting as many hours out of it, even as a diehard FFT fan =p

Artificially created data volume quota created by the ISP's slows this down a whole lot. They are the ones who stand to lose A LOT for the reality of IP TV to really takes off.

Most of the people don't realize that if tomorrow they switched to watching TV like they do currently, to the same channels and time on IP TV. Their Cable TV bill would be "gone" but for most of them, their ISP bills would be trough the roof thanks to those quotas and the outrageous charges per GB over the quotas.

I know they will kill "physical" media sooner or later but I doubt that will be to our benefit... I was told once; that the era of downloadable games on PC would come and lower the overall cost of ownership of games because they don't have to print a box and a manual plus they don't have to press a DVD. And so far other than very good deals on steam from time to time that haven't materialized yet. They don't even print a manual worth of the name in boxed games most of the time now instead they just put a PDF on the disk.

I wonder if they believe enough in their "dematerialized" distribution channel to try to make it so the next Xbox can't accept physical media and see if this flies with folks with no high speed internet hooked on their Xbox (it's a lot more people than you think).

As soon as I can stream blu-ray quality audio and video without tanking my internet quota, I'll believe you Tranthas.

Even Netflix's "HD Streaming" is shitty bit rate 1080p, and you can tell the difference side by side with blu-ray. Hulu doesn't even try for 1080p last I checked, and their HD option was 720p, with no 5.1 surround involved.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

Physical media is going no where for the next 10-15 years. If Microsoft is hedging their bets on this happening soon, it's going to cost them to lose a large part of their console base.

Not only does everyone not have some type of internet to allow for this, but many ISPs are starting to limit how much you can download during a time period.

People fail to realize that just because they live in a city and have multiple options for "broadband" ISPs that everyone has this same option.

According to statistics on this page. http://www.internetworldstats.com/am/us.htm

Only roughly 33% of Americans have "broadband" which is still pretty loosely defined as anything over 200 Kbps in both directions simultaneously. Go ahead and try downloading an Xbox game or watching movies or whatever with that type of a connection.

Also I'm sure there are many parents out there that won't allow their children to have their Xbox connected to the internet, probably not much to make too much of difference, but there are some.

The Cloud is the future.

I don't know anything about the next console, if there is one. If I did, I wouldn't be able to talk about it.

But: I doubt we're completely abandoning physical media quite yet, for all the reasons stated above. I wish we were, but the points about Internet quotas are all good ones (for now -- there's stuff we can do to mitigate that) and frankly, everyone's too afraid of Wal-Mart and GameStop to cut out the retail middleman right now. If we didn't push our games through retailers, they'd stop carrying our console on their shelves, and we're not really positioned well to have that fight.

Cloud City was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.

_________________

So now that I've slept... basically that means that if there's another console, it will very likely accept optical discs of some kind, but we won't create another peripheral for the 360 just for Blu-Ray.

I would argue that HD-DVD only died and disappeared so quickly because Microsoft was never fully behind it to begin with. That's why it was a peripheral, not built in.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

It was probably a peripheral because our other options were to charge $600 per console like assholes, or delay our console's release by two years. Either one would have lost us the war.