cletus Posted October 27, 2010 Author Posted October 27, 2010 I was looking at the ps3 in shops yesterday. Can anybody tell me what difference/benefit i`d get from buying a 250gb console instead of a 120gb? Is it worth the money? Is there a vast noticable difference in gameplay?
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
benhben Posted October 27, 2010 Posted October 27, 2010 I was looking at the ps3 in shops yesterday. Can anybody tell me what difference/benefit i`d get from buying a 250gb console instead of a 120gb? Is it worth the money? Is there a vast noticable difference in gameplay? No difference in Gameplay. 250 or 120gb is just the size of the hard drive. The only reason you would need 250gb over 120 is if you want to use it as a media player and store films and music
Hughesy Posted October 27, 2010 Posted October 27, 2010 CLETUS - get yourself to Sainsburys ASAP Special deal today - PS3 Slim, 160G - £199...7 day only special price, however stocks are limited so will go quick. At 160GB you could still store probably 200+ films on if you wished!
Rover Down Under Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 Xbox (the new one) edges it for me for the following reasons: - Halo and Gears of War series - Way better online (you get what you pay for) - Better graphics - Faster load times - Already have Blu-Ray on my PC and it is hardly used anyway - discs are expensive, haven't got full HD TV and don't really watch movies often - Kinect - More ergonomic controller - Doesn't look like a sandwich toaster Wouldn't mind a PS3 but I just can't justify the expenditure when I have one perfectly good entertainment system, well 2 if you include the other half.
Hughesy Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 - Way better online (you get what you pay for) - Better graphics - Faster load times - Kinect Explain the 1st 3. Kinect - is that not the same as Move?! The same thing PS3 had out 1st?
Rover Down Under Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 Explain the 1st 3. Kinect - is that not the same as Move?! The same thing PS3 had out 1st? - Way better online (you get what you pay for) None of my PS3 owning mates play online because they say it takes ages to connect, drops out a lot and is quite laggy. Might be just an Aussie thing. - Better graphics Review of cross-platform games always say Xbox has the better graphics, shading and lighting on the PS3 suffer the most owing to the, apparently, revolutionary CELL chip. - Faster load times Some games seem to take an age to load on PS3, then there are those mad games that you have to spend 20 mins installing, WTF? - Kinect Kinect is nothing like Move. Entirely different technologies and you don't have to hold a dildo with a glowing ball on the end with Kinect. I'm sure you meant to say "Move...the thing Wii did first and PS3 copied."
LeChuck Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 - Halo and Gears of War series Personally FPS games bore me to tears, so I definitely prefer the exclusives of Little Big Planet, Uncharted 1 & 2, Heavy Rain etc. - Better graphics - ... haven't got full HD TV Better graphics? Anyway, it's a little contradicted by another point you made!
Rover Down Under Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 Personally FPS games bore me to tears, so I definitely prefer the exclusives of Little Big Planet, Uncharted 1 & 2, Heavy Rain etc. I never understand this one when people say "I don't like FPS" and then you find they own and love third-person shooters. Gears is a third-person shooter BTW and Halo is occassionally. Better graphics? Anyway, it's a little contradicted by another point you made! Not at all, lighting, shading, blending and colouring are just as noticeable on lower resolution screens. I'd be a complete hermit if I ever got a full-HD screen anyway, especially an LED, they make games look absolutely stunning. It's like the same "wow" effect you got from CRT to plasma/LCD all over again.
benhben Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 - Way better online (you get what you pay for) None of my PS3 owning mates play online because they say it takes ages to connect, drops out a lot and is quite laggy. Might be just an Aussie thing. - Better graphics Ive never had problems online, its as fast as offline play. Only game I had which was shocking online was Pes2008 and 2009. However that was the game and was as rubbish on both PS3, Xbox and WII. Ive played both and can tell no difference in the graphics and I have HD tv's. I think its generally agreed that the Xbox may have slightly better online play and has Halo and some other specific titles and is cheaper. The ps3 however has better reliability, more stylish in the day of black flat screen TV's (blends in) and blue ray. Personally I could never get on with an Xbox because I dont like the controllers (too big), but as a gaming console I dont think there is much difference.
LeChuck Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 I never understand this one when people say "I don't like FPS" and then you find they own and love third-person shooters. Gears is a third-person shooter BTW and Halo is occassionally. I literally don't own a FPS! I have played some that I like (Deus Ex springs to mind), but generally I prefer more varied games. Little Big Planet alone is worth getting a PS3 for, it's full of invention.
beerwins Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 I literally don't own a FPS! I have played some that I like (Deus Ex springs to mind), but generally I prefer more varied games. Little Big Planet alone is worth getting a PS3 for, it's full of invention. Not too mention the gazillion levels you can play online, its a wicked game. I tend to play FPS games a lot on the PC but now I am giving them a whirl on the console but find on the console its way more intense so its nice to have games like LBP to relax with and explore now and again.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.