• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Red Dead Redemption - 360 & PS3 comparison (Bish-approved!)

R

RiotPelaaja

Remedy
Hanmik said:
Ok. rockstar are not my favourite PS3 developers at the moment..

1. PS3 version is not up top par with the X360 version. Even though it has been proven by countless developers that it is possible to get similar games on both consoles.

2. Rockstar did not expect big Sales of this game in Europe on the PS3. Because of that there is a serious SHORTAGE of copies in the stores this friday. Every European website has some info regarding this. Some say that only Preorders before the 15th. of May are sure to get their copy. Others say that the game available on the 28th. of may because of shortage.
And one store I called (in Denmark) recieved an Email from Rockstars Danish partners, which said "That due to bigger demand than expected, there is serious shortage of this game in Scandinavia and the rest of Europe. they are making more copies, but they will not hit the European stores before 28th. of may.

How the **** can Rockstar not expect big demand in Europe for the PS3..? are they living under a rock.? (pun intended).
And how can they not develop a game that is up to par with the X360 version.. ?

We are living in 2010 not 2007---
Click to expand...

Actually the PS3 shortage issue has much more to do with the fact that Sony certified the game very late, which made hitting the 21st of May date near impossible. 2K and Rockstarare definitely not under-estimating the sales success, but do understand that in Scandinavia the local distributors buy the amount of copies that they think they can sell and while this is an Rockstar GTA-like game, most of the distributors here actually think a good western game wont be a big hit.
 
T

TheThunder

Member
NemesisPrime said:
TBH a lot of cross-platform games have been "identical" because the 360 version has been downgraded/not upgraded a bit. This is a sad cross-platform trend where new versions of a game get an improved engine on PS3 to try to be identical while the 360 version uses the same engine as the previous game in the series with only very minor tweaks.

A bit of a pity but we have seen it before in the previous gen with PS2/XBox ports.
Click to expand...

What, are you serious :lol ?
 
G

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
NemesisPrime said:
TBH a lot of cross-platform games have been "identical" because the 360 version has been downgraded/not upgraded a bit. This is a sad cross-platform trend where new versions of a game get an improved engine on PS3 to try to be identical while the 360 version uses the same engine as the previous game in the series with only very minor tweaks.
Click to expand...

This is sad, because...? It's not fair? Multiplatform development, in terms of resource focus or allocation is inherently not going to be as fair to any single platform.

If a team starts a project leading on 360 and then on their next project lead on PS3, that seems a fairly 'even' spread of focus between the two projects. It won't be as flattering to either system as focusing on just one for two projects, but that's multiplatform development for you.
 
Windom Earle

Windom Earle

Member
The-Warning said:
Me neither. I know there are legitimate mutli-console owners who want to know the differences
Click to expand...

Raises hand. Also I'm interested in tech, that's why I visit these threads.

The-Warning said:
but there's also others who are in it for the trolling lulz. This is their way of getting back for hearing about the beast UC2 so much. It balances things out for them :p
Click to expand...

The usual suspects have turned up, no surprise there.
 
W

WrikaWrek

Banned
The differences are pretty big, damn. What would concern me the most is the shimmering effect, and the blurriness that really kills some of the detail, particularly in the vegetation where Read Dead Redemption really shines.

Why would PS3 only owners care anyway. It's not like you have another choice, just pretend the 360 version doesn't exist. Calling this a shitty port, and finding it a pretext to troll the game or the developers just seems like pure stupidity in fashion.

There 2 consoles are different from each other, and they produce different results. Can't quite understand how some feel devs have to reach the same exact results on both.

Response goes straight to "Lazy" etc, well if it was the other way around would they be lazy? :lol Of course not.
 
G

GreekWolf

Member
The-Warning said:
This is their way of getting back for hearing about the beast UC2 so much. It balances things out for them :p
Click to expand...
8de09-NotSureIfSerious.jpg
 
Forsete

Forsete

Member
I wish all devs were like ND. However this Will do for the 6 months it takes for the ultimate version to get here.
 
S

skyfinch

Member
Forget foliage, frame rate, and LOD. Which version makes you feel like an actual cowboy after about 2-3 hours of game play?
 
Castle Doctrine

Castle Doctrine

Member
About the beast UC2 remark, I was mostly playing around that's why I added the :p

Mostly playing around. In the realm of the fanboy wars, I do believe there's some jealousy and annoyance of the twin beasts UC2 and GOW3. so these PS3/360 comparison threads are a little bit of payback. Of course no one is going to admit it.

:p
 
C

coopolon

Member
BeeDog said:
I don't buy the "but we multiplat owners need to know the pros and cons of each version" argument anymore.
Click to expand...

I own both a 360 and PS3. I don't care which console I buy games for (I actually hate both of them, I consider myself a PC gamer at heart), I just prefer to get the best version. Previous AAA games have been superior on the PS3, like Burnout Paradise and FFXIII. Many other games have been virtually identical, or least not appreciably different.

I pre-ordered the PS3 version because I heard about some vague PS3 DLC and thought it would be like Batman: AA.

Then, I realized the pre-order DLC was shit, so I was then at the point that I didn't care which version I got it for.

Thanks to this thread, I learned that the 360 version is clearly (and significantly) superior. I cancelled my PS3 pre-order and picked it up on 360, and am very happy that I did. I don't give a shit who wins the console wars. I just want to play the best looking games I possibly can.

I also don't think the PS3 version is shit, nor do I think that if I had gotten it I wouldn't have been able to enjoy it. But, I'm incredibly happy that this thread existed, people went out of their way to provide impressions and comparison shots, so that I could make an informed choice as a consumer.

Bungieware said:
I'd much rather see people I trust express their genuine feelings about these differences, however blunt they may be, than being reserved and repeating over and over that both versions are completely identical when in truth they are not.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. I don't care if it gives fuel to some pathetic 14 year olds whose egos are tied up with their console of choice. If there are differences, I want to know about to them, I don't want to pretend everything is identical so that PS3 kids and 360 kids can share a swingset during recess.
 
Vigilant Walrus

Vigilant Walrus

Member
Hanmik said:
Ok. rockstar are not my favourite PS3 developers at the moment..

1. PS3 version is not up top par with the X360 version. Even though it has been proven by countless developers that it is possible to get similar games on both consoles.

2. Rockstar did not expect big Sales of this game in Europe on the PS3. Because of that there is a serious SHORTAGE of copies in the stores this friday. Every European website has some info regarding this. Some say that only Preorders before the 15th. of May are sure to get their copy. Others say that the game available on the 28th. of may because of shortage.
And one store I called (in Denmark) recieved an Email from Rockstars Danish partners, which said "That due to bigger demand than expected, there is serious shortage of this game in Scandinavia and the rest of Europe. they are making more copies, but they will not hit the European stores before 28th. of may.

How the **** can Rockstar not expect big demand in Europe for the PS3..? are they living under a rock.? (pun intended).
And how can they not develop a game that is up to par with the X360 version.. ?

We are living in 2010 not 2007---
Click to expand...


I am not a coder, but the way I understand it, game development has always been easier on Xbox 360, simply because the dev kits, hardware are more reminisent(spelling?) of a the PC development platform, which developers are used too.

There are some cases where the PS3 version is stronger, and some where they are equal, but aren't we still at the point where the 360 versions far overweight the ps3 versions on a general basis? I am specifically thinking of the examples where there is a big difference - Like Bayonetta!

I think, like with Valve, Rockstar, even though they are one of the most skilled developers in the world, that they simply had to put priority on making a great game, and at least have it run in a certain way on one platform.
Since 360 is two/three cores, and ps3 is like 7-8-9 or something, maybe its also just easier to start developing on the one with two/three cores, and then chop it up, for the ps3 version, than go the other way.

It sounds complicated if its true that one of ps3's cores handles the AI, and another the sound and a third the physics. That's probably a lot of chopping up.
I am not excusing Rockstar for doing a bad port/optimization job, but ain't the real fault at Sony if they made it an extra hassle to develop for?
Game development is expenssive enough as it is(obviously). Devs dont need complicated working platforms.


But I wouldn't know. I am just pulling assumptions and generalisations out of my butt.
 
Windom Earle

Windom Earle

Member
The-Warning said:
so these PS3/360 comparison threads are a little but of payback. Of course no one is going to admit it.

:p
Click to expand...

Of course, this is what makes 70% of the comparison threads. Butthurt fanboys. Going in both ways of course. Sony fanboys gloating over FFXIII on 360 or Alan Wake. 360 fanboys getting their "revenge" with RDR now. Pathetic, but taking sides is just part of the human nature.

And no, nobody is going to admit it. The only answer you will get is ":lol"
 
M

McLovin

Member
Damn I'm such a fanboy... My ps3 is broken, 360 version is better, and I have a 1 year live card on standby for my 360, but for some reason I'm gonna wait until I get a new ps3 to get the ps3 version. I'm waiting until e3 to see if they have a pricedrop...
 
W

WrikaWrek

Banned
McLovin said:
Damn I'm such a fanboy... My ps3 is broken, 360 version is better, and I have a 1 year live card on standby for my 360, but for some reason I'm gonna wait until I get a new ps3 to get the ps3 version. I'm waiting until e3 to see if they have a pricedrop...
Click to expand...


So, you're a moron.
 
G

Gareth Bale

Member
The-Warning said:
About the beast UC2 remark, I was mostly playing around that's why I added the :p

Mostly playing around. In the realm of the fanboy wars, I do believe there's some jealousy and annoyance of the twin beasts UC2 and GOW3. so these PS3/360 comparison threads are a little bit of payback. Of course no one is going to admit it.

:p
Click to expand...

i6iej4.jpg


:p
 
Y

Yoshi256

Banned
OneMoreQuestion said:
You serious?
Click to expand...

There was surely a purpose in not showing PS3 footage until release.

Although I have also a PS3 I ordered the Xbox 360 version because I expected something like this to happen.
 
N

NemesisPrime

Banned
gofreak said:
This is sad, because...? It's not fair? Multiplatform development, in terms of resource focus or allocation is inherently not going to be as fair to any single platform.

If a team starts a project leading on 360 and then on their next project lead on PS3, that seems a fairly 'even' spread of focus between the two projects. It won't be as flattering to either system as focusing on just one for two projects, but that's multiplatform development for you.
Click to expand...

Yeah ok.. maybe sad is not the best word. As a dev myself, I just feel like more platform exclusivity (be it PS3 or 360) is actually better for the creative side of the business. Multi platform stuff always feels a bit like a Chinese sweatshop setup :)
 
D

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
NemesisPrime said:
TBH a lot of cross-platform games have been "identical" because the 360 version has been downgraded/not upgraded a bit. This is a sad cross-platform trend where new versions of a game get an improved engine on PS3 to try to be identical while the 360 version uses the same engine as the previous game in the series with only very minor tweaks.

A bit of a pity but we have seen it before in the previous gen with PS2/XBox ports.
Click to expand...
I don't think that is a fair assessment as there are definitely things you could do on PS3 that would be difficult to pull off on 360. It all seems to be related to how they design the engine. GPU centric games perform better on the 360, but there are many things you can do with the CPU on PS3 that would be more difficult to pull off on 360. Exclusives demonstrate this very well. You can do so much more on both platforms when the game is designed exclusively for it. Do you think results like Gears of War 2, Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, and God of War III could have been achieved if they had been multiplatform releases? I sure don't.

The PS2 and XBOX were much further apart than the 360 and PS3 are.
 
S

szaromir

Banned
gofreak said:
I'm not sure how much of an excuse that is when other developers are finding ways and means beyond the GPU, to work around limitations either relative to other platforms or their own ambitions for a game.
Click to expand...
Yeah, let's forget that this game took ages to develop and Rockstar employees worked like slaves on this one. Ultimately, if RDR is competetive with other open world games on the platform (and it apparently is, including exclusives such as Infamous) throwing accusations that the devs did not work hard enough to work around the platform limitations is ridiculous.
 
D

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
JWong said:
Can't wait til the PC version comes along.

It'll add much to this discussion. :lol
Click to expand...
Yeah, it'll probably run like shit. :\ GTAIV has been host to many a great mod, but the performance just isn't what it should be.
 
Cornbread78

Cornbread78

Member
NemesisPrime said:
Yeah ok.. maybe sad is not the best word. As a dev myself, I just feel like more platform exclusivity (be it PS3 or 360) is actually better for the creative side of the business. Multi platform stuff always feels a bit like a Chinese sweatshop setup :)
Click to expand...


pretty much, you have a lead platform, then a crap platform... Just look at FFXIII and now this game for proof, it's really, really sad and only gamers suffer in the end.
 
M

McLovin

Member
Well i guess it doesnt help that all my friends and family are on ps3... Plus once that live card runs out i wont be able to play online. I got the live card for reach mostl.
 
I

I NEED SCISSORS

Banned
Goldrusher said:
960x704 > 1152x640 ?
Click to expand...

I believe Insomniac do some really fancy shit with the image - something about reconstructing the AA samples to produce a 720p image. It certainly produces a cleaner result than 640p + QAA.

I know I joke about it a lot, but it's times like this when I really wish Sony would educate developers a bit more about alternative rendering methods, and also give them access to the MLAA code. By moving AA to the CPU as a post-processing effect, they free up valuable GPU resources that can help with framerates and even rendering resolution. I'm not trying to say the onus is on Sony, but when I see all the fancy tech that the first-party stable is using, not sharing it seems like a missed opportunity. It would be a serious boon to the PS3 if suddenly multi-platform titles have better image quality on PS3.
 
G

G_Berry

Banned
Cornbread78 said:
pretty much, you have a lead platform, then a crap platform... Just look at FFXIII and now this game for proof, it's really, really sad and only gamers suffer in the end.
Click to expand...

FF is an excellent example of a rushed port, the game didn't even get started on 360 until after the PS3 version was finished (as far as I know).

Accusing R* of being lazy is just insulting and I doubt very much that the PS3 version was rushed in any way.
 
F

Felix Lighter

Member
dark10x said:
The PS2 and XBOX were much further apart than the 360 and PS3 are.
Click to expand...

I swear everyone here remembers it differently. No one expected perfect pixel for pixel identical multiplatform games last generation. Now if a game has an edge on one platform over the other, the developers are considered lazy and people refuse to buy. In my opinion, this generations multiplatform games perform the closest across platforms, by far, over any other generation but the scrutiny has just become that much more intense.
 
F

Feindflug

Member
LiquidMetal14 said:
Of course I don't care in the end. Some things need to be clarified though.
Click to expand...

I was not talking about you and your impressions I was referring to all the PS3-only owners that even though they were interested in the game will not buy or just cancel their pre-orders because the 360 version is better even though guys like you who are actually playing the game assured them that the game on the PS3 is still looking good and it's perfectly playable...

If someone wants to play the best version of multiplatform games should just get a 360, either some of you like it or not that's the way to go and it's well known for about 3-4 years now.
 
Cornbread78

Cornbread78

Member
G_Berry said:
FF is an excellent example of a rushed port, the game didn't even get started on 360 until after the PS3 version was finished (as far as I know).

Accusing R* of being lazy is just insulting and I doubt very much that the PS3 version was rushed in any way.
Click to expand...


Let's get this straight, FF was definately a rushed port, but RDR was not? Hmm...
 
T

TheKurgan

Member
Kos Luftar said:
Ok, so I only own a PS3 should I still get this game? Is the game good?
Click to expand...

Definitely get the game.

Sucks to hear the PS3 version isn’t up to par with the 360. I bought the PS3 version since a good friend of mine wanted to hook up online and he doesn’t own a 360. But to be honest unless you come into this thread and nit pick the image quality differences you will be perfectly happy with the PS3 version. From the little I have played it runs fine and looks good.
 
T

Tricky I Shadow

Banned
Ugh! I’ve played both versions of the game.....and this thread is full of so much ridiculous exaggeration!

The differences are not as big as what some/most of you are making them out to be. I’ll leave it at that.
 
K

keyrat

Member
After seeing vids and screens, especially considering the foliage detail, 360 gets the nudge. Still, I think the PS3 version actually benefits from the blur, especially when looking at trees in the background. On 360 I would probably tone down the sharpness and contrast on my TV to get a similar look.
 
K

Kos Luftar

Member
TheKurgan said:
Definitely get the game.

Sucks to hear the PS3 version isn’t up to par with the 360. I bought the PS3 version since a good friend of mine wanted to hook up online and he doesn’t own a 360. But to be honest unless you come into this thread and nit pick the image quality differences you will be perfectly happy with the PS3 version. From the little I have played it runs fine and looks good.
Click to expand...

Well reading this thread everyone said GTA4 was better on 360 but when I played it on PS3 I thought it looked really good so I guess I should just leave this thread and just pick up RDR on my PS3.
 
G

G_Berry

Banned
Cornbread78 said:
Let's get this straight, FF was definately a rushed port, but RDR was not? Hmm...
Click to expand...

Well yeah?

Is it not true that FF was thrown together rather quickly? I remember DF stating in the comparison that crazy decisions were made that were detrimental to the final quality of the game for no apparent reason. Better codecs could have been used for video etc etc.

As far as most people know, RDR was made side by side with the 360 version, different teams maybe but definitely not thrown together at the end of 360 development.
 
T

Tricky I Shadow

Banned
Kos Luftar said:
Well reading this thread everyone said GTA4 was better on 360 but when I played it on PS3 I thought it looked really good so I guess I should just leave this thread and just pick up RDR on my PS3.
Click to expand...

Trust me, you won’t notice any differences unless you have both versions of the game and are constantly stopping to compare them both and look for differences. The PS3 version is completely fine. :D
 
Baki

Baki

Member
Cornbread78 said:
Let's get this straight, FF was definately a rushed port, but RDR was not? Hmm...
Click to expand...

Less of a rushed port and more like painted themselves into a corner by porting from 360 to PS3 rather than leading with PS3 and then porting to 360. Its well known that its much easier with the aforementioned way.

At any rate, to reach the same standard of the X360 at this point would require more time and money and won't make a difference in sales.
 
M

mujun

Member
schennmu said:
The usual suspects have turned up, no surprise there.
Click to expand...

Yep.

Some of them are going on and on about how bad the PS3 version of the game is compared to the 360 one despite everyone already understanding perfectly.

Others are talking conspiracy theories about how all this talk in this thread is "payback" for UC2 looking so good.

Right?

Or do you only see it from one side.
 
Baki

Baki

Member
mujun said:
Yep.

Some of them are going on and on about how bad the PS3 version of the game is compared to the 360 one despite everyone already understanding perfectly.

Others are talking conspiracy theories about how all this talk in this thread is "payback" for UC2 looking so good.

Right?

Or do you only see it from one side.
Click to expand...

I have to see this. :lol :lol :lol
 
T

Tricky I Shadow

Banned
By the way, something that people seem to be ignoring is the sound quality.

The sound is definitely superior on the PS3........just throwing that out there.
 
T

TheKurgan

Member
Kos Luftar said:
Well reading this thread everyone said GTA4 was better on 360 but when I played it on PS3 I thought it looked really good so I guess I should just leave this thread and just pick up RDR on my PS3.
Click to expand...

Yes, Yes you should! :D
 
M

mujun

Member
Kos Luftar said:
Ok, so I only own a PS3 should I still get this game? Is the game good?
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like you should. If I only had one console I wouldn't be worrying about whether the other console's version is better or not. Won't stop you from enjoying the shit out of what is by all accounts an awesome game.
 
E

EagleEyes

Member
One of the best looking games on consoles this gen easily. Unfortunately since both versions are not equal and it being multiplatform it will never get a fair shake on GAF. But from what i've played so far IMO it exceeds technically at least anything i've played on my 360 and PS3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4
185
23K
SpearFist replied
  • Locked
Are characters personalities and original writing being replaced by unified political views? Is escapism dying?
Drama 3 4 5 6 7
310
15K
Operations66 replied
  • Sticky
The Official Topic Redux |OT| Claim your game (Up: 2024 games added)
2 3 4 5
235
93K
Arsic replied
Starfield design lead says players are "disconnected" from how games are made: "Don't fool yourself into thinking you know why it is the way it is"
Opinion Game Dev 3 4 5 6 7
331
23K
ByWatterson replied
  • Locked
Nexus Mods deletes anti-Pride mod for Spider-Man, encourages angry users to delete their accounts
News Drama Community
44
3K
DeepEnigma replied
Top Bottom