Originally Posted by gamespot post
The problem with comparing launches instead of comparing what is going on right now is that Microsoft's launch was a year ago...and it's graphics still hold up, and even exceed those of the PS3. Had Sony launched a year ago like they were supposed to, than that would be a valid arguement. Unfortunately for Sony, that was not the case. From the look of things, it appears as though Sony is launching last years console this year - which is why the graphics are roughly the same, or worse than the 360s. And as many people have said, most of these games were developed side by side with the 360 in anticipation of Sony keeping its word and launching when it said it would. They look the way they look because Sony's graphics card is hampered by terrible design decisions. Period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is what the 360 people are trying to say, for you Sony fanboys: Sony promised that their console would blow everything else under the sun out of the water. They promised that the PS3 would make the 360 look like "Xbox 1.5". They promised that "the next generation doesn't start until we say it does." They promised superior graphics, physics, games, etc. Instead, they have released a console that costs $200 more but is roughly equal to Microsoft's offering, despite waiting an extra year to release it. They have included a lot of non-game features, but have clearly neglected the gaming side of their GAMING CONSOLE. IGN and Gamespot, and anybody with 20/20 vision can clearly see that Microsoft's textures are sharper, the lighting is better and more balanced, and the framerate on the 360 is also better. Talking about Sony's 7 SPE's is pointless, because they are simply fancy floating point calculators. I heave seen interviews with dozens of game developers, analysts, and engineers who say that these extra cores are nearly useless for gaming purposes. So saying that Sony will somehow catch up and bypass Microsoft in the graphics department only shows ignorance about the technical facts of the two consoles.
From what I have read, Sony's console would do great at multi-tasking spreadsheets, or quickly calculating complex math problems, but is not very good at displaying graphics or aiding in smoothing out framerates and game play. Eventually, a programmer will be born who can somehow make the PS3 games look as good as Microsoft's titles, but it won't be soon.
Those who say "Just wait until Sony releases their 2nd gen" must keep in mind that Sony's 2nd gen will be competing with Microsoft's THIRD (3rd) generation of games. Do you think Microsoft is simply going to stand by and stop improving the graphics of their games? Not bloody likely.
Lastly, games will probably continue to be more or less the same on both systems (advantage, Microsoft) because most titles in the future will be cross platform titles. If you read gaming news, you know that developers are jumping ship to Microsoft like rats on a sinking log. Why would they be doing this if they (the people who actually design and create games) thought that Sony had a bright and shining future?