After the release of Rockstar’s GTA western Red Dead Redemption, the major topic for discussion is not the game itself but instead the alleged inferiority of the PS3 version, which Rockstar claims is “identical” but critics claim runs at a lower resolution and with significantly degraded visuals.
The two versions are compared below, with the Xbox 360 on top:
The major difference is said to be a likely 640p resolution on the PS3 (upscaled to 720p), compared to full 720p on the Xbox 360, a not insignificant 20% difference. Other apparent inferiorities include less grass, rougher antialiasing and lower framerates.
Opinions range from calling the differences a matter of personal preference to condemning the PS3 as the inferior console.
The game itself is being heralded as a masterpeice and certain Game of the Year candidate, so whatever platform squabbles ensue, the game itself is beyond reproach.
Even so, players are wondering just why a game with a budget in the hundreds of millions is suffering from the same lazy porting which afflicts so many supposedly identical “multiplatform” games.
Agree to up for a James Franco Sex Tape!
I can’t believe i read people using this invalid “porting” argument. Bunch of idiots, you don’t know anything about game development.
And seriously, people are saying that Rockstar is lazy? that the game s ugly? (the fucking GOTY). My God, f♥♥k off, just f♥♥k OFF….
Basically what it seems to come down to on the shitty PS3 ports is that they make the games for the 360, which can’t handle the BluRay data storage capabilities of the PS3. So when the port’s put together the PS3 is shortchanged by having to work upward off of inferior hardware, and you end up getting a “good enough” product instead of what the PS3 could REALLY manage.
Just think how bad it would be if the games were MADE for the PS3 and then ported to the 360…you’d either get half the game cut out to fit on the 360 disc or you’d get a 360 game that runs 3-4 discs long and STILL looks like s♥♥t.
Who gives a s♥♥t about slight changes? Come on! It’s the contrast and aliassing…
Companies tend to do better for the platform that is doing better (sell wise) than the others so they can increase their profits. But for minor differences such as these, what’s the big deal here? Grow up…all of you.
so many dumb comments, yes xbox 360 version looks better but FFXIII was better on ps3 then 360. Its all about how the programmers tackle the project, nothing to do with the system. This argument has been going on which is a beefier powerhouse and too be honest I havnt seen a game one either system blow the other system out of the water. Each system has there own powerhouse games that show off there tech. Only difference between the two is sony has blu ray while xbox has better online funcionality. That is it.