Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Xbox 360 or PS3

PanthersFanInGA

By PanthersFanInGA,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

PanthersFanInGA Newbie

PanthersFanInGA

Posted
Posted

What do you guys think is the best way to go?

I currently own an Xbox 360 that is less than 2 years old and is already busted. Will not read any discs you put in the tray. I'm leaning towards a PS3 because I've heard about many problems with the 360. I do like how PS3 doesn't charge for online play. What do you guys like better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kettle Newbie

Kettle

Posted
Posted

there are alot of opinions in another thread on the same topic. search and you will see. just to give an opinion though. i used to own 360 and had the RROD twice. they fixed it for free, but it still bothered me because the turn around time to get it back was a week once and two weeks the other time. i got tired of kids on live too, and that was a big reason i sold it for a wii. got tired of the wii, and now have a ps3.

it isn't without its problems. i've had it since september, and it is starting to get slow to load games. pretty frustrating to sit down to play some MW2 and have to wait several minutes to even get the game to come up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NFL Executive Newbie

NFL Executive

Posted
Posted

As an Xbox 360 owner for about 5 years, I would advise you to go with the PS3. Here is why

Xbox VS PS3- there is really no difference in quality online play, but the 360 charges out the butt and the PS3 makes it all free

HD VS Blue Ray- this really needs no explination, PS3 has Blue Ray

Durability- The PS3 will not have nearly as many problems as the 360. Some say that the PS3 has no "Red Ring Of Death" which is false, but as far as disk read errors and overall life the PS3 may never break down on you... I have owned 3 360's now (one was sent to me after the 1st one broke through microsoft) in about 5 years... I have a life and maybe play games about 6 hours a week... not to hard on the system.

Games- The Xbox 360 has more attractive games in my oppinion, such as Mass Effect 2! However the Halo's have went down hill, and Sony makes much smoother graphics in their games. It becomes quality (PS3) VS quanity (360)... go with quality... what are the chances you are going to play all the 360 games anyway?

Repairs- this is the only area that the 360 has a clear advantage. You can expect to get your 360 back from microsoft in about 3-6 weeks after sending it in for repair. The PS3 takes an everage of 6-12 weeks, sometimes longer.

Overall, both a great systems, but I regret picking the 360. The Mass Effect trilogy is worth getting the 360 for alone, but it will probably end up going on the PS3 as it is already multi-platform (360 and PS3) so at the end of the day, you should really go with the PS3.

Hope this helps

NFL Exec

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Purity-Control Newbie

Purity-Control

Posted
Posted

I've had a PS3 since launch and play the sh*t out of it, movies, games, everything and not one problem with it

Also got a 360 and I'm on my 3rd one after very lite use.

Games that come out for both systems I always pick up for the PS3 over the 360, I don't want to be in the middle of a game and get RROD. I go with the workhorse PS3

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PanthersFanInGA Newbie

PanthersFanInGA

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for the advice guys. I've been leaning toward a PS3 and that's probably going to be what I go with. I'm just tired of dealing with the pity problems the 360 has been giving me. I mean come on, I haven't had this system 2 years and it's already toast? Funny cause my Sega Genesis upstairs that I have had since I was 5 or 6 runs like a charm. Just goes to show they are making things way to complex that can't keep up with the systems specs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
d-dave Grand Master

d-dave

Posted
Posted

Its a tough choice. Even though you have to pay for xbox live, I think its far and away the better online system. PSN won't be free much longer, no matter what users may want. I think the games on the 360 are more fun, but that's just me. The PS3 is finally starting to look better, but it's not really even noticeable comparison wise, to me.

But with its blu ray and free wifi and many video/audio players, I give the PS3 the edge. The new PS3s lack the ability to play older games, but who doesn't have an old PS2 lying around? I love the catalog of the 360s and xbox live. So its really up to you. I just wanted to toss in my 2 cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PanthersFanInGA Newbie

PanthersFanInGA

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yep xbox360 died on me less than 2 years of use and I hardly played it.. so got PS3 and really wish I got it in the first place.

Thats what I'm saying. I had my 360 for around 2 years or less and never even played THAT MUCH. That is why I don't understand how it quit reading discs. I never moved it and played maybe a few hours a week at the most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • frankw
      An Offensive Tackle for the Long Term, but....

      By frankw · Posted

      Brother you've been WR driven for going on almost two decades now.  No need for us to discuss further.
    • TD alt
      An Offensive Tackle for the Long Term, but....

      By TD alt · Posted

      First, apologies @MHS831, I know you began this about tackles, and it was good. But... Frank, your post is just another Bryce sucks post. You obviously believe, like your buddy, that if we draft a WR it's all about evaluating Bryce Young or coddling Bryce Young. In short, it would be about improving the damned team. If anything, if Bryce is as destined to fail (or is already a failure right now... irredeemable), then another playmaker at WR would just seal the envelope and send him on his way. In my world, that's a good thing.  If some of you think that Bryce is a lame duck, then why wouldn't you want to set the offense up for the next QB to come in and be dropped into the offense to have success? Or, maybe you think it's all a moot point anyway because Tepper sucks, Dan Morgan sucks, Canales sucks, Ejiro sucks, Brandt Tilis sucks---everybidy sucks! If that's the case, then why does anyone care who or what we draft? Obviously some of you have all the answers and can run a gotdamn franchise better than the FO does now.
    • Swaggasaurus
      An Offensive Tackle for the Long Term, but....

      By Swaggasaurus · Posted

      Yeah man, idk. I’m not super big on looking at the position group overall and damning the group. I’ll do the same with less words for WR. I think Proctor is the ultimate fit because he could be your future left or right tackle or left or right guard. Guys a starter, how much Zavala, Christensen, Curhan, and Corbett did we see last year again? Mauigoa will not be there when we pick, but you take him for the same reason you take Proctor minus maybe the LT. Freeling *could* be an upgrade at LT for the future. You don’t take Miller or Iheanahor because the position flexibility isn’t there, likely RT only guys. Those Utah guys are light in the ass, don’t want. Now I do WR. All extremely unproductive when compared to previous Round 1 WR. Tate- Gone Lemon- Complete player, not a burner, would take at 19 Tyson- Made of glass, Colorado washout  Cooper- Not the best hands. Like 300 of his yards were lucky ass stumble blooper looking poo. Bernard gives you similar but better in the 2nd. KC- Slaps then catches the ball. Lightning fast for about 20 yards. Good return man. poo QBs probably more to unlock. Would take at 19 if Proctor, Freeling, Lemon were gone. Washington guy- Lumbers, the smoothness Canales hyped for TMac, not there with him. We need a different style player.    
×
×
  • Create New...