Oh. My. God. What are you, twelve years old?

"You didn't prove to me the sky is blue so I don't have to believe it! Lalalala." Oh, yeah, you "pawned" me good. If you can't handle a hardware discussion because you don't want to face common knowledge (not to mention you were trolling a PS3 thread), and act like the Xbox 360 not outperforming the PS3 in one game (even though it does in a SLEW of others) is some personal insult to your manhood, you need to grow up.

I'm wasn't "playing" with you in the other thread, nor here. I'm pointing out you're acting like a rabid console fanboy in almost every thread I read that I see you in, and perhaps you'd gain an ounce of credibility if you put that aside.

If instead you'd rather jump up and down proclaiming victory because you are capable of annoying other posters into no longer responding to you, then I guess you're just flat out too far gone. I'm not here to have pissing contests with angry children, so if that's your goal on this site, then victory dance away.

EDIT: Just FYI, I posted a quick few links in the other thread since doing web searches is such an excruciating process to you. Now kindly quit being a PITA.

@starcraft

you've gone on for pages (and pages and pages.....) about how "10=10=indiscernible differences", but did you ever stop and think that maybe it got a 10 on both versions because, I don't know, because its GRAND THEFT AUTO 4?!!!! Maybe because the game is so great that its pro's vastly outweigh it's cons?

You say that they score games relative to each other, and since both got a 10, they are equal (despite all things saying they aren't, performance wise). Well I have an example for you:

http://ps2.ign.com/objects/907/907835.html
http://wii.ign.com/objects/907/907834.html

Budokai Tenkaichi 3. BOTH got an 8.0, yet the Wii has improved visuals and online capabilites. If games are scored relative to their counterparts on other platforms, then why'd they score the same?

The same case is with GTAIV. It's a GREAT game, obviously, so it's going to get a 10. They're not going to dock points just because of pop ins because the entire experience outweighs that. Sure, the PS3 version has "better anti-aliasing" and "far less pop ins" but I guarantee that had this game been on PS2 technology, it'd STILL get a 10 because it's THAT good, even though the PS3 and 360 versions would technically be VASTLY superior.

Get off your high horse and just enjoy the game when it comes out because the situation is as follows:

Based on the review, if they could, they'd give the PS3 version a 10.5 to show it was better and the 360 a 10, but they can't based on their review system. And at the same time, they aren't going to give the PS3 a 10, but the 360 a 9, because despite there being performance differences, GTAIV is not a "9" game. Think about it that way, and then stop complaining

I don't feel you have zero credibility, however I do feel you overlooked something, and perhaps didn't pay proper attention to what I have been saying. Apparently simply trying to claim a poster has zero credibility in an attempt to avoid their arguments is the SDF's job.

The fundamental principle that IGN have been identifying is that they write all reviews based on the game's competition. However the PS2 and Wii are from different generations. Do you think it would be reasonable to judge all the PS2 games released in the last year against the graphics on the 360 equivelants?

Perhaps you should start a thread in the Nintendo forums telling everybody that the Wii's graphics should be continually judged equally alongside the HD console's graphics. See how far you get

But it is your last paragraph where I feel you have missed my point entirely. They say that games are judged on their competition. There is no greater competition for the PS3 GTAIV than the Xbox 360 GTAIV. And yet, relative to the PS3 version, they didn't feel that there was a significant enough difference for the game to deserved a mark down. I think it is ridiculous for people to suddenly claim IGN is biased because they "would have marked the PS3 version down if it had been the other way around."

Clearly they wouldn't have done that. They could have done that now based on achievements and what is undoubtedely a smooter online experience with the Xbox 360. But they obviously thought that relative to the Xbox 360 version, the PS3's lack of achievements wasn't significant enough for the game to deserve a better mark.

that was pretty weak considering how he clearly debunked your entire argument, is that the best you've got?

You are seriously now attacking the PS3's online stability, too? The PS3 is generally better because of dedicated servers for most games. There's no reason to assume that the 360 version is smoother. I saw you slip that in there. Achievements do not a better game make, btw, and that situation is going to be fixed anyway on PS3. The fact is the game is better on PS3 and you won't accept it. Hey, I was surprised, too, since the PS3 was blamed for delays, but seriously...just get over it and move on.