Red Dead Redemption Reviews

Here's a fair shot that really highlights the difference between the two versions:

360:

a0037809_4bf350951597e.jpg


PS3:

a0037809_4bf3509b4e857.jpg
 
^^ Where did you get those shots from? It's bullshit. I have the PS3 version and it looks nothing like your shot. It's closer, if not BETTER than your 360 shot.
 
I must say this game rules. Coming from a kid who grew up on a farm and rode horses, did 4-h and horse showmanship, this game really satisfies those old memories. The scenary is beautfiul, riding horses is a blast, blowing off a dudes face when you meant to shoot the rope tying him to a tree is awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I haven't found the lasso yet still in the Amarillo town, anyone have it yet?


Oh and to that comparison shot up above seems about right. The ps3 seems to have less AA/AF but also the bloom effect looks better. And that picture looks alot blurrier then what I'm looking at on my tv when playing RDD. My friend has the 360 version and his looks just a tad sharper, but the ps3 version scenary looks better for some reason.
 
Last edited:
Dallows said:
^^ Where did you get those shots from? It's bullshit. I have the PS3 version and it looks nothing like your shot. It's closer, if not BETTER than your 360 shot.
Click to expand...

I got them from here:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=21355476&postcount=704

Whole lot more included in the post as well.

The results seem entirely consistent with this engine when you consider how GTA IV ran on both consoles. You've got the same lower resolution and slightly blurred image thanks to the Quincunx AA and apparently a more uneven framerate.
 
Blubikins said:
I must say this game rules. Coming from a kid who grew up on a farm and rode horses, did 4-h and horse showmanship, this game really satisfies those old memories. The scenary is beautfiul, riding horses is a blast, blowing off a dudes face when you meant to shoot the rope tying him to a tree is awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I haven't found the lasso yet still in the Amarillo town, anyone have it yet?
Click to expand...

I got the lasso from following the story quests with um.. That McFarlane girl. Haven't lost it yet.
 
ManCannon said:
I got them from here:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=21355476&postcount=704

Whole lot more included in the post as well.

The results seem entirely consistent with this engine when you consider how GTA IV ran on both consoles. You've got the same lower resolution and slightly blurred image thanks to the Quincunx AA and apparently a more uneven framerate.
Click to expand...

I can't see those at work right now. But I will look later.

Just take it from me though. I HAVE THE GAME ON PS3. It doesn't look ANYTHING like that shot. It's crisp and clear. No blurring, and a lot is very smooth. I can deal with some AA.

Framerate has hitched here and there but it's hardly anything worth complaining about.
 
Dallows said:
Just take it from me though. I HAVE THE GAME ON PS3. It doesn't look ANYTHING like that shot. It's crisp and clear. No blurring, and a lot is very smooth. I can deal with some AA.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm pretty sure that's a direct feed shot taken straight from the game. It's also been established that the PS3 version runs at a lower resolution and Quincunx AA does slightly blur the entire picture in it's attempt to eliminate jaggies.

I'm sure it looks better in motion however, screenshots rarely do games justice.

I hope this doesn't start a console war or anything, I just saw some people in here discussing the differences between the two versions and I just happened to have that thread open at the same time so I figured I'd post one of the comparison pictures. For anyone who owns both consoles and is trying to decide which version to buy it seems the 360 version is the one to go with.
 
ManCannon said:
Well, I'm pretty sure that's a direct feed shot taken straight from the game. It's also been established that the PS3 version runs at a lower resolution and Quincunx AA does slightly blur the entire picture in it's attempt to eliminate jaggies.

I'm sure it looks better in motion however, screenshots rarely do games justice.

I hope this doesn't start a console war or anything, I just saw some people in here discussing the differences between the two versions and I just happened to have that thread open at the same time so I figured I'd post one of the comparison pictures. For anyone who owns both consoles and is trying to decide which version to buy it seems the 360 version is the one to go with.
Click to expand...

It's like banging my head against the wall here.

You're just spreading FUD like every one else with this crap. I can say I haven't seen the 360 version in person but what is so hard to understand what I'm saying? It's not fanboyism or anything like that. It's honest. I have the game. I've played it for several hours, and it just doesn't look like that, ever, not once, in any instance.

I already proved these people wrong once before. I'll go and find the shots tonight too. It was Resident Evil 5, and I'm sure you can find the comparison gif. Well I did my own comparison, guess what? My shots looked nothing like theirs. Not even when I looked at the game on my TV did they look even close. The "PS3 Version" was missing textures, was blurry, look low res. When I fired it up on my system it was smooth, crisp and clear. Everything was there. Some people even though the PS3 shots looked better than the 360 ones.

I'm not going to turn this thread into a debate. But it's bullshit.
 
ManCannon said:
Well, I'm pretty sure that's a direct feed shot taken straight from the game. It's also been established that the PS3 version runs at a lower resolution and Quincunx AA does slightly blur the entire picture in it's attempt to eliminate jaggies.

I'm sure it looks better in motion however, screenshots rarely do games justice.

I hope this doesn't start a console war or anything, I just saw some people in here discussing the differences between the two versions and I just happened to have that thread open at the same time so I figured I'd post one of the comparison pictures. For anyone who owns both consoles and is trying to decide which version to buy it seems the 360 version is the one to go with.
Click to expand...

Do you actually have PS3 and 360 versions at home and can confirm those differences on those screenshots? If not than you're just spreading FUD as Dallows posted, other than the fact that PS3 version is running at a lower resolution, that is. Inability of Rockstar to code for PS3 is a topic for another thread.
 
Ya, it's hard to believe that the PS3 version looks that bad. It looks like they're both moving shots, but I'm going to guess that the ps3 shots are taken at full horsepower speed, thus more blurrrrr, less detail.
 
I got to play for a few hours last night. I don't think it looks terrible, but there is no denying there is more shimmering and aliasing on the PS3 version (640p)
The free roam is fun, however I've read many complaints of the game bugging out on Live. Invisible characters, warping, dropped connections etc. The game is crying out for a PC release.
 
kao85 said:
Ya, it's hard to believe that the PS3 version looks that bad. It looks like they're both moving shots, but I'm going to guess that the ps3 shots are taken at full horsepower speed, thus more blurrrrr, less detail.
Click to expand...

Yeah, hard to believe because it isn't true. Whatever.

theNoid said:
You're not disproving my eyes when I watch that youtubedoubler video posted above. Direct feed video side by side is more credible than your screen shots. Both version looks good, but the 360 version clearly has better fidelity.
Click to expand...

Can't check the video at work, but i will. Same with the neogaf website. I linked an old thread where (I'm pretty sure) someone had posted a gif comparison of Resident Evil 5. And it's so far off from reality.

But again, I can't verify the link still works until I get home.

The pics I take come out blurry, but there's no denying the detail is there in an actual shot from the game.
 
The PS3 jpeg is 70K smaller than the 360 jpeg. The PS3 jpeg looks like it's gone through color subsampling. Also, the PS3 version is 720pix, I thought it was supposed to be lower res in framebuffer, so it's probably been stretched too.

And oh, did I mention they're jpegs?
 
Man, I was tempering my expectations because of all the hype but I am seriously impressed with the game so far. I'm only about four hours into it but the game world is a serious technical and artistic achievement.

Amazing
 
Like it's GTA cousin, this game also suffers from some pop-in graphics. Like guys on horses suddenly appearing as you speed down a trail.
Over-all though, the game is pretty fantastic.
 
Well the old link I had the picture is gone from the host. Couldn't find it again.

It's kinda laughable. The videos you linked are tiny. And eloj has already pointed out flaws in the comparison images. lol
 
Dallows said:
It's like banging my head against the wall here.

You're just spreading FUD like every one else with this crap. I can say I haven't seen the 360 version in person but what is so hard to understand what I'm saying? It's not fanboyism or anything like that. It's honest. I have the game. I've played it for several hours, and it just doesn't look like that, ever, not once, in any instance.

I already proved these people wrong once before. I'll go and find the shots tonight too. It was Resident Evil 5, and I'm sure you can find the comparison gif. Well I did my own comparison, guess what? My shots looked nothing like theirs. Not even when I looked at the game on my TV did they look even close. The "PS3 Version" was missing textures, was blurry, look low res. When I fired it up on my system it was smooth, crisp and clear. Everything was there. Some people even though the PS3 shots looked better than the 360 ones.

I'm not going to turn this thread into a debate. But it's bullshit.
Click to expand...

bazylik said:
Do you actually have PS3 and 360 versions at home and can confirm those differences on those screenshots? If not than you're just spreading FUD as Dallows posted, other than the fact that PS3 version is running at a lower resolution, that is. Inability of Rockstar to code for PS3 is a topic for another thread.
Click to expand...

eloj said:
The PS3 jpeg is 70K smaller than the 360 jpeg. The PS3 jpeg looks like it's gone through color subsampling. Also, the PS3 version is 720pix, I thought it was supposed to be lower res in framebuffer, so it's probably been stretched too.

And oh, did I mention they're jpegs?
Click to expand...

Are you three serious? Every single site that has done a comparison so far has said exactly what these screenshots show, that the PS3 version is blurry and has less detail. What is it you're trying to say, that the guy who took these shots, who own both versions and both consoles, went into photoshop and blurred the PS3 image and subtracted grass?

You can imply that they're lying or that these images are doctored all you want but it's simply not true. Here, have another one. Maybe you can find some evidence of Photoshop manipulation in it:

a0037809_4bf356b796a30.jpg


a0037809_4bf356bdbd11c.jpg


I'll let you guys figure out which one is a 360 shot and which one is a PS3 shot. I'll give you a hint though, on the PS3 shot the guy would have had to crop out a few things.
 
Who cares which system has the better graphics? STFU and just play the goddamn game for the platform of your choice.

This argument has been rehashed 173520217502175021012 times, everyone is just beating a dead horse by rehasing this argument every time a multiplatform game comes out.

JUST PLAY THE DAMN GAME.
 
Well I just figured it would be better that there be legitimate comparison pics as opposed to that one featuring a direct feed shot with an off screen picture.

Really, this is no different than when the [H] compares the output between an Nvidia card and an ATi card. It's a consumer's right to know.

Unfortunately some people would rather invent conspiracy theories than accept the truth :(.

And I can only speak for myself but I am playing the game. Put in over 10 hours total since I got it at 1pm yesterday. Loving the hell out of it :).
 
The difference is having an absence of emotions

why should you be emotionally attached by whether or not your system has superior graphics to another?

If you're playing the game and having fun, what difference does it make?

To the unemotional gamer, none.
 
ManCannon said:
Well I just figured it would be better that there be legitimate comparison pics as opposed to that one featuring a direct feed shot with an off screen picture.

Really, this is no different than when the [H] compares the output between an Nvidia card and an ATi card. It's a consumer's right to know.

Unfortunately some people would rather invent conspiracy theories than accept the truth :(.

And I can only speak for myself but I am playing the game. Put in over 10 hours total since I got it at 1pm yesterday. Loving the hell out of it :).
Click to expand...

I don't buy comparison shots. Why should I? When I load up the game on my ps3 and my tv, it looks great, and nothing like the pictures that are continually posted in all of these "comparisons."

Why would I claim such things? Why are these problems not present when I play? Are you saying it's my eyes? Maybe I'm just blind to the fact because I don't want to believe it!

The only legitimate difference I ever saw was in Ghostbusters.
 
Fail said:
Who cares which system has the better graphics? STFU and just play the goddamn game for the platform of your choice.

This argument has been rehashed 173520217502175021012 times, everyone is just beating a dead horse by rehasing this argument every time a multiplatform game comes out.

JUST PLAY THE DAMN GAME.
Click to expand...

AMEN

Stop fixating on static screenshots and enjoy the game, its amazing!
 
Fail said:
Who cares which system has the better graphics? STFU and just play the goddamn game for the platform of your choice.

This argument has been rehashed 173520217502175021012 times, everyone is just beating a dead horse by rehasing this argument every time a multiplatform game comes out.

JUST PLAY THE DAMN GAME.
Click to expand...

Seriously.. Graphics don't make a game good.
 
Fail said:
Who cares which system has the better graphics? STFU and just play the goddamn game for the platform of your choice.

This argument has been rehashed 173520217502175021012 times, everyone is just beating a dead horse by rehasing this argument every time a multiplatform game comes out.

JUST PLAY THE DAMN GAME.
Click to expand...

We all spend hundreds of dollars on either the 360 or the ps3, of course people who own one or the other want that deliscious justification feeling by knowing theirs looks better.
 
huxley said:
We all spend hundreds of dollars on either the 360 or the ps3, of course people who own one or the other want that deliscious justification feeling by knowing theirs looks better.
Click to expand...

If they only own one.. Why would they buy a copy of the game on the other system?
 
Only thing that matters to me is which console has the most friends list who is the playing the game and to me it's the PS3.
 
I think the graphics comparison discussions are useful. I mean, I'm going to enjoy the game regardless of graphics but I see it like this:

Since I have a choice to purchase the game for either console I would prefer to buy the version which provides me with the best overall experience. While graphics alone do not determine the experience they are definitely an important part of the equation. With games it's always about the experience.


Dallows,

I'm interested in seeing your PS3 version screenshots if you end up posting some. I'd like to get an idea what the game will look like on my calibrated plasma as well (my copy hasn't shipped yet so it'll probably be a week before I get mine).
 
Artificiary said:
Dallows,

I'm interested in seeing your PS3 version screenshots if you end up posting some. I'd like to get an idea what the game will look like on my calibrated plasma as well (my copy hasn't shipped yet so it'll probably be a week before I get mine).
Click to expand...

I tried to get some shots but they all came out like shit. My camera just just and old point and shoot so it's not great for doing this. But I can assure you that the ps3 version does NOT look that bad. Plain and simple.
 
mdk30 said:
$50 isn't going to buy you a house... get the game. :D
Click to expand...

I caved. Picked it up earlier today. With my Assassin's Creed 2 trade in, 30% trade in bonus, plus another 10%, plus about 40 bucks of Edge card credit the game costed me a whopping 67 cents!
 
Dallows said:
I tried to get some shots but they all came out like shit. My camera just just and old point and shoot so it's not great for doing this.
Click to expand...

How are off screen shots with a crappy camera better than direct feed shots straight from the game?

I mean honestly, what exactly are you trying to say here? That these shots, which back up what's been said by every reputable site that's made a comment on the differences between the two versions, are fake?

Artificiary said:
I think the graphics comparison discussions are useful. I mean, I'm going to enjoy the game regardless of graphics but I see it like this:

Since I have a choice to purchase the game for either console I would prefer to buy the version which provides me with the best overall experience.
Click to expand...

And this is exactly why these shots were taken. The guy who took them has both systems and was in a position to do a fair comparison yet for some reason it's being implied that he has an agenda and that the PS3 version doesn't look like what's being shown in his images.

How exactly are you so sure the PS3 version doesn't look like what's being showed anyway, Dallows? The difference, while pretty obvious with two images stood side by side, is hardly monumental. Do you have a photographic memory, did you ride by that particular spot in the game and make a mental note of exactly how much grass there was? The blurring is only slight and I'm sure it looks different on your TV than it does on your monitor, and as I said before probably much better in motion. No one is trying to argue that what you see when you play the game on your PS3 isn't good.
 
alright, reading through that long ass thread, this thread, and multiple other reviews, it seems to me the general consensus is this: the 360 does have better visuals, and more objects in certain scenes.

but this is a very subtle minimal difference, and should not influence you majorly on your purchase.

In the end the game itself is getting very positive reviews, and that is all you should be worried about. get this game and have a blast.
 
Agreed.

If you only have one console, buy it for that one, PS3 or otherwise. I don't think anyone is suggesting that the PS3 port isn't worth owning, the comparisons are really only for people who have both consoles and are trying to choose between the two versions.
 
ManCannon said:
Are you three serious? [...] You can imply that they're lying or that these images are doctored all you want but it's simply not true.
Click to expand...

Look, I'm not saying one version doesn't look better, I'm just saying that the magnitude of the difference can't be correctly quantified using the first images I commented upon, this for the OBVIOUS technical reasons I laid out. And yes, I am in fact saying that offering two images for comparison and having one be substantially more jpeg-compressed, is a) a form of doctoring and b) lying.

I'd like to hear your arguments for why it isn't.
 
The size difference can easily be explained by the fact that one image is originally blurrier than the other. If you put two nearly identical images through jpeg compression but one is blurred and the other isn't the blurry image comes out smaller because there's less detail to begin with. Try it yourself if you like, throw an image into an editor, save it as a .jpeg, then blur it a bit and save it as another .jpeg and see which one comes out smaller.

I would definitely agree however that the images would better serve their purpose in a lossless format, but I think it's a bit ridiculous to suggest tampering when the size difference varies between shots.

You can believe there's something shady you want if you like, though.
 
Tried lassoing a horse for the first time this morning. What a frustrating experience. Spent about 10 min chasing the horses down. I didnt realize that you have to HOLD down the left trigger to keep the rope on the horse. What a pain! :mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top