Blu-Ray is a "con" in my opinion. I do not believe for one second that the human eye can tell the difference between a blu-ray and a DVD playing on a typical home LCD/Plasma set. Maybe the sound is better if you put it through a "towards-the-top-of-the-range" audio system, but again for the majority of people Blu-Ray is simply an unnecessary and unwanted "half-step" forward in the format evolution. You want to go and start trying to replace all your favourite DVDs with their Blu-Ray equivalents ? Are you rich ? For most of us, the answer is going to be "no".
So Blu-Ray really is out of the equation when looking for your new console.
Blu-ray is much more than a 'half step' forward, and while it may be unnecessary to most in this time of transition from CRT tech to LCD and OLED tech, once hi-def is the standard, Blu-Ray will be as much of a step forward as DVD was from VHS.
And, no offense, but to say that the human eye can't see the difference between Blu-Ray and DVD video quality... that's a truly idiotic notion, especially when viewed on a hi-def set. The typical home LCD/Plasma TV is around 32", which is a good size for viewing standard def, and 480p looks good on sets that size. HOWEVER - on TVs of that size, you can STILL tell the difference between 480p and high definition. Much crisper, much deeper blacks, much better color quality, etc. Don't try to say that Blu-Ray isn't an evolution, because while I can see where you're argument would make a bit of sense at this point of time, it's like saying 'You want to go and start trying to replace all your favorite VHS tapes with DVD equivelants? Are you rich?' in 2000. Kinda appropriate, but time would prove that argument dumb, as it will here.
rambozotheclown said:
Go for a 360 - Sure they may die of RROD, but you get a 3 year warranty against this now so that's not a major issue any longer.
Sooooo... a higher capacity disk is a 'con' but having to replace your system periodically isn't? I mean, I'm taking the extreme here (I don't know anyone IRL other than, uh, myself who had to replace their 360, but I shouldn't have had to in the first place, duh), but still, that's stupid. I wasn't pleased with not being able to game for two weeks because Microsoft couldn't put out reliable hardware.
rambozotheclown said:
Xbox live is not free, like PSN, but it IS better, faster, more populated.
More populated, sure, but a lot of people, myself included, would argue that the improvements that XBL make on the online formula aren't worth $50 a year when you look at what you can get on the PS3 for free. They're not that different.
QUOTE(rambozotheclown @ Dec 14 2008, 01:25 PM)
Xbox360 is NOT only for FPS freaks.... there are other games out there in their hundreds. Just unfortunately no POS like "littleBigPlanet" (Most eagerly anticipated game ? WTF ? It's just a graphically flash 2D platformer (with 3D effects) that the lazy bastard programmers didn't even finish - "I've got a good idea.... rather than finish the game lets just spin it that the customer ends up designing the levels for us! Kerching !"