| Jessman said: Isn't it because alot of Multi Platform games are developed for the 360 then they get ported the the PS3? |
Of course, the 360 had a one year headstart and a more mature development environment from the beginning (because the PS3 includes much better and newer cutting edge technology and Microsoft re-used tools on the 360 from Windows speeding things up) which resulted in the bulk of multi-platform games being lead on the 360 platform. Despite some very crucial hardware differences it's due to the PS3's bulk power the minor differences between current multi-platform games aren't really that big (basically most games are virtually identical in the eyes of many, some are slightly better on the PS3 and others on the 360) unlike what Eurogamer claims (they usually sound like 360 fanboys lacking technical knowledge).
The real specifications differences can be judged based on the exclusives. The PS3 exclusives are technically much more impressive than its multi-platform games, while 360 exclusives are usually of similar quality from a technical perspecitve as its 360 lead multi-platform games.
Likely the development of most future multi-platform games will be lead on the PS3 because the development requirements to get a good performance out of the PS3 are also beneficial to 360/PC versions. It's a better more effort requiring approach, but it will improve the quality of the game engine overall. Likely the differences between multi-platform games will not change dramatically in the PS3's favour in the short term as developers are unlikely to fully tap into the PS3's additional headroom. Like the devs behind Ghostbusters stated that they could have pushed twice as much on screen if the game would have been designed to be a PS3 exclusive.
It's the PS3 exclusives where you will see great differentations and I hope this will push multi-platform game designers to tap into the PS3's potential as well, so they aren't left behind in comparison.
IMO it's a similar situation as with the Amiga and Atari ST early on within their lifecycle. There's no doubt the Amiga was far more powerful, but early games were designed around the Atari ST hardware specs (for example using mono sound instead of the Amiga's superior stereo audio specs, for example using 16 colors from a 512 color pallette while later games used 100s of colors onscreen from a 4096 color pallette all Amigas are capable of, some early games used a flipscreen approach as the Atari ST wasn't that good at scrolling while later Amiga games had dozens of parallax scrolling layers, etc). Some early Atari ST / Amiga games were as good as identical and sometimes even ran faster on the Atari ST hardware.
