sony and microsoft. is there a bigger potential in ps3

I play both consoles.to tell the truth I somehow always support sony and want them ro come out on top.ps2 made me the fan,somethimg like when I support barca in champions league.when they anounced xbox 360 and sony I,m sure many of you were typing xbox 360 vs ps3 in google.I came across the article that looked like it was written by a clever dude.he erote how 360 would be more simple,great next gen system and how ps3 had potential to deliver something very special and revolutionary later.well,ps3 seems to underdeliver.I think it did not live up to the expectations of most gamers unlike 360 because people expected more from sony.it seems to me that developers need to realy sweat and put everything they have only in ps3 to come up with great game(mgs4)while with xbox it looks easier and ithink it has overall better game library.if not for mgs I would have thought ps3 was inferior to 360.the whole point is,do you fellow gamers think that there is something left in ps3 that later will really surprise us and we will all be talkin how ps3 only needed some time to show us what an outstanding potential it had.to tell you the truth I feel sceptical about that and think that sony probably took some wrong steps in the very begining and leaves impression of a company who entered next gen not fully prepared and maybe earlier than they would have liked.

Can somebody decipher his post, please? I have absolutely no idea what the heck he's saying.

here is the real turht the ps3 is trash. time is money in the business world. It takes way more time to make a ps3 than a 360 game. game devs have to fight to make a game on the ps3. i would say it's not productive. I would like to know how much killzone 2 is costing sony in a ression to make. If this game flops. will they make their money back.blackdreamhunk