DeadGzuz said:
Of course no mention of the ugly dithering artifact on the 360 side, should I gasp with surprise?
Here's food for thought. Take a look at
Richard's BC2 comparison article. Especially the part where Rich compares the difference in screen tearing.
Richard states that bc2 360 has "a small, but noticeable advantage in terms of screen-tear." According to Rich's gameplay analysis, bc2 360 tears around 9% while bc2 ps3 tears around 16%. So, the difference is around 7%. One can conceivably conclude that bc2 360 has a small but noticeable advantage in terms of scree tearing.
Let's see what Rich has to say about tearing in
JC2.
Tearing in jc2 ps3: "The game maintains v-sync throughout, making for a higher consistency in image quality as you play."
Tearing in jc2 360: "In the course of this video a mere eight per cent of the 60Hz output of the Xbox 360 consists of torn frames."
So, that's about 8% difference. One can conceivably conclude that jc2 ps3 has a small but noticeable advantage in terms of scree tearing. But, curiously, such wording is absent in the jc2 comparison article but instead Rich lauds that the 360 version merely tears 8% of the time.
Judging by the tone of Rich's articles and his posting history over at beyond3d, he seems to be more familiar with the 360 architecture. That doesn't necessarily mean Rich is bias against the ps3 but due to his familiarity with the 360 architecture, whenever he compares the difference between 360/ps3 multi-platform games, he invariably goes more in-depth with the 360 versions and might be unintentionally propping up the 360 versions more than the ps3 versions.
Anyway, there are enough sites out there that do these types of comparisons so it's best to check all of them before deciding on which version to get.