This is the reason why I refuse to buy Red Dead Redemption.cjelly said:[...] it's definitely a mess. PS3 version is a mess compared to the 360.
Mikey Jr. said:DF still hasn't put up a RDR article yet? Didnt they say it would be up today?
Red Dead Redemption Face-Off tomorrow. Wanted it complete for today but there's just too much to cover. 18 hours ago
-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.
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.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.
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.
kingslunk said:PS3 copy is fine imo
biggest bullshit evercjelly 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.
That's certainly reaching, it's called lock-on (in settings). Disable it?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...
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.
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...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.
LiquidMetal14 said:That's certainly reaching, it's called lock-on (in settings). Disable it?
It's all part of the grieving process.speculawyer said:I can't believe there are some 35 pages on this topic. :lol
Look under the jetty in the top pic.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.
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.
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.
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.
lawblob said:About sums it up
lawblob said:About sums it up
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.
2 Minutes Turkish said:especially after the rumors circulating that it was apparently the 360 holding back their games.
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.
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.
Amazing isn't it?!speculawyer said:I can't believe there are some 35 pages on this topic. :lol
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.
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.2 Minutes Turkish said:Don't even know if I'm buying this game at all after how disappointing GTA4 was.
mujun said:So he's not an xbot, he's biased against companies from outside the UK now?
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.
burgerdog said::lol :lol :lol :lol Are you 6 years old?
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.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.
Truespeed said:When they try to discredit a journalist from one site more than a journo from another then you start to wonder about their objectivity.
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.