Like I said Carmack knows what he's talking about. Rage looks better than anything else on console by some way. Look at this brand new screenshot. Maybe people should listen to him about PS3 power.

So basically what you're saying is, the PS3 is the weakest link, right?  And how did you come to this conclusion? Nothing on the 360, (at least at the moment), looks as good as Killzone 2 or the soon to come Uncharted 2.  And going further by your reasoning, the 360 should also not have any methods to help in it's development, right?  See what i'm getting at?  Don't count your chickens before they hatch, because as far as I know, the 360 doesn't have anything that approaches the technology and graphics of Rage either.

Carmack said that at the end of development, both consoles would be even.  That was so sneaky of you, trying in a roundabout way to downplay the achievements and capabilities of the PS3, while uplifting the 360.  Does anyone not notice this?  RAZurrection is basically saying the PS3 is inferior to the 360, and developing for it has led to downgrades.  If I know the PS3 fans on this site, they aren't going to take this lightly!  Prepare yourself for a war RAZ. LMAO! 

A longer singleplayer than uncharted

Seperate co-operative missions

A MASSIVE improvement in both artistic (i think) and technical (Proven) prowess compared to uncharted 1.

In game gameplay recording feature.

10 player multiplayer

i guess Naughty Dog are just being lazy- you said that about 3 months ago when none of these features were implemented and youre still saying it? Your statement is wrong, end of story.

Like I said Carmack knows what he's talking about. Rage looks better than anything else on console by some way. Look at this brand new screenshot. Maybe people should listen to him about PS3 power.

Carmacks saying that apparently.

Rage looks and runs better than both, especially Uncharted 2 which looks identical to Uncharted 1.

Why does the 360 version need help? It's running at a solid 60fps like it's high-end PC counterpart...a year before release as Carmack and God intended, this is why no-one is making excuses like "if only Carmack got help from MS 1st and second party developers blah, blah, blah"" because... its a reality.

And you can keep hoping that it will, in the interim we PC & Xbox hardcorites will revel in TRURAGISM knowing that ours with certainty, does, if the PS3 ever makes it, we'll make space.

You're the one suggesting that a team that's built an engine far beyond any of Sonys exclusive offerings needs to do things differently, just because the PS3 isn't keeping up for these 5th/6th generation engines (it's been coming for a while now though). All i'm saying is that they really don't, because from the 1st party stuff as has been shown so far (released and unreleased) there's nothing that remotely comes close, let alone with 60fps, open world split-screen caveats.

Uncharted was a short game anyway, to be longer than it is not exactly pushing the envelope.

LAZY! A not lazy developer would have the full campaign as co-op, rather then a multi-player mode that can be played co-operatively.

Looks just like Uncharted 1 with motion-blur really, Edge magazine agrees too.

Fair enough.

LAZY! A multi-player mode should have been in the original in the first place, this is just an example ND not being as lazy as when they made Drakes Fortune . Hell even Dark Sector has a multi-player mode FFS, it's a standard really. It least in non-Sony games.

Uh, i'm sure I was familiar with all of those features back then, it's very bare minimum stuff, very lazy.

Here's what they need to do to not be lazy -

*Implement full Campaign co-op play with split-screen support (including system link and Online)

*Implement split-screen support for the already existing multi-player modes (including system link and Online)

Pretty straight forward no? Gears 1 & 2 did it, Resident Evil 5 does it, no reason for Uncharted 2 not to do it...unless the PS3 is maxed out ...or Naughty Dog are just lazier then Epic and Capcom.

well it looks as impressive as kilzone 2.

yes that ingame from the beginning of the game.

thread title is defintely right, the rage runs faster on xboys

Something that looks more beautiful/better to the eye does not mean it has more processing power... When people finally figure that out?

Some people just don`t want to get it.

I got it...I have to swap multiple dvd`s for some 360 games. No big deal.

More people got it...you have to put up with 30fps Rage and some bad ports of 360 games if you buy a ps3. No big deal. But no disc swapping...ever.

Now if we all get it...that will be sweet.

Let me just say this "RAZurrection"....at the moment, the PS3 is the reigning champion of consoles, in terms of graphics and technical achievements, and may I remind you that it is not yet 3 years old. If that is not a testament to it's capabilities, for now and in the future, I do not know what you would call it. Basically, do not dismiss the PS3 before it can truly be harnessed. Of course, this goes to the 360 as well;however, that isn't the problem here. You are incriminating the PS3 for holding back Rage, yet you dismiss the problems that have arisen from developing on the 360.

Yes, that's right, if you think the development is all roses when it comes to Rage on the 360, you are terribly mistaken. As stated in the interview, it is having texture resolution problems.
Note: Resolution problems on the 360 are as big a problem, as frame rate problems on the PS3. Fair share of troubles, no?

PS: I no longer wish to debate this RAZ, this is my stance, and I am sticking to it!