How are video games any different than any other form of entertainment? I know they are interactive but I have seen some PG-13 movies and read some books/comics that are more violent and sexualized than a Mature rated game, not to mention that the REALLY violent or sexualized games like God of War have violence so over the top that any kid with at least half of a brain knows that it is not real, not right, and in many cases not possible. Yet the government thinks that video games are simply turning our kids into merciless killers. Now, I AM against 10 year olds playing Grand Theft Auto and the like, but that is on the parents' shoulders. If you don't want your kids playing violent games DON'T BUY THEM. P.S. These aggressive tests are not accurate because certain people are just naturally more aggressive (even if they have a control they are still more than likely inaccurate.)

Now, back when ps3 first launched, yes, you could notice the 360 was much better. But now, the differences are so minuscule on multi-platforms, no one can tell unless you look at them side by side. Most of the time it just comes down to which system the developers were originally programming it for. A ps3 exclusive like uncharted 2 is going to look better than a multiplatform like Arkham Asylum because all of Naughty Dog was committed to making it work to the ps3's strengths. With a multi-platform, compromises have to be made to get the same game to work with different hardware. If they originally wrote it for 360 and then adapted it to ps3, the ps3 is obviously going to have a few flaws, especially when developers have said how difficult it is to work with the cell processor (if your not making a ps3 exclusive). The 360 usually is slightly better because making games for 360 is a lot like making games for a computer because they have similar hardware, the cell processor is new, no-one's used it before, and the developers need to be fully committed to fully take advantage of its power.