This is why I say you should have to prove you have the console of topic in order to talk in a Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft specific forum (I'm not saying you don't, just trying to make a point).

I though i remembered reading the gran turismo 4 was about all the ps2 could handle, oh and uh GOW 2.

I believe Bethesda is a great developer to continue the Fallout franchise. I mean, I can totally trust them after Oblivion.

On-Topic: I would really like to see a game that uses the majority of the PS3's power. But I was wondering, how are the games gauged on how much power they use? Like, how do people know what percentage of the PS3 is using. Please no fancy mumbo-jumbo. Say it in English DOC! Thanks :D

You show very little knowlodgement of videogames if you think a console needs the same specs as a PC to run something akin to it .Consoles are optimized 200% better ,can use their whole power toward the videogame and dont have to run dozens of others programs and a heavy SO behind as a PC.The Genesis/MD and SNes were far superior to a PC with the same specs(286 or even 386) ,the PSX and N64 put to shame PCs with the same specs(486DX2)  ,the Dreamcast was far more powerful than any PC of the time(Pentium with Vodoo graphics card ) ,the Xbox and Cube were far superior to any PC with the same tech (Pentium III and 64Mb graphics card like Geoforce 4400) ,and the 360 and PS3 are far superior to any PC with a 3.2Ghz dual core and a 256Mb(or even 512) graphics card as the 7800Gtx or 7950.Time will prove it .No saying a quad core and a 8800Gtx cant outdo these consoles ,but Crysis may be possible in any case .

 Actually, you need to read the topic again =P

 "The figures sound hokum, but it wasn’t until five years into PS2’s life cycle that games tapped even 90% of its power - a statistic measured by Sony’s Performance Analyser tools, yet to be released on PS3."

 The problem with direct comparisons between console and PC games in terms of graphics is that PC games almost ALWAYS display at much higher resolutions than consoles do.  Even your basic run of the mill PC game can do resolutions better equivalently than 720p and also add 4xAA or other stuff so it does require more power. 

Remember that most PS3/360 games have been caught faking their resolutions, COD4 was found to not even be a real 720p resolution.  And we've seen what happens when some games (i.e Lair) try to maintain 1080p in a large environment.  

I agree that a console with the same spec as PC will almost always be better but its not a completely fair comparison. 

Are you sure about the ps3? It can't upscale ps3 games. I've seen enought whining from Playstation forum members about the ps3 not upscaling 720p to 1080i on most ps3 games

Maybe Sony did that to stop devs from faking it like in Halo 3?  (640p)  I don't know...

No CoD4 on PS3/360 is 640p too upscaled to 720p I believe.

My thoughts exactly.  I'll of course be getting the game on PC (where it belongs), but I really don't trust Bethesda at all.  They had better not fuck this up.  Also, Diomedes the consoles simply can't run Crysis at it's current form.  You could make a dumbed down version of the game on the consoles, but the game that was released on PC can not be done on the PS3 or 360.  This has been stated by Crytek developers so many times it's not even funny.  It just can't happen.

If I remember correctly, Square-Enix is using everything the PS3 has in terms of power (some friend of mine said to me; he's a bigger FF addict than I am; I only own FFXI and FFTA lol) and with the Blu-Ray player. I remember reading on VGChartz awhile back that FFXIII is having a release date of late 2008 to mid/late 2009 or something. If ANY developer were to draw out the full potential of a console (PS3 for the topic), then it would take a serious and long amount of time for the game to be in development and polished near to perfection. FFXIII may take the cake on this in terms of development time and polishing. I could be wrong, though.