UltimateNinja9, well done reading general articles on the subject of the PS3 vs. 360 but lacking any real knowledge on the subject. Game developers are lazy but Sony is a genius for trying to rework the entire architecture of PC and gaming development?
Did you ever think that it isn't game developers that are lazy but that it's increasingly more difficult to go about programming for the architecture scheme that Sony implements? Don't forget to combine that with the horrific tools they provide developers. But I guess we should listen to you since you have all the experience in the world and discredit all the talented game developers that speak out on the topic.
As far as Folding@Home goes, I wouldn't be surprised if the PS3 was much better then anything else. Seeing as the whole console is built around the CPU handling EVERYTHING. But for gaming the strength of the xbox GPU combined with it's CPU makes up any difference and puts both on level playing ground. It's like running "Super Pi" on your PC. Sure having fast times is proof of your increased CPU & Memory speeds that might make some programs run faster (Solitaire, Word, Notepad), but at a certain point it doesn't exactly add anything to your gaming experience. Thats where higher "3DMarks" come into play. Folding@Home doesn't use any GPU power does it? So obviously the PS3 will win out, but to use it as some type of proof that the PS3 is better suited for gaming is ridiculous. Furthermore, why discredit the 360 (or any PC for that matter) when every little bit counts? Seems rather stupid to me. Maybe all those PC users that have been running this crap on their old PC's should just shut them off now because obviously they mean nothing. He should choose his words a little better I think.This post has been edited by jaygould30: May 3 2007, 07:56 PM