Analysis: Red Dead Redemption on PS3 vs. Xbox 360

PC World: Does Red Dead Redemption have a resolution problem on Sony's PlayStation 3? Is it even fair to call a "sub-high-definition" ; resolution choice a "problem"? Will anyone who doesn't own both systems care? Is raising the point a waste of space? Am I standing on the lip of a lava pit goading readers to push me in?

Tahoma or Sans Serif? DVD or Blu-ray? S-Video or HDMI? Electronic paper display or LCD? We choose technology--yes, fonts are technology--based on visual parameters all the time. While it's silly to dismiss a game because of minor visual disparities on one platform versus another, it's just as silly to pretend those differences aren't there.

[Nike]

Criminy, make it stop!

@disagrees: What? You want more of these comparisons? Masochist.

[booni3]

because it isnt like you didnt know it was coming......
again.

[iHEARTboobs]

It appears that this news is like a wet dream to some people. Enjoying the game though. :)

[Greywulf]

I mean I understand the 360 community getting excited to point out a PS3 game is SUB-HD. Ignoring the fact that their lead exclusive after 6 years is lower res than the PS3 version of RDR.. But still..

When did RDR become Crysis for consoles?

[Dance]

i also find it amusing that you guys were beaten on alan wake and final fantasy for not being high definition but as soon as redemption comes out you start acting like it is no big deal

[Stationfan]

Like I mentioned before Alan wake was taunted of being an example of what can be done with a game build up from scratch on the 360. And still didn't surpass anything on ps3.

You guys make it seem like RDR is proof that the 360 is on par technically with the Trey which it just shows rockstars developing skills are nowhere near to the level as a Sony first party developer. Infact no developer i just hope rockstars polishes they're ps3 skills by the time the agent is released

[Blakzhuk]

RDR had two separate dev teams. Stop spewing this 'exclusive' rhetoric like it means something. You all are assuming that exclusive games are the best. There's no factual way or measurement to determine what games are the best because it's all opinion. So for some of you gamers to sit here and say that PS3 exclusives are the best this generation, you are just stating your opinion. To say that Alan Wake failed because after 5 years it's sub-HD is your opinion. No one started counting pixels until this generation. If you didn't count them during the PS2/Xbox era, than anything you say now about resolutions doesn't matter.

[shadow2797]

They may have different dev teams, but it's still a multiplatform engine. One, I may add, that's proven to be inferior on the PS3.

It's ignorant to imply that exclusives aren't generally the best looking games on their respective platform. They're built specifically for that platform, after all. Alan Wake was touted as the best looking game this generation by some, and many called it a visual powerhouse. Yet, the game is way below HD standards.

RDR on the other hand, is just another game where the PS3 gets an inferior port because of a X360 lead development. It's important for multi-console owners (I'll be playing it on 360), but it's not a big deal.

And let's not pretend 360 fanboys aren't guilty of the exact same double standards. Fanboys are fanboys.

[aaron5829]

but from what i observed..

No PS3 fanboys claim that RDR will be the best looking game ever...

But for the other side... before SC:C and AW was released... these 2 games were touted as the best looking games ever... some even boldly claimed that it looks better than MGS and Uncharted combined..

Get what i mean ?

Games that are supposedly "best looking ever.. even better than uncharted!!" is a sub hd game...

Before the reviews started coming in, i dont see anyone hyping this game... and now all of a sudden... My version iz betterz than yourzzzz!

OFF TOPIC : it seems PC mags want to be in the console wars too...

[ReBurn]

Let's be fair. Fanboys on both sides were total idiots when it came to Alan Wake. The Splinter Cell controversy was muted compared to the Alan Wake controversy. There were just as many sub-HD articles posted about Alan Wake as there are comparison articles about Red Dead Redemption. For 3 days the top stories were nothing but that. For a multi-platform game, look at Final Fantasy XIII. Nothing but how awesome the PS3 version was and how bad the 360 version was. The sub-HD stuff was flying then, too.

And the comments were just like we're seeing now. PS3 fanboys gloating that 360 was "maxed" and "inferior" and "couldn't do HD". The 360 fanboys were sticking their heads in the sand and saying that Alan Wake was the best-looking game ever, which it clearly isn't. And that FFXIII was just as good visually as the PS3 version, when it clearly wasn't. Now the idiots are out in full force again, but the roles are reversed. And they're all stupid. Every one of them. Because their blinders are getting in the way of common sense.

If anything this should prove that there is no definitive proof that one console is better than the other. Both PS3 and 360 are *capable* of producing crisp, vibrant native 720p graphics and running at butter-smooth frame rates. However, some *developers* are more skilled at using each system to it's fullest. Both PS3 and 360 are capable platforms for creating masterpieces, but the developers have to be good with their tools.

[Blakzhuk]

A sub-HD game can look better than an HD game.

[shadow2797]

ReBurn, that was one of the most intelligent comments I've read in a while. +Bubbles

Blakzhuk, I could argue that a sub-HD game SHOULD look better than an HD game, given the amount of memory that is freed up per frame.

[Consoldtobots]

the fact that the game engine has MAJOR problems keeping character models in the rendering pipeline should give everyone pause. This is happening on the 360 version. If they can't even master that etch a sketch I don't hold out much hope for the PS3.

[Simon_Brezhnev]

lol PC site doing analysis on a console game and im already sick of these comparisions its like the 50th

[mittwaffen]

Nerd ragers will go after this like white on rice.

Look at them all!

[Hotel_Moscow]

rice is brown and then bleached to be white so ummmmmmmmmm yeah

[mittwaffen]

What I just said is a long used metaphor.

You dont pick them apart; haha.

[BubbleSystemSuck]

another?

[ALFAxD_CENTAURO]

Getting this for PS3, because I have more friends in PSN than Live to play with. Besides the exclusive content.

[Dance]

exclusive content is hardly worth bragging about and given the choice i would go with less inferior version

[ALFAxD_CENTAURO]

So, you want a version with less friends and no exclusive content?

Just to play in a small graphical difference.

I better for PS3, more friends, exclusive content and free online play.

[Steve_0]

Its disappointing but the PS3 version is clearly inferior software. Disappointing because the PS3 is clearly able to spit out much higher quality, when devs put in the effort. 360 certainly wins this round.
That said, I'm still getting it on PS3. Why? because of the free online? No. I rarely play online and don't care for the exclusive content. The reason I'm buying it for PS3 is simple, while my launch PS3 continues to run like the wind, my 360 is dead after being self repaired countless times. I am not gonna go through the effort of fixing it again only to have those 3 blinking red lights leer at me halfway through Red Dead Redemption. Maybe my PS3 will run it at a lower resolution n whatnot, but it'll get through the game like a champ. Not coughing and wheezing it's way only to stumble before the end.

[cayal]

"exclusive content is hardly worth bragging about and given the choice i would go with less inferior version"

So you'd pay the same price for the slightly better looking game...one that you cannot even see the difference vs one where you get more value for your money.

[BigPappaPump]

and don't forget that playing online is free my friend! Oops! that's already covered. Serves me right for rushing the reply button lol.

[madkrazygames]

Now this is just becoming ridiculous.

[Socomer 1979]

How Snooty.

Its all good though, after the fun i had making fun of ALan Wake Its okay that 360 gamers get some too. even though I cant see what the difference is.

Its just too bad im not as upset as 360 fans were with alan wake the exclusive 5 years in the making, rated 8.0 survival not-so- horror dvd game.

Im playing red dead redemption on a 46" HDTV with Free PSN online. It Looks wonderful. Its Graphics are on par with Playstation HOME yet for the xbox360 its the best looking game to date. Standards? Dont cha wish your console was hot like ps3? Dont cha?

[Double Toasted]

Are you dizzy yet, lol?

[Colonel-Killzone]

Well I'm gonna rent RDR first and see how it is and if I like it. Anyway I never depend and never will expect multiplatform titles to take advantage of the PS3 hardware or what it can do. From the standing point 3rd parties are complete bs when it comes to porting over to the ps3 least most of them. Not gonna bash the 360 I put the blame completely on Rockstar.

[ReBurn]

And Rockstar is where the blame belongs. We all know that both 360 and PS3 are capable consoles. Tons of examples on each platform. Rockstar's decisions allowed the games to be different.

It's a shame, really. Because both versions are incredible from what I've seen. Different, for sure. But PS3 owners shouldn't be disappointed.

[Colonel-Killzone]

Yea I understand where your coming from. But a notice a lot of people is trying to make fun of the 360 version etc which is very childish. Even though some 360 fanboys is laughing etc its dumb to try and bash the 360 in this situation. As I said before the bashing should be going on the rockstar not the 360.

[thief]

Its NOT acceptable to have sub-HD resolution, period. But the point is, this game was made to generate some revenues while they work on GTA5 and Agent, and essentially used the GTA4 engine. As GTA4 was superior on the 360, RDR would be superior on the 360 as well - if Valve made Half Life 3 based on the HL2 engine, the PS3 version would continue to be as awful as in case of orange box.

We should just be thankful that, for a game that wasnt the main project for Rockstar, it turned out to be so much fun.

The real question is, rather, how much better Agent would be. I would expect that game to tap the PS3's potential, run at 720pand show some decent graphical improvements over GTA4/RDR.

[Doctor Phil]

I'm never buying another R* product. Im not gonna buy L.A. Noir and Im sure as certainly not gonna buy Agent. R* deserves a boycut from the PS3 community.

I bought a console with HD-capability to play HD-games, and it is in no way OK that R* screws over PS3-owners by selling us a broken (and i mean broken) game AND keeping it a secret.

I sincerely urge PS3-owners to boycot R*.

Also, I don't think Im gonna buy Sonys next console.

Take it from a PS3-owner who has had enough of crappy ports 4 years into the PS3's lifecycle.

[Ghost_Sparta]

"I'm never buying another R* product."
"Also, I don't think Im gonna buy Sonys next console."
- Your lost, seems to me they're like stupid measures! But it is your call...

[AKS]

Oh, for Christ's sake! Grow up, drama queen. The game is superb.

[despair]

it cost 100 milliom (or so they say) to make the game and thats a revenue ploy and not the main project for Rockstar?

Sure they want to make money but you don't spend 100 mil on short term investment. They expect 5 million plus sales and will get it.

This game is the start of a franchise (red dead revolver doesn't count) that will probably rival GTA from the buzz and scores its getting. But sales will tell.

[lagoonalight]

Video game execs are worse liars than the movie execs. These games cost nowhere near 100 million. Don't believe it for one second.

[ApocalypseShadow]

ps3 fans want games to reach their full potential.doesn't matter if it's graphics,online or psn game downloads.we know gameplay matters most.but we want developers to push themselves.if developers don't push themselves,what's the point?

which is why we respect sony in house developers.sure they can just create games.but isn't the point of next gen(current gen) is to outdo last gen gameplay AND graphics?if it isn't,then there was no need for this gen.

ps3 fans know there are developers who haven't caught up to sony exclusive games.but ps3 fans aren't defending them.we know they are not up to speed.we want them to catch up.the only defense i see is against 360 flip floppers.

first graphics mattered when ps3 released to 360 fans.when the graphics crown was taken,they jumped sales.when sales was taken away,they jumped to reviews.when reviews were taken and shown by metacritic,they jumped to online.when online was taken away by 30-60-256 players,the only think 360 fans have left is multiplatform games looking slightly better OCCASIONALLY.

i know microsoft wants you to jump around,jump in,jump for joy for sales and such.but you really need to stop jumping.when you can't name games that are exclusive that are beating ps3 exclusives,you have nothing to hold on to.when you laugh and snicker about multiplatform engines not up to speed,but neglect exclusive games not even hitting 720p,you go nothing to hold on to.when the last graahic awards you received was back when gears 1 launched,you got nothing to hold on to.

RR doesn't hold up on ps3 slightly.tell us something new.but also tell us why ps3 exclusives aren't the case?and why more 360 first party games fall into the catagory of sub-hd?

[tinybigman]

Can't argue what you wrote. God I wish the haters on both sides would just up already.

I own all 3 consoles and I alternate my multiplat games based on friends list or single player.

I could tell SCC, AW, and GTA4 were sub HD but I didn't care I enjoyed all 3 games a lot.

[jetlian]

ps3 has never had the graphic crown atleast not texturally. How can you even compare RDR to any ps3 exclusive when all of them lack an open world except infamous. which was a smaller game and a whole lot ugly. I'm not even sure infamous was true 720p.

last gen xbox had better exclusive and better multyplatforms. Now you want me to believe ps3 is better yet it fails to match 360 on multy. its all made on pc and ported over. why do they have to cut corners to get a function ps3 version all the time

[JayD-1K]

how can we judge the PS3 abilities by game engines that doesn't even challenge the "easy to work with" 360?
easy....we don't! We do judge it by , how the game made for the system runs and look. when the PS3 came out, the gaming community were quick to point out how the PS3 "couldn't compete" with the 360. But now, you have games that have truly starting to push the boundaries of the hardware! it's to the point that the PC fans have started to chime in when ever the PS3's graphics prowess is brought up!
i said it when the PS3 hit the streets and i'll say it again...it will take Sony to show what the PS3 hardware can really do...and they have!

[BeaArthur]

Shut up and play games. Buy which everyone you want and enjoy it.

[bjornbear]

AYE AYE!!

agree'd

[darxed]

Why you're getting disagrees is beyond me... Hell no! we won't play games! we won't buy the one we want!... silly fanboys

[Ghost_Sparta]

Completly agree!

[Hallmark Moment]

I'm glad RockStar is trying to make the best games as possible so they can compete with other developers not letting the lowest common denominator console hold their work back, they got to eat too. They also want a chance at GOTY, they need every advantage they can get.

[ndibu]

Sir may I please have some MOAR!!
This site is turning me into a fanboy...*sigh*...i hate you guys, really, i do.
But more sub-hd RDR PS3 articles please. :)

[divideby0]

what many just dont get its NOT a knock on the PS3 its a knock on RS...
they are the ones who blew it...we all know what the PS3 is capable of...
just another case on a lazy developer and what irks me about RS is they knew it and showed all 360 stuff up until the games release.
slimbags....

[Thudd]

like when FF13 came out. It was day after day of trashing the 360. Article after article of it. PS3 owners (I own 2 btw) lined up on N4G to denounce the 360 and its sub-HD port. Now yet another multiplat game gives the 360 higher resolution, better AA and better frame rates. What do we hear? Quotes like "shut up and game" or "how many articles do we need?". Cry fanboys, you sad pathetic whiners. Both systems are great, both have great games. Lining up behind one, and only one just makes you look stupid.

[cyborg6971]

And your childish rant makes you look like you listen the the johans brothers. I think it is you who needs to chill cause your one bubble to me notes that no one wants to hear anything you have to say. Most likey because it comes out like this. And I could give two sh!ts less if you have two ps3's a .360 and a wii, your statement like your screen name thudds on inpact.

[commander]

Im playing on the ps3 and having a blast. People would rather argue about a game than play it. You guys are not gamers. You are ppl who belong at these big sites like ign that say they play games.

[Jack Klugman]

and cyborg6971 reported for personal attack. pointing out the hypocrisy is NOT childish but personally attacking someone when you have no argument is. you lost that one cyborg.. u 2 should have your bubbles swapped and I will do my best to see that it happens.

where were all these when FFXIII released? or heck even AW when it was being thrashed because of sub-HD resolutions?
now everyone says it doesnt matter? WTF kind of double standard hypocrisy is going on here? i will bet my lab coat that the next 360 subHD game is going to be thrashed and not one of these apologists claiming it doesnt matter will be found..
is consistency when it comes to these sort of things too much to ask?

[cayal]

It kinda does matter when Alan Wake is a almost linear console exclusive and RDR is a multi-platform open world sandbox.

[TABSF]

You can't achieve anti-aliasing on the RAGE engine because its deferred rendering
if this is to be correct then its only 720p on 360

[MR LOOKINGBILL]

lmao....please no more thead conparisons of RDR we all know the 360 version is superior in every way.

[spiky1228]

I completed both version of GTAIV atleast two times. I have to say PS3 version is more blurry, but the texture are more detail. The XBOX360 version looks sharper but the texture is somewhat more plain. The color is a huge difference. The 360 color is more vibrant and PS3 color is more dark which makes it have a more realistic look.

EVIDENCE:
Choose first person view when you ride in the car and you see 360 version does not have the dirt on the hood of the car but PS3 does.

The face of NIKO is obvious more blurry on PS3 but sharper on 360.

CONCLUSION: You guys hear this so many time, but its more about preference. I like the 360 sharpness but prefer the color of the PS3. So its up to the controller and which console you have. Both copy cost $59.99 when it came out.

[SmokedOut]

I get a laugh from all the fanboys that are screaming " It doesnt matter". This is after they spent 10 minutes writing a 2 page story crying about it. Obviously it matters alot more than you wanna admit. Stop your fanboy crybaby ways and get both consoles, you guys are the ones missing out.

[dj55555555]

Come on Rockstar this game shouldn't even challenge the PS3, work with naughty dog or Santa Monica do something the PS3 has been out for four years you should be alot better than sub hd. I'll still be getting it though, you never know we might get a patch.