360 vs. PS3... yes another thread

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » August 9, 2006, 1:51 am

I am completely torn between which of the two of these I am going to buy, so I figured I would rile up another Winnow vs. everyone thread and see if I can maybe read something in the process that will swing me one way or the other.

To be honest, for games I am leaning towards the 360 except for one huge detail.. ASSASSINS CREED.. I really don't know if I can get myself to buy the 360 if this game indeed does not come out for it.

On the other hand I would like to try Dead Rising, Gears of War, FEAR, the other game by the people that did FEAR.. Oblivion.. Just off the top of my head.

Before I started reading about Assassins Creed it was an easy choice.. The only games I would really be missing out on for the PS3 would be Final Fantasy.. and I refuse to base my system choice solely on that game after how bad the last couple have sucked, but there has to be other exclusives for the PS3 that look great. And PLEASE don't say Gran Turismo..

So I guess just let the opinion's fly.. What games do you forsee being a big advantage that are exclusive to one or the other, etc etc..

I know there are other threads on this but I wanted to try and avoid sifting through them after how ridiculous they got.

Leonaerd · Post by **Leonaerd** » August 9, 2006, 2:15 am

and I refuse to base my system choice solely on that game after how bad the last couple have sucked,

X-2 sucked.

Final Fantasy X got better as more time and effort was put into it. If you're the type that strategizes every nook and cranny of a character's development (which you must not be, for you'd've certainly liked the game), then for you the game would've had limitless value. Easily 200 hours.

Final Fantasy VIII was awesome because by the end of the game, if you put the right effort into the character creation, beating it was a snap and it was very satisfying because it was deserved. So many RPGs (including most of the final fantasy games) left the hardcore strategist nut wanting more. Not VIII.

Final Fantasy X was awesome for the same reasons... with the Monster Arena as a welcome and nut-friendly addition.

Nut. Nut nut nut. Nut.

But to pertain to the discussion, it appears the 360 is a more relevant choice at this point. If you're really that torn, wait until the release of the PS3, because the developers will flock to one system over the other, and until its release there's no way to know where the exclusives will be.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 9, 2006, 2:45 am

PS3 is going to have a horrible set of games at release. You're looking at about 15 months before the PS3 has games to match what the 360 has now...and by then of course, the 360 will have twice as many again, and this time, not all cheesy games (except for the cocksucking exclusive EA NFL football games that both PS3 and 360 will have).

Contrary to what Sony will have you believe, I don't see any developers boasting about how easy a time they're having developing games for the PS3's new cell processor. It should be interesting to see how their release games compare to Gears of War for the 360 released at the same time, and then again, when Sony has a game equivalent to Gears of War out, how the new 360 games look at that time.

As for Assassin's Creed:

Assassin's Creed for Xbox 360 gets previewed

Posted Jul 25th 2006 6:55PM by Ross Miller

CVG, in case you didn't know, is kind of a big deal. In fact, they are so much cooler than us that they can preview the Xbox 360 version of Assassin's Creed -- a title whose existence has been a mystery -- like it is no big deal.

The preview is pretty standard fare -- the moves are cool, it looks purdy, the HUD is a bit anachronistic. Really, the news here is that CVG has seen the Xbox 360 version (or have seen a build that Ubisoft confirmed as Xbox 360-bound), thus dissolving the exclusivity ambiguity.

No release date, general or specific, was announced, nor was there talk of how the game controls (an indication the CVG team likely did not see a playable version). This is another PS3 title that was once thought exclusive but now confirmed multiplatform. It could still be a timed exclusive for Sony, but to what extent is the company's PR line (i.e. not concerned with exclusives) reflective of internal opinion?

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » August 9, 2006, 2:49 am

Don't see why one would wait, unless funds were a severe factor. The 360 has enough even now to pique the interests of most gamers (re: Oblivion).

PS3 may be good or bad...doesn't really fucking matter if you can't make up your fucking mind to buy one of them.

*~*stragi*~* · Post by ***~*stragi*~*** » August 9, 2006, 3:15 am

hey let me make this easy

one is out the other isnt

close thread

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » August 9, 2006, 7:53 am

Assasin's Creed has been rumored over and over as coming to the 360 and those rumors have been shot down every time by Ubi. Either people really want this or this is the worst kept timed exclusive secret the industry has ever seen.

Being on the fence, you havta ask yourself a few questions:

1 - Do you care about Back Compat with your current game collection?

MS fucked up with BC by going the emulation route. I however believe it was that or dropping support for old titles completely, and that would've been even worse.

PS3 claims to be able to play all back titles except for a handful of obscure PS1 games (I read this somewhere, not sure where) so this would be your best bet.

2 - What do you want the machine to do?

If you have interest in HD movies, then while both have the ability(360 will have it by Nov 17 I'm positive), it all depends on the horse you wish to back. BluRay or HD-DVD. If you don't care about HD movies or you prefer to get a stand-alone player, at least the 360 will save you a few hundred bucks in the short term.

As far as a media player is concerned, PS3 is supposed to have PVR capabilities built in. How well they will pull this off is anyone's guess. XBox360 has extender capabilities so if you have media center or plan on getting Vista Home Premium/Ultimate, your computer can act as the PVR and relay all that to your TV through the 360. (I use the Vista Ultimate Build 5472 with the 360 as an extender for it and it works well enbough for day to day use now. A few glitches or slowdowns now and again with menu surfing however I have no doubt that the functionality will be ready for Vista Launch)

3- Titles availalbe in the short term.

MS has the upper hand on this as people are developping now and there's some great titles available now/coming soon.

There's going to be a steep curve with the PS3 out the gates but apparently there was also one for the PS2 that got solved by a few companies making engines and licensing out to other developpers.
It might be a good 12-18 months as you said before you start getting non-sports games.

Here's also XBLA that's something I really never expected. I play more games here than I do real 360 games. They don't go with flashy graphics here. It's all about the gameplay.

Online System

Not much I can really say about this other than my own hypothesis of what Sony is doing(which indulge me cause I'm going to do =P)

I believe that Sony will have the basis in place and it will be free. they'll have a friends list and some sort of messenging interface. Leaderboards and the such I have no idea. I have heard rumors that they'll have something like the 360's Gamerscore/Achievements and that they were tentatively called Entitlements. I also thing that the PS3 is going to act as a hardware based iTunes and be a storefront for(at the beginning) Sony media(video/music/TV shows). If Sony does well selling it's own stuff there, others may follow suit and start using it for digital distribution.

I believe that gaming servers will be hosted by the 3rd party dev/publisher and that Sony won't really be looking into that part of the business. (I'm hoping for the players sake that they at least enforce quality of service on this component of games or it could be a black eye on the whole system).

I won't emphasise on the Live service. It's well known that it's a pay to play model and it works really well.

Reliability:
You're aware most likely of the 360 launch issues and the red ring of death on the 360's. MS had to bump it's Original Warrenty to 6 months from 90 days. They're coming out with another version of the 360 next year with a 60nm processor (same tech in the new Intel Core-Duo processors) that will run significantly cooler but at the same clock rate as the current 360. There are some issues there and if you go with the 360, make sure you either get it with extended warrenty at a store that takes returns easily or get the MS extended warrenty.
I bought the MS support contract cause I didn't get a store extended warrenty and theirs starts after the the 6 month default one. As a result, my 360 is warrentied until November 2008 and from what I read on the official XBox forum, MS has been really good at replacing 360's expediently. Apparently the units manufactured in 2006 have been more reliable than the launch systems but there's no hard numbers to support this. MS is saying that the failure rate is at about 3% and if you're breaks out of warrenty, MS charges 120$ for repair/replacement.

The PS3, there's no way to say until the system launches. From the stuff I've read in message boards, PS hardware has, in the past, had a tendency to fail in the 18-24 month rante. I've heard about people saying they bought 3-4 PS1/PS2's in the life of the product cause their's fails. Wether this will prove true with the PS3 remains to be seen although at this pricepoint, a failure of that type will hurt all the more.

Overall it's really a decision of what you want to do with your gaming system. I've never been an adopter of the PS/PS2 and usually got my systems late in the cycle at a deep discount. I'm also somewhat biased cause I already own a 360 and I love it(my wife plays it, although XBLA titles only. There's something I though I'd never see).

I hate the title price point however gamefly-type services have helped in that regard and the PS3 title price won't be better.

And as Stragi said, one is here and the other isn't. If you're in a hurry there isn't much options. If you're satisfied with your gaming currently, just wait till March/April of next year. The PS3 availability issues should be all cleared up and you'd have a much clearer overall picture of what's offered for both. For that type of money, you really don't want to regret your choice later on.

Syenye · Post by **Syenye** » August 9, 2006, 11:45 am

the assassin's creed on 360 is still just a rumor at this point, but with the way things are shaping up, i think it will be released on another system eventually, if not right away. i think most of the others will do the same. square enix released FFXI for 360, i can't really see them developing exclusively for the PS3. and if ps3 sales are disappointing, i'm betting most developers won't be going for exclusivity... developing for the ps3 is too costly for that.

it might also be a while before you can get a ps3. the local ebgames/gamestop told me that they most likely won't be taking preorders, after what happened with the 360. and i doubt sony will ship too optimistically after the psp flopped on release day.

if i were you, i'd buy a 360 and a few games, and then marvel at the money i saved by not buying a ps3. then i'd take that money to amazon and buy a guide on how to use the internet.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 9, 2006, 12:47 pm

Keep in mind that you can buy 5+ games (depending on versions of 360 and PS3 consoles) for your 360 with the money your save not shelling out money for a Blu-ray.

I suppose you could look at it that way...for the same price, a 360 bundled with 5 games of your choosing or a PS3 that you'll actually be able to get ahold of sometime early in 2007 with no games and not many to choose from when you do go looking for the next year beyond that.

miir · Post by **miir** » August 9, 2006, 12:48 pm

But to pertain to the discussion, it appears the 360 is a more relevant choice at this point.

Leonaerd · Post by **Leonaerd** » August 9, 2006, 2:41 pm

miir wrote:
But to pertain to the discussion, it appears the 360 is a more relevant choice at this point.

Of course it was obvious. But he asked, so I answered. Better use the same pic again for this sentence.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 9, 2006, 4:08 pm

I prefer this one (unless it red-x's!)

Jice Virago · Post by **Jice Virago** » August 9, 2006, 8:01 pm

It really comes down to preference and how lazy/cheap you are.

X-Box 360-
Pro:
Its out now.
XBLA has some fun stuff in it for cheap.
Its easier to develop on.
It has tons of shooters.
Its less expensive.

Con:
It has tons of shooters... and not much else.
Most of what is on XBLA can be gotten free if you have a cheap PC and emulators.
Lack of real backwards compatability hurt the system.
Controller lacks a true Digital D Pad (minor, but really annoying in SF2 and similar games).
No RPGs outside of Oblivion.

PS3-
Pros:
Superior potential if the console has the abilities being touted.
Superior controller (don't reinvent the wheel, though the 360 controller is much improved over its predecessors)
Superior third party liscenses (Square is kingmaker for most people)
True backwards compatability.

Cons-
Expensive.
Untested online features that may prove pointless.
Forcing Blue Ray format on users (this may end up positive, but not likely)
Harder to develop on (PS2 went through this, there will be some delay in quality titles while developers work out the kinks)
Microsoft/Sony cock fencing will make it less LAN friendly than the 360

I have a 360. It played SF2 for me, until I got fed up with the controller. Now my wife plays some marble game on it while I await Jade Empire 2 and a better controller. Someday I might replay Oblivion.

I will be getting a PS3 and I will be confident in the knowledge that it will play more games I own the day it is released than the 360 will ever have, because of backwards compatability. I know it will have all the newer RPGs I want because Microsoft cannot get its foot in the door of that genre.

I consider both consoles worth the money, atm, but if your still filling out your pubes and heavy into pirated software and modding, the 360 has more potential. If you want RPGs of real quality and quantity, get the PS3.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » August 9, 2006, 8:39 pm

I'm still waiting anxiously for Enchanted Arms, Mass Effect, Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey.

Trias · Post by **Trias** » August 9, 2006, 8:51 pm

i'll be picking up enchanted arms when it comes out end of August. I don't have very high hopes for it, but it looks decent enough to keep me amused.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 9, 2006, 9:00 pm

Jice Virago wrote:
PS3-
Pros:
Superior potential if the console has the abilities being touted.
Superior controller (don't reinvent the wheel, though the 360 controller is much improved over its predecessors)
Superior third party liscenses (Square is kingmaker for most people)
True backwards compatability.

Is this backward compatability a for sure thing or promised like the 360's? Will you stake your life on it?!!!

"Superior potential"
will believe it when I see it in an actual game.

Can't wait to see your posts after you get the PS3 and nothing is available and you fall asleep.

Jice Virago · Post by **Jice Virago** » August 9, 2006, 9:49 pm

Holy fanboi rage!

But to answer your question, I have played more PS1 RPGs than individual 360 games since the console has come out. Of all the PS1 RPGs only FF5 has ever had any issues and those were minor. My 360 literally won't run half the Xbox shit I own at all and does not run most of it flawlessly, to say nothing of the fact that I have no desire to unlock all the shit in MK6 again since it won't transfer saves at all. The Xbox and 360 had far more similarities than the Ps1 and Ps2, knew this feature to be important, and still MS fucked it up and decided patching later was the best course of action. I feel pretty confident that the emulation will be there, considering that there are more PS2 titles in the works than 360 titles (and as many Atari 2600 titles in the works than new Xbox titles atm) and Sony will want to migrate their user base like they did with the PS2.

If thats not enough to outline my thoughts, I have three words for you:

Barbie Horse Adventures

Whoever ported this fucking game over before ESPN2k5 should be put to death or made to work the help desk phone lines when Vista gets released.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » August 9, 2006, 10:28 pm

Yeah cause I'm sure barbie Horse adventures really pushed the Nvidia chip that was in that XBox. The reason it's there is probably cuase it used graphic technology that was so rudimentary that practically no change needed to be done to get it to work, not that they did it at the expense of other games.

Jice Virago · Post by **Jice Virago** » August 10, 2006, 12:55 am

Ok let me try to put it in Xbox fanboi terms:

Are you pleased that halo 1 & 2 still freeze up periodically knowing they spent even 10 seconds on making Barbie Horse Adventures work? Given how much they have riding on that franchise, there should have been nothing else worked on until those games ran flawlessly.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 10, 2006, 1:06 am

Who cares about backward compatability? It's over hyped.

I haven't once had the urge to play an old game on my 360 and I certainly haven't had the urge to drag out my PS2 (cept just once for FFX!)

Fuck the old xbox and ps2 games. Live has shown that if people want to go old school, they go really old school with Street Fighter II, Gallactica etc...and again, 360 arcade leads the way, with probably Wii second and PS3 a distant and buggy third whenever it comes out.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » August 10, 2006, 1:19 am

Good thread so far, keep it coming!!!

Backward compatibility will not be much of an issue with me for the 360 if that is what I decide to buy, as I have never owned an xbox, and do not plan on buying the 360 to purchase old xbox games. I have a shelf full of ps2 and ps1 games that I never finished (including pretty much every rpg ever made for the ps1) and I can't even get myself to put one of those in until I buy a new system.

I think that is how I may differ from a lot of people, I generally do not ever play a console game from start to finish twice. There are few exceptions to this for me, I could probably count them on one hand.

The Blue Ray vs. HD DVD thing means absolutely nothing to mean at the moment because I don't even own a HD tv (although I do plan to soon). I am very sure that either one of them will look great.

The PS3 is a hard one for me, being as not a whole lot of info has been released about it at all (especially considering its being released in 4 months), but most of what I have heard is really turning me off. The cost of games is a big one, the lack of titles being another, and the lack of a solid online setup could be a big hit for me too because the few shooter games I would like to buy, I would like to play online.. And while I really liked killzone, the lack of a good online set up, and the lack of options to do something so basic as shut certain weapons off for an online game really sucked.

The bottom line is I am not totally convinced that there will be a huge difference in the capabillities of the two systems (and I am by no means a Microsoft fanboy).

I think I am starting to lean in the direction of the 360, heavily due to a fact that someone stated above; I can buy the 360 bundle, and 4 games for the price that I could get the PS3 with no games. Another big reason is I do not have one reserved, a lot of places aren't even taking reservations, and I have zero intention of taking a day off of work so I can camp in a parking lot with a bunch of other losers to MAYBE get a PS3.

Bottom line is I want games now, and while November is a fine wait time for me, waiting until the middle of next year is not. Besides, I could just buy a 360 now, and by the time there were more than 2 or 3 games I wanted to play for the PS3, I could afford to grab one of them as well.

I am really hesitant about the PS3 on release as well considering I worked at Sears when the PS2 was released, so I grabbed one off the trailer before it even made it to the sales floor, and it was broken inside of 2 days. I brought that one back and exchanged it, and that one broke 1 week later. I bought another one that lasted me two years, then broke, and now I have one of the slim PS2's which I bought on the same day GTA San Andreas came out (cause my other was broken) and it is still working, but I have barely used it.

I can't imagine how pissed off I would be ( or anyone would be, for that matter) if I spent 600 dollars + games and accessories for a PS3 and it broke in a week, and I had to eat the cost, or wait for a new one to be mailed out to me.. I just don't know if it is worth the risk provided my previous experiences with sony consoles.

Even after stating all that, I am not totally convinced.. but I have time I guess.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » August 10, 2006, 1:22 am

Winnow wrote:Who cares about backward compatability? It's over hyped.

I haven't once had the urge to play an old game on my 360 and I certainly haven't had the urge to drag out my PS2 (cept just once for FFX!)

Fuck the old xbox and ps2 games. Live has shown that if people want to go old school, they go really old school with Street Fighter II, Gallactica etc...and again, 360 arcade leads the way, with probably Wii second and PS3 a distant and buggy third whenever it comes out.

I have to strongly disagree with you on the 360 arcade being better then the Wii. If they really make ALL nintendo games available for play, I would spend 200 dollars on that console JUST for that.. There are so many great Nintendo games that nothing could ever rival.. No arcade, no new console, no computer game, nothing.. Nintendo is going to take a heaping steamer on its competition this round with that capabillity alone, not to mention a really kick ass new zelda game, and possibly a good metroid game as well.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » August 10, 2006, 7:24 am

Jice Virago wrote:Ok let me try to put it in Xbox fanboi terms:

Are you pleased that halo 1 & 2 still freeze up periodically knowing they spent even 10 seconds on making Barbie Horse Adventures work? Given how much they have riding on that franchise, there should have been nothing else worked on until those games ran flawlessly.

I played through Halo 1(was bundled with my xbox) once and never played Halo 2 at all. I don't really see the buzz about that franchise and have always thought that the Master Chief is an unimaginatively bad character.

I agree with Funk about the Nintendo back-catalog being available for the Wii. I also would get one of those for a handful of those games.

I could finally try to finish Blaster Master and replay some favorites like River City Ransom and Crystalis.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » August 10, 2006, 10:54 am

i am still utterly convinced as i was 18 years ago that blaster master can't be beat without a game genie.

Syenye · Post by **Syenye** » August 10, 2006, 11:36 am

i can't wait to play bubble bobble on my wii. and snake rattle and roll.

microsoft was touting backwards compatibility as one of the perks of the 360 this time last year, and look at how well that turned out for them. it's never really been an issue for me though. and i can play my ps1/2 games on my ps1 or 2.

i'd have to agree with winnow and say that backwards compatibility is overrated.

also: next guitar hero for the 360.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » August 10, 2006, 11:42 am

Syenye wrote:i'd have to agree with winnow and say that backwards compatibility is overrated.

also: next guitar hero for the 360.

I think that the backwards compatibility is not overrated when there are a lack of available games for that console.

...as for the second point above, I have been tempted to pick up a PS2 several times just for Guitar Hero. I have not given in, and I will continue to hold out for the 360 version.

Syenye · Post by **Syenye** » August 10, 2006, 11:56 am

if it can handle it natively, then sure, backwards compatibility is a good thing. but i already paid for a ps1 and a ps2, and i don't want to pay for them again inside of a ps3. also, only games that follow sony's guidelines will be playable on the ps3.

the only game i can really see wanting to play is guitaro hero, and they've stated that USB controllers for the ps1/2 will work on the ps3... does that mean i'll need another adapter for the guitar hero controller in addition to the one i'd need to play my saved games?

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 10, 2006, 12:52 pm

Trying to have any kind of console discussion is a complete waste of time on this forum, as the fantards crawl out of their holes in the gamefaqs.com forums and shit everything up.

BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY MEANS NOTHING TO ME BTW I CAN'T WAIT TO PLAY ALL THE OLD NINTENDO GAMES ON MY WII HURR HURRRRR

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 10, 2006, 1:01 pm

360's Live Arcade is for those that like to live in the past, not backwards compatibility.

As for original games coming out, the 360 has just as many or more than the PS3. There is a top 50 list in the lastest EGM found here:

http://www.veeshanvault.org/forums/view ... hp?t=18316

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » August 10, 2006, 1:06 pm

Although I don't think that was directed at me, what I will say on the issue is this.. The Wii is the only place backwards compatibillity matters to me (although I think there is a big difference between being able to physically put a ps1 disc into your PS3, and being able to download old Nintendo games as a big selling point of the Wii)

It's worthless on the PS3 and 360..

Syenye · Post by **Syenye** » August 10, 2006, 1:34 pm

as stated previously, backwards compatibility in the xbox/playstation lines is meaningless because those consoles and games are still available and cheap. the nintendo line is different. you can't beat the NES lineup, and it's hard to find the consoles and games in playable condition.

and backwards compatibility for the wii isn't the same as it is for the ps3/360.

Akanae · Post by **Akanae** » August 10, 2006, 2:19 pm

It's not just about finding the systems/games in playable condition. I still have my original NES, Super NES, and Nintendo 64 and all of the games I want. They all work fine (aside from the occasional green screen on the NES). It's just a pain in the ass to have all of them connnected and deal with the short controller cords.

I will most likely purchase games I already own, and can still play, on the Wii just for the ease of use.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » August 10, 2006, 2:25 pm

Winnow wrote:Live has shown that if people want to go old school, they go really old school with Street Fighter II, Gallactica etc...

Galaga.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 10, 2006, 2:35 pm

Aslanna wrote:
Winnow wrote:Live has shown that if people want to go old school, they go really old school with Street Fighter II, Gallactica etc...
Galaga.

I had that typed out but it just didn't look right! Still doesn't! I don't like the look of the word.

I had fun with the "Galaga" trial on the 360 but you can play these games free on the net:

http://www.tripletsandus.com/80s/80s_games/galaga.htm

Nice to have Live high scores, etc. though.

Sparty · Post by **Sparty** » August 10, 2006, 4:10 pm

Xbox360 > PS3

My name is Sparty

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » August 10, 2006, 4:36 pm

As much as backwards compatability is important to me, I honestly don't know why anyone would want it on the 360. There are no XBox games worth playing again. Stick to cool shit like Oblivion, and... uh... I'm sure it will have some other really good games soon.

I have no real faith in any of the companies to deliver, but I do hope one does. The minute one does, they will have my money. Not a second before. If XBox someday has a good library, and the PS3 doesn't explode when you plug it in, I may even get both.

Not holding my breath at this stage though.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 16, 2006, 8:11 pm

Some hype control news for the PS3:

There's been a lot of interest in the PS3 due to its stated 1080p output for both games and movies (via Blu-ray). What's interesting is that a lot of folks don't realize how meaningless 1080p actually is in this generation.

Let's take games first. The PS3 has roughly the same pixel-pushing capabilities as the Xbox 360. Don't need to take my word for it, it'll be obvious soon enough over the next year. Even if this wasn't the case, consider we now live in a multi-platform development world, and that the current sweet spot developers are targeting is 720p due to the extremely similar system specifications. Simply put, a developer who is planning to release their game for both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 will aim for a common attainable ground. In fact, I'll stick my neck out and predict that that you won't see any 1080"x" games for the PS3 this year.

Let's move on to HD movies. Home Theater Magazine (recommended!) has a sister website, and I wanted to point you to a great blog post by Geoffrey Morrison discussing the topic.
Most modern HD displays (Plasmas, LCD, DLP, etc.) display content progressively, even if they first received an interlaced signal. Let me restate that: when you're watching a 1080"x" signal on a modern HD display, you're almost always watching a 1080p signal. The only difference is where the de-interlacing happens - but the displayed output is always 1080p. (Minor caveat is that there are rare TVs that don't de-interlace correctly, as described in the link above. But this is very rare today.)

And some interesting news about possible future plans for the Xbox 360. I like the Media note. I hope that means all formats...Divx, Xvid, etc!

1. A holiday HD-DVD Xbox360 add-on that will be very inexpensive (around the $200 mark) and is rumored to only require component inputs. No HDMI in sight. This would of course point the finger to no HDCP being used on initial HD-DVD movie disks as expected.

2. For you folks that are buying the new 1080P panels that are now on the market, have no fear, as the Xbox360 looks to already support 1080P resolutions. All that will need to be changed is the connecting cable. Little more information is known on this or if there will be a gaming performance impact.

3. Xbox360 meets Media Center for next year? While the details on this product are certainly few, the concept is a project that is moving forward at Microsoft. The next Xbox360 facelift will be a product that really blurs the lines between HTPC and gaming console. While this is not a term that Microsoft used, the Xbox360 will be seeing an added on "media jukebox" for handling tons of movies, video, pictures, and music.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 16, 2006, 8:50 pm

Too embarrased to post the link to the worthless, irrelevant blog/fansite you shovelled this drivel out of again? is it the guy who was on a plane to japan filled with game designers?!?!

Janx · Post by **Janx** » August 16, 2006, 8:51 pm

If the 360 can take the place of a HTPC in the future I'll be VERY happy with the purchase.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 16, 2006, 9:56 pm

Janx wrote:If the 360 can take the place of a HTPC in the future I'll be VERY happy with the purchase.

It would take away my desire to hack it for sure. The present hacks only allow you to copy games which is boring but if a true hack came out that allowed for XBMC type apps again, I'd be first in line. I think Microsoft gets that part of it now and that's why they're releasing the game development stuff and possibly releasing a more functional media center type app for the 360.

Just about any new 360 info (and a lot of PS3 info) is posted on the front page of:

http://www.xbox-scene.com/

If I don't post a link, make a few extra clicks and go there.