Even and RE5 look better than U2...............

Panosola

Man no lie, this game looks awesome. UC2 should not be considered graphics king, RE5 should be. But what fun would that be right?

Where is the GS review? Are they holdingit because of the issues with PSN? I bet they are because they don't to rate 360 version a 9.0 and the ps3 version an 8.5. I suspect this is what is happening. That or they're just trying to drive hits.

/

They are about the same, the only differnces really is art direction and color palette, and the PS3 devs do a better job of thinking outside the box in that regard.

But really I have both consoles and have yet to see anything on the PS3 that made say "wow ,wait a minute that looks leaps and bounds better than anything on Xbox 360", just hasn't happen yet.

wow really no difference between console version, another calculated score by CreateahitSpot and that reviewer should be written up or something, for making blantanly false statements....tsk tsk

Looks meh really.

As far as the differences between console version, its seems inconsistent at best. Didn't Ghostbusters have huge differences in visuals between the PS3 and Xbox 360 version and yet it scored the same.

Seems like other factors are work here trying to get us to bicker about stuff and visit GS site. Its simply done for hits I would say.

I wont even rent it.

Racing games get boring fast.

If that was the only difference, then the score should change.

I going to rent it for sure, I don't buy games for my favorite Blu Ray player.

Halo doesn't deserve it's success.

I sense Gamespot will delete this thread for some bs reasoning I would still like to explain why Halo is no great exclusive and is successful due to it's mediocrity, genericness, place in the public eye and exclusivety.

Mediocrity- Halo is by no means an amazing game. It does nothing new or much better than the competition, but is just so great in how mediocre it is that it is easily accessible by the gaming public. Goldeneye, Call of Duty, Doom, all much better games especially in their own time and for their new ways of play, are somehow eclipsed by Halo because it's just so amazingly basic that it can be picked up and played without anything new and/or exciting as part of the package.

Genericness- Halo's story is good by the books, Halo's character design is good by the books, Halo's gameplay is good by the books. But nothing more. Halo doesn't try anything special, it stays safely within the realm of what's been done to please a wide variety of people. Who have played very few games and will say "OH! Look this is the best game ever." Metal Gear Solid and Super Mario Bros 3 brought something new to the table, Halo didn't, with the exception of a widely overrated gameplay feature of two-handed wielding.

Public Eye- Microsoft is powerful, guess what computer I'm typing from. Not only does it run larger marketing campaigns than other companies, but it does them better. Halo is known as the best game ever by so many people because it's the only game in that league of FPS that those players have played. It will come as no suprise that the majority of Halo players are of a younger generation, who hadn't experienced the classics that would overshadow it's gameplay if only they knew them. I've played many better FPS, not the least of wish are Modern Warfare and Half-Life, I just hope that someday Halo 3 fans will play them too.

Exclusivety- The fact that it is so touted is a reason it is so touted. It is self-preservating it's reign in that it's the basic choice for any Microsoft fan. It's so easy to say, "we got Halo" because of that. And the fact that Halo is so known as THE exclusive for the 360 makes it that much more powerful as a top game player, even if it doesn't deserve it.

hukibeast

Just like Uncharted.

Demon Soul or Uncharted 2?