@ kafar
> i blame game journalists and ms.
Most journalists are NOT well versed with regard to technicals (for example even Eurogamer in the past and they are the best ones on the topic out there), also even high level game devs (it's the low level coders who know how the hardware really works). Microsoft send fake information out to journalists claiming the 360 to be much more powerful than the PS3, IGN at the time revealed the letter to the public.
Microsoft can be blamed for many things inhibiting progress with regard to game engine development. Microsoft did a good job making their tools easy to use, but also neglected efficiency and intentionally goes against portability. This was already the case with the first releases of Direct X, games were a hell to port to Amigas, Macs and Linux. I knew the developers of a leading company porting Direct X based games to those platforms in the past, the end result was far superior in terms getting the most performance out of the hardware (compared to running on Windows on a system with similar specs), but the porting process took a lot of headaches.
Quoting one cross platform developer for a high profile game company:
"Secondly, the matters of multithreading policies, the whole job queue architecture, encapsulation of jobs and their corresponding data packets, etc. that work on the PS3 are indeed more than applicable of the 360/PC. And as I've mentioned before, they work better than anything and everything that Microsoft recommends (so far without exception for us)."
I don't like Microsoft's approach this gen at all. Keeping PC centric games XBox 360 exclusive, even 3rd party ones such as Alan Wake. Paying a company like BioWare to not release their PS3 version of Mass Effect 1 (timed exclusivity I can accept, but this approach is IMO anti-competitive and destructive).