really? i though the xbox360 was/is

It's funny because when I first read the original post I thought it said Redwood Studios. Then I looked again and wondered "Who the hell are these guys?".

 Peter Moore said it himself that he will push EA to make the PS3 version of game devs to make the games the best they can. 

Harder to develop for =/= lesser specs. Just because the coding has to be done differently doesn't translate to the 360 easily running a PS3 game. Matter of fact, as the article says, aren't they building it as a 360 game right now, THEN shifting to PS3? Wouldn't that make the original build for 360, and then showing how the PS3 can run the game?

I think we all know the PS3 does not have lower specs, just more complicated ones

Or it could just be that they're both based in Redwood Shores, in Redwood City California.

You know. Where EA is located.

That'd be my guess personally.  Actually i'd guess they were the same team.

They're the previous development team combined with Maxis from what i know. Whcih gives them some games like

Sim City, The Sims games and the Tiger Woods golf games.

So they have some pretty notable sellers on their development list.

Not sure what "Redwood Studios" has made.

 Actually it said that they were doing it on the 360, then switching it to the PS3 because the PS3 version was having trouble doing what the 360 could do.  Then they were going to port it back over to the 360.

The PS3 has become the lead console because you need to optimize the hell out of it to get an equal amount of ability than you could the 360.  In other words, they are going to do there best to have it be as good a game as they wanted on the 360 and hope they'll succeed, but if the game sucks... it's probably because they had to spend forever optimizing for the PS3.  

@ TheBigFatJ
The guy mentions the fill rate, but also points out in the same sentence that he does not come from a developer background. He is the executive producer of the game, not a programmer. He even begins to say that the PS3 can't handle the physics, then corrects himself by saying that it is just more difficult. As anyone familiar with the cell architecture will know, it is pretty much custom built for physics calculations. It's design has a number of similarities with Ageia's PhysX PPU. It is unquestionably better than the 360 in this regard. The 360's general purpose advantage is only really better for things like A.I., but they are not as processor intensive as physics, so the advantage is completely negated.

All things considered, the PS3 quite clearly has higher specs than the 360, but the more complex design means it requires more development time. This game is being ported to PC, so leading with the 360 is just common sense, as it is kind of a middle ground.

Im glad that developers are focusing more on the PS3. They have the 360 down cause its technology has been around forever. It looks like if you have experienced developers you can make games that look far better (MGS4, Uncharted, GT5, etc.) Although I think that we will be seeing crap games come out for awhile as well on the ps3 (Conflict:Denied ops!, DW6!)

I don't think its a matter of specs, but a matter of familiarity and development difficulty.

The PS3 is clearly the harder and less common architecture. Therefore instead of building on the 360 and then trying to port to PS3, which has routinely proven to have PS3's games that are flat out worse than their 360 versions. They will build it on the PS3 to ensure the game runs really well there and then port over to the 360 which will give them a much smoother transition since they are far more familiar with the system.

Makes perfect sense to me.

 EDIT: Plus, EA recently stated that 2008 will be PS3 > 360, so they are shifting their resources to match their expectations.