Ok, for not looking to talk crap, that seems to be the first thing you did.

"I (and other people i'm sure) have absolutely no desire to build a computer that will be more or less useless in 2 years time to play new games."

a) there are people that don't mind and in fact look forward to building a new computer.

b) you still need a PS3 to play UT3.

c) My 2-year-old rig, which was hardly cutting-edge two years ago, can still play UT3 on the RECOMMENDED SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS.

d) Even if you don't meet the minimum requirements, frequently it's just a matter of upgrading a specific component, not buying a new PC. Most of these upgrades cost a fraction of what it would cost to simply purchase a PS3. 

"With a ps3 i can play what i'm sure will be a great game (UT3) with the right controls (kb & mouse) without having to pay up a new pc."

You still have to pay up a new PS3 if you don't have one. Funny enough, I don't have to pay anything since my 2-year-old rig can handle UT3 with aplomb. 

I somehow have trouble believing that the PS3 will be capable of handling games like UT4 or UT5 on pc level without being dumbed down by quite a bit. I mean it just doesn't have the hardware imo. How do people intend to play new pc games when the ps3 has only 256 mb of ram? Even if the cell can help out, i somehow doubt that the chip can make up for the loss of 1gb that will probably be needed for the games stated above. Further on, graphics. I'll be damned if someone dishes out a gfx stunner like crysis on the PS3. Last time i heard the rsx was no more powerful that a nvidia 7800GT card. so where do you think the PS3 will get the juice to actually create such beautiful gfx?

Ah, wrong up there Wojtas.

The PS3 has only 512MB, not 256. Also, the RSX is exactly the same as a G70 better known as GeForce 7800 GTX, just at 90nm (no, the G71 is a bit optimized, less transistors), a tad bit faster and half memory bandwidth (128-bit), compared to it's PC counterpart (256-bit).

But everything else you said is perfectly correct :D

it is not 512mb, it is 256mb*2.

about UT3, do we know WHEN the PS3 version will be released ?
late this year ? early in 2008 ?

...and I can already foresee another PS3 bottleneck: Texture sizes.

The demo apparently contains medium-quality textures, most likely to reduce the size of the download.  However, this much we do know about DirectX (from http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_geforce_8800_preview/):

"Virtualized memory for the GPU – In the past, the amount of texture storage was limited by the amount of onboard memory the graphics processor held. Now textures can be stored on system memory, eliminating the memory bottleneck on texture size.

"Increase in memory texture - increased the maximum texture dimensions in DX10. They were 2048x2048 or 4096x4096 in DirectX 9, and in DX10 they're 8192x8192."

If memory serves me correctly (pun not intended), Unreal Tournament 2004 uses 2048x2048 (max) textures under DirectX 9. If Unreal Tournament 3 uses the maximum 8192x8192 texture size, then I can categorically say, flat-out, that there is no way in a pig's ass that the PS3, with only 256x256 memory, be able to handle a 16-player deathmatch with such high textures. I would even say with 4096x4096 textures the PS3 would have severe issues just trying to keep up.

 Lame to reply to your own post, but hey ho.

Check the rest of the kit on this test rig:

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=464&type=expert&pid=2

X6800?! Thats $800+ cpu

Raptor drive, thats not cheap...

(Its the same as my rig at home, cept I'm running 2x 7950gx2s) 

 If you think Call of Duty 2 sucks, what is the point in talking about COD4? Play the demo and you'll find that COD4 is COD2 with better graphics and not set in WWII (it was a cool playthrough the demo though). 

@Morgyn: At that resolution, I seriously doubt framerate is CPU limited anymore :P also, having a Raptor actually doesn't makes much difference in frame-rate compared to modern 16MB cache HDD, the difference would be in loading times, but it would be negligible (spelling?) unless both are heavily fragmented. No offense if you have a Raptor tho :P

@your mother: Actually, I'm pretty sure some developers have already mentioned what you say... I would post a source, but I'm lazy and I don't really care on proving that :)

 I much perfer COD4 over COD2, its the best one since the original. 

a must buy... in the PC.