That's my guess too. The texture sizes are more important than the max resolution anyway, since the max resolution should be assumed to be whatever PC users hack it to be.4x higher resolution is pretty vague. I'm guessing it uses 1080p as a base, so I wonder what internal resolution the X360/PS3 versions are running at. They must be pretty low. Either that or they mean the max resolution it can do is like 2560x1600. Siliconera didn't source their quote, so guessing it's some kind of translation from a Japanese press release.
Yes, I'm not arguing that, I'm just talking about coding-wise. They've been cross-developing with the pc in mind from the start this time around. I don't see them needing an extra month and a half for the pc version. I don't know all that much about the process, but wouldn't they be rendering in house at the highest resolution and downscaling for the shitty consoles, rather than the other way around? Ok, now I'm not even making any sense to myself, but do you get what I mean?Personally I think that's alotdifferent. Higher texture resolution + being able to run at a display's native resolution = pretty huge jump in image quality. Anytime that you have to upscale shit it becomes a blurry and usually jagged mess. This is even more true the bigger your display gets.
Can you justify buying an overpriced 360 game if you plan on getting the PC version a month later?360 version is only there to sate our thirst for a couple weeks or a month until the real version is out on the PC~