Third party opinion: Xbox 360 is the worst for hidden costs [Archive]

Zeus

09-14-2008, 07:44 AM

According to UK's Digital Spy website, the Xbox 360 is the worst console out there for potential hidden costs. In their article, they considered the following for the three different consoles: electricity costs, controllers, TV cables, connecting to the internet, other additions, quantitative total and in their summary believe the Xbox 360 comes out the worst.

<center><img src="http://www.maxconsole.net/content_img/i23823u2j22222.jpg"></center></a>

It should be noted that these are all optional costs - you don't need to buy another controller, to purchase a Live subscription or run your console every day for the next few years. But many people do, and if you are thinking of getting a new system for yourself or someone else these little costs add up to something fierce. The Xbox 360 is the worst for those hidden costs, although the others aren't exactly innocent either. When you consider this doesn't include what you actually bought it for - the games - it shows that this hobby is a costly thing indeed.

News Source: <A href="http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/a130120/feature-hidden-costs-of-gaming.html" target="_blank">DigitalSpy</a>

panyan1991

09-14-2008, 07:46 AM

well it is M$!!!!! they try to squeeze every penny out of you and then make you think you got a bargain!

WEBLY

09-14-2008, 07:47 AM

in retrospct yeah its a rip off secially the hd dvd thing good games high maintenence .....

Appleseed

09-14-2008, 07:49 AM

still cheaper than building a system for crysis.

L84skewl

09-14-2008, 07:50 AM

Vesica

09-14-2008, 07:52 AM

Not really a surprise there. But I have learned to expect nothing else from Microsoft over the years, they are one of the most money hungry companies out there, and they know very very well how to exploit the marked.

Rockman_Joey

09-14-2008, 07:56 AM

shemmy

09-14-2008, 08:30 AM

paying £60 for a 360 Wireless Adapter is a fucking joke.

this was one of the main reasons i got the ps3 over the xbox. when i saw the price i just thought what a bunch of robber bastards MS were.

Vesica

09-14-2008, 08:36 AM

How are these hidden costs?

Consoles use electricity to run. No brainer.

You need more controllers to play multiplayer.

It comes with the basic cable to hook it up to an SD tv & an HD TV. It's your choice to get HDMI or Optical Audio.

I'm most positive it states in the manual you have to pay for Live Gold.. That's the only one I could see people not expecting. The other 3 are givens.

If they give you the cable you need for it to function, Why would you expect to get Composite/Component/HDMI/Optical.

(remember buying RF adapters) yeah me too. This has been going on for decades.

Well, ignoring the obvious electricity and controller costs, we are left with the not so obvious, but very clever designed money drain from Microsoft. For starters you got the online part, people might not like it, but they still pay for it. Microsoft knows this very well, and they know to exploit it.

Then there's the online profile part, why do stuff like avatars cost money? It's just a .gif file with very few pixels, I see no reason for why this should cost anything. But like before, Microsoft knows how to exploit this, they know that people are very likely to use those "spare points" they got, to buy things like this.

And now the hidden hardware costs, and as you stated, you don't need to buy additional cables to hook up the box, but if you only have a wireless network at home you're out of luck. Why don't they integrate the wireless in the console? It's not because the console would cost more to produce, I would gladly pay $5 or $10 more to have integrated wireless. It's because they want more of your money, and they know that most people will buy it if they have no alternatives. They sell the adapter for about $80, and I guarantee you that they sell it with at least 50% profit.

Then the hard drive, the average customer might never have to buy a new one, but some people still do. Then you are again stuck with no alternatives, and you have to buy the one from Microsoft. Why don't they allow third-party hard drives like Sony? Why can't you just connect a normal hard drive? I guarantee you that they sell these hard drives with at least 40-50% profit to. Then we are left with much smaller things, like the power cable. Why don't they use a normal power cable like the ps3, instead of that weird one? Simply because if you somehow manage to destroy the one you got, you need to buy a new one from them for $50.

Microsoft is not stupid, they know very well how to exploit their costumers. This is the main reason for why Microsoft lost my support for many years ago, but I must admit that I admire the way they manage to do this without raising peoples awareness.

Evolution

09-14-2008, 08:38 AM

That is a very interesting article. It is not covering the games in general but it covers long term costs for consumers hence the Wii is doing so well and the PS3 is gaining ground. The cost of the 360 is purely one of the reasons I canceled my Gold Account. I am at University now so I don't have to worry about my electricity bill (60GB PS3 early adapter) so I can use all the electricity I want :D

I like download games, they quite fun and often they're better than the retail offerings which are available on the storage media such as DVD9 and Blu Ray.

However, it didn't cover the Wii's Connect24 which I found surprising but I fully understand why Sony kept the Wifi inside the new PS3 revisions, it's literally perfect and flexible which I completely agree on.

Of course people are going to moan about games, games and games which yes the PS3 is starting to provide but I can see why the PS3 has been selling very well worldwide. Yes, it doesn't have many exclusives but including Wifi was a very smart idea but you still got to buy a HD cable but they've got cheap now and paying £60 for a 360 Wireless Adapter is a fucking joke.

Very interesting article indeed.

I got one for £19.99 a few years ago and it was the official one. The Belkin one can be had for £30 as well so its not £60 at all.

sirxlaughs

09-14-2008, 08:59 AM

this was one of the main reasons i got the ps3 over the xbox. when i saw the price i just thought what a bunch of robber bastards MS were.

That's b/c it's not a simple Wifi adapter. It is a wireless bridge. You can use a third party bridge (like I did), and connect any device in your living room (multiple consoles, pc's, etc) through one bridge.

sirxlaughs

09-14-2008, 09:18 AM

Well, ignoring the obvious electricity and controller costs, we are left with the not so obvious, but very clever designed money drain from Microsoft. For starters you got the online part, people might not like it, but they still pay for it. Microsoft knows this very well, and they know to exploit it.

The level of quality of Xbox Live is still unmatched. I gladly play my ~$4-$5/month.

And now the hidden hardware costs, and as you stated, you don't need to buy additional cables to hook up the box, but if you only have a wireless network at home you're out of luck. Why don't they integrate the wireless in the console? It's not because the console would cost more to produce, I would gladly pay $5 or $10 more to have integrated wireless. It's because they want more of your money, and they know that most people will buy it if they have no alternatives. They sell the adapter for about $80, and I guarantee you that they sell it with at least 50% profit.

50% profit is really not all that much when you consider the markups out there. Price out similar wireless bridges (the 360 adapter is a bridge).

Then the hard drive, the average customer might never have to buy a new one, but some people still do. Then you are again stuck with no alternatives, and you have to buy the one from Microsoft. Why don't they allow third-party hard drives like Sony? Why can't you just connect a normal hard drive? I guarantee you that they sell these hard drives with at least 40-50% profit to. Then we are left with much smaller things, like the power cable. Why don't they use a normal power cable like the ps3, instead of that weird one? Simply because if you somehow manage to destroy the one you got, you need to buy a new one from them for $50.

There is a lot of proprietary stuff going on with the hard drive. Sony took a completely different (and better, IMO) route on this. If you do a google search on the hard drive, you'll see that it's not as big a markup as it first seems to be. The power cable on the 360 is not "normal" because the PSU is not integrated into the system. The PS3's is integrated. So, if you should have a PSU failure (uncommon, but possible), you will have to send your entire system out for repair.

Microsoft is not stupid, they know very well how to exploit their costumers. This is the main reason for why Microsoft lost my support for many years ago, but I must admit that I admire the way they manage to do this without raising peoples awareness.

There is no successful business that got that way by doing it all for the customer. Businesses find a balance of customer happiness and fat wallets. Look at what Nintendo charges for the Wii.

shemmy

09-14-2008, 10:08 AM

That's b/c it's not a simple Wifi adapter. It is a wireless bridge. You can use a third party bridge (like I did), and connect any device in your living room (multiple consoles, pc's, etc) through one bridge.

that's the point, it should have been "a simple wifi adapter" included in the machine.

dannybII

09-14-2008, 11:04 AM

But to coin a phrase..... for sheer game enjoyment (over wii/ps3) priceless.

Talidan

09-14-2008, 11:30 AM

Well, ignoring the obvious electricity and controller costs, we are left with the not so obvious, but very clever designed money drain from Microsoft. For starters you got the online part, people might not like it, but they still pay for it. Microsoft knows this very well, and they know to exploit it.

Then there's the online profile part, why do stuff like avatars cost money? It's just a .gif file with very few pixels, I see no reason for why this should cost anything. But like before, Microsoft knows how to exploit this, they know that people are very likely to use those "spare points" they got, to buy things like this.

And now the hidden hardware costs, and as you stated, you don't need to buy additional cables to hook up the box, but if you only have a wireless network at home you're out of luck. Why don't they integrate the wireless in the console? It's not because the console would cost more to produce, I would gladly pay $5 or $10 more to have integrated wireless. It's because they want more of your money, and they know that most people will buy it if they have no alternatives. They sell the adapter for about $80, and I guarantee you that they sell it with at least 50% profit.

Then the hard drive, the average customer might never have to buy a new one, but some people still do. Then you are again stuck with no alternatives, and you have to buy the one from Microsoft. Why don't they allow third-party hard drives like Sony? Why can't you just connect a normal hard drive? I guarantee you that they sell these hard drives with at least 40-50% profit to. Then we are left with much smaller things, like the power cable. Why don't they use a normal power cable like the ps3, instead of that weird one? Simply because if you somehow manage to destroy the one you got, you need to buy a new one from them for $50.

Microsoft is not stupid, they know very well how to exploit their costumers. This is the main reason for why Microsoft lost my support for many years ago, but I must admit that I admire the way they manage to do this without raising peoples awareness.

I agree with you entirely. I initially wanted to buy a PS3, but since my friends were on Live i bought a 360 instead. I've spent a whole lot on accessories and feel somewhat ripped off. And as Vesica makes clear, its a lot about want and not necessarilly need.

I want wireless controllers for my 360, not wired. This costs extra, plus you need a battery pack/play & charge if you dont want to waste more on batteries. I chose to buy this. I want a 120gb hard disk, but its so damned expensive that i'm sticking to a 20gb. I want a wireless adaptor, but they're way too much (and a wireless bridge uses yet another plug socket that i would rather avoid). I want to play online on my 360, and have chosen to dish out extra for a live subscription.

You can claim that you dont need any of these accessories and have a great time on your 360, but the truth is without these it seriously limits your
experience.

Why the **** should i have to comprimise with wireless bridges, battery packs, and hard disk space when its clearly microsoft exploiting the hell out of me?

Rockman_Joey

09-14-2008, 11:51 AM

I got one for £19.99 a few years ago and it was the official one. The Belkin one can be had for £30 as well so its not £60 at all.

I was going to say I got a Belkin Gold HDMI cable for my PS3 about a year ago for £20, they have got considerably cheaper over time :)

Vesica

09-14-2008, 11:53 AM

The level of quality of Xbox Live is still unmatched. I gladly play my ~$4-$5/month.

Thank you, you are living proof of my argument. You don't mind paying for it, and I can assure you that Microsoft is very aware of this. They know how to exploit it, and they certainly don't mind doing it.

50% profit is really not all that much when you consider the markups out there. Price out similar wireless bridges (the 360 adapter is a bridge).

Even if 50% profit is not that much, it still don't justify why they don't integrate wireless. Remember that Microsoft also get royalties for every third-party adapter sold, so they make their money either way.

There is a lot of proprietary stuff going on with the hard drive. Sony took a completely different (and better, IMO) route on this. If you do a google search on the hard drive, you'll see that it's not as big a markup as it first seems to be. The power cable on the 360 is not "normal" because the PSU is not integrated into the system. The PS3's is integrated. So, if you should have a PSU failure (uncommon, but possible), you will have to send your entire system out for repair.

Again, this still don't justify for why they charge 1/3 more than a regular hard drive, there's no way that the plastic chassis containing the normal 2.5 hard drive cost that much to produce. And about the power cable, I have a external PSU for one of my computers, but it still manages to use a normal power cable. Now, I might be wrong in this case, that Microsoft in fact didn't have this in mind while choosing this, but out of my own experience I've come to expect the worst from them.

There is no successful business that got that way by doing it all for the customer. Businesses find a balance of customer happiness and fat wallets. Look at what Nintendo charges for the Wii.

Yes I agree, but Microsoft is well known in the computer world for going beyond the regular "screwing customers over" line. And I have no doubts, that if the 360 were to cost the same as the Wii to produce, Microsoft would probably charge a lot more than Nintendo does now.

12eman34

09-14-2008, 11:57 AM

Is there honestly ANYONE who didn't know this?!
http://www.freewebs.com/elfgrin/DUH.jpg

QrafTee

09-14-2008, 12:45 PM

Anil8tr

09-14-2008, 01:43 PM

sirxlaughs

09-14-2008, 03:21 PM

Thank you, you are living proof of my argument. You don't mind paying for it, and I can assure you that Microsoft is very aware of this. They know how to exploit it, and they certainly don't mind doing it.

Thank you for completely ignoring my argument about quality of service. It is not exploitation if I don't mind paying it. If you do not want to pay for it, or feel it is not worth your money, then just don't use it. Simple, yes?
There is still no free service that rivals Live.

Even if 50% profit is not that much, it still don't justify why they don't integrate wireless. Remember that Microsoft also get royalties for every third-party adapter sold, so they make their money either way.

Sure it does. They wanted to keep the cost of the system as low as possible. That's plenty justification. Why did Sony remove PS2 support from the PS3? To cut costs. Simple money-making math. Every company wants to make as much money as possible. I never understand why people try to single out MS more than others. Like they are the devil of devils.

Again, this still don't justify for why they charge 1/3 more than a regular hard drive, there's no way that the plastic chassis containing the normal 2.5 hard drive cost that much to produce. And about the power cable, I have a external PSU for one of my computers, but it still manages to use a normal power cable. Now, I might be wrong in this case, that Microsoft in fact didn't have this in mind while choosing this, but out of my own experience I've come to expect the worst from them.

Again, you don't know what's going on inside the hard drive - software wise. Microsoft is not a hardware manufacturer. They pay people to make those hard drives for them. It also does not all come from one company. One company makes the drive, another makes the case, another makes the SATA adapter, etc. Your PC PSU does not supply power the same way the 360 PSU does. Each pin on the 360 PSU supplies a different voltage. There are 3V, 5V, and 12V pins. The cable going from the PSU to your PC is probably not "normal." Don't motherboards use 20/24 pin power connectors?
The PS3 went a totally different route with the hard drive, and it's something I prefer over the 360. It was a design decision. The PS3 is very mod-friendly.

Yes I agree, but Microsoft is well known in the computer world for going beyond the regular "screwing customers over" line. And I have no doubts, that if the 360 were to cost the same as the Wii to produce, Microsoft would probably charge a lot more than Nintendo does now.

What is a regular screw over? Creating a proprietary memory format and not supporting any other format in your products? Sony has always been about pushing proprietary hardware.
You may have no doubts, but I have plenty. Microsoft is in a very aggressive position right now. Given the fact that MS initially took losses on the 360's, and are now cutting prices like crazy - If the 360 costs what the Wii cost, MS would use that to dominate the market against the Wii. That should be obvious. The money is not in the hardware, but the software and accessories. I can't even buy a printer that I can use out of the box.

There is no devil of devils. Every company has a simple agenda. Keep the consumer happy enough to make the most money possible. Different companies go about it different ways, but they all do it. You can't justify one by saying another is worse. If you pick on Microsoft, you should pick on every other company as well.

sirxlaughs

09-14-2008, 03:30 PM

that's the point, it should have been "a simple wifi adapter" included in the machine.

There are advantages to using a bridge. Microsoft's adapter also supports wireless-a, which has higher throughput, but less range, than G. It's a design decision. Microsoft felt it was the best one. Again, you can always use a 3rd party solution. I didn't like it either. That's why I did my own thing.

Cue

09-14-2008, 03:49 PM

I got one for £19.99 a few years ago and it was the official one. The Belkin one can be had for £30 as well so its not £60 at all.

http://www.play.com/Games/Xbox360/4-/719752/Official-Xbox-360-Wireless-Network-Adapter/Product.html?cm_mmc=Froogle-_-VideoGames-_-Hardware-_-Official+Xbox+360+Wireless+Network+Adapter&source=5063&engine=froogle_videogames&keyword=Official+Xbox+360+Wireless+Network+Adapter +(X360)

it still is around that price £55.

That's b/c it's not a simple Wifi adapter. It is a wireless bridge. You can use a third party bridge (like I did), and connect any device in your living room (multiple consoles, pc's, etc) through one bridge.
It is NOT a wireless bridge!! Unless you can call a USB connection to wifi a bridge then all adaptors are bridges so the price is not justified. A bridge in Network terms tends to mean just that transfering from one medium to another ethernet to wifi for example.

Evolution

09-14-2008, 04:18 PM

http://www.play.com/Games/Xbox360/4-/719752/Official-Xbox-360-Wireless-Network-Adapter/Product.html?cm_mmc=Froogle-_-VideoGames-_-Hardware-_-Official+Xbox+360+Wireless+Network+Adapter&source=5063&engine=froogle_videogames&keyword=Official+Xbox+360+Wireless+Network+Adapter +(X360)

it still is around that price £55.

It can be had cheaper. Amazon and some of the UK games stores sell them on special from time to time. Game had it for £29.99 as one of their Christmas promotions last year.

Personally for gaming I use a hard wire but I know thats not always possible for others.

Nothing does it better than good old fashioned Cat 5 network cable.

Cue

09-14-2008, 04:27 PM

What is a regular screw over? Creating a proprietary memory format and not supporting any other format in your products? Sony has always been about pushing proprietary hardware.

When memory formats were new everyone was doing it to become the dominant force but its not the case anymore. the Sony PS3 as an example now supports SD/MS/Compactflash

There is no devil of devils. Every company has a simple agenda. Keep the consumer happy enough to make the most money possible. Different companies go about it different ways, but they all do it. You can't justify one by saying another is worse. If you pick on Microsoft, you should pick on every other company as well.

to right everybody tries to make money and that does tend to mean screwing people over. however in the context I think the 360 is a prime example of it. the wireless adaptor is to expensive and I can't understand why you are defending the price. that and the fact that you must pay for online play and MUST use a hdd made by microsoft and correct me if I'm wrong their usb camera is dispicable. MS even forced their 360 hands on the PC market which completly P*sses me off since I cannot play Crysis with a pad without using key mapping software to try and get around their "MUST use a 360 pad".

sirxlaughs

09-14-2008, 05:20 PM

When memory formats were new everyone was doing it to become the dominant force but its not the case anymore. the Sony PS3 as an example now supports SD/MS/Compactflash

So, because it was new, it's ok? How can you justify that? Sony's Memory Stick format wasn't even being made by 3rd parties like Sandisk for a long time. It was (and still somewhat is) a grossly overpriced memory format. It went on long after memory formats were new.

to right everybody tries to make money and that does tend to mean screwing people over. however in the context I think the 360 is a prime example of it. the wireless adaptor is to expensive and I can't understand why you are defending the price. that and the fact that you must pay for online play and MUST use a hdd made by microsoft and correct me if I'm wrong their usb camera is dispicable. MS even forced their 360 hands on the PC market which completly P*sses me off since I cannot play Crysis with a pad without using key mapping software to try and get around their "MUST use a 360 pad".

You keep saying must, must, must. You don't "must" have to do anything. I don't have to pay for a WoW subscription if I don't want to. I just can't play it otherwise. You just complained about having to use an HDD on the 360, yet didn't mention all the mandatory installs for the PS3. Why should I buy a system that requires HDD installations, and then have to put my own HDD in it? This is an accessory cost, is it not? I'm not sure what the problem is with the 360 pad on the PC is b/c I don't use pads on PC games.

It is NOT a wireless bridge!! Unless you can call a USB connection to wifi a bridge then all adaptors are bridges so the price is not justified. A bridge in Network terms tends to mean just that transfering from one medium to another ethernet to wifi for example.

It IS a wireless bridge, and it IS different than an adapter. A wireless ethernet adapter requires drivers. A wireless ethernet bridge does not. There are other differences as well. Why can I not use a USB adapter on my 360, yet my D-Link DAP-1555 media bridge works? I have two 360's and a media PC connected to it right now. All get online flawlessly. There are no drivers within the 360 to support wireless adapters. The OS uses a fraction of memory on the 360 when compared to the PS3. Like I said - it was a design decision by Sony and Microsoft. One chose to have a wireless adapter built in (which requires drivers to communicate with hardware), the other offers a wireless bridge option. They are not the same.

http://compnetworking.about.com/od/hardwarenetworkgear/ss/wirelessadapter_4.htm

dannybII

09-14-2008, 05:22 PM

And the wii is the cheapest console to make.... it made profit from day 1 and all this time down the line it's still not dropped a penny. It's now technically more expensive than a 360. If you buy another Wiimote and Nunchuck (each sold seperately) BANG theres another £50 which is £15 more than a 360 wireless pad. PS3 has dropped a few quid but in general it's still over-priced, it sold me a sixasis WITHOUT rumble because it said it couldn't be done with motion sensing or some such BULLSH!T, then it sold me another with rumble (which still feels like sh!t with crap triggers etc). You want a headset with your PS3? You're going to have to pay for that sir. etc etc etc etc etc

Big company makes a profit.... WTF? and here was I thinking they were charitable organizations.

NewBeginning

09-14-2008, 06:03 PM

this was one of the main reasons i got the ps3 over the xbox. when i saw the price i just thought what a bunch of robber bastards MS were.

It's almost as bad as the PS3 coming with regular A/V cables and no headset.

All in all, they didn't do thier research. Just the cost of having 4 sets of controllers for the Wii will squash any prices you'd pay for anything on the 360. Just 3 remotes and nunchuks would be close to $200. At $500, the Wii isn't such a cheap console anymore.

KingPepper

09-14-2008, 06:44 PM

Yes i agree about microsoft being greedy bastards, especially with the Full version of Windows Vista, have you seen how much they are charging for that........ :eek:

Not only that mind, XBOX 360 games should be £29.99 max, as should PS3 Games, one game only on PS3 so far is worth £39.99 and that is Metal Gear Solid 4, as that is supposed to use up all the space on a Blu-ray disc, some feat that is, because of all the Development time and money that has gone into that Amazing game / story / Movie, whatever it is..........

The Nintendo Wii also has way too high pricing, and are copying Microsoft in that way, and that is on the Software download channel, they are selling Master system games / SNES Games for 800 Wii Points each, when you can download on a PC every sodding game ever made, for nothing, and play them on most other systems, by way of Emulation.
also the pricing of NDS Games is terrible for what you get, i would say you are paying for the packaging more than the game itself..........:D

dannybII

09-14-2008, 07:56 PM

http://forums.maxconsole.net/showthread.php?t=124346

say no more.

wpc

09-14-2008, 08:24 PM

The REAL summary: Do your homework before you make a game console purchase! The resources are there, you just have to spend the time doing it. If you can't afford what you want either save up more or settle for something else in the meantime until you can get what you want. Either way, people have absolutely no excuse for saying they didn't know at the checkout.

Well said. One of the funniest things i have seen a 360fanboy begging for XBL gold or M$P codes. IMO the only reason why people love their 360 is playing backup.:D

DEDDOA

09-14-2008, 08:46 PM

Most of it seems fair enough,, tho the controllers bit does seem a bit missleading. Why no mention of the fact that you need to buy a new controller if the battery goes on the PS3 controller and a USB lead, or the rechargable pack for the Wii. To be honest I prefer the Wii/360 method than the Sixaxis one, i know when the battery goes it's not going to cost much to replace. I could replace the batteries for both with a recharger for under £10 which is damn site cheaper than buying a new controller. Not only that, but I can recharge a pack or batteries while I play so I never need to be wired, which needs 2 controllers on the PS3.

It's all swings and roundabouts, but it does seem that you need to take all factors into account to get the same experience, and while some may seem to cost more, it depends on what exactly you get.

dalezer

09-14-2008, 09:12 PM

still cheaper than building a system for crysis.

exactly :D

11111

09-14-2008, 09:14 PM

yea i've spent alot when i initially bought my 360. here's the breakdown:

360 elite: 350 (bought it lightly used a while ago)
2 extra controllers: 80
battery packs/cable: 20
LIVE: 50
ms points: 20
verbatims: 30

sirxlaughs

09-14-2008, 09:25 PM

Cue

09-14-2008, 09:26 PM

So, because it was new, it's ok? How can you justify that? Sony's Memory Stick format wasn't even being made by 3rd parties like Sandisk for a long time. It was (and still somewhat is) a grossly overpriced memory format. It went on long after memory formats were new.

what? I never justified anything especially the price. I merely said that the support was not there at the beginning because they were trying to determine a winner of the format, and told you that yes they do have support for other MC formats my PS3 is proof of that. we are on a console forum right?

You keep saying must, must, must. You don't "must" have to do anything. I don't have to pay for a WoW subscription if I don't want to. I just can't play it otherwise. You just complained about having to use an HDD on the 360, yet didn't mention all the mandatory installs for the PS3. Why should I buy a system that requires HDD installations, and then have to put my own HDD in it? This is an accessory cost, is it not? I'm not sure what the problem is with the 360 pad on the PC is b/c I don't use pads on PC games.

well let me tell you because you dont seem to understand. u wanna play wow u MUST pay for it .what has mandatory installs got to do with anything do sony get money for it?

U wanna new HDD for your 360? u MUST buy a microsoft one. I want a new HDD I can buy any 2.5 sata.

U wanna play online on your 360? u MUST pay for it. I wanna play online its free.

U want ur face in a game? u MUST buy the MS usb camera. I want my face in a game I can use any.

U wanna use a wireless headset? U MUST use a MS proprietary one. I want a headset I can use any BlueTooth one.

And now I wanna use a pad on Crysis, I MUST buy a MS one.

It IS a wireless bridge, and it IS different than an adapter. A wireless ethernet adapter requires drivers. A wireless ethernet bridge does not. There are other differences as well. Why can I not use a USB adapter on my 360,
Thats the whole point you cant!

yet my D-Link DAP-1555 media bridge works? I have two 360's and a media PC connected to it right now. All get online flawlessly. There are no drivers within the 360 to support wireless adapters. your bridge? correct me if I'm wrong (no sarcasm)
it goes
ethernet>wifi

MS usb adaptor it goes
USB>wifi.
It is not a bridge look up the definition of network bridging. ur xbox doesnt magically decide to send the info through your usb hoping theres a bridge there.

The OS uses a fraction of memory on the 360 when compared to the PS3. Like I said - it was a design decision by Sony and Microsoft. One chose to have a wireless adapter built in (which requires drivers to communicate with hardware), the other offers a wireless bridge option. They are not the same. Nonsense thats what I think anyway. The MS adaptor plugs into the usb slot without the 360 knowing that its a wireless adaptor how exactly does it work?
I think you may be mistaking it for a real ethernet (Rj45) to wireless bridge. but even then the 360 has some form of hardware control for the ethernet adaptor.

Cue

09-14-2008, 09:54 PM

Most of it seems fair enough,, tho the controllers bit does seem a bit missleading. Why no mention of the fact that you need to buy a new controller if the battery goes on the PS3 controller and a USB lead, or the rechargable pack for the Wii.

because you dont it is replaceable and is in the instructions how to swap it out. Also a battery going is a fault or lifetime issue. why not mention that you have to buy a new wiimote if the dpad breaks or wears? I do agree on your other points though. the rechargable AA tend to run out alot quicker on my wii. the PS3 pad I think goes for 36 hours without a recharge.

sirxlaughs

09-14-2008, 10:59 PM

what? I never justified anything especially the price. I merely said that the support was not there at the beginning because they were trying to determine a winner of the format, and told you that yes they do have support for other MC formats my PS3 is proof of that. we are on a console forum right?

Yes, we are on a consoles forum. So, why not talk of Sony's track record with accessories with the PS1 and PS2. You are also the one who mentioned about Microsoft being known in the computer industry as ripping their customers off. There was no flash memory format war. All formats are still in existence today (SD, CF, Memstick). Sony just wanted to push their own format by making it the only one available to their products for many years. Who gives a crap if the PS3 supports multiple formats? That's not what I'm arguing. I'm talking about pre-PS3 Sony products.

well let me tell you because you dont seem to understand. u wanna play wow u MUST pay for it .what has mandatory installs got to do with anything do sony get money for it?

It directly affects the price of the PS3. Without mandatory installs, Sony could offer a 360 Arcade style console. Then the consumer could purchase their own HDD later. Better than getting stuck paying for the one that you just replace, no?

U wanna new HDD for your 360? u MUST buy a microsoft one. I want a new HDD I can buy any 2.5 sata.

You can do this now with a hack that is available. Again, you still are disregarding that it was a design decision by Microsoft, and that you have no idea what's behind all the proprietary workings of the HDD. . A WANT and a NEED are different. If you want a new hard drive for your 360, but don't want to pay for the official one, then you can live without it. You're arguments are sounding like a spoiled brat's.

U wanna play online on your 360? u MUST pay for it. I wanna play online its free.

You still did not acknowledge the level of quality Microsoft provides it's Live customers vs it's free competitors. If you want to play online for free, there are plenty of other places to do it. There are even ways to play with your 360 online for free (not through Live). Research it.

U want ur face in a game? u MUST buy the MS usb camera. I want my face in a game I can use any.

U wanna use a wireless headset? U MUST use a MS proprietary one. I want a headset I can use any BlueTooth one.

Again. Drivers, drivers, drivers. The wireless protocal in the 360 is proprietary (recall the wireless guitar fiasco). To add in another protocol and make it compatible with all this other stuff was a design decision that they felt was better for the console. I just plug the headset that comes with the system into the controller. Wireless enough, being that I barely use it.

And now I wanna use a pad on Crysis, I MUST buy a MS one.

Isn't that Crytek's fault? They made Crysis. They chose to support the pad. Send them an angry e-mail, maybe they'll patch it.

Thats the whole point you cant!

Because the 360 does not contain drivers for them!

your bridge? correct me if I'm wrong (no sarcasm)
it goes
ethernet>wifi

MS usb adaptor it goes
USB>wifi.
It is not a bridge look up the definition of network bridging. ur xbox doesnt magically decide to send the info through your usb hoping theres a bridge there.

Nonsense thats what I think anyway. The MS adaptor plugs into the usb slot without the 360 knowing that its a wireless adaptor how exactly does it work?
I think you may be mistaking it for a real ethernet (Rj45) to wireless bridge. but even then the 360 has some form of hardware control for the ethernet adaptor.

You are really stubborn about this bridge thing. Creating a network bridge is not the same as a wireless ethernet bridge.

http://hardware.teamxbox.com/reviews/xbox-360/39/Xbox-360-Wireless-Networking-Adapter/p1/

Please do some research before constantly arguing with me about it. Don't just try using goofy logic.

"The Xbox 360 Wireless Networking Adapter is a USB-powered, dual band wireless bridge that has been specifically designed to work in concert with the Xbox 360."

A specifically designed USB-powered BRIDGE. The 360 knows it's there, and Tx/Rx data that would normally go through the RJ45 jack. That means it only requires the drives for the ethernet port, and can use the USB adapter to bridge that connection. That's just how it was made. Accept it.

"First, its USB interface allowed Microsoft to get away from using an external power supply such as those found in practically all wireless bridges."

"Most wireless bridges require the initial setup to be performed using a computer, but the Xbox 360 Wireless Networking Adapter has obviously be designed to work with the Xbox 360 right out of the box. Even if you use any form of wireless security, you still don’t need a computer to configure the adapter since Microsoft has included such utility within the Xbox 360 system."

Now, go and find a third party bridge that is priced lower than the 360 one, and use it if you do not like Microsoft's offering. I use a wireless-n bridge (not cheap) to try and maximize wireless speed.

Here's another article about the memory footprint of each system. Read and learn, please.

http://ozymandias.com/archive/2007/03/22/More-Context-on-Memory-Reservation-Issues-on-PS3.aspx

sirxlaughs

09-14-2008, 11:06 PM

Cue

09-15-2008, 12:03 AM

Batteries are wear and tear items. They lose charge after repeated cycles. Where can I buy a PS3 controller battery? Reminds me of Apple.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/10/19/PS3_controller_battery_not_replaceable/

http://kotaku.com/gaming/sixaxis/sony-confuses-ps3-owners-with-diy-battery-replacement-214221.php

Unlike microsoft google is your friend :p

http://www.google.com/products?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfns=1&q=ps3+battery&um=1&sa=X&oi=product_result_group&resnum=1&ct=title

sirxlaughs

09-15-2008, 12:20 AM

Unlike microsoft google is your friend :p

http://www.google.com/products?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfns=1&q=ps3+battery&um=1&sa=X&oi=product_result_group&resnum=1&ct=title

Which one of those batteries is approved by Sony? Why are there no official batteries? Not even a Nyko made battery? Doesn't opening the controller void the warranty?

Cue

09-15-2008, 12:21 AM

Cue

09-15-2008, 12:23 AM

Which one of those batteries is approved by Sony? Why are there no official batteries? Not even a Nyko made battery? Doesn't opening the controller void the warranty?

uh not sure but why would they need to be. under warranty sony has said they will replace your batteries have they not?

heres a better search term if anyone is interested.
http://www.google.com/products?q=replacement+ps3+battery&btnG=Search+Products&show=dd

Cue

09-15-2008, 12:44 AM

just to point out I read your memory article, which btw is writen by a 360 employee, questions by a MS employee answered by a MS employee. wtf are we discussing again because this is what I read

Xbox 360 reserves 32 MB for the system. The remaining 480 MB (94%) is completely available for games to use how they wish. The 32MB of system memory is used for the kernel, device drivers and the Xbox 360 Guide, which includes friends lists, voice/text messages, achievement lists, gamercards, Live Marketplace, 1-1 chat, virtual keyboard, and the music player. For CPU reservation, core 0 is completely available to the game, and the system reserves a small percentage (think single digits) of core 1 and 2.

sirxlaughs

09-15-2008, 12:49 AM

You keep talking about design decisions. who gives a rats ass about whats going on in the HDD all I know its not providing me with anything special while limiting my choices (not that I have a 360 but you get the point) same with the BT. MS's propitiary design decision is based on the fact that its propitiary thats it. simple as that. who cares about PS1, PS2 yes they ripped you off (i dont know I dont care) you say it as if I'm trying to defend sony by pointing things out. all I'm saying is the 360 is a propitiary powerhouse and for some reason your stating otherwise. fair enough if you think MS had other reasons for limiting the use of almost every peripheral of the 360 but bill sure as hell aint fooling me. Oh and about crysis yes it was a deal just as gears and games for windows live was. I am not arguing about the bridge like I said correct me if I'm wrong without sarcasm I really would like to know how a usb slot turns into a ethernet or wireless port if there is no device drivers. The article you pointed to said nothing except use the term bridge over and over again.

When did I say the 360 was not a proprietary powerhouse? You don't know and don't care? So, Microsoft is the king of all evil because you don't know of any other evils. I'm picking at you with this debate because you are singling out Microsoft without even being well informed.
If you want to know more about how a USB slot can work with bridge, ask Microsoft about it. I didn't not design the 360, and don't know all of it's inner workings. Wouldn't it be safe to assume that Microsoft put a driver in there that could detect the USB bridge and allow it to communicate with the network hardware? A USB port is just a simple communication port - power, ground, data in, data out. That article uses the term bridge very specifically. If you understood the difference between a bridge and an adapter, you would get it. Let me point it out to you, then.

"Most wireless bridges require the initial setup to be performed using a computer, but the Xbox 360 Wireless Networking Adapter has obviously be designed to work with the Xbox 360 right out of the box. Even if you use any form of wireless security, you still don’t need a computer to configure the adapter since Microsoft has included such utility within the Xbox 360 system."

A wireless adapter does not have a web based interface. It is controlled by drivers from within the system. Just like a PC with a USB adapter. You don't go to an IP address and configure the adapter (similar to how you configure a router). Bridges have network interfaces (like routers), because there is no internal driver to configure it. Obviously, for the 360, the bridge was made specifically for it, and everything was integrated into the system. That does not change the fact that it is a BRIDGE and not an ADAPTER.

"Although you can get wireless bridges for less than $99, there is no way you can get something better than the Xbox 360 Wireless Networking Adapter at this point. Unless you don’t care about having a nasty cable reaching the top of your Xbox 360, the Xbox 360 Wireless Network Adapter is simply a must have."

At the end of the review, they even point out you can get cheaper BRIDGES that work with the 360.

"If we can think of any downside it could be its relatively high price, and we say relative because when compared to other wireless bridges, the price of the Xbox 360 wireless adapter is on par."

It's on par with prices of other BRIDGES. Adapters are cheap.

How can you not care about design decisions? Did you read the article about memory usage? Do you even understand how important that is to developers? They are important things to consider when you decide how to focus the design of the console. As far as you know, there is nothing going on in the HDD that is doing you any good. That is, however, my whole point. You don't know. You just keep on pointing fingers at Microsoft above all others without actually knowing what your pointing at. I am not disagreeing that these companies rip people off for the sake of their wallets. I am trying to explain why Microsoft should not be singled out. One company should not be singled out in this kind of debate.
I don't know what Microsofts reasons were. That's why I keep saying they were their own design decisions. I don't know why they were made. I can only speculate. Memory usage, though, is a HUGE factor. The fewer outside technologies you support, the less crowded your system is. More can be dedicated to running games. So, I can't use a bluetooth headset on my 360. I'd rather the developers be able to pump out games than worry about what headset I'm using.
Sony created a very mod friendly console. The PS3 is like a jack of all trades. The problem is, when you are the jack of all, you are the king of none. The 360 is more like the Wii in a sense that is about games first. That's why I bought it - to play games. Sony has long since fought to take over home entertainment. The PS3 was designed with that in mind.

Cue

09-15-2008, 01:33 AM

Now, go and find a third party bridge that is priced lower than the 360 one, and use it if you do not like Microsoft's offering. I use a wireless-n bridge (not cheap) to try and maximize wireless speed.

Again I dont need to thats my point and thats what this whole article is about hidden charges. The 360 is a proprietary powerhouse and thats what contibutes to the cost. Never did I single out microsoft (though I do think its one of the worst) but I did somewhat single out the 360.

First, its USB interface allowed Microsoft to get away from using an external power supply such as those found in practically all wireless bridges.
First you

Have you ever wondered why? because practically all wireless bridges are usually an ethernet to wifi bridge (tends to not supply enough power) which is tranparent to the system (the 360) it knows nothing of the bridge it happily churns out data to its ethernet port which the standalone bridge converts to a wifi signal. However with the 360 usb "bridge" the 360 MUST be aware (and therefore have some kind of driver) to forward the data to the usb port. Anyway this is all semantics. fact of the matter is the propritory hardware provides very little value for many and therefore zero advantages.

the less crowded your system is. More can be dedicated to running games. So, I can't use a bluetooth headset on my 360. I'd rather the developers be able to pump out games than worry about what headset I'm using.

Game Developers do not have to support or worry about each hardware add on :confused: thats the job of the PS3/360 to do.

sirxlaughs

09-15-2008, 03:03 AM

Again I dont need to thats my point and thats what this whole article is about hidden charges. The 360 is a proprietary powerhouse and thats what contibutes to the cost. Never did I single out microsoft (though I do think its one of the worst) but I did somewhat single out the 360.

The article also didn't mention that an 80GB PS3 costs $400. Whereas even the new 60GB 360 is $300. It fails to talk about rechargeable batteries and a charger for the Wiimotes. It didn't mention the classic controller if you like VC games. The article is not exactly a thorough example. The only thing that I got out of it was what I already knew. Companies screw you on accessories.

Game Developers do not have to support or worry about each hardware add on :confused: thats the job of the PS3/360 to do.

This is where I can see that you may not understand certain things. The drivers for that hardware and other features have to be run by the operating system. If the operating system is cluttered with drivers and features, it has to use more memory. The more memory the operating system takes, is less memory for developers to use. The 360 dedicates 32MB for EVERYTHING.

"Xbox 360 reserves 32 MB for the system. The remaining 480 MB (94%) is completely available for games to use how they wish. The 32MB of system memory is used for the kernel, device drivers and the Xbox 360 Guide, which includes friends lists, voice/text messages, achievement lists, gamercards, Live Marketplace, 1-1 chat, virtual keyboard, and the music player."

The PS3, by comparison, is a huge memory hog. This is one of the things that shows Microsoft's software engineering brilliance.

"Sony’s numbers are massive in comparison. The Xbox team knew from day one of Xbox 360 system development that we needed to accomplish two things: 1) let game developers focus on writing their game, and 2) give game developers plenty of memory to make great games. A ton of work has gone into making sure the OS is as tiny as possible. Our best engineers have focused on ensuring the components that make Xbox 360 so easy to use – like unified friends lists, custom music in every game, a legally-compliant global commerce system (Live Marketplace) – all fit within 32MB, with enough space left over so we can expand features in the future without affecting any existing games. The unsung heroes of Xbox 360 are the engineers who’ve constantly tuned the memory footprint of the system."

http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2007/08/21/ps3-sdk-1-80-lets-devs-add-custom-soundtracks-to-games/

Sony is constantly trying to tweak memory usage as low as possible.

Vesica

09-15-2008, 04:26 AM

Thank you for completely ignoring my argument about quality of service. It is not exploitation if I don't mind paying it. If you do not want to pay for it, or feel it is not worth your money, then just don't use it. Simple, yes?
There is still no free service that rivals Live.

Well then, thank you for completely failing to see mine. Microsoft makes a lot more money from selling games and items on Live than they do with the $5/month they get from subscribers. The point is that they don't need a subscription, the royalties from sales should be enough to pay those "service costs". Sony does this, and this far it has worked really well, Microsoft on the other hand won't do this until people stop paying. Just look at Live for Windows, didn't go all that well.

Sure it does. They wanted to keep the cost of the system as low as possible. That's plenty justification. Why did Sony remove PS2 support from the PS3? To cut costs. Simple money-making math. Every company wants to make as much money as possible. I never understand why people try to single out MS more than others. Like they are the devil of devils.

Oh please, that's a poor argument. Sure, they wanted to keep the production cost down, but why don't they at least integrate the adapter in the Elite? One should think that their "ultimate" sku would have integrated wireless. And the reason for why people is singling out MS, is because Microsoft is bit a head of the crowd when it comes to this, just google it.

Again, you don't know what's going on inside the hard drive - software wise. Microsoft is not a hardware manufacturer. They pay people to make those hard drives for them. It also does not all come from one company. One company makes the drive, another makes the case, another makes the SATA adapter, etc.

Do you know what happens when I put a new hard drive in my ps3? The file system and the security programs gets automatically installed. The ps3 don't ask me for money to do this, and there's really no reason for why Microsoft need to charge extra for this.

The point with my first post was to prove that Microsoft is the company with the most hidden cost, like the op post states. I think I have proved that very well, and you can't really deny it. I admit that Microsoft is not the only company to do this, but Microsoft is a bit a head of the rest in my opinion.

DEDDOA

09-15-2008, 05:24 AM

because you dont it is replaceable and is in the instructions how to swap it out. Also a battery going is a fault or lifetime issue. why not mention that you have to buy a new wiimote if the dpad breaks or wears? I do agree on your other points though. the rechargable AA tend to run out alot quicker on my wii. the PS3 pad I think goes for 36 hours without a recharge.

I'd like o know where, plus rechargable batteries are usually only good for a couple of years before the charge time in them becomes a problem. I still Hvae my PS1 pads with no issues, so the wear and tear on the pad is not a problem, but the battery is.

I have been into many computer shops and have yet to see a PS3 battery for sale outside of specialist online stores, so even if it is replaceable, it is not a common product so isn't cheap or easy to get hold of by most people, unlike common rechargable batteries.

One other thing to mention is battery life, in my search for the battery I found a comparisson, for that extra cash you pay for the 360 pack, you get 3x the battery duration of the PS3 and with the Wii 2x, so you get what you pay for.

It's as with all things, you can't look at one side of things and expect to get the entire picture.

http://www.gamepro.com/article/features/159148/which-controller-has-the-best-battery-life/

gonepostl

09-15-2008, 06:07 AM

That is a very interesting article. It is not covering the games in general but it covers long term costs for consumers hence the Wii is doing so well and the PS3 is gaining ground. The cost of the 360 is purely one of the reasons I canceled my Gold Account. I am at University now so I don't have to worry about my electricity bill (60GB PS3 early adapter) so I can use all the electricity I want :D

I like download games, they quite fun and often they're better than the retail offerings which are available on the storage media such as DVD9 and Blu Ray.

However, it didn't cover the Wii's Connect24 which I found surprising but I fully understand why Sony kept the Wifi inside the new PS3 revisions, it's literally perfect and flexible which I completely agree on.

Of course people are going to moan about games, games and games which yes the PS3 is starting to provide but I can see why the PS3 has been selling very well worldwide. Yes, it doesn't have many exclusives but including Wifi was a very smart idea but you still got to buy a HD cable but they've got cheap now and paying £60 for a 360 Wireless Adapter is a fucking joke.

Very interesting article indeed.

This is a high form of arrogance. In my opinion the wii has a lot of hidden costs with the Ps3 coming in third. Since we are talking about hidden costs and not final price value the Ps3 is in the last.

360 for what they said
Wii for being overpriced hardware and forcing peripherals on you. aka extra expensive controllers and motion plus
There's not a single thing you NEED to go out and buy for the Playstation 3. If you have something that you can come up with that doesn't come out of the box please enlighten me. And no, rumble is not a need.

sirxlaughs

09-15-2008, 09:21 AM

Well then, thank you for completely failing to see mine. Microsoft makes a lot more money from selling games and items on Live than they do with the $5/month they get from subscribers. The point is that they don't need a subscription, the royalties from sales should be enough to pay those "service costs". Sony does this, and this far it has worked really well, Microsoft on the other hand won't do this until people stop paying. Just look at Live for Windows, didn't go all that well.

I'd like to see the financial logs you have access to. The plain and simple fact is Microsoft feel they should charge for the service they provide, and there are enough people who feel Microsoft provides a service worth paying for. Sony's PSN doesn't hold a candle to Live. I keep telling people - When a free service can compete with Live, people will complain, and Microsoft will change their policy.

Oh please, that's a poor argument. Sure, they wanted to keep the production cost down, but why don't they at least integrate the adapter in the Elite? One should think that their "ultimate" sku would have integrated wireless. And the reason for why people is singling out MS, is because Microsoft is bit a head of the crowd when it comes to this, just google it.

Is it a poor argument because you don't agree with it? Come on now. You completely disregarded Sony's removal of PS2 support to cut costs. Saving even $.03 is huge when you're talking about massive quantities. Integrate what adapter? There is no adapter to integrate. Where would they put it on the 360 board? If you mean that they should just give it to you as an included accessory, that is different. There are plenty of websites that talk about how the BRIDGE Microsoft offers is relatively well priced when compared to 3rd party stuff. Just good it. Great argument. You got me there. Microsoft is ahead of the crowd and I should google it to find out why.

Do you know what happens when I put a new hard drive in my ps3? The file system and the security programs gets automatically installed. The ps3 don't ask me for money to do this, and there's really no reason for why Microsoft need to charge extra for this.

Do you know what happens when you turn your PS3 on? More than twice the memory used for the 360's OS is used by the PS3. I've already said that these were design decisions by both companies. Sony decided to make a mod-friendly console. Microsoft did not.

The point with my first post was to prove that Microsoft is the company with the most hidden cost, like the op post states. I think I have proved that very well, and you can't really deny it. I admit that Microsoft is not the only company to do this, but Microsoft is a bit a head of the rest in my opinion.

They are most certain not ahead of anyone, and they do not have the most hidden costs. If you want to start arguing symantecs, a hidden cost should be one you don't see. No one said "who's making the most money." This was about hidden costs. Whether I buy a Microsoft HDD, or upgrade the PS3 HDD, that IS a hidden cost on BOTH. Why not mention that the PS3 battery is not officially replaceable without service? Pop your own controller open to change it, and what happens to the warranty? Why not factor in the base cost of the system? Why not factor in the losses taken in by each company? Sony is massively subsidizing the PS3 b/c of all the features in it. Otherwise they could not compete. People talk about buying power. What bigger show of how much you have than to say, "I can take a huge loss on my new console and still stay in business because my bank account is just that big."
It is starting to seem to me that Sony is the true king of "hidden" charges this console generation.
The Wii charges are right in the open, and everyone knows they're getting taken by Nintendo.
The 360 charges are right in front of you too. Everyone knows what they might need to buy before "accidentally" purchasing a 360.
The PS3, however, seems to have some people believing that they are getting this great deal of a machine. Do you think Sony made an all-in-one entertainment machine because they wanted to help you clear some clutter in your living room? Or could it be a way to take living room space away from their competitors?
I know Microsoft has reputation issues, but to say they are "ahead" of the pack is just plain wrong.

sirxlaughs

09-15-2008, 09:24 AM

This is a high form of arrogance. In my opinion the wii has a lot of hidden costs with the Ps3 coming in third. Since we are talking about hidden costs and not final price value the Ps3 is in the last.

360 for what they said
Wii for being overpriced hardware and forcing peripherals on you. aka extra expensive controllers and motion plus
There's not a single thing you NEED to go out and buy for the Playstation 3. If you have something that you can come up with that doesn't come out of the box please enlighten me. And no, rumble is not a need.

Actually, there is one thing - HD cables. haha
Other than that, I agree completely.

Cue

09-15-2008, 02:18 PM

The article also didn't mention that an 80GB PS3 costs $400. Whereas even the new 60GB 360 is $300. It fails to talk about rechargeable batteries and a charger for the Wiimotes. It didn't mention the classic controller if you like VC games. The article is not exactly a thorough example. The only thing that I got out of it was what I already knew. Companies screw you on accessories.

This is where I can see that you may not understand certain things. The drivers for that hardware and other features have to be run by the operating system. If the operating system is cluttered with drivers and features, it has to use more memory. The more memory the operating system takes, is less memory for developers to use. The 360 dedicates 32MB for EVERYTHING.

"Xbox 360 reserves 32 MB for the system. The remaining 480 MB (94%) is completely available for games to use how they wish. The 32MB of system memory is used for the kernel, device drivers and the Xbox 360 Guide, which includes friends lists, voice/text messages, achievement lists, gamercards, Live Marketplace, 1-1 chat, virtual keyboard, and the music player."

The PS3, by comparison, is a huge memory hog. This is one of the things that shows Microsoft's software engineering brilliance.

"Sony’s numbers are massive in comparison. The Xbox team knew from day one of Xbox 360 system development that we needed to accomplish two things: 1) let game developers focus on writing their game, and 2) give game developers plenty of memory to make great games. A ton of work has gone into making sure the OS is as tiny as possible. Our best engineers have focused on ensuring the components that make Xbox 360 so easy to use – like unified friends lists, custom music in every game, a legally-compliant global commerce system (Live Marketplace) – all fit within 32MB, with enough space left over so we can expand features in the future without affecting any existing games. The unsung heroes of Xbox 360 are the engineers who’ve constantly tuned the memory footprint of the system."

http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2007/08/21/ps3-sdk-1-80-lets-devs-add-custom-soundtracks-to-games/

Sony is constantly trying to tweak memory usage as low as possible.
well it is a misinterpretation, the developer doesnt have to worry about what
headset your using like you said thats not what happens. that has nothing to do with memory usage restrictions. the headset you use makes NO difference the developer is simple faced with the memory restriction no matter what headset you use. fair enought the PS3 has a large memory footprint but that seems to have very little impact on the quality of games GTA4 PS3 is the same as GTA4 360 etc etc so it clearly isnt such a revolutionary design decision that you make it out to be.

Cue

09-15-2008, 02:31 PM

I'd like o know where, plus rechargable batteries are usually only good for a couple of years before the charge time in them becomes a problem. I still Hvae my PS1 pads with no issues, so the wear and tear on the pad is not a problem, but the battery is.

I have been into many computer shops and have yet to see a PS3 battery for sale outside of specialist online stores, so even if it is replaceable, it is not a common product so isn't cheap or easy to get hold of by most people, unlike common rechargable batteries.

One other thing to mention is battery life, in my search for the battery I found a comparisson, for that extra cash you pay for the 360 pack, you get 3x the battery duration of the PS3 and with the Wii 2x, so you get what you pay for.

It's as with all things, you can't look at one side of things and expect to get the entire picture.

http://www.gamepro.com/article/features/159148/which-controller-has-the-best-battery-life/
I will not trust that article as far as I can throw it

But due to the lack of an auto-off feature like the Wii and 360, Sixaxis lasted a meager 18 hours and 41 minutes; the first controller to die on us.
well surely when its on you should be counting the hours that its on how can it be due to the fact that it doesnt turn itself off :confused:.
I can tell you personally that the battery lasts alot more than that and is that truly a sixaxis or a Dualshock also is the battery used in the 360/wii rechargable? probably not you will have to keep buying batteries anyway. I urge people with a new ps3 pad to time their pad use so we can collect some stats. and yes my stick of a PS2 pad have worn as has the stick on my nunchuck. but at the end of the day battery wear is still battery wear just as any other wear you obviously do not include it in things like this.

battery used:
Duracell CopperTop
http://www.google.com/products?hl=en&q=Duracell%20CopperTop&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wf
costs the same amount as a replaceble ps3 battery. which lasts 1 year at least. You would have to buy this thing evey 36 hours on the 360/Wii. Use rechargable batterys on the wii and you will find that they hardly last at all cant speak for the 360 but I assume it will be 1/3 longer than the wii which isnt long at all. you cannot compare rechargable AA batteries to block Li-Ion ones otherwise your laptop will be running on AA's.

sirxlaughs

09-15-2008, 02:48 PM

well it is a misinterpretation, the developer doesnt have to worry about what
headset your using like you said thats not what happens. that has nothing to do with memory usage restrictions. the headset you use makes NO difference the developer is simple faced with the memory restriction no matter what headset you use. fair enought the PS3 has a large memory footprint but that seems to have very little impact on the quality of games GTA4 PS3 is the same as GTA4 360 etc etc so it clearly isnt such a revolutionary design decision that you make it out to be.

Do a search and find out why Epic said Gears of War will not work on PS3. Then tell me the memory footprint and those design decisions have little impact.

What misinterpretation? Why are you talking about developers and headsets?
The developers don't need to worry about peripheral support and drivers. DUH. HOWEVER, for ever peripheral the OS supports, a corresponding driver is loaded into memory. That is what the developers care about. How much memory they have access to. The 360 supports a bare minimum of proprietary peripherals. This helps with the OS's efficiency. I did not say it was a revolutionary design. All game consoles in the past were designed like that. Sony, with the PS3, made an all-in-one entertainment machine. They didn't even advertise it as a gaming console. They call it a computer entertainment system.

Cue

09-15-2008, 02:52 PM

This is a high form of arrogance. In my opinion the wii has a lot of hidden costs with the Ps3 coming in third. Since we are talking about hidden costs and not final price value the Ps3 is in the last.

360 for what they said
Wii for being overpriced hardware and forcing peripherals on you. aka extra expensive controllers and motion plus
There's not a single thing you NEED to go out and buy for the Playstation 3. If you have something that you can come up with that doesn't come out of the box please enlighten me. And no, rumble is not a need.

Well everything can be considered as not needed so thats not a fair argument. I dont need wifi, I dont need MC slots or 4 usb ports but I do like the option that they are there if and when I do. I just think the price of the ps3 is one of the best ( its the most expensive out of the 3 i know I know) but you do get very good value for money.

Cue

09-15-2008, 02:57 PM

Do a search and find out why Epic said Gears of War will not work on PS3. Then tell me the memory footprint and those design decisions have little impact.

What misinterpretation? Why are you talking about developers and headsets?
The developers don't need to worry about peripheral support and drivers. DUH. HOWEVER, for ever peripheral the OS supports, a corresponding driver is loaded into memory. That is what the developers care about. How much memory they have access to. The 360 supports a bare minimum of proprietary peripherals. This helps with the OS's efficiency. I did not say it was a revolutionary design. All game consoles in the past were designed like that. Sony, with the PS3, made an all-in-one entertainment machine. They didn't even advertise it as a gaming console. They call it a computer entertainment system.

you do realize how rediculuos you sound with that first statment right? thats like me telling you to look up why MGS4 cant be on the 360.

I'd rather the developers be able to pump out games than worry about what headset I'm using.

your words not mine. you still convinced there was no misinterpretation.
The drivers are all the same this is bluetooth we are talking about here its a standard and they have profiles to follow so the headset you use will have no impact on the memory restriction.

All game consoles in the past were designed like that. Sony, with the PS3, made an all-in-one entertainment machine. They didn't even advertise it as a gaming console. They call it a computer entertainment system.
its called attempted tax evasion and good value for money.

sirxlaughs

09-15-2008, 03:30 PM

you do realize how rediculuos you sound with that first statment right? thats like me telling you to look up why MGS4 cant be on the 360.

MGS4 can not be reproduced 100% on the 360. I believe that. It was designed specifically for the PS3, and would have to be reworked for the 360 (level loading, space issues, etc). Gears of War on the other hand would not be the same game on the PS3. Epic has already come out and said that the PS3 does not have enough memory to run Gears of War as it is on the 360. I told you to google it because it's frustrating talking with a guy who keeps stating his uninformed opinion as fact.

http://www.siliconera.com/2006/10/26/from-the-gears-of-war-hollywood-launch-party/

See if you can spot the one sentence that explains why the PS3 could not run Gears of War as it is.

your words not mine. you still convinced there was no misinterpretation.
The drivers are all the same this is bluetooth we are talking about here its a standard and they have profiles to follow so the headset you use will have no impact on the memory restriction.

Again, this shows how little you understand. How can supporting a device not have any impact on memory? To support that device, the driver has to already be loaded into memory. The more devices you support, the more memory is used. The memory is reserved for supported devices and features, the less is available to programmers. What is so difficult to understand?

chyottone

09-15-2008, 03:36 PM

The Wii and PS3 have full USB keyboard support for text input, whereas the 360 keypad costs £25.What? USB keyboards do work on the 360, they have since 2005. Anyways, let's see here...
Cost of 40Gb PS3: £299
Cost of 60Gb Xbox 360 Premium: £169.99
Difference: £129

Wonder what you can do with that £129, let's try following the article.
Second wireless controller: £29.99
Still £99 to go for a PS3

Two Play & Charge kits: £26
Still £73 to go for a PS3

Two years of gold Xbox Live membership: £58
Still £15 to go for a PS3
£13 for a second headset for your extra controller perhaps? Maybe just buy one year of live and buy something else... Hmm...

Ok, I'll make it simple, I'll just match the PS3's features. You can get the HD-DVD addon for £12, three years of XBL (warranty periord) for £87 and £30 for a wireless access point. There, £129. Only difference with this setup is that you've got dualshock 3 out-of-the-box and 20Gb more HDD space with the same price as you'd get a 40Gb PS3 for.

PS3 - Just a composite cable; no HD option in the box. Your gorgeous new HD console will look like it's being played back through an '80s VCR. You need a component or HDMI cable, stat. That's £20, thank you very much.Seriously, wtf? :D

Cue

09-15-2008, 03:47 PM

MGS4 can not be reproduced 100% on the 360. I believe that. It was designed specifically for the PS3, and would have to be reworked for the 360 (level loading, space issues, etc). Gears of War on the other hand would not be the same game on the PS3. Epic has already come out and said that the PS3 does not have enough memory to run Gears of War as it is on the 360. I told you to google it because it's frustrating talking with a guy who keeps stating his uninformed opinion as fact.

http://www.siliconera.com/2006/10/26/from-the-gears-of-war-hollywood-launch-party/

See if you can spot the one sentence that explains why the PS3 could not run Gears of War as it is.

right sure whatever PS3 can't run GoW because epic told you so but 360 can run MGS4 because you say so. :rolleyes:
it's frustrating talking with a guy who keeps stating his uninformed opinion as fact. Again, this shows how little you understand. How can supporting a device not have any impact on memory? To support that device, the driver has to already be loaded into memory. The more devices you support, the more memory is used. The memory is reserved for supported devices and features, the less is available to programmers. What is so difficult to understand?

i actually shows how little you know. bluetooth does not need specific hardware drivers you dont install drivers on your phone when you connect a bluetooth headset then have another driver to support another. do you honestly think you do? the drivers are on your phone are specific to your BT chipset not to the specific headset you connect. they have profiles meaning any headset that is officially BT standard follows that profile and will use that driver.
You are right ths is getting frustrating, end of conversation.

sirxlaughs

09-15-2008, 03:47 PM

its called attempted tax evasion and good value for money.

That's what you think. It is your opinion, and you're entitled to it. Just don't spout it as fact.

sirxlaughs

09-15-2008, 03:51 PM

right sure whatever PS3 can't run GoW because epic told you so but 360 can run MGS4 because you say so. :rolleyes:

bluetooth does not need specific hardware drivers you dont install drivers on your phone when you connect a bluetooth headset. do you honestly think you do? the drivers are on your phone and they have profiles meaning any headset that follows that profile will use that driver.
You are right ths is getting frustrating, end of conversation.

I just told you that I don't believe MGS4 can be reproduced on the 360. Just like Gears of War can not be reproduced on the PS3. If Epic were to make Gears of War for the PS3, they would have to change it to use less video memory. It would no longer be the same game. You are really dense.

The bluetooth drivers are already built into the phone, no? What is wrong with you? Seriously now. Those drivers take up part of the phone's memory. If bluetooth does not require drivers, why can't I connect a bluetooth device to my laptop? If I plug in a bluetooth receiver, why do I have to install a driver for it?
Here's a bluetooth driver that doesn't exist.
http://www.bluesoleil.com/

Cue

09-15-2008, 04:02 PM

What? USB keyboards do work on the 360, they have since 2005. Anyways, let's see here...
Cost of 40Gb PS3: £299
Cost of 60Gb Xbox 360 Premium: £169.99
Difference: £129

Wonder what you can do with that £129, let's try following the article.
Second wireless controller: £29.99
Still £99 to go for a PS3

Two Play & Charge kits: £26
Still £73 to go for a PS3

Two years of gold Xbox Live membership: £58
Still £15 to go for a PS3
£13 for a second headset for your extra controller perhaps? Maybe just buy one year of live and buy something else... Hmm...

Ok, I'll make it simple, I'll just match the PS3's features. You can get the HD-DVD addon for £12, three years of XBL (warranty periord) for £87 and £30 for a wireless access point. There, £129. Only difference with this setup is that you've got dualshock 3 out-of-the-box and 20Gb more HDD space with the same price as you'd get a 40Gb PS3 for.

Seriously, wtf? :D
I thought that the 60Gb Xbox 360 Premium was £190 and the 80GB £299 at least according to play.com. The wireless access point will get you nothing unless your into hacks and flashing things. Your HD-DVD player would be like buying an eaten apple. But apart from that I agree.

Cue

09-15-2008, 04:15 PM

I just told you that I don't believe MGS4 can be reproduced on the 360. Just like Gears of War can not be reproduced on the PS3. If Epic were to make Gears of War for the PS3, they would have to change it to use less video memory. It would no longer be the same game. You are really dense.

The bluetooth drivers are already built into the phone, no? What is wrong with you? Seriously now. Those drivers take up part of the phone's memory. If bluetooth does not require drivers, why can't I connect a bluetooth device to my laptop? If I plug in a bluetooth receiver, why do I have to install a driver for it?
Here's a bluetooth driver that doesn't exist.
http://www.bluesoleil.com/

enlighten me about what makes Gears of war so different to all other games that it cannot be ported exactly the same what specifically about it gives you that impression and for the record I do believe that MGS4 can be ported to the 360.
About the driver, no **** it needs a driver do you believe that the headset on your 360 is working without drivers. The BT driver is not for the headset its for the bluetooth reciever. that driver will work for every headset that follows the standard. So I as a developer do not need to worry about which one you buy. If you buy one that I didnt predict it makes no difference to me since the driver that works for all headsets has already set my memory restriction. do you get it? now explain this

I'd rather the developers be able to pump out games than worry about what headset I'm using.

like I said there may have been a misinterpretation but for some reason you seem hell bent on the fact that there wasnt. You call me dense but I suggest you take a long hard look in the mirror, wtf is up with people in these forums and insults.

sirxlaughs

09-15-2008, 04:47 PM

enlighten me about what makes Gears of war so different to all other games that it cannot be ported exactly the same what specifically about it gives you that impression and for the record I do believe that MGS4 can be ported to the 360.

You can think it, but it doesn't make it true. The fact that you need to be enlightened shows you don't understand what's going on.
Gears of War uses more than 256MB for video data. The PS3's 512MB is split into the CPU and GPU. Half for each. Epic has come out and said that Gears of War can not run with only 256MB of video memory. The 360 also has 512MB of memory, but it can be split any way the developer wants. Both the CPU and GPU have full access to it. So, for Gears of War to come out for the PS3, the memory structure has to be taken into consideration. Gears of War is a texture heavy game.

About the driver, no **** it needs a driver do you believe that the headset on your 360 is working without drivers. The BT driver is not for the headset its for the bluetooth reciever. that driver will work for every headset that follows the standard. So I as a developer do not need to worry about which one you buy. If you buy one that I didnt predict it makes no difference to me since the driver that works for all headsets has already set my memory restriction. do you get it? now explain this

First you say, no driver, now there's a driver. Good god. The 360 headset works b/c there is a driver. DUH. BUT, the 360 supports only that ONE wireless protocol. The PS3, by comparison, supports many more. Even the hard drive. It has to be that ONE specific drive. When you only have to support ONE specific device, protocol, feature, etc, the driver can be condensed. Just the fact that there is bluetooth on the PS3 means there is a bluetooth driver taking up memory space. If it wasn't there, the PS3 OS's memory usage might be one driver's worth less. It has nothing to do with what brand headset. It is the fact that the bluetooth protocol is there. There are tons and tons of features in the PS3. Web browser, wifi, bluetooth, HDD's, keyboards, mice, blu-ray, XMB interface, etc. If the PS3 was focused on games only, all that stuff could have been consolidated. The PS3 is a great entertainment system. I just feel that the 360 is the better games console.

like I said there may have been a misinterpretation but for some reason you seem hell bent on the fact that there wasnt. You call me dense but I suggest you take a long hard look in the mirror, wtf is up with people in these forums and insults.

It's an insult to my intelligence when I have to dig up old articles to disprove what you believe to be fact. Even after I try to give you reading material so that you can understand things better (to avoid as many misunderstandings as possible), you still don't get what I'm trying to say. It's frustrating. Just frustrating.
The most frustrating part is that you pour out your opinions as facts without understanding everything. If you said something like, "I don't really understand how this memory stuff works, but I don't think the PS3 suffers the way you describe it." - I would reply with something like, "That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. We obviously have differing opinions on this point. Here are some technical articles written by people smarter than I am that may explain things better for you."
And that would be that.

Cue

09-15-2008, 05:16 PM

You can think it, but it doesn't make it true. The fact that you need to be enlightened shows you don't understand what's going on.
Gears of War uses more than 256MB for video data. The PS3's 512MB is split into the CPU and GPU. Half for each. Epic has come out and said that Gears of War can not run with only 256MB of video memory. The 360 also has 512MB of memory, but it can be split any way the developer wants. Both the CPU and GPU have full access to it. So, for Gears of War to come out for the PS3, the memory structure has to be taken into consideration. Gears of War is a texture heavy game.

First you say, no driver, now there's a driver. Good god. The 360 headset works b/c there is a driver. DUH. BUT, the 360 supports only that ONE wireless protocol. The PS3, by comparison, supports many more. Even the hard drive. It has to be that ONE specific drive. When you only have to support ONE specific device, protocol, feature, etc, the driver can be condensed. Just the fact that there is bluetooth on the PS3 means there is a bluetooth driver taking up memory space. If it wasn't there, the PS3 OS's memory usage might be one driver's worth less. It has nothing to do with what brand headset. It is the fact that the bluetooth protocol is there. There are tons and tons of features in the PS3. Web browser, wifi, bluetooth, HDD's, keyboards, mice, blu-ray, XMB interface, etc. If the PS3 was focused on games only, all that stuff could have been consolidated. The PS3 is a great entertainment system. I just feel that the 360 is the better games console.

It's an insult to my intelligence when I have to dig up old articles to disprove what you believe to be fact. Even after I try to give you reading material so that you can understand things better (to avoid as many misunderstandings as possible), you still don't get what I'm trying to say. It's frustrating. Just frustrating.
The most frustrating part is that you pour out your opinions as facts without understanding everything. If you said something like, "I don't really understand how this memory stuff works, but I don't think the PS3 suffers the way you describe it." - I would reply with something like, "That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. We obviously have differing opinions on this point. Here are some technical articles written by people smarter than I am that may explain things better for you."
And that would be that.

Spewing out facts doesnt make the argument more true. I know how much ram is in both yet with all these differences developers can reproduce a game on both a 360 and PS3. GTA was the same Bioshock looks the same, Mercs 2 is the smae (although contradictory to what you say the textures look better on the ps3 version) I refuse to believe that it cannot be done simply because its different and for some reason you think GoW is GOW because of the textures. after all you said it wont be the same game.

I never said there is no drivers for the BT chipset read my posts properly next time. I specifically said there are drivers for the BT chipset but that does not mean that I need drivers for headsets I use. therefore developers should not have to care which one I'm using and their memory restriction does not depend on which I use.

I do not pour out opinion as fact never have done so and if there is any statment that you think is otherwise I'll tell you wether I am showing my opinion or stating something I believe to be factual.
The statment "The chipset needs drivers not the headset" is not an opinion its something I'm very sure is factual so whyTF are you arguing about it I dont understand. BTW do you have any idea how arragont you sound I read every one of your article but they were all irrelevant sh*te.

d889

09-15-2008, 05:35 PM

Cue

09-15-2008, 05:39 PM

gonepostl

09-15-2008, 06:47 PM

Well everything can be considered as not needed so thats not a fair argument. I dont need wifi, I dont need MC slots or 4 usb ports but I do like the option that they are there if and when I do. I just think the price of the ps3 is one of the best ( its the most expensive out of the 3 i know I know) but you do get very good value for money.

Think of it like this. Name one computer in your house that doesn't have a wifi card.;)
Granted yes real gamers play with cords so I'll give you that but wifi is needed for people who aren't as pro as me. You have the option for the cheaper one that doesn't include mc slots so sorry you lost with that one man.

Lol, how could anybody put Ps3 in second?:cool:

DEDDOA

09-15-2008, 07:19 PM

I will not trust that article as far as I can throw it

well surely when its on you should be counting the hours that its on how can it be due to the fact that it doesnt turn itself off :confused:.
I can tell you personally that the battery lasts alot more than that and is that truly a sixaxis or a Dualshock also is the battery used in the 360/wii rechargable? probably not you will have to keep buying batteries anyway. I urge people with a new ps3 pad to time their pad use so we can collect some stats. and yes my stick of a PS2 pad have worn as has the stick on my nunchuck. but at the end of the day battery wear is still battery wear just as any other wear you obviously do not include it in things like this.

battery used:
Duracell CopperTop
http://www.google.com/products?hl=en&q=Duracell%20CopperTop&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wf
costs the same amount as a replaceble ps3 battery. which lasts 1 year at least. You would have to buy this thing evey 36 hours on the 360/Wii. Use rechargable batterys on the wii and you will find that they hardly last at all cant speak for the 360 but I assume it will be 1/3 longer than the wii which isnt long at all. you cannot compare rechargable AA batteries to block Li-Ion ones otherwise your laptop will be running on AA's.

Well I know from personall experience myself that my PS3 pads need recharging more than my 360 or Wii ones, and I use the official recharge packs for the 360 and Energizer Rechargable for the Wii. I have to recharge My PS3 pads (thats both dual shock 3 and sixaxis) on average 2x as often as I do for the 360 which also see far more use in that time than the PS3 ones.

It got to the point while playing MGS and Uncharted, that I had to keep 1 pad on charge just to get throught the games as it would take 2 pads to finnish a game, however I managed to get through Mass effect 1.5x before needing to change packs on the 360 pad and the play time on that was more than double that off what it took for me to finnish Uncharted or MGS4 (i did all the side quests plus the addon meteor q). Now say what you for that, but thats the way it has been for me and I have 3 PS3 pads, so it wasn't even a faulty pad to blame.

I put it down to poor power managment on the PS3 pads as they lack the power saving features of the 360 pads, then there is the annoying fact that if you knock a PS3 pad on by accident you need a pin to turn it of, on the 360 or wii you can pop the battery.

You may disagree but the story matches my own experience with reguards to the controllers, which is a major hidden cost, 2x the electricity to recharge is not to be overlooked.

d889

09-15-2008, 08:03 PM

i cant believe people are even using battery recharging power consumption as a real argument.

my 360 charger takes about 3v @ 1.5amps .... thats freaking NOTHING, i split my DWP (power) bill with my roomates and i can tell you there is no way to determine if charging the battery raises the power bill (hint: IT DOESNT)

the controllers takes the equivilent of a AA battery, you think a AA battery is going to affect power bills when i bet everyone here runs their computer almost 24/7 which is drawing hundreds of watts.

Cue

09-15-2008, 08:04 PM

Well I know from personall experience myself that my PS3 pads need recharging more than my 360 or Wii ones, and I use the official recharge packs for the 360 and Energizer Rechargable for the Wii. I have to recharge My PS3 pads (thats both dual shock 3 and sixaxis) on average 2x as often as I do for the 360 which also see far more use in that time than the PS3 ones.

It got to the point while playing MGS and Uncharted, that I had to keep 1 pad on charge just to get throught the games as it would take 2 pads to finnish a game, however I managed to get through Mass effect 1.5x before needing to change packs on the 360 pad and the play time on that was more than double that off what it took for me to finnish Uncharted or MGS4 (i did all the side quests plus the addon meteor q). Now say what you for that, but thats the way it has been for me and I have 3 PS3 pads, so it wasn't even a faulty pad to blame.

You may disagree but the story matches my own experience with reguards to the controllers, which is a major hidden cost, 2x the electricity to recharge is not to be overlooked.

Fair enough can I ask what rechargable batteries you use for the wii since I have 4 pads and they all run out very quickly so I'm guessing it must be the battery but I have tried 3 variaties all with 2700mAh yet non of them last as long as the PS3 battery for me. I've also tried the 2500 Energizers.
The benchmark you showed me was about as usefull as the PSU benchmarks that fly around the internet. some guy thinking he knows how to conduct a scientific experiment when infact he/she knows nothing. there are too many factors to consider here. 1 console distance, 2 battery type, 3 gaming intensity (a fighting game wears a battery alot faster than MGS4) 4 Rumble intensive or not? etc etc
you cant do a test by just saying yeah I did this and that happened. a good start would be to set the rumble on constantly while pressing buttons at a comparable rate.

I put it down to poor power managment on the PS3 pads as they lack the power saving features of the 360 pads, then there is the annoying fact that if you knock a PS3 pad on by accident you need a pin to turn it of, on the 360 or wii you can pop the battery.

Now there is something definitly wrong there! knocking buttons on the ps3 pad does nothing on all my PS3 pads (1 sixaxis 3 Dualshock3s). the only button that does is the PS button in the middle which when pressed turns on the PS3 and for that you need no pin turn off the PS3 and the pad turns off aswell or if your playing with another pad you can turn it off in the menu. I for one dont like it when I'm playing a multiplayer game on my wii and one of the pads decided it wants to go to sleep but thats opinion. both the wii and ps3 should give you the option I guess. A firmware update may fix it since all it needs to do is send out the turn off pad signal it does when you do it in menu.

Cue

09-15-2008, 08:11 PM

Think of it like this. Name one computer in your house that doesn't have a wifi card.;)
Granted yes real gamers play with cords so I'll give you that but wifi is needed for people who aren't as pro as me. You have the option for the cheaper one that doesn't include mc slots so sorry you lost with that one man.

Lol, how could anybody put Ps3 in second?:cool:

I can name two, both my linux builds :p.
I know there is a cheaper option but those were examples.

Cue

09-15-2008, 08:13 PM

sirxlaughs

09-15-2008, 09:37 PM

if you took the movie length cutscenes out of mgs4 it could work on a 360, game developers have the tendancy to just fill up the blu-ray disc and say 'omg we need more storage' ....

if games can look great crossplatform (gta4 and cod4 look almost identicle, ive compared them switching sources on my 54" hdtv and one console is not better than the other) then obviously pretty much every game can work on both consoles.

who cares about wireless, you should be plugging the thing into the router anyway for performance, controllers ... whatever everyone has to buy them, $50 a year for live? if you cant afford it then your parents bought the console for you, GET A JOB.

I totally agree. Games can be ported back and forth. But when a game is tailored for a platform (like MGS4 or Gears), it has to be altered/reworked to perform properly on another platform. If you remove the cutscenes, MGS4 is no longer same MGS4. Personally, I think with a little compression (PS3 has issues with on-the-fly decompression) and multi-discs, a game like MGS4 can be redone to work on the 360. A game like Gears (the way it is done currently) can be done on the PS3. It runs on the unreal engine, which obviously works on the PS3. According to Epic (not me), the way the texture work is done in Gears of War requires more video memory than the PS3 allows them to use. So, to get a game like Gears to work on the PS3 would involve tricks with the textures and memory usage. The game no longer works the same (internally). Even Carmack has said that he can design a game specifically tailored for the PS3 that would not be possible on the 360 and vice-versa. It all comes down to the design of the game.
Wireless just clears up clutter. It's aesthetically pleasing and convenient. I can barely tell the difference on my wireless network. If you setup a good network, you'll get good enough speeds.

d889

09-16-2008, 12:25 AM

i definately agree that exclusive games are tailored to the console, and that porting to a different one is 'impossible'.

i'll give them that, because while nothing is impossible, no one is going to pay the ridiculous amount of money to work on a game that would take longer to port than it would to originally create. all games can run on all consoles, but these companies are in business to make money so i will leave it at that :)

DEDDOA

09-16-2008, 04:17 AM

Cue

09-16-2008, 06:13 AM

Well I use Energizer 2500 mAh Nickel-metal hydride and I have no problems. I also use them in GH3 guitars, again with no problems and a few days between recharges when in heavy use.

By the way, when i played MGS4 I had only sixaxis no DS3, so no rumble, and yet I still had to use 2 pads to finnish it.

Also the PS3 does not always come on if I knock the PS button as I have my consoles all turned off at the mains when it's not in use, so it is a problem. it is also not always the PS button that does it. i use my PSP via my laptop to play on TV, so used to use a PS3 pad, however I need a pin to turn it off afterwards. I have since stopped using the PS3 pad as it's too much hassle and now use a 360 pad, which just takes a pack pop to knock off, which is much less trouble, also like I said, it has much better power management, if I go for a coffee it will power down so saving battery power which is a plus for me especially as I get to use it wireless on the PC.

Now after chatting with a couple of work mates this morning who also have PS3, 360 and Wii, they all find the Ps3 while getting similar use to the Wii still needs recharging the most, and far more than the much more used 360 pads. what can i say, it's been a slow morning :D

Now I know you will disagree with al that, but thats mine and others experience, and thats not a dig at the PS3, just the option to go intergrated battery on the pads as opposed to removable, not to mention poor power saving when not in use for long periods of time.

No don't disagree at all its your experience so how can I disagree with it. I just find it odd that my wii control batteries run out so fast especially as I turn off the speaker and rumble on my pads and I use 2700 batteries. the ps3 pad does turn off after a while trying to find the PS3 but it does take an unusually long time how much charge is wsted in that period I dont know but my PS3 pad can easily last 2 weeks with almost continueous play from 7 till 12. I'm quite intreged by your experience since it might suggest that the launch wiimotes are less efficient while sony may have cut back on newer pads do you have launch wiimotes (ones with thin straps)/ PS3 pads. Oh and the fact that you used 2 pads to finish the game might just mean it is a long game, how long did you play for.