360 has already reached it's peak, why do you think games are coming out sub-HD now?

The PS3's architecture is beginning to be understood, and developers have learned to use the SPE's but not to their full ability, we will enjoy better and better looking games for atleast another year before it's at it's peak.

PS3 > 360

Ps3 may be more powerful, but i doubt we will see anything in it's lifespan that "blows away" anything on the 360, the difference in my opinion will be hardly noticeable.

Maybe, maybe not.  Certianly to get a graphically STRONG game out of the 360 is fairly simple due to it's similarity to the PC.  But the level of optomisation required to synchronise the cores and learn to properly distribute RAM memory indicates that it will be at least a few more years before we see the full potential of the 360 tapped out. 

Given they are both going to be a distant second/third in the console race this generation, in a few years (3-4) I suspect the 360 and PS3's development numbers will have slowed dramatically, almost to a standstill. 

To me the ps3 is as more powerful than the 360 as much as the original xbox was more powerful than the gamecube. You would barely tell a difference at all.

Read my first post to understand why you are fundamentally incorrect.

As for sub-HD, neither of the two high-definition consoles are powerful enough to render high-physics, high-graphics games at 1080p with a fast, consistent frame-rate.  It's an interesting paradox.  If you believe Sony, you must have 1080p, 60FPS games in order to truly enjoy the next generation.  The irony is, if you follow this advice you need to bypass the PS3 and go straight to an expensive gaming PC.

As for the last part, I think we will eventually see a very minor graphical advantage for some exclusive PS3 games over 360 ones.  That said, due to it's more focused architecture, the 360 will have better AI in it's top games, which can be applied to gameplay while a little extra graphical sheen cannot.

Developers understand the Playstation 3. The question is, do they want to risk making a game for the Playstation 3, in which less of them exist, or the Xbox 360, in which more of them exist? It's easier to develop on the Xbox 360, and apparently, the Xbox 360 has better graphics than the Playstation 3. So wrong. The Playstation 3 was all about the graphics, and here, the Xbox 360 beats it. It's like a karate ninja getting beat in a karate match by a boxer.

For everyone who thinks it's HARD to develop for the PS3... that's just not the case.

The problem is it's radically different, not that it's hard. So there is a lot to learn. It does not take more brain power to understand how to develop for the PS3, it just takes knowledge that has not yet been learned.

As developers learn it, games will get better (and have already)

 If you trust any of the official reviews of games released on both systems then the PS3 beats the 360 more times then the 360 beats the PS3 in graphics.  On a side note go look at GT5P and show me a 360 game that compares to it.

 thats a quite the pointless way of looking at it.

Heres a way that makes last gen sense.

Base specs PS2 had only a 1/3  of xbox power yet held its own, thats sony wacky ass design.   Base specs Ps3 is even if not more powerfull the the 360, add sonys super whacky ass design this gen and you got one hell of alot more powerfull console then the 360.

or

Car nut version - PS3 is a 400hp Ferrari the 360 a 400hp mustang, sure they got similar hp yet the Ferrari will rape the Stang around a race track. 

 I was using this as a metaphor to show that youl would barely know the difference such as the case of the gc and xbox.