Good read without bias.

Nice to see something that doesn't say "X>Y" just points out how they are different. I would love to see a fully in depth view on both consoles that was entirely unbiased.

Thats too drastic. Obviously graphics arent everything but graphics make an experience too. Its all not all or none. UC2 is what it is because of the graphics, gameplay, platforming, environments, voice acting...many of th ehuge set pieces wouldnt be so if it were "scaled" down. oure making it too simple.

OT: I think most of us know when a team is working on a single platform they can get the most out of it. This is why for the most part, exclusives end up being moot and not really debatable. I think Alan Wake will be the 360's crown jewel whee its released, like Uncharted 2 is the PS3's.

The cell can have all the POTENTIAL in the world to be better, but if it isnt used it isnt better, so potential doesnt mean squat. I still dont notice glaring differences between Gears and Killzone or screens of UC2 and Alan Wake.....granted someones bound to cherry pick a couple and post them side by side, but each has its own charm to me.

This. Devs haven't been willing to do that for the 360 whereas it's seemed to be a necessity for the PS3.

That's changing now.

The original idea was, I believe, to not have a conventional GPU at all (imagine the developers then!).  However, in the end they struggled with Cell doing the lot and realised they needed to add a GPU of some sort.  Some articles I read at the time indicated that while the Cell might have done the lot (I find it doubtful myself) it was also a case of having something more familiar for developers.  Either way a GPU was added.

The upshot is that, in the worst cases, games just use the PS3 GPU limitations and all (which is why we saw the really bad ports early on, which effectively were using the PS3 in the worst way possible).  Things improved as developers changed code to better use PS3 architecture, but even now this is still an issue - for example I'd be willing to bet some of the Bayonetta issues are due to taking code for 360 GPU and just dumping it on PS3, with the resulting performance being poor because only the GPU in PS3 is being used and the Cell wasn't being leveraged at all for graphics.  The usual quick fix is reduce graphical fidelity rather than actually change the core code, hence the muddy port.

OT - good article, nothing new but at least clear and no bias I could sense.

cant be bothered to read all this...

Oh sweet Jesus !

Does anyone have a Facepalm pic handy......

so basically,in the end,you need a ps3 to get drake with his skin on :)

Well, he is sort of right - the 360 architecture is definately easier to code for and more forgiving of average code.  The PS3 requires really good clean code, and a specific approach to using the architecture to achieve the same results.

I know what you mean though, the final conclusion is a bit shaky to say the least.

I just despair....Reasonable

Given the comments on the boards you have to question how much coding the average forum member has done.

No coding experience is no bad thing. However when the self same members start making sweeping remarks about the nuances of programming, paradigms used and other constraints you really do have to wonder about their motives for comment.