I just love these arguments. From a non-graphics-whore perspective such as myself -- I often literally cannot tell or do not care about the difference between a Wii and PS360 game, let alone the difference between the PS3 and 360 versions -- the discussions of these tiny minutae to discover slight graphical advantages in one version over another is just crazy.

To each his own and all, but... wow. These differences are so slight, it's like arguing over different shades of brown. In fact, I think you literally are discussing different shades of brown in a few of these photos. 

 When meeting the requirements of a standard (like OpenGL, or DirectX) your drivers are given a command (like 4AA this image), and the returned image is tested against a reference image. If the returning image is within an acceptable level of variance, you pass. This is done for dozens (or hundreds of images with different effects on them. How the manufacturer creates those images however, is entirely up to them. They might employ different techniques to achieve what they fell is the best reference image with the lease amount of processing. So, ATI and Nvidia, while both passing these standards, do render images differently. In this case (how the 360 does 2xAA), it could be that the 360 chose to reduces some level of fidelity for the benefit of performance.

Well I dnt see a huge difference , but it was expected for the PS3 version to look even a bit superior , because it was the main console version ...

makingmusic476 said: There also seem to be better effects on the ps3 version. Just look at the way the ledges of the ice creatures look with the light shining through them: (right click > view image)

 Here's what I don't get about the PS3 version... How is there light coming from the bottom of the monster?

 Your really funny if you thought that I didn't know what motion blur is. My personal opinion is that motion blur is over-used on many games and I prefer seeing the raw graphics whitout that particular effect. And it doesn't really look better in live sequences, that's a matter of opinion. 

 Actually, since you have to hold down the right bumper instead of the trigger to target, it's the 360 controller that's going to give you cramps. I can't believe Capcom didn't think to reverse the functions of the shoulder buttons. Ubiosoft knew better when they put out Assassin's Creed - trigger for the modifer on the 360 and R1 for the PS3.

 Even just playing through the demo once was enough to leave my right index finger cramping on the 360 controller. I love the triggers but I hate those stupid bumpers.

I think there might be something to this sharpness filter theory on the 360. Play through the demo on both systems and watch carefully in two locations. The first is right as you're leaving the city and approaching the tunnel to the wharf. There's this area you come out to with grass and a wooden tower where you have to kill a couple of baddies. Pay attention to the grass.

The second area is on the wharf itself. Pay attention the concrete while you're running over it.

In both of these situations, I noticed a whole lot of noise and movement on the surfaces on the 360 version and I think it's because of the sharpness filter. In these two areas on the PS3 version, the grass doesn't have this problem at all and the texture filtering is much better on the concrete. I can't come up with the right words to describe it at the moment but it's like aliasing on textures instead of on the edges of surfaces. The effect is almost like interlacing, only it's confined to certain textures with the most detail.

At the same time, I'm not a big fan of the motion blur either but it bothers me less than this effect.

There's a difference and I think the motion blur in the PS3 version actually makes that version look worse (why are they even using it?). For example take a look at the screen in the link below (look especially at the ground between the PS3 and 360), it just seems like the PS3 version lacks detail. The same thing can be seen in GamingDevil's post in this thread.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1122016&postcount=163

And besides, claiming realism is preferred in a game with heavy dark fantasy elements, and impossible physics topping a John Woo film, is delusional. In the case of this game, motion blur should be preferred for looking cool, not for being realistic.