If you don't care about storage space and you can get cheap hdmi cables from some where... and you don't need wireless internet access... and you don't want to play online....... then I guess the 360 is cheaper...

Who am I kidding?

Also, the header image for this article... are those chicks fighting in chunky barf?? Nasty.

Sorry Sony. As with everything else in America... facts do not matter, perception does.

@carpwrist: Don't think every 360 owner requires WiFi (I wouldn't want to game on wireless!), so remove $99.99 for the WiFi adapter.

And people who KNOW they want a hard drive WON'T buy the arcade unit and a separate HDD...they'll buy the Pro system at $299.99, which includes HD video cables and headset (something Sony charges extra for).

Graphic FAIL.

@jpw21683
The fact that you don't need wifi, isn't the point.

When you compare both systems side by side, the 360 lacks features.

Adding those features makes it a more expensive console.

All I know is that I own both a Wii and a 360, and I am perfectly happy with both of them.. The end.

Why buy the $99 adapter, when you can just buy a $50 (or less) WRT-54G, load it with DD-WRT, enable client bridge mode, and you now have even more ethernet ports near your TV, in case you have a Blu-ray player that neads one, or the wired Popcorn Hour device.

All I know is that I own both a Wii and a PS3, and I am perfectly happy with both of them.. The end.

Wow, Sony is right. No wonder the PS3 is selling like hotcakes and dominating this generation. More features at a higher price for the win!

:rolls eyes:

Don't they reiterate this every year?

They need original content to make the PS3 worth the price, it's been getting better, but as far as I can tell it's just as generic as what the 360 has to offer. It's stand out content that will make the difference. Team Ico's game, Little Big Planet, etc... I don't see the PS3's market share really increasing unless they knock off 100 bucks and HD user base increases 10% by the end of the year.

Tubatic said it right; Basically it is ahead of it's time, which I'm sure people will look back lovingly at, but its stupid isn't it?

Home.

I've previously made comments regarding the different selling models; they each have strengths, but in the long run I think the PS3's is better.

You need something, not even now but maybe in the future? There it is. I had to dick around with a second router (even hacking a router and all that is a nerdy sort of fun) to get my 360 online and I wouldn't have complained if the system had cost more and come with wireless straight out. For the record, gaming over wireless is functionally identical to wired gaming. The bottleneck isn't your 56Mbps G access, it's your ~5-10 Mbps internet access, and chances are the up speed is significantly less.

When I started looking for rechargeable controller batteries because the 360 doesn't come with those either I realized just how much bullshit addons are.

360 huggers forgot to mention a few things:

- you need to pay ~$50 a year to play online on the 360 as opposed to ZERO on the PS3...that would add up, won't it?
- you can put ANY standard notebook HDD drive to upgrade WITHOUT VOIDING WARRANTY. plus the fact that i can attach any STANDARD USB drive on its STANDARD USB ports. try THAT on your 360.
- HDMI cables can be bought for less than $5 on eBay. I'm not sure why anyone would need to complain about that.
- Sony has built-in rechargeable battery on their wireless controllers that can be recharged with a STANDARD USB cable. With the 360 you need that stupid Play and Charge kit...

don't get me wrong. i don't hate the 360...just my 2c on putting things in perspective.

@bubuli: I'm only going to argue with you because I like a good healthy debate :)

-true, you do have to pay to play online, but at the same time, isn't Live acclaimed as a really good service? Smoother and easier than PSN? Sure, it has occasional hiccups, but every massively distributed communication system in the world sputters every now and then.

- I won't argue the fact that you can attach any drive to the PS3 on the cheap. That really is MS just being greedy. But, I can plug in externals and read music and pictures off them. I can also plus in my iPod and listen to its music through the 360. And lets not forget its Media Center Extender capabilities, which are really well integrated.

- here I agree with HPV, if its only $5, then why doesn't Sony lump one in there, at least with their expensive model, as MS does with the elite?

- I'd rather have removable rechargeable batteries as they end up dying evetually, and then its a hassle to take them out. and if you buy the battery pack tiself without the cable its only around $10. Also, the cable in the kit is like 15 feet long which makes it perfect for playing from the couch while recharging, as opposed to the 2 feet one that the PS3 comes with. And you could argue about getting a longer USB cable, but I'm pretty sure its hard to find a 15 foot long USB-mini cable, and it'll be semi-expensive.

I hope I didn't come off as rude. Just trying to stimulate a good debate.

You know, I have a $3000 computer and yet the most I tend to do with it is listen to music and fuck off on the internet. I have a way overpriced piece of hardware to do minimal stuff. That was my dumbassed decision. The thing is, Sony never gave the option. They threw boatloads of extra shit on their console that not many people benefit from which jacks up the price. Im not saying the PS3 is a bad system, im just saying to too overpowered out of the box to justify the initial price to most consumers.


Will people stop complaining about $50 for xbox live. You know all that exclusive shit the 360 gets that PS3 users never see? Yeah, thats why....

Sony doesn't put alot of money into their internet service because it is free, which makes total sense, but Id rather pay extra for a better service.


And dont even get me started on backwards compatability...all 360 consoles have it, while it was stripped from the PS3. Im sure thats worth something to lots of people with stacks of games from the last generation like me

After having both in my living room I gotta say I wish Xbox live was on PS3. The PS3 is silent. Plays blu-ray movies, and has the built in wi-fi. BUT.... it's the games and the gamers that make a system and xbox is way better there, even if it sounds like a jet taking off some times. I have lived without the wireless adapter and bought mine with a hard drive so other than the recurring 50 bucks a year for live it's a better investment. The 3 doesnt get much play. None of my friends are on it.

Saying the 360 is more expensive then the PS3 because of the stuff you have to buy to make it like the PS3 is pretty silly.. it's like saying that a slurpee is a more ezpensive car because you'd have to buy an engine and a chassis and wheels and stuff to make it into a car, plus you still have the original cost of the slurpee.

Most consumers don't need every feature in the PS3, and certainly don't need every feature when they first buy it.. very few people buy the wireless adapter, for instance.

You could also argue the PS3 is more expensive then the 360 because in order to play 360 games you have to buy a 360 adding $199 onto the ps3's price.

The barrier for entry for the 360 is 199.99. The barrier for entry on the ps3 is twice as much. That's really all that's important.

I do not want to defend the 360 but the first image is just plain wrong. This has definitely been true in the beginning of the PS3 but nowadays the 360 with 60gb, two games and hdmi cable is about 200€ (yeah, I am from good old europe). It is definitely true that there is no Wireless but I do not need it, and overall: I want to choose if needed.

If the PS3 would be cheaper I would definitely buy one, just because I want to continue the MGS saga but 400€ is just too much for no real surplus as I do not have a HDTV.
If someone has a HDTV and thinks about Bluray but does not own a console, I would definitely recommend a PS3. But for someone not eager to change his DVD collection to Bluray the overvalue gets lost, and then, as most games are available for both, I would recommend the 360, because the difference of price gives away 5-10 games today.

Just my 2 cents

I've had my 360 for three years and haven't purchased ANY of those add-ons and have been just fine without them. And that was with a 20 GB HDD, too (That I still have and am using).

I think of them as more for convenience purposes, not because I need them. I haven't since I bought my 360.

@Sarlac:
-If they replace your controllers, then yes, they do have the advantage there, though it really wouldn't make business sense for them to do it, especially if they're already losing money on the thing.

- Ah, but the battery pack with the cable is like $15, and the battery itself like $10, which means the cable should be $5. No Shipping costs and its pretty much hot-swappable. I'd day it wins for convenience then.

Ugh. What Sony doesn't realize is..

Not every person purchasing a 360..

...NEEDS A HARD DRIVE.
...NEEDS WI-FI ACCESS (or even has it in their house!).
...WANTS TO PLAY ONLINE.

I work in a game retail store, and I am endlessly explaining the differences between each console. People buy game systems for different reasons. For Sony (and some of the people in these comments) to assume that every single gamer is as hardcore as the next is foolish. Some people are just fine with a memory card, most SERIOUS gamers wouldn't choose Wi-fi over hardline for their online gaming, and some just don't care at all for Xbox live or the digital download service in general.

Would you rather pay for features you actually care about? Or be forced to cash in on doodads you'll never even use? The only thing I cared about when buying my PS3 was whether or not it played PS2 games, and the fact that I could finally see Cloverfield on Blu-Ray. However, I AM NOT EVERYONE.

..and all this chest thumping about features is pointless. I bet if Sony told people they could get a PS3 sans Wi-Fi for $100 less, a LOT more people would buy the damn thing.

*looks at 360 pro console*

Just putting it in perspective.

They forgot the part about the PS3 lacking games.

*rimshot*

i have both systems and i can say the 360 is cheap! cheap parts, cheaply made and thats why you have RROD but it does have some very good games.

I used the old PS2 Component cables with my PS3 and it looked spectacular for HD performance. Of course it looks a little better with the HDMI, but the components worked really well for me. Am I not picky enough?

I'm sidestepping all the hardware buying shit since I got into with some guy last week on the cblogs.

You know what you need, you know what these units come with, there really shouldn't be any complaints, because if you want one or the other and can't decide, you ought to do some fucking research and see what you're gonna get both in games and service from each console.

It boils down to games. Are the games you want to play going to be on console A, B, or C?

Yes/No?

Great, buy that one.

Done deal.

I am a game player and have been for 20+ years. What I care about (in a console) is a wide variety of games to play (go figure)...a feature that comes in bunches on the 360.

I don't care about media applications nor do I care about surfing the internet...I've got a laptop (with an anti-virus…did I hear correctly that consumers are contracting viruses on their PS3’s?) that handles that just fine...what I DO care about is games and playing them. That's why I am here on this site that's why I spent money on this generation of consoles.

As for LIVE and...OMG...PAYING FOR IT...holy shit, you mean people pay for things? Well, the way I see it is that with only one subscription I can play hundreds of games online and commune with pals easily via voice chat or messaging while in the game or out...not bad. In the way of comparisons, if I were to game on my laptop I would have to pay-per game (the free games aren't really awe-inspiring) downloading each...but, this isn't about PC gaming is it? This is about Sony's desperate statements and the wild corporate rollercoaster they've been riding which now has them listening to and parroting their fans...wow, reality is stranger than fiction. Instead of trying push your HD sets (why do you think the graphics are shitty without HDMI..This is not a coincidence), blu-ball-ray player, and your "home entertainment center" concept...push games to me! That's my fix and you used be one of the more competent dealers...I guess time changes all things

While the cost of the PS3 has always been a sticky issue, it was not the sole issue for me as a "game player". After all, I paid $480 for an import Saturn when it came out (oh, the games I played on that Saturn!) demonstrating that I will spend top dollar to game. If Sony wants more install then they need to go back to basics. Stop trying to sell applications to ADHD suffering hipsters who don’t know whether they want to watch a bluray, surf the net, or listen to music (notice I did not mention gaming because hipsters don’t really do that…that’s one of the reasons why the few games available for the PS3 don’t sell nearly as well as their 360 counterparts). Go back to the games…and yes, Sony has made “some” progress in that regard, but obviously Metal Gear and Uncharted simply weren’t enough. Honestly, I doubt Killzone-God of War-Infamous will be enough either. Your bottom line should be games as a priority and until that happens (and they drop the price) I can’t see getting one.