Poll of the Day > Dailymail says XBOX Series X is BORING compared to the PS5!!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

Dailymail has now got ahold of both XBOX Series X and the PS5 and has played both consoles to determine which is the better system.

Microsoft launched 2 consoles with a high end XSX and a low end digital only XSS as they described it as both packing a punch for gamers with a massive graphics upgrade with new features that should satisfy XBOX gamers.

And although the XSX is a graphics powerhouse, some games do not match up quality wise to the "weaker" console of the PS5 and is actually visually WORSE in some cases and overall, they say Microsoft's newest consoles are effectively BORING compared to Sony's PS5!!

They also said Microsoft's controller is boring compared to Sony's because it is the exact same mould from previous models except with a share button and a hybrid D-pad but doesn't feel revolutionary compared to the PS5.

In terms of the graphics, both consoles (except XSS) are essentially the same and unless you are a hardened gamer with a trained eye you will won't know the difference

The one area XBOX wins is in the Velocity Architecture games as the speed improvements are the single biggest improvement of these consoles

MS's Game Pass is also a win for Microsoft where the ability to access to online gaming and to download a number of games for a monthly subscription such as Halo, Gears and Forza

There's also a concern with Microsoft still having many models in the market that may confuse shoppers as the XBOX One X, XBOX One S are similar in name to the XBOX Series X and XBOX One Series S

In the end, Dailymail says PS5 is the winner of being the most innovative console that "feels" next gen as Sony went the distance to change the look and feel of the PS5 whereas Microsoft stayed safe and only improved its graphics.

Both consoles are sold out online and should be for a relatively long time into next year

Do you agree with this assessment?

https://i.imgur.com/LntjejT.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/m0gnlmD.jpg
---

Good hardware would get boring after a while without good software to support it

---

the ps5 controller copied what the Xbox one controller already had lmao

---

Neither has a remotely appreciable library, so I think dailymail might need to reconsider what "fun" means in the context of game consoles.

---

likehelly posted...

the ps5 controller copied what the Xbox one controller already had lmao

Turnabout is fair play

---

The ps5 looks like shit. Sometimes boring is good. Otherwise it's still just launch titles.

likehelly posted...

the ps5 controller copied what the Xbox one controller already had lmao

Uh, the XBone controller doesn't have much resemblance to the ps5 controller, particularly since it's still doing that shitty asymmetrical analog configuration. Unless there's some other SKU, I don't see *any* resemblance to the ps5 controller. It's just the ps4 controller in a different color with a smoother aesthetic.

---

It may be jumping the gun as they are recent launches. Looking back at the last gen or two it's still a safe assumption. XB has played it too safe relying on BC too heavily. Sony or Nin innovate in drips but the software is what counts most.

Aaantlion posted...

particularly since it's still doing that shitty asymmetrical analog configuration.

As someone who has always liked both the Nintendo and Sony layouts, what is the problem with asymmetric thumb sticks?

---

Last I checked, my thumbs were symmetrical

---

Metalsonic66 posted...

Last I checked, my thumbs were symmetrical

+1.

I totally understand having a preference though. I can use either controller with no problems.

Honestly the only controllers I've ever had issues with were the N64 controller and some bad third-party ones.

---

Metalsonic66 posted...

Last I checked, my thumbs were symmetrical

Your thumbs are, but controls schemes often aren't. It varies by the type of game, but most games' control schemes use the left stick more often than the D-pad and the face buttons more often than the right stick, so having the left stick and face buttons at the same level on the controller (and closest to the thumbs' neutral position) makes the most sense. Of course, there are plenty of games that use the right stick more than the face buttons (namely shooters), so a symmetrical configuration is still perfectly reasonable, but I personally prefer the asymmetrical one because it's better suited to the vast majority of the games I play (I really don't play console shooters).

I just wish the GC button layout had stuck. Having the most-used button (in a control scheme that's actually designed sensibly with the GC controller in mind) in the most neutral position for my thumb was great. I'm also not sure why the WiiU's approach to the symmetrical layout hasn't been more widely adopted, since it had both sticks in the thumbs' neutral positions (which makes the most sense for dual-stick schemes), but I guess the face buttons were a little awkward to use for schemes that used them predominantly.

---

No. They're both equally boring and terrible, and this is the gen to go Nintendo + PC. And I say that as someone who's owned PS 1, 2, 3, and 4.

And I'll NEVER understand the fixation w/ being the most powerful console. The most powerful console never wins in any gen for the past few decades. Maybe SNES over Genesis is a counter-example? Too young back then to recall, didn't seem like clean-cut "gens". Genesis was like in between NES and SNES.

Anyway...
PS4 beat Xbone (only later did the Pro come out, way after PS4 built its huge lead)
Wii beat PS3 AND 360 (I think PS3 made a comeback and won in the very end, but Wii dominated the first half of the gen when it mattered)
PS2 beat Xbox AND Gamecube (supposedly it was more powerful than PS2? I don't know how...)
PS1 beat N64

The most powerful console is a proven loser, nearly every gen. and yet every gen, Sony and MS clamor over each other trying to lay claim to that title.
Madness.

mrduckbear posted...

They also said Microsoft's controller is boring compared to Sony's because it is the exact same mould from previous models except with a share button and a hybrid D-pad but doesn't feel revolutionary compared to the PS5.

If it isn't broken, don't fix it. One thing Microsoft has always had a leg up on is having a better controller

streamofthesky posted...

No. They're both equally boring and terrible, and this is the gen to go Nintendo + PC. And I say that as someone who's owned PS 1, 2, 3, and 4.

And I'll NEVER understand the fixation w/ being the most powerful console. The most powerful console never wins in any gen for the past few decades. Maybe SNES over Genesis is a counter-example? Too young back then to recall, didn't seem like clean-cut "gens". Genesis was like in between NES and SNES.

Anyway...
PS4 beat Xbone (only later did the Pro come out, way after PS4 built its huge lead)
Wii beat PS3 AND 360 (I think PS3 made a comeback and won in the very end, but Wii dominated the first half of the gen when it mattered)
PS2 beat Xbox AND Gamecube (supposedly it was more powerful than PS2? I don't know how...)
PS1 beat N64

The most powerful console is a proven loser, nearly every gen. and yet every gen, Sony and MS clamor over each other trying to lay claim to that title.
Madness.

Didn't 360 beat out PS3 or am I remembering wrong? Seems like PS3 is the most trashed sony console and 360 is the most loved Xbox console

OhhhJa posted...

Didn't 360 beat out PS3 or am I remembering wrong? Seems like PS3 is the most trashed sony console and 360 is the most loved Xbox console

360 is the closest MS has ever come to beating Sony, and I think for a while it was ahead of PS3. It would also be an example of the weaker console winning. But the weakest of them all, Wii, smoked both of them. And I think PS3 overtook 360 later on for sure. Less sure if it surpassed the Wii.

And yes, the best MS has ever done was in the one gen where they had the weaker console than Sony.
So again...why do these companies keep competing over something that's meaningless at best, and (with at least correlation backing it up) an active detriment to success at worst?

Aaantlion posted...

The ps5 looks like shit. Sometimes boring is good. Otherwise it's still just launch titles.

Uh, the XBone controller doesn't have much resemblance to the ps5 controller, particularly since it's still doing that shitty asymmetrical analog configuration. Unless there's some other SKU, I don't see *any* resemblance to the ps5 controller. It's just the ps4 controller in a different color with a smoother aesthetic.

aside from the fact the dualsense controller is just an xbox controller shell but widened, the haptic feedback shit was directly copied from the xbox one controllers.

and sony is still going with it's garbage symmetrical design which no one likes.

---

streamofthesky posted...

360 is the closest MS has ever come to beating Sony, and I think for a while it was ahead of PS3. It would also be an example of the weaker console winning. But the weakest of them all, Wii, smoked both of them. And I think PS3 overtook 360 later on for sure. Less sure if it surpassed the Wii.

the 360 was beating the ps3 all up until the generations end. sony was still manufacturing ps3's well after microsoft ended production of the 360, and that's how the ps3 beat the 360.

that being said, it only beat it by a little over 1m units, and the ps3 was still being sold a over 2 years after the 360 ended.

no one came close to beating the wii, that thing was a goddamn juggernaut.

streamofthesky posted...

And yes, the best MS has ever done was in the one gen where they had the weaker console than Sony.

actually, microsoft has always solidly been in 2nd place.

the original xbox was nowhere close to beating the ps2, but it did beat the gamecube.
the 360 beat the ps3, but came nowhere close to beating the wii.
the one definitively destroyed the wii-u, but we know that it didn't beat the ps4. it's likely close given all the leaked shit from ea and account numbers, but we'll never actually know since microsoft doesn't show sales numbers anymore. (incidentally, sony is doing that now, too.).

next gen has started, and the switch is solidly in the lead, since it's been out for longer and the series and 5 literally just came out last week, so who knows.

---

likehelly posted...

the 360 was beating the ps3 all up until the generations end. sony was still manufacturing ps3's well after microsoft ended production of the 360, and that's how the ps3 beat the 360.

that being said, it only beat it by a little over 1m units, and the ps3 was still being sold a over 2 years after the 360 ended.

no one came close to beating the wii, that thing was a goddamn juggernaut.

actually, microsoft has always solidly been in 2nd place.

the original xbox was nowhere close to beating the ps2, but it did beat the gamecube.
the 360 beat the ps3, but came nowhere close to beating the wii.
the one definitively destroyed the wii-u, but we know that it didn't beat the ps4. it's likely close given all the leaked shit from ea and account numbers, but we'll never actually know since microsoft doesn't show sales numbers anymore. (incidentally, sony is doing that now, too.).

next gen has started, and the switch is solidly in the lead, since it's been out for longer and the series and 5 literally just came out last week, so who knows.

I said the most powerful never wins, not that it is always in last place.
In any case, 360 was the only gen that MS was weaker than Sony, and it's the gen it did the best in.
My basic point stands that it's crazy they keep chasing the pinnacle of being "most powerful" when it never fucking matters. Price matters way more, and it's easier to be cheaper if the console is less powerful.

And Switch is PS4/Xbone gen, don't be ridiculous. Or it's it's own gen if you must. But it's absolutely not the same gen as PS5/SeX, and there's not way in hell Nintendo's not releasing a new console in the next 2 years (Switch has been out for over 3.5 years at this point, so it will end its life more in the PS4 gen than the PS5 gen).

Nichtcrawler X posted...

As someone who has always liked both the Nintendo and Sony layouts, what is the problem with asymmetric thumb sticks?

I've never found them comfortable. And the GC's controller was generally a mess. (Although I guess the smaller c-stick had its benefits?) The left stick in particular always just felt weird in both cases.

Metalsonic66 posted...

Honestly the only controllers I've ever had issues with were the N64 controller and some bad third-party ones.

The analog placement on the n64 was just weird, but nobody had been using analog sticks all that much prior. I would holding the damn controller by the center piece for some titles like Pod Racer.

adjl posted...

I just wish the GC button layout had stuck. Having the most-used button (in a control scheme that's actually designed sensibly with the GC controller in mind) in the most neutral position for my thumb was great. I'm also not sure why the WiiU's approach to the symmetrical layout hasn't been more widely adopted, since it had both sticks in the thumbs' neutral positions (which makes the most sense for dual-stick schemes), but I guess the face buttons were a little awkward to use for schemes that used them predominantly.

While I understand the practicality of having some over-sized buttons, it shouldn't have just been that one button since most games you're not just relying on one button no matter how much you use it.

streamofthesky posted...

And I'll NEVER understand the fixation w/ being the most powerful console. The most powerful console never wins in any gen for the past few decades. Maybe SNES over Genesis is a counter-example? Too young back then to recall, didn't seem like clean-cut "gens". Genesis was like in between NES and SNES.

Same, especially when what matters is what's on the console itself.

OhhhJa posted...

Didn't 360 beat out PS3 or am I remembering wrong? Seems like PS3 is the most trashed sony console and 360 is the most loved Xbox console

By the end of the generation, the ps3 was absurdly ahead of the 360 although the 360 is still MS's best-loved console. The ps3 had a disastrous launch and took a while to get going. Otherwise the 360 with its laughably high console fail rate would have been blown out of the water from the get-go. (Although the ps3 also notably had a very high fail rate later on.)

likehelly posted...

and sony is still going with it's garbage symmetrical design which no one likes.

In this case, symmetry means Sony has 2 well-placed analog sticks vs MS's 1. Symmetry by itself is generally a better thing, but it really matters where the things are placed in the first place.


---

likehelly posted...

and sony is still going with it's garbage symmetrical design which no one likes.

LOL

---

Zeus posted...

While I understand the practicality of having some over-sized buttons, it shouldn't have just been that one button since most games you're not just relying on one button no matter how much you use it.

While true, it's not like the other buttons were any harder to hit than they are on any other controller. It made A very comfortable to hit without sacrificing anything else. Making it much larger would have made the other buttons harder to hit, which would have been bad, but as it stood, I liked it a lot. The only real drawback was that it was basically impossible to hit B at the same time as X or Y, but that wasn't something that came up a lot.

---

I like the Gamecube face buttons when it comes to Smash at least

---

mrduckbear posted...

Dailymail has now got ahold of both XBOX Series X and the PS5 and has played both consoles to determine which is the better system.

Thank fuck for that. I was waiting for a their expert opinion.
Both PS5 and Xbox Series X are basically the same. The exclusives are what matters and Sony has one I think while Xbox has none at launch so it's a eh.

---

Microsoft sucks at naming their consoles.
---

adjl posted...

While true, it's not like the other buttons were any harder to hit than they are on any other controller. It made A very comfortable to hit without sacrificing anything else. Making it much larger would have made the other buttons harder to hit, which would have been bad, but as it stood, I liked it a lot. The only real drawback was that it was basically impossible to hit B at the same time as X or Y, but that wasn't something that came up a lot.

I recall generally having occasional issue hitting the B button due to the size of the A button. At any rate, it just felt unnatural.

GanonsSpirit posted...

Microsoft sucks at naming their consoles.

No kidding. How fuck XBone got by them was a mystery in itself, but then they went and gave the new one a name that sounds more like a small spinoff or variant than it does a new console.

---

OhhhJa posted...

If it isn't broken, don't fix it. One thing Microsoft has always had a leg up on is having a better controller

Yes and no.

I have always preferred the PS controllers for anything that relies on the D-pad.

Xbox always had the better triggers though tbf.

likehelly posted...

aside from the fact the dualsense controller is just an xbox controller shell but widened, the haptic feedback shit was directly copied from the xbox one controllers.

Implying either design is something revolutionary is really funny when they both initially copied Nintendo, SEGA, Atari, etc.
But... I will give Sony the edge for being one of the first companies to popularize a controller with built-in rumble and dual-analogs on a home console controller.