360 x ps3 x wii

[hellrider]

360:

intel celeron D 3.0 ghz 20k l1 cache 256k l2 cache 64bit processor
256 ddr2 share channel
ati radeon x800 with 256 gddr3 vram
60 giga bytes HD
Os: xbox LIVE

signature game support:

mortal combat
gears of war
halo
mechwarrior
godzilla
spiderman
lost planet

prize(n america): $300

ps3

Sony cell STI 3.2 ghz 64k l1 cache 512k l2 cache 256bit processor
1024mb ddr3 dub share channel
nvidia geforce 7950sli GTX ultra with 512m gddr3
120 giga bytes HD
OS: playstation console

signature game support:


transformers
gods of war
socom
call of duty
fear
quake war
mental gear solid
ghost tricom
the darkness

prize(n america): $899

wii

IBM powerpc 700mhz 128 l2 cache
64mb rambus dram
s3 chrome s27 with 32mb vram
no harddisk available
OS: the wii

signature game support:

mario
final fantasy
sonic



prize(n america): $149

which you think is better??

 

[Jakut]

This will turn into another battle of the fanboys and get closed in the end :|

 

[Majin_You]

Go with the console (or combination of consoles) that has or will have the games that you will enjoy.

That's just about the best criterion to go by. If you know you don't care for the selection of Wii games, narrow your list to the PS3 and the 360. If you know you like where Sony's library is headed, rule out the 360, and so on.

You'll likely only get mixed opinions here; people who think that the PS3 is the bee's knees will recommend it; people who have had fond experiences with the 360 will recommend that. Wii owners will make their case, too.

If you're still stuck after you've ruled out consoles that don't sport a library you'll enjoy, consider how much you're willing to spend. If money is no object, then factor in functionality and other, non-gaming features (eg: Blu-Ray or HD-DVD support).

In my opinion, (which is usually not the popular one in more recent console war threads), you shouldn't boil your decision down to the specs.

 

[Adaptus]

Majin_You is right. It's all about personal opinion.

You should look at the games for each system. Get the system with the games you want most.

There's also the option of getting more than one system, too. It's what I did.

 

[Smith]

Well someone has no idea what's actually inside of each console.

 

[liad]

where did you get this info its all wrong -.-
the hardware specs are wrong,aswell as the exclusive games list.
spiderman 3 isnt an xbox360 exclusive it has versions for each next gen console. aswell as a pc and ps2 version and handheld consoles versions.
also final fantasy isnt a wii exclusive. Final Fantasy XIII and Final Fantasy Versus XIII are developed only for the ps3
as for sonic its not a wii exclusive there is a ps3 sonic game aswell.
speaking about wii exclusive games you forgot about zelda,pokemon,wario etc..

edit:also the xbox 360 hdd is 20 gb not 60 and the elite 360 version is 120gb
and the ps3 hdd is 60 gb not 120..
also the ps3 price isnt 899 it was 600$ at the release it could be cheaper now.

 

[frsrblch]

Well someone has no idea what's actually inside of each console.

Magic gnomes?

You also forgot to mention the alternative, which is to buy a PC. It's gnomes can be more expensive, but I much prefer the controls on it to those on the consoles.

 

[SA_Gohan]

Well someone has no idea what's actually inside of each console.

The blood of our childhood memories?

or was it silicone?

 

[Chakra-X]

The Playstation 3 is $599 in America, not $899.

It's all a matter of what appeals to the person and their situation. Any goddamn fanboy driven opinion that follows the "The Wii/360/PS3 Sucks" is a terrible and void opinion.

A casual gamer? On a budget? Like party games? Want something different? The Wii is the one that appeals to this more.

Love the multiplayer? Want an immediate library of games? Want better graphics? The 360 seems like it would fit.

In to the whole high-def thing? Looking to make a robust entertainment system?

Then there are the types of games you would like to go for, since some are exclusive to that certain console.

Don't let anyone tell you that one console is better than the other. It doesn't work that way.

 

[hellrider]

360 has better graphic?? they had been test and run under quake 4 and the result is only 89 fps in 1024/768 4AA, but meanwhile ps3 is 145 fps and even run under HD with 1600x1200 ps3 is still the winner!!

remember ps3 has double graphic processor (Geforce 7950SLI GTX ULTRA + EMOTION II ENGINE) and 512 GDDR4 video ram and look back to 360 they only have radeon x800xt with 256 mb GDDR3.

 

[Smith]

360 has better graphic?? they had been test and run under quake 4 and the result is only 89 fps in 1024/768 4AA, but meanwhile ps3 is 145 fps and even run under HD with 1600x1200 ps3 is still the winner!!

remember ps3 has double graphic processor (Geforce 7950SLI GTX ULTRA + EMOTION II ENGINE) and 512 GDDR4 video ram and look back to 360 they only have radeon x800xt with 256 mb GDDR3.

No one has run benchmarks with either the 360 or PS3. You're also incorrect with your hardware specs, by a lot. Go google/wikipedia the correct info.

EDIT: Quake 4 isn't even released on the PS3. This thread has no purpose at all.