I never liked CoD4... I still play GRAW2 and RSV2 to this day, though. My brother has only a 360, and I've never found anything that plays on the 360 but won't on the PS3 myself... Neither has he. Besides, if you use TVersity to transcode, that issue is eliminated. It's not simply about what will play... it's the PS3's (far) cleaner interface, the live video previews, the on-the-fly chapter creation for video files, the superior upscaling, and obviously the blu-ray... And I agree with all that. If you have money to burn and online is all you care about, sure the online for 360 is better. If you care more about single-player games and media center capability, the PS3 is the better choice. Or you can just get both like me, so ya don't have to choose.
Well, I think 'money to burn' is just as much a requirement of the PS3 camp as the 360 camp. In any case, though I understand the 'principle' argument, I've never understood the 'cost' argument against Live. The 50 bucks a year (for a lot of people, less than that) doesn't seem that major when one game costs 60+ and stuff like a single controller can get up near 50.
The thing is, when I buy a game I'm eventually going to play it. I'm only very occasionally online, so what may be "worth-it" or "a deal" for someone else just isn't cost-effective for me. I figure I'll be keeping both these systems for 5 years, assuming they last that long... if I subscribed to Live for the whole life of the system (as most people do), then tack on $250 to the price. Not a big fan of that.
