Boro

iTrader: (1)

Why all the Blu-ray debate, the OP says BD is not a deciding factor.

phil_wrx

iTrader: (2)

fanboy

i have the xbox hd dvd played and hd dvd is really really good but microsoft backed the downloading of hd content over a player hence why toshiba struggled.

and most experts actually say the next big media medium wont be blu ray but HD download on demand just like apple tv and xbox market place

phil_wrx

iTrader: (2)

because ps3 owners have nothing else to get one over 360 owners

stonejedi

iTrader: (51)

no i am not a fanboy mate lol!!! if you read my earlier input on page one i have nothing but good things to say about the xbox 360 because i have both consoles(COULD NOT LIVE WITHOUT GOW!!!)but sony just seem to get things right with there game consoles i remember when i was waiting for the N64 to come out but instead decided to get the ps1 which no one did not know about WHAT A CONSOLE!!! so i can only expect good things to come from the ps3

stonejedi

iTrader: (51)

one more thing the only reason microsoft went for hd downloads because the big 3 film companys went with bluray and because sony already had 70%of the film industrys backing bluray microsoft could only buckle and except defeat because there hd dvd format DISC could not compete,even universal pictures that went hd dvd DISC exclusive left hd dvd under the pressure and went back to bluray that is why you can buy hd dvds for pennies because it is a dead format even toshiba stopped production making the hd dvd disc and the players NUFF SAID!!!.

phil_wrx

iTrader: (2)

lol did typing all that give u a hard on you seemed to get excited sayin DISC

stonejedi

iTrader: (51)

stonejedi

iTrader: (51)

im just passionate about the facts i dont mind having a open chat i find it quite useful picking things up that i did not know before but as i said i like the facts not b.s.

kbsub

This thread is nearly as funny as the other 50 odd PS3 vs 360 threads

You 360 boys .... The PS3 is still a very good Blu Ray player and about the best for the price ... Get over it FFS.

bob269

HD failed because the big corporates made the desicion to pull out not the consumer (HD was actually cheaper to produce (content was more versatile and player friendly) and they had 50+gig discs ready for production) , as of bluray it's dying on it's ****, as pointed out, downloads will take over once uk broadbands drop useage restrictions. Sony (and the bluray consortium) paid the movie industry off but forgot to actually market bluray so the non geek paying consumer is still pretty much in the dark as to what it is or why they'd want it.

P1Fanatic

What difference does it make who pulled out - like the customer ever has a say in these things...

As for blu-ray dying on its **** thats not what Ive read with Disney and Fox reporting already this year that up to 12% of sales were on blu-ray for their big releases. Thats not bad at all for such a new format although it does seem that DVD sales in general have been dropping since the global recession kicked in,.

I really do not see HD downloads/streaming happening any time soon and the logistics of it are immense esp when UK ISP's are clamping down on download amounts not dishing out more. Maybe when we catch up with the US getting Fibre into our homes things may change.

Simon

Geezer

Just because MS have a dream of HD downloading doesn't mean it will happen!

PS3 and Xbox360 are still minority devices compared to DVD players, and people are not gonna buy them en masse just to satisfy Bills dream.

Most consumers don't want the hassle of buying devices specifically for this purpose, or having to have a computer with enough oomph to play HD content or have the hassle of downloading and burning so they can watch on their DVD/Blu-Ray player. And asking people to watch on their PC monitors, well.......

Disc format is here to stay for a while, and that format is gonna be Blu-Ray. You only have to watch tv adverts to see that nearly all new films now say "On DVD and hi-def BluRay from [insert day here]" to see how much it is getting pushed.

As has been said on here before, the change th Blu-Ray is out of our hands and will happen.

Until BT finish their 21CN rollout, or cable gets decent penetration (which, lets be honst ain't gonna happen here) ISPs cannot even begin to think of upping their download limits, so streaming content is a long way off.

Geezer

stonejedi

iTrader: (51)

agree 100%

STi wanna Subaru

iTrader: (1)

I know plenty of people on Virgin downloading 8gb High def content all the time. I don't think it's as far away as you think. People already are used to the concept of a media hub with hard drive of some description under their tv's now. Sky+, Sky HD, Virgin +, 360, PS3. I also know most people aren't **** AV geeks so any arguements about sound or picture quuality untless seriously compromised are a non issue. As I see it I think BLuray will grow for the next 3 years then watch download content taking over. Video on demand is already growing in popularity.

P1Fanatic

There is a big difference between a small minority downloading limited HD content (are we talking ripped stuff or legit Virgin content btw?) and scaling that to a legitimate, reliable and viable media infrastructure available to all (le whereby Joe Bloggs thinks ah I want film xyz Ill download it then watch it. For one there is the delay of downloading, problems connecting to the server and many other issues. A dual layer blu-ray holds approx 50gb - admittedly the full capacity is not yet utilised but as with most things Im sure it will in time.

As for streaming that is a different kettle of fish. Thats more comparable to renting the content like going to Blockbuster and renting it. You dont get to keep the film and watch it as and when youd like.

Simon

Geezer

I think you'd find that for the majority of the UK population, mention the words 'media hub' and they'll look at you as if you are from a different planet!

Most people are still not tech savvy, (most adults anyway) and for the moment, that's where the spending power lies. For the next generation, I'm sure you're right, but that is years off, and Blu-Ray will achieve similar penetration to DVD in the meantime, IMO.

If companies like Sony, Panasonic, etc. don't push that sort of consumer electronics then non matter what Billy Boy wants, it won't happen. It would be a major paradigm shift for people to start having computers, not traditional consumer electronics, as the centre of their home entertainment systems.

Geezer

STi wanna Subaru

iTrader: (1)

People already have a computer type device there now they just don't know it. The point is call it what you like but if there's a box under the tv that is connected to the net and delivers the HD content people want with ease then the additional box to play a physical medium is on borrowed time. The 50Gb of data is full uncompressed info and yes some people who are **** will be able to tell the difference but joe blogs in the main wont. It's the emperors new clothes to a degree.

SirFozzalot

No one will ever win this argument. The "other" owners will always dis-agree with you, whichever format you have.

Some prefer the 360.

Some prefer the PS3.

Just like some prefer the EVO and some prefer the Scoob.

OP......go to a shop or to any friends you may have with either console, try them both and then pick the one you prefer.

Simple.

Dream Weaver

I have to laugh whenever these threads appear, as they always elicit the same responses each time, and the dedicated fanboys come on here with the same old nonsense.

Then you get really dedicated MS fanboys that actually buy a PS3 just so they can then say they own both and never use the PS3, no names mentioned!

They both do pretty much the same thing, the major games are available for both, it just depends which you prefer the look of and how they work.

I bought a 360 for over £300 2 years back, and I barely use it now as it's so bloody noisy and I hate having to fork out £60 for an add on wireless networking tool, and then £40 a year for Xbox Live!!!

My PS3 60gb I got as a bargain at £199 last Xmas through my sisters work. That has had more use than the 360 since then, as I like the fact it's connected straight off and I can just turn it on and download stuff or play games, web browser comes in handy as well.

It can be annoying having to download updates, but not soul destroying. PS3 has HDMI as well which is nice.

I personally prefer the PS3 controller as well, except the triggers.

They both play the same (mostly crap) games, as gaming doesn't seem to have moved on this past few years, so go for the spec you want for either console based on the price you want to pay.

I don't think a decent spec 360 Elite is much more than a PS3 is it?

Iain Young

...and then you get the general gaming fans who buy a PS3 because they began to believe the PS3 fanboy hype and wanted some of the action

Not an issue for me. Well, I don't use wireless for the 360 or the PS3 as it isn't fast enough for streaming HD video. You can get a live subscription for £29 if you shop around, and it's well worth it. If Live and the PSN were of similar quality levels then I'd object to paying, but Live is so much better that I think it's worth it.

My 360 was connected straight off, as was my PS3 and my Wii. Does anyone really use the web browser (I can't stand trying to type in urls with the joypad). Strangely enough I can turn on the 360 and download stuff just as easily as the the PS3, (in fact since the NXE it's a lot quicker to find stuff than going through the PSN store). There's a lot more stuff available to download on Live as well (even on the free Xbox live service).

360 has HDMI as well these days

I find the updates very annoying. Seems every time I turn it on there is another update which takes at least half an hour to download and install. By comparison the major NXE update for the 360 took precisely 2 minutes to install.

I got a beta code for Home last weekend. Took about 45 minutes to download and install. Started it up and it ran ok. Went to go to a different room only to find it had to be downloaded. Cue another 30 minute wait. You might find that ok, but I find it flippin annoying.

There have been some stonkingly good games released recently. Perhaps you should try some of them

About the same I think...

P1Fanatic

Ian - what makes Xbox live betting in regard to the online gaming side of things? Genuine question as I hear this a lot and moving from many years on the PC to a PS3 its a backward step in regard to the number of dedicated servers you get with PC whereas PS3 just seems to connect to someone hosting a game on their PS3 (at least in my limited online time with just Far Cry 2 at the moment). Do MS provide & maintain dedicated gaming servers from the Xbox live subs?

I think 360 Elite is still about £30 cheaper but no wireless but does have hdmi cable which PS3 does not. Im using Wireless at the mo as PS3 in the lounge and router upstairs. Just about to order some 200mb powerline adapters but for initial setup the wireless was a good addition for me.

Simon

Iain Young

Yes. Basically MS have a massive number of dedicated gaming servers which run the live service. Different games work slightly differently, but essentially it all runs on the MS hardware. This has a few effects..

• It's very fast (much faster than the PSN and more reliable - I get endless dropped connections / games when trying to play on the PS3)
• Game servers are not reliant on the original publisher to keep them running (so no throwing away games if the publisher shuts down).
• The service is very "integrated", so the same online protocols / connection methods etc are used for all games. This ensures that the end user experience is essentially the same no matter what game you play. It's very slick, and very easy to find / join / host games.
• If the original "hoster" drops out, usually the online game will keep running (until everyone exits). Obviously for some games this doesn't make sense (1 on 1 fighting games for example), but when in deathmatches etc it keeps the game going.

It's not free, but it's not expensive either (you can get it for around £2.40 a month if you shop around). Well worth it in my opinion

I tried that, but wireless just isn't fast enough to stream HD video. I'm using ethernet upstairs, but will probably be getting some powerline adapters for downstairs soon, (if I can work out the wiring - they don't work through extension leads apparently).

Tenby

iTrader: (1)

Could somebody clarify, which of the 360 or ps3 has blu-ray out of the box?

Iain Young

Only the PS3 has blu-ray. The 360 doesn't even have the option...

P1Fanatic

Cheers for the reply. Yep that definetly sounds better. I never dropped out of a game of Far Cry 2 or even noticed any lag just after each map it kicked me to start menu. Maybe an issue with the game rather than connection. But as I say its my only taste of PS3 online gaming so far.

Read up on the powerline stuff - lots of people get them work over extension leads, even those with surge protection. Obviously if you need to stream HD content you want the fastest connection so not sure what speeds people have been achieving over extensions etc.

Simon

Tenby

iTrader: (1)

thankyou...off to buy one

messiah

Downloading won't kill off BR. How long has iTunes etc been going now? You can still get CD's...

And the downloadable films on the 360 marketplace are over-rated, poor PQ and audio is still 2.0 in the majority of cases. It doesn't matter what you can download these days, people will always want something they can touch.

Tenby

iTrader: (1)

They are a bit more expensive than I thought! £250!

P1Fanatic

What are you after PS3 or 360 - assume the former as you were asking for blu-ray?

Simon

Tenby

iTrader: (1)

Yes PS3. I wonder how much they will come down in January. Seen it for £225 refurb