Nobody should buy a 360 ever.
- Thread starter RancidLunchmeat
- Start date
- Status
Gotta pay for Live, though.
Until you can bring up histories of people having several PS3´s failing, and we are talking XBOX huge numbers, like 4+ hell 10+ then it can stay under the rug. You are the only one i have ever heard ofI can guarantee you that with the internet Sony hate there is not the slightest chance that any serious PS3 problems would be "swept under the rug". There is a goddamn army out there ready to do whatever it "takes".
You pretty much nail it yourself, a PS3 breaking down is bad luck while a 360 it is really just a question of time.
But thing you have to give to Microsoft, eventhough they made a pisspoor job on the hardware they did a incredible job with their "fans". Rancid is one of the rare 360 customers that is actually fed up
I strongly disagree with the PS3 portion of this statement, I absolutely consider the 60GB launch PS3 just a matter of time whether it is disc read issues or YLOD. With regards to your next paragraph, I agree completely, they are like a heroin dealer, I don't even know how many I have purchased anymore, I have only done the repair once and a store warranty once any other failures I have just purchased a new one.
Given the investment of your game library, that's actually a tiny portion of your gaming outgoings. It'd cost you far more not to get an XB360!
Only if you have friends...
Noooo! My 60gig better not beef it like my brothers did. I wanted the hardware BC because I never had a PS2 and wanted to play some of those games.
Well every electronic device "is just a question of time". I bought my PS3 2+ years ago, the odds of having a 2 year old 360 that works is way worse than a PS3. No matter how you slice it.
So what are the chances of having a 360 fail 10 times? And what are the chances that several people, most likely 100´s experience the same thing. When these stories hit the WEB the general fan opinion was that the 360 didn´t have a construction flaw
Claiming that a PS3 has near perfect reliability is to me just as much FUD. The difference between how reliabile people expect the PS3 to be is vastly different to how reliable the PS3 actually is. There are still people to this day claiming that the PS3 has a better reliability than what I would expect from a toaster or an electric jug. Just because the Xbox 360 reliability was terrible, the refurb reliability was terrible at one point as well doesn't make the PS3 near perfect. If 12/100 Xbox 360s are expected to die and 4/100 PS3s every year and these are more accurate numbers then I will be happy. A 3:1 and accurate differential is better than a 10:1 false belief and it gives people a better chance to make an informed decision.
Maybe I've just been lucky, but I've come to trust Sony quality.
My EU launch PS2 is still fully functional. It had heavy use until I bought my PS3 at launch. The PS3 has only froze on me twice, last time was after the latest Home update.
My PSP that I bought in spring 2005 is still working 100%.
My Sony ES-series AV receiver has been functioning 100% after I bought it in 2001. It's been on pretty much every day, at least 5h/day.
My ES series Sony CD player is still working after I bought it sometimes in the mid 90's
To me, The Sony products I've owned have been "perfect quality", as they've outlasted until the tech has become obsolete (I kinda hpe my AV-receiver finally gives it up, so I'd have a good reason to upgrade )
That quality has made me somewhat a Sony loyalist. I think it'll take a RROD like catastrophy to convert me
I am however, considering on replacing my trusty old AV-receiver with an Onkyo or Yamaha, because of the features/price ratio.
My EU launch PS2 is still fully functional. It had heavy use until I bought my PS3 at launch. The PS3 has only froze on me twice, last time was after the latest Home update.
My PSP that I bought in spring 2005 is still working 100%.
My Sony ES-series AV receiver has been functioning 100% after I bought it in 2001. It's been on pretty much every day, at least 5h/day.
My ES series Sony CD player is still working after I bought it sometimes in the mid 90's
To me, The Sony products I've owned have been "perfect quality", as they've outlasted until the tech has become obsolete (I kinda hpe my AV-receiver finally gives it up, so I'd have a good reason to upgrade
)That quality has made me somewhat a Sony loyalist. I think it'll take a RROD like catastrophy to convert me
I am however, considering on replacing my trusty old AV-receiver with an Onkyo or Yamaha, because of the features/price ratio.
But we have some data that for early 360s the number is a higher than 12%. And using your own criteria of back-of-napkin statistics based on anecdotal evidence we'd come to the equally erroneous conclusion that early 360 failure rate is near 100%. I mean, you don't have to go far to hear from people who have had 6, sometimes even 10 consoles fail on them. It's not common, but it's what you're doing with your '2 PS3s failed' story -- you can either look at it as a statistical anomaly or conclude that the failure rate is far higher than reported.
Also, you're using FUD wrong. FUD is going 'yeah, but when you get a YLOD you'll probably have to pay for it out of your pocket', or 'when you buy a 360, when it burns out you'll be 2 weeks without playing your games' . It might be fanboy drivel to talk about the PS3's perfect reliability, but it's not FUD.
Last edited by a moderator:
You can look at it from a different angle - buying 2 Arcade 360s is like having RAID 1 ... if one fails you play on the other while the first is being replaced.
It's still the price of one PS3 anyways, so it almost makes sense (in a very cynical way).
Btw, I have a 2006 X360 that is still alive but I don't lose sleep over it getting the RROD. Honestly I've been itching to buy an Arcade just for the HDMI port and lower power consumption.
It's still the price of one PS3 anyways, so it almost makes sense (in a very cynical way).
Btw, I have a 2006 X360 that is still alive but I don't lose sleep over it getting the RROD. Honestly I've been itching to buy an Arcade just for the HDMI port and lower power consumption.
Maybe I've just been lucky, but I've come to trust Sony quality.
My EU launch PS2 is still fully functional. It had heavy use until I bought my PS3 at launch. The PS3 has only froze on me twice, last time was after the latest Home update.
My PSP that I bought in spring 2005 is still working 100%.
My Sony ES-series AV receiver has been functioning 100% after I bought it in 2001. It's been on pretty much every day, at least 5h/day.
My ES series Sony CD player is still working after I bought it sometimes in the mid 90's
To me, The Sony products I've owned have been "perfect quality", as they've outlasted until the tech has become obsolete (I kinda hpe my AV-receiver finally gives it up, so I'd have a good reason to upgrade
That quality has made me somewhat a Sony loyalist. I think it'll take a RROD like catastrophy to convert me
I am however, considering on replacing my trusty old AV-receiver with an Onkyo or Yamaha, because of the features/price ratio.
How's the laser on that old PS2? My two old PS2s(One from 2001 another from 2003) are slowly dying, and their load time gets longer and longer. Cleaning the laser helps a lot, if you ever have problems with it.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
That's the thing that I find most amazing.
For people that get the RROD they keep getting it. But for many other X360 users, they never get the RROD, ever.
It's almost like you fall into one of two camps. First camp (majority of users) you never get an RROD. Second camp you get a RROD and never ever stop getting RRODs.
It's weird. But then I only have forums to go by for RRODs, as everyone I know, and everyone that I know that knows someone with an X360 has never had an RROD. And that's a few hundred X360s.
It's just bizarre. Although I know of a few people the bricked their X360 trying to hack it.
Regards,
SB
I don´t recall having seen that, but if it was done by someone who compared the PS3´s to the 360´s lifetime expectancy i guess they had a perfect, if fanboyish claim.
And the thing is, chances are that Sony corrected every problem they could as they launched the new versions. They didn´t knowingly sell a product that would have a high risk of failing.
Most anecdotal evidence is one person with one PS3, the evidence I gave is one person multiple different PS3s and multiple failures over a year. There is a significant difference, I hope you can see.
The Fear is 'my console will break and it will cost me time, effort, money' Uncertainty 'what is the relative likelihood of a failure between the Xbox 360 and PS3' The doubt 'the most commonly stated failure rates for the Xbox 360 are in the 10-30% range and they are in the 1-2% range for the PS3?' Noone is faced with an unexpectedly unreliable Xbox 360. However people are most definately faced with an unexpectedly less reliable PS3 because the accuracy of the information available is Nil.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
So you are implying that MS knowingly sold a product that would have a high risk of failing? And that MS didn't try to fix things with each revision?
And then go on to claim others are fanboys?
Regards,
SB
So you are implying that MS knowingly sold a product that would have a high risk of failing? And that MS didn't try to fix things with each revision?
And then go on to claim others are fanboys?
Regards,
SB
The second part probably isn't true, Microsoft certainly tried, but there are articles written on the first part, about how the failure rate was incredibly high, but being first to market was more important. Edit: -tkf- has the source.
Last edited by a moderator:
So you are implying that MS knowingly sold a product that would have a high risk of failing? And that MS didn't try to fix things with each revision?
And then go on to claim others are fanboys?
Regards,
SB
I am not implying anything, i am pretty sure they knew they where shipping Consoles that wouldn´t last.
http://venturebeat.com/2008/09/05/x...istory-of-microsofts-video-game-console-woes/
And i think the history speaks for itself, they didn´t get the problems under control, and they kept selling the machine. I can understand their reasons, in a weird money/consolewar way they had no choice, just as Sony had no choice but to sell the PS3 at a gigantic loss because their Blu-Ray Drive had a very critical and expensive component with very low yield numbers..
There is a difference, but neither is meaningful enough to draw some conclusion from. You're claiming that consumer study reports are wrong but your sample size of 80 people you know can't say anything either way.
So you are implying that MS knowingly sold a product that would have a high risk of failing? And that MS didn't try to fix things with each revision?
And then go on to claim others are fanboys?
Regards,
SB
I think they did know, but the seriousness of the problem didn't become evident until late enough in the project that they felt it would hurt less to go ahead with the launch and deal with the consequences than have to scrap all of their plans and start over since they would be missing their targeted launch window. Keep in mind the Sony hype machine was in full effect at the time promising features and performance that they would end up not delivering and the $599 bomb had yet to be dropped. I think it probably was the right decision under the circumstances, but because of it the brand image took a hit that is not only hurting them now, but will carry over into any future products.
One might expect any XBOX followup to be overbuilt to compensate much like Chrysler did in the 90's when their transmissions became known to be fault-prone. They developed transmissions that were so robust that it actually hurt them since their cars/SUVs were too durable (from the car manufacturer/dealer's perspective, who saw a drop in their repeat business and service business because of it).
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status