CoD5 is like 30 bucks, but for some reason CoD4 is selling for 60$ on amazon.com ... i wonder why....

can't believe people are still commenting on this...

to me, GoW1 was a grittier story than GoW2, in my opinion

FighterHayabusa, ur forgetting one thing, the storyline... don't tell me R2's storyline is better...

cspowered, are you poor or something?

i would prefer the consoles, for my opinion, because i don't really feel like getting off my ass and getting video cards and RAM every 6 months, i rather just stick to what i have

i don't know if i'm right or wrong, but did GS activate the super white lighting on the ps3 versions of the pics? because i play dead space in a dark room and it isn't as dark as the ones here... and CoD5 is much more detailed and brighter... i think GS has a grudge against the ps3... wanting it to look bad...

obviously the PC's graphics will be much better, since you can enhance the graphics and FPS by increasing RAM and replacing the video card. its a stupid idea adding PCs to the comparison because obviously its better!

azren, i totally agree, they have the technology they're just not f***ing using them!

there is something wrong with the dead space pictures, why the hell are there dark lines near Issac's back in the PS3 version? Only COD: WaW and Madden win the 360 graphics, the PS3 wins the rest. I just don't understand... how come the 360's graphics are better in those games when the PS3 is using Blue-Ray technology?! It doesn't make sense! Either it's the console itself or the CD... obviously PS3 has the better CD, but what is in the 360 that gives off those cool graphics? I own both and i'm not a fanboy in anyway of those two, its just the games that i care about (gears of war 2 on 360, resistance 2, LBp, killzone 2 on PS3!)!