S.T.A.G.E. said:
Based on tech and space, the PS3 is superior dude. The 360 is just cheaper and quicker to develop for. The PS3 takes twice the time and space. The Xbox versions of alot of games looked way better than the PS2 counterparts. This gen is totally different with two powerful systems, but the PS3 has the edge even though its a pain in the ass to develop for it. P.S. MGS2 was multiplat...not part 3. |
My apologies on the mgs3 gaffe.
As for system power, I'm not good with specs so I can only judge by what my eyes observe. Even so, this gen many people seem to consider the ps3 and 360 equals than last when it was obvious to even the most die hard fanboy that xbox was more powerful than ps2. Ps2 was a pain in the ass as well but was the lead platform for all it's multiplats due to it's massive userbase which the ps3 can even come close to claiming.
Despite the ease of dveloping for the superior xbox, Konami in this case managed to make a poorer port. What else could explain this aside from Konami simply not wanting to make any effort at all? In the ps3's case where it takes even more effort, what do you expect? Answer: lots of shitty ports. I don't care anyway, I boycott them all. There too many other games to purchase.
"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)
"WAR is a racket. It always has been.
It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler







