Uncharted 2 maxes out the Ps3:

http://www.ps3center.net/news/2095/uncharted-2-to-max-out-ps3s-spus/

Lol @Jo21 says those Gears of War pics cant be of gameplay either cutscenes or retouched..

Ps3 better cpu
360 better gpu
360 better ram setup.

Ps3 cell and RXS they are limited and cant use no more than 256mb of ram for each.

360 Xenon and Xenos have the freedom to use more 256mb of ram when they borrow from each other.

http://kotaku.com/381412/kojima-disappointed-with-metal-gear-solid-4


"I remember saying three years ago that we wanted to create something revolutionary, but in reality we couldn't really do that because of the CPU. We're using the Cell engine to its limit., actually. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing the PS3 machine, it's just that we weren't really aware of what the full-spec PS3 offered - we were creating something we couldn't entirely see."

this is what kojima said 

and no he was not paid by ms to say that ^^  lol I always laugh when I see a ps3 fanboys like player1 say something like that

"also 360 cant do x16AA. those pics are cutscences or retouched."

Have you even played any of those games on a 360?  If you had you would know those aren't cut scenes and that the Gears 2 is beautiful.  

You are looking more and more foolish, maybe you should stop now.    

Jo...

When you compare Gears and Uncharted, for example, you do have to realize that Gears has to animate more than one player character. The Gear's squad is made of 5 units, all of them rendered in high poly and texture detail. And the engine has to take into account in order to stay locked at 30fps that they are all in screen at once that's a huge tax upon the system resources. There's a "budget" as they call it, and Gears uses a considerable amount of that budget on the members of the squad. Games like Uncharted do not have that burden so they can spare more resources in the environment, main protagonist, etc. It's the same reason fighters usually look insanely good - there's just a backdrop and two characters. In other words, it's easy to make a section of a wall insanely good but rendering the whole building is a different thing.

This of course no attempt to belittle the great engine they used on Uncharted, as it's a terrific tool but also has a huge benefit over UE3 - it's not intended to be a do-it-all multiplatform tool, which means it's inherently more efficient.

Development resources also matter a lot these days. Both the ps3 and the 360 are highly complex hardware and... this was something we started to see last gen but it has definitely exploded in the current generation. Games definitely benefit from time and the amount of guys chained to the desk hammering keys at the engine. That just isn't all there is, however - even more talent and intelligence are required for today's complex engines. Halo 3 from example, suffered from a very ill-conceived engine - the Bungie guys in charge of it even decided to render each frame twice and blend them together. Sure it resulted in great lighting, the dinamic range was off the roof - but at huge costs.

What I am saying here, is that what you see in games like KZ2 or GT5, for example is the result of talent, years of development and huge technology budgets. Which are no excuses of course, the games do look visually amazing. But they come not because the hardware running the software is necessarily better, but rather because a series of decisions were taken along the process that greatly helped to produce games of astounding visual impact.

A better comparison would be something like Virtua Fighter 5. Both versions were made by the same guys, they first got the ps3 version out and then they made the 360 version (which of course means the 360 saw its version considerably later).

The guy talking there is the guy who designed the cell. He's the chief architect of what is the core of your ps3. If you think he doesn't know about processors, architectures, performance, etc you might be in denial.

of course, but uncharted also have to animate more than one char, too. and AI for enemies of course, physics, etc.

but saying they are equal in raw processing power its not something he said, he said both have it benefits. because  6 vs 8/9 threads is not equal.

115gflops < 204gflops.

by numbers anything that can be done 360 it can be done ps3 thats my point.

each console have it benefits, 360 being half the price of the ps3, but raw power, ps3 its beat by high end pcs.

As a less extreme example, imagine a computer with 1000 processors at 204 megaflops each.

There's no point in trying to explain something to someone who's in denial.. just leave him be IMHO.

And so does Gears... doesn't it have scenery, enemies, AI, physics, etc?

By the way, that's not what he said - that's what you wanted to read.

Just so you guys know this guy was a manager. If you believe managers are the ones who create things then yes he was a creator. And his group was in charge of probably the least interesting part of the architecture.

He left the company and will probably say anything to flog his book. No self respecting architecture person will talk in terms of "more powerful".

@CGI Sony are targetting the WRONG technical achievements. They should release KZ2 with local coop rather than make it look extremely fancy. Consider that 3x as many people play locally instead of online theres the difference. How can a game like KZ2 ever live up to games like Gears, Halo and Call of Duty when it doesn't include that one basic, simple feature that has set consoles apart from computers since generation 1. I won't be able to play KZ2 as much as I would like to because I can't just take the big screen Bravia all to myself. I have to include others and the only way to include others is with the Xbox 360.