What the Cell is Going On?

Blu-ray. The Cell Processor. The RSX graphics chip. The PS3 was supposed to be the most insanely advanced gaming machine ever created. It was supposed to be able to deliver visuals well beyond anything capable on console or PC. According to Sony, the next generation wasn't supposed to begin until PS3 arrived.

So why is it, then, that all these PS3 games look just the same as they do on the Xbox 360?

When the PS2 first launched, Sony demanded that all games on the system be enhanced visually over their rival platform counterparts. The PS2 represented the next generation of gaming, and software was required to support this notion. With the PS3, Sony seemingly has no such requirements, offering us only that it "expects and encourages publishers working on PS3 titles to take full advantage of the technology and features that PS3 provides." Well, encouraging may not be enough. And promises for better looking games in the future don't really cut it. The PS3 is here now, it costs an extra $200 (at minimum), and the visual difference is questionable.

Don't believe it? 1up put the PS3 lineup to the test. They captured images and video of several games and their Xbox 360 counterparts - using the same exact capture device, with same type of connection cables, running at the same exact resolutions.

[DJ]

It's up to developers to take advantage of the hardware they're given. Most devs like to keep multiplatform titles visually consistent across platforms, EA being one of them. Visual Concepts on the other hand happily took advantage of the PS3 hardware, and the results were pretty impressive. Better AI, more AI-controlled characters, better graphics. =]

[BIadestarX]

The same can be said about the 360. Is this why Gears looks better than any PS3 game? Wow, you are right Epic did take advantage of the power of the 360. Here is the sad part. You will not be able to compare the console's power with exclusive games. The game must be in both consoles to be able to do so. Take the wii for example. Which version of COD3 shows better graphics the wii or the PS3? There is no question that the PS3 version shows a huge improvement over the wii. Now the problem starts when you compare any multi-platform game between the 360 and the PS3. Any Idea why?
You cannot compare MSG4 with Halo3 since even the lighting, sound, etc are different. Just not possible. So, if the PS3 can't prove that it's far more powerful than the 360 with 3rd party game; then it will never will.

[Boink]

you just keep telling yourself that.

it's only first gen, so i'm sure they will tweak out more later, and the ps3 will eventually catch up.

But sony really needed to hit the ground running, especially with gears setting such a high bar for them. It seems more they tripped coming out of the gate(with the exception of R:FOM), and will now have to work even harder.

The bad news? Europe gets a preview of what to expect before they buy, and that is not going to help sony at all. The PS3 sold well in US and Japan cause people were expecting their minds blown, but now that Europe knows what it's waiting for, they will likely start lokking at the wii or the 360, or both to get the best of both worlds.

Sony needs more that RFOM and they need it now if they don't want to lose a chunk of europe that they dominated so well before.

[MicroGamer]

Wii is not going to be able to keep up. They will be hampering cross platform development. In the last generation, they could pretty much use the same models and textures with just little tweaks here and there to make them look the best they can on each platform, but Wii is now so far behind the 360 and PS3 in terms of graphics muscle that they can't diplay the same models and textures and keep the frame rates up at the same time like the 360 and PS3. Going low tech is going to lose them a lot of titles.

[uxo22]

People keep saying that games are first generation as if something as changed since the game was created. The PS3 has been in development longer than the Xbox360 has. The Developers have had plenty of time with the dev kits. The difference is as it is with anything else (in most cases) if a developer puts the time into a product, they will get better results.

Sometimes you guys act as if the DEV kit for the PS3 was released 60 days before the PS3 was. Dev kit my A$$ it is what it is. There's going to be games out there that look much better on the PS3 (and viceversa)and to put it simple it's going to be because the developers for that particular game put more time and effort into it.

IT's already been said that the Cell is more difficult to develope for, with that being said, simple mathematics would tell me that a PS3 game should be take a bit longer to produce that one for the three-sixty. If they don't take the extra time and care, as you see in this article, the 360 versions will continue to look better.

DISCLAIMER: This is just my opinion and nothing else.

[BoneMagnus]

Excellent point about Europe! I hadn't considered that. They already have a bad taste in their mouth because of the delay, and the overall poor reviews could affect their willingness to purchase once it is there - or at least delay purchases until a must-have title comes out like MGS. But, if Europe is slow to adopt, it could affect developers' desire to program for the console.

[HyperBear]

How many Xbox 360 Fanboys were on that site just clicking "What the Cell is going on". Like i cansee some games on 360 that are better, like Tiger Woods, and most of the sports games, but like Blazing Angles and Ridge Racer better on 360 than PS3, highly unlikely. i mean, that just begs the question, did the 360 fanboys when looking at this, did they even watch the trailers, or they just out in hyate for Sony just said "What the Cell is going on". But I think the 360 wins most of them, but theres the weird one that PS3 should have gotten, but it didnt. 1UP has a lot of 360 fanboys.

[forgiveme]

31% PS3 fanboys voted that Call of Duty 3 looked better on the PS3 when clearly it doesnt

[MoonDust]

Except Blazing angel and Fullauto, they used different cars and planes so the comparison is not good.

[ArmrdChaos]

First, the screens are not identical. Secondly, the Xbox 360 version was stylized to give it that old movie look (greenish tint) which they obviously decided to go away from for the PS3 version.

[MicroGamer]

I clicked "sort of looks better on PS3" 3 times on that one, but I really didn't see anything that blew me away to the point where I could say it looks hella better on PS3 than 360.

[NextGen24Gamer]

Well according to those polls....Over 85 % of the people clicked "what the cell is going on". on every game...in some cases closer to 95%. But many of those probably feel like us. 9 out of 10 games look better on the 360. But one aspect the screen shots don't show is the bad frame rates for most of the ps3 games. There is no excuse for that. Games that are 60 fps on the 360 are a studdery 30 fps on the ps3. DJ and others will come to sonys rescue and come up with excuses...but read the article. Sony made all these claims and failed miserably. There is no excuse for this. And DJ, its even worse when you look at Sony's first party games....They are getting ratings of 3, 4, and 5's. Then you have the one bright spot in Resistance...an average score of 8 point somthin.... Is it not obvious yet? Are sony fans in complete denial and filled with constant excuses? Just watch the responses to this article and see for yourself. The people have spoken....The war is over folks. There is only ONE premier next gen console on the market right now...and thats the xbox 360. Whether the ps3 can recover? Who knows. Sony fans have hopes just like they did about sony's promises for the launch....I assume there will be some exclusive games for the ps3 that will be Good. But I'm not holding my breath...every day that goes by I appreciate more and more what Microsoft has created in the xbox 360....The best next gen system TODAY.

[MicroGamer]

the graphics look better and framerates on 360 are higher in spite of the awesome power of the multi-core Cell, greater storage capacity of the Blu-Ray and mega-bandwith on the XDR Ram. Even with "advantages" like that, PS3 still doesn't manage to blow 360 out of the water.

[power of Green]

Doing damage controll.

[Marriot VP]

in that case, if he would be compared to a cop, he'd be a cooked cop.

[PS360PCROCKS]

I agree with whoever said it that you can't compare 3rd party titles since they will usually look alike, and at the same time you cant compare 1st party titles. But at the same time, most of these games look better on the 360 or exactly the same. The ones that stand out for the 360 are Madden (Look at the stands and the field) and ultimate alliance, and COD3, and I actually think RR as well. Ps3 side blazin angels, full auto, and their was another one but I forget

[power of Green]

PS3 is getting bad grades from it's 1st party (built from the ground up for PS3)tittles by reviewers, it has nothing to do with what DJ's saying.

They say some of those PS3 games run like PS2 games.

G4's Attack of the Shows "In The Loop" had a ball bashing the PS3( they wher laughing and couldn't keep a straight face while talking about PS3) today, they hyped up the PS3 for it's launch(ratings) and just days later are saying if you want next gen games go with the 360.

[kingboy]

Ofcourse the games at launch are gonna be less impressive.What your forgettin is sony`s console is the only hardware here with a brand new cell chip that`s never been used before and for now i`ll say developers are in a process of just learning how to develope for ps3.we seeing what the cell can do at birth,then soon at mid-age and finally mature form

[eques judicii]

how the graphics look 2 years from now... because sony has some very stiff competition now, and if exclusives jump ship because they can make more money on another console (larger install base) then the incentive for the ps3 drops and so does its market share.

So while the ps3 may look better in a few years... will that make people wait? will people look at the 360 now and the ps3 now and say... why am I paying 200 bucks more?? I know I did... that's why I have a 360

[InMyOpinion]

How come PGR3 for 360, which was a launch title, still looks better than any of the Ps3 games?

[power of Green]

Yah....! how come 360 launch games look better than PS3's, you speak as if the 360's hardware is weak and last-gen but in reality it's more next-gen than most of PS3's hardware.

[videl]

the problem with the comparison is, who says wich pics are from ps3, and wich are from xbox360? or are there any ps3 pictures, or are they photoshoped ? the truth is, ridge racer looks by far better on the ps3, but xbots say the other way round. ppl buy a ps3 and compare it by yourself, because this screenshots are bs, noone knows where they come from.

[CG]

Its professional reviewers who say RR6 looks better than RR7.

GET OVER IT YOU F@G!!!!!

[SuperSaiyan4]

So what did you expect? The XENOS in the Xbox 360 is immensly ahead of technology than the RSX in the PS3 now any PS fanboy will deny that because they are not clued up on technical hardware unlike the Xbox fans. Many Xbox fans are or used to be PC gamers or system builders and clearly know what they are talking about unlike the PS fans who dwell in the clouds believing the nonsense they hear or see.

Xbox 360 sets the standard in true next generation gaming, Sony goes with hardware forgetting what is most important and that's having a better GPU and software.

Who is losing their exclusives? Sony
Who is getting the worst reviews? Sony
Who promised and never delivered? Sony

[CG]

You say that developers are in the process of learning how to develope for ps3 but you ps3 fans forget that its the same situation with the xbox 360 even though devlopers have had more time with the 360 they are still only scratching the surface.

Yeah the games will look alot better on the ps3 when developers get more expirence but the same goes for the xbox 360!!!
What do you think the quality of the 360 games is just gona stand still until the ps3 games catches up?? LOL

The ps3 will always be playing catch up, not to mention the FACT that the ps3 is much harder to develope for, its going to take developers years if ever they manage to tap into the potentail of the ps3 hardware.

Just face it the ps3 games are below par and will never look as good as the 360 games.

[rjkc]

ps3 games look much better than 360 did last year but also because of sony many delays dev kits went out very late. 3rd party developers had very little time to put very good games out . Next year this time we should be able to tell what the ps3 can do

[InMyOpinion]

If you consider the advances made in graphics development since the xbox 360 launched, the Ps3 games should by any means look much better. If Bizarre developed PGR3 to come out this year instead of last of course it would look better. Funny thing is, it still looks better than most PS3 games that are launched this year.

[pbo2m3]

You're a moron. So all the reviews that have said that the 360 games look better are all lying. Think before you speak. I know that you are such a big Sony fanboy but don't make it so obvious by saying retarded crap like that.

[greenlynxx]

No, no, no. The bottom line problem with the whole launch game comparison is that the respective launch games aren't competing with each other. Sony's launch games are competing with GOW and other games coming out now and not primarily competing with games that are a year old. Likewise the launch games put out by MS only had to compete with last gen games.

This whole argument is based entirely off a whole list of assumptions that are completely unverifiable and therefore pointless.

[rjkc]

such fanboy why do i have 18 360 games you are a stupid fanboy i can afford to buy all 3 no problem

[power of Green]

You're still an idiot and you have no clue what you re saying.

What kind of idiot thinks that higher income will make people be intrested in all the consoles.

[TOM]

People who talk about thier income in this way usally dont even have jobs.and if you did have all three you wouldnt pick the ps3 as the best system at this point.In time,it may well be worht the money ,but at this point anyone who paid for a ps3 just look like fuking fools.

[Balance]

one thing to consider also is the ps3 launch games should have been better, after the 6 month launch delay of the ps3 they (devs) should have had time to spruce it up. such as some upcoming ps3 games (fight night, blazing angles) those games were made then the devs had another 10 months to make the game better for the ps3.

but you need to keep in mind it is the people making the games not necessarily the hardware. if epic had layed and egg with gears of war everyone would be saying how the 360 can't do this or that. it would have had nothing to do with the 360 since obviously it can but every one would have said it couldn't, and lucky for gamers epic did get it right in a big way with gears because that game is alot of fun.

[marcusfenix]

The 360 is more powerful and the PS3 is struggling to keep up. Games run better on the 360 because the overall software and hardware architecture is better for game development.

[DJ]

Weak PC cpu. Low system bandwidth. Bottlenecks galore. Are you serious? The GPU looks pretty nice, but again, the fact that it's the Southbridge and has to multitask so many things is kind of over-the-top. And using high-latency GPU memory for the CPU is the most questionable design decision I've seen in a long time.

1st-gen PS3 titles standing up to 2nd-gen 360 titles says a lot.

[power of Green]

1st gen, 1st party PS3 games are being voted as the worst games in launch history.

Reviewers are saying they play and look like PS2 games and you're saying and i qoute: 1st-gen PS3 titles standing up to 2nd-gen 360 titles".

they dont even stand up to some PS2 games let alone 360 launch tittles.

[NJ1307RSX]

Go suck a big one.

The PS3 launch games are looking much better than the 360 launch titles and comparing the PS3 to the PS2 just goes to show you're an ms fangeek.

Get a life besides trolling these forums. And don't forget 1st gen PS3 titles are being compared against 2nd gen xbox 360 titles, wow! Just goes to show how desperate you ms fans are.

[MicroGamer]

whether the design is questionable or not, it is working and for a whole lot less money than PS3. Microsoft set out to make sure they could stay competitive in racing to the lower price points, so they saved money in every way that they could without crippling the system. Sony just kept throwing money at the PS3 until it became a bloated monstrosity that only rich kids can afford to buy. So while Sony is scrambling for ways to cost reduce the PS3, Microsoft will be working on the generation after this one and will beat them there, too.

[marcusfenix]

Doesn't know what he is talking about. I guess PC's don't use the same kind of memory? LOL I have GDDR3 in my PC do you? There are no bandwidth problems with the 360, the 10mb of EDRAM alleviates any bandwidth problems. From what I have seen for the future of the PS3 nothing even comes close to Gears of War. The GPU is better than the PS3's, the CPU is better suited for game code, it uses a DVD drive with faster read speeds etc.... Blu-Ray is a bottleneck, using system memory is a bottleneck, trying to play while roasting a pig on your new george foreman grill is a bottleneck! :)

[DJ]

CPUs have superior performance when linked to CPU memory, and same with GPUs linked to GPU memory (like GDDR3). If you hook up CPUs to GPU memory or vice versa, performance takes a pretty big hit in videogames, which require high performance.

CPUs take a lot of small chunks out of RAM at a very fast rate, while GPUs take large chunks of data with long intervals in between. Their respective RAM types are catered towards these needs. This is why using high-latency GDDR3 memory for the Xenon (which is already bogged down by 1.6GHz L2 Cache) was a bad idea. It is however great for the Xenos since it has so much GDDR3 memory to work with. Unfortunately, it's at the CPU's expense (which feeds the GPU with instructions).

Explains why Sony made the smart decision of splitting off the memory pools. The only reason they could do this is because of the FlexI/O technology that Rambus developed for them. That way you get the benefits of full memory access for the GPU without the 360's disadvantages.

[JustCallMeDaddy]

WhAt ThE CeLl Is GoInG oN?

[The great 1]

You people like boink who say Europe got a preview of the PS3 really believe that, i've said this once and i'll say it again, not everybody who plays games are as passionate about it as the people on this site or other fanboy news sites, basically they'll here it as PS3 the must have machine and guess what the news wont be reporting Mobile Suit Gundam getting a 3.9 from gamespot or Genji 2 not being a graphical masterpiece, they will report the console being selt out and they will call it the most powerfull console ever and report it how it is people want PS3, not Xbox, oh yea and due to the exchange rate Uk Pounds, to US dollars i get games for like £35 rather than £50, so i don't lose out there do i, now as for the Xbox 360 people just see it as a radiator, people had a check calling PS3 a George Foreman, that Xbox 360 looks like a Radiator device, but the difference is PS3 cooks things just the way they were meant to be Xbox will burn them, lol, your house down lol, well it doesn't have Cell so i'm sure it's likely to do so lol!

[Grown Folks Talk]

ssj04?

[Anerythristic26]

Alot of PS3 owners are finding out the only thing " Real Next Gen" about the PS3 was the Sony hype.

To everybody else , my only wish is that people would stop talking about the PS3 like it is a Turbo Grafix 16; it is a POWERFUL system. I just think it's been proven that it is not the Death Star that Sony got you all excited about and on very equal footing with the 360.

At this point I think that all PS fans should say " enough is enough " and really just stop believing the hype and the lies. If you like the games on the PS3 buy it. Don't buy it because you really believe what Sony says and you just know it will destroy all that stand before it in a merciless fit. Honestly the people like me that have a seeing is believing attitude about Sony sort of feel sorry for you guys , like you feel sorry for the kid that gets socks for Christmas.

[specialguest]

i thought ridge racer was suppose to look better on the 360, but after inspecting the details, my verdict is that both looked the same. the only difference is the colors. i also think that screenshots does not do a cmoparison justice.

by the way, did that first comparison thread just diappeared?!? hmm... anyway, on the other thread, i stated that the 360 version in most games either looked identical or technically better by an edge.

[ApocalypseShadow]

if you started playing games last year in picking up 360,you were playing next gen.some games were rushed to launch and dev kits still needed to be delivered.but you were playing next gen.but playstation fans who were waiting for THEIR NEXT GEN,didn't start until over a week and a half ago.and again,games were rushed and dev kits were way late.the real difference is way better BC for old games,a next gen player built in, but weak online.microsoft being the opposite.

microsoft fans weren't waiting for ps3.playstation fans didn't want a 360.and families were waiting for WII.to each his own.

games will get better on 360.games will get better on ps3 and WII.but i would say there are many developers that know how to program for WII because it's basically a gamecube with more ram and speed.many developers know how to develop for power pc chips that 360 has.i don't know of a lot of developers who knew how to develop for a chip that has 7-8 backup processors helping one main one.so some are either going to struggle to make games for an unknown chip,excel at it leaving others behind or just port from 360 development and say "who cares?!""we just want money!"I THINK THIRD PARTIES WILL JUST GO FOR THE MONEY.FIRST PARTIES FOR EACH SYSTEM WILL PUSH THE SYSTEMS UNTIL THEY BREAK.BUT AT LEAST WE GET GOOD GAMES.

[mellowspaz]

Everyone seems to compare Microsoft to the dreamcast era. But doesn't anyone else see history repeating itself with Sony emulating Nintendo from the Nintendo 64 era. Stubborn format adoption, huge loyal fanbase, harder to program for, 2 generations of domination lost because of overconfidence. I remember many nintendo fans, including me, switching over to the playstation because of the games, and I think this is what's going to happen in the future with the 360, I know I already have.

[gsquad]

First I would like to say that you CAN vote more that once so I can’t say that this is the best way to determine what system is better. But, if you voted you will see that there are three choices:

YES
The PS3 version is clearly better

MAYBE
The PS3 sort of looks better

NO
What the cell is going on?!

If you picked one of the first two you have voted that the PS3 version looks better. Whether that is by a little or a lot you still voted that it looks better. if you pick the last on you say that the X360 version is better by a little, a lot, or they are about even/equal

YES
The PS3 version is clearly better = CB

MAYBE
The PS3 sort of looks better = SLB

NO
What the cell is going on?! = WTHC

When I went through this is what I saw:

Tiger Woods

CB 6%
SLB 14%
WTHC 81%
Winner X360 looks better by either a little, a lot, or are equal

Call of Duty 3

CB 9%
SLB 19%
WTHC 71%
Winner X360 looks better by either a little, a lot, or are equal

Madden 07

CB 9%
SLB 14%
WTHC 76%
Winner X360 looks better by either a little, a lot, or are equal

Ridge Racer 6 vs 7

CB 17%
SLB 21%
WTHC 61%
Winner X360 looks better by either a little, a lot, or are equal

Tony Howk’s Project 8

CB 8%
SLB 11%
WTHC 81%
Winner X360 looks better by either a little, a lot, or are equal

Fight Night Round 3

CB 28%
SLB 27%
WTHC 45%
Winner PS3 looks better by either a little or a lot.

NBA 2K7

CB 8%
SLB 9%
WTHC 83%
Winner X360 looks better by either a little, a lot, or are equal

Need For Speed: Carbon

CB 9%
SLB 12%
WTHC 78%
Winner X360 looks better by either a little, a lot, or are equal

Full Auto

CB 25%
SLB 24%
WTHC 51%
Winner X360 looks better by either a little, a lot, or are equal

Marval Ultimate Alliance

CB 7%
SLB 8%
WTHC 85%
Winner X360 looks better by either a little, a lot, or are equal

Blazing Angels

CB 31%
SLB 22%
WTHC 47%
Winner PS3 looks better by either a little or a lot.

I think that this is pretty close I only disagree with Ridge Racer, Full Auto, and Need for Speed: Carbon. I think that X360 has them beat on Call of Duty, but all others you really cant tell the difference, graphically. Now X360 has PS3 beat in some games on features but that’s a different article to talk about.

Remember these are just the percentages that I saw when I voted they have more that likely change since then.

Jump In and Welcom3 Chang3

[0ldb0y]

What irks me is that some people take what "professional reviewers" say as a fact of life. Some argue for different sides for the same game - where is the "fact" there? For some, it will really come down to matter of personal opinion as to which has better graphics. At some point, you could say definitively that one set of graphics are better than the other based on several factors, i.e. polygon count, shading ability, layers/textures, etc., but even then it comes down to a numbers game and not everybody can really appreciate it as such a high level.

At this moment today, the difference in graphic quality is TOO NARROW to deem one console superior to the other. You could also argue about graphics capability, but as DJ said in post #1 it comes down to what developers are able to do with what their given.

I think all the bickering and back and forth over which is better is all for naught. Undoubtedly, you will see developers take each system's capabilities further over the next few years, but I doubt either one will eventaully blow the other one out of the water, regardless of any given title being 1st party or 3rd party. If Gundman on the PS3 had the "best" graphics ever, it still wouldn't make it a good game. If GoW wasn't quite so glistening and stunning graphics wise as it is, it would still be a great game overall. In the long run, 360 and PS3 fanboys will have to own up to that gameplay being more important, and its possible that we'll see the Wii run away with that. If Nintendo's not-so-graphically-next-gen console is able to attract more attention in the LONG RUN on a WIDE SCALE, then you'll really begin to see where third party development will begin to shift.

For the now, however, argue about exclusive titles between the 360 and the PS3, and even the Wii. I think that will be the true factor in determining the winner in this "war," not which console has the best graphics.

Frankly, Sony promised a lot prior to their launch, and I don't think they failed to deliver at all. It's just that Microsoft delivered as well. You can't really take that away from either side.

[BIadestarX]

How else can a console prove that it's better than another? The games! 6 months ago Sony fanboys didn't say that PS3 games were going to look same or worst the 360 games; they said PS3 would blow the 360 away. Well, the PS3 was launched and guess what? The 360 it's still standing. When the Xbox came out; it was obvious that it was more powerful than the PS2; you could tell the difference with 3rd party games. Like today I can tell a huge difference between wii Ultimate Aliance and the XBox 360 version. Where is your stupid common sense Sony fanboys? How do you prove which car is faster? which horse is faster? Which scanner scans better? Which TV looks better? Why comparing the consoles should be any different? Why do you need 2 years to prove that the PS3 is better? I mean better by hardware not developer's support. The XBox was better than the PS2; but the PS2 had more games.
You people are expecting hardware to change over time. It is true that developers will learn over time, but don't expect the learning curve of these developers to work magic. This is why consoles have a lifespan, this is why Sony made a PS3.

[gsquad]

You say how do you tell if a car is better that another car. Well, I have and RX8 and have race just about every stock 4or 6 banger out-there, and destroy them, even if they have more horses on paper.

So you can’t make a snap judgment about anything, at least not in one comparison.

Give the programmers some time to understand the full potential of both systems then judge, watch the market share, at least let PS3 get out of their launch window before you make a judgment, but don’t be a bigot.

I'm not calling you one, bladestar, I am talking to anyone who just wont give things a try, read the definition before you get upset.

Definition
Bigot: a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or OPINION.
http://dictionary.reference...

(I am talking about opinions, let people have them and move on. Don't get into shouting matches with them. /flame wars)

Instead just be open to the debate/conversation about good games. I just want to play good games I don’t care what system they are on. That’s why I will have to get all three at some point in time.

P.s. I don’t think that it should take all five years to reach the potential of a system. In three years, from PS3 launch, if they don’t have the market share or their games don’t look, blow your socks off, better than the X360 they never will.

Jump In and Welcom3 Chang3

[BIadestarX]

I agree that we should let developers learn the tools (I am a software developer myself; so I know how important is to become familiar with the tools I work with). But, remember this is not about proving that developer will make better PS3 games or that the quality will improve. It is to prove that the 360 is a piece of sh** compare to the PS3. That the PS3 will reach a level that the 360 cannot possibly reach. That's is what Sony fanboys are saying. I believe the PS3 is a very powerful piece of hardware, but beliving that it will make the 360 obsolete it's simply not logical. Let's that game development is more software than it is hardware. It is true that hardware it's important (memory, CPU and GPU) of which the 360 prove to be more powerful than any top of the line game PC. Why can't Sony fanboys accept that the 360 as powerful as the PS3 in the game department?

[Dusk]

Sony, the PS3, and its fanboys is not that the 360 overall is better than the PS3. Sure, the 360 has better developers' tools, better online, better GPU, better controllers, more established features, better PC functionality, better HDTV functionality, more games in development, a very large head start in units sold, and is cheaper. Yes, the PS3 has more capacity on optical disc, an experimental CPU that may or may not prove superior, better Japanese developer support, and more brand recognition in the console world. But these advantages haven't yet decided which console is superior as both can offer solid entertainment, gain developers, and make improvements.

The real loss for the Sony camp is that the PS3 has proven that it does not blow the competition out of the water like Sony's hype tried to make people believe. What is now blatantly obvious is that the PS3 didn't enter the market ahead, it entered it behind. The PS3 games didn't enter the contest ahead of the 360 games. Best case they are as good and in many cases worse. Now that Sony's online service is in homes, people can see that it doesn't blow LIVE out of the water like Sony said it would. The reality is that it seems unfinished and has a LONG way to go just to equal LIVE. Sony's hype was that the PS3 is a supercomputer, but now that it's on the market the reality is that it's far from it. It can't even stream music during gameplay and the 360 completely dominates the PS3 when it comes to PC/Mac interaction. Sony claimed HD gaming didn't start until the PS3 hit the market, but the reality is that the 360 has far better HDTV functionality. At least every 360 game displays in 1080i, which can't be said about PS3 games as many don't. All of the older HDTVs only have 1080i. What about the PS3 not displaying bluray movies in 720p? As 720p and 1080i HDTVs are vastly more common than 1080p HDTVs, this really dampers the PS3's 'true HD' features.

These things show that there is no justification at this point in the PS3's higher price point. These things also destroy any confidence that Sony will assuredly dominate the market again as it has to play catch-up just to equal its competition. This is the real loss for Sony and its crew.

[slugg]

Notice how Sony hasn't stepped up to address/find a solution for any of these problems? All along, (most recently with the problems involved in the video downloads), if their was a problem with the 360, Xbox live, or a service they provide, Microsoft immediately responds to the problem and as soon as they can, releases a fix.

[slugg]

Yes, Sony cannont deliver what they promised-- we already knew that. Their "first" generation games, which because of the system's delay, have been in development (some, not all) as long as 360's "second" generation games, don't look as good as they "should" or were expected to look. The important thing is this: xbox 360 WILL BE the main development platform for multi-system titles. So even if the PS3 eventually shows that it is more powerful, the majority of games will look the EXACT SAME on the 360 and PS3. I remember reading over and over in game reviews in the last generation how PS2 games were ported to the Xbox and took no advantage of the Xbox's OBVIOUSLY greater power. Now, the situation is reversed-- by launching first and offering an easier-to-develop-for platform, Microsoft has positioned its system as the lead development platform. At the same time Sony was shooting off their collective mouths about when the real next-gen started and were busy copying xbox live, nintendo's controller, etc., Microsoft was talking to devs like Rockstar, Capcom, Ubisoft, and pushing to get exclusive games or at least simultanious launches (like GTA 4). Sony was outplayed and outmanouvered by a wiley, competitive company that shored up its weaknesses (hardware) and played to its strenghts (software). Sony, sitting on its laurels as the market leader, assumed that people would buy their system "just because it says Playstation on it" and would be willing to "work harder to afford it," and so decided they needed to use it as a blu-ray trojan horse and media center instead of focusing on THEIR strength- Hardware. Along the way, instead of trying to keep the exclusive software that helped the Ps2 dominate in the last gen, they "assumed" that companies like Rockstar would stick with them. Big mistake. The last year, Sony has looked like an all-pro running back that fumbled the ball, and keeps trying to pick it up but kicks it farther away each time instead. Will the competition get the ball first and run in back for a touchdown? Its looking pretty likely at the moment...

[Mr Murda]

...said it any better myself. You're exactly right, and this is what I've been saying for a while. This isn't a Sony bashing thing, it's unfortunately the truth.

Nice Comment!

[Sphinx]

Bluray Trojan Horse... perfect way of putting that.

[0ldb0y]

When "Metal Gear Solid 2" went from PS2 to Xbox as "MGS2: Substance," it certainly got a graphical upgrade. I was hoping for a port of "Snake Eater," but that didn't happen. Could we see a crossover for "Guns of the Patriots?" I highly doubt it, but certainly hope for it. I think some PS2 -> Xbox ports had a facelift, but it wasn't a large factor in commanding marketshare in either direction.

I like the football analogy. As for who picks up the fumbled ball and runs it back, it may not necessarily be Microsoft OR Sony...

[Sphinx]

Ha, I knew that'd get your attention. Anyway, one thing I don't recall anyone really saying this way is this: even if the PS3 graphics are a little better than the 360's in the future, why would developers put that much time and money into a console that has a smaller install base with owners who buy less games? Maybe the PS3 has a better processor... but if it takes too much time and money to use it fully, it'll rarely (if ever) get used fully. Since the 360 is cheaper and easier to program for, most games will look similar. So, it all comes down to this:
360- less expensive, Xbox Live
PS3- BluRay movie playback
Other than that, they are pretty much equals. Now, if price and online play are more important to you, get a 360. If watching high-def movies is more important to you, get a PS3. There, I settled it.

[slugg]

That videogames are a BUSINESS. Microsoft is already making a little money on the 360 itself, selling more accessories and games, and has a decent installed base. Sony is losing its a$$ on every PS3 they manage to produce and sell, and people aren't buying many games and accessories yet. But, everyone in the industry agrees-- the games are the important aspect of the equation. Better exclusive games or the better version of multi-platform games on your systems means you sell more systems, and the bigger your installed base, the more companies want to make games for your system. That is why the fact that Sony's first-party games suck, and its multi-platform games, while they might look AS GOOD as 360 games, play WORSE with fram-rate problems, etc., could be the straw that broke the camels back. Game companies will make games for the system that is easiest and cheapest to develop for, and the one with the largest installed base (more chance of sales). In this case, the 360 is both. Sony is in trouble.

[NextGen24Gamer]

28 - after
THE TRUTH - 1 Hour ago | Let him/her speak
Rereading that killzone thread I've decieded and come to terms with its just all about personal preference!

I mean we argue the same things every damn day! Consoles and games are made to be fun! Who cares about the reviews and analyst just enjoy gaming for what it is!

We could all be telling eachother the fun we are having with RFOM and GOW and Zelda but instead we argue about which one is better!

Fact is you can ask 1,000,000 people which game they prefer and why! They would all give you different responses, but the real point is that ALL OF THEIR ANSWERS WOULD BE CORRECT!!!

Just enjoy your console or consoles and spread the good news! I'm tired of fighting about nothing!
Reply | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Spam/Offensive

29 - THE TRUTH -
TopGamer - 40 Minutes ago | Let him/her speak
WOW. I agree 100%. BTW....You do have Gears of War and Rainbow Six right? Those are the two games I play the most on xbox live. I just started getting into Call of Duty 3. Did you get your ps3 yet?

I think ps3 fans were just irritated by all the 360 fans being so elated about the 360 and bragging about next gen games. I think 360 fans were just upset that sony fans were bashing the console they purchased. And now that the ps3 has launched and its not better than the 360 like most people assumed it would be.....360 fans are rubbing it in sony fans faces. Thats why I say its OVER. Let us all enjoy games now. talk about the games. And give our opinions on different news articles that come up.
Reply | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Spam/Offensive

30 - I WILL HAVE TO SAY I AGREE
shadowgamer - 4 Minutes ago | Let him/her speak
WITH TRUTH AND TOP GAMER(wow,i agree with top gamer-kidding).it's the same thing over and over and over again.I LIKE GAMES.ALWAYS LIKED GAMES OVER COMPANIES.i'll admit i felt i had to defend the side that likes japanese games and sony,because when i got here,it was all negative for sony and the games on their system.even games that were not made by sony were being bashed.i wasn't here to see the sony side bashing the 360.so i don't know what was up.but after getting the ps3,i will say it's going to be a toss up.great developers on each side are going to make great games including the wii.bad developers are going to make bad games on each as well.i think most of us were playing before sony,nintendo and microsoft(some of us were playing atari and pong),and if they leave,say an outside company makes 3d holographic headsets that don't make you sick,i think as gamers,we will still be playing.like bloods and crips,it's got to stop.
Reply | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Spam/Offensive

[zornik]

@24 That is a fact.

[Funky Town_TX]

We should not be comparing screen between the 360 and the PS3. THe PS3 cost $100 to $200 more that the 360. You can't compare the Wii to the 360 as far as gfx goes. That is only a $50 to $150 difference. With more dev time things just may change.

[Ravenator529]

comparisons are constantly made between the 360 and PS3 is that both M$ and Sony dumped tons and tons of money into developing next-gen graphical powerhouse gaming consoles.

Forget the Wii. They will sell systems but I really think that Nintendo did themselves a disjustice by not investing into a graphical upgrade. I have a feeling that the Wii will turn into another dust collector like the Gamecube over time. But that is a story for another thread.

These graphical comparisons will be made for years to come. True, the PS3 is still very early in its life and realistically they only have about 400,000 units worldwide at the moment. Things can change with longer development times.

The question that I always bring up is:

Does Sony have time to wait?

IMO they don't have another year to bring out their powerhouse games. M$ is on a major roll right now. And I don't see them backing off any time soon!

It especially doesn't help when M$'s first major attempt at RPG gaming in Japan (Blue Dragon) is getting RAVE reviews from Famitsu.

It's going to be a very very interesting year!

[jedicurt]

after looking closely at all of the game shots, i have to agree with all but one pic. I couldn't really tell any improvement except on the gameplay pic of Madden. Maybe it was just the lighting in the game or something. but the players actually looked (in my opinion) quite a bit better and more realistic than the 360. but i can't say that is the absolute truth without seeing them both in person before me.

[Thugbot187]

Normally I would say the whole argument over which has better graphics is silly. To point out Sony did put there foot in there mouth for the second console in a row saying how they had superior graphics, and how we would be amazed because till the PS3 there has never been anything as good. The even went as far as to declare the CGI as in game play. The problem I think everyone is having is that none of there claims are true. The PS3 isn’t better than the top of the line PC, and looking at the games it’s about equal with the Xbox360 or falls right bellow the Xbox360 in some cases. If the PS3 was so great it would not be hard from the start from them to show a dramatic difference over the Xbox360, look they easily show a dramatic difference over the Wii. Face it DJ and the rest of the fanboys who have bought into Sony’s lies, the PS3 doesn’t offer such a blinding leap over PC and Xbox360 in visuals as Sony has claimed. I would doubt that Sony could produce anything as visually as good as Crysis on the PS3 as they claimed. For most of us consumers who have a brain and don’t blindly follow or listen to Sony’s lies, feel that Sony isn’t showing us anything that’s better than what’s on the Xbox360. Not only that Xbox360 has more Exclusives, most of the major AAA games or coming out on both consoles and funny thing is the Xbox360 seems to get the better review. If Sony hadn’t made all the false claims and the console came out at the same price as the Xbox360 they wouldn’t have these problems. Please Sony Fanboys don’t tell us it’s worth it because it has BLU-RAY. Can anyone of you give a valid argument why BLU-RAY over HD-DVD? Please don’t say capacity because holographic DVD, and Bug Protein DVD’s yield far greater capacities. Honestly just accept the fact Sony made some outrages claims and isn’t living up to them. If you want to support the PS3 and you still are a big fan fine but no need to put down the Xbox360, for being a better buy for the price and what it offers. We don’t care about BLU-RAY (Majority of consumers feel DVD is fine and if they had to upgrade HD-DVD.)

[power091999]

Understanding that most if not all of these games look almost identical.

Is it possible that the PS3 is getting the 30fps here, and bottle neck there because most of these games were (built) on the 360?

I mean the PS3 came out 2 weeks ago. Understanding this, the original games were probably built on the 360 base, THEN ported to the PS3. I can see why there would be issues here, and there.

This also can say to me that games that look identical on a system that has been out for 2 weeks, can not say anything for a year from now.

Before everyone jumps on me about how games are made, or built. Understand that this is more of a question, than a statment about either system.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

[Killer Cop]

Why do people think they can compare graphics when the same title comes on both consoles. People are so stupid. Developers making a title for several consoles usually dont make different graphics, because it will take 3 times longer to make if you released it on 3 platforms. Like Call of Duty 3. Models are the same. Textures are the same. But wait, the lightning is not the same? Thats because it can b chanced with like a click or two, but still consumes more power. And I can also add that it takes shorter time to render something which dark, than lightened up.

I hate these comparisons people make. Like 50% of them can't see any difference because really ain't so much into graphics. 20% are fanboys stating they can't see any difference at all. And 10% of them is fake. The rest is the ones we can use. Halleluja.

Just wait for Killzone 2 to come out, then you will see graphics.

[slugg]

In, like 2009, when Sony can finally maybe make a game that looks close enough to the CGI B.S. they passed off as gameplay 2 years ago? Why no new video of this awesome game, if it has been in development all this time, it should look awesome right now, shouldn't it? Why wouldn't Sony show some footage to counteract these negative comparisons? Just wondering...

[slugg]

With their loose-lip comments about how superior the PS3 is supposed to be. The thing is, if no one can tell, doesn't that mean they were basically full of sh1t? Not trying to start a flame war here, but this whole comparison thing came out of Sony's comments of "the next gen starts when we say it does," which, apparently, still isn't here yet. Maybe in 2008 when MGS4 comes out?

[Alymon]

No one here is going to sway someone one way or the other on which system is better or which they should get. We've all already made up our minds. We've had a year to think about it since the 360 came out, and weeks since the PS3.

Nothing but hype. That's all it ever is on launch. The more it gets hyped, the more people are disapointed, but the more people that buy it.

Sony hyped it up to drive sales. Simple as that. The more sales they get, the better their installed base and the more weight they have with third party developers. If they can push hard enough, beyond the criticisms, they can build enough of a base to have their system succeed (even if not as much as the PS2).

They did an excellent job hyping it up and it is selling out because of that. Unfortunately, their supply is so crippled (last analyst report I read said under 200,000 units (source was PJ Nealy I believe)) that they aren't getting enough out there. If they can't boost supply before the hype dies down (and it is dying fast) they aren't going to get the installed base they need to win people over.

On the flip side, the 360 already has a good installed base and is still selling, with new titles driving sales (Gears of War in the US, Blue Dragon in Japan). Microsoft doesn't have to worry about their hype anymore because the rush is over and the supply is now steady. People are buying the 360 not because of hype now, but because of the software and services.

Will the same be true for the PS3? Will it be able to deliver after the hype? So far there hasn't been much hope for ground breaking titles. But then again, many of the major announced titles were pushed back and won't be out for a while.

Personally, I think Sony crippled themselves. But if the PS3 gets good titles down the road and looks great, I may pick one up (especially if Blu-Ray dominates). But until that time I'll reserve judgment and stick to the system with proven software and capabilities.

[marcusfenix]

Ugly graphics and horrible framerate!!!

[DeathNote1]

you can't have small pictures
or the name of each console beside it.

oh and did u fanboys realize ign rated tiger woods and cod3 higher on the 360? overall scores, including graphics.

but they rated rr7 (overall including graphics) and madden nfl (graphics) higher on the ps3?

I'm real sick of you xbots.

[Sphinx]

..."Xbots" are sick of you, too.

[DeathNote1]

so feeble minded.

[marcusfenix]

This link from 1up say that Madden is better on the 360 visually.

http://www.1up.com/do/revie...

I have to agree, i have seen both in person side by side, and the lighting is way better and more realitic in the 360 version. IGn says they upgraded some textures etc... But me or my friend didn't see a difference but HIS WALLET DID!!! LOL

[Sphinx]

Well, I am impressed you could pull "feeble" from your vocabulary. The problem is all you want to do is complain about how the names of the consoles are put on each picture. Give me a break! Seriously, the PS3 costs $100-$200 more than a 360, has less games, and the online sucks. There is nothing for you to defend on the PS3 except the possible future.

[MicroGamer]

don't let magazine reviewers make our game buying decisions for us. We can see the screenshots and the videos for ourselves and decide which one we think looks better. You can look at a screenshot and say it is too dark or the colors are not right or the models don't look detailed enough and I can then look at the same screenshot and disagree completely with you. Use your own brain. Decide for yourself which system looks better instead of depending on a reviewer to tell you the difference. That is why the article was structured the way it was, to give everyone the chance to decide for themselves which looks best. If you like PS3 best, great, go for it. I think it does look best in a some games, but not enough to bring me back over to the Sony side.

[Cyclonus]

Go suck a d/ck.

[DeathNote1]

i guess everyone thinks a large majority of consoles are sold in the first year or two.
wrong.
so, what will those consumes then see in the future?
price drops and theoreticlaly better ps3 games.
most people will argue on why a dev should put up with the learning curve. well, they did once for the ps2.
they only know if they will again or not.

[NextGen24Gamer]

The news is why did sony make all these claims about the ps3 being far superior to the 360 and everyone pays 200 dollars more to play the ps3 but yet the ps3 games DON'T look any better than the 360 games. Thats the point the article is saying. And every gamer should look at sony like WTF. Stop talking about how powerful your system is and stop saying you are the only true next gen system and start putting out some AAA games that do the speaking for you. PLEASE. Because we all have eyes and we can all see as the poll clearly states...The more expensive Ps3 isn't delievering what it said it would. At this point its barely keeping up with the 360 and in some cases its far behind. And us as consumer should expect more when we have to pay more. Am I wrong? Who cares which console is better. We should care about how our money is spent and what we get for it. WHen I buy a video game console...I expect top notch games with great online play. Period. Right now, sony isn't living up to their end of the bargain and keeping their promises. They need to get their act together because MS is taking advantage of every sony blunder. And its costing sony in market share by the minute. Thats the truth....and thats Real. Lets all hope for great games and hope that games keep getting better and better for both platforms...thats how they will get our hard earned money....and let the award shows dictate which games are the best. Because thats what its about. Games.

And Deathnote1.....The first console to sell 10 million systems in every generation throughout history has won the total sales war. Thats a fact that has remained a constant.

[marcusfenix]

The 360 is still better for running game code and the finished product shows! I hate Sony, the #1 hype machine in the world! They never deliver on the hype, the 360 on the other hand did deliver and boy did it deliver good. The 360 will sell more than the PS3 get over it, it might not sell more than the Wii but it will sell more than the PS3.

[Dragonopolis]

First I have an Xbox 360 but I don't worship hardware manufactures I'm a gamer. As a gamer I was not that impress with Xbox 360 launch titles. The Xbox 360 demos were horrible with the exception of Call of Duty. But did such a boring launch of game titles make the Xbox 360 any less powerful or hinder other developers from creating awesome goodlooking games? No

Someone up above stated that using first gen as a crutch is wrong and stated one of the reason is that Sony had a year long to develope. Well, so Did Microsoft and its Xbox 360 supporters. They had a year to Develope too. As a matter of fact, we Xbox 360 owners can thank the hype of PS3 because without it I doubt we would have received the the quality of Games we've seen so soon. Gears of War is considered by many as the launch title of Third Generation software titles for Xbox 360. Whatever...... The fact is Gears of War is the Only Xbox 360 game that is out right now that surpasses PS3 launch titles make me wonder what was the Point Microsoft. A year head start and We have ONE title that we can hold up proudly a say "Yea, This is why Xbox 360 was launched early."

When you Compare Xbox 360 launch titles to PS3 launch titles there is no comparison. PS3 launch titles are just better period.

My theory in all this is if the Xbox 360 was able to produce a game at this quality. What would all the launch titles a year ago look like today had they had another year to work on them. They would have kick Sony's hinny thats what. Microsoft could have release the Xbox 360 this Christmas, I love gaming but I'm not addicted I can wait for quality. MS would have Had 10 times the amount of Xbox 360s in the store because they had a year to stockpile and I bet over the year MS would have caught the hardware problems it had at launch and fixed them. Thus, we Xbox 360 owners would have had a trouble free, incredible amount of High Quality launch titles, and pretty much a gaurentee Sony whooping. My impression of Microsoft over the past year has been this.

Microsoft has no balls.

Microsoft didn't have much faith in the system they were selling otherwise they would have taken Sony on this Christmas. If Gears of War represents what developers could have done with the same time frame had they waited, Xbox 360 could have easily sold all those Xbox 360 over the pass year this Christmas Season and Sony and Nintendo would going out of business in the gaming industry.

Thankfully, I don't buy consoles for the console I buy my console for the games. So if there is a game I totally enjoy and its on the Wii I'll get that too.

Sony's launch titles are as good as Xbox 360's Second Gen games and that puts Xbox 360 not a year ahead but only six months. Come March 2007 when all them supposedly Killer Apps that didn't make it by launch Like Killzone, Unreal, MGS4, etc.... The question is do We Xbox 360 fans have anything to counter these late comers. We shouldn't be talking about Gears of War we should be talking about what We are getting thats better than Gears of War in the Next Three months because it is my belief that those titles I mention about and perhaps some I haven't mentioned will probably be on par or even better than Gears of War and that's a scary thought. Only time will tell though. I say Sony fans should rejoice. Sony didn't let them down and they do have a system that is at least equal with what we Xbox 360 owners have.

I like fighting games and is one of the main reasons I bought an Xbox 360 was the continuation of the DOA series. I also like Virtual Fighter so will probably in the next three months get a PS3. Luckily, both systems have enough "other games" that I like to justify the purchase of both and the options will only grow over time. I like the all-in-one design over the add-ons approach so in my opinion Sony gets points for that.

People need to stop it with this hardware war crap and get to gaming. There are great games for both systems no one said ever said you had to limit yourself to one system. If Xbox 360 owners were smart and had the money they could have put $50 a month a side and had two consoles and HD movie play back and a lot more software options instead of just the xbox 360 and the HD-DVD add-on (if your into HD that is which I feel is what Xbox 360 and PS3 is all about).

Quite frankly, if your not into HD I believe you are really wasting your money buying an Xbox 360 or PS3 and are better off with the Wii - but thats just me.

Anyway, I done ranting and raving. Sorry Sony fans you have to be constantly bombarded by immature Xbox 360 owner comments but then again you have to them too and we get bombarded on Xbox 360 sites as well.

Well got to go....... I leave with this last thought....

"We need more gamers not haters."

Peace

[gearhead]

WHAT ARE YOU GETTING ON THE PS3 IN IT'S FIRST YEAR THAT IS ON PAR OR BETTER THAN GEARS OF WAR? NOTHING

We have Lost Planet, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Alan Wake, etc... that are coming in 2007 and all have better quality visuals than anything I have seen on the PS3, Unreal Engine 3 loves the 360 and it shows. Bioshock, Mass Effect, gears of War all use UE3 and all look better than any PS3 game including Unreal Tournament 2007, which the 360 is getting as well. I am glad Microsoft and Epic have such a good relationship. But you would know that because you have your head up your hipocritical a$$!!!

my friend must live in another galaxy! The PS3 launch was the worst EVER! It is not on par with the 360's launch it is much worse. Not only that multi-platform games are better on the 360 and always will be because it is the development console of choice. I doubt the PS3 will match Gears quality for a couple of years if at all. RFOM was mediocre and it was the best the PS3 offered and still is, which is a shame since we had GRAW and Call of Duty 2, PGR3, Condemned!!! All better than the PS3's launch titles, you are a FANGIRL my friend you have no balls or eyes for that matter. Wii60!!!

[no_more_heroes]

the problem is that they were saying it would be WAY better from day 1. Now that they see it isn't, they want to use the same argument that 360 fans weren't allowed to us last year - "devs aren't used to the hardware yet. Just wait 'till next year then you'll see." Well, we shall see indeed.

[highps3]

Its funny people are judging what the Ps3 can do by release games. Seriously is all the 360 can do PDZ or PGR3?

Some of you really need to get your head our of your arse.

Wait until Killzone or MGS4 comes out then we will see whats what.

Oh and Sonys NBA game looks better than ANY NBA game on 360. By a long shot.

[Thugbot187]

While you are waiting for games to come out, I will be playing the rather large stack of games I have accumulated for my Xbox360, and buying new ones along with online content as it comes out. I’m not going to wait for Sony to play catch up and copy cat, I’ve got achievements to unlock and friends to meet up with on XBL. When Sony figures it all out and these killer apps come maybe I will look into a PS3. I’m sure they will have had a price drop so I will pick up the console for cheaper and have a good laugh at the idiots who paid $200 for it and waited to play great games all in the name of brand loyalty.

[EnforcerOfTheTruth]

...our multi account buddy toned down a lil bit and doesn't talk so much smack.
We are getting more for paying more as PS3 is not just a console, but a multimedia system with a next gen movie player. From the nextgen point of view it doesn't cost $200 more, but $100 as a console without HDD, wirelss controllers and online experience isn't really what's next gen is about. Next gen is not just the games but the whole experience.
marcusfenix - How did the 360 deliver and PS3 not? Resitenece is better than any 360 launch title as it's rated higher than COD3 and COD3 is clearly better than COD2. It was predictable that 360 will in the beginning look better cause it has more games and nobody expected the PS3 to launch with 100 games. People are criticising PS3 for not having enough great games at launch, but we all knew that games like MotorStrom, Heavely Sword, Lair, etc. won't be launch games. Wait a few months and the PS3 will show it's muscles.

highps3 - No it doesn't. NBA 2K7 looks better and plays better.

[FKN Unbelievable]

PS3 is not living up to expectation at the moment. I won't say fanboys but sony supporters cannot see what is happening to thier console. Sony Once again Over-promised and Under-delievered. No way in hell should anybody pay $200 more for a System that Supposedly has more Potential in the long run but can't seem to start the engine to get out the gate. Sony with this Potential Sh1t all the time is Weak.No one wants potential anymore people want results with next gen Power for the price it cost now not later. If i was a Sony Supporter i would be hurt too,I'll be Feeling crunchy inside knowing my god has betrayed me.I listen to People up here prove this,that and the third about why the PS3 can't live up to the hype and wounder why they stay in Denial when the Facts get shown.
I'm Sorry to say But Sony Has Fuked up big time and all the Damage Control in the world can help the barrage the MS is putting on them.
From the Moment MS took that 1080p Sh1t and smashed it with a simple update you Supporters started damge control instantly with "Oh it not native though". Look here no one is Going to kill if you Jump In. Most of the Xbox Supporters uphere has PS's stashed somewhere in the closet and may Whip it out once in awhile for that one special game but you Sony dudes don't do that and thats a Shame. Serouisly though On the Polls it all in PS3 favor none of the Selection say 360 is clearly better, or maybe better. By saying this is no difference you saying the system is equal when the clearly are not.
BTW the PS3 games seems to lack the Textures and Lighting effects found 360 titles that add the overall better presentation to the games.

Also
Ken Kutaragi says:

"Microsoft is trailing behind us, but they are not a threat. They are good at improving [on products], but we will be advancing to the next level with revolutionary technology...Microsoft shoots for the moon. Sony shoots for the sun."
Well When man landed on the Moon it was revolutionary (First ones to Sell 10 million units within the time frame.). Landed on the Sun is impossible and Coming within 100's of million miles to the will kill you. So do the Knowledge.

[wildcat]

I don't think that anyone can say who will win the "console war." All there is are predictions and analysts saying this and that. All I have to say is that analysts are not gamers and it really doesn't matter now who sells the most because it's going to be very close. I think Microsoft knew that they had to launch the 360 early because Sony had wide brand recogition and it was a very smart move as the 360 has been very successful and has many good games and next-gen graphics. But you can't just count Sony out just like that. I don't think it's possible given that they were so successful with their first two consoles to just suddenly fail miserably. People know the games that Sony make and that's the reason I think people are going to be interested in the PS3. Heavenly Sword is just one example that I can give right now as to the PlayStation's style of games. Gears of War is one example of an XBOX 360's style. Now that is not all the games that are going to be good, it is just an example. They are both great to me. It's all a matter of what you prefer as a gamer.
Also: You can't always rely on those people like Kaz Hirai who try to sell you their product for good information. They give a bad name to, I think ,the people who work hard to create gaming consoles.

[tackleb0x]

I'd be an angry fanboy too if I wait a year for a system that costs $200 more and gives me less of a gaming experience.

[Dusk]

Actually, according to gamerankings.com, COD2 (90.1) for the 360 is rated higher than Resistance (89.1). COD3 360 (83.7) and COD3 PS3 (81.2) are both ranked pretty far below COD2. As for comparing launches, lets look at the rankings for the top 5 games that aren't on both the PS3 and 360.

360 -> COD2 (90.1), PGR3 (88.5), DOA4 (85.8),
NFS:MW (83.4), Condemned (82.7)

PS3 -> Resistance (89.1), RR7 (79.1), Untold
Legends: DK (59.9), Genji (57.9), Mobile
Suit Gundam (37.1)

You can't twist these numbers as they're averages from all reviewers. It's quite obvious which system had the better launch. As for games on both systems, nearly all reviewers are saying the 360 versions are better for most of these games.

[testerg35]

I've shown the same numbers and Sony Fans overlook the facts.

Here's another thing.. GOW has been in development or a while, probably about same as RFOM. So if the 360 was launched this year against the PS3, the it would have still been GOW vs RFOM... guess who wins there.. PDZ would have had a whole year more of development, all the other 3rd party games (ie: COD, NFS, NBA, ...) would pretty much be equivalent.

So it would have been:

GOW vs RFOM.... winner GOW
PGR3 vs RR6 vs RR7... PGR3

[drewdrakes]

Ok there is different footage for each game, thats not fair. Also, I don't know what you people think, but 30fps is not "studdery", unless of course every movie ever made is "studdery" as well as everything you've ever watched on TV.
Movie: 24fps
TV North America: 30fps
TV Europe: 25fps

[FirstknighT]

This is getting old fast. Articles are coming out left and right about how inferior the ps3 is. And the sony boys are still complaining and whining about "didn't have enough development time" or "its the job of the developers to use the hardware" or "the sun was in my eyes" Just stop already! I dont even bother posting as much as I use too...cuz the facts are out...360 is the better next gen system! I mean cmon, the ps3s launch line up is said to be the WORST in gaming history! That says alot!!! It was okay to debate about this before the ps3 came out but the facts are out now. You guys are looking pretty pathetic still trying to defend ur system. But please keep trying...I get a good laugh from it!

[NextGen24Gamer]

Your right 30 fps is not studdery...but I have a ps3 and just about every game not only runs max at 30fps...but its not a steady frame rate...many times the frame rate dips which causes it to be studdery...thats a fact... And all the 3rd party games do it often enough to where it can get irritating. Not only does the 360 versions run in 60 fps...but the gameplay and framerates are steady....30 fps isn't bad....its the bare minimum games should be in....but when the game dips below frequently....thats bad....60 fps is ideal for games. Its butter smooth and just feels more responsive.... There are many games that run in 30 fps for the 360 as well...and some games have had there issues here and there when there are many things going on at once.... But for the most part...360 games keep a steady frame rate. Gears of War never even hiccups....Personally...I think its more of a coding problem. Developers tried to put too much in the launch games to make them look pretty...but the code wasn't effeciant and couldn't run it smooth. Why the 360 version of Call of Duty 3 runs at 60fps and the ps3 version runs at 30fps...is beyond me. And nba 2k7....forget about running it in native 1080p....the frame rate is horrible...and for a sports game you don't want frame rate dips...not fun...but even when I put nba 2k7 in 720p mode...it still studders here and there....

BTW...Nba 2k7 in 1080i mode for the 360 looks better than the ps3 version in 720p mode. The detail looks a little closer when you put Nba 2k7 in 1080p mode...but the frame rate is a major issue when you do that. So its a mixed bag....Lets hope developers figure it out. Thats a lot of money to spend to have games not up to snuff with the less expensive competition.

[ApocalypseShadow]

it never ends.it never ends.it never ends.it never ends.it never ends.it never ends.does anyone get my meaning?

this site is just too negative.it's likes gangs,arab and israelies,republicans and democrats,nike or converse,black and white,mcdonald fries or bk fries.it never ends.

i'm looking for fun.i'm looking to talk to other people about games and the fun they are having.maybe they want to hear about the fun i'm having.but this site is a joke.it's a joke.even when people try to put things aside,others just pass over it and say"well the sony fans..."or"well sony said...""well microsoft said...""nintendo said...".

the graphics this,the framerates that,100-200 dollars more,poor bc,wacky remote...i think i'll just look at the news and not even click on comments.i'm all for agreeing to disagree but the merry go round has to end.think i'll go play some games.that's where the fun is.

[Grown Folks Talk]

i demand you come back and argue with me. coleco vision owned atari. what do you think about that? transformers are way more next-gen than go bots. milton bradley is cooler than parker brothers. so there. what are you going to do about it? argue, argue, argue ,argue, complain, complain, complain, complain, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight. just messin with ya. games were about fun when we had ataris and segas. now it's about status and power and look what i got that you don't. it's the american way.

[ApocalypseShadow]

former question mark.it did used to be about fun.seeing who could get a high score in pac man,asteroids,defender,asking how to find something in zelda by bombing,playing together in contra,ikari warriors,streets of rage and gunstar heroes.did you see when optimus prime died?did you watch dungeon and dragons?did you see michael moonwalk.did you like the music in super metroid?those kind of things.but you're right.it's who's better mentality.i'm american but i hate consumerism.i don't have to have everything.america used to mean freedom,now it's about spreading "democracy" so that we can get products in as many countries as possible even if it means you have to go to war to do it.got to get a starbucks everywhere.but yeah,it used to be about the games.

[Grown Folks Talk]

there are just better ways to go about it. we haven't always agreed about everything, but you've never been an @ss about things. it should be very obvious at this point that people aren't going to be swayed by these comments. and yes, i did see when optimus prime died. DAMN YOU HOT ROD!!! p.s. i hate coffee so damn starbucks too.

[TheBeginningOfTheEnd]

imagine if the 360 didnt lanch last year and that it was due sometime in november. the games would look just as awesome as the current 2nd gen. of games for the 360. ppl would see that gow bats the pants off anything on the ps3 and all the 3rd party multiplatform games look the SAME. the only competition the 360 had last year was from high end pc's, and so developers could only pull off pc cuality graphics to the 360, mostly with cross platforms.

[TheBeginningOfTheEnd]

sorry bout my grammar and stuff, i was typing like really fast and didnt edit it!

[WhEeLz]

Look ppl the ps3 just came out and still looking as good as the 360, and 360 before you bash me about how much time the developers had on the ps3...didnt the dev kits go out late?? you know how long it takes to make a game? I mean come on...the 360 has been out a year and ps3 is close to it!! wait until the ps3 has a year under its belt then we'll see.....and to be off topic...i say the wii will win the next-gen war, ms and sony will be neck to neck...

[BlackCountryBob]

In what universe does which console has better graphics matter at all? The graphics are unimportant and if the only rason you buy a console is because it looks nicer you are a pleb! All that matters is the games themselves, not how they look but how they play and that is a solo decision, choose the console which has the most games you wanna play and buy that one and then please, stop bickering like school children over something which is not only unimportant but also impossible to reach a conclusive answer!

[BRUTUS]

ha ha ha poor xbots try to prove that xbox360 better than ps3 you are pity.Dear xbots leave us alone with our ps3 and our worst games ,we are happy with it

[FKN Unbelievable]

"ha ha ha poor xbots try to prove that xbox360 better than ps3 you are pity.Dear xbots leave us alone with our ps3 and our worst games ,we are happy with it "
So be quiet then. You did'nt have to say anything.

[gsquad]

I think that to have an impartial comparison we need to have, exact same footage from both systems on the same games. (RR6 to RR7?) Secondly we should have it set up so that you can’t tell which system it is on until you after you complete all of you votes. (This would take away the fanboy vote. Because you couldn’t tell by just the name, you would have to vote biased on just the screen shots.) Lastly the pictures should be mixed up, meaning ps3 on the left on the first comparison but then maybe on the right on the next comparison, you see where I am going with this. Kinda like the blind Pepsi and Coke taste test back in the 80’s and 90’s. This would be a much better comparison.

Just a thought.

Jump In and Welcom3 Chang3

[gearhead]

The 360 games either look identical or slightly better except for FNR3.

Blu-Ray is failing. Multi-platform games look almost identical but run twice as good on the 360. First Party games are better on the 360. GOW vs. RFOM+they had about the same amount of development time but Gears of War curb stomps RFOM and chainsaws it into little pieces. Upcoming first party and third party games all curb stomp any upcoming PS3 game. Mass Effect, Too Human, Bioshock, Alan Wake, Halo 3, Halo Wars, Assassins Creed on the 360 shown first at E3 05 under a sheet being fronted as a PS3 LOL

JUMP IN the water is warm and there are hot babes everywhere

[gsquad]

The water is warm cause you WII’ed in it. And hot babes, What hot babes OOOO…… I see the FanGirls are in the pool.

Hey I have always kept it respectful, don’t start with me. I have more bubbles to spend than you. LOL!!

Now back to the best quote ever!!

“Jump In and Welcom3 Chang3”

[Indigo]

I think not, the fact that everyone is killing themselves to try and see a difference in these games are down right hilarious. All this hype sony is making over HD ready and so forth is horse poop. Considering the system doesn't even come with the HDMI standard. Now i've got my nice HD tv $2000 PS3 1000 and the games, compared to the 360 aren't blowing them away as was promised. Talk about getting ripped off, More smoke and mirrors i say, i really see how the PS3 could make me take a bullet for it. yah riight, what a joke hahaha

[Geohound]

until PC games start looking better than 360 and PS3. Then you could all stop typing.

[Say's you]

MotorStorm doesn't even come close to the 360 graphics it has its own graphics and plus the ones that say that MotorStorm looks like last years Generation is a moron to begin with cause there is no way that MotorStorm looks like last years Generation and further more Final Fantasy XIII deffinitly looks more Generation then Xbox 360 and Resistance Fall of Man and MGS4 Devil MayCry4 and The Getaway 3 and Lair and Heavely Sword should I go on untill I prove my point I haven't yet to see a PS3 game that looks exactly like the Xbox 360 graphics except some of the sports games but I'm talking about the games that are exclusively for the PS3 and some games that are not look even better on the PS3

and further more PC's will never be powerful as long as they have those slow powered Duo proccesors that Intel makes the only way they are going to be powerful if they have the Cell that has 8 cores that can do more task then 2 cores that intel or amd makes cause to or 3 isn't going to cut it with PC's.

[360pluswiiequalsps3]

that when ps3 games are improving graphics x360 is just sitting there. while ps3 games are improving graphics, 360 games are improving graphics as well

dont call me a fanboy, im saving up to get all three consoles instead of originally planned windows vista with dx10 card

[Grown Folks Talk]

without being called something. it seems a lot of people hope gears is the best the 360 can do to justify their position. seeing as how mass effect, bioshock, and alan wake in early stages look already as immpressive as gears, my guess is the best is yet to come. all 3 systems will show improvements. it's no different than last time around. some games will look great, some average, and some flat out horrible. it's about the devs, not the hardware.

[miasma]

I have been a PS2 gamer but recently I bought the PS3 at lauch, sold it, bought a 360 with the profits (nice to have a console for free) because there just isn't enough games for the PS3 to even bother right now. Nice library of games, i can buy most of them second hand, and 360 looks great on my HD set BTW. When more games come out for PS3 i'll pick one up later, SO, why not have both??

[MySwordIsHeavenly]

How is Blu-Ray failing?

It just passed HD-DVD in sales last week! How the FRICK is that FAILING???

I hate looking on this forum and seeing the usual morons saying the PS3 sucks. You're all just adding to the bad publicity. You just WANT Sony to fail. WTF has Sony ever done to you? It gave you two generations of the best gaming of your lives..and this is how you repay it. PISS OFF YOU FANBOYS!!!

I HATE THE WII FANS WORSE THOUGH. YOUR SYSTEM SUCKS!!! IT'S A GAMECUBE WITH A GOOD CONTROLLER!!! THE SIXAXIS CAN DO THE SAME FRICKIN STUFF!!!

OF course the 360 has better graphics on THESE games. They were ported to the PS3!

It's funny how you guys twist something and make it seem like the 360 is superior! It's even funnier how this site only allows negative PS3 press!!! Because it's usually the 360 fans that post bad press on the forums...

There is no bad press for MS because no one is paying attention. For every lawsuit Sony went through this year, MS went through 5!!!

NOONE TRACKED THOSE NOW DID THEY???

DON'T YOU SEE HOW BIASED YOU ARE ALL BEING???