@MikeB: Yeah, whatever, way to ignore the point and take sentences out of context and act like a smartass instead of admitting you are biased.
Anyway.. Programming back then was way different than it is now. Now it's usually through an API, back then it was pure code. Porting something back then was a worse job than it is now.
Plus, rushed ports are usually worse on the platform the game is being ported to, whether one is more powerful or not (like FFXIII or Bayonetta). But, I never mentioned ports. You did. Not surprising, since you always try to twist what others say in your favor... I mentioned multi-plats. That does not necessarily mean a port. If you take the same time on two platforms and develop on them equally, we all know which one usually comes out on top, usually both on graphics AND performance. Whether people notice differences or not is not relevant. Of course they're not gonna notice, they only buy one copy whether they have both consoles or not. But the point remains, the PS3 has more trouble handling stuff programmed for the X360 than the other way around.
And even in most cases where the PS3 was lead, X360 versions tend to look at least equal, sometimes better. So it's not only porting issues like you make it sound. One example is Mirror's Edge which has AA on the X360 but doesn't have it on the PS3, the game most users don't like to think about (Ghostbusters), Modern Warfare 2 (performs and looks better on the X360), BFBC (dithering on X360 version, but superior shadow filtering, water and performance..). The X360 holds up to the PS3 in almost all cross-platform games, even when not being the lead platform. Games like FFXIII are more an exception than a rule, just like Ghostbusters. However, there are other factors as well....
If you actually bothered to look at the link, in the most recent games analysed, 5 are better on the X360, 2 are better on the PS3, and 6 are pretty much equal. That's a pattern that has been seen through the years and hasn't really changed. The PS3 has been playing catch-up, and a console that's definitely more powerful wouldn't need to. Sure, first year, maybe.. 2nd year.. Fine. But come on, how many years has it been? And why do multi-plats still have trouble with the PS3 graphics compared to the X360 graphics? The complexity of the console is more of an excuse. And oh, your "the PS3 design was ambitious and thus very different compared to PCs, PS2, XBox and whatnot" part, the PS2 was more difficult to program for than the PS3... Just throwing that out there..
Getting back to why it's an excuse, Naughty Dog created their engine in a relatively short time. If they can, what's the argument here about multi-plats not representing the power of the PS3 after all these years, and that we should only look at exclusives? They are being ported from the X360? Well, what about those examples I gave above? Are they suddenly non-existent? It's the same with all you people. You use exclusives as comparisons. Not only is that irrational in every way and completely biased towards the platform of choice, but Sony intends to push graphics, while MS really has a totally different focus.. That is community and Xbox Live, and that's why Halo was never about graphics, and why Forza 3 is so community driven. If there's a proper way to compare the power of platforms, it's the non-exclusives aka multiplats, because they need to render the same thing in the same situations, and that's where you'll find the strengths and weaknesses of both. You won't by drooling over exclusives which have no real comparison on the other platform. Forza vs GT I can still understand, but comparing AW to GOWIII or whatever is completely out of place.
There are only 3 exclusives that can be considered outstanding on the PS3. UC2, KZ2 and GOWIII. That's 3 games out of a library of 600+ games. If it's one or two more, fine, then it's 4 or 5 out of 600+ games. Whichever it is, that does not represent the strength of the whole console. They are more the exception than the rule, being such a small percentage (~0.5%). And if you look at technical analysis in the link, from the games analysed, 113 look better on the X360, 62 are equal, and only 16 look better on the PS3. Now these numbers are facts. They are not the opinion of anyone, and if there's any conclusion to be drawn from these numbers, it is that the X360 is more powerful. However, I still don't have the guts to actually say that, because I am personally still unsure, and actually, so should everyone else be. But you are basically following a religion where UC2, KZ2 and GOWIII are The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost that form the entire game library of the PS3 called God.
If you actually objectively look at things, you can see that in certain situations the X360 has the advantage, and in other ones, the PS3 has the advantage. People saying that either platform is definitely more powerful than the other are probably talking bull. It's all based on arrogance, and it's fking disgusting.
That's my rant, and now I'll get out of here since this is already way too offtopic, but I'm sick and tired of everyone always acting as if the X360 is the most inferior console ever. No I don't really care which console is more powerful or which has the best graphics, what I do care about is people feeling the need to tell others that their sausage is bigger and actually bringing it up every chance they get.
