Err, sure it matters, but I think I'm a big boy and can decide the merits of each platform on my own. Also, I don't need people telling me which issues I should find minor.DevilWillcry said:Hey choosing which platform to buy a multiplat on usually comes down to the advantages the hardware of the consoles themselves have over eachother. But I don't want to derail the thread so I'm done with that. I just think it's funny how people argue over "sub-HD this, better grass this, aliasing, bleh bleh bleh" when we know a PC version is going to hit (It's the RAGE engine, don't doubt it) that addresses all these issues and improves performance. The console wars stuff just seems kinda pointless knowing that. But hey that's not here yet anyways. I'm not looking to fuck up the thread, so I'm out. Just wanted to give my 2 cents on these platform differences everyone is up in arms about. Still say controller preference, Trophies/Achievements, and online freinds should always dwarf any graphical differences every time
-
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!)
- Thread starter Mik2121
- Start date
KoruptData
Member
Is there LOD on each platform? Im on PS3 and its quite noticeable.
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
now I have been getting the "network problem" issues
D=
D=
I'll be getting the PS3 version, since I don't have a 360 and that's what most of my friends will be playing it on. I'm sure a PC version will show up, but it's not worth waiting that long just for higher resolutions, etc. The differences are unfortunate, but not a deal breaker imo.
It sort of is pissing money away if the system's exclusive titles aren't that compelling to you. I own a PS3, and a capable gaming PC. I play most multiplatform titles on PC (which includes a lot of games that many people call "360 exclusive" ironically) and use the PS3 for PS3 exclusive games/Blu-Ray, etc. I don't have anything against the 360, but the system simply doesn't interest me.
Not everyone can afford all systems. And even if you can afford all major platforms, it doesn't mean you have to. Especially if exclusive titles on one particular platform (be it PS3 or 360) aren't compelling enough to buy a new console for. Opinions opinion opinions.
Chrange said:
It sort of is pissing money away if the system's exclusive titles aren't that compelling to you. I own a PS3, and a capable gaming PC. I play most multiplatform titles on PC (which includes a lot of games that many people call "360 exclusive" ironically) and use the PS3 for PS3 exclusive games/Blu-Ray, etc. I don't have anything against the 360, but the system simply doesn't interest me.
Not everyone can afford all systems. And even if you can afford all major platforms, it doesn't mean you have to. Especially if exclusive titles on one particular platform (be it PS3 or 360) aren't compelling enough to buy a new console for. Opinions opinion opinions.
Truespeed
Member
The-Warning said:
It all makes sense now. It's not Rockstar's fault for the inferior PS3 port, but rather our fault for not recognizing how difficult it was for them to come to grips with a complicated asymmetric CPU, a weak ass GPU and a foreign split memory architecture reminiscent of a PC. We should be thankful it's even 640p. It bothers me when people make excuses when the system is more than capable in the proper hands. To reiterate, this company has never been able to make a PS3 game in HD - that's pretty pathetic for a company that calls itself Rockstar.
By the way, the most vocal critic of the Cell and multi-core processors in general, John Carmack, will be releasing his game in 720p and 60FPS on both consoles. That's how a real Rockstar does it.
it does to some extent but not nearly as effective as edges although MSAA is not based on edge detection. TRAA is the solution which can be multi or super sampling.gofrea said:
I don't think any console game uses TRAA although it is supported by Geforce 7xxx which RSX is based on not sure about 360.
gofreak said:
I think the problem is that it's not something standard like MSAA, developers need to jump through hoops to get a custom algorithm working on a SPU, I think it requires a considerable amount of R&D which 3rd parties aren't willing to spend money on when there are standardized and implemented methods. if it was implemented in dev kits, something that developers just could turn on and use like MSAA or QAA then yes. IQ is definitely superior to low levels of MSAA in most cases.
MLAA isn't cost free performance wise, basically an SPU is assigned to do AA full time, in games with a massive open world that require constant streaming, or complex AI or physics is used, I think this method is not a good solution. RDR is a game with all of these things, you have euphoria, a big massive world and lots of NPCs.
The problem is that edge detection algorithms are far from perfect (at least those that I've seen and worked with, well known methods like Canny) , their performance depends on many factors like gamma, color contrast, brightness etc. they are even less efficient on complex surfaces like foliage, trees or fences etc. The main advantage of MSAA is that you have access to more information on the actual 3D geometry not just 2D pixels.gofreak said:
they are either racing games or games with very simple geometry or sub-HD.chandoog said:
TheKurgan said:
Tricky I Shadow said:Trust me, you wont 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.
so is this pretty much accurate? I've got in on PS3 coming from Amazon, and I'd really rather not have buyer's remorse : (
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Kodiak said:
I have the PS3 version and honestly wouldn't have noticed anything if I didn't come into this thread. By that I mean its an astounding game, my GOTY so far, beautiful open space, amazing landscapes, but there are jaggies. Again, if I hadn't visited this thread it really wouldn't bother me since I wouldn't have realized the 360 didn't have as many. I still am having a blast regardless.
Haeleos
Member
I'm really not a fan of the multiplayer. The whole autoaim/name and title over your head/watch your automap gameplay is really weak... in any game. Any situation where I'm firing at a big name floating in the sky because I know someone is standing underneath it is cheesey as hell.
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
Anyone know how to get more ammo in free roam? I I don't know how to get ammo without dieing.:lol
Truespeed said:
Yeah, I noticed that the PS3 version was never mentioned in any of the articles about RDR. Another odd thing was that RDR wasn't mentioned in the official Playstation blog.
Using my conspiracy hat, I figured that it had to be due to MSoft putting up extra marketing dollars to help promote/develop the game or that RDR just ran a little better on 360.
I don't necessarily agree with the idea that PS3 users should pay less though. If the developer shelled out the money to make the game, they should price it at whatever makes sense to them from a business standpoint. The market will decide wether or not it's worth it.
As a PS3 gamer with a 360 (with a silver membership), I'd prefer the game on PS3 due to the free online system. However if there's a frame rate issues and/or screen tearing on the PS3, I'll get the 360 version and just ignore the multiplayer feature.
Rebel Leader said:
Check the boxes highlighted with a white gleam. Green for dead eye.
JoseSensa said:
Haven't encountered any real framerate issues yet. Haven't noticed any screen tearing either. A small bit of pop in here and there, but thats about it, and only if you're really looking for it. Aliasing is pretty noticeable in the intro cutscene, but after that, its negligible.
A few people have said the audio is better on the PS3 version, but there hasn't been any solid consensus. As usual the audio aspect of the game is largely ignored with people fawning over which title has better visuals.
In my experience the audio on PS3 titles is usually better, but just because its LPCM doesn't automatically better.
In my experience the audio on PS3 titles is usually better, but just because its LPCM doesn't automatically better.
Equus Bellator Apex
Junior Member
Not even going to fucking risk it :lol
infinityBCRT
Member
It really depends on your display and display settings too though. On my 46" Sammy Slim DLP, 720p@2xAA pretty much looked flawless as if it were 4xAA, and in games with no AA you could see jaggies but they weren't very pronounced. On my 47" LG LCD, Jaggies are a little bit more noticable, especially when theres a light object in front of a dark background, but its still not nearly as bad playing games on my 25.5" Samsung LCD Monitor... 720p@2xAA... doesn't look that great. Anything less looks awful.EviLore said:
And sharpness also plays a factor as well. If you have it calibrated properly it should look good, but if you have it too high (anything above the neutral or 0 setting depending on your tv), those jaggies will probably show more than it should.
gray_fox224
Junior Member
Holy shittt :lol :lolalr1ghtstart said:Knockout of the Night
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
I just got an avatar award from RDR
SirIgbyCeaser
Banned
I strongly believe that developers are just dumb and when they compare their console versions side by side, they work less on the final polish of a PS3 version because when properly set up with HDMI on a nice TV is easily made excellent.
This console war is exactly like the graphic card war. Just small almost insignificant difference about the way the design of the machine outputs.
This console war is exactly like the graphic card war. Just small almost insignificant difference about the way the design of the machine outputs.
Projectjustice
Banned
Xbox 360 version is just so beautiful! The game has so much atmosphere!!! I love this game!
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
Omiee said:
You also get awards on the PS3 version aswell..
To get the sombrero you have to shoot a guy's hat off
well i was going for the 360 version after i saw some screens etc and people telling me 360 version was better, but i guess amazon shipped my copy already before i could cancel it so im getting the ps3 version.
i heard u can unlock stuff for home on it..? is that confirmed for us only or worldwide.
cuz i remember white knight chronicles had that for the us but not europe
i heard u can unlock stuff for home on it..? is that confirmed for us only or worldwide.
cuz i remember white knight chronicles had that for the us but not europe
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2010...-dead-redemption-reward-unlocks-mall-updates/Omiee said:
Edit: dont think they posted pics :/
OldJadedGamer
Banned
chespace said:
I was going to ask the same question. Also, why would you even care about this thread as it doesn't matter. If you have only one system and want the game, you are going to get it for that regardless.
a nice video comparisson
http://www.gamepro.de/index.cfm?pid=386&pk=2389
im so glad cuz imo the differences are small its not like im gonna keep looking at a mountain or what ever.
http://www.gamepro.de/index.cfm?pid=386&pk=2389
im so glad cuz imo the differences are small its not like im gonna keep looking at a mountain or what ever.
Omiee said:
this is a good video. At the beginning I thought the X360 version looked muddier.. but you can clearly see that the X360 version looks a little better at the end. The two parts where you see Marsten in the city, on his horse and on foot, it looks a lot clearer on the X360. Looks better there, but it still looks Great on the PS3.
The texture popups and the Three shimmer, is nothing to write home about. In such a waste world, it would be the last thing I would stop and pay attention to.
Ohhh.. I love the german announcer in that video, he sounds so
NOT
Omiee said:
Here is the hat and a shirt you win.
http://boardsus.playstation.com/t5/...1;jsessionid=797A252F49B9E951E3712F2A5453F137
miladesn said:
Yeah, I don't mean that it uses edge detection in the 2D image processing sense, just that MSAA 'only' anti-aliases edges (using edge coverage etc.).
The Intel paper is still the best public reference on MLAA (AFAIK), and the ups and downs vs SSAA. It shows the results of some problems like pixel-width objects and so on, but also talks about advantages relative to SSAA's own problems.
http://visual-computing.intel-research.net/publications/mlaa.pdf
miladesn said:
This is all very true. I think it's exactly why Sony should make their implementation available, they'd be stupid not to.
For RDR, I'm sure by the time the idea of it was gaining interest, it was already late in development, and I highly doubt they had the time to start an experimental trip down this particular avenue.
However, I'm not sure how custom each game's implementation needs to be. I think if you could take, for example, gow's implementation it would be a huge headstart over rolling your own. You'd probably want to tweak some variables for best results in your frames, and you'd need to do you own testing and comparisons etc. but if you had the benefit of someone else's experience it would be a big help. Enough of a help, I think, to make it a no-brainer to test.
miladesn said:
The worst case frames cost in gow were 3-4ms, running on 5 SPUs. To try and boil that down to a percentage of CPU performance, for a 30fps game, you're talking maybe 8% of CPU time. Probably for latency reasons you'd not want to put 1 SPU working on it for half your frame time, it's probably better to split it among as many as you can fit it on.
Another big deal is the saving on the GPU - they saved 6 or 7ms of RSX latency (~20% in a 30fps game).
miladesn said:
That's a big assumption. I doubt this stuff is hurting the CPU to the point of no headroom (unless it's being wildly inefficient or something).
miladesn said:
To say what you're saying in another way...MSAA is relatively constantly expensive regardless of edge complexity
If even your worst case frames with MLAA are cheaper than with 2xMSAA, it doesn't really matter that the cost increases on more edge-heavy frames. Even if MLAA was the same cost, or perhaps even a little more expensive, it could still be worthwhile if you're heavily GPU bound (and if you're getting a better result that doesn't hurt either).Anyway, we're straying a bit OT. But I do hope R* will have the opportunity to try out new AA tech for their next game on this engine.
NEOPARADIGM
Banned
Well I finally saw some baaaaaaad framerate slowdowns on the PS3 version tonight. During a "rescue the woman" situation in that city east of the ranch (Theives-something), FPS dropped to damn near 15, I'd guess. Hell, maybe less. Just FWIW. Was a real "oooooh boy" moment. Hope that's that last I see of it.
On the other hand, I can say I haven't seen any tearing in over 10 hours with the game.
On the other hand, I can say I haven't seen any tearing in over 10 hours with the game.
Windom Earle
Member
SirIgbyCeaser said:
Well, at least Rockstar was smart enough to mix up the settings for brightness and contrast in GTAIV... And the blur filter for PS3 GTAIV also came directly from hell. They most certainly lack "final polish", and not only in their PS3 versions. RDR 360 looks pretty clean though, I will hopefully get the game today and have an extended look at the tech.
Norml said:
Oh great, useless home stuff.
mujun said:
mujun said:
:lol
NEOPARADIGM
Banned
Dresden said:
Oh okay then, that's cool.
Well, not cool, but you know.
Windom Earle
Member
Majine said:
Home items are just the worst possible reward for me, but I guess there are people still using home that might like it. FFXIII is a piece of crap, but the XMB theme rewards were nice!
And I don't mind Xbox avatar stuff, because it's something you will look at a bit more usual.
G_Berry said:
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=247405
That's for the invisibility bug but I'm sure it'll patch other things too.
MightyHedgehog
Member
Nah, the hat looks fine...it's just that the Home models all look like dead-eyed zombie metrosexuals...mannequins in a some high-end mall clothing store. Avatars at least look warm and alive with a sense of vague personality...or humanity.Haunted said:
Not kidding either - looks like I got the wrong version after all!
I <3 Memes
Member
Truant said:
This is getting sexy now.
The AA method and overall blurring of the image on the PS3 really does look exactly the same as it was in GTA4. I think the brownish art style of the old west helps it to not stand out as much as it did in GTA4 though. Unfortunately the blurring seems to detract from the quality of the lighting which looks outstanding in this game.
As a pc gamer I can only judge from these stills, but I'm not sure the trade off of reduced aliasing was really worth it.
GitarooMan
Member
I love how this thread has in part become a place for PS3 owners to get constant reassurance and a group hug with constant variations of "The PS3 version is fine, still fun and playable, don't worry." Hasn't that been fucking obvious for days? I would hope at this point PS3 only people get the sense that "hey this game rocks, it's still worth getting." I always think it's weird that these threads which are intended for multi-console owners get invaded by single-console owners who shouldn't really give a shit about this.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky