It did a lot of things day one that was half the problem!

720p seems reasonable, Not sure but didnt KZ2 have slowdowns at times attributed in part to 1080p please do not shoot me but since eating the CJD ridden cowburgers in the 80's my memory is not to hot.

If anyone thinks 1080p makes a huge difference, they are kidding themselves. If I see a game chugging on desired settings at 1080p on my pc, the first thing I do is lower the resolution. Give me lots of AA @ 720p rather than 1080p with no AA any day.

Does anyone know what this game runs at in 3D? 720p/2 per eye?

*Puts the thought in his mind to change Starcraft 2 graphics settings*

KZ2 ran at 720p not 1080p.

Gotta disagree there. Native 1080p with max settings looks noticeably better than 720p with max settings on and my PC monitor is 23inches i.e not that big. Plus the viewing area is much improved. Motion blur helps to mask lowish frame rates (as in 25-30fps which is low by PC standards). You do need a pretty decent PC though to play max settings @ 1920 x 1080p though but contrary to what many think it doesn't cost an arm and a leg but acknowledge it's a lot more than consoles and not as user friendly for games. Apart from strategy games I just prefer playing games on consoles as it's hooked up to my surround sound and on a bigger TV I can sit on my sofa. I know I can do that with a PC but it's more of a hassle due to needing the keyboard and mouse and it takes a lot of room.

Native 1080p with 8X AA does look better than 720p and 8XAA. I think one would have to be pretty thick to try to argue that... However 720p with lots of AA looks better than 1080p and no AA. Usually thats the choice one has to make for PC gaming (1080p or anti aliasing)

Otherwise, I am running overclocked GTx470s in SLI so I can max out any game at 1080p...however I'm gaming at 5760x1080 using 3 monitors in 2D surround vision...and at that res, I do run in to issues with some games. I find that lowering all 3 monitors to 720p and keeping the AA up looks much better than disabling AA and having 1080p accross the baord. I hate jaggies!!!

Couldn't agree more. I have Il-2 Sturmovik which runs at 1080p, but graphically i think it's inferior to Battlefield Bad Company which only runs at 720p. 1080p at 1280x1080 just isn't enough of a step up from 720p at 1280x720 to make a really discernible difference. My 17in PC 4:3 monitor handles 1280x1024. So techically it's more HD than PS3 in HD (even though it carries no such label). I think the lack of 1920 pixels on the horizontal axis of PS3 1080p mode will continue to restrict the graphics sharpness on large widescreen TVs. But even with full 1920x1080 HD, my 17in monitor would still cane its monkey ass. Marketing has a lot to answer for...

That's not a fair or a very scientific comparison. First of all your comparing two different games and second of all your only comparing 1280 x 1080 and presumably that's the best your monitor can handle. Try comparing native 1920 x 1080p (which is Full HD) on a TV or PC monitor that can display those resolutions vs 1280 x 720p. It's a big difference in picture quality.

Also the PS3 can do Full HD but only on basic games like Super Stardust. Current gen consoles just don't have the horsepower to display advanced games at Full 1080p.

Do most PS360 games even have 720p?

Yes. Most of them are native 720p.