Xbox 360 vs PS3

Let me qualify my following statements by saying that I have owned both the PS1 and PS2 (as well as the original Xbox, and now the 360). I am not adverse to buying a PS3, but right now don't have any compelling reasons to do so. The hardware itself is almost enough to get me to pull the trigger, but it is nothing more than an expensive paperweight without software. Personally, I don't care about watching HD movies right now, and the library of games is paper thin.

When the 360 launched, I was sure that their strategy to beat Sony to the punch was flawed, but now I am not so sure. The original Xbox had only been out a few years and was still the most powerful system on the market when the 360 hit store shelves. There was at least one or two years left in the black behemoth when Microsoft pushed out the 360. Nonetheless, we are now starting to see the fruits of Microsoft's get-there-first strategy. Right now, you can play Gears of War, Oblivion, GWAR 1 & 2, Call of Duty 2 & 3, Splinter Cell: Double Agent, Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Vegas, and Guitar Hero II on the Xbox 360. Meanwhile, the only game worth playing on the PS3 right now is Resistance: Fall of Man.

To be fair, the 360 had a similar quality shortage at launch, and a long dry spell after launch, much like the PS3 is experiencing right now. There is no doubt that a similar wave of must-haves will start hitting for the PS3. As a developer, you would be a fool to not support the current king of console gaming. But for the casual gamer who wants to get into the next generation now, the Xbox 360 makes for a strong case on the strength of its library alone.

Outside of the hardcore crowd who buy the consoles at launch, games sell hardware, so expect more PS3s to be sold as Metal Gear and the like start arriving. But already we are seeing holes in Sony's armor. Previous titles exclusive to the PS2 like GTA III (limited exclusivity to PS2) and Devil May Cry (complete exclusivity to PS2) are now bound for Redmond's machine. 3rd party exclusives are going the way of the dinosaur - it is simply too expensive for developers to not hedge their bets across all consoles, unless the hardware manufacturers themselves are willing to fork over the bucks to ensure that exclusivity. Sony could have done so with GTA IV and Devil May Cry IV but blew it. Assassin's Creed and Unreal Tournament are a couple of other games no longer exclusive to Sony's machine. These events undoubtedly had a direct hand in Ken Kutaragi, the father of the Playstation, leaving Sony.

Due to the escalating cost of producing games, this generation will see more console-clones than any other. So what you are left with to differentiate one machine from the other is:

1) hardware
2) services
3) first-party library & exclusives

Let's take these one-by-one and see who has the advantage.

Hardware
The physical hardware itself is clearly slanted in Sony's favor - the specs alone read like a nerd's wet dream - but at the current price point of the respective systems, I call it a wash. If Joe gamer can spend $599 or $399 for a console that essentially plays the same games, which is he going to pick? If he is in the market for a HD DVD player, the PS3 certainly makes for a very compelling argument. But if he just wants to game, the waters get murky, and the expensive Blue-Ray player suddenly becomes an albatross around Sony's neck.

The hardcore players already have their systems. Like all console wars, it is the elusive general populace that will determine the victor. Certainly the Playstation brand carries a lot of weight, but is that enough to get average gamers to pluck down the extra cash? As of right now, no. Stories abound of store shelves of unsold PS3s. The oft-rumored PS3 price cut will certainly help if it comes to fruition, but expect that to be offset by a 360 price reduction that looks certain to happen by the holiday buying season. Which means that, for now, Microsoft's lead is secure.

Winner: Tie


Services
PS3 offers an online service, for free, that allows gamers to play each other. Xbox's equivalent service costs $60/year. But this is definitely a situation where you get what you pay for. Xbox Live is integrated in the same fashion across all 360 games, your friends list is universal, and the achievements are as addictive as crack. The $5 a month alone has added incredible longevity to games- just ask the millions of gamers still playing Halo 2 on Live, who otherwise would have long moved on. Not to mention the spring dashboard updating hitting this week, which includes IM integration.

Live is a mature offering, developed over the course of several years and still expanding in functionality, whereas Sony's online service is a newborn still trying to find its way in the world. There is hope on that front, however, as PS3's service is starting to take shape with the recently-announced Home. Home is a 3D world where your avatar lives and can interact with other players. You will be able to have your own apartment and furnish it as you like. This is a killer offering and a step in the right direction, and is a true next-gen service, unlike Live's fully functional, if static, offering. But, like the PS3 itself, this cool feature is unrealized (launching this fall), and the 360 offers a more complete service package.

Winner: Xbox


First Party Titles & Exclusives
The Xbox 360 and PS3 versions of games like GTA IV, Madden, and Assassin's Creed will be close enough in game play and features to be almost identical (although expect the PS3 games to look better, graphics-wise). But the first-party library is ultimately where the console war will be won. Both systems have their A-list games that will entice fan-boy and casual gamer alike. Personal preference will ultimately make the difference here.

Major Upcoming PS3 Exclusives:

• Final Fantasy XIII
• Final Fantasy Versus XIII
• Grand Turismo 5
• Metal Gear Solid 4
• Warhawk
• God of War III

Major Upcoming Xbox 360 Exclusives:

• Halo 3
• Bioshock
• Too Human
• Splinter Cell
• GTA IV episodic content
• Star Wars Battlefront III
• Mass Effect

Winner: Xbox



Summary
Ultimately, I expect this round to go to Sony, based on name-brand recognition alone, but it will be a close battle. Between the 360's lower cost, Xbox Live, the long list of triple AAA quality exclusives, and the movement of former PS exclusives to the Xbox, Microsoft will make up significant market share this console generation. It is fairly obvious at this point, however, that they are both playing for 2nd place, as the Wii looks to dominate both companies and will likely emerge as the overall market leader. Expect to see the end result being a pretty even split between the three manufacturers, however, with perhaps only 5 - 10% of market share separating first from last.

Personally, I have played the Wii and came away unimpressed. The graphics are blah and the much-hyped controller seems like a gimmick. Any system that can get 80 year-old nursing home residents to play a video game is certainly an impressive feat, but as a dyed-in-the-wool hardcore gamer, I prefer the traditional systems. But until the PS3 starts kicking out must-haves (God of War 3 would be sweet) or drops the price, I will get my next-gen kicks with the Xbox 360.

Star Wars Prequel Trilogy: 10 Things That Didn't Suck

I was re-watching one of the Star Wars prequels today, and starting thinking about the prequels in general. I find the prequels equal parts good and bad - there are enough good bits to keep me interested and happy, but just as many negatives to make me feel frustrated about what could have been. I decided to capture a list of the 10 best things from the newer trilogy, I will do the same in a future post about the 10 worst things.

Counting down, Letterman-style:


10) The Fetts



The Fett legacy only grows with the prequels. Boba doesn't do anything of significance, but his papa looks pretty damn cool in that blue-and-silver armor, and he duel-wields those pistols with panache. Plus we get to see more of Slave 1, the coolest ship in the Star Wars universe. The only downer is that we don't get to see more of the Fetts (not counting the millions of look-alikes, of course).

9) Count Dooku

Christopher Lee has made a career of portraying villains and monsters on the big screen, and Dooku's title pays homage to the most famous of those. Though evil through-and-through, Dooku has a gentlemanly air about him, so that we almost think he isn't really evil. During his seduction of Obi-Wan, seems geniune and true, and he also seems to genuinely want to spare the lives of the Jedi in the arena. But when the time comes, Dooku shows his true colors as a Sith, and an evil, power-hungry one at that (but aren't they all)?

8) Darth Maul
Maul is the most under-used villain in the entire Star Wars saga, surpassing even Boba Fett. It seems George Lucas has this habit of creating really cool bad guys, but then doesn't make the most of them, and kills them too soon. Maul was the villain in Episode 1; his tattooed face is iconic and easily recognizable even by casual followers of Star Wars. His mere presence exudes evil, and when he is on the screen, you can't take your eyes off of him.

And then there is the lightsaber. Fan boys the world over fainted when the trailers showed Maul unleashing the double-bladed weapon. Maul employs his lightsaber with acrobatic ferocity, and though out-numbered, he beats Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan handily. If only he hadn't been so easily caught off-guard by Obi-Wan...

Maul could have been near the top of this list, if only he had been better utilized.


7) Clone Troopers

As one Jedi might say, the Clones are some bad Mother F'ers. They look sweet in that gleaming armor, can actually run and shoot at the same time (unlikely the Stormtroopers to follow), and they are genetic replicas of the infamous Fetts. Plus they ride around in those sweet gunships.

Even though the Clones become the Empire's shock troops, you almost still feel sympathetic as they turn on their Jedi commanders.

6) Mace Windu

The baddest Jedi in all the galaxy. Mace was largely wasted in Episode 1 (who wasn't?), but in the last two prequels Mace gets out of his chair and shows everyone why he is second in power only to Yoda. His fighting style is as unique as his purple-hued lightsaber: precise, minimalist, and with an undercurrent of fury bordering on the dark side.
Some question why Samuel L Jackson is in the prequels, but there is only one actor who could wear Windu's robes so well.

5) Qui-Gon Jinn

Our first glimpse at a 'real' Jedi is through the prism of Liam Neeson's performance as the contemplating and wise Jedi Master Qui-Gon. Qui-Gon is the epitome of a Jedi - thoughtful, powerful, empathetic, and wise. Liam's own thoughts on Episode 1 aside, his performance is understated and perfect for the character.

4) Lightsaber battles

The strength of the prequels is not in its story or dialog, but the prequels really come alive when lightsabers are bared and humming. For those that grew-up with the OT (original trilogy), lightsaber duels were generally slow, deliberate affairs. The prequels are the first real glimpse at the Jedi of old, and it does not disappoint. The fights are fast and intense, full of jumps, flips, and showmanship. The Maul/Obi-Wan/Qui-Gon duel is still my favorite across the entire spectrum of duels. Obi-Wan and Anakin is more powerful (see #3 below), but the Maul battle retains the coolness factor, especially since it was the first major fight.

3) Obi-Wan vs Anakin

The mother of all lightsaber battles, the fight between Obi-Wan and Anakin is the most powerful of the entire 6-act saga. Intense and non-stop, the fight itself is a chorographical masterpiece, but it is the emotional undercurrent that really adds weight to the battle. Apprentice vs Master. Anakin's all-consuming hate vs Obi-Wan's resignation and regret. Watching the fight, especially against the volcanic backdrop, you almost think that they will stop fighting and help each other escape the inferno. But there is no stopping this train wreck, and all you can do is sit back and watch.

2) Ian McDiarmid

Palpatine's progression from straight-faced and conniving senator to emperor overlaps the 3-act prequels, and Ian McDiarmid plays the part with such skill and relish that all other performances in the prequels pale by comparison. His seduction of Anakin Skywalker ratchets up dramatically in Episode 3. Palpatine is the ultimate salesman, telling Anakin what he wants to hear and opening the door to Anakin's fall from grace. But it is the understated way that Palpatine operates that makes this so powerful and even believable, to the point that the viewer feels sympathetic and wants to believe that Palpatine is really a man interested in the greater good. It isn't until Palpatine's physical metamorphosis that he becomes the all-evil emperor in outward appearance as well.

1) Obi-Wan Kenobi

Ewan McGregor perfectly captures the spirit of Alec Guinness' original performance, while simultaneously adding his own unique twist, to the point that when I hear the name Obi-Wan, I picture Ewan's young and vibrant version. Over the prequels, we see him grow from eager Padawan to confident Jedi Knight to powerful Jedi Master. Though under-used and obscured by Qui-Gon's long shadow in Episode 1, Obi-Wan continues to develop, fully coming into his own in the final act. He is confident and able, self-depreciating and wise. Anakin is the tragic hero in the prequels, but it is Obi-Wan's loss that feels most acute, more so even than Padme's.

Without question, Ian McDiarmid's is a better performance, but Ewan's Obi-Wan is my favorite character of this trilogy, and easily in the top 3 across the entire saga.