Graphic differences between Systems

A few days ago i noticed graphic differences between my friends 360 NBA LIVE 2009 and my PS2 NBA LIVE 2009:
Most people aren't putting any effort into PS2 games.
It's not like its a popular system, but why would they create the same game and have the less enhanced graphics on one of them?

The Xbox 360 is much more powerful than the PS2 thus it can handle more advanced graphics. No matter how much effort they would of put into the PS2 version it couldn't come anywhere near how good it looks on the Xbox 360 (or PS3 for that matter).

They still make the games for the PS2 because there is still a lot of people who only own a PS2 and not any of the newer consoles and contrary to what you said it actually is a very popular console. :P

This has got to be the most stupidest thing I've ever heard. One question, are you living in 2005? The freaking Xbox 360 and PS3 have the better graphics programed into the systems. They can't make a game the same graphics as the Xbox 360 for the PS2 because PS2 doesn't have the better graphic chip.(and no you can't switch chips the PS2 hardware can't take the newer graphic chip)

Playstation 2:
- GS "Graphics Synthesizer" clocked at 147 MHz
* Pixel pipelines: 16
* Video output resolution: 256x224 to 1280x1024 pixels
* 4 MB Embedded DRAM video memory bandwidth
o Texture buffer bandwidth: 9.6 GB/s
o Frame buffer bandwidth: 38.4 GB/s
* Overall Pixel fillrate: 16x147 = 2.352 Gpixel/s
* 32 MB System Memory

Xbox360:
- Xenos (custom ATI R500) GPU clocked at 500 MHz
* 48 unified shader pipelines (can run either pixel or vertex shaders)
+ Maximum texture fillrate: 8 Gpixel/s
* 10 MB Embedded DRAM video memory
* 512 MB System Memory
* Video Resolution 720p (1280x720)

The PS2 is from last generation, the 360 this gen. Of course there's a big graphical difference.

In comparison to the X360, my computer's card has 96 unified shader pipelines, 500mhz core, 320mb GDDR3 memory, 2560x1600 max resolution, and a texture fill rate of 24 billion/sec. And that's just mid-range these days. The brand new nVidia cards have 240 unified shader pipes, 1GB of video RAM and a texture rate of 48 billion/sec.

Sure, the X360 is much better than the older gen PS2, but its about 3 years behind technology of PC systems.

Is it really behind three years? It doesn't seem that way but I won't argue with you seeing you know a lot about gaming technology.

I got an old windows 98' computer and I can get awesome graphics of CoD 4 out of it, so really you can't compare a computer to any of the gaming systems because in the end the computer would be better.

It would only be better because you can just keep upgrading your computer and the graphics and all that good stuff, where as the Xbox 360 and PS3 are the same for about six or seven years, then a new console is released. I still, and always will prefer the consoles over the PC though. They are all great these days.