No, it' s NOT just what Sony and Microsoft are saying at all.
Sony says PS3 is twice as powerful in all areas than 360, ...and Microsoft are saying that 360 is more powerful and easier to develop for.
Yeah, pretty much, and the PS3 DOES have a processor advantage, but 360 has a GPU advantage.
THAT, is what DEVELOPERS are saying. And not just developers who are working with just one of the two consoles, but developers who are working with both.
Anybody who understands the specs can see it anyway. Generally someone sees higher numbers and think it must be better or whatever, but unless you understand what does exactly what and how and exactly what the output would be when that component if combined with another, ...then you can only hypothesize.
I know how a PS2 works because i get to play about with their insides daily and do all kind of funky shit. I can tell you that PS2 has a phenomenal amount of bandwidth which is one of the reasons why PS2 games advance visually so often and why they have far surpassed even Sony' s own predictions.
Because i get to sit in a lab and have to look at games technology on a regular basis, that gives me an understanding of what does what.
PS3 has a CPU advantage and 360 has a GPU advantage, why is that so hard to believe?!
As for Revolution, ...you won' t be disappointed with it' s graphical capabilities. The gap between 360/PS3 and NR will be less than you expect because Revolution just does things in a slightly different way.
Obvilion is a nice looking game yes?! Well i fully expect similar results from the best NR games (about 2/3 years after launch), and while 360 will have far surpassed that by then, it wouldn' t exactly make NR redundant would it.
BTW, Adam has information about Revolution that he' s not allowed to talk about. Perhaps we could ask him to read through ths stuff and see if he' s permitted to tell us that it' s incorrect or " unlikely" , rather than trying to get him to tell us what it is...