Both GOW 3 and U2 are the cream of the crops, I would have to say as a whole, entire game U2 has the edge, Yes GOW 3 is amazing , most of the game is stunning, but there are some places in GOW that do not look as good as the rest of the game, Naught Dog did a superb job, because U2 is very balanced, really the entire game looks the same and that is brilliant. GOW 3 just has a few areas that they did not tweak to make the whole game the same, The best in GOW is better then U2, just as a whole its not quit there, the textures on GOW are amazing though, Its no question PS3 is the king of graphics, Look for U3, and Killzone 3 to raise the notch again.

I read a remark bu others saying the PS3 has more trouble handeling games programmed for 360, and I dam near fell of my chair laughing, what maybe 3 years ago, thats why all the games from 2009 multi, look better on PS3, thats why games like FF were cut in half to be on the 360, I mean I could go on, but theres no point, I own both 360 and PS3 and love them both, but it is what it is, they both have pros and cons, and graphics for the PS3 vs 360 is not a con for the PS3, and the 360 has been out a lot longer. I just luah my ass off people still make funny coments like this. It sucks this whole equality thing sucks, they are dev games on PS3 first, then having to scale back to 560p or 600p because 360 can't keep up, they need to make the best game they can for each console, that would put the BS to rest. I love playing games, 360 , ps3 what ever game is the best is the one I will buy. have fun gaming, put it to rest, it is what it is, everybody needs to learn to deal.

I may get banned for this , not trying to upset anyone, this is my opinion, its hard to have a real debate, or discussion on VG, people get upset way to easy and are quick to ban someone for there opinion. So for all to know this was not meant to piss anyone off, we just need to enjoy these consoles for what they are, like I said both have the good and the bad, I wish MS and Sony would venture together they would make one dam ossum machine. most likly will never happen , but wow that would be cool.  

@dirkd2323
"thats why all the games from 2009 multi, look better on PS3"

Except, they don't. Look at the link. There's the evidence. Epic fail.

This is exactly what I'm talking about with my last post... Here's another one doing the same preaching about PS3 garbage. And that's the main reason I don't believe you have an X360, because "you started laughing" blah blah. I actually brought arguments AND numbers AND sources. You didn't. So I agree with one thing, it is hard to have a real debate with people who don't listen to reason and only preach about their preferred console, people like you and MikeB.

Yeah yeah I said I would leave, but I'm getting sick and tired of retards running these forums and everyone letting them get away with it, or having arguments like "just ignore them". Might as well ignore the whole section then.... And no that's not how it's supposed to be.

@nightant

your gonna have 2 accept ps3 can do better grafix than 360. move along

Well.. Sony has a bigger/better first party support ( IN MY OPINION ).
But they have more engines that are ..exclusive? compared to X360s first party (a fact I think..?)
This is Sonys 3rd gen while it's Microsofts 2nd. Sony has been in top with the PS2 and ..maybe PS1? Not sure about PS1.

Point is, they have more first party dudes with exclusive engines which makes us go O_O while a lot of the X360 games use the U3 engine (I think.. xD)

Im not really a expert on the engine area, but I think i'm partly right on what I said above. If not, please feel free to correct me ^^.

No one has to accept anything until the 360 games get completely ground up custom engines for all their exclusives like the top PS3 exclusives.  Then maybe we can make a comparison and see.

Rest of the world? Well so far this thread has one review saying the game has the best graphics. It's all opinion, and just because she doesnt share that same view with you doesnt mean you can automatically bash the review.

Don't forget to include yourself.

Underneath that Hollier than thou attitude, you're no better than the rest.

By calling names at every turn like you did there, I would say you're even worse.

Where exactly did I preach for the X360? Did you miss the links and numbers and the logic?

Of course I'm worse, because I tell it like it is, and people hate the freaking truth. Saying you don't know if the PS3 really is stronger than the X360 is the same as telling a Christian you don't know if God exists, or telling a biologist that you're not sure evolution is true. They'll go apesh*t on you. You people all accept these fking stealth trolls in this section, and that's the whole problem. The whole site is PS3 oriented, and if you say anything slightly positive towards the X360, there's always someone there to tell you how wrong you are, how they laughed at you and the comment you made, how you're blah blah blah. It's fking ridiculous. I actually respect Selnor of having the courage to stand up to that, even if he turns out to be wrong, he's only trying to make a point, but all you people are too busy bashing that you completely miss what it is.

I'm not holier than anyone. I'm just not afraid to tell anyone when they are being unfairly biased and I actually provide arguments AND data to back it up. Unlike you, who are now only bashing me as a person for not agreeing with this retarded sheep mentality going on about the PS3.. Afraid to tackle on the subject itself? And guess what, after all those arguments I gave, no one can actually refute them logically. All they can do is say how I'm bad or that I should just accept it blah blah. Unless you actually have real arguments and data to dismiss my claims, I politely ask you to don't react to me at all, and certainly not as a person or my behavior, because me being pissed off right now is nothing compared to the years of bashing people in here have been going through. Keep that to yourself or just leave if you don't like it. 

@Skeeuk: You sound like "You're gonna have to accept that Jesus is your only savior, move along".

Checking all the other reviews up on Meta, the one from Eurogamer is the only one that states the graphics are "decent" while everyone else seem to think they are very good or great and that gives me every right to question that bit of the review. And just because you agree with it (for some reason) doesn't mean I can't "bash" the review. The lowest visual score I saw outside of Eurogamers "decent" was an 8.5, which is several notches above decent as it were. Its fine she didn't love the game and scored it a perfect ten (hell, I didn't expect that to happen at all) but at least she should get a clue about what's what in the genre, on the platform and on the market in general in regards to visuals.

Nowhere did I take a stance when it comes to which console is better than the other.

But that's gonna change in this here post.

The fact that you act like you're all butthurt because the PS3 is on a roll right now clearly gives away that you have your own bias.

Sure, you're not willing to directly call a winner, but you do have a hard time agreeing to the obvious.  That although all multiplatform titles that use either the UE3 (incidentally, Cry Engine 3, arguably a better and more up-to-date engine, runs better on the PS3 according to Crytek themselves) or are ported codes from the 360 to the PS3 will run better on the 360, no games come close to the technical feats offered by the 3 "kings" you already mentioned (Killzone 2, Uncharted 2 and God of War 3).

That you deny what the developers themselves aknowledged about how multiplatform games would take longer and thus cost more to develop and make them perform as well on the PS3 as on the 360 (which just isn't worth it from a business standpoint, you'll agree) surely speaks for itself.

That you put a blindfold when it comes to the many claims by third party developers who acknoledged the [although most likely slight, but definite] superior potential of the PS3 also speaks for itself.

If the 360 is such a powerful beast or is as capable as the PS3, then, using you logic, we should see games that are as technically impressive and "boundaries pushing" as those 3 PS3 exclusives.  Those are nowhere to be seen.  The closest we've got are the 2 Gears of War games.  And those 2 are filled with technical issues (like heavy frame rate drops for example) and they're developed by the Engine creators, no less!

In any case, although you made some nice reflexions on the matter, the truth is that the PS3 has offered more technically impressive stuff than the 360 ever did so far.  Even Alan wake, lighting aside, didn't offer anything to beat the PS3 exclusives we all talk about so much.  If the games designed specifically for the 360 cannot touch the technical quality of the PS3's exclusives, don't you think it's more than enough to call a winner?