PS3 wins paper console war: 360, Wii, and publicists cry foul!
GamePro put on a mock PS3 vs. 360 vs. Wii console war on paper for the sake of enjoyable discussion. The safe-bet supreme guestimate? Sony's big black box, the PS3. All three consoles were judged against the following: speed/power, graphics, storage, best controller, online support, media functionality, game library (talk about subjective criteria), and overall value. The PS3 took four categorical wins, followed by the Xbox 360 with three, and the Wii with two.From the article: "The Xbox 360 is undoubtedly an extremely powerful machine that's seen considerable success. And the Wii is clearly a tiny dynamo that could easily turn this industry on its head. Still, we can't shake the feeling that, in the end, the PlayStation 3 will prove itself to be the console with the longest legs."
Not to take anything away from the PS3's technological achievements, but PSPs and 3DOs can win on paper all day long. Discount the article as necessary to tame any heightened emotions (end patronizing disclaimer).
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
crono141 @ Oct 10th 2006 2:35PM
Great... Way to feed the trolls.
gameclu @ Oct 10th 2006 2:36PM
The ps3 just costs too much. And there isn't enough HD adoption yet. The only thing the PS3 has going for it is strong name brand recognition. That might be enough. Though, I seriously have my doubts.
pandlcg @ Oct 10th 2006 2:38PM
A lost of those scores really made the Wii out to be the ass-clowns of the console war. But then again it's just subjective material.
joshua @ Oct 10th 2006 2:38PM
time for attack of the fanboys
ME, THE UNBIASED ONE @ Oct 10th 2006 2:39PM
*cough* *cough* extremely biased.
Chris @ Oct 10th 2006 2:40PM
LamePro am i rite?
existonfile @ Oct 10th 2006 2:41PM
Duh, it's from Gamepro. What a terrible magazine. I wonder how much Sony payed for that comparison.
www.paulvsdave.com
ill trooper @ Oct 10th 2006 2:41PM
PS1 and PS2 were both great systems; the PS3 will probably be one as well. Why hate? It's a good year for gamers. I'm buying all three systems.
BMWM3P @ Oct 10th 2006 2:42PM
It's true the PS3 is the best, they only gave the 360 a win in the less important categories to make it seem like it can compete. The PS3 blows the 360 out of the water gamespot was to nice to the 360.
scarr1 @ Oct 10th 2006 2:43PM
BUUUUUULLSH*T
BlindsideDork @ Oct 10th 2006 2:44PM
Well they messed up on one category. The Wii should've taked the library cause you have all the Wii games at launch (around 27) and then for people who didn't have a cube, you can play ANY Gamecube game there was...so wouldn't that meant they have better line up.
Yes XBox has backwards compatibilyt but not all can be played. and PS3...eh, most people already have a PS2, no change.
Buckshot @ Oct 10th 2006 2:44PM
Damn, beet me to the "Lamepro" comment. More fake Cell propaganda too, "It could be faster but it's not yet" bullshit. Compare when the products actually exist and can run side by side. Does $ony own gamepro too?
Krazy Koala @ Oct 10th 2006 2:46PM
Why are these kinds of posts ever placed on joystiq? I couldn't care less if the conclusion were "360 takes all categories" or "Wii triumphs." These are all theoretical results concluded by people who no better than we do. They are PAID to be fanboys. I could easily argue at the moment that if you want to talk about game lineup, 360 blows the PS3 out of the water at the moment. To include the backwards compatibility lists is a different story.
Me @ Oct 10th 2006 2:47PM
Hell yeah....That's what im talkin bout !!! The PS3 will succeed because the 360 is doing good and i know way more people that want a PS3 that didn't buy a 360 and won't be buying a wii either.
Al @ Oct 10th 2006 2:47PM
Whatever I'm getting all three just like last-gen. The only way to game in my opinion.
DocWho @ Oct 10th 2006 2:49PM
Aint no bullshit fanboys.
All bets are on the P$3 once again coming out the clear winner, on name brand and hype alone. There is nothing that compelling drawing anyone away from the P$3, not even the price.
Those claiming revolutionary gameplay on the Wii, wow, I hope you hit your little sister in the eye waving that stupid wii-mote all over the place.
$ony is still the pissers too beat. Why? Just like EA always sells Madden, the $ony brand will continue it's run.
So yell all you want Wii fanboys, you are still fighting for 2nd with the 360, a distant 2nd at that.
GamerZero @ Oct 10th 2006 2:49PM
If you still think about purchasing a PS3,
I offer a free lobotomy for $300,no money back guarantee to make your decision
easier.
If you are a sheep you do not this procedure
but I am willing to give you a good crack on the
skull just incase you are confused or have
sheep-dip syndrome.
Seifer @ Oct 10th 2006 2:50PM
When was the last time GamePro was relevent? They still used goofy kiddie nicknames for their editors last time I checked.
jayntampa @ Oct 10th 2006 2:51PM
The article is ridiculous -- for example: Size of the unit has the same weight in grading the best unit as selection of games or online functionality!
Huh?
Just not well thought out.
jason cubs bear bulls rule 4life @ Oct 10th 2006 2:51PM
i want a system with good fun games and lots of them wii and 360. if i recall ps2 didn't have good graphics and shitty online software compared to xbox with live. the reason ps2 dominated was good games. look at ds compared to power house psp. i see wii dominating japan,ps3 2nd, 360 close to 2nd but 3rd. in usa and europe 360 1st,wii 2nd, ps3 third. also, ps2 sold more cuz they could do price drops faster cuz 360 was newer. NOW 360 has more better exclusive and wii is new and different and could be good like the ds was. also 360 can do price drops quicker
DocWho @ Oct 10th 2006 2:51PM
@11: you can play ANY Gamecube game there was..
Wow, that huge Gamecube library.....NOT!
Going back to old games is boring, no matter how much you want to hype that aspect.
Dux @ Oct 10th 2006 2:56PM
Look. I havent read that article but If I had to put my money on someone to win this generation I would put it on the 2 time proven champs, Sony.
DojoRacoon @ Oct 10th 2006 2:56PM
This is dumb. I'm not saying PS3 won't win but their criteria is retarded and the blogger makes a good point. Using this criteria the PSP should be way ahead of the DS. The only thing Sony really has over the competition is brand name recogintion.
mac aoidh @ Oct 10th 2006 2:56PM
While i'm not completely sure in Europe, I would be terribly surprised if wii didn't trounce PS3 in Japan and if Microsoft didn't outsell PS3 in America.
But who knows? With 5 million 360s already sold, a likely 8 million wiis by the end of this year and 6 million promised PS3s by the end of next year, it's anybody's game. Rofl...
MadCynicalDummy @ Oct 10th 2006 2:56PM
Its also interesting to note that most of Game Pro's coverage till now has been pro-Sony/PS3. So, no surprise.
mcgoo @ Oct 10th 2006 2:56PM
the only categories that really matter are: system/peripheral/game cost, system performance potential, 3rd party support, online support, first/second party titles (your mario's, halo's, and GT/MGS).
storage, media functionality matter little in the whole scheme of things.
sphetr2 @ Oct 10th 2006 2:58PM
They cheated on the "Value" section. They called it "bang for your buck" instead of "price" so that the PS3 seems almost remotely affordable.
And they completely ignored Wii channels on "Additional Features."
Dalvin @ Oct 10th 2006 3:01PM
SONY HAS USED THE SAME CRAPPY CONTROLLER FOR 3 GENERATIONS!!!! THATS WHAT I CALL INNOVATION.
Sonic @ Oct 10th 2006 3:03PM
Win or Lose Nintendo always wins finacially. Never once losing money on their console. If real important things were put into what was judged then it would be a different story. Well in the case of what was judged lets see.
Speed/Power - Well what kind of speed, the speed a game takes to load up or the quickness of the systems interface. Oh neither, its just a processor pissing contest.
Graphics - Well duh, Sony wins, they put the most money into it.
Controller - Sony took things out and made the same controller as last time. 360 revamped its controller to actually fit your hands this time. And Wii lets you do pretty much anything. I wonder who won?
Storage - Why is this a catagory. That all can fit way too much data either way.
Media Functionality - Its a game console. Sure it has extras, but what about the games.
Game Library - How many? Better? Even though no games have been released fully for Wii or PS3.
Overall Value - Who determines what each dollar goes to?
Wait, why do I care what they say? Oh yeah, because they say it.
crono141 @ Oct 10th 2006 3:03PM
"I hope you hit your little sister in the eye waving that stupid wii-mote all over the place."
I'm gonna hit your little sister.
But not in the eye.
And not with a wii-mote.
Minty Fresh @ Oct 10th 2006 3:03PM
This is coming from GamePro....they haven't mattered since the late 80's.
BlindsideDork @ Oct 10th 2006 3:03PM
@#21 Ok, go for it, but that means you can't play Halo or Halo 2 or GTA2,3, 40894, or how many of those GTAs there were. Cause they are old games and that would be boring.
GameCube might not have had the most games but they had games where they counted. Granted PS2 had lots of games...whe 10 new each week? But how many were spectacular? Some were, but not a good ratio. And XBox had what...2 or 3 decent games that couldn't be found on other systems?
My point exactly...hater.
Covarr @ Oct 10th 2006 3:07PM
It was stupid of them to put graphics and CPU as seperate categories. Their comparison of online support was based only on launch, and ignored Sony's announcement of downloadable Genesis/Turbografx games. They completely ignored Wii channels (News/Weather/Photo) in the comparison of additional features. They didn't mention backwards compatibility for any of the systems, despite its relevance. Perhaps the biggest mistake they made, though, is that they weighted all of these factors equally for the final verdict, which is just plain stupid.
I'm not saying their final verdict was right or wrong, but the data it was based on was both lacking and poorly organized. I'd be interested to see who wins a paper war that includes everything they missed, along with some sort of weighting scale.
Sonic @ Oct 10th 2006 3:07PM
@21
Going back to old games is boring, no matter how much you want to hype that aspect.
Wow, you're about as dumb as a bag of hammers. All three companies are banking on reselling old games. You're just dumb, dumby dumb head.
RoroCo @ Oct 10th 2006 3:09PM
Funny how they mentioned the PS3 only had marginally better graphics so they gave it a better score... yet the PS3 is significantly larger than the 360 and they gave it the same grade... Funny little biased writers...
And I agree that they should have weighed the categories... Library, CPU, Graphics, and Online capabilities should have been rated much higher.
People can adapt to different controllers... who cares about the size of the thing... media format (really)... and additional features(I am buying a GAMING console...who cares abou tthe rest).
Just my 1.75 cents.
Sloar @ Oct 10th 2006 3:09PM
@26
I agree with most of your criteria. however, media and storage do play an important role. being able to play dvds is, in my opinion, an added bonus. is it needed? no, but it sure is nice. do we need a blu-ray player? well, I think a small population is excited about that. the fact that the wii doesn't even offer that option I think hurts it.
you also state that one of your criteria is "system performance potential". that, I feel, is a useless measure. I could have all the potential in the world, but if I sit on my butt and play video games all day, it doesn't matter what my potential is, does it? let's compare system performance--which we can't do because 2 of the systems aren't even released yet. which point further exploits the flaws in this whole thing. it's a stupid gimmick by morons who think this "study" actually proves anything.
tom @ Oct 10th 2006 3:14PM
you cant do a comparasion reveiw with out somthing to compare it to. what is very strange is they give graphics to the ps3 when no two multi format games have been released, also when its clear that the 360 has a more powful graphics card but not processor, and a longer lasting one due to the unified shaders. also giving it mult media cant be decided yet as its blu ray vs windows media center (vista)and hd dvd add on.
DocWho @ Oct 10th 2006 3:17PM
#34 stupididly wrote the following:
All three companies are banking on reselling old games:
Which as what to do with my point.
Old games are still boring.
I have tried many many many of them on many sites and Roms etc. Re-Living the 'old days' of video gaming lasts for about 5 minutes. But you go ahead and re-play a classic old game.
Consoles charging for old game does not make an old game good.
Talk about dumb.
computer games @ Oct 10th 2006 3:17PM
Had to laugh at the GPU comparision (and PS3 Win). That extra 256mb ram on the GPU in the 360 is very important, it's what is allowing such massive textures without having swapping going on all the time to system mem. The PS3 is bottlenecked there in a way.
GPU power is 360's win. THe HDMI output which clinches it for Sony is tentative at best because the vast majority of ps3 owners won't even have hdmi for a while.
Having said that I do have hdmi on my TV and I wish MS would hurry up and confirm if they really are going to look into getting a cable/adapter out for it. Digital signal is good.
Darth Pixel @ Oct 10th 2006 3:18PM
The PS3 costs too much.
Proof: This morning, at all GameStop and EB Games stores, available pre-order allocations were consumed withing 5 minutes of store opening.
Ah ah ah...denial is not a river.
computer games @ Oct 10th 2006 3:18PM
Oh and though I like the Wii, to say it's the winner in control is ridiculous.. based on an unreleased console??? The 360's controller is the best I have EVER used (except for the Dpad), it has rumble, it's wireless, it's comfy, it looks good.. and it WORKS on games that are OUT THERE NOW wonderfully.
ALso the PS3 should never get the same rating as the 360 controller just cos it has that stupid tiltability, RUMBLE is far more important though no Sony fan would dare admit it.
pixelator @ Oct 10th 2006 3:20PM
Look at the angry Ninty-fanboy Joystiq blogger, comparing the PSP to the 3DO. Nice.
Saiclone @ Oct 10th 2006 3:21PM
There was something like this last year on cnet about the PSP and DS..........PSP won :)
aZn_1080p @ Oct 10th 2006 3:22PM
LOL @ all the fanboys on here crying that someone again stated the obvious - that Sony will *dominate* this generation like the last two. There is no way around this, keep dreaming that viva pinata and wii sports will save your respective systems, it just isnt going to happen. Why do you think that *every* analyst worth a damn says Sony is going to win again? Mark my words, within a year of launch, PS3 will be *humiliating* the competition, just like last gen.
Its not all bad for the fanboys - xbots can take comfort in the knowledge that M$ will improve its marketshare somewhat, and further monopolize the industry by swallowing up lots of smaller companies.
Wiitards can take comfort in the knowledge that Ninty will again make a profit, and will get to clear out all those surplus gamecube parts they never managed to sell, which is good for their bottom line... and we all know, wiitards are happy when Ninty is making big money, even if they have to wait 6 months between games LOLOL!!!1
RoroCo @ Oct 10th 2006 3:23PM
@40... Really? Have you heard abou tthe shortage they are having? The PSP sold out quickly too... I wuld hardly concider the PSP a highly succesfull venture for Sony...
Dinny @ Oct 10th 2006 3:24PM
Given their own scores for each of the sections the total scores for each console break out like this.
Xbox 360: 35.25
PS3: 35.25
Wii: 30
Seems like more of a tie then a win.
jarardo @ Oct 10th 2006 3:25PM
This is so funny, I wonder how a winner is truly rated? I think a winner will be determined each and every time a person buys the console they choose and love it, this article sucks! I have been a PS fan for years now, but theres no way in hell I'm paying 600 for pretty graphics. I think the real winner in this will be nintendo, just based on the fact that if they sell a few million wiis they made a huge profit, therefore they will have capital to work on their next system, I forecast Sony filing bankruptcy in the next 5-6 years, they will have to sell about 5 or 6 million consoles in order to even make a slight profit, thats just bad business. No matter how well Microsoft does, and I believe they will fare ok, but we might not start looking for a XBOX version 4 anytime soon, they have plenty of other aspects of their business to fall back on. Lets just sit back and see how it all pans out in the end, but I think it's clear who has the best strategy to stay on top financially here, and to me, that's winning.
Robotic House Plant @ Oct 10th 2006 3:28PM
Personally, I think it's stupid to rate consoles against one another, when two of the consoles and their software haven't even shipped yet.
And I question some of the categories. It seems some were included for the sole purpose of allowing certain console strengths to be highlighted. Seriously... size and weight? I guess if I were transporting my console a lot that would be worth mentioning. But alas, once my console is installed, it rarely moves, and my TV shelf amazingly doesn't not buckle and luckily has enough room to store console, games, and still have space available.
I question why Wii wasn't graded higher in value.
I question why the PS3 controller is so highly rated without rumble.
Anyway, I'd much rather see comparisons made after all consoles are released and their software available.
m3mnoch @ Oct 10th 2006 3:30PM
what i find most amusing about it is that if you ran the same qualifications on last generation? well. the original xbox could justifiably take all of the categories but "library."
...and we all know how that generation turned out.
silly little gamepro.
m3mnoch.
DocWho @ Oct 10th 2006 3:31PM
Staying on top financially does not bring in the games.
The DS, GC and soon Wii are continuing to suffer from a lack of games.
And the GC barely had any games at all.
I don't own stock in these companies, therefore, financially means nothing to any gamer. Wii will have a very very small library again, and may only improve if Nintendo can prove they can sell Wii's, which is in doubt.
Instead of Wii being $199 and picking up market share, they chose to make money and sell at $250. Lost sales just to make some money? Less sales = smaller library.
thus #47, that was a dumb