[citation][nom]giovanni86[/nom]The hardware is there stop whining.
[/citation]
Well, maybe, but TBH it's pretty unreliable. That's the real problem, is longevity. The heat issues point to a product released way before it was ready. I have a bunch of old consoles spanning back to the original NES, and they all still work (though the NES is finicky as it always has been). If I'm lucky, I can't count on my 360 lasting more than a few more years, which conveniently, is about when the next one is expected to come out. And being stuck with "officially approved" HDD's and wireless adapters is worse than any Apple product that I know of. Heck, the PS3 doesn't care what HDD you put in it, but he 360 requires you to buy the ultra-outrageously-overpriced and under-performing HD that they say will work with it. It's a 2.5" SATA drive inside that cartridge, for crying out loud! I want to be able to actually use the feature of ripping games to the HD so the loud and too-hot optical drive doesn't need to be working ovrertime to kill the whole system, and I want the benefits of faster loading times that come with using the HD for game storage. But the 20GB my system came with ain't gonna cut it, and I don't feel like paying $90 for an under-powered 802.11b wireless adapter. Sure, there are other options for the wireless (an eternal WiFi bridge setup as a network adapter, but seen as an Ethernet LAN connection) but the HD is a ripoff. I can get a good 320GB 7200RPM SATA drive that can fit in the XBOX for $80, but I have to pay $140 for an "approved" 120GB 4200RPM SATA drive. I can pay $55 for the equivalent 5400RPM SATA drive, and it'll be faster. So why not just put in a larger, cheaper third-party drive? Because Micorsoft put in a special firmware key that rejects non-MS-branded drives. You can spoof it for some drives, but nothing larger than 120GB, and it has to be a specific model as well.
[citation][nom]giovanni86[/nom]There is no dramatic difference in graphics or the amount of CPU power needed in games today.
[/citation]
Only because, for consoles, they only make the game as good looking as the hardware can allow. If they had better hardware to work with, they'd use as much of it as possible. Even though the 360 wowed me with it's graphics, it wasn't long before I could pick out all of the problems with it's rendering engine. Across the board, it seems like no-one can figure out how to make colors, lighting, and textures consistently accurate or glitch-free. The PS3 games do a much better job with this, and I'm willing to bet that there's a little more going on than just the developers' effort in paying attention to detail, and even Gran Turismo 4 on PS2 does significantly better than Forza 2 in these regards, even with less polygons.
[citation][nom]giovanni86[/nom]The updates look great, i am looking forward to them all on my Xbox. Xbox 360 has the best dashboard hands down, beats the crap out of PS3's.
[/citation]
Well, I can't speak much of the PS3's dashboard, but I can tell you I prefer the old XBOX dashboard over the cluttered, confused "NXE" dashboard. The "OXE" was much more user friendly. Turn your console on now, and what does it do? It puts the marketplace up front and center. It wants you to get distracted and buy things. And what happened to things like dashboard themes? things like that that people already payed money for that were ruined by the NXE. And I liked it even better before I connected to XBL and got bombarded with advertisements before actually even playing a game. Hell, I'd take the Wii's homepage over the NXE any day.
Facebook
Twitter