For those of you claim that consoles are way cheaper than PC's, if you don't include a high-quality LCD Tv, the graphics won't come near to looking as good as they seem on the Gamespot pictures. -How much does a brand-new, top-of-the-line, 42", 1080p, 120Hz, 1 000 000:1 contrast ratio, 2ms response time, LCD Television cost? $2 000-$2 500CAD if you get the best one. -How much does an equally performing, 1050p, decent size, 120hz, 2ms response time, 50 000:1 contrast ratio, LCD Monitor cost? $400 max, but most of them are way below $250. Include those in the prices, and the consoles aren't so cheap after all. That's not all, Gamespot decided to use a quad core (which cost a lot more than dual core, and dual cores beat the crap out of quad in gaming, even in quad core optimized games) AND a GTX 280, which is probably the worst card on the market right now in terms of price-performance ratio, just to up the price while degrading the performance. Considering that a card 1/2 it's price, the GTX 260 (the newest version), remains within 5% of the GTX280's performance and beats it if overclocked easily, and that a setup 3/4 of it's price, 2 HD4850's in Crossfire, can kick the GTX 280's ass, Gamespot obviously wasn't favoring the PC.
@ dogmavskarma you are a genuine retarded primate. How about you put orange juice in your car's gas tank then blame the manufacturer for not making the car explode because it was not "compatible" enough. Not anybody's fault but yours if you 1950 calculator can't run a 21st century game...
Hanass' comments