PC, Xbox 360 or PS3?

[Rackhir]

So what should I go for? The PC is the most expensive but it opens up the possibility of MMORPGs. On the other hand I don't really have the time and money for those.

If you've got the money for a decent PC, you've got the money for a mmorg. They average about as much as catching a movie + popcorn a month. Time and/or the willingness to spend the money those are other issues.

On the other hand, consoles are less expensive, but I have to wait for the kids to go to bed before I can play the more hardcore games and I tie up the TV.

Xbox 360 seems like the best bet. I'm dying to play Halo 2 and 3 after playing the first on PC ages ago. This Portal sounds awesome. Do you have to pay extra to play online?

Well even with Bungie's recent divorce from MS, you won't be seeing Halo on any platforms other than PC. But PCs are much better for FPSs than the xbox or PS3 (though the PS3 at least has the option of permitting keyboard and mouse use, only Unreal Tournament 3 actually supports it AFAICT). I don't think Portal currently supports online play. The Orange Box doesn't have any charges for Online play of Team Fortress 2. Microsoft does try to get players to shell out for a Xbox Live Gold which lists for $50 for a year. You don't have to get it, though there are benefits. There aren't currently any charges for any of the PS3 online stuff AFAIK.

PS3 just seems way to expensive. What killer games are out for it? Is there any reason I should give it a second look?

Which do you guys like best?

The PS3 seems more expensive than it is. Since it's best compared to the most expensive Xbox + the HD-DVD Player options, which is the same price. The low end 360 is really not a good bargain, since it lacks the wireless networking ($100 if you add it) and you need to buy a memory card for it (512mb $50, the HD add on is only like $100) and it lacks the wireless controller.

Of course one of the main things you are paying for with the PS3 is the Blu-Ray Disk capability (There are various offers for 5+ free movies, but most of the choices suck). However you don't get the full benefit of something like the Blu-Ray movies (or the 360 or PS3) unless you have a decently large tv with an HDMI input. FWIW, I give both of the HD disk formats about a 50-75% chance of both failing long term (3-5yrs) and being "iTuned" by some sort of download system.

The PS3 is quite a capable media hub, if you care about playing stuff from your computer through the tv/stereo. The 360 can do a lot of this as well.

 

[Arnwyn]

Xbox 360 seems like the best bet. I'm dying to play Halo 2 and 3 after playing the first on PC ages ago. This Portal sounds awesome. Do you have to pay extra to play online?

PS3 just seems way to expensive. What killer games are out for it? Is there any reason I should give it a second look?

And here's the rub. Absolutely you have to pay extra to go online with the 360. The PS3 is free. Are you interested in playing online? If so, then the PS3 is cheaper than the 360. That's right - cheaper. (The analysis is somewhere in this formum - if I get a chance, I link to it again; but in any case, a simple NPV analysis by anyone with even a little competency in spreadsheet usage can do it.)

Otherwise - what Takyris said. (With a note that he forgot to mention Warhawk, which is far superior to both of the games he listed.)

Also note that the 360 is an inferior machine with some hardware issues (battery-powered controllers, if you can imagine; and screams like a banshee when the drive is in use; and that's before even mentioning it's very high failure rate ["RROD"]). OTOH, the 360 also has the best selection of games, period. It's an unfortunate and painful choice for the next-gen systems, currently. Kinda sad.

 

[trancejeremy]

The $400 40 gig PS3 is coming soon (Nov 2nd) so it's not really that expensive any more (not at least compared to the Xbox 360 at $350). Drawback is that it doesn't have PS2 back compatability (at all).

The 360 definitely has more games, though, and the $280 Arcade pack is viable (no hard drive, but does come with memory card at least).

However, in the future, it looks like most games will be for both (and PC). Other than 1st party exclusives.

I'll probably end up getting a 360 first, simply because you can hook it up to a PC monitor (albeit with $50 cables), as I don't have an HDTV.

 

[Vocenoctum]

You'll find either side can make good points, usually by glossing over details or exagerating some failures. It also depends on what marks a good system to you.

If you get a 360, go for a Pro (the "normal" console) for $350 and either a Play & Charge kit ($20) or the recharger tower thingee. The new consoles come with Forza and Ultimate Alliance. In addition you also get backwards compatibility for the most part (list available).

Games you need (if you like the sort): Gears of War, Halo1/2/3, Bioshock. Mass Effect will probably be great, and Oblivion can destroy days of time.

I don't have a PS3, and the models change every month, but currently the 80 gig is the model to get, IIRC. It has emulated backwards compat like the 360, and all the hardware. The 40gig is neutered, though it'd still play the games and such. (Same as the 360 Core/ Arcade)

Model guide: http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/10/diagram-compari.html

If you can put togethor a PC, that'd probably do you great. The Intel Core's are pricey though, and just about any of it will be outdated soon enough I'm sure. Still, Bioshock, Crysis, etc, plus MMO's.

 

[James Heard]

I'd go with the PC. Everything your next gen game consoles can do, your PC can do with enough mediocre investment, plus you can do "productive" things with it besides play games. Better yet, you're not stuck with a proprietary "maybe no one will buy it/make games for it" platform. You sometimes have to wait a while, but eventually almost everything comes to the PC - and if it doesn't it's not the fault of PC manufacturers locked into a corporate war with games companies.

 

[MarauderX]

I'd go with the PC. Everything your next gen game consoles can do, your PC can do with enough mediocre investment, plus you can do "productive" things with it besides play games. Better yet, you're not stuck with a proprietary "maybe no one will buy it/make games for it" platform. You sometimes have to wait a while, but eventually almost everything comes to the PC - and if it doesn't it's not the fault of PC manufacturers locked into a corporate war with games companies.

I concur. Plus you can upgrade as you wish - new video card, monitor, cable hook-up, get the opportunity for MMORPGs... etc.

 

[drothgery]

I concur. Plus you can upgrade as you wish - new video card, monitor, cable hook-up, get the opportunity for MMORPGs... etc.

Err... even if you don't have an HDTV yet and decide getting one is necessary to get a current-gen console (which I think is true), it's still cheaper to get a $1000 HDTV and a $400 console than to spend three years on the gaming PC upgrade treadmill.

 

[hong]

I'd get all 3.

<--- TOO MUCH DISPOSABLE INCOME

 

[Aus_Snow]

PC ftw.

All the best games (IMO) - and a decent enough setup is not actually that expensive. Especially if you make your own, cutting through as much hype as possible when shopping for the parts.

 

[Mallus]

PC ftw.

All the best games (IMO) - and a decent enough setup is not actually that expensive. Especially if you make your own, cutting through as much hype as possible when shopping for the parts.

Sure, you can get a decent gaming PC for a reasonable price. The thing is, it gets less decent every minute you own it as hardware specs march on. At this point I've resigned myself to only playing strategy games on my PC.

One of the nice things about consoles is that the games get better as the system ages, and you're always eligible for that platforms cutting-edge titles.