that was shown at E3

GT believes UNCH3 surpasses every game shown at E3 including the PC versions of Bioshock Infinite and Battle field 3, UNCH3 won GT's best graphics of e3 award

Apparently it was the best showing of stereoscopic 3D of any medium and that along with great art direction is why they got the award. According to a comment by one of the editors. Basically even tho technically both BF3 and Metro: LL were better, style and 3D trumps that.

I guess it's a pity that EA didn't partner with Nvidia to show some 3D BF3 gameplay @ 120hz, they probably would have won if they did.

Oh and keep in mind the fact that a Wii game won last year beating KZ3

Presentation isn't always about what looks the most realistic or technically better, it could be just about what looks better artistically or what looks better based on the things being done on screen. I watched the Battlefield 3 game-play videos and I wasn't impressed at all, it looks boring and it's basically a better looking Bad Company 2, these modern war shooters have started to just blur together.

Just to add, Kirby's Epic Yarn isn't a technical powerhouse and it still won a whole lot of awards last year for graphical presentation. Also, according to a few podcasts, the press were given a demo to an amazing stage in Uncharted 3 that none of us has seen, it blew them away and it was far more impressive than the press conference presentation, maybe that's what compelled GT to vote for Uncharted.

LOL! well we knew Uncharted 3 is a graphical beast but damn beating PC?

No idea why I thought of this thread http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=130551&page=1
after reading this.

Read that thread... it's very obvious WHY.

Haha...

Even when PC fans want to push PC as limitless, there is a fact and that is that developers of that platform are almost forced to develop keeping in mind that not everyone has the most powerful PC up to date. Even when you can upgrade a PC with current tech that appears yearly or whatever, not everyone do so because of expenses and because they may not care for upgrading if they do not see a need.

PC developers develop, as any other platform, thinking about profit and, at the end of the day, they must consider developing a game which will be able to run in powerful and not so powerful computers in order to make a product that will be an option for a wider number of consumers. It is here where the limitless potential of PC gaming is shattered. It is not an easy and safe bet to make a game that demands a lot of hardware and tell the consumer: "Here, buy this game and buy almost a new computer so that you can play it because yours cannot get it running".

On the other hand, console developers have a console with its defined specs which allows them to determine what can be done and what cannot be done and develop using the potential of the machine, with the exception of the multiplatform aberrations that appear from time to time.

I'm guessing that's based on aesthetic. It didn't have the best technical graphics, but that's secondary to visual design.

Not a surprise considering that media outlet was too incompetent to even put together a PC that could play Crysis in it's review year. They aren't qualified to judge visuals.