Check out IGN's latest video feature to see which console has the better graphics in this side-by-side comparison.
I'll still be getting the PS3 version for the bonus content but R* has to get their shit together if they want Agent to hang with the big boys.
Yeah, PS3 blur at 0:54 *shudders*. I'm looking forward to Rockstar finally making some *real* next-gen content with Agent. They've got a lot to prove after this RDR mess.
this comparison isn't even 720p and it's compressed there's no way you'd be able to see a difference in this video :/
The sad part is, even at a low video res and compression you can still tell the difference. If you can't consider yourself lucky.
if you download the 720p version if you are an ign insider you can clearly see the differences. Its a great game though and equal fun will be had on whichever version you get.
I seriously don't understand why your getting disagrees?! because as much as I hate to admit it, the 360 version does look better! you don't even have to look hard to notice the difference!
Yeah. On that video. But in the real world, my RRR does not look like that. And if the 360 looks better than my PS3 version then so be it, but should the articles here reflect reality?
@ army. Dude, 'remember' and others are getting disagrees because the ps3 fans cannot stand it when the ps3 peforms worse and is called out. When the PS3 excells, then we must laud it for its awesome prowess. funnily enough, when the ps3 underperforms, we must make excuses, blame developers, downplay the differences - ANYTHING except acknowldege the facts that the ps3 underperformed. This is the unwritten rule of N4g and yeah, it's a sad state of affairs, yet that's precisely why you got disagrees. In fact, ever since this Rdr fiasco, ps3 fans have debubbled me simply because I am pointing out the facts. The personal attacks and abuse have piled on thick and fast in the last few days. It's amazing to think that these people's egos are so inextricably intertwined with their ps3 console that they resort to abuse and name calling whenever their fragile egos are knocked, even slightly. It's disturbing to think these people call themselves 'gamers', when clearly they simply are angry, insecure fanboys. Some are young and I can cut them some slack, sure, but quite a a few are in their thirties and fourties... That's a worrying prospect.
@commodore64 I know exactly what you mean. Some fanboys are just way too sensitive and biased. This game looks somewhat better on the 360. That's just the way it is.
I dont agree with all the personal attacks that are leveled at you and its true that fanboys will never logically argue an issue but I have to say that the blame for this does go to the developers and not the PS3. It's not as if the PS3 cannot run at 720p, 1080p. This is just a cost issue with R* re-using the same tired engine that they used for GTA4. BTW, I love my 360 and my PS3 equally :) but I will be getting this on the PS3 because I dont do LIVE.
These bogus rigged comparisons have got to go.
I saw comparisons in real life with my PS3 and my friend's 360 copy (on my 360). The 360 version looks sharper on my television.
Right. I don't disagree with that. Just that this looks nothing like what is on my tv and these fanboys know it. Now it has become "look how much spamming flamebait we can put on N4G!" Like MS cares and will reward them.
This Game is using the same Engine as GTAIV, right, so everyone knows what happened with that game and by that there is no complaints at all, cos no-1 can make a "bayonetta case" over this game and IF it's what guys + reviewers are saying, the game is great, so you no-1 will give a Damn...
WTF is that ? Get some help from Naughty Dogs or work harder on the PS3 version... don't make us look bad By the way RDR is overrated ! good game but no where close to +9
R* was never loyal to sony GTA was never a playstation staple either deal with it all corporate companys care about money that goes for Sony,MS,Nintendo,Square Enix,Ubisoft,Activision,EA and espically Rockstar
RDR is rated perfectly fine and AW is way underrated. How dare you hate on the best western game ever created.
Did IGN do a comparison video with any other multi plats that were superior on the PS3? if I recall, they didn't do a separate review on FF13 or a comparison video. I may be wrong though.
...this is NOT gaming journalism. It does nothing but toss heaping loads of fuel to the fanboy flames.
^ Agreed. Rockstar is just stupid for releasing such a diff in versions and graphically opps in both. I fully agree with you about Agent, now they have to prove something to me before I put Agent on my must buy list. They do NOT get a pass for me, after I bought the PS3 version of RDR
I hear ya man.
Blnid DAs are just: single 360 console owners rockstar employees or just gamers who accept substandard quality... geez, grow a set or buy a set of glasses
Theres such a huuuuuge difference, how the hell can i play this game knowing my version is soooooooo inferior..? /s
Last night when i was playing rdr something dawned on me..Iforgot to turn the rgb to full..Before the game looked blurry as hell and just wasn't sharp.After i turned on rgb to full it was like a new game the colors looked very sharp the overall looked hella nice.I would be happy if rockstar would fix the bugs,other then that i have no problems with the game.Websites blow it up like crazy,buy the game and enjoy it..
Its pretty weird how one scene shows a lot of dust kicking up in the Xbox version and the PS3 version is missing it entirely. Yet, near the end, the PS3 version shows dust in places the Xbox version does not.
Dynamic environments maybe?
yeah there is dynamic wind or something I read in one review...that could have been it... same with the sky...at one point the 360 and PS3 versions have radically different skys despite it being the same 'scene'...
When in motion there is very little difference, from that video anyway. A compressed reszied vid on the internet.
I'm waiting for somebody to compare all the comparisons.
Dude, phenomenal idea! I'll tell my buddy on Gametrailers to get right on it (seriously).
im wondering when all of this will end.
They are really beating this dead horse...
...but skinning it, and selling the hide and meat to the General Store. ;)
They can buy it back from the General Store to beat it even more.
And then beat hookers .... I mean what
Then maybe you guys should stop instigating these console superiority wars
The PS3 version is better, it has exclusive content on it.
it needs the exclusive content.did you see the video? watch it and you'll know why.it had to redeem itself someway!
WTF, man? I can hardly see ANY difference in that compressed video.
totally agree it might be a half ditched attempt for rockstar to cover for their mistakes... The video is hard to see the difference but high definition still and videos clearly show there is a difference
That video was crappy as hell can't see anything..even if the 360 version is a lil better doesn't make the ps3 version crap.Rockstar can't build from the ground up for the ps3,would cost way to much money and most of all..time.I would love to see them make a Gta or another sandbox title just for the ps3 and fill up 50gigs of blu ray space.Not sure about agent will see..
Yeah the exclusive SUB HD reslolution.
Alan wake, Splinter cell conviction and every Halo say hi.
Oh and MGS4 and Ratchet & Clank also say hi. Not to mention, the PS3 has far more sub-hd multiplatform games than the 360 does.
Ratchet and Clank is 720p native.
No, I thought it was well known that the PS3 Ratchet games were sub HD. Ratchet & Clank: Tools of Destruction = 960x704 Ratchet & Clank: A Crank in Time = 960x704 http://forum.beyond3d.com/s... There are sub HD games on both systems, but if you check the above link you will see that there are more sub HD games on the PS3.
Cool, a low res video comparison. Next on the list, compare the audio fidelity on a .01" speaker.
I don't get why they bother doing this either, if it's not going to be at a respectable res then it's not going to mean a whole lot since half of what i see is video compression.
i never expected much from RDR, being GTA IV's graphic's was not that amazing on ps3 i can't say i expected RDR's to be
ok, havin jus got this game and bein pleasently surprised at how awesome it looks, i can safely say that i no longer give a damn. only reason i checked this vid is cos ign do good comparisons, and in all fairness, the difference was somehat less noticeable in this than it was in the other ones i've seen. oh and for all the people wantin to jump on me for sayin that the difference aint that bad, i'm sayin it's LESS NOTICEABLE, i'm not sayin it ain't there, so you can holster your guns and pick your controllers back up, and i'll be on my way...
i will wait for lens of truth comparison
Last I heard they were having issues with their comparison systems or something, and they only compare a fraction of the titles available. Personally, I've often found myself at odds with their findings. I've seen games that they claimed were practically identical but the PS3 had better performance and a couple of seconds load difference and they called it a tie. I've seen comparisons of a fighting game (blazeblu) where the game is, again, identical but they complain that the 360's controls are deeply flawed and give the game a tie. With Wolfenstein they said the 360 version had screen tears almost every time you fired a gun but because the PS3 version had 8 seconds difference in loading times they were a tie. Really? Screen tearing every time a gun shoots versus 8 seconds load difference? I find LOT's comparisons interesting but it's when I see things like this it seriously makes me question the rest of their comparisons. How do they decide when performance benefits are cancelled out by load time, or control issues are just forgotten about like they're nonexistent? And usually games are so close you'd never know there was any issue if it wasn't for sites like this. I think they just turn some of us into pixel counters and make us forget we're supposed to be gamers.
You love your Playstation 3 waaaaay too much. lol! Time to find a women buddy.
I can honestly say in the 4 hours I put in last night that these comparisons never entered my head once. In fact after chasing off some rowdy types from the ranch, I was kind of choked up, gazing in awe at my first sunrise.
true, RDR is one beautiful sandbox game. @bathyj did you see the missing foliage or grass from the PS3 version? I mean u did mention the same thing about the FF13 x360 version. But anyways, i can't really tell much differences between the 2 versions. These pixel and graphic comparison video just doesn't do anything for the gaming community except fueling this stupid fanboy wars, and make game less enjoyable for everyone. Go play what ever u guys want cause this is stupid.
... We get it, alright? .. The Xbox 360 version is superior in the graphics department.. No one bloody cares anymore anyway. We just want to play the game on whichever console we own it on. Okay? Now be off with these comparisons.. Please! .. I beg of you. :(
People do care if there is a difference because it is strange that there is a difference when other games prove there shouldn't be...but I do agree about these comparison videos they are everywhere
"hen other games prove there shouldn't be" nope, others games prove ps3 would be every time really superior (like ps3 exclusives)
post (first it was hard to double post....no its easy)
Who cares? It looks fantastic on both consoles!!!
Who cares?? I'll remember you said that. lol! Quick question. How many faces does a coin have?
I care!! i have both consoles and is good to know that one or other is better so i can decide witch to buy......witch is 360 for me! You can run but you can no hide........you know that this is the best game of the year so is difficult for a ps3 fan boy to recognize that it is better done in a console that you have called "inferior". It happened with Bayonetta and GTA4 before so what is happening? Doesn't the blue ray work for this games?
Then get the PS3 version. It has more content. Lol. You don't have a PS3. Chill out! It is an inferior system. Don't troll. You know the PS3 is more powerful. God of War 3 much? Multi-plats look better on the system they were developed for. You're just trying to get troll bait. Lol.
I have uncharted 2 and god of war. Uncharted2 is the best looking game ever made but i think after E3 with Crysis 2 you will understand that is not ANYMORE and that the 360 is capable of make what Ps3 do. The makers of Crysis 2 said that 360 version looks better than Crysis for PC and thats something to think about! Gears2 is looking terrific too and no less Halo Reach! The only difference between both consoles is the blueray meaning space! Is it difficult to swallow that somebody who has both consoles likes better the 360?
Oooh and GTV and Red Dead were not developed for 360 remember that GT4 was exclusive for PS3 until microsoft buy it. Just refreshing memory! LOL
lol, delusional fan in denial. everybody with a brain knows that not a single game on xbox is equal to god of war, uncharted, ratchet, heavy rain, etc, but some multiplatforms, like gta and others, are not optimised for ps3 (time and money).
Really? I mean, seriously? You have to be joking. Ratchet in no way, shape or form is anything special. Lots of 360 games look better than Ratchet & Clank.
Gta 4 ran better on the Ps3 less pop in,And overall more people liked the way it looked.Simple fact is the Ps3 is a mofo to code theirs nothing more to it.
dosen't matter anymore, after uncharted 2 we all know what kind games the ps3 can run ,so.. yeah anything below ...hell even uncharted 1, is the developers fault graphics wise, thats all i can comment on until i play the game, dose every game have to be almost looking like uncharted 2, kz2, or crysis...nope, just look at deamon's Soul's hell of a game, but it would be nice if games looked good, but i guess its no surprise since its a multy plat game .