This is going to end just like that fiasco with starcraft when every reviewer said GTAIV was better on the PS3, but both versions got a 10/10. "Both versions got a 10/10 meaning no discernable differences" even though he was ignoring the fact that it got a 10/10 because the game itsself was so good (when reviewed at the time) not because of technical differences. When it was getting reviewed, the game was called "perfect" so to give the 360 version less than a 10 because of pop-in would've been bad, and also it would have lowered the game into the ranks of other games that weren't "perfect". For example, what he was ignoring was that, if GTA 360 got a 9.5 instead of a 10, that would mean that GTA 360 was only as good as say...Halo. But the fact is, GTAIV, the game, was so good that it got a 10. It was because it got a 10 that starcraft tried to ignore the differences and say both versions were "equal"
I see this happening here, when Tekken 6 gets, say, a 9/10 on both versions, even though the PS3 version will be considered "better". Everyone will say "well if it's so much better, why'd it get the same score?" They'll ignore the fact that despite technical differences...Tekken 6 is still Tekken 6 and the game is about a 9/10.
That's my prediction.
