Xbox 360 > All

[Iceglow]

Ok guys this is going to be a little long one but I'm going through peoples posts and see a few things worth commenting on.

I've never been that interested in XBox 360 for far too many reasons. Perhaps it's the fact that Microsoft tries to screw its consumers with proprietary gizmos like hard drives, wireless adapters, controller chargers, and online play all for lots of extra money on top of the console.

Yeargdribble, I seem to recall seeing in another post you have a Wii? Either way, regardless of if you do or not lets face it Nintendo are the ones who screw you over with the periphials. Microsoft got rid of the Pro and Core system models of 360 because frankly the elite wasn't selling with them around, neither was the arcade. I would have dropped the arcade myself and kept the pro around because the 360 definitely does need a hard drive unit on it. However, 360 controllers come in 2 varieties, wireless and wired. Wired ones run on the usb and will also work on the PC as a control pad for games there. Wireless controllers can be run on any rechargable AA batteries, there are options such as the play and charge kit, the quick charge kit ect but they are optional. I've had some AA rechargables for years since my GBA gaming days and thus I just use them, works fine for me. Nintendo requires a remote and a nunchuck for most games and now a motion plus unit for many of it's titles lets add that up: Wii Remote: £29.99, Wii Nunchuck: £19.99, Wii motion plus: £19.99 that is by my reckoning for one controller for one other person to play the games with you a £59.97 bill, maximum number of players in Wii games? 4, excluding the £29.99 for the remote in the console, thats basically: £209.89 exluding any extra periphials needed to play 4 player on Wii. That doesn't then include the accessories for a Wii remote such as steering wheels at £6.99 for unofficial 3rd party ones and £9.99 for the official. Then you got the nunchuck condom rubber grip £9.99 (I'll leave the Wii remote one out since motion plus comes moulded in to one of them already but if not they're £9.99 each too) The gun frame for shooter games £9.99 oh dear god the list just goes on most at £9.99 or more. The fee for online gaming is not too bad to be honest does it bother me? A little, but no more than the monthly £7.99 millions pay monthly for World of Warcraft and I get to play a damnsight more games online than they do. Hell the latest big MMORPG contender has a £15.99 fee monthly to play! XBL gold membership works out to be like £3.50 a month if you do the maths. Sony offer pretty much the same number of accessories as Microsoft just most of theirs are 3rd party. As for the XBL Avatar market place, lets not go there if you're stupid enough to pay for those things you deserve to be mugged for your money.

Basically if I wanted to get a console to play single player games on I'd easily take the PS3 because there's hardly any exclusive single player games on the 360 worth getting the console over, not compared to the PS3 which has a load. On the flipside if I was out for multiplayer gaming good times I'd go with the 360 all the way because it craps on the PS3 from a great distance in that respect. It all comes down to what you're looking for out of your console.

This is pretty much truth. There's some good multi games on the PS3, but PSN just doesn't give you the kinds of social features that XBL does. I'm not really a big online gamer, so there's very few games on the 360 that appeal to me - Gears and Halo are cool and all, but I'm mostly interested in the campaigns, which aren't really that beefy. Basically what Dan said is exactly right, it's all about where your gaming interests lie.

Agreed. I happen to work with a guy who for years was a ps3 fanboy who hated and didn't pay any attention to the 360. He recently after much discussion with me and a few others at work decided that for his second console for his bedroom (his ps3 is in the lounge) that it would be a waste of time getting a second ps3 he may as well have the best of both worlds and get a 360. He now is a completely changed man he brought his 360 and went online same day. He was shocked by party mode and also by the fact that the 360 comes with a headset for online gaming chat straight out of the box whereas the ps3 you have to spend money buying a headset seperately and also whilst he thought the ps3 online was ok he noticed an immediate improvement in terms of stability and the speed of the servers finding games on CoD 4 much faster than he could on ps3. He also stated he found GTA IV much more comfortable to play on the 360 than the ps3. The division on PS3 and 360 is generally comming down to what you go in for. I could have brought either one but I enjoy Halo and I have always enjoyed going online and playing with friends for me the 360 was an immediately obvious choice. DK has hit the nail on the head there and since I work in a store selling consoles most of the time I have to admit when asked by customers what they are after from a console when they ask for the better of the two it is pretty much the exact same words I use to explain that on a technical scale on a HD tv through HDMI connection there is no difference graphically that the naked eye will particulary pick up on. There is very little to split the hairs on.

[Yeargdribble]

Stuff about accessories for Wii with relevance to Yeargdribble's condemnation of Microsoft accessories.

tldr version at the bottom (before my note)

You're correct. Wii does have a lot of accessories, but few of them are necessary. I have a pair of controllers with nunchuks. One I had to buy, the other came with the console. Together a Wiimote+Nunchuk retails for $60. A 360 controller retails for $50 and PS3 controllers range from $55 to $75. You automatically assume since I can play with 4 people that must do and therefor buy all of the controllers, but that's a spurious argument. The controller cost issue is relatively the same across all consoles, probably being worst with PS3. If I want to get a Wii Motion Plus (or 2) I'll just pick up Wii Sports Resort and get two of them in the box.

I got one of the Wii-wheels with Mario Kart and bought another one for $5 when I saw it on sale. Not so bad a deal. I don't need some plastic gun thing or gimmicky sports attachments to play.

My Wii cost $250 when I bought it. At the time the 360 cost $400. My Wii came with built-in wireless. If I added that to a 360 I'm up to $500 for a tiny HD. If I wanted to upgrade the HD in a PS3 I would spend $100 and get probably 500 Gigs whereas for the same price I would've gotten maybe 40-60 Gigs for the 360 because Microsoft made it proprietary. I suppose you could make it without the stupid $100 wireless thing from MS and just make a bridge with a router (which I will be doing), but that still costs you. It's humorous that you argue how the Xbox 360 (Elite) comes with a headset in the box and the PS3 does not. But the PS3 has wireless out of the box and 360 does not. Headsets are cheaper than wireless routers last I checked. Fine, Xbox has more stable online and PS3 (and Wii) has it free. It's give and take, but that doesn't make anyone necessarily better than the other nor does it protect any of them from reasonable criticism where they fail.

Now Microsoft is making all memories cards that aren't marked up, proprietary crap completely unusable. That's not a good way to treat your customers.

With a Wii you can buy lots of silly gizmos if you want but you don't have to. Most of them are third party scammy crap. For Xbox you practically must buy overpriced MS brand crap to even come up to par. That was my only argument against Xbox. They actively make a point of forcing consumers to buy their first party crap to make their console playable.



NOTE: Let's just be clear that we can make arguments without taking sides. I can hate Microsoft's business model and still like their console. I hate a lot of the crap Sony has done where they seem to take delight in sh***ing on their customers as well, but I love my PSP and PS2. You don't have to counterpoint this as though I were a Wii fanboy defending everything Nintendo does. Wii Motion Plus is BS and should've been in the standard Wiimote from the start. I'm just calling a spade a spade with the way Microsoft does business.

[Iceglow]

Stuff about accessories for Wii with relevance to Yeargdribble's condemnation of Microsoft accessories.

tldr version at the bottom (before my note)

You're correct. Wii does have a lot of accessories, but few of them are necessary. I have a pair of controllers with nunchuks. One I had to buy, the other came with the console. Together a Wiimote+Nunchuk retails for $60. A 360 controller retails for $50 and PS3 controllers range from $55 to $75. You automatically assume since I can play with 4 people that must do and therefor buy all of the controllers, but that's a spurious argument. The controller cost issue is relatively the same across all consoles, probably being worst with PS3. If I want to get a Wii Motion Plus (or 2) I'll just pick up Wii Sports Resort and get two of them in the box.

Well I don't assume you must get 4 controllers however here is my point on the whole thing, 4 controllers should not cost over £200 to rig to normal standard use. On the 360 here is how it would break down: (using GB prices from HMV) 360 wired controller £24.99 official, £19.99 unofficial. 2 of these + 2 wireless controllers at £39.99 means, 4 controllers can come to as little as £129.96 for all 4 controllers to be official on the basis of 2 wired, 2 wireless. On the PS3 it comes to £39.99 for each controller or £159.96 for 4 pads. Now acceptable arguments include the cost of batteries for the 360 pads but I'm going to disregard that because frankly there is no need to buy a rechargable quick charge kit or a plug and play/charge kit. As far as gaming goes, the PS3 and 360 pads will work perfectly well out of their packaging for that money, the Wii controllers increasingly need to have Wii Motion plus on them, therefore how can you sit there saying Microsoft force people to use official products or to buy periphials when Nintendo's controllers alone scream out that they are a rip off. Bluntly ask a Nintendo executive to justify charging nearly £100 more for 4 controllers in full function compatability with their console and any game released compared to their competitors, I bet that he can't.

I got one of the Wii-wheels with Mario Kart and bought another one for $5 when I saw it on sale. Not so bad a deal. I don't need some plastic gun thing or gimmicky sports attachments to play.

Thats good that you don't need some gimmicky attachments to play, however a LOT of people are suckered in to buying these things or simply resort to buying the plastic gun frames to make holding the damn thing feel more comfortable. I suppose in a way the world of nintendo fans should be grateful they didn't think to bring out an official light gun controller and decide that to play FPS or Arcade FPS games you must use that because going on Nintendo's track record so far it'd cost around £70 to get each one.

My Wii cost $250 when I bought it. At the time the 360 cost $400. My Wii came with built-in wireless. If I added that to a 360 I'm up to $500 for a tiny HD. If I wanted to upgrade the HD in a PS3 I would spend $100 and get probably 500 Gigs whereas for the same price I would've gotten maybe 40-60 Gigs for the 360 because Microsoft made it proprietary.

I agree the Wii is the cheapest console unit out there, but it's lack of serious games and extortionate controller prices and gimmicky accessories they try to ram down your throat and the short lifespan of the Wii remote (I see customers come in all the time having worn these things out til they break) and it's periphials means Nintendo's Wii is by far the most expensive console to maintain. The ps3 hard-drive you speak of would not be official and therefore if it was incorrectly installed and caused problems bye bye warranty The biggest official PS3 hard drive is 250gb, exactly the same as the one in the biggest xbox console, the super elite. Ironically the Xbox 360 super elite costs £250 comes with 2 wireless controls and Forza 3 along with the download codes for extra content from the special edition (though you don't get the keyfob ect from the special edition) this is exactly the same as a PS3 with a 120gb hard drive. The 250gb PS3 costs £300 on it's own with 1 control pad. (again information taken from HMV where I work including content of the super elite bundle and prices)

I suppose you could make it without the stupid $100 wireless thing from MS and just make a bridge with a router (which I will be doing), but that still costs you. It's humorous that you argue how the Xbox 360 (Elite) comes with a headset in the box and the PS3 does not. But the PS3 has wireless out of the box and 360 does not. Headsets are cheaper than wireless routers last I checked. Fine, Xbox has more stable online and PS3 (and Wii) has it free. It's give and take, but that doesn't make anyone necessarily better than the other nor does it protect any of them from reasonable criticism where they fail.

Wireless isn't essential and it's probably advisable to if possible use an ethernet cable to directly go from router to 360/PS3/Wii (yes this is true of all consoles) this is because any interference would directly affect your online play and it's VERY easy to disrupt a wireless internet signal even across such a short distance as a living room. However I will point out that the wireless adaptor for 360 did originally cost £59.99 in the UK. It currently retails at £29.99 in the UK which is a big drop in price as does a 60gb hard drive. Now for a wireless headset for the PS3 you're looking at £29.99 for a decent one. All of a sudden thats not such a big difference after all. I am also curious as to your references of buying a wireless router. What you are buying is a Wireless adaptor, thats very different from a wireless router in fact I believe you might even get away with any cheap one but have never tested this so please, don't take this as gospel truth. As far as buying a router goes, yes they are expensive but as you rightly said there is no requirement that you use wireless and the 360 comes with an ethernet cable in the box.

With a Wii you can buy lots of silly gizmos if you want but you don't have to. Most of them are third party scammy crap. For Xbox you practically must buy overpriced MS brand crap to even come up to par. That was my only argument against Xbox. They actively make a point of forcing consumers to buy their first party crap to make their console playable.

This statement here is utter bollocks sorry. I have a 360. I have 1 wireless controller as came with I have 20gb of hard drive as came with my 360 (and yes sometimes I do consider upgrading it), I do have the wireless adaptor for xbox 360 which did cost me £59.99 but thats my choice to buy that. I do not own a play and charge kit, I do not own a quick charge kit I do happen to own several AA rechargable batteries and the charger for them. So please explain to me where I was forced to buy any accessories for my 360 made by Microsoft? My 360 is more than playable it's fantastically good fun I regulary play on it and get in excess of a weeks active gaming battery life per charged pair of batteries I have 6 batteries meaning I often have 3 - 6 weeks worth of gaming before I have to consider charging a pair up for the next. I'm an avid 360 gamer and I fail to see your point I'm sorry but Yearg for all essential purposes here you are talking completely and utterly out of your ass please listen to 360 owners about 360 consoles we tend to know more than non owners after all we're living with the machines.

NOTE: Let's just be clear that we can make arguments without taking sides. I can hate Microsoft's business model and still like their console. I hate a lot of the crap Sony has done where they seem to take delight in sh***ing on their customers as well, but I love my PSP and PS2. You don't have to counterpoint this as though I were a Wii fanboy defending everything Nintendo does. Wii Motion Plus is BS and should've been in the standard Wiimote from the start. I'm just calling a spade a spade with the way Microsoft does business.

I'm not counterpointing you as if you were a Nintendo fanboy, don't worry you're not Roto yet! However I am making a point here that you own a Wii you should be wiser to this, Nintendo released motion plus, something what we both completely agree should have been in the basic functionality of their console to begin with. Only possible reason to hold this back and then to charge £19.99 per unit is to make more money by forcing your gamers to buy this too. Same goes for the nunchuck, the fact that it is needed for almost all games means Nintendo really to be fair to their customers be selling this and the Wii Remote for no more than the cost of a single Wii Remote. I'm very certain having looked in to getting my girlfriend a Wii and speaking to people with the console and having looked in to it from the route of I sell the damn things often enough to know it is the cheapest console unit to buy but the most expensive long term console, far more so than the 360. I agree Sony crap all over their customers too and so does Microsoft, if they didn't they wouldn't be good businesses making money from us. Microsoft done a massive crap on their customers by discontinuing the most popular models of 360 during their prime allowing them to raise the price of the Arcade from £129.99 to £159.99 though at the same point this same dick move from them allowed them to drop the price of the Elite to £199.99 from £249.99 which did make an awful lot of difference and has directly reduced the price of the Super Elite model which most likely would have retailed at £299.99 if not for the discontinuation of the Pro and Core models. Sony has shat all over it's customers more than any other games console developer so far in this round of console manufacturing imho, constant shakeup of features, functionality and even console specification is not a good thing, they seem to have settled now with the slim and lite PS3 (ironic they call it the slim when it's actually deeper in terms of front panel to back panel than the high gloss original just slimmer in terms of height and shorter in terms of length) with it's 250gb and 120gb models. However I believe it's only a matter of time before we start playing swings and roundabouts with Sony again.

[Yeargdribble]

Well I don't assume you must get 4 controllers however here is my point on the whole thing, 4 controllers should not cost over £200 to rig to normal standard use. On the 360 here is how it would break down: (using GB prices from HMV) 360 wired controller £24.99 official, £19.99 unofficial. 2 of these + 2 wireless controllers at £39.99 means, 4 controllers can come to as little as £129.96 for all 4 controllers to be official on the basis of 2 wired, 2 wireless. On the PS3 it comes to £39.99 for each controller or £159.96 for 4 pads. Now acceptable arguments include the cost of batteries for the 360 pads but I'm going to disregard that because frankly there is no need to buy a rechargable quick charge kit or a plug and play/charge kit. As far as gaming goes, the PS3 and 360 pads will work perfectly well out of their packaging for that money, the Wii controllers increasingly need to have Wii Motion plus on them, therefore how can you sit there saying Microsoft force people to use official products or to buy periphials when Nintendo's controllers alone scream out that they are a rip off. Bluntly ask a Nintendo executive to justify charging nearly £100 more for 4 controllers in full function compatability with their console and any game released compared to their competitors, I bet that he can't.

First, you're comparing apples and oranges. You're talking about MSRP on the Wii controllers and using a discounted price you can find from a retailer on the 360 controllers to make your point. I can also find all Wii controller bits for considerably less than MSRP. That's why I was using MSRP as the zeroing point. You're then trying to inflate your point by talking about the price of a set of 4 vs the cost of 1 or 2. It makes your argument seem more compelling because you're throwing out a bigger number, but it's a misnomer.

I think you're a bit hyperbolic about Wii games increasingly needing Wii Motion Plus. There are relatively few current adopters though I will concede that at some point it will likely become a necessity, though Nintendo is likely to make cheap bundles for some time to come. I wouldn't be surprised to see TW2 as a standalone at $50 and a bundle for $60 which would include a half priced WMP. They've already started down this road.

But for the sake of your argument, a single MSRP controller with Wiimote+Nunchuk+WMP would be $80 while an MSRP 360 controller would be $50 which clearly makes the Wii controller more costly.

Thats good that you don't need some gimmicky attachments to play, however a LOT of people are suckered in to buying these things or simply resort to buying the plastic gun frames to make holding the damn thing feel more comfortable.

Once again, most of these little gimmicky things are 3rd party and have nothing to do with Nintendo's marketing. They are far from necessary so I see it as a moot point when we're talking about the console company gouging the players.

I agree the Wii is the cheapest console unit out there, but it's lack of serious games and extortionate controller prices and gimmicky accessories...

... just gonna restate the irrelevance of 3rd party plastic to the discussion...

...they try to ram down your throat and the short lifespan of the Wii remote (I see customers come in all the time having worn these things out til they break) and it's periphials means Nintendo's Wii is by far the most expensive console to maintain.

This is quite anecdotal and I don't see where you're getting this from. I've had the same two Wiimotes for about 3 years now and they are fine despite plenty of play. I've never heard any complaints about how well they hold up before.

I was really really going to try to avoid this, but your argument reeks of irony as you seem to ignore the RROD. If you want to talk about maintenance and shoddy devices that break down you shouldn't try to do so in comparison to the 360.

Wireless isn't essential

I'll agree, but for fairness sake, both other consoles (including the dirt cheap one) have onboard wireless if you want to use it. In side-by-side comparisons, for those that want it, this is a place where the once relatively low price of the 360 is not all that it seems.

I am also curious as to your references of buying a wireless router. What you are buying is a Wireless adaptor, thats very different from a wireless router in fact I believe you might even get away with any cheap one but have never tested this so please, don't take this as gospel truth. As far as buying a router goes, yes they are expensive but as you rightly said there is no requirement that you use wireless and the 360 comes with an ethernet cable in the box.

You can use a wireless router in lieu of the wireless adapter and get a lot better value. MSRP on the MS WNA is $100 while a decent router is only $60. You can get far more functionality out of the router as you an hook it to several other devices and use it as a bridge to your primary router for all of them. It's what I'll be doing without a doubt. It just takes a little extra setup.

The ps3 hard-drive you speak of would not be official and therefore if it was incorrectly installed and caused problems bye bye warranty

Perhaps, but it's pretty easy to install a HD and at least Sony gives an option. For those who are smart enough install their own non-Sony HD, they just saved some money. This isn't even a realistic option with the 360 and I'm sure it was done this way on purpose.

This statement here is utter bollocks sorry. I have a 360. I have 1 wireless controller as came with I have 20gb of hard drive as came with my 360 (and yes sometimes I do consider upgrading it), I do have the wireless adaptor for xbox 360 which did cost me £59.99 but thats my choice to buy that. I do not own a play and charge kit, I do not own a quick charge kit I do happen to own several AA rechargable batteries and the charger for them. So please explain to me where I was forced to buy any accessories for my 360 made by Microsoft?

You're probably right that I overstated it. I don't even consider the controller chargers necessary and don't have one for my Wiimotes. When I'm talking about the MS crap I'm talking about the proprietary wireless adapter and proprietary HDs. Sure your console is functional without them, but less so than it could be. You would probably be more likely to upgrade that HD if it wasn't so costly to do so. The fact that you have to shell out a huge amount of money for a wireless adapter is sad not only because you have to buy one, but because it was made to be needlessly proprietary and therefore far more expensive.



In the end I think we largely agree on certain issues like the fact that basically all of the console companies suck. I don't really have that much more ire for the 360 than any of the others, it's just that certain issues stick out to me. Primarily are the proprietary things they put in place where a standard could be used. This pissed me off so much about the PSPGo going to a proprietary USB cable instead of the standard cable that everyone probably has half a dozen of lying around their house. This forces the consumer down a narrow path and that always upsets me.

I don't think Nintendo intentionally dicked the consumer over with the WMP. I think it was a case of the tech not being ready at release, but they had to drop a console into the market to make a showing against the other current gens. In the long run it pissed everyone off though because what WMP has turned into is what everyone felt like they were promised. Instead they got silly waggle controls often used in a place where a traditional control scheme would work better. Also to be fair, for the lower price of the Wii you also don't have DVD, much less Blu-Ray. They were not equipped to offer large storage solutions though they did help a little when they allowed SD cards to fix the shortcomings... but sadly SD cards cost a premium vs a real HD.



I really didn't want to get into all of this when I started the thread. Mostly I just wanted to see what everyone was talking about being so awesome on the 360 because I wasn't seeing it. I found the answer. It's mostly the FPSs that aren't on my radar but still appeal to a wide number of gamers. It's the superior online play (with the caveat of a fee).

I'm not going to be sad to get my Xbox this weekend. I'm looking forward to a number of games that are Xbox exclusives even if they aren't marquee titles and even though most of the XBLA exclusives I was most interested in are going to also be on PSN soon, I'm still certain there will be a good number of games that I'll want to purchase.

It's always going to be better to have all of the consoles and not miss out on any of the games. I have no grudge against any certain games getting exclusivity (and once I have all the consoles I'll have even less reason). I just have a problem with crappy business practices which all of the companies engage in and arguably some to a greater degree than others.

[ljkkjlcm9]

I think it breaks down to this:

Microsoft is willing to give incentives to companies to release "exclusive" titles. The company gets all this money to develop, but the contract only requires it to be exclusive for a set period of time. The company, with the completed game, knows their is a market for it on PS3. It's extremely easy to convert from the 360 to the PS3. They go to Sony, and Sony says, you can only release it if you change stuff.

This is how you get: Ninja Gaiden Sigma(2), Star Ocean: The Last Hope International, Tales of Vesperia... etc releasing on PS3

On the other hand, it's very difficult to change a game developed exclusive for the PS3 for the 360.

Honestly, I'm happy with my PS3 and Wii. I've been playing Demon's Souls like crazy, and I haven't enjoyed a game this much in a long time! I'll be getting Assassin's Creed 2 for my PS3, and I actually own the first for the 360 (though I don't own the system, roommate did lol).

THE JACKEL

[Iceglow]

First, you're comparing apples and oranges. You're talking about MSRP on the Wii controllers and using a discounted price you can find from a retailer on the 360 controllers to make your point. I can also find all Wii controller bits for considerably less than MSRP. That's why I was using MSRP as the zeroing point. You're then trying to inflate your point by talking about the price of a set of 4 vs the cost of 1 or 2. It makes your argument seem more compelling because you're throwing out a bigger number, but it's a misnomer.

I'm not using any discounted prices, the prices I am using in the UK are the official RRP prices. If I was to mention discounted prices I would be deducting 30% of all the prices of the controls since that is my current level of staff discount. Also I would point out that the Wii Nunchuck actually falls in to a 2 for £30 offer which also includes SD cards and games. I used the base price of these units from the UK, it seems that America is being dicked more on the price of console periphials than the UK, however my point still stands. Even if we took 4 wireless 360 controllers it would still only come to the same cost as 4 ps3 controllers, something Nintendo do need to answer for when they charge £100 more nearly.

This is quite anecdotal and I don't see where you're getting this from. I've had the same two Wiimotes for about 3 years now and they are fine despite plenty of play. I've never heard any complaints about how well they hold up before.

I was really really going to try to avoid this, but your argument reeks of irony as you seem to ignore the RROD. If you want to talk about maintenance and shoddy devices that break down you shouldn't try to do so in comparison to the 360.

I get the Wii remote faults from the number of times customers come in and say they are buying a replacement pad to me. That is fine however you here are comparing apples and oranges, the RROD is a fault yes, however Microsoft now offer a free 5 year warranty on all Xbox 360 consoles which covers the RROD as standard. The Wii controller systems are not covered in the Nintendo Wii Console warranty and cannot be covered by 3rd party replacement covers or extended warranty not to mention the Wii comes with a standard 1 or 2 year warranty. If you wished to compare issues with the periphials you should be looking for faults with the PS3 or 360 controllers to compare, something I haven't managed to find many apart from gamers throwing the control in a pique of rage.

You can use a wireless router in lieu of the wireless adapter and get a lot better value. MSRP on the MS WNA is $100 while a decent router is only $60. You can get far more functionality out of the router as you an hook it to several other devices and use it as a bridge to your primary router for all of them. It's what I'll be doing without a doubt. It just takes a little extra setup.

Why would you bother doing this unless you only have an ADSL modem and not a router? Ok heres a simple thing to do, most normal routers have 4 ethernet ports and you can simply place a networking cable between the 360 to one of those and connect to the internet through your main router. You could also bridge it by networking the 360 in to the ethernet card of your PC and sharing the connection. The idea of buying another router for your home to connect your 360 too is mildly disturbing and like I said, the wirless adaptor in the UK at least has fallen in price dramatically so I would assume the wireless adaptor has in America too (also to note, it has no proprietary features apart from the fact that it is designed to clip smoothly and discreetely to the rear of the console as for connecting to the machine it plugs in via a rear usb port hence I believe any network adaptor will work)

You're probably right that I overstated it. I don't even consider the controller chargers necessary and don't have one for my Wiimotes. When I'm talking about the MS crap I'm talking about the proprietary wireless adapter and proprietary HDs. Sure your console is functional without them, but less so than it could be. You would probably be more likely to upgrade that HD if it wasn't so costly to do so. The fact that you have to shell out a huge amount of money for a wireless adapter is sad not only because you have to buy one, but because it was made to be needlessly proprietary and therefore far more expensive

You definitely overstated it. I actually am not upgrading my hard drive because as with both the 360 and the PS3 the transfer of data between two of them is not as simple as a PC to PC or even memory card and I am pretty lazy with it and therefore won't bother. I will probably upgrade once I have absoloutely no choice but for now I have still got over half my hard drive empty. The USB wireless adaptor I made a point about above, it's simply that usb the only proprietary facts about it is that it clips to the rear of the casing very nicely and flush as far as I am aware it is simply an 804.2g network adaptor. The hard drive is another matter yes but then if you were serious about getting a 360 you'd honestly not even consider an Arcade unit sensibly, you would be looking at the Elite or the Super Elite.

In the end I think we largely agree on certain issues like the fact that basically all of the console companies suck. I don't really have that much more ire for the 360 than any of the others, it's just that certain issues stick out to me. Primarily are the proprietary things they put in place where a standard could be used. This pissed me off so much about the PSPGo going to a proprietary USB cable instead of the standard cable that everyone probably has half a dozen of lying around their house. This forces the consumer down a narrow path and that always upsets me.

It's true we are agreeing in a lot of places, all companies dick us over it's the way of life however I do feel you're getting mixed up in places as to the level of proprietary periphials for the 360 and that for me is annoying because it isn't half as bad as you make it sound.

I really didn't want to get into all of this when I started the thread. Mostly I just wanted to see what everyone was talking about being so awesome on the 360 because I wasn't seeing it. I found the answer. It's mostly the FPSs that aren't on my radar but still appeal to a wide number of gamers. It's the superior online play (with the caveat of a fee).

I'm not attempting to put others of getting other brand consoles well apart from maybe the Wii but then I really don't like the Wii, it feels too gimmicky and too full of broken promises of what should have been hardware wise. and I didn't like the Cube either for that matter, though I did love the 64 and the SNES before that. Sony's PS3 and Microsoft's 360 are pretty damn even like DK said and like I initially agreed with the difference is that the 360 is more aimed at multiplayer gaming and the ps3 is more aimed at single player journeys. I would hapily own both if I could afford a PS3, (boo no staff discount on consoles and hardware) the difference in the two really is neglible though as others I am sure will agree, the 360 is the FPS gamers bread and butter when it comes to console gaming these days.

[Yeargdribble]

Why would you bother doing this unless you only have an ADSL modem and not a router? Ok heres a simple thing to do, most normal routers have 4 ethernet ports and you can simply place a networking cable between the 360 to one of those and connect to the internet through your main router. You could also bridge it by networking the 360 in to the ethernet card of your PC and sharing the connection. The idea of buying another router for your home to connect your 360 too is mildly disturbing

My primary router is in a room that is not my living room with no way of being moved closer. I'd have to run probably 30-50 feet of cable around several walls, through a door and down the hall to have a hard line. I happen to have an extra wireless router lying around which works out for me. Even if I didn't I'd rather buy a 4 port wireless router (which is cheaper than the wireless adapter anwyay) and at least have the flexibility of it being useful for something else at a later date in addition to being able to hook to more devices. I see no purpose in getting a single purpose device for more than the cost of a multi-purpose device that serves the same.

[NorthernChaosGod]

But then I bought my PS3 Slim & I'm sorry its so much better. Unless your playing an FPS game the PS3's controller is so much better. Then there is the added fact if you want to charge the 360's controller you have to take out the batteries & put them in a charger can't play on but with the PS3 controller when the battery is low you plug in the USB cable & keep on gaming. Lack of rumble is not an issue since the Sixaxis controller sold with the Slim has rumble. Graphically as well the PS3 is superior but that wasn't a factor that swayed me so much.

I don't know if this has been touched upon, but you can play while your controllers are charging on 360. It's called a play and charge kit, my 360 came with one when I bought and I opted to get a second one for my second controller.

[Madame Adequate]

oh god wall of text crits for 9001 damage

[Slothy]

They go to Sony, and Sony says, you can only release it if you change stuff.

I don't think I've ever heard of a case where a developer said Sony made them add content to a timed exclusive when porting it. I'd say it's more likely that they want to give PS3 owners something extra to compensate for the wait, but whatever.

On the other hand, it's very difficult to change a game developed exclusive for the PS3 for the 360.

I have to call BS on this I'm afraid. The major difficulty in porting from the PS3 to the 360 is in the programming. Code developed on the 360 generally ports better to the PS3 then the other way around, though I'd bet that as developers have become more familiar with the PS3 that's not as true today as it used to be.

Even still, having to recode things has nothing to do with adding extra content since that would be a simple matter of adding content (levels, character models, etc.), not drastically overhauling the underlying code. The only difficulty you might run into is similar to FFXIII where there is simply so little space on a DVD compared to a Blu-Ray that some quests or things may need to be locked out on some discs, but that would actually be less of a problem for an FPS or action game than something massive like an RPG and there are ways around it. In fact, if the team is developing for the PS3 with the knowledge that it will be ported to the 360 later, they'll likely anticipate those difficulties and work around them on the PS3 so it's easier to get on the 360 later.

[Bolivar]

Bolivar's Guide to Online Gaming - Debunking Myths (lol jk)

TLDR: For those with attention deficiency disorders, here is a summarized snippet of the general ramblings for you to ponder over - - you can just look at headings to get the point

I. Stability - The PSN is faster, more stable, and more PS3 exclusives use dedicated servers

also whilst he thought the ps3 online was ok he noticed an immediate improvement in terms of stability and the speed of the servers finding games on CoD 4 much faster than he could on ps3.

Okay, this is the biggest myth on the internet that needs to be dispelled - XBox Live is not faster or more stable than PSN. How many times was XBox Live unexpectedly down this year alone? I can only think of once that's happened with PSN (and its free). Furthermore, a MTV multiplayer study found that in fact the PSN is faster than XBox Live.

Even if it wasn't, it doesn't matter what system you play a game on. Nearly every multiplayer game on ps3/360 uses P2P, not servers. This mean your connection speed and stability depends on the host of the game, not what network you're using. The only game on 360 I can think of that doesn't are the Battlefield games, but those servers are owned and operated by EA, and they use the same ones on all platforms.

At the same time, plenty of PS3 exclusives use dedicated servers whereas I can't think of a single 360 game that does. Resistance 1 & 2, Killzone 2, Warhawk, SOCOM, and MAG all use dedicated servers, meaning your experience will always be fast and stable no matter how you're playing them.

II. Wireless - It works...

Wireless isn't essential and it's probably advisable to if possible use an ethernet cable to directly go from router to 360/PS3/Wii (yes this is true of all consoles) this is because any interference would directly affect your online play and it's VERY easy to disrupt a wireless internet signal even across such a short distance as a living room.

This simply isn't true. I've been using Wireless for over a year now and there hasn't been a noticeable difference from playing with ethernet. I use a decent $50USD one that's usually simultaneously used by 2 laptops while a 3rd laptops downloads. Even before that, I used a crappy one provided by the landlord, shared with 5 rooms in our apartment as well as our own. Even then, there was no noticeable difference from playing wired.

III. The difference between XBL and PSN is now nominal; PS3 games have richer and more varied multiplayer experiences.

as others I am sure will agree, the 360 is the FPS gamers bread and butter when it comes to console gaming these days.

Over the last 3 years, Sony has been slowly chipping away at the differences in services provided between the two, and the only features remaining are a universal Party System and Cross Game (Voice) Chat. But if you can hop into games with friends on the PSN just as easily, what's the significant advantage XBox Live has? The only game that's been a hassle for me is Battlefield 1943, and even then the game had problems with the 360 Party System if I'm not mistaken. Furthermore, many games provide their own party systems like Resistance, Call of Duty, Little Big Planet, MAG, and Uncharted 2. XBL has a little more convenience, no doubt, but not much.

Moreso, I disagree with Iceglow and DK because I have to question what kinds of game experiences you're having on XBL once you get into matches. It seems to me that 360 games just provide the same generic multiplayer modes that have been the norm for the last 15 years.

I would argue the PS3 has better online games. SOCOM and Warhawk are 32 player tactical shooters, the latter with a variety of vehicles on land, sea, and air. You can hop into a friend's game in Little Big Planet and build a level together. Killzone 2 is up to 32 players with dynamic matches with a deep class system boasting an impressive array of effects. Resistance 2 is up to 60 players on massive maps also with dynamic matches. Demon's Souls is arguably innovating the community experience of RPG's. And MAG, well, I think that goes without saying.

IV. Conclusion

I totally agree XBL is a solid service that gives you convenience for your money, but in no way is it faster or more stable. Wi-Fi is an awesome feature to have in your box. Lastly, the PSN is all but caught up with XBL, but even then, I would say the PS3 library gives you more to choose from and experience when it comes to online multiplayer.

[DK]

Moreso, I disagree with Iceglow and DK because I have to question what kinds of game experiences you're having on XBL once you get into matches.

fantastic ones thanks, I have had many hours of entertainment trolling people with Psy (usually Steve) on Halo 3, great times exploding aliens with chainsaws and fighting for my life in the corner of a map on GoW in Horde mode, one of the best gaming experiences in my life playing through the entire of SR2 with Psy tearing up a full on sandbox game world as, among others, B.A Baracus and Mad Murdoch, the Chuckle Brothers, Uncle Phil and Carlton etc, not to mention co-oping entire campaigns in other games such as ODST and GoW, having parachute wars on the excellent GTA IV episodic addons The Ballad of Gay Tony and The Lost and Damned among other things, gathering lots of innocent citizens around with our beautiful lute playing in Fable II only to spam god level lightning spells on them etc etc. And yes having universal party systems and the ability to have private chats open with just all of my friends in the same party vastly improves the multiplayer experience in its own right. I suppose you could say I have as much fun with my XBL gaming experiences as you do playing with yourself furiously trying to prove the PS3's superiority in every possible way over the 360 because you hate Bill Gates hair or some other inane reason. Which I am assuming is a lot because it is all you seem to do.

[Shattered Dreamer]

I agree with Bolivar on the wireless subject when I play AOE3 with my mates we use wireless & it runs the same as using a cable!

But I have to say I agree with Iceglow that the 360 is the better console for FPS gamers. I mean Xbox Live was built around the COD series & Halo & the controller has triggers on it for crying out loud.

I can't really comment on online gaming it honestly doesn't really interest me. I prefer to play games by myself or socially with people who are actually in the same room.

[Bolivar]

I suppose you could say I have as much fun with my XBL gaming experiences as you do playing with yourself furiously trying to prove the PS3's superiority in every possible way over the 360 because you hate Bill Gates hair or some other inane reason. Which I am assuming is a lot because it is all you seem to do.

...are you ok?

[Psychotic]

OOC:	On a one to ten scale, Bolivar, what would you rate Bill Gates' hair as?