leo-j:

The 360 doesn't run good either... they gave it 8.0 for the graphics (7.5 for ps3). Here is what IGN said for the 360 version: 

8.0 Graphics
A lot of slowdown, some of it is understandable, other times it’s not. It doesn't run as well as the first Vegas.

The only thing that Vegas 2 proves is that the Unreal 3 engine is stagnant... it's not getting any better. It's been almost 2 years since the first Vegas on the 360 and Vegas 2 runs WORSE than Vegas.

 I have a feeling that GeoW2 is going to get owned by Resistance 2. Insomniac's engine evolved so much for Ratchet and it's still getting stronger for R2 while UE3... oh well, I love Epic but 3D engine middleware just sucks.

PS3 owners scream about how ubisoft fails with the PS3 ... i can only imagine how Wii owners could be ... Ubisoft has made an incredible amount of crap for the Wii ... mainly some of the worst ports on the console... i think that's real fail

@london_calling: that pic my friend is full of win :D

IGN not freaking gamespot. Gamespot is trash

^^

lol true dat

You're absolutely wrong here, the U3 Engine is an absolutely fantastic piece of kit, Ubisoft just can't develop a technically efficient game to save their lives. The Unreal engines have a reputable history of being constantly expansive over time, and the latest will be no different.

Don't blame Epic, blame Ubisoft.

On topic though I think this is just another case of the PS3 not being as powerful as everyone else thinks! :P Ooooh I went there. 

 Score is affected when some of the IGN's xbox team members review multiplatform games. They play most (if not all) of the game on the 360 and then go to the PS3 just to see if they can find "problems".

 You will see that Dark Sector will get the same score on both 360 and PS3 since it's being reviews by Greg Miller/PS3 team.

 I only blame Ubisoft for choosing UE3. It makes development much faster at the cost of some runtime problems. UE3 is a fantastic engine but it's a cross-platform solution and not equally optimized for all platforms. This is where a native in-house engine can shine. Also all UE3 games look kind of similar. Hopefully UE4 will be optimized for consoles like Epic said. 

 And please stop blaming PS3's hardware for the "slowdown" / texture problems. You don't know what you're talking about. Go talk to Insomniac or Naughty Dog and ask them. They both use high resolution texture streaming, 400Mb of textures per level. That is correct my friend, 400Mb textures cached to the HD and streamed real time to the graphics card. They are the one's that can tell you about it since they are the one's pushing the hardware. On top of that Insomniac's 2nd generation engine (R&C:TD) runs at an amazing 60 FPS. Can you name a UE3 game running at 60 FPS on 360 or PS3? Nope. Also go play Mass Effect and enjoy the awesome low resolution textures for up to 5 secs before the high-res texture pops in.

 Also, remember Too Human? It was supposed to be released on top on UE3 and they had to drop it and build their own engine since UE3 did not perform as well as they expected. The E3 demo (2006) was so bad that the frame rate was about 10 FPS, rofl.

Say what you will about Unreal 3 engine but Gears of War still looks better than 99% of ps3/360 games.

The content of the review is the same, it is just the conclusion that is different, I'm getting it anyway