Prizefight (week of August 26)
Xbox 360 Slim vs. PS3 Slim
Xbox 360 Slim vs. PS3 Slim
Just as Sony was beginning to enjoy the success of the PlayStation 3 Slim, in comes Microsoft with a brand-new thinned-down version of the Xbox 360. The new 360 is about 17 percent smaller than its predecessor and includes a 250GB hard drive and onboard Wi-Fi.
Now that both game consoles are competitively priced and offer most of the same functionality, only one can be crowned king.
We'll put these two console through six rounds of grueling battle to see which one emerges victorous.
Let's keep it clean, fellas. Ding, ding!
Editors' note: The Prizefight scoring system is as follows: Each judge rates on a zero-to-five-point scale. At the end of each round, we will take an average of the three judges' scores. The final score for each phone will be an average of all five rounds.
Round 1: Design
Here's where we examine the look, size, feel, and sex appeal of the consoles.| player | Jeff | Scott | Brian | the winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Microsoft Xbox 360 S (250GB) | 4With its 17 percent size decrease, sharp angles, venting, and touch-sensitive controls, the new Slim edges the PS3 in styling. Better yet, it's the only console that can be positioned horizontally or vertically out of the box. | 4It's sleeker, slimmer, and shorter, and a lot nicer than the clunky old 360, but it still looks like a PC plugged into your TV. | 4It's a console that has a defined look and personality to it. I love the black piano finish and its edgy look. | 4 |
 Sony PlayStation 3 Slim (120GB) | 3The PS3 Slim looks like a record player. It's too wide and square, and its matte-black finish comes off as cheap-looking. | 3Undoubtedly an improvement in the size department, but its matte plastic and nondescript look make it seem cheaper than the more eye-catching original PS3. | 3The PS3 Slim just looks dull when you put it next to the 360 Slim, and there are still shades of that George Foreman Grill design. | 3 |
Round 2: Features
What's the hardware packed inside? Are there other capabilities that distinguish it from the other? Here we're talking hard drive, Blu-ray, HDMI, Wi-Fi, and more.| player | Jeff | Scott | Brian | the winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Microsoft Xbox 360 S (250GB) | 4On par with what the PS3 Slim offers, but the lack of Blu-ray really prevents us from giving it the Features crown. | 3Built-in Wi-Fi should have been included to begin with, although it's nice to have here. But we're fed up with the proprietary hard drives--even worse, they're different from the old 360's. And there's still no Blu-ray. | 4It has everything you need and brings built-in Wi-Fi, but a proprietary hard drive and the lack of Blu-ray hurt it here. | 3.7 |
| Sony PlayStation 3 Slim (120GB) | 5A user-replaceable HDD and a Blu-ray player give the PS3 the edge in this category. | 5There's very little to dislike in terms of features: Blu-ray, user-replacable hard drives, and multidevice Bluetooth make the PS3 a true home media center. | 5I can pop in the hard drive that I want; Bluetooth compatibility covers myriad devices; and Blu-ray is now the difference maker, instead of a feature that didn't matter in the past. | 5 |
Round 3: Online services
Online gaming is an absolutely necessity these days. How do Xbox Live and the PlayStation Network compare?| player | Jeff | Scott | Brian | the winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Microsoft Xbox 360 S (250GB) | 5Xbox Live offers the best online experience hands down. It's tough to knock the $50 price tag now that Sony offers a similar premium service. | 5Xbox Live is one of the best reasons to own a 360. User profiles, online matchups, and a great Netflix app add up to the best online experience of this generation. Our only knock: the Gold version costs $50 a year. | 5Xbox Live set the bar for an online gaming service and continues to get better. The ease of use and its community make it worth the $50 yearly fee. | 5 |
| Sony PlayStation 3 Slim (120GB) | 3A few service hiccups and an overall lack of polish makes declaring a winner here easy. PlayStation Plus pales in comparison and PlayStation Home continues to fail to impress. | 3Few incentives to meet people online, no real online dashboard, and an awkward--to say the least--PlayStation Home hobble the otherwise solid PS3 experience. Sony's premium online service focuses on free content rather than a better experience. | 4The Playstation Network for online gaming is FREE, and that matters to me. Its network isn't always as reliable, it still lacks cross-game chatting, and inviting friends to game is not very elegant. Playstation Plus is just a service for additional gaming content, but it has yet to add any online features that enhance the PSN. | 3.3 |
Round 4: Games
Which console offers the best games? Here we'll look at exclusives, downloadable titles, and more.| player | Jeff | Scott | Brian | the winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Microsoft Xbox 360 S (250GB) | 4The console has lost out on some major exclusives, but the Fable, Gears of War, and Halo franchises all remain. Xbox 360 also had a fantastic summer in terms of exclusive XBLA games with titles such as Limbo. | 4Up until recently, the Xbox 360 was the go-to system for the best cross-platform versions of games, and excellent first-party titles, but the exclusive games have taken a dip as of late. The Xbox Live Arcade collection of games crosses a wide gamut. | 4Gears of War, Halo, and Fable highlight its exclusive franchises, but it's lost its edge when it comes to original first-party titles. Mass Effect is even defecting to the PS3. Xbox Live Arcade shines as the most diverse game library for a console, and it has exclusives that shine, such as Limbo and Shadow Complex. | 4 |
| Sony PlayStation 3 Slim (120GB) | 4The PS3 has made major headway in securing exclusive titles, but the PSN games are a bit behind what Xbox Live offers. | 4Finally catching up on the quality of third-party games, the recent strong advantage for the PS3 has been its superior library of exclusive games: Heavy Rain, God of War 3, and MLB: The Show, to name a few. PSN downloadable games offer many gems, but not as wide a selection as on Xbox Live Arcade. | 4The PS3 has taken the lead when it comes to diverse first-party exclusives like God of War, Uncharted, Little Big Planet, Heavy Rain, Killzone, Ratchet & Clank, Infamous, and more. But the PSN game library isn't nearly as meaty as the 360's. | 4 |
Round 5: Graphics performance
At the end of the day, the games we play must be pretty. So who takes it when we put Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 graphics side by side?| player | Jeff | Scott | Brian | the winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Microsoft Xbox 360 S (250GB) | 4Xbox 360 games and PlayStation 3 games, for the most part, look identical, but each console's exclusive games really stand out among the rest. | 4Despite being the oldest current-gen system, the Xbox 360 still shows off some of the smoothest graphics and animation around. | 4Xbox 360 exclusives look great and push the system to its fullest. When it comes to third-party titles, the 360 has had the slightest of edges, but its not enough to give it the round. | 4 |
| Sony PlayStation 3 Slim (120GB) | 4See above. | 4Technically, the PS3 can knock the socks off the Xbox 360, but we've rarely seen any games other than first-party titles that really take a step forward. Third-party games have often looked slightly worse than on the 360, but Sony's caught up and even slightly surpassed the 360. | 5I own both consoles and haven't seen a game that matches the scale and detail in God of War, Uncharted, and Killzone. Those three titles show you which console has the computing power chops. | 4.3 |
Round 6: Value
Finally, which console gives you the best overall bang for your buck?| player | Jeff | Scott | Brian | the winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Microsoft Xbox 360 S (250GB) | 4We love the fact that the Slim 360 stayed at the same price point, but it's also the same price as the PS3, which offers a Blu-ray player. This additional feature is what it all comes down to, and the 360 doesn't offer it. Plus, Xbox Live still costs $50 per year, and there are more accessories to buy for a 360 than a PS3. | 3After all these years, it feels like the Xbox 360 should be less expensive than it is. It's hard to complain with the value, but it's still really 2005 technology. | 4Both consoles are $299, and you're getting a great gaming experience either way. There is value in the Xbox Live service, but it still costs $50 per year. | 3.7 |
| Sony PlayStation 3 Slim (120GB) | 5All the features you've come to expect, but the addition of a Blu-ray player puts the PS3 over the top. | 5A $299 price tag for an upgradable Blu-ray player that can also double as a game system makes the versatile PS3 the best hardware value. What seemed like a gimmick in 2006 is now an edge in favor of Sony. | 5The difference maker is the Blu-ray player, which is still rated one of CNET's top Blu-ray players overall. Plus a free network that is more than satisfactory. We used to not care about Blu-ray a couple years ago, but now we do. | 5 |
The winner is...
Winner
Sony PlayStation 3 Slim (120GB) (4.10 pts)
Runner-Up
Microsoft Xbox 360 S (250GB) (4.06 pts)
In one of the closest Prizefights ever, we actually had to go to the hundredths of a point to settle this one. In all fairness, it seems we all agree that both consoles are excellent products and value, but a winner must be crowned.
I've come to DISLIKE the sensor control for the disc drawer; I've inadvertently activated it too many times by merely walking too close to it while passing by the Shorty's current resting spot. I've had better luck with the sensor for the power switch, however, rarely accidentally activating that. I understand the corporate reasons for not including Blu-Ray but it's still a loss in value to the end user. As for the losses in exclusive titles; it really seems that Microsoft isn't willing to fork out the sort of $$$ it takes to keep developers from jumping ship. I'm guessing the crossover to PCs isn't generating the sort of secondary revenue that Redmond/developers were hoping for?
Xbox Live still has it over PSN and frankly I never could find much fault for its $50/yr fee anyways...I guess I'm just not THAT cheap. Plus for me, the Wi-Fi unit in my Chubby stopped working really early on in its life, forcing me to CAT5 it in order to get online. I use my 360 Shorty more than my PS3 Chubby these days, but I suspect that's more out of the Shorty's newness than for anything else. The new 360 is a lot quieter than before, and definitely more silent than the Chubby, but occasional discs will still spin up a noisy racket (whine). As for cross-platform titles...I've gotten to the point--and age--where I tend to wait for user reviews before buying a new game title, particularly with cross-platform video games. Where one platform rates a game higher than on another, I go for that version (thank you, Amazon, for the providing that info). Sometimes it's 360, sometimes it's PS3.
In the end, I think it comes down to two things: having Blu-Ray vs having a better online experience AND the ability to play legacy game titles. After just having replayed Halo for the original Xbox on the Shorty, it's hard to find fault with allowing the old game titles to work on the newest 360 when the new PS3 Slim similarly is woefully lobotomized, but swapping discs with Mass Effect 2 DOES point out the inconvenience (and wastefulness) of not having a larger cap optical drive when the tech is clearly available. The larger hard drive (250GB vs 160GB with the PS3 Slim's recent update) just isn't nearly enough to offset the hardware advantage of having BD capability. But I think I still the value Xbox Live and the legacy games from the original Xbox is enough to give the advantage to the Shorty, but only just. Microsoft really would have had the clearly better console if it only had the BD drive.
Xbox users remain #anon and have system easier to create games for.
who is winner now?
IMHO, you need to own both! There are way too many amazing exclusives and Xbox Live Arcade games you can't get on the PS3, and for the past 2 years, the PS3's game library has grown immensely that you simply cannot pass up on those games either because they aren't on the 360.
If you're a kid and your parents aren't very rich, here's one way to convince'em to buy both! Get a 360, then convince your parents to buy a PS3 for Blu-Ray Movies and Avatar in 3D!!! Then show them how much a Blu-Ray player really costs and once they realize the prices are pretty much the same thing, they will get a $300 PS3 rather than some $200 to $400 Blu-Ray player.
For the record I have both and totally agree that currently the PS3 is a better value with the built in BD player, but it's pretty obvious that we're slowly transitioning to a future where "on demand" content will be the norm. M$ is simply trying to leverage that reality against not having a costly BD drive in their system.
Sony and the Movie Studios want to prevent this but Microsoft understand that its going to happen.
Blu-Ray is a Sony owned technology. Other companies are allowed to use it and make their own Blu-Ray players but they have to pay for the license from Sony. Paying Sony to use one of their technologies is probably something Michrosoft does not want to do. Including a Blu-Ray player in the 360 would most likely cause the price to increase, even for the arcade bundle, to compensate for the fees they have to pay to license the technology not to mention the cost to build and implement the hardware itself and to adapt all current 360 hardware to play nice with the Blu-Ray player and adapt all future software to actually use it.
It's not really just a simple matter of sticking a Blu-Ray drive in the console methinks.
Just a thought. I totally agree that Microsoft should try a bit harder at getting more HD content onto the console via video streaming etc, but I can say that I honestly don't see BluRay coming to Xbox any time soon.
both have been out for enough time that i think we should just let them be who they are and quit fighting about it. beside, do you really want a 360 that acts just like a PS3 and vice versa? what's the point then? But since most of the 'great' games are war/blood and guts/shoot em up types, i guess calling this a console 'war' is fitting.
first one to drop below 150 with a hard drive gets my money.
Heck remember when the nintendo was the only game in town and we were excited to get a stupid power glove to wear that made no sense
Rage, the game waited for next year, by ID is said to have more content in the version for PS3. Any way, it would be that or have to change lots of discs in the Xbox 360 version.
Not sure if mentioned but the size of the power supply is MUCH smaller then the old one on the original Xbox.....and now i can hear EVERYTHING and not the slim running when the disc is spinning. Again....a fanboy of a PSCRAP, and a blinders on review, IMO.
Overall they are almost on par with each other. Blue Tooth does give the PS3 an edge if you use accessories.
As for the hard drive, you can put a TB hard drive in the PS3 if you desire, how large a HD can you purchase for your XBox? And how much does MS charge for it?
If Sony was going to upgrade the network connections in the PS3, I would ask for a Gigabit wired connection before I would ask to have the wireless upgraded.
Wireless N was a nice move for X360, no doubt. But other than that, exactly what does the X360 have on the PS3? Noise level is still high with the X360 slim; even though improved, there is still a heating issue; $50 per year may not be much for online game play, unless you have three or four people who want their own account; and the PS3 has the processing and graphics superiority. And all that game advantage the X360 had? Yeah, that's inevitably moving away as PS3 gets better proprietary games and more 3rd party development.
None if this means the X360 is bad -- it's not. In fact, it's a great gaming console. But pull your head out of your rectum for a moment and open your eyes. The PS3 is taking over.
Oh yeah, how are all those controller batteries doing for you?
the xbox live community is truly magnificently simple and robust. however, it does cost you. personally, think ps3's online service, and the slightly more mature community, is extremely valuable at 0.00 annually.
If you already own a Blu Ray player and want the better system for games, then go with the 360. Either way you can't wrong.
Yes the PS3 has a Bluray player, but i have no desire to 1) actually pay for a movie when i can download it off of th Net and 2) pay the retarded amount of $25 PER movie!
So clearly the Bluray drive is of no importance to me and even if the Xbox had a bluray drive, it would still be better
Can't go wrong with either, although I prefer PS just cuz of blu-ray (i prefer buying blu-ray n dvds over online streaming or renting), but both are equally good in my opinion
Same with slim.
And, you DO realize that the PS3 games come on Blu-ray right? Some of those games may require more than one DVD if not for blu-ray. Blu-ray is also more scratch resistant than DVD.
I have about 700 movies on DVD/Blu-ray at home, at least 100-150 of them are Blu-ray. Yes, I do watch them over (that's the entire point behind purchasing them instead of renting them). Like a good book, I like to watch a good movie several times. Over the years I may watch a movie over and over and over. I bet I have watched the first Star Wars movie 50 times. How much would that have cost to rent? At at least $2 per rental I would say $100, since I bought the disc and it only cost about $12 (CDN) I have actually saved $88. That is just one example of a DVD. I also have lots of movies on blu-ray I will watch over and over.
Sorry to have to tell you this but 90% of blu-ray movies do not cost anywhere close to the price of a new game (where did you get that idea from?). At best, you may find some TV series that are expensive for a season, or some IMAX shows (documentaries mostly) but they are also available at high prices on DVD. I concede there are SOME companies who actually believe their new blu-ray movie releases are worth over $25. I don't purchase those movies because their prices are a rip-off, however that's not blu-rays fault. I also have lots of games on my PS3 that I play a few times a week. Most of my gaming is on a real gaming system (a computer) and not on a toy gaming system (a console).
When you see someone with hundreds of movies on DVD, how about asking them how often they watch them instead of just assuming you already know?
The lack of built in wifi and bluray drive made the decision simple, along with my preference for PS3s bluetooth set up for accessories and lack of a gigantic power brick. Even though there are a few XBox only games that I'd like to play, my reality is that I don't choose to spend my free time on games very often. I like having the ability to play games, which is why I went for the PS3 over a dedicated BluRay player, but it's the third or fourth most used feature on my console behind the BluRay/DVD player, NetFlix, and serving audio to my A/V system.
Although I know a lot of other home theater users swear by their PS3s, my priorities probably make me an atypical console customer. Still, I definitely concur with the both overall conclusions of this shootout. First, that the PS3 is still, just slightly, the better system and second, that both systems are pretty amazing values.