[QUOTE="alexfla"]

[QUOTE="marchofthenoobs"]

you seem to forget that the X360 and PS3 have vastly different GPU's and CPU's. The coding for the two consoles is very different. Therefore, you can't make 1 set if code and expect it to work on both consoles. this requires building the game for one console and then adapting it to work with the other console. Obviously, this is a long, drawn-out process. during this process, some mistakes will be made, and the games will not be perfectly identical. Since the X360 has a larger fan base, and because MS spends some of the money they make with gold memberships, games are made for the X360 first and then ported to the PS3. this causes the 360 games to look better than PS3 games. If you look at exclusives, PS3 exclusives look better. and a port will never happen because A. the head companies (MS and Sony) paid big bucks for their exclusives and B. the ports wont look as good for the aforementioned reasons. Finally, if you look at the mathematical capabilities of the PS3 and the X360, the PS3 has more power. once again, this is not debatable, it is fact. The X360 may look more powerful in a fair comparison, but the PS3 is the more powerful system.

Martin_G_N

[QUOTE="alexfla"]

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

Probably older than you, but instead of addressing my point you question my age, that makes you sound like the young one here.

Espada12

Explain how?

Because you simplify to the point that it doesn't make sense. You say when the creators of P use it, but you're talking about different development houses. The developers of UC2 and GOW3 have nothing to do with each other and can't be considered creators of P or PS3.

If you would say something like the creators of UC2 that powers P to the Sun are not allowed to use X so we'll never know if they could use X to reach the same distance as P.

We do know for a fact that the creators of ALL Multiplats that use P and X, are able to go closer to the Sun with X 90% of the time.

This translates to X going farther than P if you run both of them with the same software or creators of whatever you want to call it.

In conclusion, X is more powerful than P.

you seem to forget that the X360 and PS3 have vastly different GPU's and CPU's. The coding for the two consoles is very different. Therefore, you can't make 1 set if code and expect it to work on both consoles. this requires building the game for one console and then adapting it to work with the other console. Obviously, this is a long, drawn-out process. during this process, some mistakes will be made, and the games will not be perfectly identical. Since the X360 has a larger fan base, and because MS spends some of the money they make with gold memberships, games are made for the X360 first and then ported to the PS3. this causes the 360 games to look better than PS3 games. If you look at exclusives, PS3 exclusives look better. and a port will never happen because A. the head companies (MS and Sony) paid big bucks for their exclusives and B. the ports wont look as good for the aforementioned reasons. Finally, if you look at the mathematical capabilities of the PS3 and the X360, the PS3 has more power. once again, this is not debatable, it is fact. The X360 may look more powerful in a fair comparison, but the PS3 is the more powerful system.

marchofthenoobs

[QUOTE="alexfla"]

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

How so?

I have two shuttles one called X and one called P

When the creators of P use the shuttle it goes all the way to the sun

When others try to use it they don't reach as far and sometimes fall short of what shuttle X can do with less effort

When the creators of shuttle X use it they reach close to the sun but don't quite make it there

When others try to use it they see similar results as the creators because unlike P shuttle X is easier to use and sometimes they do better with shuttle X than P while trying to perform the same task because X is so much easier to use.

Does that make P somehow less powerful than X? No it doesn't, infact P is still more powerful than X even though it's not as easy to use.

Espada12

Probably older than you, but instead of addressing my point you question my age, that makes you sound like the young one here.

[QUOTE="alexfla"]

Even if you go back to the Atari 2600. When a new system such as the Colecovision is released, gamers compared the multiplats between it, Atari and the intellivision to judge which system was the most powerful.

This happened with the NES vs Master System, the TG-16 vs Genesis vs SNES vs Neo Geo, the Saturn vs PS1 vs N64, the PS2 vs DreamCast vs GC vs Xbox and now with the PS3 vs 360, we are supposed to believe that this method is not valid anymore because Sony marketing says so.

...

ianuilliam

Really? People compared multiplats between NES and Sega MS? There weren't really many multiplats to compare, other than crappy movie spin-off games. And nobody really compared which was more powerful anyway. 8bit pretty much meant 8bit.

In the 16 bit era, it was all about Mascot vs. mascot. Either you liked Sonic, or you liked Mario.

It wasn't really till the PS1/N64 era when I first started hearing people make direct comparisons over which was more powerful within the same generation. And even then, it wasn't about comparing multiplats, it was all about the technical specs of the systems more than anything else.

In the PS2/xbox era, I started hearing people point out 'this game looks better on xbox', but the counterargument was that ps2 had a billion more great games, because there were so many exclusives for it vesus xbox having... Halo.

Finally, we have this generation, when more games are multiplat than not. Some multis are better on one system, some are better on the other, but in reality, the differences between those are minimal. Personally, I find the which controller you prefer to make a bigger difference between versions than any graphical differences. The only way to REALLY compare the systems performance is by comparing games that are built from the ground up to get the most from each machine. Of course, even then, art stile (miss-spelled intentionally because GS forums limitations) sometimes makes a bigger difference than technical graphics as far as how good a game looks anyway.

The point is, having been gaming since the 80's, I've never really experienced this comparing systems based on multiplats that you say has been the measuring stick since the dawn of video games.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

I wont read that wall of text but yeah, it´s pretty obvious multiplats are the only way to compare consoles.

Uncharted2 does look a bit better than Gears2 but there are too many variables to compare them (diferent teams, MS vs Sony support/money, multiplat vs exclusive engine, etc).

There are also many examples of multiplats developed first on PS3 and then ported to 360 and the results are usually the same. 360 is indeed as powerfull as PS3 and it´s sad ppl prefer to close their eyes to the facts at keep supporting that "power of the PS3" myth :?

TintedEyes

[QUOTE="ndawgdrake"][QUOTE="XboximusPrime"]

360 does however get the better lookign version of a multiplatform release 9 times out of 10, so that might be saying something. But I do agree that PS3 is the graphical leader for Exclusives. But when most of your games on the console (those being multiplatform) look worse then on the other console, how much does that actually matter?

XboximusPrime

I think these two console are probaly the closest two rival consoles have ever been in terms of tech power and potential power. We always heard that X console is undoubtably technically superior to Y console, because usually they were Technically more powerful. XBOX was undoubtably more advanced then PS2, SNES was undoubtably more tech advanced then Genesis, and Im pretty sure NES was technically more powerful then the master syestem.

But with these two consoles, for every dev saying X console is better, you have another one saying that Y is better.

It is not like the 360 is the primary development console for most multiplats, and the PS3 often gets a copy of that, oh wait.

A pure copy can never beat the original, just get to 99.99% of it.

dercoo

Console graphics king is on the PS3. Sure UC2 could be ported to the 360 and you could speculate that maybe it MIGHT even look the same or even better, but that's never going to happen and all you CAN do is speculate. The fact is the best looking PS3 game looks BETTER than the best looking 360 game, so how does that figure into your argument for the 360 winning "hands down?"ndawgdrake