lol, now it's fairly obvious you are just trying to start a console war. The link I gave provides a clear side by side comparison with a CONSIDERABLE difference. If you read the article you'd notice the PS3 version suffered frame rate problems, muddy textures, etc. Bayonetta WAS a big name released that is touted as an action title as competent as God of War.

360 has a superior GPU and the PS3 has to devote a fair amount of the processor towards making up for the shortcomings of it's GPU. Here is a http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=989MBOiIghA of John Carmack, a highly respected developer/programmer, discussing the differences of the platforms. Note: the volume is extremely low so headphones are suggested

I find it laughable that you insinuate that Microsoft would pay for reviews. Sony is much more liable to throw money around in the gaming industry as evident by the sheer volume of developing studios that they have bought out over the years in an attempt of monopolizing IP's.

Yoda senses alot of Xbox fanboyism here.Typical...

It's actually generally the other way around, but not for the reasons you'd think. The 360 has a specialised chip that makes for cheap 4xAA, and the PS3 doesn't. The upshot of this is that while, on average, the PS3 churns out slightly higher resolutions, the 360 generally has more AA.

Like I say, the differences are tiny, and not worth fighting over.

Thanks for the info :goodjob:

No you are being a Xbox dedicated fan completely ignoring facts, I have stated that I have both, I KNOW what I see and I have played hundreds of games on both so stop it with the Xbox is better BS because it doesn't float and all the expert reviewers will agree. The Xbox's GPU is NOT superior, like Phyoshi said the Xbox generally uses lower resolutions but has superior AA whereas the PS3's GPU enables higher resolutions but lower AA so there is not much difference. Its CPU is inferior no matter which way you want your Xbox to be the bee's knee's the Cell processor was Sony's main marketing tool and used properly is quite powerful. No framerate problems on any PS3 game I have played and the muddy textures are apparent on BOTH systems because they both sport 6 year old hardware which has no hope competing against PC hardware that is always updating. Not saying games look bad on either, take a look at Crysis 2, looks fantastic on all 3 systems, but stop this Xbox superiority complex it just makes you look quite foolish because you don't know your facts. Its also laughable that you think Microsoft wouldn't stoop to paying off reviewers or companies either, the biggest software company in the world with a monopoly over everything wouldn't do that no not at all ! Heck some would argue that they paid off Bethesda, I seem to remember a certain FO game recently getting downloadable content that the PS3 didn't.... Oh by your reckoning that is because the Xbox is the superior machine!

Both consoles look good but the average PC will alow much higher resolutions.

Well, since the thread was about the poster's concern over issues with the PS3 version and not the Xbox 360.... :shrug:

I don't really know all that much about the technical side of consoles, so I don't really know. Then again, I have never played the PS3, only the 360 and the PC.

lol, right, because you have two copies of every game No one cares that your mommy bought you two consoles (which I doubt you have). I never said the xbox was better overall, in fact if you watched the video I linked the conclusion is that PS3 ends up being better due to blue-ray. The general assertion was that multi-platform games often look worse on PS3 than 360, a matter which is not debatable given the preponderance of evidence to that fact. The reasoning behind this is that the PS3 is more difficult to develop for, also a matter not up to debate for the same reason. I assume you will continue with your "HURR DURR" fabrications of supposedly "playing hundreds of games on both" and implying you have multiple copies of many multi-platform games but you will always face the fact that the general consensus of the professional video game industry is that multi-platform games are often (not always) better on 360 and that the PS3 is a comparatively awful platform to code for.

As for your edit, there is no proof as to your accusations of buying reviews so we can only look at what is fact. Yes, Microsoft often pays for timed exclusivity on DLC. Boo hoo. On the other hand, Sony has bought over twice the number of developers in order to secure a larger First Party stable. So on one hand it's timed exclusivity of add-ons and on the other is the wholesale purchase of exclusivity. One of these things is more ridiculous than the other

You have not given any evidence of this that is what I find funny, you say Multiplatform games are always better on the Xbox but you seem to lack the ability to provide evidence of this. Please provide me some links and let me refute each ! Yes I do own both because as funny as it many seem to you, I like the dedicated games of BOTH the PS3 and Xbox, I got sick of not being able to play Gears Of War for example, until it arrived on the PC anyhow, then there was Halo, Forza the list go's on. Similarily I love the PS3 for the same reasons, Uncharted 2, Killzone 2+3, GT5 its the same thing! Unlike you because I have both I am not dedicated to believing that one is superior over the other.

:lmao: He has provided evidence of this in the form of a link. Did you even read his post? While you haven't provided anything except for you saying that you have compared hundreds of games on both platforms. :lmao:

http://www.lensoftruth.com/category/head2head/. I never said 'always'. Actually I explicitly stated that it ISN'T always. I said generally. Also I'm not being biased, I'm being factual

Boom! case closed

Until he comes back arguing against every case :brokencomputer: You'd think I said "PS3 eats babies and did your mom". All I'm saying is the PS3 is hard to program for (an assertion echoed by numerous developers) and calling the devs "lazy" is the biggest really devoted fan move ever.

He was obviously just trying to derail the thread. Apparently two links isn't 'evidence' at all. Heck, I even said PS3 was the stronger platform overall. What more does he want :banghead: I feel bad that OPs thread got trashed but I guess his question has been answered to some degree during the course of the debate.

If you watch the http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=989MBOiIghA I linked to John Carmack's interview it explains why, due to a finite development cycle, multiplatform games often turn out worse on the PS3. Given Todd has said time and time again that they are putting graphical fidelity across the board above PC specialization I think it is safe to assume there will be no significant issues with the PS3 version versus the 360 version

Yeah and I love the fact that (some) PS3 fans view Microsoft as some giant tyrant empire that steals from Africa and stuff it really is humorous.

I don't get it. Honestly, if you look at Sony's list of First Party Development studios it is quite obvious they put a lot of money into securing a good portion of the industry talent for exclusivity while Microsoft generally just pays for timed exclusive DLC. Which is more 'tryannical': buying out an entire developing company for exclusivity on all IP's from them or paying for timed exclusive for single instances of DLC from single installments of multi-platform IPs?

This isn't necessarily an attack on Sony. As a 360 owner I wish Microsoft bought out more talent so that the quality and number of Xbox exclusives would rise, instead they release First Party Devs (such as Bungie) to be free to create multi-platform content. No, this is just a defense against the assertion that Microsoft is out to throw money around and screw PS3 gamers out of content

Lol what OS do you use on your PC if you are old enough to have the money to have one? What Office software does it use? What media player do you use?

Don't be niave Microsoft have a long history of bullying smaller companies and using their huge sums of cash and huge loads of lawyers to get what they want.

And yes 2 links, one which is very suspect as looking at both examples I cannot see any reasonable amount of difference and one link to a game I haven't even seen reviewed at all. Xbox only owners are silly, and like I have stated many times I have BOTH, your system is not in any way superior to the PS3 and BOTH look pretty identical so just get on with the facts and go play Halo or something constructive. Really pathetic...

HA! sounds like someones a bit insecure there , No one here has attacked Sony at all,although you have been pretty vocal about your opinion on Microsofts Xbox.

Who uses WMP? People use office because it's the best software of that kind. Many people use Ubuntu or other Linux based OS while some use an Apple OS for their PC.

Actually I gave you many links, it was just 2 up to the point of his post. I have provided a link of a highly reviewed game that was notorious for being significantly worse on PS3, a link to one of the most respected game programmers/developers in the history of videogames describing in great detail the difference between the two systems graphically and in the context of development, AND a website compiling comparisons of multi-platform games with in depth anolysis. You, on the other hand, can only say "My mommy bought me both consoles so I'm an expert". Is it really paining you so much to see your beloved PS3 insulted so harshly to the tone of "it's marginally worse overall for multi-platform games and difficult to develop for" that you deny reality? I'm hardly caught up with such buyer's remorse that I'd be blind to the facts, I could easily have owned a PS3 but instead chose to get a newer version of 360 to replace my old one.

really devoted fan defeated

I can only dream

jeez they censored devoted fan :/

I hardly think ad hominem gets your point across very well, do you?

I think the point Thorn is trying to make is that the differences are ridiculously small. Even in beyonetta, oft-quoted as one of the worst examples, looks almost entirely identical. It seems ridiculous for two tortoises to be arguing about who can run the fastest, especially when the difference between them in a few mm/hour anyway.

Really dude? :stare: The entire basis of his argument was ad hominem, it was only a subtext to mine. If you wish to come in here and sound intelligent throwing around overused logic terms at least make sense. Did you WATCH the video I linked to? For the first 5 seconds I was like "Hey, they don't look too different". Then the PS3 footage starts vibrating from bad framerates/screen tearing and after 10+ seconds you notice it is far more washed out than the other version.

Maybe http://www.lensoftruth.com/head2head/verdictxbox-360/head2head-bayonetta/ will help

Ignorance astounds me :wacko:

Don't ask me man :facepalm: Also I dunno about the whole fan thing. I tried to use the usual vernacular earlier as well. Apparently they have a filter