Sony: MS "punched themselves out of the fight"

[crumas2]

MikeB said:

Legend11 said:

 

Proving to be much more powerful? You mean with the multiplatform games with the majority giving the 360 the edge? If the PS3 was really a lot more powerful it would show even if games aren't developed for it first.

The 360 provides more tradional like technology, the later more demanding games are about on par. Early Atari ST to Amiga games were also slightly subpar, later games were far superior.

Judge the PS3 based on current exlcusives like Uncharted, Ratchet & Clank: Tools of Destruction and Gran Turismo Prologue (1080p) but take into account my sig below.

Soon we will have Metal Gear Solid 4 (1080p), people will already know which platform is far more powerful this year, faster than was the case for the Amiga.

I have to wonder who those people are that will know (or care) that the PS3 is "more powerful".  I know that it theoretically has more power, but I can't imagine the average potential console buyer looking at one of the rare 1080p games on the PS3 and a 720p game on the 360 (that has been hardware scaled to 1080i or 1080p) and saying "Oh, my god!  Look how crappy that 720p-upscaled game on the 360 looks compared to that 1080p game on the PS3!  I HAVE to have a PS3!"  For you and me there might be some noticible difference when comparing the two on screens that are side-by-side, but I'm playing Mass Effect right now, and the game is absolutely stunning in graphics, sound, voice acting, plot, etc.  I can't see any game on the PS3 in the next 6-12 months "blowing it out of the water", so to speak.  The PS3 hardware may be more powerful on paper, but it isn't a next-gen leap over the 360, as some would like to believe.

I just don't think comparing the games on the 360 to the games on the PS3 are a slam dunk for choosing a PS3.