PS3 GTA IV almost certainly 630p

Eurogamer writes: "The PlayStation 3 version of Grand Theft Auto IV almost certainly runs in 630p.

Word spiralled from comparison shots by the same fellow responsible for outing Halo 3 as sub-HD, and the same chap who assists with our Face-Off screenshots before we show them to you.

However, Eurogamer's Face-Off compiler and resident big-brain Rich Leadbetter says that while the PS3 version may be a touch blurrier, it's not necessarily inferior. Far from it, in fact."

[sonarus]

Long story short ps3 looks better at a lower resolution lol. That is interesting indeed

[Capt CHAOS]

I only know of the popping issue on the 360 and the slightly worse frame rate on the PS3, even though it's running on a lower resolution. And the colours on the PS3 version appearing bland.

[MattFoley]

I played for 4hrs and had pop in once on 360.

How do you disagree with what happened at my house.
Were you looking in my windows again?

[Scerick]

IGN:

"While GTA IV is pushing the PS3 and 360 to the limit, it also runs amazingly well. Sure, there are framerate hitches here and there and (particularly on 360) there is some texture pop-in, but it actually runs better than I expected."

"For those wanting to know which version looks better, the edge goes to the PS3. The textures and framerate are comparable, but the PS3 has far less pop-in. The 360 has richer colors, but the PS3 has better anti-aliasing making it look a little cleaner. Because GTA IV can preload onto the PS3 hard drive, the in-game loads are faster."

Edit: @Matt above,

They must have webcams setup in every room of your house...

Someone disagreed, they must be higher-tech than your average webcam..

[WIIIS1]

It was telling enough which console is weak when the fact surfaced that one console has to rely on harddisk installation to run GTA4. Now we have this news that Rockstar also had to lower the resolution to make the game run on PS3... no wait, there are reports of the game freezing too. Dam am I glad I purchased the right version!

[JsonHenry]

So let me get this straight.. the game HAS to load on the PS3 HDD, it runs at a lower resolution on the PS3, the AA is better on the 360 version, and to top it off the colors are slightly washed out on the PS3 version?

So where is this "superior" PS3 technology at? I swear, if it were not for a VERY few games I would have sold my PS3 when it was still worth something on Ebay...

[green]

Sony said the PS3 will make the 360 look like XBOX 1.5.I am still waiting for that to happen before i get a PS3.

[INOUE]

The guy who pointed out PS3 was 630p said it looks better.

"it's 630p (1120x630)
regardless PS3 media look better for me, the light and atmosphere is more real (maybe HDR vs X360 MDR, post-process...), i agree with global reviews feeling but more comparison screenshots would be good
it's interesting, it shown that number of pixel isn't enough for determine better visual"

http://forum.beyond3d.com/s...

[WIIIS1]

So INOUE, let's put aesthetics aside, are you now man enough to admit that from a technical standpoint, the console that requires harddisk installation and lower resolution to run GTAIV is clearly NOT the superior console? Because apparently a lot of peons on this site were trying to say otherwise just a day or 2 ago.

[Spinner]

Did anyone even read the article?

"It's worth noting that due to the post-processing effects the game employs (there's a serious amount of stuff being done to the raw frame), the PS3's lower resolution serves to mask a lot of the nasty after effects," said Leadbetter.

"For example, look at the dithering on the signs in the background on those shots. A bit ugly on Xbox 360, but smoothed and blurred away on PS3, presenting a generally nicer look."

[shadow_hearts]

GAMEREACTOR

http://www.gamereactor.se/r...

Swedish Gamereactor mentioned in their 10/10 review that they were pretty surprised regarding the difference between the PS3 and 360-versions. The PS3-version features better colours, contrast, load times and what looks to be better resolution textures. The game also looks sharper and has a more stable fps.

IGN

http://www.n4g.com/NewsCom-...

"For those wanting to know which version looks better, the edge goes to the PS3. The textures and framerate are comparable, but the PS3 has far less pop-in. The 360 has richer colors, but the PS3 has better anti-aliasing making it look a little cleaner. Because GTA IV can preload onto the PS3 hard drive, the in-game loads are faster. Don't worry Xbox owners, the load times are rarely more than 30 seconds and don't occur very often. The slight visual edge goes to PS3, but the 360 is no slouch. Either version will do you proud".

X360 version has FR dips too . more frequent than the PS3 version
"Past GTA titles have had mild-to-serious framerate issues and technical glitches, because the games were trying to do far more than the PlayStation 2 could handle. While GTA IV is pushing the PS3 and 360 to the limit, it also runs amazingly well. Sure, there are framerate hitches here and there and (particularly on 360) there is some texture pop-in, but it actually runs better than I expected. That a game with great AI, an awesome physics engine and a detailed open world runs so well and with such short load times is a technical marvel. For that, I can forgive framerate issues and some noticeable aliasing. "

http://www.n4g.com/NewsPend...

EGM "PS3 version looks slightly more vibrant and sharp "

GAMESRADAR

http://www.gamesradar.com/x...

"Occasional pop-up".........ONLY IN X360 version of GTA4

http://xs226.xs.to/xs226/08...

GAMESRADAR also confirms that PS3 version is SUPERIOR

"While the PS3 and 360 versions of the game are functionally identical, the PS3's visuals sport noticeably smoother edges, along with a warmer color palette that makes everything look slightly more realistic. If you're looking to compare Accomplishments with your Achievement-hoarding friends, though, forget it - GTA IV ignores these half-assed consolation prizes altogether. PS3 owners also have to put up with a nearly eight-minute installation the first time they start the game, which puts the normally slower Blu-ray load times on par with the Xbox 360 version. (That is, unless it's running on a 360 with no hard drive, which we're told will face much longer loads.)"

http://www.gamesradar.com/p...

IGN's video revealed massive differences between the 2 versions especially in terms of color

[barom]

lol there is one guy on a forum stating that it's 630p or wutnot. And suddenly that becomes a fact? Cmon folkz. Did you suddenly just forget all the reviews stating GTA IV looks better on PS3?

But even so. Regardless of what resolution it is, in the end the PS3 version is the better looking one.

[dan-boy]

what do you prefer to be called?? and can i ask why some people have multiple accounts, and just say the same thing? copy and pste the same sh!t and put up the same links trying to validate their desperation??? laughable and just more than a touch sad imo!

[Gam71]

Nasim or doodoobrains or shadow hearts, Hows your multiple accounts going.
Only had this one 17 hrs and down to 3 bubbles.
I predict 3 days and you'll need another account.

Why don't you play the game.

[shelbygt33]

So when Halo 3 came out and was found to be sub-720p, people believed this guy right out of the box, no questions asked.

Now that the SAME PERSON has posted on the ps3 GTAIV being sub-720p, those same people doubt him?

It must be nice to be able to pick and choose what you believe only when it supports your beliefs.

End result - both Halo 3 on xbox 360 and GTAIV on ps3 look stunning!!

[sonarus]

Why is everyone having such a hard time accepting that ps3 version looks and runs better?. Its slight as hell and they are almost identical so it isn't such a big deal but all the major sites that we relied on to tell us which version of multiplatform games ran better have already given ps3 the edge in performance. In fact i haven't heard anyone say the ps3 version is bland since the real reviews came out.

Everyone has said the ps3 version has the edge in AA, ign and gamereactor gave ps3 edge in framerates. Everyone gives ps3 better load times and pop ups. Everyone agrees ps3 version looks slightly better.

I wonder why they look better at a lower resolution. It seems like some people are going to be in denial about it. I personally don't care because it isn't a big deal. But pretending that its not happening is a little pathetic.

Lol at captain chaos and 360 has better framerates
lol at jason henry and 360 has better AA

[LJWooly]

If you're the sort of person who plays a game and actively thinks about the difference between the two versions, then you are a sad, sad person.

It really doesn't matter, it's still the same game. Why can't people live with that?

[BenzMoney]

Actually, it's looking more and more like the PS3 doesn't use any anti-aliasing at all... just filtering and upscaling.

"this?
http://img294.imageshack.us...
no AA, just filter and upscale"

http://forum.beyond3d.com/s...

It seems like Rockstar was unable to get the game running on par with the 360 version at the same resolution (360 runs true 720p w/ 2xAA) so they downscaled it, removed AA, and applied a good filter.

It looks like they got pretty nice results from doing so, of course. The final product looks nice. But that doesn't eliminate the technicalities... only the "PS3 version looks better because it's technically superior" arguement is eliminated.

[thewhoopimen]

Xbox Defenese force you do know that if this "forum" speculation is not verified as true you guys lose all credibility for whipping up a huge stink right? The posters haven't even been able to verify 100% that the screenshot they are using is a ps3 shot and is only confirming the resolution of a shot they received. (I went through the forum and the assertion btw is 640p for ps3 not 630p).

[sonarus]

well i guess that explains the better framerate, the pop ups and the shorter loading times:D

See i'm not here to compare console differences my first comment was to spark a rise out of you guys.

PS3 can run in 480p and 360 can run in 1080p but if it looks better than 360 version then there is something else clearly going on. Maybe the post processing effects aren't possible on 360 i don't know don't care. All i know is PS3 version looks better runs better shorter loads times is sharper whether its due to AA or not and then it is has less pop ups which to me is the single most important factor anyway

The end justifies the means. Simple as that. I don't care how they did it be it upscaled or native resolution whatever all i know is that at a lower resolution it looks better than 360 version. For all i know they intentionally downscaled ps3 version to keep it on par wit 360 or intentionally didn't downscale 360 version to keep it on par with ps3.

Whatever they did i don't care. 360 lead development, it was easier to program for...but yet ps3 came out on top end of story

[MikeGdaGod]

how is this true if the ps3 can't upscale games? and if it can upscale games, why not upscale to 1080p?

GTA4 says 720p on my tv, MGO says 1080p. how are these not native if the ps3 can't upscale.

will someone please explain this

[LJWooly]

The PS3 does upscale it scottie. That's why the PS3 natively displays the game at 1080p, but according to this, the game only runs at 630p (i would have thought 640p myself, but whatever).

Sort of like COD4. Displayed at a 1080p setting, but actually only runs at 640p.
(Sorry if I didn't answer, I may have misunderstood the question).

With that said, take this with a grain of salt.

[Statix]

The latest tests by Quaz51 at Beyond3D have revealed that the PS3 version HAS NO AA! Compared to 2xMSAA for the XB360 version.

So much for the idea that the PS3 version "has better AA." Looks like it just fooled everyone because the game is 640p, and the lower resolution results in a BLURRIER image overall (thus, looks "smoother," because the BLUR hides jaggies).

[sonarus]

So let me get this straight. The ps3 version has NO AA and runs at 630p while 360 runs at 720p. But majority of the reviewers including IGN agree PS3 version looks sharper, slightly better framerate, FAR less pop ups and slightly better loading times

Now i didn't know lower resolutions look better than higher resolutions. Whatever PS3 version applied to make it look better than 360 version should have been applied to 360 version as well because it fooled all the reviewers and it will fool all gamers.

Bottomline is END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. I don't care how they did it but they were able to at least make the ps3 version appear to look better and that is really all that counts. The way it looks on my tv not on a computer monitor after they have blown up the screens by 400X.

On my TV it looks better than 360 END OF STORY

[Statix]

The reviewers didn't say it looked "sharper," they said it looked "cleaner" and "smoother" because of less apparent aliasing. This is due to the fact that the PS3 version only runs at 640p, a lower/blurrier resolution, thus giving the appearance of less jaggies/smoother image, but also blurring out the details. Like a haze of vaseline. You can arguably achieve the same effect on the XB360 by turning down the Sharpness setting of your TV.

Weird that the PS3 version has no AA, after all, contrary to what reviewers have been saying.

FYI, here's a screenshot comparison between the 2 versions:

PS3:
http://img294.imageshack.us...
360:
http://imk.cx/screenshots/x...

[BenzMoney]

How about we tone down the hyperbole a little bit, shall we?

"FAR less pop ups"

-- I don't recall reading any reviews that said the PS3 version has *FAR* less pop ups. Fewer pop ups? Yes. But try to cut the exaggerations down to a minimum, ok?

-- As for framerate, it's funny that people keep quoting that IGN review, "...framerate drops AND (particularly on the 360) pop-in..." Does everyone just ignore the little word 'and' between the portion of the sentence referring to framerate and pop-in? The review is clearly stating that both versions suffer from occasional framerate issues, and the 360 has more noticeable pop-in.

-- Finally, would you not expect a game that is running at a lower resolution to have better framerate, less pop-in, etc? I don't understand why you find this so surprising? Typically, when you turn down the resolution on a game, you're reducing the load on the hardware. You get the same results when you remove AA. Try loading up a game on your PC at highest resolution and AA settings. How's the performance? Now reduce the resolution and remove the AA. Notice the boost? Why is it, then, that the PS3 runs at a lower resolution, with no AA, and only manages a minimal boost in performance over the 360 version running at a higher resolution with AA? Wouldn't you expect a huge improvement in framerate, for example? The PS3 is pushing about 1,000,000 (23.4% less) pixels than the 360 is, per frame. The reduction of loading times and pop-in is most likely due to the installation as opposed to processing power.

It comes down to the machines having radically different architectures; just because something works for the 360 doesn't mean it'll work for the PS3, and vice versa. If anything, the fact that Rockstar was able to get the two versions so alike on two completely different sets of hardware speaks to the talent of their studio. One might expect a huge boost in performance after reducing the resolution and AA, but we know this isn't the case. Why? Perhaps the PS3 is doing SOMETHING ELSE behind the scenes, like filtering/upscaling, because that's what works for THAT console. Big deal.

Watching you guys fight about miniscule details is hilarious. What's even more hilarious is the amount of 'damage control' (as if there's any damage to control) and energy is spent on trying to cover up fact. I don't care about which console you prefer, or what game looks better to reviewers or anyone else. I just care about pointing out the facts.

EDIT:

As for which actually looks better, I don't know because I haven't seen either in action. But from these comparisons, it looks like the 360 holds up pretty well against the supposedly 'superior' PS3 version:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum...

[sonarus]

From those comparisons, i think the ps3 has better colors. I really don't care about this so i don't know why i am using all my bubbles debating this.

What i do know is no one cares about the technical specs, its how it performs on your tv. Majority of people who have seen both gave ps3 the edge on visuals. Last time i checked, higher resolutions looked better than lower resolutions.

If they need to downgrade to 480p to make it look better than 1080p then they should feel free to do it anytime. Its the way it looks on the tv that counts and not under scrutiny by some beyond3d forum dudes.

Actually if you go thru that thread you actually see them say PS3 version is better A LOT