GTAIV: PS3 version runs at 630p while 360 version at 720p

[maash]

http://www.ps3forums.com/showthread.php?t=136366

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1...p;postcount=513

This is from the same guy who made news that Halo 3 was running at 640p and Bungie admitted he was right.

[Coldgunner]

here comes the flamer wars...

[McSmiggins]

In before the flame war. :)

It really doesn't matter, at all, I can't believe all the fuss people made about Halo 3.

[sTIMPZ]

Halo 3 looks good so it really doesn't matter to me...and GTAIV is going to look even better.

[Coldgunner]

indeed, you gotta be pretty shallow to not buy a game for qualities other than its graphics, however this appears to be some guy who reckons its running at X res

[spenser.d]

indeed, you gotta be pretty shallow to not buy a game for qualities other than its graphics, however this appears to be some guy who reckons its running at X res

I'm pretty sure we tried mentioning this when people tried to mutiny Bungie over it, but nobody listened then...

-Spenser

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Who cares what res it runs at, graphics aren't that important (especially considering how popular GTA3, VC and SA were, and they were ugly).

here comes the flamer wars...

-f

[Kushan]

I'm going to need a more credible source for that claim than some random guy on some random forum.

[DrCheese]

I don't have a problem with it, but I've always felt it's lame that they can still stick "720p" "1080p" on the back of the box. Halo 3 did that. Upscaling does not equal HD at all.

[DELTETHISACCOUNT]

Damnit, I wish people would stop telling us this crap. It's only then that I notice the blurriness and upscaling in games like Halo 3 and COD4.

[spenser.d]

I'm going to need a more credible source for that claim than some random guy on some random forum.

Why? All you have to do is count the pixels. You don't need an expert for that one.

-Spenser

[Kushan]

Why? All you have to do is count the pixels. You don't need an expert for that one.

-Spenser

I'm also incredibly lazy.

Also, I don't have a PS3 to count the pixels of that version.

[maash]

here is what its running at

PS3: 630p with 2xAA at FP16 Lighting

X360: 720p with 2xAA with FP10 Lighting

PS3 has a more softer image because it is being upscaled to 720p While you see more jaggies on the 360 version because it is being rendered natively at 720p.

[Kupo-Cheer]

I've also heard that the 360 version suffers from very minor framerate problems every now and then, so I guess that is why. I would rather the game run at ever so slightly less than HD quality, if need be, in order for the game to run at a silky-smooth framerate. Halo 3 was a beautiful game (obviously not the *greatest* graphically, but it was nonetheless pretty), and so is GTAIV, regardless of resolution.

I'm still getting the 360 version simply because I don't have a PS3.

[spenser.d]

I don't have a problem with it, but I've always felt it's lame that they can still stick "720p" "1080p" on the back of the box. Halo 3 did that. Upscaling does not equal HD at all.

Well if you want to get technical (and Bungie has mentioned this on their story about it), they render two buffers both at 640p, so you get 1280 rendered pixels and so they can easily put 720p on the back and not be twisting the truth.

(Info on that is here: http://nikon.bungie.org/bwu/index.html?item=147)

-Spenser

[CY:G]

Seriously, who cares what they did to get it to look how it looks as long as it looks nice.

I mean, yeah its pretty cool to know the technical details, but if you think that this info makes one version superior/inferior that the other then ....

[spacer]

There is such a thing as 630p?

[d4v1d05]

You can tell from the pixel. I know from my experience after having seen lots of pixels in my time.... Seriously though, I'm getting the 360 version and I don't care what resolution either is at... It's all about the gameplay for me

[Kushan]

I've also heard that the 360 version suffers from very minor framerate problems every now and then, so I guess that is why. I would rather the game run at ever so slightly less than HD quality, if need be, in order for the game to run at a silky-smooth framerate. Halo 3 was a beautiful game (obviously not the *greatest* graphically, but it was nonetheless pretty), and so is GTAIV, regardless of resolution.

I'm still getting the 360 version simply because I don't have a PS3.

I've heard the opposite, I've heard that the 360 keeps it's framerate much better than the PS3 version does.

Source: http://kotaku.com/384422/which-version-of-...nd-360-versions

The Grand Theft Auto series has never been synonymous with a rock solid frame rate, something it generally seems to get a pass for. While GTA IV is smoother in general than it's predecessors, it can expectedly suffer during chaos. The Xbox 360 version seemed capable of achieving a smoother frame rate, peaking higher in certain circumstances, such as in confined spaces or during light traffic, but both versions seemed to regularly run at a similar clip.

So it's a tradeoff, smoother frames or smoother frame rate.

If the above theory of the PS3 being upscaled to 720p makes it look smoother, then surely anyone playing at 1080p wont notice any jaggies?

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

All the review quotes on each version on the technical side of things can be read here - http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=286527

PS3:

360

How do people tell what resolutions the games actually run at? :/ Some sort of software/hardware? Surely they don't zoom in and "count the pixels" ? :blink:

[Guest]

90 pixels... big deal, didnt notice it with halo, doubt i will notice it with GTA.

How do people tell what resolutions the games actually run at? :/ Some sort of software/hardware? Surely they don't zoom in and "count the pixels" ? :blink:

Yep, think thats exactly how its done... lol, sad really

[CY:G]

How do people tell what resolutions the games actually run at? :/ Some sort of software/hardware? Surely they don't zoom in and "count the pixels" ? :blink:

That guy over at 3dGaming forum says that he is a developer and can figure out all that data including quantity and type of AA, HDR, etc just by looking at good picture of each version of the game running..., yes.... who would trust this guy right??? well, he appears to have quite the credibility over at those forums and after all he was the one that calculated the pixels on Halo 3...

[+InsaneNutter MVC]

Surely they don't zoom in and "count the pixels" ? :blink:

Yup apparently that?s what was done with Halo 3 and Cod 4, some people must have a lot of time!

[spenser.d]

90 pixels... big deal, didnt notice it with halo, doubt i will notice it with GTA.

Yep, think thats exactly how its done... lol, sad really

No, that's not how it's done. You would be lucky to come out with such an even number as 630 by counting by hand. It probably has something to do with using a capture card to feed an image into your computer straight from the game and having a program count the pixels for you.

Actually I take that back. Halo 3 was found out first using this method (which is far easier than counting 640 pixels):

Easy math there (I guess what you're looking at is part of the sniper rifle).

-Spenser

[Julius Caro]

No, that's not how it's done. You would be lucky to come out with such an even number as 630 by counting by hand. It probably has something to do with using a capture card to feed an image into your computer straight from the game and having a program count the pixels for you.

-Spenser

What? If the ps3/360 was outputting those pixels you wouldn't even need a program to "count" since the resolution information would already be in the "stream".

Anyway, the ps3 and the 360 will output 720, 1080, etc IN SPITE of the resolution the game is actually being rendered at. If there is an option to make the ps3 output at non-standard resolutions so as to "count" the pixels, let me know!

The games are just upscaled, when the rendering resolution is lower than 720. Knowing how the "upscaling" algorithms work should be enough to detect the actual rendering resolution if it's too obvious. Edit: Just seen that picture with the steps. Proves me point, as those steps are the result of a rather 'simple' upscaling technique.