GS only see what it wants to see once again. Look at Assasin's Creed 2 for example. In the first picture, PS3 clearly shows more details on white lines on the ground. On the third picture, look at the black matt the male character stands on. The PS3 has a clear black edge (better contrast and blacks) while xbox one shows a "whiter" black edge. On Batman, the only thing GS pointed out was a logo that's different? That's all you can point out? What about black levels? See how the white color stands out much more on ps3? Do you know why or care to explain why? Now, let's look at modern warfare 2. Notice how Xbox360 on the first picture failed to load the texture properly on the gun on the table? Of course, GS would not mention it to you at all! Why?

There seems to be a sheen of grey lense coving xbox360 shots, making the pictures much less attractive. PS3 pictures are much brighter and clearer. It's like Kodak developed film versus Walmart developed film.

On the star wars comparison, what's with the huge distortion of the reflection on the floor (in the third picture) on the xbox360 version? It seems that the distortion is quite unrealistic. Also, there objects reflected in the ps3 version but not in the xbox360 version. Guess these details also escaped GS's "professional" eyes.

And GS bias shows up here again in the Mortal Combat comparison. On the ceiling, there are lightings missing on the ps3 version, but on the wall between the two dudes, xbox360 version is missing some lighting. I guess GS is just too lazy to mention those. Also, if you look at the shadows, xbox360 version seems to have a white sheen over it, so that every black is more of a grey really.

What's wrong with GS? Every picture on xbox360 is lighter and looked slightly washed out, where ps3 has better color contrast and deeper black level.

Biglukev, lol. I guess you are a warlmart shopper and worship warmart then. DS beats xbox360 by miles. Wii beats xbox360 by miles. PS3 at least sells faster than xbox360 in the same time period. And xbox360's sales number dropped in 2007 comparing to 2006. And let's not forget that 2007 had the biggest xbox360 exclusives... yet, the sales number still dropped. And those numbers don't lie. They show who's more popular.

[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]

Biglukev: lol. that 120gig Xbox360 costs 449. 50 dollars cheaper than 80GB PS3. Let's see: xbox360 has: 120 gig harddrive (40 dollars value over ps3), xbox live (50 dollars more per year), which means it's already 499 on the first year purchase. System link cable (10 dollar value), a live headset (which 15 dollar value) , and doesn't cost less (cuz if you Do get live, it's 499 already). PS3 has: blue-ray (150 dollars value at least), 80GB harddrive, which is about 40 bucks cheaper than 120GB, and it all have wifi, which is 100 dollar value. So let's sum it up: xbox360: base cost 449, total value that's not on ps3: 40 (harddrive) + 10 (cable) + 15(headset) = 65. And essential extra you have to pay: xbox live. 50 dollars per year. So the first year cost to get your xbox running is 499. and first year value save: 65. So total is 434. PS3: cost 499. total value that's not on xbox360: 150 (blue-ray) + 100(wifi) = 250. Essential extra: none. So total value is 499 - 250 = 249. So that's what you really get.

buffdaddy69: When poeple buy the xbox360 new, they only get harddrive if they buy the more expensive ones. if they buy the arcade ones, they still get no harddrive. And they still get no wifi And they still get no HDMI if they don't chose the right version. So you are saying? And once again, GS refuses to turn on true-RGB on ps3 so that it will represent true colors that RPG can output and therefore ps3 pictures looked a little washed out. Why would GS do that? Also, when gamespot said that they prefer the sharper look on xbox360, it's clear that GS is a xbox360 fanboy. Why? Because if you look at the last graphical comparison, when GS did the comparison of Oblivion, they said: "although ps3 version of oblivion has shaper textures, we prefer the muddier xbxo360 looking. Because they look more realistic." And my god... talk about double standards!

BorkaBonum: Why are you keep telling lies such as Sony is SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive? It's 50 bucks more than xbox360 in their comparable models. And Sony offers at least 3 more functions than xbox360 does. Let's see: Sony has: wifi, hdmi, harddrive, blue-ray Xbox360 has: no wifi, no hdmi(on many boxes), no harddrive (on some models), no blue-ray. Even if you dont' care for blue-ray, those other three are bigger deal to gaming. So how is that 50 dollars NOT justifiable for all the extra feature. And how is that 50 dollars siginificantly more expensive than xbox360? Lie, lie, more lies from you xbox360 fanboys.