• 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!)

NinjaBoiX

NinjaBoiX

Member
-NinjaBoiX- said:
I have it on Xbox, and a pal has it on PS3. I don't think the IQ on PlayStation is that much of an issue, it's the horrendous draw distance. Flags on buildings, shadows, wildlife, all appearing 20-30ft in front of you. There is some LOD problems on Xbox, but nothing that bad. The framerate is noticably poorer too.
Click to expand...
nelsonroyale said:
I don't have said probs with the ps3 version...not sure what his issue is...there is pop in, but not crysis vanilla levels.
Click to expand...
OK, maybe it isn't "20-30 ft" it was just a manner of speaking. But it is easily the most notable difference between the two games. I'd been playing a few days on xbox, then my pal finally got hold of a copy for ps3. At first I was like, "the IQ isn't too bad, a little more blurry and jaggy but not a dealbreaker." Then he got on horseback, and the engine actually had to render stuff fairly quickly. It just couldn't keep up. I just thought it was weird that everyone is focussing on IQ when performance is easily the dividing factor.
 
C

causan

Member
Mr Pockets said:
I played the PS3 version last night and most of today.

I have no clue what all the whining is about. The game is fun as hell, looks great, plays smooth. I have had no issues.

Have I played the 360 version? Nope. But even if I do, I doubt it will make the game any less fun.

I saw all the comparison shots with missing grass and signs that can't be read from 50ft away. I really don't care though...when I am speeding around on my horse, or watching a cut scene, I am not looking at the backgrounds with such scrutiny.

I will say that I don't like the look of the night sky though...that would probably be my only real complaint. Just looks kind of fake.

Anyway, continue on with your debate....good luck to whoever wins, it surely means so so much. :lol

Gonna go back to play now.
Click to expand...

Listen to this guy. I just got the PS3 version and feel the same way.
 
Q

Q8D3vil

Member
got my ps3 copy today for multiplayer.
double juggies, worse fps and resolution.

had fun with the online though

the difference is nearly as bad as bayonetta :/
 
C

CaseyTappy

Member
kingslunk said:
PS3 copy is fine imo
Click to expand...


This thread is about comparisons for multi console owners so they can pick the version they want .
We know the PS3 version plays fine .

I can't believe this where this thread has gone , especially after a warning and huge ban wave already !
 
f@luS

f@luS

More than a member.
cjelly said:
It may not be the worst port ever, but it's definitely a mess. PS3 version is a mess compared to the 360.

Problem is people let their opinions get in the way of cold hard facts and figures.
Click to expand...
biggest bullshit ever
 
NinjaBoiX

NinjaBoiX

Member
Thread translation - "My friend thinks his Audi A3 is better than my VW Golf. Sure, his is slightly faster and better looking, but I think my Golf is fine." "No doubt, it's a great car, but given the choice, I'd go with the Audi. True, they are essentially the same car, the Audi is just that bit better bolted together."
 
J

jorma

is now taking requests
I have the PS3 version and the first thing i notice about the gunfights is that my rifle is locking on to enemies on screen that i barely see. Might be the same with the xbox version though. And obviously the settings on my TV, but they are fine for my other games so...
 
LiquidMetal14

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
jorma said:
I have the PS3 version and the first thing i notice about the gunfights is that my rifle is locking on to enemies on screen that i barely see. Might be the same with the xbox version though. And obviously the settings on my TV, but they are fine for my other games so...
Click to expand...
That's certainly reaching, it's called lock-on (in settings). Disable it?
 
M

Metalmurphy

Member
OldJadedGamer said:
Again, last gen the vast.... vast, VAST majority of developers had no problem up porting from the PS2 to the Xbox with very little effort and the Xbox version outside of a few developer fuck ups was 99% always the better version with very minimal effort from the developer. And it wasn't just the PS2-Xbox ports but also PS2-Gamecube ports. And if you blame the memory split then that is still a fault of the machine so you are blaming the machine at that point and not the developer. Burnout Paradise and EDGE has the PS3 platform as the lead and the 360 sku turned out just fine. Down porting wasn't a problem.

That picture you posted is the extreme example of a developer not caring about the port, giving it to another developer to do and just shitting it out to meet a contract. You are kind of proving my point with that pic. That game was and still is the exception to the rule.
Click to expand...

You realize you just contradicted yourself 3 times in 2 posts right?

"When porting down from a more powerful system to a weaker one, it's the fault of the developer for not doing it properly."

"VAST majority of developers had no problem up porting from the PS2 to the Xbox with very little effort and the Xbox" (weaker to more powerful)

"Down porting wasn't a problem."

First you talk about "down porting", then "up porting" then "down porting" again. Make up your mind son.

That would be just like saying every game has mid-game installs just because of one title... come to think of it, those two games share something in common.
Click to expand...
Except one of them isn't even a port at all, so I don't see why you would bring it to the discussion, unless ofc, you're just throwing random jabs at the PS3...
 
J

jorma

is now taking requests
LiquidMetal14 said:
That's certainly reaching, it's called lock-on (in settings). Disable it?
Click to expand...

I know what it's called. I even used those very words to describe what i was doing. How would disable lock-on help me see enemies more clearly?
 
F

FrankT

Member
And the final sentence pretty much sums up the purpose of this thread and the conclusion the same. Not that it was going to be much different.
 
Windom Earle

Windom Earle

Member
Decent face off. Not much news I guess. Superior PS3 indoor lighting already got pointed out somewhere. Superior water and shadows on 360 are new, but I don't really see it in the screenshots. Water looks different but not really better in my eyes. And the missing shadows?

Overall I still think that Rockstar deserves a lot of shit for this port.
 
NekoFever

NekoFever

Member
schennmu said:
Decent face off. Not much news I guess. Superior PS3 indoor lighting already got pointed out somewhere. Superior water and shadows on 360 are new, but I don't really see it in the screenshots. Water looks different but not really better in my eyes. And the missing shadows?

Overall I still think that Rockstar deserves a lot of shit for this port.
Click to expand...
Look under the jetty in the top pic.
 
J

JoseSensa

Neo Member
Jtyettis said:
And the final sentence pretty much sums up the purpose of this thread and the conclusion the same. Not that it was going to be much different.
Click to expand...

Here's what DF said:

In short, Rockstar is to be commended on what is an absolutely fantastic game on both platforms, but the technical analysis is pretty conclusive: if you've got the choice of buying the game for either console, Xbox 360 is the version of Red Dead you should buy.

I think I'm going to double dip on this one. PS3 for online and 360 for single player.
 
adamsapple

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Cue "DF are xbots" onslaught.

anyway, yeah nothing really there that wasn't already dissected in this thread, still now we've got comparisons from both DF and Lens, hopefully that makes the decision-making for anyone still on the fence somewhat easier.
 
B

Barrett2

Member
DF said:
Just about the only area where PS3 commands an advantage is in terms of loading: the 515MB mandatory install shaves off a few seconds, but as the only in-game loading occurs during fast-travel between locations (using the campsite), it's hardly worth mentioning. Certainly the install doesn't grant any kind of tangible performance boost in terms of less LOD-popping or anything like that.
Click to expand...

About sums it up
 
D

Dabanton

Member
Interesting FaceOff. For those who can't be bothered to click the link the final assessment in full

So, we're just left with the matter of the final recommendation. We've demonstrated conclusively that the Xbox 360 version of Red Dead Redemption possesses higher resolution, improved levels of detail, noticeably superior performance in-game and fewer jaggies owing to a more consistently applied anti-aliasing solution that doesn't blur the image. Shadows are generally sharper, and of better quality (particularly on the characters' self-shadows).

Just about the only area where PS3 commands an advantage is in terms of loading: the 515MB mandatory install shaves off a few seconds, but as the only in-game loading occurs during fast-travel between locations (using the campsite), it's hardly worth mentioning. Certainly the install doesn't grant any kind of tangible performance boost in terms of less LOD-popping or anything like that.

However, none of this is to say that Red Dead Redemption is not a good game in its own right on PlayStation 3. Play on PS3 without having seen the 360 version and it's difficult to imagine that the fun factor of the game has been massively impacted. And if Rockstar had decided to deliberately dial back 360 to make the game look and feel identical to the PS3 version, it's hard to imagine that the enviable scores it has attracted would be any different.
Click to expand...
 
F

FrankT

Member
lawblob said:
About sums it up
Click to expand...

I saw that. Kind of interested to see that breakdown. I mean from reports in here that isn't the case when compared with the 360 version installed. I'm sure LoT will have a better breakdown in that regard I believe. I think that and one other thing I saw was the only questions that came up from what I read compared to this thread. Oh yea, tearing on the 360 version which iirc they say isn't noticeable. In fact it isn't at all.
 
B

bycha

Junior Member
Digital Foundry confirmed R* for been really lazy. Dips to 20fps in ps3 version during gunfights is not something i'm looking forward to.
 
2

2 Minutes Turkish

Banned
money shot

In short, Rockstar is to be commended on what is an absolutely fantastic game on both platforms, but the technical analysis is pretty conclusive: if you've got the choice of buying the game for either console, Xbox 360 is the version of Red Dead you should buy.
Click to expand...

Don't even know if I'm buying this game at all after how disappointing GTA4 was.

Might try before I buy methinks. But I'm surprised that even now Rockstar are still doing this to PS3 ports, especially after the rumors circulating that it was apparently the 360 holding back their games.
 
Dr. Zoidberg

Dr. Zoidberg

Member
2 Minutes Turkish said:
especially after the rumors circulating that it was apparently the 360 holding back their games.
Click to expand...

Well, they could have been saying it was holding back the size of their games, not the performance.
 
D

Dabanton

Member
2 Minutes Turkish said:
money shot



Don't even know if I'm buying this game at all after how disappointing GTA4 was.

Might try before I buy methinks. But I'm surprised that even now Rockstar are still doing this to PS3 ports, especially after the rumors circulating that it was apparently the 360 holding back their games.
Click to expand...

The game is worth a buy tbh the sheer sense of immersiveness is immense and there is plenty to see and do.

I also remember on Gaf when that used to be the prevailing mood that the PS3 version of R* games would be the best funny how that's turned out.

it only seems like yesterday that Wollan was telling us that the Xbox 360 version of GTA:IV would be so underpowered we'd need to load each island on separate disks.

Also i thought the reason for the orignal delay of the game was because they were having trouble with the PS3 version...
 
Truespeed

Truespeed

Member
It was nice to see Gimpstar get a free pass from Leadbetter on the DF comparison. Unfortunately, Square Enix wasn't so fortunate as their game received the full force of the Leadbetter Tsunami as he ravaged not only the game, but also the developers. I wonder if it has anything to do with Gimpstar being a company that originated in the UK? Considering all of the issues with the PS3 version he commends Gimpstar for a job well done.
 
B

Barrett2

Member
Mr Pockets said:
I played the PS3 version last night and most of today.

I have no clue what all the whining is about. The game is fun as hell, looks great, plays smooth. I have had no issues.

Have I played the 360 version? Nope. But even if I do, I doubt it will make the game any less fun.

I saw all the comparison shots with missing grass and signs that can't be read from 50ft away. I really don't care though...when I am speeding around on my horse, or watching a cut scene, I am not looking at the backgrounds with such scrutiny.

I will say that I don't like the look of the night sky though...that would probably be my only real complaint. Just looks kind of fake.

Anyway, continue on with your debate....good luck to whoever wins, it surely means so so much. :lol

Gonna go back to play now.
Click to expand...


Its about time someone set this thread straight. Droppin' truth bombs.
 
M

mujun

Member
Truespeed said:
It was nice to see Gimpstar get a free pass from Leadbetter on the DF comparison. Unfortunately, Square Enix wasn't so fortunate as their game received the full force of the Leadbetter Tsunami as he ravaged not only the game, but also the developers. I wonder if it has anything to do with Gimpstar being a company that originated in the UK? Considering all of the issues with the PS3 version he commends Gimpstar for a job well done.
Click to expand...

So he's not an xbot, he's biased against companies from outside the UK now?
 
N

Neuromancer

Member
2 Minutes Turkish said:
Don't even know if I'm buying this game at all after how disappointing GTA4 was.
Click to expand...
I don't know if you're talking about on a purely technical level but if you're not, well, I was really disappointed in GTA4 as well. RDR is about a million times better in every conceivable way as far as I'm concerned.
 
Truespeed

Truespeed

Member
mujun said:
So he's not an xbot, he's biased against companies from outside the UK now?
Click to expand...

When your game has more technical problems than a game you took a metaphorical shit on then you start to wonder about his objectivity.
 
B

burgerdog

Member
Truespeed said:
It was nice to see Gimpstar get a free pass from Leadbetter on the DF comparison. Unfortunately, Square Enix wasn't so fortunate as their game received the full force of the Leadbetter Tsunami as he ravaged not only the game, but also the developers. I wonder if it has anything to do with Gimpstar being a company that originated in the UK? Considering all of the issues with the PS3 version he commends Gimpstar for a job well done.
Click to expand...

:lol :lol :lol :lol Are you 6 years old?
 
M

mintylurb

Member
schennmu said:
Decent face off. Not much news I guess. Superior PS3 indoor lighting already got pointed out somewhere. Superior water and shadows on 360 are new, but I don't really see it in the screenshots. Water looks different but not really better in my eyes. And the missing shadows?

Overall I still think that Rockstar deserves a lot of shit for this port.
Click to expand...
The shadowing system could be the same, but with a horrible offset that looks for all the world like a bug. The offset may have been introduced by the reduction in resolution from 720p to 1152x640.

Anyway, looking at those DF shots, the ps3 version looks rather blurry even for a 640P game.
 
S

seady

Member
Is this game easier to achieve 100% (or to beat) compare to GTA series?
I always dropped GTA 1/3 of the way because things get repetitive and felt like I have a long way to achieve anything.
 
2

2real4tv

Member
mintylurb said:
The shadowing system could be the same, but with a horrible offset that looks for all the world like a bug. The offset may have been introduced by the reduction in resolution from 720p to 1152x640.

Anyway, looking at those DF shots, the ps3 version looks rather blurry even for a 640P game.
Click to expand...

My thoughts also looks quite horrible imo compared to the 360 version. Not looking forward to Agent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4
193
24K
Sleepwalker 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
236
94K
Maiden Voyage 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