| Allfreedom99 said: How about the myth that the PS3 has generally better graphics than the X360. While this may be true for certain games its also the other way around. Some games look better on the X360. Even at that when differences are compared between the two for multi-plat games it is evident that the differences are very minor. They do both have different hardware that perform in different ways, but time and again it appears in games that they are very close in graphics capabilities. I still know people that say the PS3 graphics are way better due to the fact that it uses bluray discs. I keep telling them bluray just allows for more storage on the disc. Im not sure why they keep insisting this point. Both have relatively the same HD quality during gaming. |
I swear, I actually considerd putting this in the OP but then I remembered some graphical debates from the past where someone would post comparsons of multi-plats and show that "if you look under the table in the bar on the back left corner of Super Puffball Adventure, there is a texture that isn't in the 360 version so the PS3 version is tons better!", or come with all of this technical jargon about processors and RAM and I figured it was best to just leave that one alone.
To be honest, I've reached a point where I'm pretty numb to graphics (I know it was one of the points in the OP about the 3DS). As long as the games look good enough, that's good enough for me. I don't think I'll ever be blown away by something from this generation, again. Just like when I look at Super Nes games and they all pretty much look like they're on the same level, or when I look at PS2 games and they all look about even, now, no matter how impressive they were at the time, that's how I look at current gen games. They all look about even to me.
