Just when we thought we might have had the 360 60fps vs PS3 30fps problems behind us here's NHL 08 to prove us wrong.  Apparently that's not the worst part about the whole thing, according to a Finnish reviewer the PS3's version of NHL 08 feels like the 360's 07 version of the game...  PS3 sports fans don't seem to be catching a break these days or at least footballs or hockey pucks at 60fps anyways :(

source:  http://n4g.com/NewsCom-60107.aspx#C377000

ps.  G*$&#^ damn you EA and your "lazy programmers" I'm going with 2K they're better anyways... Umm what's that, the PS3 version of NHL 2K8 is also 30fps?  What?!?!?!!  Microsoft bought them all off!!!  It's a conspiracy I tell ya!  A conspiracy!  /sarcasm

omg.. Why doesnt sony do something about this?

Nobody will care about these games, sports are not hardcore enough anyway /sarcasm

This will hurt Sony for years. If their "superior hardware" doesn't demonstrate any "superior graphics" then nobody will have any reason to pay more for their console.

@Footbag: "This will hurt Sony for years. If their "superior hardware" doesn't demonstrate any "superior graphics" then nobody will have any reason to pay more for their console. "

 Give me a break, does the thought of that somehow make you happy?  NHL 08 is an EA game, didn't EA just say that their devs aren't "used" to the PS3 yet (and Ubisoft's GRAW 2 team said that it was not harder to program for, just took time to get used to).  Let not forget how great DiRT's PS3 graphics are, or hmmm, UT3, Ninja Gaiden Sigma, Heavenly Sword.  The list of great games demonstrating the power of the PS3 (which also demonstrates the lack of experience certain developers have with it ) just keeps growing.  Please you have not made a statement of fact (this will NOT hurt Sony for years), this is a statement of FUD.

 In response to Legend11's post,  I agree but its Sony that have created powerful hardware with a steep learning curve.  But with time I see the PS3 (if it gets enough dev support) making games that compared to a 10 in graphics on XBox 360, something like a 11.5 (not much better but better).

Not to be saying idiotic things, but I think microsoft may take over EA. Or atleast partner with them (did not say they will but it looks like it). And are trying to release old ports on the ps3 in order to make a little money.

I really hope every EA brand game is a flop on the PS3 till they stop being lazy retards.

It's totally stupid... It won't hurt Sony - very few people buy a system for sport games (we'll know how many next week). People buy system mostly for first party games... Some people think angry PS3 users will sell own system and buy an X. Nope. It doesn't work this way. They just won't buy this crap.  End of the story. Only EA lose.

Knowing EA they just establish teams and fundings in relation to it's customer base. Just like you can afford to spend more on a Pirates movie then on a Bourne movie.

Giving the fact that the PS3 is fairly new and the news that the PS3 won't sell 11 million by march it's considerable that they just had equal funding for both platforms. And since programming the PS3 is not more difficult but something you have to learn (aka more difficult), it was to be expected that the PS3 version wouldn't be as good as the XBox 360 version.
The statement can be underlined by the fact that early X360 ports were as good as the PS3 versions but took a year longer. So when they come out at the same time you could have guessed what the result would be.

But from a developer standpoint it's pretty obvious: you don't make games to entertain but to entertain AND make money. And a game that looks better is most often more expensive, this is certainly the case with the PS3.
So making a great looking PS3 game would cost more, has only 40% of the consumer base, is more expensive to distribute because Blue-Ray disks cost more then DVD's. Combine that with the fact that the extra power can't come from the GPU because it's comparable but from the CPU that in the PS3's case is a chip made for grid computing. Multicore has been done already for graphical enviroments in the 90's but multiple co-CPU's are new for as far as i know (beside some multiple symmetrie applications)

So they say that programming the cell is just something you have to learn, but wethher it's hard or just something you have to learn it costs time and money to do so. And you just can't make a game look that much better to make up the 4 to 10 comsumer base.

Compare it to the fact that you have three times the disk space on the PS3: they will just cut some weak points out of the game. And however you have three times the disk space, the memory is the same. So games will be larger, but will always look the same.
But weren't games supposed to be just fun?