I'm a bit of an old fogey when it comes to gaming - my old PS2 hasn't seen the light of day for years and the Wii only gets a dust off once in a while, when the kids want to play. However, I'm starting to think that a shiny new Xbox/PS3 might be in order for Chrimbo, now that prices seem to have come down. The trouble is - I can work out what's best. The Xbox clearly has the best games library, but I'm worried that it's old in the tooth compared to the PS3. I'm also lost regarding hard drives. I'd like to play driving simulations eg GT5, WRC, F1 and some FPS - Call of duty etc. I like the look of Halo, but find it hard to keep up with the action. Can you give me any pointers on the both consoles? Specifically -

- console will be connected via ethernet and HDMI - any issues?

- do I need a hard drive or would 4Gb/12Gb be ok if simply playing games?

- Can I install a hard drive later?

- which is best - GT5 or Forza?

- are the PS3 graphics better then an Xbox?

- Which has the best selection of free download content or cheap game disks?

Any thoughts/views/comments appreciated!

Ethernet / HDMI should be no problem. Both are old, well established, standards in the techie calendar

IIRC the basic drive is used for saving game positions onto. If a drive is *needed* to play a game, it should be on the packing.

On a Xbox 360 the HDDs are in a caddy that slides on. My son has a couple of these, an official one and a 3rd party one.(ebay for the caddy and a bog standard SATA drive - 250GB iirc)

PS3: I did an upgrade on my brother's from 160 to 320GB, physically was a quick screwdriver job. Again, standard SATA drives.

I suspect you'll get a polarization in terms of answers as to which is better. Like asking if the Samsung Galaxy III is better than the iPhone 5m or strawberry vs vanilla ice-cream. ;)

For me, the biggest deciding factors were:

a) price (not relevant now though!)

what friends had (for the online aspect, although most people I cared about at the time had neither, so I was free to go either way)

c) the controllers. I found the PS controllers a lot less pleseant to use (they gave me cramp) than the 360's. Also the proper triggers on the 360 make driving games a lot nicer.

Mainly due to c) I went for a 360.

I got by with my small HDD (20GB, 13 formatted) for ages - you can always plug a USB stick in for more space (or least on the "mark 1" style 360s). I've now got a 60GB one I was given and a 16GB USB stick. Main advantage for me is being able to install games for quieter (and a bit faster) running.

Forza. Forza. Forza. Forza.

Graphics; I doubt there's much in it, and I'd expect it to be swings and roundabouts anyway.

Can't help on the free content, but online play is around £40 a year on the 360 vs free on PSN. (XBL > PSN though IMO.)

Edited 10 December, 201213 yr by TriggerFish

- console will be connected via ethernet and HDMI - any issues? Both consoles have HDMI and ethernet. Both also have wifi these days

- do I need a hard drive or would 4Gb/12Gb be ok if simply playing games? If you plan on downloading additional content or games (or installing games to the HDD) then I would suggest a hard drive. The 4gb/12gb is fine for solely game saves.

- Can I install a hard drive later? Both consoles yes. The Xbox is easier to do this with than the new PS3 super slim, but the older PS3's are easier than the Xbox's as they take standard 2.5" sata drives. The Xboxes (both old white ones and new black ones) take 2.5" sata drives but in caddys. Although the caddys are avaliable online they can cause issues so I would suggest genuine drives only (including the price mark up).

- which is best - GT5 or Forza? Forza - GT5 is a bi arcady for my liking.

- are the PS3 graphics better then an Xbox? Only on games that are PS3 exclusives. Any multi-console games are much of a muchness.

- Which has the best selection of free download content or cheap game disks? Good free DLC is hard to come by. Cheap game disk? The Xbox has a larger selection of games for under £5 on ebay because it's been round a bit longer.

I have both consoles, and have found that I game on the xbox far more and the PS3 has become just a media player. I find the xbox controller more comfortable for longer sittings, the on line marketplace far easier to navigate and the console itself "feels" better made and more durable.

The PS3 is far more capable as a media machine (blu-ray, plays more video codecs) but personally I prefer the xbox.

For a games console only buy a Wii

Think most of your questions have been answered, but I went for an Xbox 360 to replace my PS2 as the PS3 was quite a bit more expensive at the time (but it did have Bluray support) but the Xbox, imho, had a better games catalogue and controllers. There was also some question mark over whether my collection of PS1 and PS2 games would run on it. We also bought a Wii when they came out which was novel for a while but I soon wanted to go back to playing "grown up" games

One thing to bear in mind is that the new Xbox is due out (if the rumours are to be believed) next Xmas.

Chris

I have all 3 consoles, I bought a PS3 purely for GT5. guess what console I play the most? the xbox, forza (in my opinion) is much better.

the hardware is pretty much of a muchness now, they have all had their bugs and newer models have corrected them.

id also agree with the xbox controllers being more comfortable with long term playing

Thanks all for your comments. So the universal view appears to be Xbox . . . . or maybe a Wii !

If there is no difference in graphics quality between the two consoles and there's plenty of cheap games out there for the Xbox then it seems to make sense. Just can't help feeling that it's been around a bit too long now so overdue a revision.

Just a further query - can the new PS3 super slims play PS2 titles? Or is backwards compatibility long forgotten?

only the 60GB version of the PS3 can play SOME PS2 games. but they are hard to find, and very expensive.

TBH the xbox360 is still going strong, and even when replaced, generally supported for 12 months after. you could still get PS2 games up to early this year. or maybe last year

I saw them selling brand new PS2 games (for more than the PS3 version) in France this year! Interestingly, there were no Xbox titles (that I remember).

(Yes, I was sad enough to take a photo!)

Get an xbox purley for forza....i had a ps3 and loved gt5 till i played forza on mates xbox an i just couldnt play gt5 after it so i went and bought an xbox

One again, many thanks for all your comments, folks. Just been watching some YouTube vids and the GT5 cars sound awful. Looks like it's a cheap Xbox then!

Both xbox and ps3 are old machines and both are due replacements end of next year. They both still produce amazing looking games though so it wouldnt bother me if a new console wasnt out for a couple of years.

Definately get a decent hardrive as running the games from the disc is very noisy. It is on xbox anyway. I bought mine with a 60gb hardrive and then bought a 120gb 2nd hand one later on.

I used to have botha ps1 and ps2 but i am now a dedicated xbox player. Teh controller is more comfortable for me as i have bigger hands but i dare say the ps controller would serve you just as well.

I picked an xbox as its what my mates had. If they had PS3's id probably have got one of them. Basically there is no real difference between them in terms of graphics etc. They each have their own exclusive games so see which games you want to play first. For me the best thing about my xbox is xbox live. I love the arcade games that are available for not much money as some of these are easily as good as full blown titles.

TBH if your used to the wii you will be blown away by either the ps3 or xbox as the wii is dismall in comparison.

If it comes down to forza or GT5 then i cant be much help here as i have played forza 2 and 3 and GT4 on PS2 and loved them all equally. Not sure how forza 4 compares to GT5 but considering how long it took sony to produce GT5 then its safe to assume that the xbox will have more driving titles available more often.

sony did take their time releasing GT5, however - and as with GT4 - they had the prologue version. which essentially was a demo version of the full game. IMO a waste of money. but being a BIG fan of the Gran Turismo brand, I bought them anyway.

Go for a big HDD in my opinion.

On the PS3 at least a LOT of games install a huge lump of data

on the HDD.This is to make them run faster and is not optional.

Playstation network basic is free, there is a premium version which

requires payment though, with online storage for saves etc.

My games library has around 50 titles and a lot of them have

put a section of the data on the hard drive, I only have about 50gb

left out of 250gb left on mine.

But as an all rounder machine it's a better bet than Xbox IMO.

We have one under the tv and it's replaced a few separates

(DVD player, Hi fi, Blueray player etc.) Also use the internet

browser to come on here but in 42" glory It's handy being able to google

on the TV and it boots up quicker than my laptop.

Go for a big HDD in my opinion.

On the PS3 at least a LOT of games install a huge lump of data

on the HDD.This is to make them run faster and is not optional.

Playstation network basic is free, there is a premium version which

requires payment though, with online storage for saves etc.

My games library has around 50 titles and a lot of them have

put a section of the data on the hard drive, I only have about 50gb

left out of 250gb left on mine.

But as an all rounder machine it's a better bet than Xbox IMO.

We have one under the tv and it's replaced a few separates

(DVD player, Hi fi, Blueray player etc.) Also use the internet

browser to come on here but in 42" glory It's handy being able to google

on the TV and it boots up quicker than my laptop.

Xbox has internet browser also. The only advantage of PS3 is blu ray. Both machines do everything else exactly the same. Blu ray is irrelevant to me as i use mine purely for gaming but i can see why it would be a big advantage for others though who dont have a blu ray player in their living room.

Edited 14 December, 201213 yr by Jockdooshbag

My 2 pence.

Neither console is any good.

Get on play.com. £20-£25 nabs you an xbox 360 controller with a USB cable on it. As long as you have a decent PC then you get better graphics than either console and mods, mods aren't always amazing but some of them can add hours of extra game time or in the case of oblivion there were unofficial patch mods to fix everything bethesda never got around to doing.

Otherwise I would wait for the next gen announcements, I would expect them to be some time this spring.

you know if you wait just 4 years the replacement to the replacement consoles will be out.........

but if you want 3-4 years beyond that, even newer stuff will be out!

a PC never has, nor will it ever be the same as a console. im not bagging the PC, but it doesn't have the large range of games that a console does, and who wants to have a whole PC hanging next to their TV. again, not bagging, but that's the idea of a console.

It's sooner than that. New consoles are rumoured to be next Christmas or a bit after. Think last big release will be GTA5. I've gone less towards console gaming now and honestly don't know if I'll get the next one. Built myself a gaming PC and a cheap controller that covers me for most things. I only use the PS3 for GT5 now and with a proper wheel it completely changes

I am a die hard PC Gaming fan. No console will ever be able to touch graphics, sound and the sheer multifunctionality to it. Some titles are exlusive for consoles (Halo 4, Forza ) but there is plenty of equivalents, with better graphics, sound and better controllers (F1 2012, Dirt3, WRC 3, CoD, BF3, etc, etc|). Another thing is that there is no need to keep paying for subscriptions and PC games are much cheaper than equvalent console releases.

Tech is very old (XBOX uses Radeon X1800 based graphics with CPU being a museum piece, PS3 is much better in this respect) n consoles compared to current PC's and it will always be that way as product cycle for consoles is around 10 years afaik.

I wouldl ike to buy a console but will wait for new generation to make my investment last bit longer

you know if you wait just 4 years the replacement to the replacement consoles will be out.........

but if you want 3-4 years beyond that, even newer stuff will be out!

a PC never has, nor will it ever be the same as a console. im not bagging the PC, but it doesn't have the large range of games that a console does, and who wants to have a whole PC hanging next to their TV. again, not bagging, but that's the idea of a console.

I used to be a PC gamer but i much prefer console gaming now. Xbox and PS3 are old but the graphics are still amazing. PC gaming is just too expensive. Computer needs to be upgraded all the time to keep up plus PC gaming is very buggy by comparison and there are lots of compatibility issues. At least with a console the game is made specifically for that machine whereas on PC if your hardware is not up to it then basically you are not optimized for the game. Ive seen the same game run at super high detail levels on a PC and it isnt that much better than the console equivelant. When i play COD or Forza or Skyrim or borderlands or rage or assassins creed or any game for that matter on xbox not for one minute do i think " this needs better graphics". They all simply look stunning.

Maybe this is because ive grown up with games that look dire going back to my Atari, spectrum, amiga, ps1, ps2 and PC days so i now appreciate what good graphics are. So many young uns bang on about how crap the current gen of consoles are but they havent lived.

I have gamed on PC for more years than i can remember but my abiding memory was the constant battle to upgrade the machine to play the latest game and then only to suffer compatibility issues in some cases. It gets tiresome very quickly. I much prefer console gaming now.

The current consoles are plenty good enough for me but i will certainly be at the front of the queue for the next gen when they come out.

You are right in that the only reasons PC hardware needs to be upgraded is the new games requiring more and more oomph to run them. For a good time FarCry was gaming PC's killer and could bring anything to its knees.

I do se your point about games specifically coded for consoles perform better and nullify to certain extent PC's massive hardware fire power advantage. Mind you, this grows thinner and thinner the longer the console's been out there and now it is simply museum piece gaming compared to current PC.

It's like with cars, until you driven something really stunning your current top dog is perfectly fine. I find PC gaming, especialy FPS games, gains massively when all the "bells&whistles" in graphics department are turned on. My PC is 5 years old, first gen Quad Intel, currently running at 2.66 as after 4 years of running at 3.2 OC it finally burned out and will not let me oc any more, ATI HD5770 graphics, 8gb ram and now W8 on ssd - doesn't miss a bit still and still is better than any console.

Brand new game, Warhammer Space Marine, runs perfect on my museum piece of a hardware with all the eye candy wicked up . That includes all sorts of new gen graphics tricks.

As the situation is I will wait for next gen consoles .

Funny you should mention rage. I have that on xbox 360 and PC and did a side by side comparison (had PC on one TV input, xbox on another, both connected using HDMI). Taken on its own the 360 version looks amazing, console games are capable of good graphics. But switch over to HDMI2 (PC) and the difference becomes very noticeable, particularly how quickly the distant map area's drop their polygon counts on the xbox version compared to PC and the texture resolution (best way to compare texture res is to go and find some small font writing on a sign somewhere).The shadows seem to have less "jaggies" on the PC than the 360.

I wouldn't call a PC more expensive than a console though. Sure the initial investment is higher (can be reduced by building rather than buying, the markup is substantial on pre builts) but long term I'd say its probably reduced. Most people have a computer of some sort anyway so lets say they are in a market for a new one. Chances are they might be spending £300 to £400 on a complete set with monitor, keyboard and mouse. If your in the market for a console well you already have a TV which can be used as a monitor (I can't believe that there is such thing as someone without room for a computer in their living room), mice and keyboards are cheap. Then the main unit itself, my rig was custom built with a cost of around £500. A new console on release will be at least £200 maybe. Fine and dandy but when a new games generation comes out I then have to pay £200 or more again. A new games generation comes out on PC and I usually only need a new GPU or CPU. AMD CPU's are way cheaper than intel yet perfectly capable, mine cost £70 and doesnt seem to have any bottleneck right now. GPU's, if you don't get cutting edge your still likely to be able to play modern games, i myself use an NVidia GTX460, £120. There we go, new CPU and GPU in one go can be obtained for the same price as a console. Chances are though that you dont even need a new CPU or GPU every new game release. A rig that can play current games at maximum settings will probably be able to play games a good 5 years down the line with at least minimum settings, by that point the same £200 for new CPU and GPU will then get you alot more performance than now. That and ultimately you can use a PC for alot more than a console.

Funny you should mention rage. I have that on xbox 360 and PC and did a side by side comparison (had PC on one TV input, xbox on another, both connected using HDMI). Taken on its own the 360 version looks amazing, console games are capable of good graphics. But switch over to HDMI2 (PC) and the difference becomes very noticeable, particularly how quickly the distant map area's drop their polygon counts on the xbox version compared to PC and the texture resolution (best way to compare texture res is to go and find some small font writing on a sign somewhere).The shadows seem to have less "jaggies" on the PC than the 360.

I wouldn't call a PC more expensive than a console though. Sure the initial investment is higher (can be reduced by building rather than buying, the markup is substantial on pre builts) but long term I'd say its probably reduced. Most people have a computer of some sort anyway so lets say they are in a market for a new one. Chances are they might be spending £300 to £400 on a complete set with monitor, keyboard and mouse. If your in the market for a console well you already have a TV which can be used as a monitor (I can't believe that there is such thing as someone without room for a computer in their living room), mice and keyboards are cheap. Then the main unit itself, my rig was custom built with a cost of around £500. A new console on release will be at least £200 maybe. Fine and dandy but when a new games generation comes out I then have to pay £200 or more again. A new games generation comes out on PC and I usually only need a new GPU or CPU. AMD CPU's are way cheaper than intel yet perfectly capable, mine cost £70 and doesnt seem to have any bottleneck right now. GPU's, if you don't get cutting edge your still likely to be able to play modern games, i myself use an NVidia GTX460, £120. There we go, new CPU and GPU in one go can be obtained for the same price as a console. Chances are though that you dont even need a new CPU or GPU every new game release. A rig that can play current games at maximum settings will probably be able to play games a good 5 years down the line with at least minimum settings, by that point the same £200 for new CPU and GPU will then get you alot more performance than now. That and ultimately you can use a PC for alot more than a console.

Not my experience im afraid. Keeping a PC up to spec is a lot more expensive. My xbox cost about £160 and has since cost me zilch. Hasnt needed upgraded over its entire life span which was what? about 5 years. Who wants to run PC game sta "low settings" they are horrid.

I really dont think there is any compasison in terms of cost. My years of experience have proved this. I had to upgrade my PC loads of times and this was to merely meet minimum requirements. Plus PC games have a lot more teething problems than console games due to hardware compatibility issues.

As you say a top end PC will look better but you have to specifically go looking for it and do side by side comparisions to highlight it which kind of highlights that any differences are negligible.

Also a console does a lot more than play games. It can browse the internet, play films, stream media, show photos etc etc. Cant see the family sitting down in the study to watch a film on a pc but ill bet many do site and watch films etc on a console in the living room.

One thing i do miss is some of the hardcore PC games like ARMA and the original operation flashpoint. I had serious fun with these games online years ago but lets be honest they were a total glitchy mess and dont even get me started on the hardware requirements to play ARMA, was a joke.

I havent seen anything nowadys to make me want to go back to PC gaming as basically the console does it all and its an old bit of kit, imagine how good the next one will be. Plus if my missus is on the PC what am i supposed to do? Housework?

Each to their own but the PC market has a different audience TBH. Ive been there and done that but for me the console just does what i want it to do better.

Each to their own but the PC market has a different audience TBH. Ive been there and done that but for me the console just does what i want it to do better.

What 'e said!

Chris