Well, I had some credibility for you, Crimson, until you said this:
The PS3 has double the power that the X-Box 360 will have. The specs of both have been released. Just do some simple searching on www.gamespot.com.
No, the THEORETICAL FLOPS of the PS3 is twice as high as the 360, but they're designed differently. For one thing, even as J Allard said, FLOPS are only 20% of the gaming processing equation, integer performance is the other 80%. Xbox360's CPU has 6 hardware threads, vs. Cell's 2, allowing for triple the integer performance. They both have similar amount of transistors and while PS3 can say a bigger number, 360 architecture is smarter.
Another example is the Xenos, which is the 360GPU. The RSX (PS3 GPU) sticks to tried and true ideals of what a GPU should be, while the Xenos does new things, like a universal pixel/vertex shader pipeline, meaning that unlike the RSX, which will probably run 60% efficiency because either the pixel or vertex shaders lie idle, the Xenos can run at 100% efficiency off the bat because both vertex and pixel shaders fill in the same pipeline, meaning that the GPU is hardly ever idle, increasing GPU power.
I dare not mention the 10MB EDRAM ON THE BOARD of the Xenos that allows for free 4xFSAA and other rendering effects, or that the PS3 split up the main memory, inconveniencing developers, or so on and so on.
PS3 can say all the theoretical numbers they want, they're just hyping it up. The 360 is simply the better designed machine.
*Sigh*
You have a very skewed view of computer gaming.
I've been playing PC games for over a decade and most of my favorite games are PC games. Nice try.
1. Computer gaming is much easier to manipulate. Mods can be created for games to change them into completely new games. Can't do that with a console.
They can, but most mods are trashy amateurish stuff. Sure, it's nice that you can mod games, but it's usually only a handful of games that mods ever take off past the 'oh, let's duct tape a flash light to a gun' stage.
2. Computer gaming is much faster. Halo 2 is fucking boring as hell online. The action is slower than shit, even on the smallest of maps with a decent number of players.
That's why it's one of the most-played non-MMO games in the world, right? The action is slow for pacing. Halo 2 isn't UTx where you run around and click on each other, you've actually gotta think about what guns you pick up, which vehicles to drive, strategy, teaming, so on, which usually never ever happens in ANY PC online game and I've played tons of them.
3. Computer gaming allows you to set the game to how YOU want it, unlike consoles where you are limited to what you can do to the settings of a game.
That doesn't really make sense. Outside of modwork, many of the same options stay the same platform to platform.
4. Computers are used for more than JUST games. Having a decent video card is usefull for 3D rendering programs. Having a decent sound card is NEEDED for decent recording. Having that added ram is almost NEEDED for photoshop.
But we're not talking about utility rigs, we're talking about gaming rigs. We're talking about spending thousands just to play a handful of nice-looking games on your PC. Being able to run Photoshop smoother is just a nice benefit.
Your view on computer gaming is extremely skewed. Consoles are fine, but the true great games are CPU only I.E. Half-Life, Age of Empires, Warcraft, EQ, and many others.
HL showed up on the PS2 and HL2 shows up on the Xbox. The rest I'll hand you because they're the PC's bread and butter.