Xbox 360 vs. PS3 costs comparison
After a lot of deliberation, I chose the PlayStation 3 in this generation of consoles. The decision wasn’t easy, mind you. After all, the Xbox 360 had much more games (at least, during the time I was mulling it over), and they were games that I desperately wanted to play. Who can argue with Dead Rising, Bioshock, Gears of War, and Halo 3?
But there was a problem with Microsoft’s console: the Red Rings of Death. It’s pretty hard to determine how many were affected by it but based on the information available online, we’re talking about a failure rate of around 30%.
So what did I do? I put everything down on paper. I first compared the cheaper versions of both consoles:
I observed that Xbox 360 Pro owners would pay $349.98 at the very least (unit cost of $299.99 + Xbox Live fees of $49.99), which should already equal the cost of a 40GB PS3. If I want Wi-Fi with my Xbox, I have to shell out another $75 to $99. When the Xbox 360 breaks down after three years, it’s going to cost me $139 to get it fixed.
I then compared the top-of-the-line versions:
At the very least, Xbox 360 Elite owners should shell out $449.98 (unit cost of $399.99 + Xbox Live fees of $49.99). That’s already more than what an 80GB PS3 might cost. Throw in the $75 to $99 wireless network adapter, and we’re looking at an even bigger cash out.
Of course, that’s only for the first year. Naturally, the Xbox 360 would require more money down for Xbox Live and most likely, repairs.
Today, the PS3 has a pretty impressive library of games that could rival the 360, so that argument of the Xbox 360 having more games is moot. Granted, I like Western shooters much more than console RPGs, but I’m not willing gamble $299 at the very least for a console that could break down at any time.
That said, the Xbox 360 is an impressive machine that comes with superior online capabilities and a gamut of quality games, but the cheapskate in me chose the PS3 because a) it really is cheaper overall and b) it’s more reliable. This is why all the talk of the PS3 being more expensive baffles me.
Update:
Thanks for pointing out my serious math boo-boo. I’ve made the necessary adjustments. But you know what? The corrected figures show that the disparity of costs between the PS3 and Xbox 360 is even much bigger–therefore it proves my point: the PS3 is indeed cheaper than the Xbox 360.
Popularity: 100% [?]
June 24th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
shoot whoever does your math
[Reply]
June 24th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Care to tell me why?
[Reply]
June 24th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Basically because you claim a 40 GB PS3 and an 80 GB PS3 will cost the same, $399. In addition, you claim an Xbox 360 Pro will end up costing a dollar more than an Xbox 360 Elite.
[Reply]
June 24th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
because aimless just bought XBOX 360…
[Reply]
June 24th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
You know the repair costs of the XBOX 360 are covered by warrantee. Although I have mine in for repair for the second time now… This is unacceptable as products should be engineered properly for real life use and not marketing strategies.
[Reply]
June 24th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
@Ben
“When the Xbox 360 breaks down after three years, it’s going to cost me $139 to get it fixed.”
Yes, I did consider that. It’s good that your Xbox 360 is still covered by the warranty, but once it passes the three-year mark, you’re on your own.
How old is your Xbox 360, by the way?
[Reply]
June 26th, 2009 at 8:36 am
biased comparison period
[Reply]
June 26th, 2009 at 8:43 am
I wouldn’t mind paying for the network service that delivers superior content and community. Can you attest that the PS3 online service comes even close to Xbox Live? No. Free is not always better.
The PS3 is a mean machine, no argument about that. But it doesn’t “own” the Xbox. I have both consoles so I can say that much.
[Reply]
June 26th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
@Jack-Cool-Ero
I never did say that the PSN is better than the Xbox Live. Nor did I say that the PS3 “owns” the Xbox 360. Yes, I am aware that the Live is better in terms of content.
Haven’t I already mentioned this in the article?
In fact, the I drool at the thought of playing those Xbox 360 exclusives.
My argument here is that the PS3 is NOT more expensive than the Xbox 360, and that people using this as their reason for choosing the “cheaper” machine should look more closely at the figures.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
when my xbox broke down it cost me £30 to get it fixed and thats becouse i droped it after 3 years of owning it plus my wireless adapter only cost me £40 so your price comparison hear is quite wrong and it dosnt matter 360 got better games than the ps3 so would you by a slightly cheaper console that sucks or a little bit more expensive console that actually is worth while playing
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
PS3s break down too - Everyone at work has had a 360 break, but all have had em repaired for free.
Dude at work also had his ps3 break down. 199 UKP for sony to fix it. Ouch !
(I think inlcuding the cost of wireless in the comparison is a little out of whack too - My ps3 has wireless but I dont use it - can I get a refund on the wireless component
)
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
At some point the PS3 will break and you obviously didn’t take that into consideration, wtf?
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
PS3 is still 360 and how exactly do you know whether I need Wifi or whether I actually purchase Live?
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
Mike,
ow stupid t*rd, that’s totally not the point! The PS3 is more expensive
and that’s IT! With a PS3 you pay for things you don’t even want, that’s why
X360 is in most cases the cheaper solution. How many people use wireless?
How many people get a RRoD after 3 years (so the console is reaaly old, don’t think the older models
will last that long, therefore have already been replaced). And for forgetting to put the
repaircost of a Blu-Ray laser makes this comparison BIASED! I mean, that laser, if it breaks on you
within 2 years it’s still gonna cost you about $150 :O.
[Reply]
Matthew Reply:
July 23rd, 2009 at 10:02 pm
yeah but the blu-ray laser is unlikely to break,unlike the 360, take my friend, one time his dad was cleaning his room and nudged the Xbox with his hand while it was on, didn’t fall over or anything. what happened? instant RROD. i’ve moved my PS3 hundreds of times while it was on and nothing has ever happened to that.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
What kind of gamer uses wireless? Really? It’d be cheaper to run a cable through your wall than to buy a wireless router, regardless of whatever additional hardware you need.
Repair is not $139 each time, an Xbox can 3rrod 20 times within 3 years and it will be repaired free each time. Granted it’s crappy designed hardware, but that’s not really a fair comparison, especially as you don’t mention the PS3 repair costs (regardless of very low frequency).
I wouldn’t really be including the cost of live either, it’s an unnecessary extra, should I go count them on the PS3 side? Like say the price of a Dualshock controller if I was an early adapter (which I was), or the price of Qore, etc.
Sure in some cases your PS3 will be cheaper, but definitely not in all.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
Attention Xbots. Microsoft is fleecing you. You are getting ripped off. You think you have it better than PS3 users because there are “more games”. More does not = better.
What, I should feel left out because there are more 12 year old teabaggers on Xbox live than on PSN? So what?
Keep forking over your online $ and sending your Broke-boxes back to the factory. Meanwhile, I will be playing games and watching Blu-Ray.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
I was in the EXACT same position and I was gonna get a 360 then I saw all the extra costs and failure rate. I ended up getting a ps3 just after the xmas price cut in 2007 and then a year later when the 360s failure rate was a lot lower and the price had gone down too I bought one with loads of great exclusives. PS3 is still my main console because more of my mates have ps3s and I have more games on ps3 but I still play my 360 often in fact as I type this I am playing versus mode on 360 in L4D :).
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Finally someone who pays attention to the monthly figures and repair costs/durability. Soooooo many people try to argue that the 360 is cheaper… I have other systems and I love them both dearly but the ps3 has definitely been the least of my problems. (have a 40gig ps3, been through 2 360’s and on my first elite and it just stopped working O.O and I really don’t want to send it in since I don’t really have anything new to play on it.)
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
^In the above statement^: I have other systems - I meant to type both not other (sigh) my bad…
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
your prices are way way off. first of all, you can get an xbox arcade for $199, a used 20gb hard drive for $25 on amazon, and a 2nd controller for $25 on amazon. also, xbox live memberships can easily be found for $40. Also 3 year warranty on the xbox. So i spent under $300 total and that included a 2nd controller, which was less than i paid for my wii with 2nd controller/nunchuck. and there is no wireless with xbox but why do you think its necessary to have that? mine is hardwired to network. also, you forgot to mention that you get a lot more out of xbox live for the money you pay for it. i would rather pay $40 for xbox live than have either the ps3 or wii online services because they arent in the same league (and you did mention that). So I paid under $300 for the xbox 360.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
To Dan,
‘biased comparison period’
Well, to argue that this blog is biased is to argue that Maths is biased. The author, Mike, is not constructing a biased argument but instead using actual logic to come to a correct conclusion.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
might be more useful is you only said what was required to play system. For instance xbox 360 pro=$299, warranty=3 years free, xbox live=$40 on amazon, wireless adapter=this isnt required to go online. total for xbox 360 = $339.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
Whatever PS3 fanboy.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
I see that you add up to the X360 features that perhaps not everyone needs - like wifi (wired lan provides much better gaming after all. No need for paying the PS3 premium for wireless if yo can connect it wired. So if we’re into calculating how much money you really need to shell out - please remember that you forgot these additional PS3 costs:
- 20$ annualy for QORE (Live gold gives you access to games in advance, you also need to play for a similar feature in the PS3). Live gold is about 30$-40$ annually nowadays btw, so the difference is actually less than 20$ per year.
- about 60$ for a PS3 headset (it comes for free with the X360)
- About 20$ for a HDMI cable (comes for free with the elite version)
- 65$ for an extra controller at amazon (versus 40$ for an X360 controller). That’s 25$ more per controller, and since we want to play with friends at home this climbs up to 195$ for 3 extra controllers - a whooping 75$ over an Xbox 360
- an extra playstation 2 for 99$. As yuo probably recall, the X360 gives you backwards compatibility while the PS3 does not (not anymore). You want to play PS2 games? shell out 100 dollars more (you need to fill up on the god of war story after all…)
- PS3 can also break (google YLOD), and since you have only 1 year warranty, there are some good chances you will have to fix it as well during a 5 years lifetime. Problem is: repairing is more expansive and you’ll have to shell out about 150-200$ for a repair.
So when we add it all up, the real cost of a PS3 is about 850$ - that’s like 450$ on top of the price you paid for your PS3. Shit that’s expensive.
You know what might have been a smarter move if you’re price conscious? Buying an X360 arcade model for 200$ (or actually 180$ after rebate) and adding a 120GB harddrive that sells for 60$. That’s 240$, and even with 50$ Xbox live gold card and less than 80$ wireless adapter (do your reseatch, it’s not 100$) you’re still better off than buying an expensive PS3 (and the bottom line is that the X360 still has more games).
So it’s nice you’re trying to justify your purchase although it may have not been the smartest choice, but you really do need to shot whomever does your math…
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 8:28 pm
I was in the same boat as you (over one and a half years ago) and I too made the same choice. Damn happy with the choice as well! The fact that I could also play around 60-70% of the xbox’s “console exclusive” on my gaming PC also nudged me in the ps3 direction. This system hasn’t let me down yet (touch wood quick!). The number and quality of games already out for it are second to none..and the exclusives coming out in the near future are just looking to be amazing!
I’ll probably get a 360 in the near future though, just to get the best of both worlds.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
You have a point but you’re preaching to dead ears. It’s not about value anymore these days. It’s all about the price. People are constantly fooled by Microsoft, thinking they don’t need addons for games but sooner or later the charges pile up.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
Interesting article.
Ok, so after all the price comparisons; WITHOUT using these points to decide - which console would you prefer of the 2?
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
PSN has come a long way so I wouldn’t diss it if I were you. There’s no advertisements on the dashboard and the online system is relatively simple.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
The xbox is more money, especially if you want wireless, but if you watch amazon, you can get LIVE for $30 or thereabouts. They have sales quite often. The thing that really bothers me about the 360 though is you can’t upgrade the HDD yourself, without a major pain and ripping apart the console. The PS3 makes it very easy and you can upgrade as large as you want. The 360 does still have a lot more good games though.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
I agree the extra cost for certain add-ons (like wi-fi) are kind of ridiculous. But when factoring the cost of a console you can’t add possible costs like repair. The price you pay at the store, the price for Xbox live, etc. you know that you have to pay those and when. Repair can’t be factored in for one and not the other. I have a launch Xbox 360 still going strong, never one problem. A co-worker of mine (who also has a near launch Xbox 360 still going) had his PS3 for 4 months before it had some kind of problem. And wi-fi and Xbox live are options, if you don’t want them then you don’t have to pay, making the cost much lower. This comparison, while interesting, is totally subjective and should be taken as such. I do not play online and I use my router from my isp for my free silver account and have not had any repairs. My cost, $299 (at launch), lower than buying a PS3. See what I mean, different for everyone.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
What a dumb “article”.
- Repairs are free for the first 3 years. If you don’t need repairs in 3 years, you won’t need them after 3 years.
- You don’t need a wireless adapter, you can use an ethernet cable.
- You don’t need to pay for Xbox Live. You can play online if you don’t want to pay. Just keep making a new account and you get 30 days free Live. PS3 has sh!t online for free. Wow, free dog sh!t, good deal! lol
NEVER buy a 360! We don’t want XBox Live to fill up with dumb newbs. That’s what PSN is for! lol
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
[...] vs. Xbox 360 price comparison I found this one via N4G and thought it was interesting to see someone lay out the math, rather price of the two systems. That said, the Xbox 360 is an [...]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
the first ps3 should be 350 not 399, also put in rrod and no rrod since 360 owners get pissed other wise. i also think 5 years or 250 dollars worth of live should be put up, no one does 1 year
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
The cold hard fact is that you factor incidentals, and options.
My 360 required no wireless to get onto my silver account, which I use to get demos and DLC, not pay to play. Also, I’ve never had to send mine in for repairs. And last time I checked there’s a little thing called the 360 arcade model, that’s cheaper than the one you have listed as the cheapest model.
This article is fanboy fail.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
I think you have a fantastic chance of getting a job at wherever Patcher works, because they hire people who spout stupid unfounded crap in a second
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
How u go from 349.99 to 399.99 with nothing in between? Learn mathematics!
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:31 pm
Hey, nothing is new here we all knew this, but still i bow down for your hard work to show the truth to those who havn’t seen it yet, but anyways…..peace.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
139$ per repair? 99$ for am optional? those 2 lines are a bit forced in your maths…
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
hey mike whats your psn? id like to add you
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:40 pm
I think you also forgot to add in the cost of battery packs for the 360’s controllers. At $11.99 a controller, you’re looking at an additional 24 bucks for the average set up.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
to include the repair cost doesnt make sense…especially when you dont put in one for ps3…considering that all the 3 year old ps3s are now experiencing more problems
…but also the “top of the line” comparison is wrong because the ps3 top is the 160gb which costs 500…when you compare which xbox minus the biased repair cost it comes to only 550, which is obviously still more but is def a more reasonable comparison
…using the same logic for the cheaper versions…the xbox is still only $50 more than the ps3
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
Great, someone else trying to get hired from Sony during layoffs.
Listen, the Xbox 360 is $199-399. That’s it. The pS3 is $399-499. That’s it. All the other stuff is irrelevant. Not everyone pays for Xbox Live that buys a systems. Even less I imagine buy the wireless adapter. Then you have people who pay anywhere from $3 to $100 for a HDMI cable yet it’s mysteriously absent. Repairs on the PS3 chances are none? Tell that to everyone who had to pay over $100 to get their system fixed and that’s after 1 year, not 3. Then you also decided to ignore a headset because heck, nobody bought the official PS3 headset right but everyone bought a $99 wireless adapter. Brilliant. Another jackass trying to show the world his assessment on why he thinks the PS3 is cheaper when in reality the consumer sees things very differently. Also to compare free PSN to XBL is like comparing a PC to a Mac. People tend to forget that the Mac operating system is more stable and comes with additional software just like how PS3 owners tend to forget XBL is far more of a service than PSN is.
No, this isn’t me showing the Xbox 360 is better, it’s me showing you how to get your head out of your ass and see how not everything pertains to everyone. I enjoy my PS3 and I enjoy my Xbox 360. What I don’t do is try to justify my purchase to the world because one is doing as well as it should.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
no dude
thats very old numbers
xbox live 12+1 cost 39.99 not 49.99
Microsoft Xbox 360 Wireless 75.00 not 99
xbox 360 e cost 240.00 not 400
i have a xbox 360 e for 2y now and my ps3 60gb has YLOD im not joking
and dont forget that xbox 360 e comes whet 120gb not 80 gb and much longer Ensure
i cant Believe xbox 360 rrod fix cost 140 !!!! just get a new xbox 360 arcade it cost 150 box !
both console are amazing but in Price you cant Compare and i have fun plying
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
@ Jack-Cool-Ero (Xbot)
Read than say something
dum xbot
PS3-durability,cheap
Xbox-fun,content
Thats my opinon, but personally I like PS3 more
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
Don’t forget the Xbox 360 doesn’t have rechargable controllers thats an extra 20 for the charger thing.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
Mike, why haven’t you added the £80 that Sony customers had to pay when their warantee went after they bought their first generation 20Gb console to the YLOD or blu-ray burn out? you make it sound like the PS3 is uber reliable yet i know many who’ve had to replace and cash out a little bit of balanced journalism would of been nice. Also if you use my region like the UK, the PS3 is way more expensive even if the 360 broke down, you’ve also not mentioned “continious play” that Sony charged customers as an option at £60 a year incase of breakdown which many had before Sony suspended the service which is £30 more then the annual Xbox Live. Honestly at the end of the day consumers will find value in the services provided and the growing end price is moot.
Because I mean look how many PS2’s I’ve had and how much money I spent buying new ones it’s over £500 and I still own one. I think it says something if a consumer regardless to the failings still goes and buys that flawed console…
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
[...] Xbox 360 vs. PS3 costs comparison [...]
July 4th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
finally i was waiting for a article like this, but i wanted it 2 yrs ago when ps3 first came out.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 10:04 pm
How dumb…
Why not compare with the Arcade version + $60 20Gb Hard drive starter pack?
What about game costs? I notice games like Folklore and F1 Ferrari have not been reduced in price on PS3 and in general (not all, but many, especially exclusives) I see a lot of titles much more expensive on PS3? If you are doing Total Cost of Ownership take everything into account.
As for repair costs… I have 6 x 360’s and have dealt with repairs only twice, both on warranty. 3 are over the 3 year mark with no issues to date. I have two PS3’s and have had to repair both twice. The first were on warranty the second I ended up just buying new PS3’s because Sony was going to charge me $250 for the repairs… Also, if you are buying 360’s since Jaspers started shipping the failure rates are totally in line with industry standards.
Network costs? Sure the network is free, but you end up paying for it elsewhere. Either in game prices or the nickel and diming they do to you everywhere. Like paying for Home furnishings… Also, 360 is given discounts for Gold members on DLC now so the costs get reimbursed if you are an avid DLC’er. But regardless, it is an optional purchase. If you are not an online gamer it doesn’t make sense and many people are still that way believe it or not.
Wireless costs? Not everyone needs or wants one. Why didn’t you include blu-ray then? I’m sure that would further justify your delusion.
Also, the 360’s use less power then PS3… Why haven’t you dealt with electricity costs?
Finally, there are more games on 360 then PS3. If you are doing Total Cost of Ownership you should take in account the fact you will be buying more games on 360… And because 360 has more exclusive DLC you will end up buying some of the to, and your Netflix account because you will want to use that nice service to watch on your TV.
I find this article to be biased to what you want from a console and maybe experience you have had. Because optional costs are included, this ends up being just another pathetic Sony fanboy post.
[Reply]
Matthew Reply:
July 23rd, 2009 at 10:16 pm
y do u have 6 360’s and 2 PS3’s??? That kinda suggests that PS3 is more reliable to me
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 10:13 pm
And you forgot to mention the bluray player!….and as for the PSN content - I can buy a game for $10 and give it to my 4 friends in this case the game cots us about $2…WTF? How can someone says Live is bettre than PSN? And there is qore magazine($25/year), where you can get a fre game every month! so please dont tell me that it is better to buy Xcrap!!!!! SORRY
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 10:46 pm
I have a 360 and PS3. The PSN is indeed better than xbox live minus the cross-over voice chat. Once PS3 gets that, then they’ll be equal in features but even then, PSN is still better when it comes to servers and lag.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
also, let’s not forget to throw in the cost of the rechargeable battery pack lol.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 10:56 pm
Well i agree with you 100% My cousins bought a 360 a long time ago and it had already broke down 4 times!!!! Thats crazy. I had my ps3 for almost 2 years and nauthing so far but. But in the argument of PSN and LIVE i think psn is best but that just me. Cause i think the psn has got a lot more game for a lot cheeper as well as it FREE. What more can you ask for.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
I totally agree with this article. Unfortunately, Americans do not learn math and/or how to calculate VALUE.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
Dumb, dumb, dumb… Why, do you say?!?
Firstly, because this has been done to DEATH last year and the year before!!!
Secondly, because it costs $150 to send in your PS3 to have it fixed “each time.” Even if games like CoDWaW give it the Dreaded Yellow Light of Death. Many PS3 owners know this, even if they (almost) NEVER have to send it in. So, uhh… looks like you need to update, once more.
Thirdly, because, as I said, “this has been done to DEATH last year and the year before!!!”
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 11:10 pm
You definitely left out some things that could be added to the cost of the PS3 so that it would have the same features as an xbox 360 out of the box.
1. A headset
2. An HDMI cord comes standard in Xbox 360 Elite which I’m sure doesn’t with the PS3
3. Also you don’t put the cost that it would take to upgrade the hardrive to a standard pro (60GB) or a standard elite (120GB).
You seem to be only nitpicking costs with the Xbox 360 but completely ignore anything for the PS3. Also you can extend the 3 year warranty to a 5 year warranty for $100 (if it’s still in warranty). And I was told from Xbox Support that if you complete your report of hardware failure online, it costs $100 and then comes with a 1 year warranty after you get the console back.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 11:12 pm
“an you attest that the PS3 online service comes even close to Xbox Live? .”
yes, and it’s “sometime” better : dedicated servers, home, web, etc
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
While I agree that the PS3 is a great system, I think these price comparisons are inherently flawed. Parents may buy a system based on price, but gamers rarely would.
The repair cost after three years is a shaky thing to include. “Chances are, none” is not quantitative. You would have to enter the price of repair after 1 yr for the PS3. If you are going to enter a number for one side, you have to enter a number for the other.
Cheers!
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 11:29 pm
how clearly a ps3 fanboy
- 3-year warrantee (so free)
- you dont need an wireless netword adaptor (and it cost 60)
- you dont mention 360 games are cheaper
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
Xbox 360 is cheaper, but it has more additional costs.
I thought these comparisons had died out 3 years ago.
When it comes to choosing between a PS3 and 360, price should be one of the final things you decide upon. A PlayStation 2 is cheaper than both these consoles and yet nobody is defending the PS2 as the best console to buy.
If you want to buy a new console, look what consoles your friends have (because you’ll be able to play online together), look at the media functions (PS3 has Blu-Ray), look at the difference in games library.
And if you can’t decide what console to buy based on those differences between them, you can look at the price. What use is spending 50 bucks less for something if you really don’t want to have it or want the other one.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
it is funny that every time someone compare both machine , there is always one who hown both but preffer the 360 , but that is a question of taste and no i’m not a fanboy but having both machine ( not at the same time ) i got the 360 first and i whas happy whit the selection of game but the machine itself make to much noise and bluw up on me only after the first 10 month ..back then the warrenty whas for 6 month only …then after i got a ps3….and never regret it …so yes the ps3 come cheaper then the 360 it is more reliable and the online communnity is getting really cool ..and its free …
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 11:46 pm
Mike…you made a mistake…the top of the line PS3 should be $499
[Reply]
July 4th, 2009 at 11:54 pm
I bought the $200 360 arcade version and it hasn’t even hiccuped since the 8 months I’ve had it. Xbox Live costs like $35 for 12months + 1month bonus free, so 13 month in total. And sht, for wireless, you can just buy a $5 50ft ethernet cable, sht. So in fact, the 360 is way cheaper than th e ps3. plus, the warranty costs the cover of any problems, you don’t have to pay the $140. this article is so fanboy playslave spam, he includes the repair costs as if it was going to happen. op yea, btw, have u heard of YLOD? noob!
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 12:02 am
Old information. Failure rate is NOWHERE near 30% anymore. Any the 3 year warranty is refreshed every time you send it in so there is basically no chance you’d ever have to pay for the repair and last time I checked a ethernet cable is a lot cheaper than their wacko price of 99 dollars for a wireless adapter. When will people learn to bridge their wireless connections on their pcs and feed it to their xbox’s? All you need is an ethernet cable and you get to give microsoft the finger for that stupid wireless adapter.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 12:04 am
The red ring is covered for 3 years. If something else goes wrong, I think you’re going to be paying for it yourself.
I agree that the PS3 is the better value, especially if you also have a gaming PC, as most of my favorite 360 games (Orange Box, Mass Effect, Left 4 Dead) are also available on PC for less money and are technically far superior.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 12:05 am
You assume a lot in this comparison.
1. That every had broadband internet and wants to connect their console and play online. *Most* people I know that own a gaming console, either A) don’t have broadband, or B) don’t care about playing online. I know this will be hard to grasp, but the majority of people I know either have dial up still, or no internet access at all. I live in a small somewhat rural area, so mileage may vary.
2. That you HAVE to buy a wireless adapter for the 360. I’ll sum this one up in two ways. A) wireless is SLOWER than wired, by a mile. I prefer to run wires, I have no disconnection issues, and faster speed simple. B) see above, no internet or a dial up connection, and online gaming is not possible anyway, so a wireless adapter is a moot point.
3. That every console will break down. I don’t see how you can add that cost in, state that it makes the machine more exspensive, when it’s been shown that the RRoD is largely a ghost today. I have a second generation system a Halo 3 system. It’s nearly two years old now, never had a problem. I know several people that have Elite’s and the newer Pro systems, and even a few Arcade systems… NO PROBLEMS… Yes my original core system died, I chose to replace it, I wanted the Halo 3 system anyways… The only people I’ve know that’s had failures, all had first gen systems. So adding in the $139 and assuming ALL 360’s will die, is pretty silly.
You fail to even mention the $199 Arcade model. This is how a lot of my friends have gotten a 360. It was financially easier to buy the $199 model, and add a hard drive later if desired. A few have bought hard drives, the rest, are happy using the memory card, it gives them all they need.
Am I a 360 fan? You bet! I have over 130 games for it already. For the record I also own a Wii, and have around 50 games for it. Do I own a PS3? No. Why? I’m not paying $400 for a machine to play a small handful of titles that I can’t play on my two current consoles. So you say the PS3 plays Blu-rays? So does my $128 Magnavox Blu-ray player…
Sony dropped the ball in so many ways. I WANTED a PS3 BADLY. But their first mistake was allowing Microsoft to market the 360 first. I waited and waited… Then saw the $400 tag and went and bought a 360 the next day… Still I had a PS2, and wanted to sell it, and still wanted a PS3. So I kept waiting for a price drop. Then Sony got stupid. They removed backwards compatibility for PS2 games. So now I have to keep my PS2 even if I buy a PS3, in order to play my old games. This wasn’t something I was willing to do. So I bit the bullet and sold my PS2, and everything related to it. I figured I couldn’t use it on a new PS3… Still waiting for that price drop…
In the mean time I played the Wii at a friend’s house. My wife grew up with Zelda, I grew up with Mario… not long after we ended up buying a Wii. Much like the 360 allows us to play many of our old Xbox titles, the Wii allowed us to acquire GameCube titles, and the Virtual Console was a god send for us. We’ve bought literally every NES, SNES, and N64 title we ever owned, and missed… Been a BLAST playing the old favorites again. The PS3? Still waiting for that price drop…
The wife, she’s die hard into Disney movies. Our last true reason to still really want a PS3 was the Blu-ray player. So we waited… Wal-Mart has the Magnavox priced at $128. So we got it. The PS3? No backwards compatibility, smallest game library of all 3 current consoles, and now, finally, nothing to make me even remotely consider purchasing it. It’s almost sad. I had a PS1 and PS2. They were each my favorite console of their generation. I didn’t think I could ever get comfortable with another system’s controller. Now… the 360 controller is the most comfortable controller I’ve ever used. The Sony controller feels foreign to me now…
The rest…
Xbox live is worth every penny you pay for it. Yes I have broadband, yes I play online, and yes I will NEVER use a wireless connection to do so, unless I have no other possible option. If it’s multiple platform, I buy it on the 360, I buy the Nintendo exclusives on the Wii of course and the 360 exclusives on the 360… The PS3 exclusives? They are so few and far between, and not one of them has yet made me take a second look or give me any reason to remotely consider a PS3. I’ll likely sing a different song when the next God of War comes out… But in the end, I still won’t pay $400 for a console for a single title. I didn’t buy it for Metal Gear Solid 4, so I’m sure I’ll pass on GoW as well… But that’s OK, I’ve got PLENTY of great games to keep me satisfied, too many honestly, not enough time to finish all the games I own now, no need for a 3rd system…
I guess maybe that’s why I only own 2 per generation it seems… 2 generations ago, I passed on the Dreamcast… Last generation I passed on the GameCube… This generation I guess it’s the PS3…
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 12:13 am
Lol, this has already been done.
http://www.ps3center.net/news/2100/sony-ps3-is-a-better-value-than-360-wii/
Good article non-the-less.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 12:14 am
So you base your comparison on your estimation that PS3’s failure rate it 0% and Xbox 360 is 100%.
Before you say “but I mentioned only 30%” - if that was your argument you’d have to weight the X360 repair estimate with 30% _and_ further more weight the same cost into the PS3 calculation albeit at the reported somewhat lesser failure rate around 10% for the PS3.
Anyone remotely interested in doing that kind of comparion correctly would furthe rmore have to take into account, that the 3 years extended RROD is actually far longer than the PS3’s 90 days standard warranty, so all in all you have much worse failure coverage the first 3 years on the PS3.
But who am I to teach you to compare things correctly - since that would lessen the impact of your “message”…. kids now a days!
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 12:18 am
lmao someone said he’s biased when he just stated the truth. People buy 360’s because it looks cheaper than a ps3 when you go to the store because of the upfront payout. But since the 360 doesnt even include basic things needed such as wifi and occasionally a harddrive lol, then the price actually surpasses the ps3. Guess who got the better games now too? ;]
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 12:20 am
i myself have (or had as the case may be) a 360, only for it to breakdown. Rearing its ugly head, the 3red lights only proves that the ps3 is a wiser choice. stupid 3rl’s..stupid xbox
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 12:45 am
This is a bad article, and you should feel bad for publishing it.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 12:50 am
Your comparison is riddled with holes.
You do know that your comparison seems to gloss over the fact that the 40GB PS3 isn’t even in production anymore, right? And that if you want to look at sales, I can point you to the 60GB Xbox 360 Pro for sale at FYE stores for only $250, plus the 2 packaged games, plus a $60 or under game of your choice?
Or how about the fact that you curiously seem to negate to mention that the Xbox 360’s HDD is larger than that of the PS3 it is being compared to (60GB vs 40GB, 80GB vs 120GB)? Odd that you mention the size of the PS3’s every chance you can get, and yet never seem to bother mentioning the Xbox 360’s.
And that the 60GB Xbox 360 Pro hasn’t even been out for a full year, yet you’re arbitrarily tacking on a $139 expense that you won’t have to pay until, at earliest, 2011, if at all? Because you have been following how each subsequent release has reduced that rate of RRoD, right? Whereas the PS3’s relatively rare YLoD has no warranty backing it?
Also, why are you counting WiFi as a given, yet not taking into account BluRay capabilities for the PS3?
“Today, the PS3 has a pretty impressive library of games that could rival the 360, so that argument of the Xbox 360 having more games is moot”
The Xbox 360 has 120 more games rated above 70% on Metacritic than the PS2. The more you know.
———–
You can work numbers however you want, and that’s fine. But realize that your ‘comparison’ isn’t even approaching objectivity. It’s filled with unequal comparisons (Going both ways) and conditional expenses.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 12:52 am
I think you shouldn’t have added the reparing cost, but the article makes it’s point anyway.
The XBox is more expensive period. No way to run for that. Paying about $50 every year to use Live takes it. If somenoe has the XBox for 5 years, that will make $250. Wow. How about that? This is the reason I don’t have a XBox.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 1:00 am
Fanboy asshole. Find something else to do and stop wasting peoples time.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 1:06 am
You’re assuming every 360 will break but no PS3 will.
Considering the rising amount of launch PS3’s especially the 60GB breaking and the problems caused by games like CoD5 you should include the cost of repair for both consoles out of warranty.
It’s only fair or you’re giving a misinformed total cost.
The newer 360s made in the last year or so don’t have the problem with the RRoD that the early ones did but you never took that into consideration when using the PS3 fanboy every 360 will RRoD.
Show the true cost or go work at PSxtreme.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 1:10 am
Why calc in repair costs when the most common is covered by their 3 year warranty and has been extended to cover other issues as well. Seems misleading. I have had no problem replacing my Xbox and it cost me zero zip nadda.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 1:16 am
I love how you use the $349 price for the 40 gig PS3.
Let me state for the record that Sony has NEVER sold a PS3 for less than $399. The price you are using was discounted from a retailer, which makes it an unfair comparison, to say the least.
You’ll make a great marketing guy one day, the way you manipulated those figures.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 1:36 am
You’re calculating stuff that is not required to play games. The 360 costs $299, and that’s it. Everything else is extra.
What I do find funny, however, is that the 360 does come with HD cables, and the PS3 does not. Thus adding extra cost to the PS3 if you want your games to look good on your HDTV. It’s funny how the person that wrote this article left that out, but I guess the fanboy in him won’t allow him to say anything bad about the PS3.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 1:42 am
Oh, and way to go posting a 2 year old article on the fail rate of the 360.
The fail rate isn’t that high anymore, if it ever was to begin with, and I see you know that, since you could only find an old article.
It’s fanboys like you that make people disgusted with the PS3, and it’s fans. Sony fanboys are the worst. You guys go around posting fake numbers, fake stories of RROD, and for what? You think Sony really cares that much about you?
Get a life, and enjoy the console of your choosing. There’s no reason to bash the competition so much, because it only makes you look jealous, and bitter that MS has dethroned Sony this time around.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 2:03 am
If you want to include the price the fix the 360, you need to be a bit more fair about it. By your accounts, you said the 360 has a 30% fail rate. If it costs $139 to repair each time, the AVERAGE cost of a 360 should then be:
$299 + $49.99 + 0.3*$139 + $99 = $489.69
Mind you this is the average cost of owning a 360 pro. Of course, you didn’t really mention that a wireless adapter can be picked up on the cheap if you get it used (I got one for $25 on ebay), the 1 year subscription of live costs $38 at a certain well known wholesale club, and 360 used games can be found dirt cheap at gamestop. Don’t get me wrong, the PS3 is an awesome deal, but if you wanna do price comparison, you should try to be a bit more objective about it.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 2:03 am
Look, not ALL 360s have to be repaired. Including that in the price of the console is a joke. You can’t just say that since something has the chance of breaking down, that it will. Just saying, “Well, the 360 might break down, so I’ll just add $140 to it’s overall price,” is kind of ridiculous. The new jasper units have quite a longer life expectancy now(although there have been some reports of RRoD). And saying the chances of PS3 breaking down are slim, is also something you should check up on.
I know perfectly well that the 360 had a 30% failure rate, but that was with the older consoles. The jasper units and other newer units are on the market now, and they have about the same failure rate as the PS3(The 360 would still be the winner with the failure rate though). And with the wireless adapter, you don’t necessarily have to buy Microsoft’s.
There is a way around that $100 price mark, and it is relatively easy to do. Just go and buy a regular wireless adapter, and download a special program that works around the problem. Also, it’s not like you’re being forced to buy the wireless adapter or the online service, and it’s you’re own choice to do that. I don’t think a lot of 360 owners even go out and buy the things anyway. I personally use an ethernet cord, and I don’t plan on buying the wireless one anytime soon. It does suck that it’s not included with the elite unit though, and that is quite a shame.
I do think that if you buy EVERY single accessory for the 360, you will be spending quite a lot of your coin. You do get a 120 gb hard drive with the elite, and I’d take some extra memory space over a wireless adapter any day. Overall, it isn’t that more expensive for the 360. It just sounds like you’re the kind of person that likes to buy all of the online accessories. I know you already commented about XBOX LIVE, but it is quite a lot of bang for you’re buck. I do love the fact that the PS3 is a Blu-ray player though, and I wish that Microsoft would just add it to their console already.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 2:04 am
Forgot to say that it was a good article though.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 2:18 am
I totally agree. The PS3 is great value for money, even though I spend most of the time on the 360. Newer 360’s are more reliable I think (hope).. if you take away repair costs the cost is fairly even.
You forgot to add the price of a play and charge kit, which the PS3 doesn’t need.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 2:21 am
woohoo blatant fanboyism. The RROD isn’t a guaranteed cost. I’ve had my 360 since 2006 and it hasn’t had a single problem. Nor is wireless necessary.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 2:22 am
But it does need a headset which comes with the 360.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 2:23 am
PLus if u wanted to get a bigger hdd u have to buy a special xbox hdd that runs $150 where on a pS3 u can buy any standard 2.5 inch HDD or even a SSD which actually runs faster which can run anywhere from $40-$120 still cheaper then 360 hdd and u choice which one u want. PS3 comes with a blueray player and up uuntil a year and a half ago u wou;d have to buy a hddvd attachment to see hd moveis which would run u around $179. plus the $50 a year and the price of the 360 and u would be paying a crap ton more to get the expierence that was built into the PS3. fanboys suck on that!
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 2:39 am
lol at this.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 2:40 am
Alright, so I own both consoles and this is what I have to say.
I got my 80gb around 1 year ago, cost about $450 after tax(CAD), console/controller/motorstorm. I’ve expanded my library since then to about 15 games at one time. During my PS3 ownership I’ve always looked over at the 360 and wondered what could’ve been.
I bought my 360 arcade last month for $150 flat, got gears 2 for $60. Now I’m on the free month of xbox live and I’ve played gears, left 4 dead and halo 3, I’m not impressed. LIve costs about $60 for 12 months(1month bonus). The arcade came with a 256mb memory card which they say should suffice, no. I NEED a HDD (if I can call myself a hardcore gamer). A 60gb HD is about $100. TOTAL SO FAR: 150 plus 100 plus 70 for live(after tax) plus gears 60 = 380.
Now this is basically all I need, 380 is a good price compared to what I payed for my PS3, but hold it right there. The 360 still isn’t up to par in terms of capability to my PS3, I’m still missing WiFi, and I’m a fan of hardlined connections, but what if I wanna move my 360 around. WiFi adaptor = $120 (after tax). I’ve now exceeded the price of my PS3 trying to match both my console’s hardware capabilities. On top of all this the playstation has bluetooth( which has greater range and connection quality), blu ray, and a larger harddrive to boot.
And just to conclude, personal preferences, I think Live is overrated, PSN is on par, that’s right I said it’s on par with the premium service. PSN might be free, but what you get is a well thought out service that only suffers minor hiccups that I’ve seen on Live.
Aside from RPGS(Mass Effect= Bliss), the PS3’s first party game collection surpasses the 360’s in every category.
That’s all I have for now.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 2:54 am
You’re math is horrible…
If PS3 40GB unit price is $350, why does it end up $399?
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 2:58 am
I would like to add the $139 for repair each year are indeed and exaggeration, I have had my xbox 360 since 2006 so far not a single issue and still playing hardcore as always.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 3:16 am
I hardly even use the PSN usually only to buy PS1 classics and play them on both my PSP and PS3. Can u TRADE games with 4 friends making downloadable games roughly the price of a Whopper. Oh yea and i’ve been downloading FREE Movies like The Watchmen, Transformers 2 for YEARS now. Can the 360 do ANYTHING like that. Since u are paying for a SUPERIOR service apparently:)
[Reply]
July 5th, 2009 at 3:20 am
Actually you can not use “chances are, none” for repair costs for the PS3. PS3’s do break, just not as much as the 360. The Ps3 has a 1 year warranty and after that it costs you $130 to get it fixed by sony.
[Reply]
July 7th, 2009 at 2:07 am
It is always funny to see the back and forth of the 360 versus ps3 arguements. I personally have both systems and while the cost of my 360 (Got it at launch) was overall more than my ps3 (Got it after 40 gig came out). I own both because I like games in general, but after having my xbox fail on me 3 times now, I lean more towards my ps3 (I also use it for Blu Ray as well). I understand game systems break, but for me to have one break 3 times in the three years I have owned it, that is unacceptable.
Microsoft has gone ahead and fixed my most recent RRoD for free considering my warranty expried two months before it happened so I applaud them for that, but I still do not feel very confident everytime I fire my 360 up, especially since Microsoft is still sending me back my original console and have yet to replace it so no Jasper for me. The core PS3 may cost more now, but I feel like it is a more finished product. Go ahead and look up playstation 3 failures on google it is nowhere near as prevelent as Microsoft’s RRoD. I still play both but if you paid 399.99 (Launch Price) for something that will break 3 times in the 3 and half years you own it, you would be pissed too.
Also to respond for price you have to buy the microsoft wireless adapter they will not allow third party adapters. That is my piece.
[Reply]
July 7th, 2009 at 5:32 am
Useless things on the PS3:
1. WiFi - If you have posted on this thread you are probably a serious gamer and have your system hardwired.
2. Blu-Ray - Look at your Blu-Ray collection and add up how much you have spent on your movies. Now, how much would you have spent if they were normal dvd’s.
3. The controller - You play with it for an hour and your hands hurt from its design. (you know its true).
4. PSN - There is a reason xbox live costs money… its better in every aspect.
5. Games - You know you would rather have the xbox’s selection in games and with how MSoft is getting all of PS’s exclusives anyways (Metal Gear, Final Fantasy), it’s hard to argue. Besides that, none of the PS4’s games have lived up to the hype.
PS. I do admire the power of the PS4 and before it came out i was anticipating the day i got one but thus far Sony has not impressed me.
[Reply]
July 7th, 2009 at 5:38 am
*PS3
[Reply]
July 7th, 2009 at 9:53 am
I know why you did this outdated bit of flame bait… You wanted to max out your bandwidth. Which is exactly what happend. Aren’t you proud of yourself?
What a dweeb!
[Reply]
July 7th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
@Josh
First off the ps3 controller is nice I can play a game all day and be just fine.
Secondly blu-ray movies you can just rent you don’t need to buy movies and it plays DVDs
And lastly the xbox has the crapest games in the world even the first party titles suck gear of war controlls to slow and clunky not smooth at all, halo only the most overly hyped garbage and the other first party games are just as garbage. I’m not a Sony fanboy or anything because I have at least 10 other systems and I play them all the time. But Sony has better first party games and third party exclusives then xbox 360 for example Resistance: Fall of man, Resistance 2, Ratchet and Clank, and MGS4 just to name a few.
[Reply]
July 7th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
@Josh,
1. While I would love to hardwire my ps3 some of us serious gamers are older and married so running a 50 foot ethernet cable is just not in the cards. So for some (even serious gamers) the wifi is useful.
2. Blu Ray may cost more but once you watch The Dark Knight in 1080p on a 50′ screen there is no going back and besides I do not buy I rent.
3. Use the dpad on the ps3 controller and then on the 360 while the ps3’s controller has not really evolved I would use it any day of the week for any old school games the require the dpad.
4. Games I would say that is a tie they both offer good exclusives.
[Reply]
July 8th, 2009 at 1:14 am
Okay, what everyone needs to realize is that it doesn’t matter what console is better (Cough..PS3..Cough). When Mike wrote this he simply wanted to compare console costs. Not games, not hardware, not online gaming. Only the cost of the consoles after the Xbox 360 had to play catch up to PS3. Get off his back about it.
[Reply]
July 8th, 2009 at 6:01 am
@TJ,
That is the other major factor in me not having a PS3 yet… I don’t have the 50″ HDTV. HD is awesome but the cost to get the 50″ HDTV and the blu-ray player/movies + channels in HD is not worth it yet. (I am a college student so its not in the cards)
** If you can afford a 50″ HDTV couldn’t you afford the two $3.00 wall plates that you would need to run your CAT5e cable through your wall?
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 5:07 am
Point blank ps3 does more and is more powerful than 360..if my friends had a 360 id buy it but since they have ps3 so i buy it.
btw ps3 have more exclusive video games .. and why do 360 players always bash ps3 online play .. ITS JUST AS GOOD AS 360 ONLINE except its free.. i spent $500 out my pockets on ps3 .. and the ONLY thing else you have to pay for is Qore … IF you want it
my brother had his xbox for 3 years and after payng for xbox live and the battery thing for wireless .. he ended up paying the same price i did for my ps3 .. next year itll be $60 more than ps3 … so in the long run ps3 is cheaper.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 10:52 am
wow and ps3 is cutting down the price
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 11:20 pm
@Josh,
I completely understand once you graduate it could be a different scenario with especially with HD. Both 360 and PS3 really should not be bought if you do not have access to HD… Dead Rising anyone… unless you use the VGA cable for the 360.
I would run the cable but it is a pain. My house is old and running cable anywhere is a pain it took 2 days just to wire speakers in one room… and considering the router is four rooms away it would take too much of my time.
[Reply]
July 10th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
Ok everyone who says they won’t use wireless isn’t a baller like me. If you actually got a sweet gateway then you have wireless wether you want it or not and you its 2009 how can wifi not be standard thats pathetic by microsoft. And i have had my PS3 since DAY 1 ( cause thats how i roll) and its been PERFECT. 30% red ring of deaths on the other side!( thats 30% for sure imagine how many people just get a new one without reporting it) Mike is right you can almost guarantee system failure with that piece of garbage. And if i had been 360 this whole time (assuming i got lucky and didnt get RROD) i would have paid over 100 for the network! thats ridiculous microsoft should be embarrassed
[Reply]
July 10th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
oh to add to that last one. BLU-RAY!!! thats 200 worth of hardware that Microsoft cant compete with. Livin in the last gen with that DVD Bull****. No Bluray no wifi. haha. pathetic thats some last gen stuff there folks. wait till games start getting decent… and i mean like 4+GB games. the 360 will be have to do 3+disc games. and if a game maker could max out a blu-ray that would be like 40 xbox discs. so u got this old tech bs that goes bad 30% of the time and they want you to pay to play online! that is simply retarded since all the good games are multi-platform (lets face it Halo is the past[like the xbox], COD has taken over)
[Reply]
July 10th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
BLU-Ray+ $200 to SONY
Wifi + $100 to Sony
Online + $50 a year to Sony
RROD = GAME OVER YOU LOSE
[Reply]
July 11th, 2009 at 4:41 am
****************OVERALL——YOUR MATH SUCKS——XBOX 360=LIFE
YOU PAY FOR QUALITY
THE FUCKIN END
[Reply]
July 22nd, 2009 at 3:48 pm
hahahahah you all got owned u xbox lovers! woop! owned!
[Reply]
July 22nd, 2009 at 10:11 pm
GTA 4 exclusive content, yes yes oh yay
[Reply]
July 23rd, 2009 at 9:57 pm
Those figures are wrong.
1. By now at least (Since early-mid 2009) it’s wrong to assume that your newly purchased xbox360 will break, so the repair cots should definitely be negated.
2. Buying a wireless adapter for your xbox is totally unneccessary.
So, for the cheaper versions that’s $139 + $99 = $238 off your origional calculation, making it
$587.98 - $238 = $349.98, as you stated. So really, the prices in that case are equal.
Taking this in to consideration when combined with the fact that the ps3 game library does not, in fact, rival that of the xbox 360 and most people will agree with this. In addition to this, it does have superior online capabilities and a larger online community.
So while the consoles may equal in price or in the most extreme of cases the xbox360 will granted be more expensive, the greater choice of games and superior online make it a more worthwhile purchase.
Of course, the value of the superior online play, say $50, may well be worth the cost as there is no value added for the ps3s online system.
[Reply]
Mike Reply:
July 23rd, 2009 at 11:15 pm
@Lololo
1) Nope. Still no assurance that your 360 won’t break. The hardware failures were reduced, but it’s still not comparable to the PS3’s reliability.
2) That may be true, but PS3 owners don’t have to pay extra for that. Believe me, you don’t know what you’re missing with Wi-Fi. You can connect your PC AND console simultaneously. Without your “unnecessary” wireless adaptor, you have to keep switching Ethernet cables, which is a chore.”
Let me qualify Xbox Live: it has superior online content, not online play. Quality of online play depends on the game itself and your internet connection.
But at the end of the day, no matter how you look at it, what’s important isn’t the content–it’s that you get to play multiplayer online.
Furthermore, as your Xbox 360 ages, your investment increases as well, thanks to the Xbox Live subscription. Sure, you can always take advantage of the content, but like I said, what really matters is online multiplayer, which is provided by BOTH systems.
It just so happened that one of the online systems is free.
[Reply]
July 23rd, 2009 at 10:00 pm
“Of course, the value of the superior online play, say $50, may well be worth the cost as there is no value added for the ps3s online system.”
And yet the prices remain the same, which negates the argument of cost as you could assume that XBL is free for the first year. (Although this is limited as of course the fees have to be paid every year afterwards as well.)
[Reply]
August 13th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
People who are saying that he is doing a biased price comparison are wrong. Live is 50 bucks a year, the ps3 and 360 are supposed to have a 10 year life cycle, meaning the new playstation and xbox should come out in 2015. That means you will still need to pay for live for another 6 years, that will cost $300 dollars alone. Also, if you don’t buy an elite, you will probably need to buy a bigger hard drive, and you will need to buy a wifi adapter for $100, and if you want to play HD DVDs it will cost over $100 for the DVD drive. It is basically an incomplete product unless you buy an elite. But even if you do get an elite, you still pay for live.
[Reply]
November 19th, 2009 at 1:11 am
Ps3 is over priced and crap xbox 360 rule and have better games and graphics thats all that needs to be said
[Reply]
Mike Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 1:11 am
You’re kidding, right? Or didn’t you hear about the PS3 price drop? And the graphics? They’re the same, buddy.
[Reply]