• 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!)

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
Jtyettis said:
Indeed it should. Although I can attest first hand on the 360 version. Especially so with the saturation.

One notch up over normal worked nicely on my monitor. Beyond that, sunsets were getting surreal-y colourful, but depending on your taste that might be A-OK.

I couldn't quite figure out decent settings for brightness. Maybe it's just my monitor, but dark areas were typically too dark for me.
 

FrankT

Member
I've got it up a at least a couple notches and adjusting contrast/brightness around it.

Also as for as the jaggie comparison I think for me at least that earlier bar scene shot was pretty much the most pronouncing. I simply went in the bar and compared it to the shot. Quite a bit of difference there and you can see it clearly from the rails up top. Game is far from smooth, but the 2X helps. Still one of the most technically impressive games I've played this gen and especially so for open world.
 

Klocker

Member
gofreak said:
I don't know, but what I've read suggests that its resource usage is about the same.
...

But yeah, assuming their cost was the same, someone, somewhere along the line at R* made a choice to prefer QAA and its tradeoffs. Horses for courses? Clearly it's not a choice everyone agrees with.

could it be this...?

as I read it says MSAA affects double pumped Z-only fill rate where as, I assume, that Quincunx does not.

RSX - The relation to the G7x series would mean that the ROPs are capable of handling 2 multisamples per pixel per cycle. Basically, in a bandwidth unlimited scenario, 2xMSAA or Quincunx is free. But do note that the double pumped Z-only fill rate is only effective without MSAA and that this can be important for certain effects such as rendering shadows; with 2xMSAA the z-only fill rate falls in line with the colour fill rate.
 

unomas

Banned
I'm not really upset about the differences, it would be nice if it looked as clean on PS3 as it does on 360, but for those of us that only own one console what can you really do? RDR hasn't arrived for me yet, but I don't personally think having less grass is going to ruin my enjoyment of the game.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Jtyettis said:
Simply a loss of detail really or what Gofreak said.



Yea ME2, Bioshock 2, Bayonetta, BFBC2, and pretty sure Metro 2033 (this may actually be a little higher iirc, non-standard res maybe) are all 720p.



Aye 360 established a good while back. See post 704 for further detail. For further analysis you're going to have to wait for DF or LoT.
I forgot I played those. Bayonetta because I played it around the beginning of the year and thought it was last year, but the rest I actually just forgot. Eesh. Shows how much I like Bioshock 2.
 

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
Klocker said:
could it be this...?

as I read it says MSAA affects double pumped Z-only fill rate where as, I assume, that Quincunx does not.

I thought QAA used the same number of z samples...if it is cheaper it'd certainly be a reason to use it over MSAA depending on the context, but perhaps someone more knowledgable can clarify.

Kittonwy said:
I wonder why they didn't use MLAA.

Time/resources, probably.

Also, now that my 360 is back working (for now? see the dead 360 thread), I'll say this about the shadowing...if you catch out the LOD system, the results for shadows are worthy of the lol I gave earlier. And it's reasonably easy to do so. Just walk out the door of your first house - just out the door - and look at the shadowing on the veranda. It's very low resolution, a tonne of aliasing/shimmer as the shadows move. But walk out a bit more, and higher quality shadows - that are quite fine - eventually come into effect. So..my 'less than great shadows' would be those ones, when the LOD system hasn't adjusted very well.
 

Klocker

Member
DeadGzuz said:
It's the same engine from two years ago...

more info regarding this Rage engine

Technology
While GTA IV was hailed as a crowning achievement in technology for the open-world genre with its expansive and detailed world, physics system and Euphoria, the game engine Rockstar North used was actually developed by Rockstar San Diego. The RAGE engine was originally built for Red Dead Redemption (and was shown off in tech-demo form at E3 in 2005), but has since found itself as the company's staple development architecture; evolving as needed to cater for anything being built within the collective Rockstar studios' walls. What this means, however, is that while the engine is available to everyone within Rockstar, the team who know it best are clearly the guys who built it. And all the while it was being tweaked and moulded to bring us GTA IV, San Diego were in development with Red Dead Redemption; learning from mistakes or shortcomings essentially tested with GTA IV. This shows in the final result; the game is very, very quick to load (so no annoying GTA IV pre-load art screens), and the game-world seamlessly renders in incredible scope. The only time you're really facing any lengthy loads is if you fast travel to different areas, otherwise it's all-immersive, never once pulling you out of suspended disbelief and your overall experience.
 

Takuan

Member
soldat7 said:
Sorry to hear. Glad I'm not. Maybe that's part of why I love Shadow of the Colossus so much.
Yeah, the input/movement lag bothered me in that game. I'd really like a 30FPS locked version, maybe they'll release an optimized version when the new game comes out.

RDR's frame rate is acceptable. Inconsequential frame drops aren't a *big* deal, but they're still annoying.
 

EagleEyes

Member
DeadGzuz said:
I'm guessing the intern who handled the port doesn't know what it is. It's the same engine from two years ago...
It's eating at you isn't it? The bottom line is Red Dead Redemption is one of the most technically accomplished games this gen, period.
 
gofreak said:
He didn't say that, did he? He said 'the differences really aren't that bad'.

Much as I would love to keep the 360 version, the POS has apparently decided to pack it in. The disc drive won't work. It's not 3 red lights so my warranty won't cover it. Fucking joy.

Refurb 360 DVD drives are 50 bucks.
 

burgerdog

Member
Kittonwy said:
I wonder why they didn't use MLAA.
Someone posted a few pages back why you simply can't add MLAA to every single game. You should do some research on the tech, that way you don't have to post the same thing for every game that doesn't have it.

This thread is also fucking frustrating to read because there are so many single console owners in here shitting it up. People like Loudninja who always enter these type of threads and posts "guys the x version is fine, it is still playable!!" That is not why we multi console owners are in this thread. We spent money on both consoles and want to get the best version of the game.
 

-DarKaoZ-

Banned
burgerdog said:
Someone posted a few pages back why you simply can't add MLAA to every single game. You should do some research on the tech, that way you don't have to post the same thing for every game that doesn't have it.

This thread is also fucking frustrating to read because there are so many single console owners in here shitting it up. People like Loudninja who always enter these type of threads and posts "guys the x version is fine, it is still playable!!" That is not why we multi console owners are in this thread. We spent money on both consoles and want to get the best version of the game.

But we already know the answer, if you have both and you care about technical stuff buy it on the 360. If not buy it for the PS3, the PS3 game still looks amazing, but the 360 version will look 10% better. I opted for the PS3 ver (been multiplatform user) because I play my PS3 more hence having more friends in the console and RDR still looks amazing and thanks god I don't care about slowdowns, I would hate it if it had screen tearing instead.
 
so what causes the textures to be so blurry? i thought aa was for edges? it looks like everythings downsampled. wouldn't having such large space on blu ray allow for equal textures or can ps3 just not do it?
 

danwarb

Member
WasteLand Soldier said:
so what causes the textures to be so blurry? i thought aa was for edges? it looks like everythings downsampled. wouldn't having such large space on blu ray allow for equal textures or can ps3 just not do it?
It's probably just the lower framebuffer resolution and QAA.

Memory is more important than disc storage for the textures you can fit into a scene. There's still a little less available RAM on PS3 I think.
 

soco

Member
someone mentioned it a while back, but in several of the comparison screenshots i've seen, the PS3 seems to have sparser grass coverage (not the ground texture, but the actual stuff that sticks up). is the grass coverage static or is it randomly generated over certain areas? is it just an odd luck thing from a few screenshots where it's just been generated in a weird way?
 

Strawman

Member
Wazzim said:
My friends have the PS3 versions and don't really give a sh!t about it, one even plays with a SCART cable on a 1080P tv :lol

BTW Finally a real member :D
Wazzim
Member
(Today, 01:16 PM)

What the hell, does your friend not like HD or something??! :D
 

Emitan

Member
mujun said:
So the rez is the same as the 360 version in your PS3 version?

Don't bother, the differences are explicitly detailed by people who actually seem to know what they are talking about.
To be fair, I'm playing it on a shitty TV right now. So I'm not paying attention to looks as much as performance. And performance wise, it's been ok. Are there frame rate drops? Yes. There are. But I'm not some apologist. Resolution issues just don't bother me because some version is better. If the PS3 version looked like shit, I'd be upset. But it only looks bad by comparison. Which doesn't bother me.
 
danwarb said:
It's probably just the lower framebuffer resolution and QAA.

Memory is more important than disc storage for the textures you can fit into a scene. There's still a little less available RAM on PS3 I think.

ah ok. so basically there should be no excuse for blurry textures next gen :D
 

WrikaWrek

Banned
JudgeN said:
Maybe I don't understand but isn't QAA = 4x MSAA, so how does the PS3 version have more jaggles then the 360 version?

As far as i know, no. It's slightly better than 2XAA but with the downfall of vaselinization of the textures. If you add lower rez to the picture, then you have a game with more noticeable jaggies, and the whole blurriness.
 

Pooya

Member
JudgeN said:
Maybe I don't understand but isn't QAA = 4x MSAA, so how does the PS3 version have more jaggles then the 360 version?
No it's not, QAA blurs the textures it's only useful when you have a high level of AF otherwise image quality suffers. It's more effective than 2xMSAA in reducing jaggies and has about the same performance hit but it degrades clarity. Combining it with up scaled image results in the blurry picture that you're seeing.
 

goonergaz

Member
mujun said:
Much of it posting other posts quoted from his "forum". I can't figure out what the point of doing that shit is :lol

2 quotes from my forum actually, 1 of which was a comparison of both versions...the other stating what the gfx/frame rate were like on the PS3 version...
 

Risette

A Good Citizen
JudgeN said:
Maybe I don't understand but isn't QAA = 4x MSAA, so how does the PS3 version have more jaggles then the 360 version?
subhd resolution kinda cancels out the advantage that qaa has. when the image is scaled the aliasing is scaled too. in fact that's how the "pixel counters" find a game's resolution; a subhd game has jaggies with more pixels per aliasing "step" than a 720p game does (which only have 1 pixel per aliasing step)

to be honest i actually like the way qaa looks when a game is 720p. kz2 uses it and it's an amazing looking game. the same with ac2 ps3.
 

Kittonwy

Banned
burgerdog said:
Someone posted a few pages back why you simply can't add MLAA to every single game. You should do some research on the tech, that way you don't have to post the same thing for every game that doesn't have it.

This thread is also fucking frustrating to read because there are so many single console owners in here shitting it up. People like Loudninja who always enter these type of threads and posts "guys the x version is fine, it is still playable!!" That is not why we multi console owners are in this thread. We spent money on both consoles and want to get the best version of the game.

Chill the fuck out, Saboteur is an open-world game and it has MLAA, it's a simple question. I'm not expecting every game to have MLAA or suggesting that it's an easy thing to add in a game.

I have both consoles, but I don't get your hatred of single console owners.
Indifferent2.gif
 

DeadGzuz

Banned
I think everyone is confounding different effects. I think the QAA is selective, so sometimes the edge aliasing is just from 640P no AA (think Halo 3). The blurriness is not really blurriness IMO, you are just looking at distant textures which are rendered to 640P and upscaled to 720P (or 1080P). If you look a close up textures (nearby ground) or large high res textures (like a canyon wall), they are anything but blurry.

A better non-technical term for the low res + upscaling is "muddy".
 

Pooya

Member
Mikey Jr. said:
You know what? Fuck the graphics. Its all about the load times.

Has anyone done a xbox HDD load vs PS3 load time?
There is a comparison a few pages back. On DVD there is 1-2 second difference in favor of PS3 IIRC, no test on HDD.
From my time with 360 version installed, after the initial loading you pretty much don't see a loading screen longer than 5-7 seconds, it's very fast.
 

FrankT

Member
Mikey Jr. said:
You know what? Fuck the graphics. Its all about the load times.

Has anyone done a xbox HDD load vs PS3 load time?

Only comparison I've seen done as far as comparison on that end;

Magnus said:
A number of people have PM'd me, asking me to post my impressions having played both for a number of hours each.

Honestly, all the information from official sources of coverage by now will render most of my comments from the last few days useless, but in general, despite being a ridiculous PS3 fanboy, I'm deciding on the 360 version, purely for two reasons: the undebatably improved framerate (which I'm particularly anal about) and the undebatably faster loading times (literally half the length of loads on the PS3 version, and often far shorter than even that -- referring to both the startup first load, and the loads/saves before/after each mission).

That is with the HDD btw. If you want something more precise wait for DF or LoT. I'm sure they will the per second breakdown.
 

bycha

Junior Member
Waiting for Digital Foundry comparison. Only interested in FPS, almost always buy multiplat on PS3.

R* either knows for sure that no more than 5% of their audience care about how good or bad is their game on either platform or are really really lazy.

PS3 been sellin better than Xbox 360 both WW and in the West in every month of 2010 and this will probably continue till the end of this generation, so releasing worse version of the game on better selling platform is really lazy.
 

V_Arnold

Member
bycha said:
Waiting for Digital Foundry comparison. Only interested in FPS, almost always buy multiplat on PS3.

R* either knows for sure that no more than 5% of their audience are really interested in how good or bad is their game on either platform or are really really lazy.

PS3 been sellin better than Xbox 360 both ww and in the west in every month of 2010 and this will probably continue till the end of this generation, so releasing worse version of the game on better selling platform is really lazy.

You might wanna check out NPD numbers.
 

soco

Member
DeadGzuz said:
I think everyone is confounding different effects. I think the QAA is selective, so sometimes the edge aliasing is just from 640P no AA (think Halo 3). The blurriness is not really blurriness IMO, you are just looking at distant textures which are rendered to 640P and upscaled to 720P (or 1080P). If you look a close up textures (nearby ground) or large high res textures (like a canyon wall), they are anything but blurry.

A better non-technical term for the low res + upscaling is "muddy".

maybe i'm the one wrong, but my understanding of Quincunx was that it isn't selective. it's a simple 5 point anti-aliasing algorithm, and thus can make things blurrier.

there is another algorithm that's been used recently that is selective, but i think quincunx is pretty uniform from what i've read.

the subHD certainly adds to that, though.
 

Wiggum2007

Junior Member
Are there any pictures of the PS3 exclusive outfit? And I don't mean the picture that has been floating around of the gang leader with the top hat, which may or may not be what the actual outfit looks like.
 

Chrange

Banned
I just got a couple Xporter 16 GB USB sticks in to try out with the 360. I think RDR will be the first game installed to one.
 

bycha

Junior Member
V_Arnold said:
You might wanna check out NPD numbers.

I check them, and I also know for a fact that PS3 is selling at least 1.5 better than 360 in Europe in 2010.

XBox 360 is practically dead in continental Europe they have to sell Elite for 219 Euros here against 300 Euros for PS3 (just imagine this prices in NA) just to move any units.
 

FrankT

Member
Then you would know it hasn't outsold it once this year in the US. Certainly doing a bit better in Europe, but then again sales age is for another topic.

Chrange said:
I just got a couple Xporter 16 GB USB sticks in to try out with the 360. I think RDR will be the first game installed to one.

Let us know how it turns out versus the HDD.
 
bycha said:
I check them, and I also know for a fact that PS3 is selling at least 1.5 better than 360 in Europe in 2010.

XBox 360 is practically dead in continental Europe they have to sell Elite for 219 Euros here against 300 Euros for PS3 (just imagine this prices in NA) just to move any units.

I have no doubt that the PS3 is selling better than 360 in EU and overall PAL but care to share that 1.5 fact you have ?

Anyway this getting off topic, let's keep salesage out of it.
 
Chrange said:
I just got a couple Xporter 16 GB USB sticks in to try out with the 360. I think RDR will be the first game installed to one.
I have it installed to an SD card + USB adapter. Works awesome. My 360 is loud. With the game on the SD card, all I hear is the whoosh of the fans (which is still an annoyance compared to my PS3) and the occasional spinning-up of the disc. I assume that's some type of verification.

Great option for installing games. Haven't had a single issue.
 

burgerdog

Member
Kittonwy said:
Chill the fuck out, Saboteur is an open-world game and it has MLAA, it's a simple question. I'm not expecting every game to have MLAA or suggesting that it's an easy thing to add in a game.

I have both consoles, but I don't get your hatred of single console owners.
Indifferent2.gif

Indeed it is, however, is it not a very dark game? It's also a city-based game so you don't have to deal with as many transparencies as RDR. If the tech was flexible enough to support every type of game then I would be extremely happy, God of War 3 has excellent IQ.

I also don't hate sane single console owners, just the insecure ones in here who don't have a choice anyway.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Good catch with the saturation thing. Seems like it's a case just like GTA IV where I notched it up too and all the lighting in the game looks a lot more "oomphy" now .. like it has more intensity to it.
 
bycha said:
I check them, and I also know for a fact that PS3 is selling at least 1.5 better than 360 in Europe in 2010.

XBox 360 is practically dead in continental Europe they have to sell Elite for 219 Euros here against 300 Euros for PS3 (just imagine this prices in NA) just to move any units.

Link please. Share with the group.
 

RSTEIN

Comics, serious business!
bycha said:
I check them, and I also know for a fact that PS3 is selling at least 1.5 better than 360 in Europe in 2010.

XBox 360 is practically dead in continental Europe they have to sell Elite for 219 Euros here against 300 Euros for PS3 (just imagine this prices in NA) just to move any units.

a fact? really? Then please provide a link to the retail data.
 

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
Anyone wanna share brightness/contrast/saturation settings that seem to work well? Jtyettis? I'd like to tweak mine around a bit.

burgerdog said:
Indeed it is, however, is it not a very dark game? It's also a city-based game so you don't have to deal with as many transparencies as RDR. If the tech was flexible enough to support every type of game then I would be extremely happy, God of War 3 has excellent IQ.

Transparencies and their frequency are irrelevant to MLAA. Indeed, MLAA would be preferable with transparencies than MSAA for example.

There's nothing inherent about 'open world games' that would make them unsuitable for MLAA anymore than any other game.
 

burgerdog

Member
gofreak said:
Transparencies and their frequency are irrelevant to MLAA. Indeed, MLAA would be preferable with transparencies than MSAA for example.

There's nothing inherent about 'open world games' that would make them unsuitable for MLAA anymore than any other game.

Interesting, then why aren't more devs jumping onboard then?
 
gofreak said:
Anyone wanna share brightness/contrast/saturation settings that seem to work well? Jtyettis? I'd like to tweak mine around a bit.



Transparencies and their frequency are irrelevant to MLAA. Indeed, MLAA would be preferable with transparencies than MSAA for example.

There's nothing inherent about 'open world games' that would make them unsuitable for MLAA anymore than any other game.

1650x1080 monitor using VGA cables with the xbox video setting set to expanded I use.

From default
Brightness + 1
Contrast - 1
Saturation - Max

Love how the colors pop.
 
Top Bottom