PS3 is the More Affordable Console

This ends Gaming Target's week long discussion of the successes and failures of Xbox 360 and PS3 as we see them in 2009. We've gotten a lot of responses; a lot of sites calling us biased against PS3 in the beginning of the week because we started with the success of Xbox 360 and the failures of PS3. The latter half of the week is proving to inspire the opposite reactions. I hope that our analysis, now that it can be seen in full, will show that Gaming Target has been fair, but I also hope this continues to spark the debate. This console generation is far from over.

Bernie Stolar, the former Sega of America COO, once promised that the Dreamcast would include a 56K modem "out of the box." Without it, would anyone have bought it separately just to try online gaming on the Dreamcast?

[Saint Sony]

I guess 360 feels cheaper because you don't have to buy everything at once if you don't like or need all of the given options.

[Bubble Buddy]

Most of the gaming population aren't hardcore gamers. A lot of my friends who bought a console didn't know that Wi-Fi isn't it 360 or that they don't know how to setup Wi-Fi at all. Some were angered that they had to pay for online because they didn't know XBL wasn't free. Microsoft is sly but for me, I'd rather pay for all at once since I'll probably be using all the features :P

[thats_just_prime]

WOW some failed math class with a big time F if they know that 199 is less then 399.

As for all the crap the sony fanboy like to try to add on to make it look like the ps3 is cheaper it just that crap. I got a 360 and the only thing I ever got for it was a recharger that cost me a whole extra 12 dollars. Thats less the the hd cable I had to buy to play my ps3.

[iiraymoii]

MONOPRICE 3-6.00 dollar HDMI would like to have a word with you.

[Agent VX]

Oh, here we go again... The 17th zillion article on how the PS3 is soooooo much cheaper than the 360.

Yawnnnn.....

[Jinxstar]

@ Thats just prime

So you don't pay for XBL then? With no other added features at all like a hard drive, WiFi or anything if the 360 lasts you 4 years and all you have is XBL you equal the cost of a PS3. Anything extra is above the price...

Edit: I swear after I wrote my blog here about a million of these articles started poping up... Copy cats =P

[Silellak]

As I said in a post earlier in the thread, some people would rather pay a premium now, others would rather pay a bit more over time but pay less upfront.

There's nothing inherently right or wrong about either approach, no matter what 360 and PS3 fanboys may want everyone to think. It's just a matter of how people want to manage their finances.

For me, the $4.16 a month for XBL is a drop in the bucket. And - as I've explained in previous posts - I believe that money goes towards more than just the ability to play online. It goes towards funding the underlying infrastructure of XBL that allows every game - from big-budget titles to intern-created XBLA titles to even the XNA community games - to have some online gaming component. Viewed in that way, I am more than happy to shell out a small premium.

Others may not be. And that's fine. There is nothing black and white about this discussion - it's all subjective to the gamer in question.

[Sheddi]

You contributed this article, you should know?
I see where u stand.

[JasonXE]

then the wii probably cost the most out of the three? I hate how people spin stuff.

[Jinxstar]

@1.6

You been here a while now man and you know how it goes. I had a 360 and sold it cause all the games are on PC or coming to PC. I used the money to upgrade my PC and now I am happy playing for free online and buying all the games cheaper off steam. That right there is just being smart with money...

If I were say a mayor or something I would invest in quality built roads as opposed to paying people yearly to fix them because they were built poorly to begin with...

The principle goes in so far as that you get what you pay for.

Edit: Seriously saying something like "4.50$ a month is a drop in the bucket" That sounds like a smokers logic"5.00$ a day is nothing" Well over time it could buy a house... and the cost of XBL per year is close enough to the price of a full game that it's not worth it to me...

[AAACE5]

All I know is my 360 just died on me last night! Good thing it was still under factory warranty.

R-rod in not finished yet! I bought this one in may of 2008 I think, and it gave out at about 6 pm last night. Hopefully they give me a new one with the new chipset. Now I gotta wait a month.

I think i'll check out Circuit city and see if I can get a Ps3 for cheap. That way, i'll have something to play now, and i'll have both when I get my repair back.

[Anon1974]

But I just thought I'd share. Personally, I'm over $900 now into my Xbox. $450 for the console at launch, $100 for the Wi-Fi when I bought a new house and needed for my setup, 2 years of XBL at $8.99 a month. Microsoft didn't exactly advertise the $50 a month fee at the beginning. When my free months were up it defaulted to monthly and I didn't know it was cheaper until someone on these forums mentioned $50. I was like, no...wait..that's not right. Extra controller and charge and play kit. Extra re-chargeable battery kits (I didn't play my 360 for a few months and when I came back not a damn one of them would hold a charge).

Finally $75 for the extended warranty from Microsoft I got after my second RROD. Saved me from a disk gouging console they sent me as a replacement then refused to take back because "Disk scratching isn't covered under the warranty."

So yeah, if you don't need a harddrive, don't download anything, don't play with others and don't need extra controllers, don't need wi-fi, have a ready stockpile of batteries, don't intend to play online, don't want to use any of the video download services...The 360 is priced great at $199!

[Shadow Flare]

If xbox guys or anyone else finds the ps3 expensive, then use a page out of your own book. Apparently anyone who can't afford xbox live is a cheap loser because its only like $4 a month. With that logic, you only need to pay $33 a month to purchase a ps3. And what's more, you won't have to buy any add-on's with ps3 unlike the 360; you'll have bluray as standerd unlike the 360; and it won't break on you, unlike the 360. Are YOU a cheap loser?

[IdleLeeSiuLung]

It is ridicoulus to make all these console X is cheaper than console y because it is all relative to your needs.

Let's say I just wanted to play x game and I don't care to play online, then perhaps a PS2 or an Xbox 360 is the better choice. If I need wifi or if there are games on the console I want to play that isn't on the other then perhaps a Wii or PS3 might be a better choice. I really think the Xbox Arcade really competes with the PS2 and Wii, not the PS3, but gives you an upgrade path. In that respect it is a great value.

You can argue one way or the other, but consumers are fairly intelligent and will pick a console that fits their needs. Also in the US, most retailers have 30-day return policy. Unhappy? Take it back. So what is up with all the complaints, because the consumers aren't since 360's are selling.

@darkride66:
It seems to me like you didn't put much thought into your purchase as evident in the fact that you bought the rechargeable battery packs from MS and paid $8.99 a month for 2 years before even noticing! The 360 controllers (like the Wii controller) have the benefit of using regular batteries in which you can get regular rechargeable batteries for it. When the batteries goes bad, you don't have to take the controller apart to replace it and you can just pop in new charged batteries in the middle of a game. No need to charge with a long cord.

[heroicjanitor]

The arcade doesn't have a hdmi cable included either.

[Oner]

The honest and fairest comparison to use for BOTH sides is

$300 360 60gb model + 1 year of LIVE! $50 + 1 controller $50 + 2 play & charge kits $40 = $440
vs
$400 PS3 80gb model + 1 controller $50 + HDMI cable $5 = $455

That is the LEAST amount you will spend for the AVERAGE gamer up to the HARDCORE, and maybe even including the CASUAL one as well as too. I added charge & play kits because if you factor in throw away non rechargeable batteries (which IS needed) it will cost EVEN more money in the long run. So this is a totally fair comparison. No WiFi added, No HD-DVD, No additional extras etc. to "pad" one side or the other. BUT let it be known that they do have to be noted as possibly costing CERTAIN users extra money (well not HD-DVD but you get the point).

I personally would add the the Live Vision Camera $40 & PSEye $40 (because it IS a "wash" being equally priced) and the $5 HDMI cable for the 360 Pro Model since it doesn't come with one (only the Elite does) BUT since it does come with HD component cables I feel that would be unfair to add a price when it can "out of the box" do HD whereas the PS3 does not. PLUS I don't want people complaining about these items (as well for some reason) because I am trying to keep it FAIR for BOTH sides unlike past comparisons, this article included.

So "out the door" the 360 is $15 cheaper I will agree...but after the 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc. year, it is not at all.

[Oner]

@darkride66 ~ Wow! I can truly understand the sentiment.

@IdleLeeSiuLung ~

"It seems to me like you didn't put much thought into your purchase as evident in the fact that you bought the rechargeable battery packs from MS and paid $8.99 a month for 2 years before even noticing! The 360 controllers (like the Wii controller) have the benefit of using regular batteries in which you can get regular rechargeable batteries for it. When the batteries goes bad, you don't have to take the controller apart to replace it and you can just pop in new charged batteries in the middle of a game. No need to charge with a long cord."

You say all this yet fail to realize & never once even factor in having to BUY these rechargeable batteries OR the charger itself. They are still an ADDITIONAL COST of which adds to the bottom line of the 360! No matter which way you look at it period!...although you did fail to mention that for some reason as to make it "seem" cheaper which is EXTREMELY odd & misinformed I might add.

[ButterToast]

@1.13

Consumers for the most part are stupid. they look at what is going to cost them the least now and not what it is going to cost them in the long run. Now you and I might be informed consumers when it comes to deciding which console will best fit our needs, but most aren't.

[IdleLeeSiuLung]

You are right that it is an additional cost, but call it future proofing if you would (the same argument PS3 fanboys use). Instead of having to buy a new controller when your battery goes bad or having to do a complicated electronic surgery process to replace battery as in the dual-shock, you can simply replace the battery at will. Most people will probably buy a new controller due to the difficulty of replacement as well as finding the battery. Now what cost you more?

I never once mentioned that it is cheaper. I was simply saying that comparison like this is invalid because people's needs are different. With MS you pay for it over time, but more and Sony you pay more upfront, but less over time depending on your needs.

[The Lazy One]

that is, what we in the world of business, call the retard tax.

Here's the plain and simple.

Cost to play 1 game on the 360 (not including bundles): $259

Cost to play 1 game on the PS3 (not including bundles): $459

[uxo22]

This article made a lot of good points about the PS3. However the title is all wrong. "More affordable" means less expensive.

Perhaps it should be titled "PS3 is the Better Valued Console."

Either way, we've heard it all before. But it's not the gamers on N4G that you need to convince.

[Mini Mario]

The only gripe i have with the ps3 is all the installing and updating. And with alot of casual gamers that dont know alot they wouldnt even know why its doing it...its not the "put disc in and play" i guess like sonys previous machines.

[GarandShooter]

'having to do a complicated electronic surgery process to replace battery as in the dual-shock'

This is either a very weak attempt at spin, or a telling self-revelation about your manual dexterity and prowess with a screwdriver.

[pav2323]

usual Xbox 360 owner replies. "We don't need all of those features". Although, if they had the features and PS3 did not, it would be used as ammo, just like the 'feature ammo' they use now. Such as, "we have cross game invites", "Netflix", etc... I am not a Xbox hater, just a PS3 supporter. In fact, my son is playing the Skate 2 demo as I type on the 360. He enjoys the 360 more than I, and I enjoy the PS3 more than him.

[Silellak]

It's not just a "usual reply" - for many people, it's true.

Some people will want everything the PS3 does, and for them, the PS3 is the best choice price-wise.

Other people only want to play single player games or local multiplayer with friends, and may not care about Blu-Ray right now. For them, all they really need is what the basic 360 offers.

I don't think either approach is right or wrong. I do think Microsoft overcharges for a lot of their accessories, no question. I imagine they do so so that the non-Arcade SKUs seem like a better deal.

I still say not having a hard drive standard was a huge mistake for them. I know why they did it, but I still disagree, if only because it limits developers too much. The lack of built-in Wi Fi in the 360 is the other thing that always made no sense to me. I mean, come on MS, even Nintendo got their right, and their online system for the Wii is a joke. Actually - it's not even a joke, because it's too depressing to be funny.

@Below:

You basically said a lot of what I said, but shorter ;)

I guess it comes down to: Are you willing to pay a premium in advance, or pay a bit more if you decide you want those features later? No matter what the fanboys on this site may try to convince you, there's no "correct choice" there. In some ways, paying everything upfront is good. In others, it's nice to not have to spend a HUGE chunk of money up front, and instead spread it out and just spend when you decide you want/need a certain feature.

[ultimolu]

Or they'll say that potential owners wouldn't need that stuff. All they want to do is play games. But I guarantee that sooner or later they may want that stuff.

[El Padre]

I'm buying a PS3 when Killzone 2 lands (waiting for the reviews) and I would easily take a lower price over built-in Wi-Fi. A cable is cheap, reliable and my router is on the same floor as my consoles. There's a ton of cables behind my TV set - one more won't hurt.

[Sibs]

Well for me I would have had to bought a wifi adapter, and that was one of the major points for me not going through the hassle of getting ripped off by microsoft to buy it and attach it myself, so I got a ps3

For some reason I have a phone jack right near my tv, but no ethernet cable...

[Shadow Flare]

...the words of an idiot.

Microsoft started this generation with a phrase they LOVED to use, "It's all about choice".

"Mr. Moore, why bring out a HD-DVD add-on?"
-"Well it's about giving our consumers the choice..."

"Mr. Moore, why are there 3 SKU's for the 360?"
-"It gives consumers the choice"

"Why do some consumers have to buy add-ons for their 360 models?"
-"Because it gives consumers the choice if they want to buy it"

"Why aren't you making a bluray add-on for 360?"
-"Consumer demand isn't there"

FAIL

[Trollimite]

when ps3 owners call websites on there BS! they had no plans of doing a second part. but when they saw all the negative replies they made one. good job ps3 owners.

[KingJFS]

That's ridiculous. The announcement for the second part of the series (pro-PS3/anti-Xbox360) was included at the top of anti-PS3/pro-Xbox 360 articles of the first part.

[Drealmcc0y]

If thats true, then why did it get 2-1 by 360 in december

[dukadork2]

you mean you can't run a simple addition for yourself?
you mean you'd jump off a cliff to follow the herd?

xbot: follower, conformist idiot, fashion victim, easy marketing pray
M$ marketing team knew who they were dealing with

[Voiceofreason]

Ps3 isnt cheaper.. It burns hundreds of dollars of electricity a year. More so than any other console. The 50.00 cost of Live is more than made up for by the savings on your electric bill. There ar more examples of why it costs more but it is pointless. Anyone with an IQ over 50 can see it isnt cheaper, The only people foolish enough to believe this already bought a PS3 so it will not change anything.

[iiraymoii]

wow...lol 360 is balls deep in you aint it lol.

[Chug]

Digging hard for reasons to justify your purchase, eh?
You're seriously talking about electricity bills?? Wow, just wow.
So either you're desperate to debunk this article or I guess my IQ level is less than 50...

[omodis420]

@ Voiceofreason

"Boo this man"

[Silellak]

You might want to consider moving your posts to the Open Zone, if you're going to insult every PS3 owner in existence.

It doesn't help that your post is a load of crap with no basis in reality. Look, there are definitely reasons to choose a 360 over a PS3. But yours? Not even close to one of them.

[P4KY B]

I don't know if what you said about using extra power is correct or not.
But if it is correct then you do have a very valid point and vica versa.

[jro211]

You went there (electricity)? This argument carries about as much weight as an ant could carry. Who gives a #^@# about electricity. The Xbox isn't too far behind if I may add. What makes it worse is that it consumes less electricity and still craps out like the POS it is. Let's add the cost and inconvenience of replacement. Add the cost of those who had to replace their RRoD Xbox prior to the extended warranty and those who have after the warranty was extended. Anyone with an IQ above 50 (I doubt this includes you)and an un-bias opinion can see the value in the Playstation and its reliability. Oh, I own both systems and I prefer my PS3 over my Xbox. It's sad that I did have to buy a battery charger, and skip out on Wi-Fi because I didn't want to make such a stupid purchase for the price. Before you start to insult people, try growing a brain first.

[Sarcasm]

oh my god... now it's

bu bu bu bu bu teh electric bill!

[lordgodalming]

Okay okay. The PS3 does use a butt-ton of electricity. However, that's why God created power strips you can switch off and cords you can simply unplug. Good grief, the only appliance in my whole house that I always leave plugged in is my refrigerator. No food will spoil if you unplug the PS3 when you're not playing it. Same's true for the 360 or Wii as well. Next argument, please.

@thewhoopimen below: I need to quit being so surprised when someone on here actually posts a relevant link. Bubs for you.

[thegood33]

Well, let's keep it simple. No one cares about a wireless headset. Many people don't care about a wireless connection. The 360 controller is so overly superior to the PS3 controller in every way imaginable. Xbox live is superior to ps3's home in every way.

And the 360's game library absolutely smokes the ps3.
going once.
going twice.
sold.

[Voiceofreason]

Hey kids, I dont own nor will I ever own a MS console. I however am I real gamer so I read the news. Maybe you missed it or just will not admit it but a company released results a few months back showing PS3 ate up a lot more electricity than the 360 or Wii.
BTW saying anyone with an IQ over 50 can see the PS3 isnt cheaper is not insulting the entire PS3 fanbase.. You are under the false assumption that EVERY PS3 owner is the same. No not all are dumb enough to believe its cheaper, regardless of how much value they know it has. Is it cheaper? Of course not that does not mean it isnt worth the price. Many people will admit PS3 is worth the money. Few would actually be foolish enough to try to say it was cheaper. Maybe you should stick to the open zone since you take the honest truth as some negative..

[lordgodalming]

Tell you what: the 360 has a hell of a good controller. I like the spring in the analog sticks and the general shape of it. Dislike the hard buttons, but that's my personal preference. The Dualshock line of controllers (of which the Dualshock 3 is, to me, the best yet) is also great. I've been playing on them for close to ten years now and have yet to develop arthritis.

Games are an even bag. I'd love a 360 for Gears, Viva Pinata, NGII, and one or two of the exclusive JRPGs. But, again, I made my choice (can't afford both consoles), and I've had a great time with the exclusives and multiplats on PS3 as well. I won't list them here for the sake of space.

The PSN is fantastic. I honestly don't understand how people crap on it anymore. In my opinion, Home is lame and I never use it, but I'm also not paying to use it.

All that to say, when I said "Next argument" in my last post, I wasn't saying the 360 bites it hard, I was saying that the PS3 doesn't. Your arguments above were defensive and more than a little weak. This article says the PS3 is a great value, and for me, a person who saved up for 10 months to buy one, it IS a great value. Just like your 360 is for you. Game on.

[GarandShooter]

The PS3 is heavier too, so it costs more in fuel to transport it home from the store in my car. CURSE YOU SONY!

[thewhoopimen]

well to be fair, it does seem that the longer you own an xbox360, the more it comes to cost. Take the xbl subscription. If you bought a launch console, you would be about $150-200 additional dollars into it at this point. At $399 back then, owners would have paid up to $599 by now to play. Falcon owners would have paid $499 for their console by now, etc. So really, you aren't saving anything, just delaying the inevitable which is... the vast majority of 360 owners will have paid more for their xbox360 than for a ps3 at the end of this console generation.

@voiceofreason Uh No... anyone with an IQ over 50 would have gone online and did their research before spouting the uneducated drivel you just presented to everyone.
http://www.hardcoreware.net...

The differences between power consumption of the 360 and ps3 are negligible (10-30 watts/hour)... both consume less power than a mid to high end PC.

[Sarcasm]

A launch 360 owner's cost

360 Console - $399
4 years of XBL - $200
Wifi Add-on - $100
HD-DVD (some of them) - $200

So a launch 360 owner has paid $699 to $899... A launch PS3 owner? $599 for the console, and probably $10-50 for an HDMI cable. Nothing needed to add.

So you 360 fans can try to defend your pricing all you want. MS is straight BS on their milking tactics. And you guys just take it up the rear end happily.

[The Lazy One]

and it cost me:

$399 : console
$40 : controller

This was the first year I was going to have to pay for a $40 13 month XBL gold card, but then walmart put them on sale for $27, so I'm good on those for the next two years.

so that's $469

PS3 at launch with one controller was $639

Not everybody is a stupid consumer. In fact, you'd be surprised at how resourceful people can be when they want to be.

[omodis420]

GOOD READ!

I don't care what side you are on. This author laid out a very good solid list of points to back up his assertion that PS3 is cheaper. I love the end though:

"people are going to purchase the system that gives them the most bang for their buck. PlayStation 3 is that system, as supported by the reasons above, and I didn’t even have to drag the exhausted arguments “Blu-Ray” or “eventual price cut” into the list of reasons."

[Silellak]

I disagree with that quote, only in-so-much is that I'm not sure the casual audience - the kind who buys the $199 360 for their kids for Christmas - is going to jump online to compare features. They're just going to see the initial lower price tag.

[ReBurn]

How much does it cost to open each one up and start playing games right away?

There's your determining factor of what's cheaper.

What's included in the box that a gamer wants?

There's your determining factor of which is the better value.

The Xbox 360 is cheaper. The PS3 is the better value. Why is this so difficult?

[Godmars290]

"How much out the box" is a fuzzy subject. especially if you plan on taking it online.

[ReBurn]

It's still cheaper, though.

If you plan on going online then it isn't as good of a value as a Pro 360 with the HDD. Then you also get the HD cable and you can get online right away with a wired connection. If you want wireless then it's a toss-up, right? With the PS3 edging because there's no cost to play online.

My whole point is that it's all subjective.

[ultimolu]

Very good article. The guy backed up his arguments with factual evidence. In my opinion, I also believe the PS3 is the better value for money.

[aspergersyndrome]

The PS3 is the cheapest console!

I mean, who the hell can possibly deny that £300 is less than £130, £170 and £230?

Oh, that's right. Ultimolu and company.

[ultimolu]

I said in MY opinion.
If you want a 360, buy that. If you want a PS3, buy that.
I spent my money wisely with the PS3 and I'm sticking with it because it was MY choice.

[Hercules]

is just too many 360 fanboy..electricity bills? i mean, really? anywho i just wanted to state that i made this comparison a while a-go..called it the out-of-the-box comparison...but i did it whent he 360 was still $349..well who cares now..we are all gamers...i wish they would combine the onlinee servers so we could all play each other

[firetaw]

we should all be able to play 360 PC and PS3 all together or at least PC and PS3 since it wouldnt be fair for 360 owners to pay for online gaming when the other 2 dont have too.

[RedVsBlue]

Last place says hi lol

[Sibs]

PS3 says hi back

[Sarcasm]

If last place contains Killzone 2, God of War 3, and Gran Turismo 5. I won't say Hi PS3, you had me at Killzone 2.

[Death]

The PS3 for $399 includes Blu-Ray, Wi-fi, and a HDD. It doesn't include the high def cable needed to actually hook the system up.

The $299 Xbox 360 Pro has a HDD, but not built in wi-fi. $99 is steep for an official adapter so if you must use the official accessory it's kinda pricey. Aftermarket accessories and options are available. There are aftermarket adapters such as the Linksys wireless N adapter. You need to buy this for either console if you want to take advantage of the faster standard which is much better for multimedia streaming. You can also use ICS if you don't want to buy anything and have access to a laptop or your PC is near by. My favorite option for the fastest and best performance is an ethernet cable.

Blu-Ray is a win for the PS3 since HD-DVD is dead. If you are hooked up to a 1080p HDTV and upscaling your movie collection isn't enough, Blu-Ray looks absolutely gorgeous. I personally have a very nice Blu-Ray movie collection. If you don't have an HDTV then it's not really a benefit for movies and the benefit for games to this point isn't exactly over-whelming.

Batteries. A rechargeable battery is included with the Dualshock. You also get a short USB cable to charge it. The battery is not replaceable or atleast Sony doesn't offer a replaceable battery at retail. Not to mention if you own a launch console or bought within the first year you don't have a Dualshock since you own a Sixxaxis. Contrary to what many believe, Sony didn't ship free DS3's to existing owners. The Xbox 360 doesn't have any batteries in the box. A Play and Charge kit costs $20 and essentially makes your 360 controller have the same function as the PS3 controller but with a much longer cord. The best option is the Quick Charge Station which gives you a constantly charging option and a fresh battery when ever needed. For $30 you and a friend will never need to be on a leash with your console. Of all the methods this is the best and most convienent, but costs $30. It's is well worth it.

My point is there are options and needs for both systems. I can easily give a pro write up on either system based on customized and specific needs. In general though, neither box offers everything for everyone. As a gamer, the value should rest on the selection of games and at this point both systems have great game libraries to choose from.

-Death

[ukilnme]

Great unbiased comment. Bubble up.

[Hercules]

someone who knows what they are talking about..bubbles!!!

[Sarcasm]

I agree with most of the post, but I disagree when you say "neither box offers everything for everyone"

Because no matter which way anybody slices it, the PS3 out of the box is ready to go. The 360 fans like to throw at people is options. So playing at their game, you don't have to buy a quick charge kit. You don't have to buy a DS3. You don't HAVE to buy anything except a $6 HDMI cable to enjoy the console's main features. Blu-Ray, gaming, multimedia etc. is all there.

While I can agree that a 360 arcade is right out of the box ready for games. But it's 2009, people like to play online and it's damn near a necessity for today's console. So there goes $50 for XBL.

And some can just attach an ethernet cable to their 360's, but again. 2009 folks, Wifi is a big luxury that is almost a necessity. But for the sake of argument, sure we'll leave that out.

Now for the controllers, you can either buy regular batteries or buy a re-charge kit. That's a NECESSITY. There goes another $15-20 for rechargeables. Or what I did was just get a wired 360 controller for $50 so I don't have to deal with batteries.

And since everybody argues about HDMI cables for the PS3. If you want to use HDMI for the arcades, then you'll have to buy the $6 cable just like a PS3 owner.

My point? While I agree that both systems have different options and needs, my opinion is that the PS3 is ready right when you plug it in. While a 360 arcade or even a 360 pro owner will have to buy 2-3 separate accessories just to get the same experience as the PS3.

[3sq]

"It doesn't include the high def cable needed to actually hook the system up."

Dude, when xbox 360 was first released, it didn't even has built-in HDMI port. Lucky for those 360 1st version owner. Now where do they hook it up? your ass maybe?

[Death]

The differance between 1080i via component and 1080p via HDMI is frame rate. The visual quality is the same since both are 1080. An interlaced signal requires 2 passes to achieve while a progressive signal can do it in one. A game that runs at 60 fps in 1080p is exactly the same as a game that runs at 60 fps in 1080i. The differance being the 1080i 60 fps is achieved in more passes and is more of a burden on the processor. Not many games actually run at 1080p and if they do they are typically lower budget and less graphic intense.

Movies are completely different though, if you want to run at 1080p and at 120hz, you can only do that with HDMI since compnent has it's limitations. If you don't have a 1080p HDTV, then HDMI's only benefit is simplified installation.

-Death

[firetaw]

every tv comes with a RCA pluging so you don't even need to buy the HDMI if you don't have a HDTV or even if you do you can still send 480p to your hdtv. oh and the built in wifi comes in handy in apartment buildings when you want to leach off someones unprotected wireless. so even there that saves you from buying internet to hook up your ps3 on psn :P cmon give me some love here you know im right.

[Knightofelemia]

Ps3 does offer a great package and I love what I baugh, but they forgot to mention that you can upgrade the HDD at half the price. But I can also put backgrounds on my 360 for free to I have Kos-Mos as a back ground on my 360.

[bobdog626]

BluRay= Don't need it .Movies cost 29.99for 2hr XBL=50.00 for 1yr.Netflix for 1yr or 2BluRay movie's for 60.00 plus tax.Hdmi cable 29.99/Head Set 29.99/No backward compatilbility.Add it Up .Start at 399.99 and Go from there.

[RedVsBlue]

i would not bring up Backwards Compatibility with the 360 with PS3s currently out when it comes to the PS2

[00]

then why aren't the sales as high as the 360s

[Godmars290]

1) Sony's never been forgiven for their "let them eat cake" statement.

2) MS pushes a $200 version of their console that doesn't actually have all the bells and whistles they advertise.

[JasonPC360PS3Wii]

lol desperate

[ASSASSYN 36o]

All this time I thought the wii was the most affordable. Here we go with this wireless crap. Wireless is not the best connection for gaming. I use a D-link gamer lounge wired router and it has been bliss for my home connection. I tried my brothers' wireless connection for gaming and it sucked.

And this argument hasn't convinced hardly anyone third place isn't going to evaporate because of it. It's old and tired...and weak.

And my perspective is that of a consumer that hasn't been convinced. I have two 1080p HDTV's each 120hz 46, and 40 inch. I have everything required to enjoy the ps3. But my motivs for owning one isn't blu-ray it's games and online play. And neither of those elements have peaked my intrests on the ps3. And don't dare assume I have not tried a ps3 both my older brothers own a ps3. And only one plays it primarely and he uses it for movies.

And I still could care less about blu-ray. And ofcourse most of you sony kids could care less about downloadable media it's a threat to your blu-ray argument. DL media is convient fast and saves needing to go out to get something from a store. I can hit up pay-per view, xbox-live, or netflix for my movie needs. And DVD looks damn good on a 1080p t.v. enough that I could care less about the minor upgrade blu-ray may offer.

[yz250]

you feel like i do. i don't mind dvd movies on my HD tv neither. i get the same movie that blu-ray buyers get, for a third of the cost. the higher price tag for blu-ray movies doesn't justify to me the quality difference over dvd. i like blu-ray, don't take me wrong, but screw 30 dollars a movie, when i can get the SAME movie for $10 on dvd. i am a lil biased anyways because i'm not a "movie buff", but i don't see spending extra money on something when i don't have too. i also agree, wireless for gaming still sucks, no matter how the ps3 fans spin it. peace xbl demented spirit

[ASSASSYN 36o]

Looks like you got it right to me.

[Fatmanp]

(1) Nobody is forcing you to go online
(2) Anybody that uses the wireless adapter is an idiot
(3) People pay for a games console not a Blu Ray player

[yz250]

AMEN. nuff said. any other quotes for me to use? good post. i would also like to add that ps3 is ironic in a way-sony brags about HD gaming, but yet they don't include the cables you need for HD gaming in the box....makes no f****n sense. don't say it's cost ps3 fanboys, because how much would it cost sony, REALLY? sure it wouldn't effect their cost of the machine one damn bit. it's just the point of the matter i am getting at. peace

[Godmars290]

But what are you going to do when all of your 360 owning friends are urging you to? How many 360 titles are there were half or more of the game is its online element?

[labwarrior]

Especially comparing to the PS3 that has double that price, offers same visuals and a far smaller game library

[yz250]

$300 and i got a full hd ready GAME console. i have rechargeable double a's so no need for a charge kit. i also would like to add, that i can find great games for CHEAP for that $300 console. $400 ps3, still need hd cables, and a headset. also you can't find as many "cheap" games for ps3.(some were released for 360 and never made for ps3) so if i have 500 bones to spend on a next-gen console, the choice is simple, 360. it has all you NEED in the box for gaming, and with the left over money i can buy MORE games for it.(or a LIVE subscription and quite a few games) my arguement is valid, because this is how GAMERS think. i don't care about movies, screw wifi, and all that. i buy a GAME console to play games- SIMPLE. ps3 is more expensive if you just want a console for GAMING.

[Pshann1]

I don't understand why people keep adding HDMI cables to the price of a PS3. When I bought my PS3 I already had a cable because I already had a HDTV so it didn't bother me that there was not one in my box. And if you buy a PS3 and don't have a HDTV why do you care if the PS3 comes with HDMI cable? You wont be able to use it anyway. And if you plan on getting a HDTV after you buy a PS3 that when you buy your HDMI cable because then you will need it for your new TV and PS3.

[dredgewalker]

Cant we stop the flaming and comparisons, isnt it already great that people have 3 consoles to choose from? Its freedom of choice whatever you choose. If you have the money get it all, if you just want gaming and non of that bluray get a 360, if you are a a person who wants a multimedia console get a PS3 and if you want something unique get a Wii. Its not even a hard choice. Im done with this console flaming and we all should just chill out, relax and have a good game. I used to participate in this flaming but lately its been getting silly and it isnt productive on both sides.

[Lord Xire]

Only matters what you'll be doing..

To even get half the value of a Ps3 you need an HDTV 1080p and an HDMI cord....

[wombatwolf]

I love how people are just saying "lol desperate" and then leaving it at that without elaborating with why they disagree.

[Boink]

but thanks for pointing out things that everyone already knows.

bottom line is when joe average goes into the store to buy a GAME console for his kids, the sticker price is what sells them.

you can argue about useless "value" and crap all you want to justify your decided console of choice, and great for you. But anyway you slice it, 199/299 for 360, 399$ for cheapest ps3 = more expensive to uniformed consumer.

ARTICLE = FAIL.

title should have been:
"PS3, more expensive at first, but maybe cheaper in the end if you need all these extras that come standard in the ps3, but any gamer already knows this, so why bother reading my article all over again cause i just state facts that everyone has known for 3 years now."

I know it's a long title, but accurate at least.

and P.s pls move half these stupid posts to the retarded fanboy section.

-thx
boink

[OGharryjoysticks]

I file this one under the "I'm too poor to buy cheap stuff." I can't afford to keep replacing a toaster or television. When I buy something I try to make sure I buy the best even if it takes me longer to be able to buy it, so I don't have to buy it again or in parts that add up to more than the one good purchase.

[AriesFury]

but they have a better, way better selection than PSN.

[JasonPC360PS3Wii]

Sony has to rely on it's own community to push sales because they can't seem to do it on thier own.

[Jinko]

STFU.

[karlostomy]

Lol Jason.

Looking at the reply to your comment above, I think you have hit the nail on the head!

[The Judderman]

Well if your typical Johnny and just wanna play gears at home without bothering with online then im afraid the xbox is still cheaper.
As a whole the Ps3 is the better deal though although mine has still cost me a bit more than £299 with HD expansion, Hd lead and headset.

[Firstkn1ghT]

This again? Sony fanboys are desperate.

[kakashi9]

are xbots so stupid that they cant see wat a rip off the xbox is?

[Figboy]

all i cared about when deciding which console to buy FIRST (because i was going to own them all anyway), was what features appealed to me PERSONALLY, so, as an educated consumer, i did a little thing called research, and finally narrowed down which console offered me the features i wanted/needed this generation.

1) i had been sold on HD content sense i saw a trailer for Over The Hedge for Blu Ray in a Circuit City many moons ago.

after doing some research, i decided that HD DVD, while an excellent format, didn't have the studio support to win the format war. i sided with Blu Ray. the PS3 had a built in Blu Ray player, so i'd be killing 2 birds with 1 stone: my love of gaming, and my love of movies in one box.

2) next i considered things like extra costs. i'm not a big online gamer, but if i find a game i enjoy, and it happens to be online, i will play it (like Warhawk and Resistance 2). i refuse to pay for online gaming, when i can play online gaming for FREE on my PC, PSP, and even PS2). i simply couldn't justify paying $50 a year for LIVE. $50. i'd be sacrificing one game a year, just to play online, when there are free alternatives, meaning that $50 can be spent on a GAME, instead of the "privilege" to pay online. the PS3 has a free, and QUALITY, online service. although at the beginning, it was rather weak. things have changed significantly, and the all the pertinent features to getting an online game going are there (invites, joining matches with friends, etc).

Wi Fi and Blu Ray were built in, meaning i didn't have to buy any extras. PSN was free, meaning free online gaming. my HDMI cable was $8.99 on New Egg, and after dropping $650 for my PS3, and $1500 for my 40" 720p Samsung, i figured dropping $8 on an HDMI cable wasn't going to send me into a mental breakdown.

3) next i considered software library, current and future. the 360 had Mass Effect, Bioshock, and Fable 2 that really got my interest up. i'm not a Halo fan, and i'm not a Gears of War fan. not saying those games suck, just that after playing them (and i got to play Gears 2 for a good two hours today, because i really like to give games a shot; still not a fan, to be honest, and i don't think it's very visually impressive - i was playing on my roommate's 46" 1080p Samsung, for a frame of reference). the Playstation software library appealed to me more. games like Ninja Gaiden Sigma, Heavenly Sword, Ratchet and Clank, Uncharted, and the prospect of future games like Sly PS3, Jak PS3, God of War 3, MGS4, etc etc, ultimately tipped the scale in the favor of the PS3.

so much so that i didn't care about the fact that, at the time i bought my PS3 (February, 2007), the PS3 was still $599, and the 360 was $399 (for the Premium, $450 for the Elite, and $299 for the "Core/Arcade").

my own personal value gauge dictated what i spent my money on.

ultimately, i ended up buying my roommate's 360 from him for $150, so i won all around in the end anyway!

it doesn't matter which console is "more affordable," because people will buy the console that suits them, regardless of price.

i think the PS3 will be $299 before this summer, but those that bought it when it was $599, $499, and $399 did so because they WANTED TO, because the consoles features appealed to them and not because Sony somehow duped them into spending that much.

i may think the average consumer isn't the brightest bulb out there, but i have to say it's not an easy task to fool them out of $600.

Sony's next target is to drop the price, while maintaining profitability (the PS2 and PSP help in this), and they will do so in the next few months, after their fiscal year ends in April this year.

i'm happy with both my PS3 and 360, i just wish MS would invest in more 1st party titles that push the 360's hardware, and drop Unreal Engine 3 like a bad habit. after playing Gears 2 today, i think it's safe to say that UE3 is showing its age. the 360 is capable of so much more, even with a lack of an HDD standard, and limited to DVD9 (7.5, really). i'm looking forward to Alan Wake really showcasing what the 360 can do, because it's looking fantastic. i hope it comes out this year.

[lelik]

the worst part about xbox is even if you get the elite you still have to buy the wireless adapter separately. $500. wtf?

[SprayandPreycom]

Fact the ps3 has no hdmi cable

fact a 10$ HDMI CABLE SUCKS

FACT 100$ HDMI CABLE rulz and you can see the differecne

i have an elite and it came with an hdmi cable a decent one at that but i upgraded with the top of the line one for 100$ and ya you can tell the difference its subtle but obvious so when ever someone tells you that the hdmi cable for ps3 is no big deal and that you can get one for 10 bucks just remember your getting a 10 hdmi cable that wont be anything near as vivid and clear as the 100$ cable or the mid range cable that comes with the elite...

wireless adapters are for people whos mom wont let them use her modem

[Firstkn1ghT]

So the ps3 is cheaper than the 360 and it is still getting its butt whooped. WOW

[lelik]

you think microsoft gives you a better hd cable? rofl you're a moron. they're all the same. do you pay extra for a good dvi or vga cable too? are you that dumb?