360, Wii, or PS3

[JoeXIII'007]

Just a curiosity. I got a good idea of who the wiinner wiill be when this poll gets plenty of replies, but I just want to be sure.

-Joe

[Koko Ed]

I want a PS3. I just don't want to pay $500 to get one.

[Melissa Nute]

Originally Posted by JoeXIII'007

Just a curiosity. I got a good idea of who the wiinner wiill be when this poll gets plenty of replies, but I just want to be sure.

-Joe

This would work better with an actually poll...

For me, the Wii though.

[JoeXIII'007]

Originally Posted by Meli W.

This would work better with an actually poll...

For me, the Wii though.

Poll's up. Why does CD make me get the poll up AFTER I get the thread up???

[Adam Shapiro]

Hardware-wise the PS3 has the other two dead in their tracks. The hardware that is in that machine is unbelievable. I'm waiting for someone to figure out how to compile Linux for cell processors! Then for $500 you could purchase a computer that would be more powerful and have better graphics/audio support than something you'd get for much more! And just look at the additional components it's got as well: USB 2.0, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, Gigabit Ethernet, 60GB HD, MemoryStick/Flash reader, Blu-Ray!!

I think the Wii has a really interesting control system, that will be especially cool in FPS, etc. I'm very interested to see how they manage to do the tactile feedback for the fencing-style game (I forgot the name), though that would be really fun to play if they could figure out a way to make the feedback somewhat realistic (without requiring such high magnetic/electric fields as to zap the Wii itself). Without feedback you'll just end up swinging without the character moving as they'll be hitting the opponent. I suppose it wouldn't be that bad, but it still wouldn't be real.

Unfortunately the XBox was rushed too much. Granted, it's a very powerful system as well; it also has a nice assortment of games with it. The PS3 just seems like you get a whole lot more for the money, despite it being almost a year later than the XBox. I feel like Microsoft just jumped the gun a bit too much, trying to get a head start on Sony, and ended up with an obviously inferior product and only a slight time advantage.

[Kristian Calhoun]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

I want a PS3. I just don't want to pay $500 to get one.

ah! but you see that the PS3 package that's going to cost $500 won't have any Memory Stick, SD or Compact Flash reading capability or Wi-Fi support, and will lack HDMI support. It also appears that the new controller might not have any rumble features.

Nintendo Wii for me all the way. See my posts in the E3 2006 thread

[Dylan]

PS3!
The PS2 already rocks, I can only imagine that PS3+NFSMW+HDTV=Greatest Racing EVER!!

(not that I can afford any of those )

[lukevanoort]

I must say the hardware on the PS3 is entirely out of this world. A few years ago (or less ago) one PS3 would've probably made the Top 500 Fastest Supercomputers in the world. 220 gigaflop/s is ungodly out of just one processer. (Really 7, but it's one chip anyway) A one year head start is nothing to sneer at either, the XboX 360 is a nice system, with some cool features. The wireless controllers are especially nice, but the power converter is enormous, and it seems to get quite warm during extended play. IMHO, it'll really come down to games, the systems are nice, some nicer, but the differences aren't enormous, like the GameCube and Dreamcast vesus the XboX and PS2.

[Adam Shapiro]

Originally Posted by lukevanoort

A one year head start is nothing to sneer at either, the XboX 360 is a nice system, with some cool features. The wireless controllers are especially nice, but the power converter is enormous, and it seems to get quite warm during extended play. IMHO, it'll really come down to games, the systems are nice, some nicer, but the differences aren't enormous, like the GameCube and Dreamcast vesus the XboX and PS2.

Correct me if I'm wrong but won't the PS3 have wireless controllers (I guess not all of them but I figure they would have some considering the Bluetooth)? The Wii will certainly have wireless control, that's the whole concept! I think what really makes the PS3 stand out in my mind is seeing some of the screenshots from E3. The graphics are really amazing. They're so lifelike, I can't get over it. Add to that the Blu-Ray storage capabilities and you're gonna get some really ridiculous games. I don't know if the XBox will be able to match what we're going to see with PS3, especially considering the huge selection of games for both Playstation and PS2 in the past.

[Joe Matt]

Originally Posted by lukevanoort

I must say the hardware on the PS3 is entirely out of this world. A few years ago (or less ago) one PS3 would've probably made the Top 500 Fastest Supercomputers in the world. 220 gigaflop/s is ungodly out of just one processer. (Really 7, but it's one chip anyway) A one year head start is nothing to sneer at either, the XboX 360 is a nice system, with some cool features. The wireless controllers are especially nice, but the power converter is enormous, and it seems to get quite warm during extended play. IMHO, it'll really come down to games, the systems are nice, some nicer, but the differences aren't enormous, like the GameCube and Dreamcast vesus the XboX and PS2.

So, you keep spitting this stuff out, any independent verification about gigaflop performance?

[Alex Cormier]

What are the expected dates of PS3 and Revolution appearances?
I am going to buy at least one of each to sell on ebay just like i did with the 360. easy money. possibly get one for myself after the bug rush for a drasticly lower price then online as i also did with my 360.

[lukevanoort]

Originally Posted by Joe Matt

So, you keep spitting this stuff out, any independent verification about gigaflop performance?

Not really possible since it is sort of hard to test it, since it really isn't in the market in a testable situation yet. It's also power can't really be used in full since it is sort of specialized. Regardless of whether or not it gets the 220 gflop/s speed, it'll be fast, and there are 7 cores, so you'll be able to run a lot of things in parallel.

[Kristian Calhoun]

Originally Posted by lukevanoort

I must say the hardware on the PS3 is entirely out of this world. A few years ago (or less ago) one PS3 would've probably made the Top 500 Fastest Supercomputers in the world. 220 gigaflop/s is ungodly out of just one processer. (Really 7, but it's one chip anyway) A one year head start is nothing to sneer at either, the XboX 360 is a nice system, with some cool features. The wireless controllers are especially nice, but the power converter is enormous, and it seems to get quite warm during extended play. IMHO, it'll really come down to games, the systems are nice, some nicer, but the differences aren't enormous, like the GameCube and Dreamcast vesus the XboX and PS2.

i dont know if you were trying to say that the gcn<ps2, but since we're on the topic of gigaflops, the gcn has 10.5 gflops and the ps2 only has 6.5

[lukevanoort]

Originally Posted by calhounian

i dont know if you were trying to say that the gcn<ps2, but since we're on the topic of gigaflops, the gcn has 10.5 gflops and the ps2 only has 6.5

But, the PS2 and XboX could play standard optical media, the PS2 could also play PS games. The GameCube couldn't. Anyway, the GameCube different.

[Cuog]

I doubt the 220 gigaflops on the point of price, i am unsure of what the new CPUs for computers run at but if you consider the price of a nice new dual core 64 AMD FX series being nearly 1000 dollars alone. also a multi core proccessor is not really faster, its benifit is that it can to multiple tasks at once, one thru each core(im talking ultimate basic steps here)

heres a link to a fancy new AMD: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819103608