PS3 vs Xbox 360 Red Dead Redemption.


Recommended Posts

To bad they couldn't have had them identical - in terms of character placement - but in regards to the 'blurry', looks to me as it's developers doing the same old PS tricks to alleviate issues with the jaggies. I remember they used to do crazy tactics to get the 'jaggies' to work in their favor on PS2. That will always be Xbox(360) advantage over PS#, it has superior AA. Something I never paid attention to until I purchased my first Xbox.

I do not own a 360, only a PS3

And on a side note, why does it look like one image is set to the color profile 'warm' (xbox) while the other is set to 'cool' (ps3)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't bother with the ps3 version if you have both consoles. So far not so good. Lens of truth ftw soon I hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't bother with the ps3 version if you have both consoles. So far not so good. Lens of truth ftw soon I hope.

Well it's my rule to get 360 versions for multiplat multiplayer anyways but I just smell some major BS in this thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't bother with the ps3 version if you have both consoles. So far not so good. Lens of truth ftw soon I hope.

You're also a known 360 fanboy.. (no offense Brian! and I don't mean to get this tagged for flaming.. honestly.).. of which I respect your opinion, but.. as it is if I'm going to pick this up (eventually) I might have to pick it up for the PS3 ..

The free online -really- makes a difference for someone on a budget.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.

And from that stand point, I can say I quite like the PS3 version..

Night isn't supposed to have a yellow tint to it. The blue of the PS3 version actually looks decent.

They're probably taken at different times.

I don't think you can say either looks worse than the other though. They're different, but they both look good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not one legit link in this thread? Kind of disappointing

Those sites haven't received their copy for analysis yet. Can't imagine why. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those sites haven't received their copy for analysis yet. Can't imagine why. :p

IGN PS3 review - 9.7, same as 360, no mention of major visual differences. And that's even with an article stating they got the 360 version first, would put up a PS3 review when they got a chance to play it.

http://ie.ps3.ign.com/articles/109/1090380p1.html - Review

http://ie.ps3.ign.com/articles/109/1090130p1.html - "Where's the PS3 RDR review?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IGN PS3 review - 9.7, same as 360, no mention of major visual differences.

IGN is full of ****, much like any of Murdoch's companies, they are the gaming equivalent of Fox News. At least they are consistently full of it though! :p

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

tbh unless a reputable source does a side by side comparison, using the same equipment (i.e. cables and TV) taken at the same reference point at the same "time of day" in game, then I will care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spookie, #1 hater

Spookster speaks the absolute 100% truth though, IGN has been known to be paid off for their reviews and has been called out on it before.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol at calling me an Xbox fanboy. First time I have been called that in the 7 years I have been here. Couldn't be further from the truth. In fact I can't stand ms (nor Sony).

However, I am a fanboy of Chevrolet. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spookie, #1 hater

Keepin' it real bro.

Spookster speaks the absolute 100% truth though, IGN has been known to be paid off for their reviews and has been called out on it before.

*high five for following the news as well* :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spookster speaks the absolute 100% truth though, IGN has been known to be paid off for their reviews and has been called out on it before.

Source?

I'm not questioning you, I would just like to read about it and Google didn't turn up anything obvious besides some PS3 fanboys moaning about some adverts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find all these console graphics comparisons pretty pointless for anything but the ridiculous "my console is better than yours" wars that obsess people so much. You buy it on whichever console you have (and if you own both, usually buy it for a feature-based reason such as Xbox Live) and then never see the other version. I remember frequently reading that the PS3 version of GTA IV wasn't as good graphically as the Xbox 360. I even found some screens (that are fairly similar to these here in the differences) and was a bit worried. But I worried about nothing as it looks great! It's not that there aren't differences, just that once you play a game it is usually of no real consequence what graphical differences there are.

Roll on Friday! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

tbh unless a reputable source does a side by side comparison, using the same equipment (i.e. cables and TV) taken at the same reference point at the same "time of day" in game, then I will care.

So you think at a slightly earlier time of day the PS3 version will magically have less jaggies ? and magically then not run on a sub HD resolution as has been confirmed it does ? :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IGN is full of ****, much like any of Murdoch's companies, they are the gaming equivalent of Fox News. At least they are consistently full of it though! :p

I don't see how they're full of **** tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think at a slightly earlier time of day the PS3 version will magically have less jaggies ? and magically then not run on a sub HD resolution as has been confirmed it does ? :p

but the problem is that it has not been confirmed

(plus he means night time in-game)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're also a known 360 fanboy.. (no offense Brian! and I don't mean to get this tagged for flaming.. honestly.).. of which I respect your opinion, but.. as it is if I'm going to pick this up (eventually) I might have to pick it up for the PS3 ..

The free online -really- makes a difference for someone on a budget.

Not that I disagree on your observation, but I do not see nor can I think of a single scenario where one can be called a fanboy and that is a positive thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but the problem is that it has not been confirmed

(plus he means night time in-game)

I know he meant nightime in the game. and while I don't think the PS3 version looks horribly much worse, it is obviously running at a lower res than the 360 one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think at a slightly earlier time of day the PS3 version will magically have less jaggies ? and magically then not run on a sub HD resolution as has been confirmed it does ? :p

Actually I care about gameplay 1st, story 2nd and graphics 3rd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Source?

I'm not questioning you, I would just like to read about it and Google didn't turn up anything obvious besides some PS3 fanboys moaning about some adverts.

http://www.gamespy.com/articles/108/1082347p1.html

http://www.joystiq.com/2008/05/02/ign-responds-to-concerns-over-exclusive-gta-iv-review/

You seriously bet they weren't paid to write a favorable review of this?

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/105/1056419p1.html : quote:

Either that or we're all getting bribed to give games slightly higher scores.

http://horizonshadow.org/ign-you-redefine-biased/

OR.. the biggest incriminating link I have for you to read..

http://www.vgmwatch.com/?p=1111

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.