Red Dead Redemption sub-HD on PS3

CVG: Red Dead Redemption sports the same sub-HD resolution as its predecessor, Grand Theft Auto 4, on the PlayStation 3.

The lower resolution results in a slightly less sharp image compared to its Xbox 360 brother, it's been claimed.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Strange_Evil2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

Boy it's gonna get hot in here...

Expected it to be the same as GTA4.... But it's upscaled well and the blurry look of GTA4 is not there... Won't even notice it if not for the pixel counting.

BeaArthur2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

Yeah, seriously, take cover. I still don't care though, I'm picking up the PS3 version. I doubt I would notice enough of a difference to actually care.

raWfodog2834d ago

A bunch of games, many really, are sub-HD and still look great. I'm from the Atari 2600 era so there's really no bickering over pixels from my end. The game looks great on both consoles. Get the one that makes you happy, if you have a choice. Me, I'm going for the extra content on the PS3.

ryuzu2834d ago

Extra content wins in this case I think but even so, Sub-HD on PS3 isn't really acceptable anymore.

The trade off is that the GTA4 engine is ready now, so it's either get the game now and accept that engine's limitations, or wait for R* to produce a PS3 optimised engine.... Personally I'll take RDR now and see what they've managed to do with Agent.

Maybe Red Dead Revenge, or whatever will take more advantage of PS3's strong points.


GWAVE2834d ago

Sub-HD didn't mar Halo 3's "amazing graphics". At least, that's what fans would claim.

And technically, wasn't MGS4 sub-HD? I'm not sure if that is so, but MGS4 is still one of this gen's best-looking games.

Faztkiller2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

Edit Sorry Double Post :(

Faztkiller2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

Its not a big deal just like Alan wake isn't a big deal they might be sub-HD but still look great I'm getting the PS3 version for the exclusive content and Free online

EDIT Still disappointed in R* I would expect more from them

The_Count2834d ago

I have never criticised an Xbox 360 game for being Sub HD and I won't be doing it because it's on PS3. It still looks great and unless you com pare the two side by side on the same tv then I doubt it will be blatantly obvious.

qwertyuiopasdfghjkl2834d ago

Basically I had this sub-HD debate confirmed a little less than 2 days ago... I love my PS3 to death, and hate Microsoft with a passion, but my comments about this game and 1152x640 added up 40 disagrees and 10 agrees... and almost losing my bubbles. (Used to have a LOT more)

The Sony Defense Force will quickly flame their own before surrendering to any negative news.

**** the comment section. I'm done.

qwertyuiopasdfghjkl2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

Double Post.

BulletToothtony2834d ago

but it has happened before when a site says... is SUB HD and then the next day they say.. oh no wait.. it was a mistake.. it is 720p

It's just weird that they have already accomplished a 720p game on ps3 and why would they go lower now..

-Alpha2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

If this was the 360 version people would be gloating to hell and back about how the 360 is inferior. Remember Alan Wake? Halo 3?

I can't believe I'm actually seeing people "not care" as much now when it comes to RDR for the PS3 version. What a complete 180.

I hope this FINALLY shows people that it's not a big deal. I plan on getting this for the PS3 too, mostly because my friends will be on the PS3 version. I can care less for graphical superiority, and I do wish that the general audience would take that approach when it comes to graphics. So many games have managed so much outside of graphics. Halo 3 still has some of the best multiplayer this gen and MGS IV is still considered one of the best PS3 games. Both were sub-HD to my knowledge.

Personally, in terms of graphics, I am head-over-heels for the atmospheric landscape and terrain of RDR. I want to witness the snowy mountains and the orange deserts while venturing in the nature of the world. It sounds like a work of art.

Hotel_Moscow2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

alpha male it runs at mgs4 1024x768

the main reason why it doesnt effect ps3 users is because we know it can run high processing games at 720p

bloop2834d ago

What's the extra content?? I ordered it for the 360 without knowing this :(

mikeslemonade2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

Told you so... Now didn't I say both versions would not be identical in that article yesterday. I was right and you were wrong HAHA.

I'm a PS3 zealot and this really sucks. The games graphics for both versions are not going to be that good to begin with. I really want that 720p. I want it on PS3 because of exclusive content, controller, and I have more friends. However 720p with a few friends on XBL and everyone has a Mic outweighs the PS3 version. Plus you can install the game into the 360 HDD to make the game even faster.

insomnium2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

"I can't believe I'm actually seeing people "not care" as much now when it comes to RDR for the PS3 version. What a complete 180."

Are you sure these are the SAME people who made a big deal out of AW? This is the biggest problem here. Generalizing the entire fanbase based on a few rotten apples. It really sounds mighty when you do that I mean it really helps your cause but there really is no truth in there is there? Who exactly made a 180? All of us?

shadow27972834d ago


You lost your bubbles when N4G was redesigned, not because of some comment you made. The Max number of bubbles I've seen is 4.

HolyOrangeCows2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

LOL, I do believe he means "1152x640"

Still getting the PS3 version for the extra content, just like I did with B:AA.
Inb4 someone misinformed that thinks that the extra content is only the costume.

insomnium2834d ago

You people are retarded. What is there to disagree with? Do share....

lowcarb2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

You 100 percent correct. I don't think for one second the entire PS3 360 fanbase are fanboys hating at every turn. These one sided people online spreading fud are the biggest f up's in gaming history. Once again I will never trust review sites without trying it out myself. For all we know the differences are so little you can barely even tell its sub hd.

Immortal Kaim2834d ago

I think fanboys on both sides can learn something from this. PS3 fanboys have been ridiculing Alan Wake and Splinter Cell for the last month for being sub-HD, now does it really matter if the game is great? 360 fanboys better not start trying to rub this in and make out that this is a huge deal, because you guys were saying it didn't matter with AW and SCC... You guys already makes yourselves look silly with your ignorance, don't add hypocrite to your resume :)

It isn't really a big deal, the game for all intents and purposes is fantastic, lower resolution doesn't change that.

Darkfocus2834d ago

quote from the article

"Moreover, since we've yet to have official confirmation from Rockstar, it's just a rumour for now, and more importantly - who cares?"

Anon19742834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

Not taking anything away from the games but the reason they're taking so much heat is that for over a year now the forums have been filled with fans falling all over themselves about how Splinter Cell, Alan Wake or the both of them would be raising the graphical bar, putting everything else to shame. I mean, look at those screen shots! Look at them!

On and on it went before either game had even seen the light of day. I personally was beginning to think that Alan Wake was the second coming of Christ. A nail in the coffin for the PS3 beast and it's graphically superior exclusives.

I've seen this game play out again and again with some 360 fans and every single time when whatever graphical marvel on the 360 is finally released that's supposed to prove, once and for all, that the 360 has what it takes - the games do no such thing. And we're seeing this happen all over again with Halo: Reach. I'm buying Halo: Reach because I've always been a big Halo fan, but I'm not holding my breath that it's going to look as stunning as Uncharted or God of War.

So cut some PS3 fans some slack for gloating a little that neither of these two releases turned out to be the graphical showcases that all new games will be judged by. If certain people hadn't hyped it up for so long or made all the bold graphical claims they did prior to each game's release they would have released, been recognized as good games and that would have been the end of it.

Bodyboarder_VGamer2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

Calm down people, RDR it's just a multiplat game while Halo, Alan Wake and SC:C were all exclusive games that supposedly took advantage of of the much simpler/easier to code X360. And since when multiplat games have been known to take advantage of the PS3 hardware anyway?

+ Show (20) more repliesLast reply 2834d ago
LaChance2834d ago ShowReplies(13)
MiamiACR2834d ago

Exactly, and really guys guys are really whining about that when this is possibly the best western game ever made and all that matters is which console got 720p or not? Come on guys does that really even come into consideration when you think about purchasing this game?

Shaman2834d ago

Its not really possibly best western game,its THE best western game EVER,and quite possibly one of the best open games off all time.Believe,its that good.

MiamiACR2834d ago

I'm trying not to hype myself up that much Shaman, RDR will be in my mailbox in a few hours....thanks for confirming it's the best western of all time, been waiting for one of these. Gun was one of my favorites on the old Xbox.

booni32834d ago

r u down talking bayonetta? get em outta here....

avengers19782834d ago

That's funny game informer didn't say a thing about any differences in the game. I'm playing on the PS3 and it looks pretty damn amazing to me. Oh, well I guess the people 4 xbox will have something to brag about for a couple days.

adlt2834d ago

I got my copy for the PS3 today and it was awesome, graphics are fine to my eyes (which are pretty picky) the gameplay has me HOOKED.

Hellsvacancy2834d ago

I aint even got a HD Tele (yet) so i doubt ill notice any differences, not that i care, i only own a PS3 so no sh|t wot console im buyin it for

Care wait

HQLocated1112834d ago

I'll wait for the lens of truth comparison before I say anything.

Jamie Foxx2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

zhuck,pog,firstknight where are you guys atleast you had some intelligence with your comments

la chance considering red uses gta 4s game engine its not surprising as the engine is programmed that way on ps3,its when exclusives run in sub HD that it becomes an issue name me a recent ps3 exclusive in sub HD? ill name you two recent 360 sub HD exclusives... alan wake and splinter cell ..your turn

Applegate2834d ago

At least we PS3 gamers get an extra costume !! :)

8thnightvolley2834d ago

they probably saw it coming so just set some gifts up to qwench the hate

cygnuszero2834d ago

Thats exactly why the PS3 got that costume. R* knew damn well the game didnt look as good, so they had to make up for it somehow.

AAACE52834d ago

The same as it was in all previous gens. The developers always have the option to take advantage of a systems power. They did it in the past and they could do it now if they wanted to.

The problem is, alot of developers just don't want to put the extra time, effort or money into such a task. Especially when there is no guarantee they will see a return on their efforts. So the logical thing to do is go by the industry standard and don't push it too hard.

bjornbear2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

i'll be honest and say I have an SD tv, and even though that would seem to make my opinion on this unfounded, do consider I play all these games in sub-HD, and they look amazing regardless.

I HAVE played my games on a Sony Bravia HD tv at a mates house countless of times, so I am NOT unfamiliar with how any of my games look on HD.

Hell, even my import Demon's Souls is unplayable because my SD tv doesn't recognize the signal (PAL =(), so I resent my SD tv more than anything,

but I also learnt that my LAST concern in a game is it's output (so as long as its not in black and white like Demon's Souls, but that has nothing to do with the argument at hand)

if a game looks amazing in SD, its only going to look better on an HD tv, even if its sub-HD

if it really makes that much of a difference to you (and you are not a dual console owner) then I feel sorry for you, because you are bothered by something that honestly shouldn't bother you at all =/

just enjoy the damn game

Solidus187-SCMilk2834d ago

also, ps3 fanboys never shutup about 360 sub-hd games even when there is no ps3 version of that game. Now the ps3 version is the only sub-hd version and it doesnt matter??? LOL.

I understand it doesnt matter to you but there are soo many hypocrites on here, rushing to embrace the gimped version.

If you did have a HD TV you would care, as it makes a difference.

corneliuscrust2834d ago

BRUTAL around here.

Can we all stop harping about subHD games now? PLEASE?

Around here it was a flame fest in the Splinter Cell and Alan Wake stories when there was even so much as a SNIFF about a lower resolution.

Why can't we just get along?

Chimerhazzard2834d ago

"Hell, even my import Demon's Souls is unplayable because my SD tv doesn't recognize the signal (PAL =(), so I resent my SD tv more than anything"

I did the same thing as you, I live in Europe and imported the game from the US. My SD TV also didn't display the signal correctly. Easy to fix, just buy an RGB signal cable for the PS2 (works on the Ps3 as well). These cables are cheap, I bought one for like 7 euros (8 bucks?). Improved image quality over the standard composite cable and the image is now in color :)

ef-u-22834d ago

All I have to say is Final Fantasy 13 and now I see you sonytards back pedaling you hypocritical douch bags theres even a member named "it only does sub hd "to the 360 owners let'em have it find them in here and call'em by name for being hypocrites dont let up either.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2834d ago
JasonPC360PS3Wii2834d ago ShowReplies(4)
sixaxis2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

i ask wtf Rockstar??? like wtf, this is so lazy work, its been 2 freaking years

@ Ju.
you speak truth. im also so disappointed, and furious. infact i dont know anymore whether i should buy it or not.

"Moreover, since we've yet to have official confirmation from Rockstar"

they better say something nice!! i dont get it, how can they screw us PS owners over so many times. i mean first it was with gta IVs resolution, then dlc timed exclusive deal with MS, now with RDR resolution. cmone, stop it already, we were the ones who bought those millions of previous GTA games (ya know GTA3, vice city, SA)

Ju2834d ago

I'm disappointed, TBH. If at all, they reused GTA's engine not optimizing much for the PS3. I thought they sold a couple of millions with that game. Not worth investing in fixing the problem, huh ? Or just good enough making some more millions.

Well, what'u gotta do. Will get it anyway...

MysticStrummer2834d ago

RDR is beautiful. A friend and I got it at midnight, got into a private session of free roam, and just rode around doing random stuff for four hours. Didn't touch the story for all that time. This is to open world gaming what GTA3 was to open world gaming last generation. Awesome.

Awesomeness2834d ago

*cancel ps3 version*

*buy 360 version*

CadDad2834d ago

I'm thinking about doing the same. I'm also thinking of just passing on it because I have an unnatural dislike for laziness. :/


DA_SHREDDER2834d ago

This game is being considered as one of the best games of the year, yet I dont see it? Be it the 360 or ps3 version.

Smkt2834d ago

its the same thing that happened with gta4.. awesome sales..perfect scores.. OMG GOTY! then after a few months.. hey.. wait a minute.. this isn't fun.. OVERRATED GAME!!

bobdog6262834d ago

There not Lazy.The Game is that Big and use a lot memory thats all.Remember they only have 512 to work with so give them a break ok

CadDad2834d ago


There are only so many options here for why the game could be different from console to console.

1. Laziness with regards to giving equal experience for equal dollar.
2. Lack of ability to make the same game on both systems.
3. Lack of investment capital//time.

We know Rockstar makes good quality games, so the ability is there, and we know they have a ton of cash and resources to develop games, so that leaves the lazy choice.

I'm not saying it's a bad game or anything, i just think developers who "have to" skimp on a game on one system should skimp on the game on all systems for an equal experience. Anything less than the same game on all platforms for a multi-plat game is a disservice to paying customers.

I hear your apology for Rockstar, I just don't buy it, and regardless of the disagrees I get, it's still just my opinion and unlikely to change. I feel the same about all games that are better//worse from system to system.


tinybigman2834d ago

I didn't care when I played GTA4 on PS3, I didn't care after beating SC:C and AW. So I'm pretty sure I won't give two sh*ts about this when I get it for PS3.

To me the people who argue this back and forth have nothing better to do with their time.

A great game is a great game no matter what resolution it plays in.

Peace I gotta get back to work lol.

monkey nuts2834d ago

+ Bubs for a well said comment. Gaming is being hi jacked by teenagers it would seem, whos insecurities even extend to their gaming preferences.

aGameDeveloper2834d ago

I actually DID care about the sub HD resolution on GTA4. I loved the game, but could only play the game for a couple hours before the blurriness caused enough strain on my eyes to put it away for the night. The negative effect depended on the post-processing effects playing at any particular time. During daylight scenes with little to no weather, it was pretty playable. Darker scenes, especially with heavy weather effects, were the worst (IIRC - I barely got to the second island - mostly because of this issue, and due to starting over after they added trophy support).

FlipMode2834d ago

I gotta say its pretty funny watching fanboys go back and forth like

OmarJA-N4G2834d ago

Nice job R*, still getting the PS3 version.

Good thing i don't own an HD TV.

Darkstorn2834d ago

Same. HDTVs are just signs of overconsumption. I've got better things to spend my money on.

bpac1234567892834d ago

I havn't read the comments yet but i expect to here a lot of, "well who cares", "doesn't matter", and "just enjoy the game." I hope not because everyone in here went off on Alan Wake for being Sub- hd. So to just ignore it becasue its a ps3 title is so hypocritical. We should expect more from our games. I didn't spend $500 on a ps3 and $600 on and HD tv to play sub- hd games. And yes it does make a difference. Games that arn't in true HD don't look as sharp or clear as games that are.

raztad2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

I care about resolution, and it looks like the PS3 version is just inferior. Deal with it people. That's a shame although somehow expected knowing RDR is just GTA4 + horses, both technically and gameplay-wise.

Well, now I understand why R* San Diego was doing their best not to show the PS3 version. I'm not hyped about this game, nor I intent to get it anytime soon, I'll wait for a huge price drop, GTA4 was not a fun game for me and RDR looks exactly the same.

Christopher2834d ago

Very disappointed with R*. This isn't the 540p that they were claiming in the other thread, but this is pretty much R* using the GTA4 Stories engines without any attempt to make the resolutions equal. I'm sure it still looks nice, but this is a sad sign when it still takes a first-party to put out a true HD game of this level on the PS3.

vhero2834d ago

As I said with Alan Wake its doesn't matter as it still outputs on your TV at 720p upscaled or not.. I just find it amusing that there is like 10 articles on this already not surprised just amused shows how 2 sided gamers can be as the people slating this for being sub HD were the same sticking up for Alan Wake and Halo being Sub HD.

No real 360 fan with half a brain has the right to slate a game for being sub HD considering the 360s biggest seller in fact Xboxs (the whole rang from Xbox to 360) biggest selling game of all time is Sub HD. People do it as its rare for the PS3 to get one so they think its a small victory or something for 360 I say its a small victory for PS3 as it brings out the idiots who post this crap to the world and who are the fanboys and who are gamers.

Greywulf2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

I mean, really? Its cute to see you guys get all excited over a SUBHD multiplatform game (which previous version of engine was subhd), but god, at least get it right.

AW. 6 years. "full power of the 360", claimed to trump UC2/GodOfWar3/Killzone2/MGS4/A nything on the PS3. = SUBHD/Model Swapping for Cut Scenes/Different FX in cut scenes...etc.

*Proving* That the 360 can't pull off any serious fx in a HD frame. Now we are all waiting for Reach, just like we waited for AW..Gears..Mass Effect.. or any other unreal engine game..


Multiplatform game, SUBHD. which is the case for multiplatforms. The PS3 has its examples of Running exclusive titles in non-subHD resolutions. The 360...


Anyone pretending this is a big deal, is totally neglecting the fact that No one has hyped RDR > Uc2, as every single 360 fan did here. Or hell, even 'on par'.. with its low polygon box men running around.

The difference 360 fans,

Would be if PS3 fans were trumpeting RDR as a graphical juggernaut that will trump all games as we know it, PROVING the PS3 hasn't ran out of hardware ability. Thats the case with AW, and it fell on its face. It doesn't change the game, but it proves the 360 is tapped out.

Thats not the case for RDR on the PS3. Its not showing RDR ( A M U L T I P L A T F O R M) game to show off the hardware.

ceedubya92834d ago

Bickering back and forth about "sub-HD" resolutions is just stupid. As long as the game looks good enough and plays well, then who cares if the games is 640something-p native?

We buy the games to play them and have a good time. Most people don't know anything about pixel counting and all that, and wouldn't really care if they did. The sooner we all get back to playing the games instead continuing to play the 360vsPS3 sillyness, the better.

sGIBMBR2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

What a butt hurt fanboy rofl... Get over it, its just a game!! Fool, is there any need for the attack on the 360?

I bet you was one of those dudes that was slagging off the 360 version of FF right? Now the shoe is on the other foot, you totally change your mind. Fanboys at their best xD

Have a good day, loser!

Boody-Bandit2834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

Digital Foundry is reporting that people should wait unitl their findings are made public before people jump to conclusions. Check Twitter for yourselves if any of this really matters to you guys and gals.

Besides I thought sub HD wasn't a problem?
Hypocrisy much?

niceguywii602834d ago (Edited 2834d ago )

That's fake. That is damage control based from a upscaled screenshot. That is why that story FAILED!!!!!!!!!!!!

Army_of_Darkness2834d ago

the 360 version is 720p, but the PS3 version is sub-hd(640p)?! How on earth could that even be possible?!
The PS3 is more than capable of running this game at 720p, just look at GOW3 for f#@K sakes!
I call this bullsh1t! I'm getting the game because it looks awesome and I know it can't be sub-hd if the 360 is 720p..