Top
310°

GTA IV Face-off Frame-rates and FAQ

Following on from last Thursday's Grand Theft Auto IV: PS3 vs. Xbox 360 Special, author Rich Leadbetter told Eurogamer that he'd found an even more precise way of measuring average frame-rates and wanted to update you on this. He also thought it would be a good idea to answer a few of the more commonly asked questions about his methodology. The Frame Rate Tests section of the piece has now been tweaked accordingly, and here's Rich's commentary on it:

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
The story is too old to be commented.
Saint Sony4906d ago

Had a pleasure to play this gem on both system. It looked really nice on both but after playing first with 360, it was really hard to get used to PS3's more blurred look, but in the end it worked equally well.

Did not notice any tearing with 360 or PS3.

Dareaver14906d ago

the screen tearing is in the overscan. Which is in the area of the TV that you can't see. I have it for 360, and haven't noticed any, but that does answer why we can't see it.

I'm just happy with the game, it's awesome, and has some really good storytelling. It feels like a interactive movie at times, and then some of it is just so well grounded in reality that it makes it all feel surreal. And then there are the parts that aren't grounded in reality, but those are also very entertaining.

I just love some of the hidden messages that if you pay attention, address real concerns going in our lives today. The game is awesome, and i believe that it's helping bring to light that video-games are an art form and should be respected and taken seriously (without going overboard).

Silellak4906d ago

Yup, it's awesome on both systems, and the last thing we need is YET ANOTHER stupid comparison article.

So many different results from different people! It's almost as if...the versions were incredibly close and the differences are not worth worrying about!

Violater4906d ago (Edited 4906d ago )

This clearly has nothing to do with gaming anymore.
Once upon a time you played games and had fun and never worried about the pixels and the frames.
Now everything is ZOMG!!!!111 the textures and yet ignore that the gameplay is most times broken and repetitive.

Silellak4906d ago

Yeah, I've said the same thing myself before.

I remember when multi-console game debates were about big things like "The SNES version of Mortal Kombat has better graphics than the Genesis version but it's censored! What do I do?!"

Now we have people counting every stupid pixel in every screenshot to see if the way the light hits the texture is slightly different on Awesome System A or Awesome System B. As if our enjoyment of the game would somehow be stifled knowing that it doesn't run at Full and True HD, or that someone out there might be playing a slightly better version of the same game I'm playing and OMG that ruins the experience for me.

Violater4906d ago

Ok there you go clearly the genesis version was better
lol

tplarkin74906d ago

The point of comparing consoles is important since the PS3 came out a year after the 360 and cost much more.

When the Xbox 1 came out, there was no doubt of the power compared to the PS2. Now, PS3 owners hope that their game matches the 360.

You can make all the excuses you want for PS3, but the fact remains that the 360 version runs at a higher resolution and faster framerate. It also had zero issues on Xbox Live.

Silellak4906d ago

Why would I make excuses?

I don't even own a PS3.

I just think all 3 of the consoles of this generation are pretty swell, and that if it comes down to this sort of incredible nit-picking of graphics to try and find some little bit of difference, then as gamers we're all in pretty good shape.

etownone4906d ago

completely agree!!

xbox 1 dominated over all multiplat games and it was always clearly evident. This should be the same for the ps3 since it was released a year later.

but, i still laugh when i think about all the sonyfans in full fanboy force the day the first review came out for GTA4. so many comments about the ps3 power and etc., etc., hahaha...

Richdad4906d ago

Actually all data on 360 is stored in Ram first so that might be the reason of better frames since 360 is completly RAM dependent and PS3 Rockstar used HDD streaming for the purpose which made a latency.

But still not using HDD is a neagative sign but is causing profit here. You dont get virus if any, less glitch or freezing issues due to software.

Proxy4906d ago

But you got:

A game system.
A Blu-Ray player.
And reliable hardware.

Any two of those made the purchase worth it for me, and all three are even better.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 4906d ago
leeger4906d ago

if this gets approve then we will again see a start of another war. GTA4 is superior blah blah higher frame rate etc etc.

Dareaver14906d ago

true, but i think that Eurogamer is a really good site, and i thought they deserved the right to further explain how they came to their conclusions. A lot of hardcore fans were trashing Eurogamer for their comparison, and i really do think that they do the best job out of all the sites that do these comparisons.

So I believe that their work should be acknowledged. They go through a lot to give these comparisons to us (gamers), and many gamers do find the information useful.

"Fanboys" ruin ever post on this site, that's a given. But should we stop learning about the new things going on, just to avoid them? I don't think so, that would give their voice too much power. I think the real gamers should be the ones with the voice, not "Fanboys".

Condoleezza Rice4906d ago

Here we go...again.

I think a lot of people still don't accept IGNs 'which version is superior' verdict,and 1Ups as well.

Silellak4906d ago

Let me just preface this statement with the fact that I'm sick and tired of all these comparison articles and I think it's silly that people care about such miniscule, trivial differences.

That being said - at least this article uses technical observations for their results, instead of just "eyeballing it" like IGN and 1UP did.

But in the end, the real answer is, why do people actually CARE about these small differences? Just use this:

jke824906d ago

of nintendos and segas and begining even ps1 that people really didnt give a crap about frame rates and all that garbage it was just mostly "hey check out that cool game awesome lets play it" and then all the fanboys came in and argued about it not being cool........wait that never happend....we just played em...huh glad im still doing things that way and not giveing a rats left nut that one can produce a better frame rate by 5 or 6 frames full well knowing that differences that small the HUMAN eye cant even percieve
btw love the flow chart silellak

SUP3R4906d ago (Edited 4906d ago )

I still happily play those NES, SNES, Genesis, pixelated PS1 and blocky N64 games. They're just as much fun now as they were over a decade ago. Graphics don't make gameplay. These sort of articles are solely meant to divide the fanatics and pit them against each other over nothing.

Fishy Fingers4906d ago

WOW... Thought we might of had enough of these already? No?

All this childish squabbling just tarnishes GTA for me.

PS360WII4906d ago

Well this settles everything ^.-