Yeah so what the PC is better. It's still only very sligtly different in visuals, and surely the system they used costed over a grand after all the bells and wistle's.... I'll stick with my consol's.
Graphics comparisons offer a really ironic look into the console wars. I think here I have to admit I've always seen ATI as a higher quality product than the Nvidia(used in ps3's). This coupled with the 360's unified shader technology seems to be out performing Nvidia's conventional powerhouse. I still think the PS3 is a well thought out machine, and has many advantages over the 360 (remember all the overheating problems and the "ring of death" issues?). I own both consoles and I prefer my PS3 but not for the reason most people choose Sony. I like the controller so much more than the 360's. As laughable as any "consol war" argument, for me it's all about a good controller, and for me that's the PS3's biggest appeal. So I think a graphics comparison is really telling me what I already suspected. Nvidia's video card for the PS3 is being outperformed by ATI's card for the Xbox 360.
Huh? Spend 400-1000 dollars so I don't have to wait a few seconds. Considering the man hours required to finance such a purchace, I think I'll just get a new Ipod and use it as an external drive or something dual purpose like that. I feel sorry for anybody considering this as a viable upgrade.
Man I have an xbox 360 and I can't tell you what my gamer score is..... What's the point anyway? If the system is flawed to the point that you can "easily" boost your score then who really cares what your score is? For instance, who walks around talking about what a great thumb wrestler he/she is? I don't understand you people.
jahoousa's comments