I have to interject here, the gap is BIGGER THAN EVER. John Carmack has gone on the record that PC gaming is capable of 10x processing load of any of the consoles (even PS3).ph0b0s123 said:But the gap is not as big as it was in the PS2 days, when completely different versions of the same game were made for the console market verses the PC market. That's when games unique to the PC were more prevalent.Mcoffey said:A good pc is actually many times more powerful than a console. That power wont get you much since we haven't had a game that chews up rigs and spits them out like Crysis since then though. Since most games are made for consoles, all that extra power goes mostly unused.ph0b0s123 said:The dumb thing is the PC does not have 'exclusives'. Just games other platforms of the time could not handle. So now consoles are in the same ball park as PC's as far a processing, exclusives were always going to decrease. Piracy or not PC games sales are always generally going to be less than consoles sales, so people go to the bigger market. You can see this when you notice that most games now are designed for consoles and then ported to the PC after the fact.
PS3 has 256MB of system memory. A typical PC today has 4 GIGAbytes of System memory that is much faster, that is 16x the capacity. And it's pretty common to find PCs with 8GB of system memory. 360's PowerPC based CPU is small potatoes compared to Intels beasts and AMD's crazy octo-core processors.
Completely different games ARE made, Battlefield 3 is a whole different beast on PC than on console. PC gets extra physics, DX11 graphics and physics plus extra model detail. I remember back in the day, Turok 2 and Quake 3 were the same games on Console and PC but just with differing levels of detail.
GTA Vice City and San Andreas had the exact same content between PS2 and PC.