The Real HD DMC4 Console Comparison: Motion Blur In PS3 Version

Ripten's Patrick Steen writes:

"Any differences shown in screenshot comparisons can lead the uninformed to tout one version as superior to the other. This is the real Devil May Cry 4 screenshot comparison with lossless HD captures. What they show is that informed difference only cement how very alike both versions are."

Follow the link for lossless HD screenshots and an indepth analysis.

The story is too old to be commented.
predator4687d ago

why cant people leave it that they are both great and that capcom have done a great job.

Yet this comparison is not the real one either, both consoles should be hooked up via HDMI then you will see no difference at all between them.

Though i do not like how sony make you mess around with the settings to get the best out of it.

Any how great job and great game to Capcom on both consoles. I look forward to resi 5.

Cryxen4687d ago

people can't leave it because Sony fans feel they deserve a better port as their machine is more powerful.

Xbox fans won't leave it because they don't want their console to lose steam and become another xbox1 or dreamcast.

techie4687d ago

I think you'll find that this comparison concludes similarily to your view. Both are great. The Motion Blur explains the a difference in still images though...we didn't know that before.

predator4687d ago

@Deep: exactly, but it would be interesting to see both hooked up via HDMI but then dont say which version is which. that will prove there is no difference when people cant tell which one is which.

masterg4687d ago

We need this because we were shown photos yesterday that told a different story.

Here are the facts from this article:
1. The texture resolutions are the same on both consoles.
2. The Xbox 360 image is also slightly over-sharp.
3. Both versions have 2xAA (gets rid of “jaggies” on the edges of objects)
4. You’ll notice an edge without AA on the Xbox 360 more than on the PS3.
5. PS3 version has motion blur, which should not be mistake for lower-resolution textures.

techie4687d ago

I'm not sure - that would of course help. There is no difference between texture resolutions. Sharpness difference through component, which is solved with HDMI. But the motion blur will still make still images look slightly different.

Toxic Shock4687d ago (Edited 4687d ago )

It is instances like this that show how the true power of the PS3 and the Cell chip. Looks amazing and plays great on my new DS3. Love the demo.

Cryxen4687d ago

Thanks for proving my point about Xbots being scared about their machine losing steam lol

dktxx24687d ago

If you can not comprehend that the cell is more powerful than the triple-core, you are obviously an idiot. Just look past your fanboy nature, and you'll see it. How you guys can actually doubt which system is stronger is amazing.

TheTwelve4687d ago

Hey, you can't be uninformed due to the propaganda from fanboys on the internet. This is the first educated and fair look at the game for both consoles.

Capcom would never ALLOW the Xbox version to look inferior to the PS3 version. They love Microsoft.

This is why I was pissed when they made this game multi-console, because the full power of the PS3 wouldn't be used.

I'm only buying this game for the PS3 because some kids I know in church want to play it. Normally, I wouldn't waste my time with Capcom nowadays...


millertime83064687d ago

You hit the nail on the head, my friend :)

gaffyh4687d ago

@1.6 - You should listen to the Criterion podcast that came out last week (I can't remember which one), but they basically said that when they were making Burnout, the gfx card in the 360 is much better than the PS3's gfx, but the PS3 is more powerful overall because the PPUs (Cell) can calculate a lot of data if you combine them with the GPU.

And if you can't believe that there is something wrong with you, a multi-platform game developer has said that the PS3 is more powerful, and it is unbelievably obvious that it is.

Regarding the comparison, 360 version looks much better, but some of the textures look oversharpened, the point about the jaggies is correct though, they are a little more noticable on the 360. But the game looks great on both platforms.

I will probably still get this for my PS3 rather than my 360, because DMC was born on the PS2 and the controller is much more suited for the style of game.

The_Engineer4687d ago (Edited 4687d ago )

"Selling Cell, Hofstee last year gave eight speeches at technical conferences. He and Kahle have visited more than 50 companies, enduring abundant skepticism from jaded industry veterans--until they run their speedy Cell demos. “It’s just amazing to go meet with people who have been in the industry for 25 years and just see their jaws drop,” Kahle says. When a famous chip designer, a veteran of Motorola and Apple, visited Austin for a demo in 2004, Kahle showed him images from the Mount Rainier flyover, eliciting stunned silence. “He just got really quiet,” as he realized “what this is going to do to the industry,” Kahle says. "

"The PlayStation hook inspires confidence at Raytheon, the Waltham, Massachusetts defense contractor, which has studied Cell for 15 months and plans to use it in scores of next-generation systems. “Sonar, infrared sensors--there are hundreds of products that Raytheon designs that could use this type of technology,” says Peter Pao, chief technology officer. “Current chips are going to run out of steam.”"

Cell’s creators needed to strike a balance between raw power and the versatility to do more than just play games. Special graphics chips are superspeedy, but for only one task. General-purpose chips like those made by Intel devote a lot of muscle to the ability to handle a wide variety of jobs, but they aren’t superfast at any one of them. For two decades Intel boosted performance by cramming more transistors onto a chip, but now chips draw so much power and generate so much heat that they can’t be cranked up much more. Intel and others boost performance by lashing together two or more thinking elements on a single chip. Intel makes dual-core chips. Sun’s Niagara boasts eight cores. For Microsoft’s Xbox 360, IBM linked three Power cores. !!!!!But even these multicore chips will not be powerful enough to drive the next wave, Kahle argues. Cell needed an entirely new design. "!!!!!

taken from

it really is silly to come on here and hear idiotic children talk about how the cell is "not optimized for gaming" " Sony overhyped and underdelivered" when those of us who actually work with this stuff are as giddy as schoolkids about the cell. In 2 years this won't even be an argument anymore. The games running on this beast at that point will leave no doubt that the 360 is a last gen console on steroids.

meepmoopmeep4687d ago

everyone should just sit back, relax and enjoy the accomplishment that capcom has done in making sure that both platforms will see a near identical game in all its glory. i understand that many people, for some reason unknown to me, need to justify their platform or "side". let's just get these games into our machines and enjoy the hard work the developers have done in ensuring that everyone can enjoy a great gaming experience.

mistertwoturbo4687d ago

On the AVS FORUM, i could recall that people said component actually looked better than HDMI for the 360. Doesn't make much sense to me. But if the 360 is already that "sharp" looking through component, then hooked up via HDMI will make it look even more "sharper" making it even more "over sharpened"

But in all honesty people, the differences are just too minimal to even argue. "Slightly" better than one or the other just doesn't really matter. It was the same with COD4. Maybe the 360 was "slightly" better in some areas than the PS3. And the PS3 was "slightly" better than the 360 in other areas. But it came down to one thing. People don't care. It's a great game, with great gameplay, with overall great graphics on both systems, and guess what. 360 or PS3, a great multiplatform game just means more people get to play them. And why cant we just get back to the old days when regardless of what console you play a certain game on, just talk about the actual game.

The Killer4687d ago

finally someone with real brain came here, its so good to talk to normal people, i missed this feeling! this site and all others is just full of BS! people will claim something without knowing it by them selfs! like i will say wii is more powerful than ps3 because i heard it somewhere or because it can handle motion sensing better than ps3 etc!!

so many times i told those fools that cell is a super CPU(very good one i mean) and can do more things at a time etc! but yet those fools come at me and say cell is not designed for general purposes and i ask why is that and they tell me some BS or dont answer!! got what i mean?
this year and next we will start to see the power if the cell and already started with uncharted!

mikeslemonade4687d ago

This is just the comparison for the demo. Both systems have the demo installed in the HDD. Lets wait for the full game to see how the 360 plays in the bigger enviroments and going from room to room.

i Shank u4687d ago

you guys understand, right? if the 360 version looks so identical to the ps3 version that it takes nitpicking to find differences; doesnt that prove to a logical mind that the whole "Power of the PS3" bit is a freaking myth? its not like last gen, when the xbox had 32MB of ram over the ps2 (64 MB in xbox, 32MB in ps2) and splinter cell looked alot better on the xbox; so did max payne, etc. etc. this time, they both have 512MB of ram, and whattaya know; the games are coming out pretty damn identical. and from developers own mouths, it has become common perception that the 360 has the better grphx card, and the ps3 has the stronger processor. so why do some still go on about the power of ps3?

zambrota4687d ago

I warned you all about Aquanox who actually posted both the videos of x360 in VGA/COMPONENT

good news for ps3 owners no doubt

Burnout way better on PS3 (60 fps vs 40 fps,better graphics and FR)

DMC4 way better on PS3(motion blur, cleaner and shinier)

SlappyMcTaint4687d ago

Sorry, but your argument about "Sony making you tweak the settings" is weak.

Why would you invest in a PS3, HDTV and Surround sound and just leave everything at factory settings? That's ludicrous -you have no idea how much better your Receiver will sound if you tweak the settings to your setup. The same goes with your HDTV and PS3.

If you dislike messing with settings then good for you -but don't complain when Sony gives you settings to make your setup even better if you want to. I'd be willing to bet, on an HDMI-equipped 360, the same settings will be available too -just named differently...

SlappyMcTaint4687d ago

No kidding! Well said.

Anyone is an infinite retard if you think 3x 3ghz is = or even better than 8x 3ghz.

cmrbe4687d ago

Stupid. Any milti-plat dev will always try their best to make vesrions of their games equal. If they don't you would see similar case as Madden last year. From what i have seen i can't really tell the difference between the two. Can't we just leave it as is.

nicholascage244687d ago

dont be fanboyish

I am happy to see ps3 getting the better version but i have both consoles anyway

x360 cannot be compared to ps3 even on HDMI .

Reason -- only some xbox models support upto HDMI 1.2


all ps3 models support HDMI 1.3 .everything will look better on 1.3

+ Show (19) more repliesLast reply 4687d ago
s8anicslayer4687d ago

being that the game was made for both consoles in mind and the fact that capcom said there wil be no difference between the two, why don't these stupid sites just leave this issue alone, the eye can see what ever your mind wants it to see! and remember "knowing is half the battle"!

techie4687d ago (Edited 4687d ago )

This motion blur was discovered from close research by Beyond3d technical forum, not by websites only using their eyes. Read the info and you will learn something.

s8anicslayer4687d ago

whoever discovered this useless nonsense you posted doesn't matter its just flame-bait! there lesson learned! thank you!

techie4687d ago (Edited 4687d ago )

Fair enough. But I think the point of this one is to add real technical debate to quieten the rabid fanboys with this "I can see a difference on a youtube video, so I know which one is better" type talk. :)

- zambrota below: It doesn't say the PS3 version is better - it says they are the same but different. The "motion" blur isn't really motion blur, it's more a blur of the frames, perhaps aiding in AA.

zambrota4687d ago

nice find

i knew the ps3 version was better

The final game would be even more better because of the HDD install

another better multiplat game after Burnout on ps3

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4687d ago

I've played the demo on both consoles - and the graphics are amazing in both. What isn't amazing however; is the boring repetitive gameplay. I got bored just playing the demo.

Honestly guys - in terms of worries about this game; motion blur should be the least of them.

mighty_douche4687d ago

Well i played it on both consoles last night, on the same TV, both HDMI, all options set to their best and frankly i saw NO difference.

People should be more concerned with the gameplay, which is repetative and quite boring, ON BOTH SYSTEMS!

f**king, moan moan moan, thats all this site has become.


the mighty douche speaks the truth and is thus rewarded with positive feedback.


got both systems, played both demos and all i was left thinking was...

is that it ? oh well, bring on NG2 !

KDash4687d ago

everyone who sees mentionable differences is actually... GAY =)