Here I'll spell it out for you worst case scenario even.
PS3 uber game runs @ 720P
Xbox 360 runs said game @ 25% lower resolution which proportionally frees up 25% of the shader performance, which is ~70Gflops worth.
Xbox 360 can run said uber game, but just at a lower resolution.
Thus your 50Gflops deficit are accounted for and the Xbox 360 can run said game.
Dude, you just proved my point. I wasn't trying to say that the 360 can't play those games, but rather it can't play those games at the same level of scale. You would have to water down the super-uber game for it to work on the 360.
Nope. I said worst case scenario, the reality is infact somewhere between the two. Until multiplatform games show any advantage, let alone a decisive advantage for the PS3 in terms of frame-rates/visual effects the verdict remains that they are about the same computationally. Besides this every game is watered down to some extent, even exclusives relative to what my PC is capable of so im not sure why some marginal difference needs to be over-exagerated.
It's still a pretty good difference between the two. Anyway, I keep hearing the same argument over and over again from whatever website or forum I visit. That its the multiplats that make the difference. In my opinion, I don't really think that multiplatform games could really show the public a decisive difference/advantage for any console. I would have to compare the exclusives. That's just my opinion. I don't really think the PS3 can take whatever software you give to it and transform it to some uber game. That's just not possible without taking that software and optimizing it specifically for that console.
What did you say last gen when the annoying Xbox fanatics bragged about the amazing graphics of the Xbox and system quality compared to the PS2?
I get what you're saying but I doubt PS2 fans were concerned with it's quality of games last gen. Highly doubt it.