In short: Playstation 3 = Sega Saturn Chips do not matter. You can have a system with $20,000 worth of Cell SPUs and PPEs and whatever. It doesn't make a better system. What makes a system better is strong documentation software for the workstations to actually UTILIZE that power. If they're running 10%, it's because the PS3's archatecture is very poor. In the case of Sega Saturn, it definately had a huge power advantage over the PS1. Nintendo had a even more powerful system in the N64. Did that help either out against PS1? Nope. Power is good, but when developers cannot use the power, it's useless. I doubt developers will really figure out how to use the PS3's "power" for another 4-5 YEARS. At that point, you "might" see a small increase in preformance versus the 360. You have a problem with the PS3 when most reviewers that review games like Call of Duty 3, Marvel Ultimate Alliance and many othe games, and state their dead even or even the 360 has the advantage. Why? Documentation. Microsoft is a SOFTWARE company. They have to be very proficent at making software work well on hardware - which is why most devs say the PS3 is a nightmare to dev for versus the 360. Wii is even better due to it's simplicity (although it's very poor compared to total power versus 360/PS3). Remember when everyone said that Assassains Creed couldn't be made on 360 due to power? Wrong. The PS3 specs have been vastly overinflated, and the Cell processor is at the heart of it. Konami made some interesting quotes about the cell processor: Their statements say that the PS3 would be better than the 360 in terms of graphics IF you had 400+ people working on 1 game to optimize the coding exclusively for the PS3. Unfortunately, most studios have 100 people (give or take) working on a game. They cannot afford to use the PS3 with its power. Which is why so many games have gone multi-platform. I have a question for you, Washimul: If the PS3 was so much more powerful than the 360, why is it that so many PS2 exclusives have gone to 360 as well, and not the other way around? The 360 has lost very little if any exclusives, whereas Sony has lost Guitar Hero, Resident Evil 5, Assassains Creed, Mercenaries 2, Virtua Fighter 5 among other games, and the only one that the 360 lost was Full Auto 2? Also, a quick note on Oblivion on PS3: Many might say "OMG, it's going to be better on PS3, devs say that the load times, textures, ect are better, showing that the PS3 is a better machine". Wrong. A patch is coming out shortly for the 360 to increase the draw distances and load times to make it equivilent with the 360. Why? Optimization. Bethsada has had a year to work on the PS3 version + learn from the PC and 360 versions. They've now gone back to the 360 and made it better. Not because the 360 is better, or the PS3 version is better, but because there was more time to optimize the 360. However, according to bethsada, quite a few people worked on porting Oblivion to PS3. When it came to updating the graphics on the 360 to match the PS3 version....It took 1 programmer a few weeks :)
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
Essay Pro