Here is a nice little story I found to help everyone out. If you read you will see that both systems are the same in graphics but it is "THE PROGRAMMERS" that are making the graphics as you see them now. Xbox is easier to program verse the PS3. So don't pick one system over the other because this little war of who is better.........well is just nuts and lame. In my opinion PS2 is the best lol sold the most systems to date and no one is close to NPD records. "XBox 360 Xenon processor’s teraflops processing power to the PS3’s Cell teraflops performance, game developers largely agree that the 360’s Xenon is the far easier processor to program (”[unlike with the Cell,] porting between multi-core PC platforms and the Xbox 360 will be fairly trivial”), and its three powerful general purpose microprocessors offer more flexibility to programmers than does the Cell’s single main processor/seven specialized processors combo. Those concerned about number crunching power are missing the bigger picture: the two systems are, overall, on par with each other. As Sega Racing Studio boss Guy Wilday said just last week: “We’ve sat [programs we've developed for each platform] side by side and you’re really hard-pushed to tell the difference. I think that’s a testament to where you are with both platforms.” The PS3 offers a more innovative design but is difficult to program, Wilday said, while the 360 is powerful, very simple to program, and has excellent programmer support. As Anandtech deduced (a must-read for those who want to understand the two systems) early in the game when conducting a technical analysis of the relative merits of the finalized motherboards of the two systems in great detail: any performance difference between the 360 and the PS3 is basically “a wash.” Each system has its merits, however, specifically the PS3’s ostensibly “greater” processing power, due to drawbacks in Sony’s implementation, leaves the PS3, as the sum of many processors and parts, basically equivalent (performance wise) to the 360’s very flexible and programmer-friendly implementation of the 3-core system. So if the systems offer essentially equal performance, it comes down to three things: the online experience, the games, and the price. Reasonable minds can differ, but for my money, the 360 is still offering consumers the best buy in each of those categories." Hope that helped everyone. And I am no fan of just one system, I have all the systems just because I like some games that are on one system and some that are on another (like halo and Super smash bros and FF or MGS)

This is to Drknssflls it is because developers have had more time to work with the xbox and have figured it out how to push the game and system together while the PS3 all they know is that the blue ray can hold 50gb. If you go and look at games that are made by their own manufacture you will notice that the graphics are out of this world because they know how to push the system and the games "together" to get the best pictures and quality. This is just what I speculate so I could be so very wrong but w/e. No matter how little the change I notice from the graphics from both systems, I have fun playing the games on my PS3.

The color I have noticed is better on the 360 than the PS3 (which I hate to say). The PS3 seems to have a bigger lighting that seems to make the games look a bit lowing in graphics in most pictures but I agree it is more a software issue than the system. Funny thing is that I never really noticed it when I play my PS3.......interesting.