The PS3 is a better system than the X-Box 360.

1) First and foremost, I would like to point out that the 10%, formerly 30%; failure rate of the Xbox 360 is a consensus of various retailers, not Microsoft itself. My opponent defended the PlayStation 3 by bringing up the "around .02 percent" failure rate. What he has failed to provide is the proper information about that quote. The biggest problem with that "statistic" is that it came from Sony Entertainment Europe founder, Chris Deering. The question one must ask is, how reliable can information be coming from a man who founded the company he is defending using a word as vague as "around." The second problem is one that cannot be easily overlooked. The quote came out in April of 2007, long before the bugged 2.40 update. The .02% does not include one of the largest "console crashing" issues of the PS3. 2) The truth is, when the two consoles are put side by side on a common American television (not a high definition T.V.) the Xbox does come through with a cleaner, crisper picture do to its higher processing speeds. It is true, however, that on a High Definition television the PlayStation 3's picture does come through with a higher level of clarity. What is NOT true, as my opponent may suggest, is that this makes the system itself better for the average American. In the assumption that most of the video game market comes from the middle class of American society, affordability is a key role. Without getting into to great of detail of the final point of price, the average American will not own a more expensive HD TV, thus the larger part of gamers will not experience PlayStation 3 at "where it could be" , but instead will see it where it is. I feel that the graphics need to be set to the average TV, not a HD TV that the larger part of the market cannot or does not have. 3) The point that we are debating is which system has better games, the online and memory storage are different topics for different sections. Unfortunately, due to lack of foresight of my opponent, such sections do not exist and I feel that I must briefly defend the Xbox 360 here. My opponent stated that the Xbox Live price was 50 dollars as opposed to the PS3's choice of free online play. Before the higher cost immediately influences your decision I would like to state what that price is paying for. When one purchases the Xbox Live 12 Month Membership for $50, they also receive a free headset in the package. In regards to the actual online experience, Xbox 360 delivers a much greater opponent generator due to a higher level of multiplayer standards. This allows equally ranked players, players with better connections, and generally similar players to play using a unique matchmaking system. 4) I would like to take this time to thank my opponent for allowing this section to be excluded from this debate. 5) Each "additional price" that my opponent has stated is a misrepresentation of the truth. First, "$200 for a bluray player (That you will soon have to buy)." This statement is ridiculous on a multitude of levels. The largest part of the bluray market comes from PS3 owners. I agree with the idea that "if you got it, use it." It is true that the PlayStation 3 does come with the built in bluray, that fact is undeniable. The fact that bluray is doing well is simply because a PS3 owner will pay a little bit more just to put their "fancy" bluray/PS3 combo to use. Implying that it is the new age of DVD's is an example of trying to find an excuse to add money/negatives to the Xbox 360 system. Second, "$140 to fix the "Red Ring of Death" for your Xbox." A statement that should quickly be dismissed from the first point where my opponent admitted the chance of a "failure" is 10%. This is not the chance of the "Red Rings of Death" but the chance of failure in general. Trying to put the entire Xbox system into a 10% likely hood is a remarkable attempt on my opponent's behalf. Third, "$100 Wireless Network Adaptor for Wifi." This assumes that a player wants to play wirelessly or even has that option. When a direct link can provide a much stronger signal and thus better game play, why does one NEED a Wireless Adapter. In the end, that is the fact that my opponent seemed to neglect. The price of a system is how much it cost to play, not how much it cost to get the system "to the best it can be." The truth is that the core experience of the 90% non failure rate Xbox 360's is not affected by any additional price. When all the unnecessary and extra items are taken out of both systems, the Xbox 360 will give you the same level if not a higher level of enjoyment, for a much lower price.