microsoft xbox 360 review

Have a picture of Microsoft Xbox 360 Console?, please send it to us.
Picture courtesy of The Box.

Average Ratings

Graphics	8.6/10
Range Of Games	7.3/10
Value for Money	7/10
Reviewer Rating	7.5/10
Overall Rating	8.1/10

View Last 6 Months Only

70% Recommended44 out of 63 Reviews

100% Recommended4 out of 4 Reviews

Quick Links

Write your review

Review of Microsoft Xbox 360 Console

• Previous
• Review 29 of 63
• Next

By UthersGhost on 24th Jun 2007

UthersGhost's Ratings

Date of Purchase (MM/YY)	05/07
Graphics	5/10
Range Of Games	5/10
Value for money	0/10
Overall value	0/10
UthersGhost's recommendation

Good Points

The graphics are good, but barely any better than the PS2. Apart from that there are absolutely NO good points about this abysmal console.

Bad Points

Everything. I have had my Xbox 360 for a month now and cannot wait to get rid of it. I have spent more time setting the damn thing up than playing games. It costs twice as much as it is worth, and if you want to add even the slightest improvement you will need to take out a mortgage on your house to pay for it. Everything that Playstation offer for free on the PS3 will cost you an arm and a leg for the Xbox and the end result is no better than a PS2... ever get the feeling you've been cheated? The range of games are nothing more than old PS2 or Xbox games with the occasional new case-sleeve to make them look different. There is a distinct lack of 2 player co-op games which makes the idea of having friends around for an evenings gaming a thing of the past, and if you want to play online it will cost you even more! The games themselves seem rushed and incomplete and feel distinctly 'amateur'. Overall... GARBAGE!

General Comments

Get a PS3... the Xbox 360 is a rip-off.

4 Comments on Review by UthersGhost for Microsoft Xbox 360 Console

1. happydan on 26th Jun 2007

   Fanboi much? I'm not a huge fan of the 360, but there are plenty of original games and the marketplace is excellent. And apparently, you seem to think a £300 360 THAT COMES WITH A YEAR OF XBOX LIVE free is more of a rip-off than a £450 PS3. Next you'll be telling everyone the Wii is rubbish because it has less powerful graphics...

2. UthersGhost on 26th Jun 2007

   Hi HappyDan, thanks for your reply to my comments about the Xbox 360. I stand by my comments...there are not that many new and fresh games about. Most of the games I have seen are old Xbox and PS games re-hashed or slightly tweaked and put into new packaging. Of the new games that are out, I still have to see something different and fresh. Even Gears of War is nothing more than 'Killzone' with a few flashy moves. As for thinking that spending £300 on an Xbox 360 and getting a year of Xbox Live for free is good... well... I spent a whole lot more than £300 on my set up. Once I had got the console I needed to spend another wedge on a second hand-set, (which is necessary if I don't want to play alone), also I had to get a rechargeable battery pack, (another essential if you don't want to be buying batteries for the rest of your gaming life), then, of course, I had to buy games... which are currently going for between £40 and £45 each. So that £300 you were on about is now closer to £700 and counting. And what happens in a years time... when I have established a few friendships online and gotten into the Xbox community? I think it is selfish and greedy for Microsoft to ever charge people to use the Xbox Live site, after all, it's only because gamers spend insulting amounts of money on other Xbox products that there is any reason for the site to be there in the first place. If we stop buying Xbox 360 products...there will soon be no site. Doesn't say much for their customer loyalty does it?
   And apart from all that... I still maintain that the graphics/gameplay etc. of new Xbox 360 games are of little or no better quality than you see on a PS2. Project Gotham for example is no different from any PS2 racing game I have seen... and Import Tuner is even closer to PS1 standards. It is going to take something much better than Microsoft have already offered to make me feel like I haven't been cheated.
   Thanks again for your comments, it's always interesting to read other peoples opinions.

3. happydan on 27th Jun 2007

   Problem is, the console is not tailored well for:
   a) easy development - you basically have to program in machine code to get the most out of the 8 parallel processors of the Cell.
   b) a wide audience - the "OMGzWOW3DGRAFAX" teen crowd love it, but from a social standpoint it is lacking.
   
   Saying GoW is a copy of Killzone is a complete misnomer. I can turn around and say to you that KZ offers nothing new at all from Halo, which was out way before. In turn, neither offer anything new when put up against Half-Life. Truth is, as a gaming experience, GoW offers up way more innovation in the gameplay, as well as some pretty damn fine pedigree (ever heard of Unreal Tournament?)
   
   As for the graphics, claiming they are no better than the PS2 is a load of clap-trap. If you claim that because you are on a non-HD TV, then the PS3 will be no better for you. I play game son a high-end PC rig on a good monitor and have always been critical of the capabilities of consoles, but come up happy with what the 360 has to offer.
   
   The point is about the accessibility of the console and fact is, you can pick up a Premium bundle with a game and headset for £250 if you look.
   
   Also - a lot of people can turn around and tell you that charging for online membership means there's less cheating, and generally better experiences. And that's something I have a LOT of experience with, as I'm a PC gamer.
   
   And for the record... I'm most definitely a Nintendo Fanboy.

4. Freeky on 5th Aug 2007

   You've got to be kidding.
   
   If you compare the 2 consoles technically there are only small differences, the PS3 may be able to do a few more dot-product-operations per second than the 360, but the 360 has a more innovative design and clearly wins on the graphics front.
   
   If you look there are sites that have done direct comparisons (using same games) and in all cases the 360 wins, the PS3 graphics being generally softer but brighter with less contrast, it also has lower frame rates and longer load times.
   
   Remember the PS3 was originally meant to come out only shortly after the 360, it was only delayed by Blu-ray, so in technical terms there are only a few months between them, and the software developers have had both for some time.

• Microsoft Xbox 360 Website
• Microsoft Xbox 360 Information
• Microsoft Xbox 360 Games
• Xbox Official Site
• Xbox Official Magazine

• Microsoft Xbox Support
• Microsoft Xbox Repairs
• Microsoft Xbox Home Page
• Xbox 360 Problems
• Xbox 360 Repair
• Argos
• Microsoft UK
• Xbox 360 Faults
• Comet
• Microsoft Xbox Live

Would you like to see a review that's not being listed?

Web Results

Microsoft Xbox 360 : Read reviews and compare prices at Ciao.co.uk
Microsoft Xbox 360 starting from£144.99 (14.10.08). Read 237 reviews for Microsoft Xbox 360 and make a good deal. ... 5 out of 1439 similar offers for Microsoft Xbox 360
www.ciao.co.uk

Microsoft® Xbox
The Microsoft.com destination for the latest gaming news and information from Xbox.com.
www.microsoft.com

Microsoft Home
Microsoft Office ...© 2008 Microsoft Corporation
www.microsoft.com

Lucent takes legal action against Microsoft over Xbox 360 - The ...
But, said Lucent in its filing at the end of March, Microsoft has infringed this patent by releasing the Xbox 360 console, which has MPEG2 tech - it's alleged that's a breach of the Lucent patent.
www.theinquirer.net

IGN: E3 2005: Microsoft's Xbox 360 vs. Sony's PlayStation 3
The Xbox 360 CPU architecture has three times the general purpose processing power of the Cell. ... The Xbox 360 GPU design is more flexible and it has more processing power than the PS3 GPU.
xbox360.ign.com