Let's put aside the arguing for a moment, I find it incredible what a 180 this Cow has done on the utilization argument.
How long did Cows hide behind an under-utilization argument when boasting about PS3 capability? How long did they push that Cell had hidden performance that was not being utilized? Even when they had no titles as proof and every cross platform game was worse on PS3, they always relied on a "just wait" argument.
Well Sony dipped into their pockets in the end and paid out to bring titles like Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 to PS3, providing evidence to the under-utilization argument.
Now what argument are we seeing here? Console users know for a fact that high end PC hardware is leap and bounds ahead of console capability, at least the honest ones. There is no question that a high end PC would have no issue beating a console.
Yet what do we see here? We see a Cow claiming PS3 > PC because of an antialiasing technique that was applied on PS3 first. Common sense should say that if PS3 can do it a high end PC can do it better, but no, a Cow has actually chosen to ignore the possibility that the PC is more powerful. Why? Because they are seeing it used on PS3 first...
I cannot find the words to describe how incredibly hypocritical this is, years hiding behind a under-utilization argument; but the moment something is done on PS3 before PC a Cow automatically assumes it can only be done on PS3. The OP should be ashamed, this is hypocritical fanboyism at the extreme.
Log in to comment