Sony PlayStation 3 user reviews (60GB)

Pros Decent hardware, about level with the rest of the generation. Most likely huge 3rd party support. Good if you like sequels...

Cons No decent onlince service yet established by Sony. Sony have a reputatuion for wowing everyone with specs and pre rendered videos but not delivering.

Summary I would say this is a powerful peice of hardware. I personally am an XBox user, and will get the 360, but the PS3 does appear to be a good peice of hardware. I am fed up with fanboys on both sides, (XBox and Playstation fanboys) giving the "opposing console" 1. This brings down the averages of both consoles to deliver an unfair representation.

Pros Next-Gen CPU, Next-Gen GPU, Next-Gen Media, Next-Gen Memory, Next-Gen Everything

Cons It will take a small leap of faith on the part of everyday consumers, given its probable price-point

Summary Does anybody find it funny how MICROSOFT is showcasing their console's graphics on APPLE processors? Microsoft, which on any other day would tell you how inferior the Apple CPU is to their own, Intel-based bedmate, is going around the world unveiling their new Xbox on a black counter which, hidden within, houses essentially two Apple G5 computers.

I'm sorry - I needed to start with that.

Specifications and technological analyses are, at best, useless. At worst, they are an insult to anyone with even the slightest capacity for independent thought. It is never about the specs, or the numbers, or the "raw power". To me, personally, the PS2 is better than the Xbox. The Xbox has a better CPU - the Xbox has a better GPU - the Xbox probably even has a better fan. But, as an avid gamer and tech guru, all of that really doesn't matter.

What does matter, in my opinion, is that the next-generation wave of consoles truly do represent a new generation. It is easy for technological systems and devices to fall into a pattern of "rehash syndrome" - updating and upgrading existing products (yesterday's products) and pretending that they therefore represent new ideas (today's products). On the brink of the release of Xbox 360, PS3, and the Nintendo Revolution, the current-gen Xbox, PS2, and GameCube are all yesterday's products.

The battle between next-gen systems is not about the numbers (though, the PS3 does boast far better specs - for those of you who actually lend weight to this fact). To me, it is about which console will truly usher in a new generation. To me, the best console is not the one that makes yesterday's tech reusable today - the best console is the one that makes tomorrow's tech attainable today. The Xbox 360 will be nice - better graphics, better design, better interface - but in reality, it is little more than an upgrade to the current-gen Xbox. Improving graphics, performance, speed - such is the "rehash syndrome" technology trap that so many developers and system designers so easily fall into.

Consider, now, the PS3. First, we have Cell. There is a lot of technical jargon that could be thrown in here, but I'll spare you (and myself). The important thing about Cell is that it redefines decades-old "theory" about what a CPU should be. Everything - from the way it queues processes, to the way it handles memory, to the way it interacts with other key components, such as the GPU - all of it is revolutionary. Indeed, it is safe to assume that Cell will be the basis for a brand new line of chipsets that truly reinvent the CPU for every device, from PC's to video game consoles to even your coffee-maker. The efficiency and, dare I say, grace with which the Cell will operate will truly open up a plethora of new, previously unseen doors through which designers can explore. Xbox, on the otherhand, is simply using a more advanced modern-day processor (again, one chiefly modelled off competitor Apple's PowerPC line). A good way to assess the performance of these next-gen systems is to compare them to current top-of-the-line PCs. The X360 will, in truth, be using a processor that rivals the best in PC CPUs (all things being equal). The PS3, however, will be using a processor that is, at present, far more advanced and powerful than any available PC CPU. PS3 will introduce a truly next-gen CPU - X360 will "reintroduce" a current, albeit slightly upgraded CPU.

Next, let us look at graphic power. The PS3 GPU ("RSX") is, at present, twice as powerful as the most advanced currently available PC GPU. The X360 GPU (a remotely customized ATI project) is about as powerful as an upper-mid level PC GPU. Sony is taking an unprecedented step AHEAD of the PC world, introducing a GPU that, for the first time in console history, will actually force PC chip-makers to play catch-up. Microsoft is merely borrowing an existing GPU and adding a few sparks. Again, in my humble opinion, this demonstrates how Sony is thinking about tomorrow, whereas Microsoft is content with the technology available today.

Finally, we'll consider media. There has been a lot of heated debates over Sony's BD-ROM format (Blu-Ray Disks, one of two rival High-Definition, Next-Gen "DVD" medias under development). Many Microsoft fan-boys have gone on record saying that they would rather stick with the admittedly tried and true DVD format then venture a risk with a new, sure-to-be proprietary format. Again, I have to ask - in the battle of "NEXT-GEN" systems, which of these formats truly offers a 'NEXT-GEN" quality? The PS2 uses DVD. So does the current Xbox. In my opinion, a next-gen console that reuses a current-gen media format is, in truth, NOT a next-gen offering. Sony has made the decision to offer over and beyond what is available today - Microsoft would like to stick with what they've got. The BD format will usher in a new generation in media presentation - a Blu-Ray disk can truly be rendered in complete High-Definition, whereas DVDs often prove incapable. Sony is looking ahead to the real next generation, while Microsoft is still caught up in the nexus of today's current generation.

The downside? Cost. Blu-Ray will cost more than DVD. Two of the most powerful GPUs stacked together will cost more than just one, good GPU. A new, reinvented CPU will cost more than a reused, unoriginal CPU. But that's the nature of technology. You PAY for next-generation technology. You PAY for thinner, faster laptops. You PAID more for DVDs than you did for VHS. You PAY for handheld computers, smart-phones, and PDA-GPS hybrids. You PAY for new technology. The offset has always been that it is generally worth it. It is better to spend a little extra money to get better, newer products. You'll spend less on the X360, but all you are getting is an upgraded Xbox. You'll spend more on the PS3, but in that case, you're getting a revolutionary new product that will truly usher in a new generation of technology. And yes, you'll pay a lot for it - it really comes down to where you want to be. Do you want to stay in this generation, or do you want to venture where the "next-gen" consoles are supposed to bring us - the future.

In my opinion, X360 will be nice - but not next-gen. PS3 will be incredible - a system worthy of being coined a NEXT GENERATION console. And keep your heads up - it's only the beginning!

Pros amazing gaming power, HDMI outputs for high-end/future televisions

Cons too much first gen technology for ealy adopter's not to get stuck with a lemon. rigid, hard-to-develop-for CELL CPU, bandwidth bottlenecks in initial specs, slow drive

Summary One thing the PS3 camp has always held over the X360 is the brand new Blu-Ray drive. Since it seems new and cool, and most people just hate Microsoft by default, this has given rise to rhetoric like "the XBOX 1.5 (har har har)" and "uses the aging DVD format."

Even though the original XBOX DVD drives were 4x to 6x I was pretty disappointed when I found out that the X360 was going to have a 12x DVD-ROM drive instead of a 16x (can you even FIND a 12x drive for sale anymore?) until I found out how slow the PS3 Blu-Ray drive was going to be. In an interview with IGN a Sony spokesperson said that there was only an outside chance of the PS3 drive being 2x, and that Blu-Ray 1x = 4.5MB/s. Even at 2x (9MB/s,) it's still almost 7MB/s slower than X360's 12x DVD drive, and over 12MB/s slower than it could have been with a regular old 16x DVD drive.

Perhaps it's time to stop adding Blu-Ray to the list of PS3's credits, and time to start asking why you're being forced to swallow a new Sony-patented format with your PS3. It’s hard to agree with the point of view that Microsoft is being irresponsible by rushing the X360 to market when Sony seems to be doing the exact same thing with their console… the fact that X360 is hitting the scene first seems incidental. One would hope that Sony would add a faster Blu-Ray as soon as it's available and/or economically feasible, but what of the early adopters? Microsoft even said they might put a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD drive (if Toshiba’s format takes off) in later versions of the X360. This is probably because they want it to be the ultimate media center and would want to include high-def video playback if the public began demanding it, but in the interest of maintaining compatibility with older X360’s, it’s not likely that games would ever come on these next gen disc types.

I know how everyone likes to debate which system's hardware is better, but let's face it, both systems are about the same spec-wise. It's almost as if MS got wind of the CELL processor's specs and asked themselves, now how many G5 processors do we need to keep up with this? The CELL processor hype doesn’t exactly reek of “emotion engine,” but even hardcore PS3 supporters must have learned to take any Sony announcements with a grain of salt. I’m not sure anyone really believed that the PS3 was going to come with a 160GB laptop-style hard drive like the original spec said.

Microsoft seems to be sabotaging itself (inevitably, I suppose) by releasing these mediocre X360 launch-title game play videos while Sony is pumping out their brainwashing pre-rendered CG videos. It's a shame Microsoft felt that it had to be first-out-of-the-gates with this one, launching with what are (for the most part, anyway,) souped-up versions of games which could have been on the first XBOX. It's making it really easy for the casual consumer to conclude what they already want to believe... that PS3 will be better.

One thing the Sony camp is right about, it all comes down to exclusive titles. Personally I think there will be fewer exclusive titles in this generation because of the similarity of the hardware/performance and XBOX's continued growth in the market. Still, recognizing the fact that there will be great exclusives on both sides, let's all try not bash the other guys too badly just because you love devil may cry or because you hate halo. Neither system should be voted a 1(or below 5, really)... such a baseless partisan bias should really be reserved for presidential elections.

Since I'm not especially attached to any of Sony's current exclusive franchises, I believe I'll be getting an XBOX 360. I like the fact that it comes from an American company (that's something I think people forget when they're having their little "M$" hate fests) and that it acts as a wireless windows media center extender. If Final Fantasy XIII looks really impressive, I might be forced to get a $ony P$3, too.

Pros Blu-Ray, Sleek Design, Nice Graphics

Cons Resolution Problems, Bulky, Fingerprint Magnet, Pricey

Summary Let me start off by saying if you bought this system just so you can have a next generation system with Blu-ray technology and price isn’t a factor then you won't be disappointed. However, if you bought this system expecting it to own the 360 and give you a better gaming experience…..you will probably be disappointed.

First off, I think I should comment on something that everyone should be aware of before they buy this system. The PS3 has major issues with resolutions on older HDTV’s when playing PS3 games developed in 720p. What I mean by old is, that if you have NOT bought your HDTV recently and your TV sports only 480i, 480p and 1080i inputs, your going to have issues with the PS3. What issues? You will be stuck gaming in 480p. Yes, I said 480p and only 480p. For all 720p games, the PS3 doesn’t appear to have internal scaling to convert the signal to 1080i resolution. Meaning…that unless your TV supports native 720P, the PS3 will boot up in 480p mode. Well, isn’t the PS3 supposed to be a 1080p gaming machine? Yes, but considering that less then 1% of all HDTV’s sitting in living rooms are not full 1080p, you would think that Sony would want to accommodate the most common resolutions supported by current owners. So unless you’re in the market to replace your current HDTV…. be warned. Wasn’t gaming in high definition one of Sony’s marketing points???

So assuming you can get past that issue, what about the games? Well the games are really next generation. No doubt from the time you pop in a game you can tell these games are next generation. If you are one of those people hoping that the PS3 would own the 360 in the graphics department…well…again you might be disappointed. The graphics are very good no doubt. However, in reality you really can’t tell the difference between the games that exist on both systems. In fact, IMO, a couple of the multiplatform games look better on the 360. This could be though because some of those games could be ports and I am not sure. Even if you think that generation 2 titles will be where the PS3 sports it stuff, don’t expect any huge difference between systems. You won’t be able to tell the difference IMO. I guess I should have expected that knowing what developers have already been saying that for some time.

In terms of hardware, the PS3 is sleek in design. We all have that familiar PS controller that we have all have come to love. The glossy finish on the PS3 looks cool. However, the thing is a fingerprint magnet. My guess is that it will also be a dust magnet in about a week. The other thing is that the pure size of the machine seems bulky. It just seems oversized like the original XBOX did with many gamers. One of the coolest things about the PS3 is the interface buttons and the drive bay. They by far are the sweetest of any console to date. They scream next generation to me. Overall, I would say Sony did a good job with design.

What about online? Considering this was Sony’s first attempt at building an online community you can't expect it to be XBOX live. It’s nowhere near as good as the XBOX live community. However, give Sony some time and they will make it better and deeper.

Bottom line what do I think? For me, I factor in gaming, price, and technology. Gaming – The performance in the long run will probably be a wash with a slight advantage to the 360 right now. Price - The system is overpriced for most gamers and from a value standpoint doesn’t really stack up if you mainly want the PS3 for gaming. If you want a next generation gaming, a Blu-ray player for cheap and don’t mind the extra $200 then go for it. Then again, you can pick up the 360 HD-DVD drive for $199 or just enjoy next generation gaming. It's your choice. Last but not least, I just can't get over the resolution problems with the PS3. With the 360 fully capable of 1080p and having no issues with any HDTV’s on the market, it’s a huge mistake on Sony’s part. I still think Sony is a major contender this generation. However, if the PS3 does become successful in this generation, I think it has more to do with the company’s past reputation then it does with the actual performance of the PS3.

So do I recommend it? Well yes and no. If you just want a next generation system and can deal with the PS3's resolution issue and some design flaws......yes. If you're wishing for a better system then the 360...then no. I just give a slight edge to the 360 in terms of overall performance and price difference at this point.