:violin: Then you are ignorant. Both of the platforms have always performed pretty much the same. Anytime they ever do console comparisons I can never tell the difference. I think you are overreacting and being childish. Same with anyone else who hasn't seen specific footage. Get over it and grow up.
It is you who are being ignorant. The PS3 version of Fallout 3 ran at an average of 25 fps compared to the 360's and had no AA whereas the 360 version had 4xMSAA on most of its edges, but the intolerable problems came after the GOTY edition with bloated memory files, countless oversights, and frequent freezing/excessive lagging. If one doesn't know the difference between a game that functions extremely poorly and one that functions moderately well, there's a problem. Fallout 3 is the only game this console generation so poorly handled on the PS3, in my opinion. The original problems were just plainly annoying, but the freezing, saved data bloating, and broken features (I mean literally broken... as in not functioning as Bethesda intended.) were just unbearable and unique to Fallout 3, as far as PS3 games go. Fallout 3 is among those really poor PS3 ports. If you don't believe the occasional blatantly poor port exists, then you are being ignorant and it's clear to me that you are speaking with no experience with what I'm referring to do, so quite frankly, you have no business telling me what I did and didn't experience. You claim I should grow up, but it is you making arguments with no justifiable background or background evidence and it is you are so naive as to believe we live in some ideal world where corporations don't occasionally, at least, show blatant favoritism and/or lack of support for a given product. Grow up... it is a very "grown up" thing to do to realize the true nature of a corporation and to criticize and keep them in line. A corporation's goal is sell as little as possible for as much as possible. In this case, Fallout 3 on the PS3, particularly post GOTY, is realization of that.