The Technology of GTA IV/RDR *Rage Engine*
- Thread starter babcat
- Start date
True, but besides the resolution and dithering artifacts, the two versions are identical.
What this implies is that people prefer low-resolution and blurry over high resolution and sharp. I don't understand it myself - I hate the smudged blurry look on the PS3.
djskribbles
Legend
i don't think anyone actually likes the soft look. originally, i thought the ps3 version had better lighting and better colors, but thats probably just because of the time of day the shots were taken (the lighting that is). other than that, i think both versions look quite similar judging by the videos released, each having minor pros and cons.
as for resolution, i think for this generation of consoles, it doesn't really matter. very few people can notice the difference between, say, 1152x640 and 1280x720. but when people start buying really big, high resolution TV's, then more people might start noticing.
as for resolution, i think for this generation of consoles, it doesn't really matter. very few people can notice the difference between, say, 1152x640 and 1280x720. but when people start buying really big, high resolution TV's, then more people might start noticing.
Mintmaster
Veteran
It's mostly the shadows and the texturing bug that negate the resolution advantage of 360.
The shadows use only 4 jittered point samples on 360, so that adds a lot of noise. The texturing bug eliminates the sharpness advantage for any visual feature that isn't a polygon edge or from the highest mipmap of a texture (I think). Why Rockstar couldn't resolve these problems is beyond me (looks like a day's work at most), but that's how it is.
It's not that the resolution isn't doing anything. If 360 had these same problems at equal resolution then people would overwhelmingly prefer PS3.
So please, don't give up on 720p!
I think a lot of what you like depends on what you have, you know? There are few people with both a 360 and a PS3 and there may be other factors coming in to play with that subset (noise of the 360, strong preference for one brand, etc.)
I guess you're joking (hope so anyway
) but it'd be funny if developers really did decide to look into making their PS3 games blurrier because some console warriors decided to defend the honor of the game of the month on their system. Hey, it's what the people apparently want, right?Take away the dithering problem in the 360 version and if the stuff in the background would be as detailed then (signs etc) i think this thread would be completely different.
I just dont understand what it is that pulls the PS3 "down" in this game. What is so tough to handle for the PS3 that they had to give up 80 lines or resolution.
Considering that they supposedly had Sony and Microsoft guys brought in to help them i dont understand how they could end up with these 2 versions after a 9 months delay.
It seems like an average vs. minimum framerate effect: ppl may be willing to accept PS3's softer image b/c it's more consistent overall, whereas the 360's texture and shadow edge artifacts are more distracting than its higher res (and AA, though this may be mitigated by the PS3's blur filter) and crisper picture. The intriguing bit (aside from the political angle) is that Mint is arguing that both defects appear to have straightforward fixes. Who wants to try to bother the GTA team while they're recovering?
It's funny. PS3 screenshots look nicer to me, but when I see the comparison vids, I don't think I could stand the blurry look. Maybe it's not as noticeable without the 360 version handy? Maybe the unique aspects of each version 'react' differently depending on the monitor (CRT, LCD, plasma, output/input res)?
It's funny. PS3 screenshots look nicer to me, but when I see the comparison vids, I don't think I could stand the blurry look. Maybe it's not as noticeable without the 360 version handy? Maybe the unique aspects of each version 'react' differently depending on the monitor (CRT, LCD, plasma, output/input res)?
It seems like an average vs. minimum framerate effect: ppl may be willing to accept PS3's softer image b/c it's more consistent overall, whereas the 360's texture and shadow edge artifacts are more distracting than its higher res (and AA, though this may be mitigated by the PS3's blur filter) and crisper picture. The intriguing bit (aside from the political angle) is that Mint is arguing that both defects appear to have straightforward fixes. Who wants to try to bother the GTA team while they're recovering?
It's funny. PS3 screenshots look nicer to me, but when I see the comparison vids, I don't think I could stand the blurry look. Maybe it's not as noticeable without the 360 version handy? Maybe the unique aspects of each version 'react' differently depending on the monitor (CRT, LCD, plasma, output/input res)?
The PS3 version doesn´t seem so blurry to me, that is after i adjusted the contrast/brightness settings, before that everything was dark and hard to see. It would benefit from AA, the background is very blurry thanks to extreme depth of field use.
I am playing on a 3+ meter wide screen.
I can absolutely sign that.
Pump up the contrast and brightness a bit and it's quite a big difference to what is shown here (PS3 version is darker by default anyways, so it's imo not a good idea to compare screens at default settings!)
I have a theory, Rockstar did some how cheat MS, they absolutely want to leverage the instal base of both the ps3 and 360, so to make every body happy they came with really close renditions each with its pro/con.
I feel like by the time the downloadable content will hit the street these "bugs" will have disappeared.
About the resolution I wondered about that earlier, but could it have something to do with frame buffer size (memory constraint) than computional power?
I feel like by the time the downloadable content will hit the street these "bugs" will have disappeared.
About the resolution I wondered about that earlier, but could it have something to do with frame buffer size (memory constraint) than computional power?
djskribbles
Legend
most ps3 owners i've seen have said that its not too blurry at all. its only the people who have compared it side by side, or flipped back and forth, that are complaining. i can see owners of CRT based RPTV's complaining, as they are considerably softer than LCD's, Plasma's, or even DLP's.It seems like an average vs. minimum framerate effect: ppl may be willing to accept PS3's softer image b/c it's more consistent overall, whereas the 360's texture and shadow edge artifacts are more distracting than its higher res (and AA, though this may be mitigated by the PS3's blur filter) and crisper picture. The intriguing bit (aside from the political angle) is that Mint is arguing that both defects appear to have straightforward fixes. Who wants to try to bother the GTA team while they're recovering?
It's funny. PS3 screenshots look nicer to me, but when I see the comparison vids, I don't think I could stand the blurry look. Maybe it's not as noticeable without the 360 version handy? Maybe the unique aspects of each version 'react' differently depending on the monitor (CRT, LCD, plasma, output/input res)?
I took these screenshots from a night->day->night setting. I positioned the helicopter on the H and then lined the camera up so the streets in the minimap were straight.
http://imk.cx/screenshots/xbox360/Grand Theft Auto IV/heli/
http://imk.cx/screenshots/xbox360/Grand Theft Auto IV/heli/
Ah I see,I had heard that the PS3 had better use of effects.
And a more stable framerate.Both of which I would take over a litle bit better resolution.
Little reading for you about the art production:
http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=4499
http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=4499
woundingchaney
Regular
Having played both I dont believe either effects or FR were any different. Framerate is too difficult to judge, although I noticed virtually no difference between the two versions.
grandmaster
Veteran
I can capture 720p losslessly at 24-bit RGB via HDMI from both consoles at the full 60 frames per second. I commissioned a tool that allows me to easily navigate through enormous AVI files right down to the specific frame.
Aligning to the pixel is a bit of an artform, but basically you're looking for key points in the game where Niko is set down in a common position. In GTA, that would be at the beginning of missions, after cut-scenes, etc.
With regards draw distance being greater on PS3, that's simply not true.
In all honesty, I think people are looking for differences that - by and large - aren't there. I'd be happier if the PS3 version was full 720p and if the 360 version didn't have that dithering effect, but by and large, the games are like for like.
Well you've done an incredible job and your presence is highly valued here! Those helicopter pics show like-for-like geometry and provide a perfect comparison that avoids all the subjectivity that swamps these comparison topics.
grandmaster
Veteran
I've also got a tool that counts the number of unique frames in a given capture in order to give a 'real' frame rate... unfortunately, due to the random nature of the game, I can't think of anything I can capture to actually test it.