Does that mean they tinkered with some of the info (microsoft not IGN) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It means they presented it in a deceptive way to make their system come out on top as much as possible. The statistics they gave for their own system might be true, but they did a lot of guesswork on the PS3, and obviously they're going to "guess" in their own favor. They might also have left things out of the comparison that would drastically change the results, etc, etc, etc. In other words, they did not tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Whenever you see one of these comparisons released by ANY of the people involved in the comparison, just gobble down the whole damn salt shaker before you read. 99.9999% of the time they fudged to make the "home system" look like it's years ahead of the competition - whether it's true or not. For all intents and purposes, these are cleverly crafted deceptions created by somebody's marketting department - in other words, they're about as meaningful as a poster of some happily smiling model, who's probably never played a game in her life, posing with a controller over a hype slogan. You want real info? Wait until truly independent (IE, not being funded in any way by either company) third parties, with the equipment and know-how to scientifically test things, get ahold of both companies' release-spec machines. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> even if ms made it look like it in there favor atleast its not as bad as sony chart... making it out to be way way more stronger Ms gives u something thats atleast sorta believeable. The only game that looked that great on the ps3 was killzone 2 and everyone knows thats fake as hell and no way the makers of killzone 1 could pull that off. sony is hype hype hype and all the fanboys are eating it right up.