Grand Theft Auto IV: PS3 vs. Xbox 360 Special

By Richard Leadbetter Published 8 May, 2008

Including high-def video split down the centre.

Even without the Eurogamer comparison feature, the internet has been set ablaze by GTA IV PlayStation 3/Xbox 360 face-off discussions. But mere digital incendiaries are not enough for a release of this magnitude. It's time to go nuclear.

The biggest game of the year deserves the most in-depth face-off piece yet produced by anyone, anywhere, so we've massively upgraded the scope of our coverage and the amount of 'assets' you can view. There's still the same 720p and 1080p 24-bit RGB screengrabs taken from both versions of the game of course, this time using the new Digital Foundry TrueHD capture station, so why not take a look with the first of our galleries, featuring general gameplay shots?

Comparison videos appear to be all the rage, even though they're mostly low-res blur-a-thons that demonstrate absolutely nothing, so we decided to take a different approach. Our vids are encoded in supreme quality h264, but more than that, we've zoomed in on the action so you can actually see the difference. Unless otherwise stated, one pixel in the Eurogamer player corresponds to one pixel on your HDTV. Most of the clips are run at 50 percent speed too, again making the job of comparison that much easier, with more bandwidth dedicated to picture quality.

On top of that, there's an extra-special bonus too. Every video is embedded into the article, but there's a full-size, higher resolution link to the same material over at Eurogamer TV, offering a good 30 percent more screen area, with each clip reframed to make the most of the additional digital acreage. Use these if you want to link to our vids 'elsewhere'.

A sampler of what is to come can be found right here:

Highlights

As there's a colossal amount of stuff to discuss, argue and insult each other about, we've broken down the feature into these areas:

The Basics

I think the most important thing to say right from the get-go is that there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that Grand Theft Auto IV is a 10/10 game no matter which console you own. Having spent the last six days of my life playing both versions simultaneously, painstakingly matching up the gameplay and recording over 500GB of video captures in the process, everything in Tom's original review stands regardless of the platform you're playing it on. As one leading developer said to me the other day, "I think this game, like Crackdown before it, changes everything." Quite.

'Grand Theft Auto IV: PS3 vs. Xbox 360 Special' Screenshot 1

Yes there are some significant differences between the two games which we'll be going into in more depth later on in the feature, but it's important not to lose focus of the most important issue - that this release is an astonishing achievement. Content is king here, and until the extent of the Microsoft-exclusive DLC becomes apparent, the two games serve up an equally superb range of entertainment.

Even in terms of internet functionality the games are like for like. Similar to Burnout Paradise, the two games share all the usual online gaming accruements - the same levels, the same options, and very similar levels of performance, although obviously Xbox Live's servers have been coping better than the GameSpy equivalents behind the scenes at the PlayStation Network.

It's also clear to see that Rockstar has tried its level best to get the most out of both systems. Case in point is the Sixaxis support on the PlayStation 3 version. Regular readers of these features will know that I generally tend to find the motion sensor to be too imprecise to be worth bothering with, but at least here there's a sense that the programmers have tried to get the most out of it. There's a tutorial you access via the mobile phone that teleports you to the airport and lets you try out bikes, boats and helicopters - all of which offer Sixaxis support. Also invaluable is the way you can get the game to auto-calibrate Sixaxis each time the motion sensor is engaged, with the current position of the controller judged to be 'neutral'. This shows that some thought has gone into the control scheme, and there's no chance of your chopper suddenly lurching into the sky because your joypad isn't absolutely level.

Whether you actually find the motion sensor control to be anything other than a novelty remains a matter of personal taste. In terms of GTA IV, I find it decent enough with the boats, a trial with the bikes and short-lived and unintentional entertainment with the choppers. I honestly don't think that 360 owners are missing out on anything special by not having the same control system in their game.

Rockstar also makes use of the PS3 hard disk, with a mandatory 3,339MB installation of game data that takes around seven minutes. This doesn't do much for the initial loading of the game, which takes around 100 seconds on both systems, but certainly helps with mission loading, shaving a few seconds off each time a new task is initiated. There are also improvements in texture streaming as you navigate around Liberty City, but the advantages are barely perceptible.

Finally, a nice little touch is that the PS3 version of the game has much higher resolution versions of the various TV shows available to view in Niko's apartment. Additional camera angles are also included to show off the extra resolution - a cool bonus, somewhat reminiscent of a similar feature in Starbreeze Studios' PS3 conversion of The Darkness.

Resolution, Textures and Anti-Aliasing

Here's where things start to get interesting, where the two games really start to diverge. GTA IV has a different look on each machine, dictated by both technical limitations and - apparently - Rockstar's vision for the game.

First things first. Xbox 360 runs at full 720p (1280x720), whereas the PlayStation 3 code takes a 20 per cent hit, being natively rendered at 1152x640 before being software-upscaled. Regular readers of the face-off features know that this approach can work well (check out the comparison gallery for Dark Sector in the last face-off) but in most cases, the PS3 port just tends to look like a blurrier version of the original Xbox code: not impressive considering that typically, PS3 hardware - and sometimes software - is more expensive.

GTA IV is a kind of weird combination of the two. Both versions feature heavily post-processed visuals, in particular when it comes to depth-of-field effects. Objects in the distance on both versions are blurred in an effort to match the natural focus of the human eye. Where post-processed blur meets the upscaling effect of PlayStation 3, the result usually looks very good indeed - a little softer, of course, but rarely distracting. A slight change of hue (particularly noticeable on indoor cut-scenes) also makes the PS3 version look slightly warmer.

'Grand Theft Auto IV: PS3 vs. Xbox 360 Special' Screenshot 2

Technically speaking, Xbox 360 really should be winning this contest hands-down, but bizarrely, it doesn't. There's support for proper hardware-assisted anti-aliasing, eliminating a great deal of the jagginess of the PlayStation 3 version, plus it's running at full-fat 720p. However, Rockstar has introduced a 360-specific post-processing effect that dithers just about every texture on-screen. It's an effect not present at all on the PS3 version and serves to introduce an oil-painting-like effect to the overall look of the game, particularly on background objects. Unfortunately, it also seems to actively distort the edges of detail in the textures and occasionally looks really ugly.

As it is then, both versions of the game have their strengths and weakness. Ask anyone which look they prefer when presented with comparison shots and you'll find that opinion is divided pretty much straight down the middle. Even Rockstar VP and GTA IV co-writer Sam Houser stepped into the debate, telling 1UP that the 360 version had a "more clinical element" while the PS3 game has "a certain kind of softness without being blurry... [with] some warmth to it". I can see why PS3 would be more appealing to some. The upscale and resultant blur helps to make the game look a touch more movie-like; less rendered and less 'gamey' if you will - a good combination for a mainstream audience.

What is curious to me is that I can see no technical reason why the 360 game shouldn't just be a more detailed, smoother version of the PS3 version. Indeed, if the texture-dither filter could be turned off with a selectable option in a forthcoming patch, I'm almost certain that it would be the superior-looking game simply by virtue of the extra resolution and edge-filtering. But as it is, right now, there's not much in it.

As it is then, it comes down to personal preference, and in my view, Xbox 360 just 'edges' it. It seems that Rockstar didn't appear to issue a single PS3 screenshot pre-launch, which indicates that in-house the 360 game was the lead platform, and obviously the one chosen to best serve the PR effort. Anyone who's ever worked in the games business will know how carefully Rockstar controls its assets, so choosing 360 was a conscious decision. As an aside, it does seem quite ironic that in most cases, the PlayStation press would've been running previews and even reviews with Xbox 360 screenshots.

Regardless, away with such small talk and on with the video.

Resolution and AA

Alternatively, get the full picture with our 720p gallery of resolutions and anti-aliasing comparison shots.

Lighting, Draw Distance and Effects

This section of the feature mainly came about to prove or disprove a lot of the claims floating about online concerning apparent technical differences between the two games. As the vast majority of them were derived mostly from looking at screenshots other people had posted, or guesswork based on the advantages of the PS3's hard disk installation, I thought they were worth putting to the test.

Part of the reason this face-off has taken so long to put together is because actually matching the two games up is a really tough task. To get truly comparable shots, you really need to be capturing the action at the same time during the game's day-night cycle and more than that, you doubly need to make sure that the weather is identical too - not so easy when it appears to change in an arbitrary manner. Thankfully, the recently-released cheat codes allowed me to match up the weather identically before each capture was initiated, the only variable being the time taken to accomplish the same mission on both versions.

Time for a spot of myth-busting then. Aside from a slight tweak to the colour palette (going back once again to Houser's 'warmer' PS3 comments), the two games feature virtually identical lighting. Day and night cycles are basically the same, weather likewise. A case has also been made online with judiciously chosen screenshots that the PS3 version has better-realised explosion effects, but again, in controlled conditions this is proven not to be the case. In fact, the only lighting issue between the two versions that stands out is a shimmering on shadows on the 360 version. Noticeably improved on PS3, but hardly earth-shaking stuff.

Lighting and Effects

To accompany the video are precision 720p shots of lighting and effects in the game.

Onto the next bone of contention then: draw distance. The theory is that the PS3's mandatory hard disk installation gives the Sony version an advantage here, but once again, the evidence clearly shows that the Xbox 360 game matches it. It's not difficult to see why. If the hard disk is good for anything, it's the swift streaming of texture detail, not the actual geometry.

Despite the hard disk advantage of PS3, I found it very hard indeed to show a tangible advantage in terms of texture streaming, aside from whatever wear and tear on the 360's DVD-ROM unit the game might inflict long-term. Maniacal flying of the helicopter showed obvious pop-in on 360 that the PS3 version coped better with, but in more common game conditions both versions acted in a very similar manner. In fact, both games infrequently exhibited pop-in textures, something you wouldn't expect from the PS3 code.

Draw Distance

This video is backed up by 720p precision shots of good draw distance examples taken from the raw, uncompressed captures.

1080i/1080p Support

Both versions of the game have support for 1080i and 1080p monitors, even though the actual output is being scaled up from the base resolution (640p for PS3, 720p for Xbox 360). In the case of PlayStation 3, the effect only kicks in at all if 720p is not activated on the XMB, the implication being that Rockstar is happier with your screen handling the resizing work. Certainly, the lower resolution and (dare I say it) 'jagginess' are exaggerated in the scaling process, which isn't particularly good.

On the plus side, while software upscaling more often than not results in a drop in frame-rate, the refresh rate of the PlayStation 3 version of GTA IV is barely affected, regardless of whether 1080i or 1080p is selected.

We're on far more familiar ground with the Xbox 360 version of the game in that it's following the usual form of handing off the scaling duties to the ATI GPU. That being the case, it actually looks pretty good. While the texture dithering problem is still clearly apparent, the scaling does help to smooth off the effect a touch, meaning that the apparently 'clinical' look has had the edge taken off. More than that, the ATI chip works particularly well with an anti-aliased image to process, and as GTA IV supports that, the overall effect is fairly pleasing.

Also worth noting is that both versions have proper, non-letterboxed 4:3 support for standard definition screens, and 360 even has 5:4 compatibility for those running their consoles connected to non-widescreen LCD monitors.

You can see a few examples of how the game looks upscaled on both formats in our upscaled 1080p comparison gallery.

Frame Rate Tests

So far, aside from the different visual approaches, there's not much to tell the two games apart. But the one difference I couldn't help but notice was the sense that as well as possessing a higher resolution, the Xbox 360 version of GTA IV runs noticeably smoother than the PlayStation 3 code.

What is clear is that both versions adhere to no specific frame-rate. They'll pump out as many frames as they can, roughly averaging out to around 30fps (though it can go higher). However, the amount of time any given frame will stay on-screen is variable, leading to a very inconsistent look. Compare and contrast with, say, Project Gotham Racing 4, or Criterion's Black - both examples of games with a rock solid 30fps refresh rate. In terms of GTA IV, its basic inconsistency means it's really difficult to say whether one version drops more frames than the other just by trusting your own eyes. A more scientific approach is needed.

In previous face-off features, where I've felt that it's relevant, I've always mentioned the difference in refresh rate, but now I can show you how I do it. Essentially, the basic method is simple - capture every single frame that is output over the HDMI port in a lossless format, then examine the capture to check for the amount of unique frames. Digital Foundry's coder programmed a very useful little tool that does that count for me; useful considering the first test is based on a video with over 15,000 frames.

For GTA IV, I performed six tests on a varied amount of material. All of the game's cut-scenes are based on the same engine as the gameplay, so a variety of them were chosen, both indoors and outdoors, and of varying lengths. As the cut-scenes are rendering identical scenes on the fly, it's the best test I could come up with. In all cases, the respective 3D engines will be dealing with 100 percent identical source material.

Links to compressed versions of the test material are provided, but please bear in mind that there's some pretty hardcore swearing. Oh, and possibly some spoilers.

Test One: Game Intro
360: 31.627fps
PS3: 26.504fps
See it on EGTV.

Test Two: Clean Getaway
360: 28.624fps
PS3: 23.989fps
See it on EGTV.

Test Three: Final Destination
360: 35.662fps
PS3: 29.523fps
See it on EGTV.

Test Four: Station Face-Off
360: 26.015fps
PS3: 25.803fps
See it on EGTV.

Test Five: Rigged to Blow
360: 26.507fps
PS3: 23.781fps
See it on EGTV.

Test Six: Ivan the Not So Terrible
360: 33.713fps
PS3: 28.313fps
See it on EGTV.

These figures have been updated slightly since they were originally published. Head over to the Editor's blog to find out why.

So the results clearly show that over the course of the entire clip, 360 out-performs PlayStation 3 in every one of the six scenarios presented here. Indeed, on the longer vids, with a larger average sample, we're seeing a good 17 to 18 percent variance. Tests on gameplay (playing through the same mission, but not rendering identical scenes, obviously) saw a similar range of variance too. For example, the 'Ivan the Not So Terrible' stage has a nice range of in-car, on-foot, rooftop and cut-scene action. 30.106fps average on a 360 runthrough, compared with 26.733fps and 26.696fps on two separate PS3 captures of the same mission.

The bottom line is that no matter what material I put through the detector, 360 came ahead in all tests, sometimes dramatically so.

'Grand Theft Auto IV: PS3 vs. Xbox 360 Special' Screenshot 3

However, it is worth bearing in mind that the frame-rate detector can only produce an average rate. By looking at the other comparison videos in this piece, you'll see that by and large the games generally run at the same speed. However, when the engine struggles to cope, the frame-rate falls and it drops harder on PS3, hence bringing down the overall average.

One curiosity I found was that the PS3 version has v-lock enabled, whereas 360 can produce the odd torn frame. This might be seen to skew results in 360's favour where it not for the fact that typically, a torn frame is only on-screen for 1/60th of a second before v-sync is re-established. More than that, closer examination of the clips reveals that the game actually swaps between two different v-lock modes, only occasionally losing sync. And when it does, in the vast majority of cases, it's a tiny effect evident only on the very top or very bottom of the screen - mostly unseen in the overscan area. More than that, our tests showed that of the entire 60fps output of the 360, the amount of torn frames averaged between 2.35 percent and 6.07 percent. In short then, really not a problem.

Therefore, it's certainly not an issue during gameplay, and regardless, the figures above are compensated anyway to give the true frame-rate. The hosted clips are from the 360 version by the way, in case you want to check.

Truth be told, it's not really the visual differences as such that gravitates me slightly towards the 360 version; it's just that the game runs more solidly on the Microsoft platform, and when the frame-rate does drop, it's not quite so jarring as it is on PS3.

And Finally...

After almost two thousands words of technical discussion, the bottom line is that it's clear that Rockstar had some issues matching the basic performance of the Xbox 360 game on the PS3 hardware. Lower resolution, zero anti-aliasing support and a more variable frame-rate are the bottom line.

On the one hand, it's a touch disappointing that Rockstar's USD 100 million budget couldn't extend to optimising the experience to match Xbox 360, especially when you look at a game like Burnout Paradise that doesn't require a mandatory installation, has a basically rock solid frame-rate, and is technically identical cross-platform.

That said, it's patently clear that Rockstar hasn't handed in a lazy conversion here. Creative decisions have been made to compensate for the technical limitations, and by and large they really work, to the point where you sometimes wonder why they couldn't have been applied to the Xbox 360 version too. PS3 GTA IV looks absolutely fantastic, and even factoring in zero anti-aliasing support and a lower resolution, in many scenarios it looks as good as the 360 version, if not better.

I've not addressed the freezing issue being reported on the game, of course. I'll have to leave that to the people affected as - try as I might to coax the code to fall over and die horribly - GTA IV behaved impeccably for me on both systems. But the chances are that by the time you read, a PS3 patch will be out and about that should sort out those who've been affected. A 360 update after that, please, complete with a tweakable option to use the PS3 post-processing modes. Now that would be interesting.

Picture of Richard.

About Richard Leadbetter

Rich has been a games journalist since the days of 16-bit and specialises in technical analysis. Commonly known around Eurogamer as the Blacksmith of the Future.

Read more articles from Richard by visiting the Richard Leadbetter archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (549) Latest comment 12 months ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • keyboardmonkey #1 4 years ago

    I think this could hit 500+ posts

  • Xerx3s #2 4 years ago

    2000+ minimum.

    /grabs chair
    /hits frod over the head with it

    Don't you even go there...

  • Azazel #3 4 years ago

    So it begins.

  • Aretak #4 4 years ago

    I haven't read the article, but I wanted to save my seat here. This'll be good.

  • Kanselier #5 4 years ago

    Can anyone give me a summary, I can't arsed to read the whole article :)

    edit: is it too early for 'OMG PS3 cant to red cars!!!1' The shot with the explosion has a RED car on xbox 360 and w WHITE one on PS3 ;)
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 14:26

  • Jheronimus #6 4 years ago

    OMG... 1000+ posts, here we come!

    /grabs a soda and goes of to read the article, while STILL waiting for the game to arrive by mail (crappy play.com!!!)

  • neil_likes_bums #7 4 years ago

    :D oh man i've been waiting for this war :D

  • Xerx3s #8 4 years ago

    "Can anyone give me a summary, I can't arsed to read the whole article :)"

    ps3lol/360lol. Depending on your pov.

  • monkie_king #9 4 years ago

    /stops, drops and rolls

  • Xerx3s #10 4 years ago

    "For all those who said this day would never come, what have they to say now"

  • Tejstar #11 4 years ago

    Basic gist seems to be that the 360 is the one to get...

  • Razz #12 4 years ago

    The summary is that the PS3 version, whilst technically inferior to the Xbox version, graphically looks the same and sometimes better. But the difference is negligable. Which is why debating this issue pointless as the game speaks for itself. Brilliant game which is pretty the same on both systems. You can't ask for more.
    Edited by 2 at 08/05/08 @ 14:33

  • Widge #13 4 years ago

    well, from what I've read... its a no win on either side, both machines have excellent copies of the games, the differences spotted are exactly what have been banged on about in the 900+ comment review thread.

    Actually there is a winner, its everyone, going back to the best copy of the game being the one that is sat in your primary machine.

  • Clive_Dunn #14 4 years ago

    PS3 sucks, X360 rocks.

    Or the other way round.

    Whatever.

  • Kanselier #15 4 years ago

    Thanks for the reply Xerx3s. In that case x360lol ;)

    PSTRIPLE PLAYA 4 LIFE YO

  • CannonAnBall #16 4 years ago

    Basically, the 360 performs better and Rockstar haven't quite cut the mustard when they've come to the PS3 version.

    Do developers know what they are doing when they come to knocking out a game on the PS3? or is it easier knocking out a game on the 360?

  • Darkedge #17 4 years ago

    so it's pretty much identical really - softer and warmer on ps3 but crisper and higher average framerate on 360.
    Love the fact that the PS3 issue turned out to be a gamespy problem - why does that not surprise me ;)

  • Widge #18 4 years ago

    oh and in addition, I think this is going to be a horrific comments thread to read... there is enough ammunition contained within here for either "camp" to bang away at each other for the next few days.

  • Physically_Insane #19 4 years ago

    Oh shit.......

    btw this face off shit is retarded.

  • Putty-Man #20 4 years ago

    I reckon there will be at least 20 - 30 posts slagging the fanboys before the actual fanboys get a chance to say anything.

    Fanboys and fanboy slaggers, sometimes I dont know which are worse.

    Edit - great game too, whichever platform.
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 14:38

  • Widge #21 4 years ago

    PUTTY MAN THE FANBOY SURFACES

  • M83J01P97 #22 4 years ago

    Does it really matter though at the end of the day?

    Both games are the same game... both work to a high level of playability... surely it's just a case of getting whichever version you feel more comfortable playing? For example, I prefer XBox Live over PSN, but that's just personal preference.

  • ruttyboy #23 4 years ago

    A more important question is, why does a nominally mature gaming site feel the need to run such a long, dull and ultimately immaterial article on a non-issue?

    Edit: more important than the title of the article, not the above post.
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 14:38

  • DaM #24 4 years ago

    Can you not retract this and rewrite it to say one is miles better than the other? Just for the entertainment value, I don't care which. Go oonnnnn....

  • Calgon #25 4 years ago

    Ive not read all of it yet EG but never mind the whiners, some effort has been put into this, like I say if you are going to compare do it properly.

    Richard really went to town on this one... four pages... and videos?

    I can hear Swam crying from here... but as Razz said despite which version has the technical edge, asthetically they are hard to tell appart some even prefering the PS3 version.

    This should put an end to arguements on which version of GTA IV does what around here atleast(after the dust has settled in this thread), nobody got shafted on either format here, just enjoy the game.

  • syphaa #26 4 years ago

    Who cares.
    No-one notices such tiny little differences.
    PLAY IT ON ANY CONSOLE AND BE HAPPY!

    End.

  • Xerx3s #27 4 years ago

    "A more important question is, why does a nominally mature gaming site feel the need to run such a long, dull and ultimately immaterial article on a non-issue?"

    Fanboys = Pagehits = Income?

  • bloodflowers #28 4 years ago

    I'm happy I got the 360 version now, the frame rate is pretty horrible, I can't imagine playing it at all if it was worse.

  • Widge #29 4 years ago

    hey hey though, 28 comments and not a rant so far! This isn't bad!
    ^^
    although to the above, why does everyone moan about the framerate in this game, it performs better than San Andreas and we weren't moaning then!
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 14:41

  • PES_Fanboy #30 4 years ago

    What's it like on the Wii?

  • Moonprince #31 4 years ago

    I think this game, like Crackdown before it, changes everything

    Crackdown? Seriously? Changed what exactly?..

  • imamazed #32 4 years ago

    As usual, I notice no differences in screenshots/videos.

    360 is clearly the way to go for other reasons, couldn't care less about it having 1fps more or anything

  • asphaltcowboy #33 4 years ago

    Is Eurogamer actually one of the four horsemen?

  • ruttyboy #34 4 years ago

    I suspect you are correct Xerx3s :(

  • McFly55 #35 4 years ago

    4 pages of pointlessness.

  • septimus #36 4 years ago

    Oh god... here we go.

    Where are these frame rate issues? Not scene any noticeable dips on either. Once on 360, but I think that was a disc read issue (some texture fecked up).

  • mikeck #37 4 years ago

    "The summary is that the PS3 version, whilst technically inferior to the Xbox version, graphically looks the same and sometimes better. But the difference is negligable. Which is why debating this issue pointless as the game speaks for itself. Brilliant game which is pretty the same on both systems. You can't ask for more".

    Indeed Razz, couldn't agree more ;)

  • LetsGo #38 4 years ago

    Good article, I'm glad I got the 360 version.

  • monkie_king #39 4 years ago

    Interesting that the 360 occasionally averages more than 30 fps. That means it must be spiking up to 60fps in the cutscenes, which is pretty impressive.

    I found that looking out to sea can get 60fps from the 360 version, but then it's not exactly drawing very much ...

    On the dithering thing, is it maybe possible that Rockstar want the dithering for artistic effect, but the PS3 couldn't spare the cycles to run the filter? It seems too obvious on 360 not to be a deliberate choice.

  • wonton #40 4 years ago

    Most people don't care, but some do so why not give them something to chew on.

  • tobsen #41 4 years ago

    Bottom line for me is that Rockstar, while the king of content, simply don't seem to be good at the technical stuff. Nobody else could afford to release a triple-AAA title with such a bad framerate on a next-gen console.

  • Cappy #42 4 years ago

    Signed, sealed and delivered.

    I'm finally decided then, Rock Star won't get a Penny out of me for the bodged 360 port they're offering.

  • bdaggers #43 4 years ago

    How could anyone have a bias towards the PS3 version after the most unbiased, exhaustive comparison. Good job.

    The facts and figures are there, it`s gonna piss some people off, but it`s irrefutable. Get over it.

  • morriss #44 4 years ago

    YES!! THE 360 FUCKING WINS!!! YES!

    WOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

    /dies

  • Psychotext #45 4 years ago

    Good article. I hope it ends all the pointless bitching and sniping but I know it wont.

  • Physically_Insane #46 4 years ago

    Anyone who thought the 360 version wouldn't be better was just kidding themselves. It was the lead platform and the PS3 does suck donkey ass.

  • anomagnus #47 4 years ago

    oh yea baby, NUCLEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Pity that rockstar were forced by sony to gimp the xbox version.......

  • Psiloc #48 4 years ago

    I have my PS3 set to 720p, and the game looks no where near as blurry as some of those videos. I actually wish it was blurrier, it's a complete jaggyfest at times.

  • Machiavel #49 4 years ago

    Let's start the 'Rockstar added dithering filter to 360 to make it look as crap as PS3' rumour mill right now :)

  • Eurolamer #50 4 years ago

    Despite all the foreboding "WOOOO HERE WE GO!!!" comments, not a single 'fanboy' has stepped up to the plate yet.

    Conclusion = No one cares. A great game is a great game.

    A commendable effort with the comparison though it must be said, very detailed. I did enjoy reading it, just out of curiosity to see if there were glaring differences, which there are not.

  • Psiloc #51 4 years ago

    "Let's start the 'Rockstar added dithering filter to 360 to make it look as crap as PS3' rumour mill right now :)"

    You know, for a split second that thought came to my mind.

  • bloke #52 4 years ago

    Nice article Richard - solid technical work and a very sound overall analysis. That is, it's a great game on both systems :-)

  • Negotiator #53 4 years ago

    The 360 wins again, what a surprise, thanks EG for giving us the truth and the BS that IGN gave us about the PS3 version being better. All you PS3 arse heads can keep playing your over priced piece of shit machine, while I play the superior 360 which came out a year before, lol.

  • Yaz #54 4 years ago

    Eurolamer wrote: "Despite all the foreboding "WOOOO HERE WE GO!!!" comments, not a single 'fanboy' has stepped up to the plate yet. Conclusion = No one cares...."

    Not so fast, it's only been about 35 minutes since the first post here. Give it time. ;)

  • KayJay #55 4 years ago

    Resolution, Textures and Anti-Aliasing
    "Technically speaking, Xbox 360 really should be winning this contest hands-down, but bizarrely, it doesn't."
    |
    |
    "and in my view, Xbox 360 just 'edges' it"

    Errrm! :-)

    "whereas 360 can produce the odd torn frame"

    Ohh Fuck Tearing!!! :-)

    Fight Fight Fight!!

    Nah!

    Lets just go play the game, and have some Fun :-)

  • bloodflowers #56 4 years ago

    Oh well, there goes the first stone.

    And we were doing so /well/ for a change.

  • eathis #57 4 years ago

    What an absolutely fantastic face-off - the effort put in here is unbelievable!

  • nickthegun #58 4 years ago

    JUST TELL ME WHICH VERSION TO BUY!

  • Widge #59 4 years ago

    eugh, the weakened gene pool steps up to the plate

  • Psychotext #60 4 years ago

    @kj66246: I've played the game for something like 60 hours now and I haven't noticed tearing once. It usually drives me nuts so it must be pretty rare.

  • KayJay #61 4 years ago

    Lets just go play the game, and have some Fun :-)

  • ciril #62 4 years ago

    Weee, it's like Commodore vs Atari again :D

  • Negotiator #63 4 years ago

    But the PS3 has the CELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL, WHY IS IT SO SHIT.......WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY.
    An average PS3 owner's comment.

  • Psiloc #64 4 years ago

    @squarejawhero

    Nah, Negotiator wrecked it.

  • Prodigy_BE #65 4 years ago

    And Microsoft wins the console war!

  • Widge #66 4 years ago

    whoa! The placenta HAS to go on ignore. Shades of the vocal rejects I would come up against on Halo 2.

  • Negotiator #67 4 years ago

    "And Microsoft wins the console war!"

    Who cares about that.

  • muscleblade #68 4 years ago

    Did anyone think that this was surprising. As a former owner of both consoles this didnt come as a surprise at all. Im not a fanboy im only trying to be objective.
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 15:08

  • wasted #69 4 years ago

    no inflammatory x360 fanboy posts? maybe all the 360 owners aren't home from school yet...:)

    good face off tho, seems there's precious little in it...

  • bdc #70 4 years ago

    PS3 OWNED

  • Avaloner #71 4 years ago

    Great article.Made for an interesting read.

  • Widge #72 4 years ago

    I'm glad you own one

  • snale #73 4 years ago

    This must be the high point of the year for all measurebators.

  • StevilKnevil #74 4 years ago

    Nicely written and informative article. Both versions are great and any differences are pretty negligable. Fantastic game.

  • Kanselier #75 4 years ago

    So, now what. I am a tad bored.
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 15:12

  • Benno #76 4 years ago

    The 360 is a much better console

  • eathis #77 4 years ago

    No mention of how the 'rumble' feature on each machines controller is used. Seems to me that this most exhaustive of comparison tests lacks a very important detail!

  • Blackthorned #78 4 years ago

    I think it looks best when you're drunk.

  • Widge #79 4 years ago

    drunk, and being driven about in a taxi!

  • ElNino9 #80 4 years ago

    I've got both version and can't tell the difference, not thta I give a fuck mind. :D

  • fightman3b #81 4 years ago

    good to see. we can finally state that the 360 version is better. end of story. ps3 fanboys shut the fuck up and accept it. still a great game on both systems.

  • gabsta69 #82 4 years ago

    the ps3 version is rubbish, mine locks up all the time.

    Gonna get me a 360 version over the weekend, as everyone i know says it works like a charm on that console.

    ps3 blows.

  • BadBoyBonner #83 4 years ago

    I hate tearing, a lot - an I have never seen any - probably the very heavy handed dithering actually masks where the scan line difference is.

    Surely the dithering effect is eating up clock cycles from somewhere?

    The "artistic" use of post processing makes things like fences in the 360 look like a joke - it almost looks like the fences is actually made out of static interference from a TV.

    Hope RS release a patch that offers some choices over the image i.e. switch the median cut dithering post processing filter.

    If they use the same rendering specs as PS3 to generate the image on the 360 the frame rate should go up quite a bit further - which would be nice for the multiplayer as it can chug a bit at times.
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 15:16

  • Zappa #84 4 years ago

    PS3 looks better and gives me free online play.

    EG probaly went through 50 RROD's doing these fanboi test lol.

  • djcool3005 #85 4 years ago

    Is it just me or is the author of this article a bit biased. He clearly favours the 360 over the PS3. I have both consoles so don't start calling me a fanboy.

  • Widge #86 4 years ago

    Everyone is biased to something though!

  • byron_hinson #87 4 years ago

    @DJ - I have both too but I can see that this wasn't favouring either - heck he even says in general the PS3 version looks better overall...doesn't mean it performs best as can be seen from the framerate - funny thing is that the amount of people here who were complaining about tearing in the upcoming Wipeout HD will now ignore the fact that GTA on the 360 has some, its just the way it goes with these comments and the forums in general. 98% of the comments are worth ignoring.

  • ccfb #88 4 years ago

    "I'll have to leave that to the people affected as - try as I might to coax the code to fall over and die horribly - GTA IV behaved impeccably for me on both systems"

    What the hell? Learn punctuation.

  • Toonster #89 4 years ago

    My God, people! We haven't even gone past two pages of comments, yet! Step it up, ye bastards!

  • wasted #90 4 years ago

    djcool3005 - it's just you.

  • keyboardmonkey #91 4 years ago

    After reading this and taking into account the DLC i am happy that i bought the Xbox360 version. (that and the fact that i don't own a PS3)

    I hope R* have sorted out the freezing issue on the PS3 so that everyone who can gets the chance to play it. (sorry Wii owners)

  • McLovin85 #92 4 years ago

    But mines bigger than yours.....

  • Widge #93 4 years ago

    you'd been a bit buggered if you'd got the PS3 version!

    Patch update: came down last night, no freezes (although I had none anyway), decided to dive into a game of cops n robbers, no issues there either.

  • Eighthours #94 4 years ago

    Thanks for the feature, Richard. Very good, and very informative indeed.

    I do wish that the toddler fanboys of both systems would get the hell out of here.

  • Aretak #95 4 years ago

    I think, ultimately, this article provides definitive proof that the PS3 is an inferior system.

  • RedPanda #96 4 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • djcool3005 #97 4 years ago

    @Byron - I suppose it is a fair test but I just felt some of the comments he was making seemed to favour the 360. I don't know about you but having both machines, I find that the PS3 is a better machine because its much quieter than the 360 and doesn't get really hot if you play it a lot. The 360 whines like a Moped or a small motorbike when its on. That said, there are more very good games for the 360 than PS3. At the moment atleast.
    Edited by 2 at 08/05/08 @ 15:29

  • Buztafen #98 4 years ago

    Gosh, its like the great Street Fighter 2 Turbo debate of 93......:)

  • speedjack #99 4 years ago

    Wow. Interesting read... and hats off to Mr. Leadbetter for what was obviously a labour of love.

  • QPRHOOPS81 #100 4 years ago

    "Game on both versions sucks since i can't find a copy anywhere :) "

    go to blockbusters. Random i know but they have loads
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 15:31

  • Madafunkola #101 4 years ago

    This is what really happened:
    Microsoft: "Hi there Sony! I've just seen the preview code of that GTAIV game, and our version actually looks BETTER than yours! - WTF is that all aboot, with your cell and all?"
    Sony: "WTF indeed - OK, we'll cut a deal with you, if you accept a blurry texture filter on your code to make it look like poo, we'll let you have exclusive DLC!"
    Microsoft: "DEAL!"
    Both: "MWAHAHAHAHA - Fools!"

    /de-activates flame-bait cannon

    Only kidding, just wanted to stir the phanboi's about a bit.

    EDIT: Spelling, see teacher
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 15:32

  • Gavilan #102 4 years ago

    A good article which I must admit makes me glad I went the Xbox route rather than believing Sony's launch hype about it's cell processor superiority.

    The fact the PS3 version has to have a mandatory hard drive installation, runs at a lower resolution and suffers lower frame rates kind of says it all. Of course this could be that Rockstar haven't got to grips with programming for the Cell still, but they delayed the initial release of GTA IV due to the Sony machine anyway, so they should have been able to get their heads round coding it by now.

    Add to that Achievements, Xbox Live multiplayer and DLC to follow, the winner is clearly Microsoft here. As for the warmer hue, well my TV has hue adjustments so can't really say that's a big deal.

    I do genuinely feel sorry for anyone that fell for Sony's spiel about them having the superior console.

    Anyway the game rocks, and we can all enjoy it, that's what counts. :-)

    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 15:58

  • LeD #103 4 years ago

    Must suck to own the PS3 version. Talk about getting the shitty end of the stick here.

    360 takes the PS3 to the cleaners, any day of the week.

  • nickthegun #104 4 years ago

    "Gosh, its like the great Street Fighter 2 Turbo debate of 93......:)"

    Its nothing like that because at least then it was obvious to anyone with eyes that the SNES version PWNED the megadrive version.

    SNES4LIFE

  • Xerx3s #105 4 years ago

    Makes one wonder though: Who is right? IGN or EG? Did money play a role?

    /dons tin hat

  • Widge #106 4 years ago

    I don't feel sorry for owning a PS3 thank you very much! Hardly looking to sell up and migrate in the near future.

  • Gavilan #107 4 years ago

    "I feel sorry for anyone that fell for Sony's spiel"

    Don't feel sorry for you owning a PS3, it's a cool Blu Ray player after all. ;-)
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 15:42

  • neil_likes_bums #108 4 years ago

    Megadrive SF2 forever man. Forever.

  • themorganator #109 4 years ago

    interesting article, thanks EG.

    Glad I've got the 360 version though.... and it works online. I always love the PS3 fanboys talking about free online. ha ha - ITS RUBBISH IN COMPARISON TO LIVE - thats why its free!

    I know this to be true because i've got both consoles! LOL!

  • rudedudejude #110 4 years ago

    Summary:

    PC Wins + Mods.

    Consoles suck ass.

  • Widge #111 4 years ago

    oh oh, should I read between the lines for a "no games" comment there?
    perhaps a rousing chorus of "not a proper gamer" maybe?

  • keyboardmonkey #112 4 years ago

    @Aretak

    Good attempt at a bit of baiting, but i think no one is going to go for it.

  • Jheronimus #113 4 years ago

    Nah, it's more like the big Mario vs. Sonic debate of the early 90's!

    Allthough Mario had the coolest tv-show! (DO THE MARIO!!!)

  • jonsaan #114 4 years ago

    Burnout Paradise's lead platform was PS3, that is why there is no difference.

  • Miths #115 4 years ago

    "Must suck to own the PS3 version. Talk about getting the shitty end of the stick here.

    360 takes the PS3 to the cleaners, any day of the week."

    As someone else said above - and as I and many others have said in other comment threads - I would have taken the PS3 version even if it was significantly inferior (which is clearly not the case here) simply because of the hellishly obnoxious drive and fan noise of my 360.
    I know this doesn't matter at all to many gamers, but it certainly does to me. The 360 is - and might remain throughout this console generation - a slightly better gaming console (and I also prefer its controller to the small, flimsy Sixaxis), but the PS3 just seems like a much more well designed living room media/gaming system.

  • red_shift #116 4 years ago

    I want to be a part of this.

  • monkie_king #117 4 years ago

    Just wait for the WonderSwan Color port, then we'll see who is the "real next gen".

  • neil_likes_bums #118 4 years ago

    Remember, opinions can never be wrong, just different to your own. In addition, nobody but you probably cares in the slightest about your opinion. Such is life. I now only visit here to read the nonsense people spew in their strange loyalty to some massive brand who couldn't care less about them.

  • Madafunkola #119 4 years ago

    Here's a serious question - I played GTAIV with 5.1 surround last night for the first time (didn't notice the separate audio menu) and the framerate started stuttering something ROTTEN. Anyone else experienced this on either console? I'll not mention which console I have it on so that i remain impartial.

  • Weezer #120 4 years ago

    I want GTAIV on the DS so I can touch lapdancers with my stylus...

  • bad09 #121 4 years ago

    Good read!

    For me though I got 360 version for achievements and Live, any graphical differences really didn't matter.

    Edit - Plus I can play GTA 3/VC/SA and 4 all on one console!
    Edited by 2 at 08/05/08 @ 15:55

  • Razz #122 4 years ago

    SNES SF2T > Megadrive SF2T

    It's not even a fair fight. The megadrive version was complete pants.

  • japstersam #123 4 years ago

    good comparison, well said that its great on both systems, very negligable differences that dont affect the gameplay. ENJOY IT EVERYONE :)

  • CannonAnBall #124 4 years ago

    It's still early days yet for the PS3. I'm quite optimistic about a game coming along that will blow the 360 out of the water.

    What you gonna do then with your fucking 360? Link back to this GTA article? Sad fucks.


  • Carlo #125 4 years ago

    I have to confess I like the look of the PS3 version out of the two comparisons.

    But so what eh?

  • tobsen #126 4 years ago

    Seriously, judging from the full-size comparison video, the Xbox version has horribly pixel noise all over the place. I would prefer the blurrier look of the PS3 version over this any day.

  • FooAtari #127 4 years ago

    Can't be arsed reading the thread. Technically both games have inconsistant frame rate issues throughout. Which personally effects my enjoyment of the game. Neither version is perfect. And while a damn good, game, there are to many issues to make it a 10/10. 9/10 for me.

  • thewolfiv #128 4 years ago

    so much for the more expensive hardware always being on top - i got the PS3 version and i have to admit as a graphics junkie the fact a cheaper console runs identicale if not better, ah sony what the hell are you doing where is all this power from the cell? me thinks another emotion chip in the making.

  • Xerx3s #129 4 years ago

    "I want to be a part of this."

    I want to be a part of you.

  • Buztafen #130 4 years ago

    *RETRO FANBOY HIJACK* :0

    It was the speech on the Megadrive version that got me...

    'Shpinninj burd shit!'

    Quality!!!...also the fact that they had to bring out a new controller especially for it....

  • chris_ace #131 4 years ago

    Post deleted at 11:55:13 13-12-2011

  • Ranger101 #132 4 years ago

    The Megadrive version of SF2T was far inferior to the SNES version. Megadrive Championship Edition however was awesomes, and it powzed (or whatever the word is meant to be) the SNES World Warrior edition.

  • Buztafen #133 4 years ago

    @chris_ace - Get a better sound system and turn the bitch up FFS!!! :)

  • bad09 #134 4 years ago

    "Megadrive Championship Edition however was awesomes,"

    Although it sounded like they were fighting underwater :)

  • ps3_2310 #135 4 years ago

    If microsoft had a dick all you 360 fanboys would be sucking it.

  • Ranger101 #136 4 years ago

    Playing as Balrog with the default Megadrive pad was cheap though - you cold charge up Turn punches while holding a single button.

  • daedaloz #137 4 years ago

    So...

    In short.. The PS3 almost plays up to the Xbox in terms of framerates.. but looks better visual wise, all whilst taking into account
    that the XboX was the lead console in the developing process and that Rockstar haven't quite figured out how to code the PS3
    to maximize its potential yet?

    I'd say not too shabby.. but who cares.. great game on both ;)
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 16:08

  • Skooch #138 4 years ago

    LOL, to all those cocky PS3 fanbois - IN YOUR FACE!

    360 wins.

    Again.

    And will continue to win.

    Forever.

  • Zelos #139 4 years ago

    You're comparing framerates when one is v-synced and the other isn't? That's pointless. Of course the non-vsynced one is going to run faster, it's not necessarily even drawing all those frames to the screen.

    Vsync tearing is one of the most annoying things about this generation of games.

  • Ranger101 #140 4 years ago

    "Although it sounded like they were fighting underwater :) "

    It gave you that authentic 'Playing at a noisy arcades' feeling. (Albeit minus the jingle jangle of someone winning at the fruit machine behind you) :D

  • ps3_2310 #141 4 years ago

    I have been playing the PS3 version for 15 hours and it looks fine and plays fine to me. This is just eurogamer adding fuel to the buring fanboy fire

  • Gavilan #142 4 years ago

    @ps3_2310 "If Microsoft had a dick all you 360 Fanboys would be sucking it."

    Where as all the PS3 Fanboys have to suffer with taking it up the arse! LOL

    I'm glad I ain't a Fanboy as neither of those instances appeals thank you!

  • Buztafen #143 4 years ago

    Actually the Megadrive version was superior in graphics and frame rate....but no one could take their favourite characters all of a sudden talking like retards coz of the MD's skank ass sound chip.

    Controllers were better too....took 5 or 6 good throws at my brothers wardrobe before they broke....

  • bad09 #144 4 years ago

    All this talk of SNES vs Megadrive is pointless. Amiga version FTW!

  • Widge #145 4 years ago

    Well I had the Amiga 500 version of Street Fighter 2. You should try playing that with just the one button and 4 discs to swap about with when selecting characters!

    ha, synchronised A500 memories...
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 16:13

  • ps3_2310 #146 4 years ago

    @Gavilan

    We have been taking it up the ass but it's geting better and PS3 is beating the 360 in europe FACT. It did better on GTA sales if you think of the number of 260's there are to the PS3's
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 16:15

  • stephenb #147 4 years ago

    Have read the article(most of it). Then skimmed the posts, looks like the majority of us are starting to treat these face offs with the derision they deserve!

  • chiz #148 4 years ago

    A1200 ya mean? A500/600 version only runs in 32 colours :p

  • hasanahmad #149 4 years ago

    Eurogamer trying too hard to diss the obviously superior 360 version

    "Technically speaking, Xbox 360 really should be winning this contest hands-down, but bizarrely, it doesn't. "


    "What is curious to me is that I can see no technical reason why the 360 game shouldn't just be a more detailed, smoother version of the PS3 version."

    "On the one hand, it's a touch disappointing that Rockstar's USD 100 million budget couldn't extend to optimising the experience to match Xbox 360"

  • bad09 #150 4 years ago

    "ha, synchronised A500 memories..." \o/
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 16:16

  • Widge #151 4 years ago

    whoa, A1200 fanboy descends!

  • Gavilan #152 4 years ago

    @ps3_2310 "We have been taking it up the ass but it's geting better and PS3 is beating the 360 in europe FACT. It done better on GTA sales if you think of the number of 260's there are to the PS3's"

    So by your admission then you're a PS3 Fanboy and take it up the ass... classic!

    /bait off
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 16:18

  • ps3_2310 #153 4 years ago

    @Gavilan

    I am a PS3fanboy and Sony do shaft us here in europe but we still go back for more

  • megastar #154 4 years ago

    i agree with bad09, as good as the consoles were - the amiga was the fucking daddy

    lets not go into the amiga version of street fighter 2 though - that shit was just naaaaasty

  • bad09 #155 4 years ago

    1200 sucks, 500 rules!!!

    ADF unite!

  • Buztafen #156 4 years ago

    Aah the Commodore....how i miss thee!

    /remembers Turrican 2, GODz and James Pond 2 Robocod....weeps alittle....

  • megastar #157 4 years ago

    now the amiga version of lotus turbo challenge kicked the megadrive versions ass, dragged it by its weeping carcass over the finishing line, and then relieved itself over its sorry excuse of a game

  • Psychotext #158 4 years ago

    He's on ignore for me, but is swam in here ranting yet?

  • Widge #159 4 years ago

    I had a CD32 too :(

  • megastar #160 4 years ago

    buztafen - dont get me started on the music to turrican 2 (amiga)

    /wanks

  • Buztafen #161 4 years ago

    Mstar! I had the Amiga version of SF2, it may be the worst conversion of a game i have ever seen in my entire life...and it came out almost a year after the snes version.....what in blue hell was the fucking point?

  • Madafunkola #162 4 years ago

    Anyone who has to put "FACT" at the end of a sentence automatically forfiets the arguement they are trying to make.

  • Ranger101 #163 4 years ago

    Atari STE version had better sound and music than the Amiga version, but suffered from the same Disk Swap issue. Controls and graphics were shitter though.

    STE FTW FUCK THE A500!

  • bad09 #164 4 years ago

    "STE FTW FUCK THE A500!"

    NOW we have a fanboy war :)

  • JDub #165 4 years ago

    Heh, this is just a fanboi detector thread.

    /arms ignore button

  • Buztafen #166 4 years ago

    We went through the whole Nostalgia music shit only a few weeks ago bud...till around 5 in the morning...it needs to left for another year or so now to mature....although...

    Xenon 2 Megabass : Bomb the Bass


    AWESOME!!!

  • Super_Zee #167 4 years ago

    I had the Spectrum +2 version of SFII, where you had to load the entire tape between each match-up so it could load the required characters. Now that was painful.

    The +2 was still better than the C64, though... :)

  • Ranger101 #168 4 years ago

    My (STE) version of Lotus Challenge 3 was faaaaar superior to the PC AND A500/A600 versions.

    ST Format said so.

  • JediMasterMalik #169 4 years ago

    Very dissappointed in Rockstar as far as the PS3 is concerned, although I have to say, playing it, I was pretty impressed with the consistency of the framerate, it' never too bad. It does still look good, but I don't think they put as much effort into the PS3 version as they should have.

  • Widge #170 4 years ago

    Oh god... I just had memories of the blinking red message of death on the A500.
    On happier times, I remember the proud day when I got my 512k memory upgrade.

    and this is possibly the best comparison thread yet! random bollocks ftw!
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 16:30

  • anomagnus #171 4 years ago

    Do you hear that scraping sound, Swam?

    Thats the sound you're making at the bottom of the barrel

  • Ranger101 #172 4 years ago

    Wasn't the C64 and Spectrum versions just limited to you being able to choose only between Ryu or Chunli.

  • anomagnus #173 4 years ago

    and as for the amiga, that machine was a load of toss

    only queers and kiddy fiddlers bought those, and even then, they used them to destroy children and crush hope

  • SuperNashwan #174 4 years ago

    Happy days Widge, I bought Wings and the the upgrade at the same time. Take THAT ST fan bois.

  • Ranger101 #175 4 years ago

    I demand Eurogamer run a SF2T Megadrive vs SNES comparison. Using the exact same standards and depth of testing as this GTA4 one.

  • Amoebalove #176 4 years ago

    @Madafunkola

    i agree and anyone who says Fact at the end of their post is a c**t! FACT

    oops i think i just called myself a c**t!!!!!!!

  • Widge #177 4 years ago

    Street Fighter 2: Amiga vs ST vs Spectrum vs C64 vs PC vs SNES vs Megadrive - EG special

  • GamesConnoisseur #178 4 years ago

    Due to a lot of misinformation in internet, EG really have tried their hardness to be impartial with fair tests to give results, as article have said from the start and at the end both version excels.

    This is far, far better than IGN head to head trash. No not because I prefer X360, actually I have both versions on X360 and PS3 (PS3 due to arrive tomorrow) and so I can play online with either group of mates.

    The misinformation come from fanboys, so now we know the facts as presented, who cares about few fps difference? Indeed amazing on the both platform. Adding only that I have yet to see a single tearing on X360 after 23 hours and simply recommend to go with the version you will most play on your preferred console.

    Good article!

  • Widge #179 4 years ago

    I'm disappointed with lavalant's performance :(
    *gives 512k upgrades*

  • Apologie #180 4 years ago

    EG

    "As there's a colossal amount of stuff to discuss, argue and insult each other about, we've broken down the feature into these areas:"

    -------------------------

    after these phrase there is no doubt in my mind about how low and ridiculous EG have become... shame on you EG, these is not journalism and most definitely not professional... the game performs very good on both platforms, and minor differences are not relevant except for fanboy's and tech freaks, so what's the point???
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 16:39

  • Buztafen #181 4 years ago

    This SF2 comparison must happen, make it so EG....


    FACT!

  • CannonAnBall #182 4 years ago

    Next thing we'll hear from the Xbox fanboys is that HD-DVD is the future!

    This is like Manchester United and Manchester City. Every now and again City will beat United and you never hear the end of it. In the long term, there is only one winner though!

  • Psychotext #183 4 years ago

    Apologie: They're not professional because they know their readership? Hell... you're a perfect example of what they're talking about there.

  • RevanEleven #184 4 years ago

    You are a tool.

  • Widge #185 4 years ago

    Pixel counters latest: Ryu is made up of 142 pixels on the A500 version, 137 on the ST.

  • Yaz #186 4 years ago

    *Sigh* more gamers seeing what they want to see. Typical. :)

    That was a VERY fair comparison from Eurogamer. Definately the best and most comprehensive comparison of both versions seen so far.

  • Amoebalove #187 4 years ago

    For the love of God let it go swam just let it go!

  • Ranger101 #188 4 years ago

    "Pixel counters latest: Ryu is made up of 142 pixels on the A500 version, 137 on the ST. "

    Yeah, but, but, does Ryu sound like he's saying "Whore-You-Can", eh?

    Anyway WHATEVAH.

    FACT.

  • mungolikebeans #189 4 years ago

    This discussion is pointless and sad. Who really cares? My dad is biggr than your dad! etc

  • RevanEleven #190 4 years ago

    This is the shit right here, sitting in the garden, in the sun drinking beer and watching swan lose his marbles over a FUCKING COMPUTER GAME!

  • Amoebalove #191 4 years ago

    Thats right swam they are and they don't recycle the bastards!!!!!!!!

  • Eighthours #192 4 years ago

    The tradeoff is that the 360 version has tearing.

    I haven't seen any at all. And believe me, I'd have noticed.

  • Widge #193 4 years ago

    every bloody version wins! christ!

  • des #194 4 years ago

    vg charts lol

  • RevanEleven #195 4 years ago

    A whole TWO images. Conclusive proof right there folks.

  • bad09 #196 4 years ago

    swam makes me want to sell my PS3....

  • Amoebalove #197 4 years ago

    @ swam

    How has the 360 failed at anything? (apart RROD failure ha!) It was the underdog console that many had written off before it was even launched. It was supposed to be significantly less powerful than the ps3 and yet it managed to give sony a bloody nose it wont soon forget!

  • Buztafen #198 4 years ago

    @lavalant - Quit spoiling the fun, if you didnt wanna have fun whydya come to the party huh (puts on crate paper hat)

    We need more retro shit on EG anyway! Or am i the only one whose out of dippers on here????

    @swam - F F S...............................

  • RevanEleven #199 4 years ago

    Fuck, I didn't believe people like swan really existed. God only knows what a sad like he must lead. :-( And Apoloigie
    if you dont like it here then sod off, do us all a favour, eh?

  • Ranger101 #200 4 years ago

    Swam, you have to keep defending the PS3 or otherwise everyone will think you are a bad person, judge you and you will be ostracized from society for your failure to demonstrate the "TEH GayBox360 sucks ballz" and that the "PS3lol OWz0rsz all".

    Also, if you successfully demonostrate it, Kelly Brooks will give you a tit wank and hand over a cheque equal to the amount of copies that the GTA4 has sold on the PS3.

  • KayJay #201 4 years ago

    " bad09 wrote: swam makes me want to sell my PS3...."

    Why!

    Surley all these stupid 360 Fanboys Fuckwits and their pathetic comments put you of the 360...

    Swan has come back with a bit weight behind his argument... the article clearly states the two are really to close to call and if anything the 306 version has a few more negatives...

    Apart from the "And Finally..." part with the usual bow to the 360 Base on EG.

  • PearOfAnguish #202 4 years ago

    It hurts my brain to think there are people out there who care this much about identical versions of the same game.

  • Bonus #203 4 years ago

    @swam

    From those arbitrary frame rates it doesn't seem like either of them have v-sync on.

    If it was v-synced on the PS3 and dropped below 30fps it would automatically start running at 15fps which would be really bad. I haven't heard of any PS3 fanboys complaining about that yet so I'd assume it wasn't true.

    Having played the 360 version a lot I haven't seen any noticable tearing and showing screenshots isn't the way to prove anything as I could doctor that and claim it was "proof" withnothing more than paint.

  • Hughes. #204 4 years ago

    I'm waiting for the superior Wii version!

  • chrisjm #205 4 years ago

    'Because EG are biased. '

    LOL x 1,000,000,000

  • SuperNashwan #206 4 years ago

    Swam - why do you seem to take any criticism of the PS3 as a personal insult ? Its a games console FFS.

  • Ranger101 #207 4 years ago

    Dude! Did you not read my post?!

    There is a tit-wank from Ms Brooks and a cheque in the millions up for grabs here!

  • Buztafen #208 4 years ago

    kj66246 are you a robot?.....is that your batch number?

  • KayJay #209 4 years ago

    360 - Is my batch number...
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 17:07

  • chrisjm #210 4 years ago

    Maybe Swam is George Foreman and gets 10 cents for every PS3 sold?

  • Buztafen #211 4 years ago

    "Its so good, but i cant put my GAME ON IT!!!!"

  • Ranger101 #212 4 years ago

    Anyway, back to more important things:

    SF2T Console comparisons. Make it happen EG - tie it in with SF4.

  • bad09 #213 4 years ago

    @ kj66246

    " bad09 wrote: swam makes me want to sell my PS3...."

    Why!

    We all like fanboy banter but he takes it far to seriously. The game is pretty much identical so who cares??

    Besides we all know 360 version is best for achievements, in-game XMB, custom music..... :)

    \ runs

  • Yaz #214 4 years ago

    swam wrote: "Eurogamer say the PS3 version matches, and often exceeds the 360 version for image quality, despite the 360 having AA and 720p."

    Eurogamer says "As it is then, both versions of the game have their strengths and weakness. Ask anyone which look they prefer when presented with comparison shots and you'll find that opinion is divided pretty much straight down the middle."

    So it's a matter of preference swam. The higher res AA dithered 360 version, or the lower res upscaled softer looking PS3 version.

    "The PS3 versions framerate is only a few frames lower when things get busy, but NEITHER version is consistent."

    Neither is consistent, but 17-18% better framerate on average is significant enough to be noticed.

    "The tradeoff is that the 360 version has tearing."

    Which is completely unnoticeable during the game, hence no-one has complained about screen tearing in the 360 version, not in reviews or in forums.

    The reason Richard sees it is because he's analysing it a frame at a time, which is why he says "whereas 360 can produce the ODD torn frame". The odd torn frame swam does not result in noticeable screen tearing, it requires a succession of torn frames before screen tearing becomes noticeable in games.

    Personally, I really dislike screen tearing in games and I know many gamers feel the same way I do about it. Hence if it was a problem in the 360 version, gamers would be online complaining about it.

    "There is some popup on both versions, especially noticeable on the 360 during helicopter flights."

    Helicopter flights yes, but it's not really any worse on the 360 during the rest of the game, which accounts for most of the gameplay hours.

    "The 360 version has UGLY pixel noise throughout."

    Again, a matter of opinion on how good or bad the effect is.

    "So how exactly does the 360 version win?"

    Well, try reading it without filtering it with your own personal bias. :)

    "Because EG are biased."

    Pot calling the kettle black. ;)
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 17:13

  • chrisjm #215 4 years ago

    a megadrive vs snes Aladdin comparison too, that was a great example of games being the same but VERY different.

  • andywilkie35 #216 4 years ago

    i dont usually get involved in fanboy sh*t but this is one time that i just want to say that the xbox has won.....again. i have a friend that is a total ps3 fanboy even tho apart from mgs4 there is no reason to own one, so think he'll enjoy reading this, fanboy

  • Ranger101 #217 4 years ago

    Waaaaaait.. the PS3 GTA4 doesn't have custom soundtracks?

    If so, that's Lame and will be a vote swinger as to which next-gen machine I purchase.... (that and also if Sony don't release a Homebrew SDK ala XNA for programming types like me).

  • bad09 #218 4 years ago

    @ chrisjm

    Easy, megadrive :)

  • Buztafen #219 4 years ago

    Ah someone speaking sense again!

    Coincidentally, did anyone really get to grips with any of the new characters in Super SF2? Cammy, Feilong et al? Could never tempt me away from a good old Ken ass whooping....though Fei's sound bytes were awesome!

  • bad09 #220 4 years ago

    @ Ranger101

    Well strictly speaking both don't but 360 can play custom music over any game so......

  • KayJay #221 4 years ago

    "We all like fanboy banter but he takes it far to seriously."

    I don't know... looking at the last 5 pages it seem like the 360 Boys are taking it a little more serious!

  • JediMasterMalik #222 4 years ago

    @bad09 - The 360 version has an XMB?! ;)

  • kobashi #223 4 years ago

    Very well written article!! great read..

  • Verwandlung #224 4 years ago

    Ok now i know what to buy, xbox 360 + gta4
    Thanks

  • Ranger101 #225 4 years ago

    T.Hawk was a cheap bastard in SSF2T:GMCX(That's Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo Grandmaster Challenge X for the non-SF-literates out there).

    YOu could pull off some serious shit with Fei Long too. Cammy and DeeJay were lower tier characters.

  • Ranger101 #226 4 years ago

    Re: Custom Music in GTA4....

    Ah, in that case that's not so advantageous - I thought you could knockup a custom radiostation playlist with random adverts inserted in ala GTA3SA on the PC

  • anomagnus #227 4 years ago

    @swam

    you're talking rubbish, that link points me to a site that shows XBOX GTA4 outselling the ps3 version

    Consider this as well, up until GTA4, PS was the home of GTA, now we see that it can do as well, if not better on a non sony system.

    Even if the PS3 did outsell the XBOX version, its SHAT all over the idea that GTA is at home on the PS

    Also, from the comparison, EG have pointed out that due to R*'s own programming, the graphics are worse on the XBOX, and were this feature (forget the name of it) switched off, it could look better

    the ps3 has no excuse, especially, as was pointed out before, every one wrote the XBOX off, and it has now proven itself to be the gamers choice of machine

    I find it tragic that sony need a ten year life cycle to in order to claim victory in the console war
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 17:24

  • Bonus #228 4 years ago

    Swam, that's quite funny.

    What exactly in the article is wrong?

  • Ranger101 #229 4 years ago

    "indiscrimated bias"

    You mean "Discriminate bias", because they are allegedly discriminating against PS3 owners and PS3 titles and not infact randomly being biased against various systems depending on the day of the week. ;)
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 17:24

  • Ranger101 #230 4 years ago

    Also a slur against PS3 is a SLUR against your saintly mother! Sign Swam's petition now!

  • messiahtj #231 4 years ago

    Hahahaha, how sad is eurogamer!!!They need to invent that shitty "average frame-rate tests" to make 360 version of GTA looks better than the ps3 version, but they obviously fail.

    Proofs??? IGN, Gamespot, Gameinformer, gametrailers and many, many more sites (more famous,more important and better know than this sad place called eurogamer) all said in their reviews than the ps3 looks better, have better frame rate,have noticeable less tearing and, to finish quick, the ps3 verison of GTA IV win over the 360 version talking about performance and graphic quality. If you people don´t believe me, fine, you can always go to that places and view it with your own eyes.

    And to this place named eruogamer, come on guys, dont you feel bad doing this kind of shit?? You looks unprofessional, you looks biased, you looks idiotic and worst, you make looks this place like a noob place did by noob gamers and noob staff aimed to noob gamers. You seriously have issues if you said that bunch of stupid shit that you obviously know its not true. I feel ashamed for you. eurogamer staff.

    Really you need to invent this kind of shit to make someone in Microsoft happy??? If so you dont deserve to be called a gaming site.

  • Gaol #232 4 years ago

    The trend for sub 720p games worries me actually.

    I run my PS3 through a Dell 2007wfp - it has great colours and decent aspect ratio scaling but lower resolution games tend to alias a lot more when scaled up to the monitors resolution. GTA4 isn't great close up, and neither is CoD4. This trick is clearly useful on 720p native displays but I'm not sure of its worth on higher resolution displays.

    I'd need to test it out, but proper 720p with AA might look a whole lot better. Certainly full 720p games on my PS3 look a lot, lot better at monitor viewing distance. And switching to 360 might help for GTA, but precedent has been set on that platform by CoD4 and Halo 3.

    So much for HD gaming, nothing on these platforms can compare with Orange Box or GoW running natively on my monitor (on PC) - not even close.

  • Madlax #233 4 years ago

    *claps*

    Good job eurogamer !!! i bet Bill is proud of you. i hope you get the full ransom for this. because you did a great job. ;)

    If anything, this proves that you cannot simply trust any source of information, specially the media and gaming sites like Eurogamer. infact you cant trust 'any' form of media.

    These are nothing more than 'advertizing' sites, work for whoever sponsors them and puts food on the table, twisting facts is there main job.

    I have a small piece advice to the average reader, it may come in handy in various life situations.

    'Trust no one' ;)

  • MyPointIs #234 4 years ago

    I have one tiny point to add, I have easy access to both versions and I agree with the article in prefering (if marginally) the 360 looks.

    HOWEVER: There's one thing I noticed in favour of the PS3 version: It has a wider CAR SELECTION loaded at once. Sometimes you'll drive around the 360 version with only 4-5 car types around.

    That doesn't happen (so badly) in the PS3 one.

    On a side note: Just 30 few cars, 18 weapons, less than 2 hours of TV ... anyone else thinks that Microsoft payed R* money to keep the game size limited to 1 DVD??

    I do.

  • Bonus #235 4 years ago

    @MyPointIs

    The 360 has more available RAM at any one time so your arguement doesn't make any sense.

    Just because there can be more data on the disc does not mean there is more loaded at any given moment.

  • MyPointIs #236 4 years ago

    @Bonus

    I'm not guessing it. If you run both versions side by side the difference it's obvious. Just try it.

    (maybe they use the HDD for swapping vehicles and the like)

  • jetsetdemo #237 4 years ago

    I will probable invite the wrath of the angry mob but any one else think this is not as much fun to play as Vice city?
    I went for the PS3 version in the end just got my 3rd 360 back from the menders and the warranty runs out next month.
    Even though my gut felling is this would be a slightly better experience on the 360 I didn’t trust my 360 not to break down on me.
    Incidentally any one else received a recon 360 with a poorer condition disc tray than the one that was returned?

  • thewolfiv #238 4 years ago

    keep going nearly 300 post with more than 80% of it a waste of space....

  • JediMasterMalik #239 4 years ago

    @bcolter - It really doesn't debunk anything. All it shows is that in this instance (and admittedly many others) develoeprs aren't getting as much power out of the PS3 as they are the 360. When you look at exclusives, and the graphical fidelity of them, I would personally put the PS3 slightly ahead with Uncharted and GT5:p, compared to Gears of war and PGR. But then I've only seen videos for the latter online and not actually played them so I could be completely wrong. Either way I think both consoles are pretty damn close power wise.

    I think we can all agree that the Wii is far weaker though. :p

  • craigy Verified Senior Developer, Eurogamer Network #240 4 years ago

    Wow. Just, wow.

  • 3TPete #241 4 years ago

    but what's 'best' - Mortal Kombat II or Super Street Fighter II?

  • NickD7 #242 4 years ago

    "As it is then, it comes down to personal preference, and in my view, Xbox 360 just 'edges' it."

    That's all I needed to hear Richard, 360 version is better then...

    CONFIRMED FACT EAT IT BITCHES, SUCK THE BIG ONE SONY BOTS.

    *end fanboy outburst*
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 17:48

  • Bagpuss #243 4 years ago

    Well as someone who doesn't own a 360 or PS3, having gone through the article, i'd definately go for the 360 version, i just prefer the 'cleaner,sharper' look of the 360 version.

    Those frame rate results are quite shocking really, lower res, no AA, and yet still a 15-20% performance hit...so much for the Cell..

  • ManicDrunkMonk #244 4 years ago

    /masturbates more furiously.

  • Davey #245 4 years ago

    Yeah, but, 360 gives you superaids...so make your choice now!

  • PearOfAnguish #246 4 years ago

    "You looks unprofessional, you looks biased, you looks idiotic and worst, you make looks this place like a noob place did by noob gamers and noob staff aimed to noob gamers."

    Yes noobs yous looks idiotics its clearly did bye noobs four noobs!!!1!!!11!

  • morriss #247 4 years ago

    Some of these comments are unbelievable. Eurogamer goes to great length to support ever statement with scientific fact and still they get called liars and MS-fanboys.

    Unbelievable.

  • Clive_Dunn #248 4 years ago

    "Pixel counters latest: Ryu is made up of 142 pixels on the A500 version, 137 on the ST. "

    This is yet more evidence of the A500 bias EG shows on a daily basis. I'm sickened and appalled that EG even consider themselves journalists when they fail to mention the ST's clearly superior midi chip at every possible opportunity.

  • JediMasterMalik #249 4 years ago

    The price will get there eventually, that much is obvious, and the fanboy rhetoric is just that, bullshit from morons, it's not something you should concern yourself with if you want to be balanced. Anyone who thinks these two machines have a large power difference is really just delusional.

    I thnik the biggest reason why multiplatform gaes generally work better on the 360 is the tools MS have provided developers with, the software situation on the MS machine seems far superior to what Sony have provided developers, it means the devs get more out of the machine and have to invest less. The PS3 is also well known to be more difficult to program for in general so that obviously contributes.

  • morriss #250 4 years ago

    @JMM: I think no what we can all safely say is that these titles haven't harnessed the power of PS3 because there isn't a great deal more power than the 360 in which to harness.

    Of course, all games developed solely for one system will be better, but I haven't seen anything from PS3 that surpasses a 360 exclusive nor visa versa.

  • The_Programmer #251 4 years ago

    @MyPointIs

    "On a side note: Just 30 few cars, 18 weapons, less than 2 hours of TV ... anyone else thinks that Microsoft payed R* money to keep the game size limited to 1 DVD?? "

    Well you'd better be happy then that they didn't fill a Blu ray disk up or you'd be waiting half an hour to install code on the hard disk due to Blu ray's terrible access time.

  • Apostle #252 4 years ago

    Woop 360 kicks PS3lol, in the nutslol

  • Triggerhappytel #253 4 years ago

    I haven't read the article (4 pages? Piss off...), but from the video there didn't seem to be much in it. PS3 version has better colours, 360 version is slightly sharper.

  • mazzl #254 4 years ago

    so a nice game for everybody :) nice!
    to bad it's summer time so i'll be out enjooying the wether instead of playing games behind the telly.
    maybee beceause i don't own gta ;)

  • Widge #255 4 years ago

    will someone PLEASE go round to mem's house and fix his caps lock?

  • penguin_overlord #256 4 years ago

    I hope one day that Rockstar produce a GTA game with the PS3 as the lead platform. The combination of Blu-Ray and a more powerful console should result in a game even more stunning.

  • Widge #257 4 years ago

    I want a game with a countryside to roam in as well as an inner city. Thats what I loved about San Andreas.

  • Widge #258 4 years ago

    ooh nice, out of context magazine quoting ftw!

  • Psychotext #259 4 years ago

    Damnit... I'm having trouble working out who are the joke posters. I don't want to put them on ignore as they're sometimes entertaining.

  • siksik6 #260 4 years ago

    Good article EG.

    I actually bought it first for my ps3, as I'd read it looked better. Borrowed my mate's 360 version to compare, then swapped my version for the 360 one!

    It's all about the framerate for me, the rest of it is personal preference really, but the PS3 version definitely suffers more in terms of fps.

    If you own just the one console though, don't worry, it's still ace on either!!

  • RevanEleven #261 4 years ago

    Baza, you know so much more than professional games journalists. You're a veritable fountain of knowledge.
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 18:42

  • Kryon #262 4 years ago

    So the PS3 is basically pants, is that the general feeling here? Swam, what say you?

  • Kryon #263 4 years ago

    Oh, by the way, Baza rhymes with Spaza....Just so you know.

  • Yossarian #264 4 years ago

    "For all those who said this day would never come, what have they to say now"

    Misquote total.

  • ElMariachiPJO #265 4 years ago

    1) I have both version, both SE versions actually, and i love this sereis like no other.

    2)I'm playing these on the best HDTV under 40" (Sony XBR960) using HDMI and a top quality switch box.

    3)Thsi article was DEAD ON RIGHT. (GREAT job guys!..IGN should be embarrassd)

    So here's what are the facts, proven by eurogamer:

    -Graphically and perfomance wise both are equal.(knowing this must annoy the fanboys of eithier consoles..lol)

    -Graphics:

    PS3 +':

    -much less dithering of textures, especially around the shadows(and there are alot of shadows in this game)

    360 +':

    -720p rendering(640p on the PS3) with 2X FSAA(no FSAA on the PS3)

    equals:

    -PS3 version has a warmer tint(yellowish) and a more movie like look to it (less cartoon looking)
    -360 version has a more normal blue tint and a more game like look to it (more accurate color detail)

    -PS3 is more blurry looking, and looks more uniform overall from near to far.
    -360 has a more cleaner/crisp look, especially on the near areas

    Iv'e played both for 20+ hrs each and i each version is very unique in it's rendering style, and there are times i prefer the PS3 like movie look, and others i prefer the 360's crisper and less blurry look. The color isuue is another thing, while the PS3 looks less cartoon like it's colors are too overdone, while the 360's are more natural(ie..water fountains are too heavy on color on the PS3 version)

    Performance:

    PS3's +':

    -Lesser pop in, but it's a slight edge here
    -1-4 second lesser load times (for missions and going in from the outside to a large inside area)

    360's +':

    -Higher frame rate, by a 3-5 FPS average (30fpson the 360, 25/27 fps on the PS3, on average)

    This one is basically a wash as well.

    From a graphics and perfromance standpoint, both are EVEN, yet when you play each version, trust me, you WILL enjoy the styles of each version.

    This is one time where the fanboys lose out, and the owners of both versions are the real winners.

    Great job Eurogamer.

  • KD #266 4 years ago

    This is great, some of these comments are as if EG went and pissed on some relatives grave theres soo much anger.

  • Hawkins #267 4 years ago

    ...and so my PS3 continues to sit waiting for its first game as I play another superior port on the old 360.

  • Calgon #268 4 years ago

    I love the smell of fanboy tears in the evening.... :D Love it... no comparison so far compares to the one just done by EG... IGN?(dont make me laugh anyone who even mentions them as a good source on anything... reviews or otherwise... is cleary desperate). A comparison isnt a paragraph from some journo whos taking a guess about things he doesnt understand or hasnt spent a considerable amount of time looking into... which is what you Sony fanboys are clinging onto.

    It was known before launch that the PS3 version had more framerate problems that they had to work on, thats why they locked the framerate... THEY DIDNT NEED TO ON THE 360 VERSION or they would have... why? because it was already higher(still is for the most part) and smoother. The 360 version looks smoother even without V-sync(thats 2 comparisons that have said it) so stop grasping at straws.

    Another point is the fact that not only did they delay the game to have enough time to make sure they both come out on par AND have Sony's engineers working alongside Rockstar... they still came out with a lower res and a lower framerate and no Anti Aliasing like the 360 version was able to manage, those pretty core issues regarding performance comparisons... its an indication of how well the hardware can cope.

    Sonybots are running out of excuses fast here... the new tools have been out ages now, games have been made with the use of them, Sony engineers are being shipped out everywhere to try and gain an edge... yet the same old excuses are rolled out.

    2012: Swam/Apologie: "You Xbots wait and see just as soon as devs... What? PS4s out next month?... but but the CELL? Oh well that obviously was developers' fault, if only they'd bothered to learn how to harness its awesomeness, perhaps it would have all been in their next game... but we'll never know now you lucky Xbots... Oh btw PS4 is the best ever!!!"
    Edited by 4 at 08/05/08 @ 19:29

  • Ryze #269 4 years ago

    @messiahtj

    That's called corrupt press reporting.

  • CiDhed #270 4 years ago

    Rofl. I love reading the fanboi fights.

    The game is good. I only have a 360 and that is because of xbox live. The service is great and all my friends are on it. Really makes that $60 game purchase worth its money.

    I think EG did a great job. Either console you have you will enjoy the game.


    Flame on.

    Ohh and Genesis>nes :)

  • Darren #271 4 years ago

    I've got both versions of GTA IV and have played both for almost 70 hours in total, split roughly 55:45 in favour of the PS3 version. Ironically I actually think the Xbox 360 version is the best one but because I played the missions first on the PS3, they became easier on the 360 thus I've actually reached the same point in both games only it took less time on the 360.

    Anyway, my opinion is that the PS3 version looks noticeably jaggier in the foreground, especially on cars and in cutscenes, and also blurrier. It also doesn't run as smooth as the 360 version. I can't say I noticed any differences in pop in between both games, sometimes it's obvious in both versions but I can't say it ever bothered me in either. The PS3 version has slightly shorter loading times going into and coming out of cutscenes and the TV shows can be viewed almost full-screen but they're the only areas where that game clearly beats the 360 version. I love both games and despite the occasional ugliness of the PS3 version, there are still moments when it looks lovely like at night during a thunderstorm or down by the river when the sun is setting. However, if I had to choose between them, the 360 version would be the one I'd pick: it looks sharper and runs better most of the time.

    P.S. I have to laugh at IGN's comment in their review about the PS3 version having better anti-aliasing: what anti-aliasing? The PS3 version doesn't even have ANY!!! LOL

  • Kryon #272 4 years ago

    Baza's feeling the burn! He's close to the brink, the old RRoDLOL is always the last resort of a desperate man just about to go over the edge! There's no use Baz, you're on a one way road and the destination is ghey land!

  • thenastypasty #273 4 years ago

    just put the disc in poeple and enjoy ,life is to short!!!!!

  • Hawkins #274 4 years ago

    Yes, life is short:

    http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=4iV0l6UQ83Q

  • Negotiator #275 4 years ago

    The fact is no other website mentioned the PS3 framerate problems even though they are clearly there. It took a proper website like EG to put together a real comparison that shows once again, that a machine released a year later than its competition cannot compete on a technical level.

    The Ps3 version does'nt run in true HD for gods sake, but the older X360 does, that says it all. Its a big bullit for the PS3 arse heads to bite, but I guess they are used to it by now. If telling the truth makes EG biased towards the 360 then so be it.

  • onyxbox #276 4 years ago

    it sounds unbiased but you get the feeling the author is reaching for 360 all the way.

    just my opinion.

  • Darren #277 4 years ago

    P.S. I've never noticed ANY tearing in either version in all the time I've been playing... that's at 720p for both using HDMI by the way. The only time I've noticed something that looked a little like tearing was when I set the resolution to 1360x768, there's a very subtle "ripping" effect occuring *only* near the top of the screen but it never appears any lower so it's barely noticeable. I suspect that this is hidden at 720p and 1080p by the overscanning that occurs on more HDTVs. If the Xbox 360 version does tear then it hides it extremely well because normally I pick up on it straight away even if it's minor.

  • SAH1977 #278 4 years ago

    Gotta keep the hits up eh.

    Whats sadder still, there'll be more discussion on this one subject than the actual games.

    I guess that sums up why gaming, quite rightly, isn't yet taken seriously.

    Utter waste of time.

  • DjFlex52 #279 4 years ago

    Forget about SF2 on SNES and Megadrive...it was no contest: SNES wins!!!

    here's another one....
    Mortal Kombat SNES - much better graphics
    Mortal Kombat Megadrive - BLOOD!

    who wins?

  • RevanEleven #280 4 years ago

    @Darren.

    You played both versions for 70 hours? Whats with the 35 achievment points -as of tuesday- on GT4. Your talking shit mate.

  • onyxbox #281 4 years ago

    who wins?

    megadrive of course ;-)

  • keyboardmonkey #282 4 years ago

    in many scenarios it looks as good as the 360 version, if not better.

    EG being too kind to the PS3 owners ;-)

    Sorry but after all the bullshit spouted by Sony about the PS3, the power of the cell, (twice as powerful as the 360? etc...) i am happy that the 360 version is better.

  • Scimarad #283 4 years ago

    The PS3 'framerate issues' sound like a total load of shite to me. I certainly haven't noticed anything and I'm normally pretty sensitive to this sort of thing.

    Come to think of it, as an owner of both machines, I'm starting take these EG comparisons articles with a huge bucket of salt.

  • Darren #284 4 years ago

    @onyxbox - At the end of the day which version you prefer the look of is purely a personal opinion, there's no right or wrong view here. I like the look of the 360 version more. I had last week off work and going from playing the blurrier, jaggier PS3 version in the mornings to playing the sharper, cleaner looking 360 version in the evenings really made me appreciate the 720p resolution and 2X AA of the 360 game, it just looks that bit more polished to me. Clearly Rockstar have had to make more compromises to the PS3 version to get it running (640p resolution and no AA) and it shows at times. Still I found that I was enjoying playing both games so much that ultimately the graphical differences became trivial.

  • Darren #285 4 years ago

    @RevanEleven - I said I've played both version for 70 hours in total not EACH! ;)

    I've got 75 GPs on the 360 version from playing it for 29 hours actually but I don't play games for pointless (no pun intended) Achievement points anyway, I play them for fun. I've been playing the missions mostly and have done some 52 of them. I've played the PS3 version for 38 hours or so and have reached the same point in both (just one Packie mission to do, the one where you have three allies and have to grab some cash from a warehouse).

    If you don't believe me then that's your problem but I don't see why I'd lie about it. /rolls eyes

  • RevanEleven #286 4 years ago

    Of course.

  • OrgasmicMutton #287 4 years ago

    The words "water" "dull" and "ditch" spring to mind.

  • Kryon #288 4 years ago

    "megadrive of course ;-)"

    No serious gamer actually believes the MD was better than the SNES. I remember vividly, when I was 11, my father imported me a Super Famicom from Japan. All my lame-ass friends (who owned MD's) literally cried when they saw Final Fight on my system. MegadriveLOL!

  • speedsix #289 4 years ago

    This comments section is pure gold. I really wanted to post a non-biased, restrained and objective comment but who wants to read that??

    IN YOUR FACE PS3 LOOOSERS. Better graphics AND exclusive content, I guess the article may as well have said "360 owners are smarter, better looking and always get the girl"

  • ElMariachiPJO #290 4 years ago

    Now let's not go overboard here, for the 360 fanboys(co'me on you guys, you're sounding like the PS3 fanboys when IGN did there review), please just read these again:

    "PS3 GTA IV looks absolutely fantastic, and even factoring in zero anti-aliasing support and a lower resolution, in many scenarios it looks as good as the 360 version, if not better"

    "However, Rockstar has introduced a 360-specific post-processing effect that dithers just about every texture on-screen. It's an effect not present at all on the PS3 version and serves to introduce an oil-painting-like effect to the overall look of the game, particularly on background objects."

    (In case you did'nt read right..or jdid'nt even look at the pics, dithering is BAD. IE, the reading of smaller signs is alot more pixelated on the 360)

    "it is then, it comes down to personal preference, and in my view, Xbox 360 just 'edges' it"

    And that says it all, it' just preference, nothing more. Graphics and perfromance wise that is.

    DLC, Online, achievements, background music..ect, are all 360 advantages.

  • onyxbox #291 4 years ago

    @Darren

    I must admit, 360 games 'generally' look nicer because of the AA, I remember playing PS3 darkness and then downloading the 360 demo and feeling quite sick (same for TimeShift) - thinking I should have got the 360 version... but at the end of the day I probably enjoyed them as much as I would have don on 360 and I think the same goes for GTA4.

    It was just the way the article read to me, it as though the author was saying... yes there's less pop-in on ps3 etc. and it looks a bit nicer overall on ps3 despite being lower res... but I'm giving the 360 the nod.

    I dunno... I'm rambling now... like you said.

    we should all sigh in relief that they managed to get both versions to such a high standard.


  • DjFlex52 #292 4 years ago

    It does make me laugh when XBOTS make up shit to back up their claims.

    @swam

    So you're calling Darren an XBOT?...one of the few objective posters on EG who actually owns both systems.
    You're a jerk, swam!

  • Darren #293 4 years ago

    Thanks for the support, trebell. If people like RevenEleven don't want to believe me for whatever reasons then that's up to them, makes no odds to me. /shrugs shoulders

  • Calgon #294 4 years ago

    Swam you idiot REAL FSAA makes an image look SHARPER AND CLEANER... when its blurrier its an indication that it isnt FSAA thats hiding jaggies in any way.

  • Khanivor #295 4 years ago

    Keep it going lads.

  • CiDhed #296 4 years ago

    Swam... Lmao... You are one of the most emotional fanboi's I have ever met.


    A petition? Get a life dude.

  • DomX360 #297 4 years ago

    Anyone know what the music is playing in the comparision videos?

  • Calgon #298 4 years ago

    Swam it samples the colours and blends adjacent pixels... this will not make it look blurred you dumbass.

    It annoys me when people confuse AA with blurring.
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 19:59

  • CiDhed #299 4 years ago

    [link url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FSAA#Full-scene_anti-alia sing
    ]http://en .wikipedia.org/wiki/FSAA#Full-s...[/link]

    Full-scene anti-aliasing

    Modern graphics cards usually support some method of full-scene anti-aliasing (FSAA) to help avoid aliasing (or "jaggies";) on full-screen images. The resulting image may seem softer, and should also appear more realistic. One tried and true method of avoiding or removing aliasing artifacts on full-screen images is supersampling.

    However, while useful for photo-like images, a simple anti-aliasing approach (such as supersampling and then averaging) may actually worsen the appearance of some types of line art or diagrams (making the image appear fuzzy), especially where most lines are horizontal or vertical. In these cases, a prior grid-fitting step may be useful (see hinting).

    In general, supersampling is a technique of collecting data points at a greater resolution (usually by a power of two) than the final data resolution. These data points are then combined (down-sampled) to the desired resolution, often just by a simple average. The combined data points have less visible aliasing artifacts (or moiré patterns).

    Full-scene anti-aliasing by supersampling usually means that each full frame is rendered at double (2x) or quadruple (4x) the display resolution, and then down-sampled to match the display resolution. So a 4x FSAA would render four supersampled pixels for each single pixel of each frame.

    More often than not, FSAA is implemented in hardware in such a way that a graphical application is unaware the images are being supersampled and then down-sampled before being displayed.

  • Khanivor #300 4 years ago

    No swam, it does not.

    however, you seem to have sneakily given up the lie and shown yourself to be one hell of a troll, if that link is anything to go by.

    Actually, tis far more likely a mod is having fun with you :D

    [link url=http://snipurl.com/27xl8
    ]http://snipurl.com/27xl8
    [/link]
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 20:01

  • Kryon #301 4 years ago

    DjFlex52 is spot on about Darren, Although Darren always tries give a rounded opinion I used to actually think he veered towards being a bit on the Sony side but he's proven me wrong with his comments towards GTA IV.

  • Darren #302 4 years ago

    @Swam - No, I stand by what I said. The PS3 version is both blurrier and more jaggy than the 360 version. Eurogamer said pretty much the same thing in the article. Had the PS3 version not been blurry, it would undoubtedly have looked even jaggier, akin to Halo 3 on the 360 which to this day remains the jaggiest looking current gen game on either the PS3 or 360 IMHO (it too is 1152x640 with NO AA). The PS3 version escapes that honour by using a full-screen blur to mask the aliasing but it's not as effective as the 360's 2X AA and 720p resolution. In my opinion obviously. I'm in no way biased to either console, if a game looks better on the PS3 then I'll say it does, e.g. I actually prefer Devil May Cry 4 on the PS3 to the 360 version.

    Anyway, as I said earlier, this is MY opinion only having played both games extensively. You don't have to agree with it, I never said I was right. ;)
    Edited by 2 at 08/05/08 @ 20:13

  • warbo #303 4 years ago

    Thank you very much EG.

  • ElMariachiPJO #304 4 years ago

    It must really be sad to be a fanboy of eithier console, ha?

    You cannot enjoy all great exclusives(yes the 360 has more, for now) such as Mass Effect, Bioshock, RFOM, Halo3, and many others due out from now unitl this fall(Fable2, MGS4, RFOM2, Fallout).

    And you could never enjoy both the 360 and PS3 version's in terms of presentations(each has equal pro's and con's) as each is so so very different and unique.

    Anyway, you fanboys, go and agrue this off, while i enjoy both consoles.

    (It's like having two girlfriends, and each is different. Or would you rather be stuck to only one? lol)

  • Calgon #305 4 years ago

    Swam no not blurrs - it blends... which will give cleaner image... a cleaner image isnt a blurry image.

  • Darren #306 4 years ago

    @Swam - The Xbox 360 has no noticeable screen tearing and, trust me, as others will know on this forum, if it was an issue I'd have said something about it. If it *did* occur then sadly I must have blinked the one time it happened. ;)

  • CiDhed #307 4 years ago

    Swam:

    Dude, Who cares? Its a video game? Do you have a petition set up for every media outlet? Everyone is bias. Look at the main stream media(assuming you are in the USA) and tell me they aren't bias.

    It is life. Get use to favoritism and nepotism.

  • Skeletor #308 4 years ago

    @Confounder
    If you had only read the article before posting...
    "All gaming sites" don't come up with such a detailed and technically competent comparison. They take a more subjective approach.

    Best GTA IV article yet - no hype, pure information. Thanks.

  • TheNinkyNonk #309 4 years ago

    I'm finding the graphics in BOTH versions rather drab and disappointing...

  • darkphoenix #310 4 years ago

    Obviously the X360 has the best version.
    Higher resolution, higher framerate, better multiplayer, dlc, better pad,...

    IGN can suck me balls, sony sell-out bastards.

    And those who doubt this extremely professional comparison, go watch the gametrailers.com videos and you'll get the same result.

    Face it, PS3 is a weaker machine.


    And Rockstar DID favour PS3 in this, trying deliberately to damage the X360 version.
    They should be ashamed of themselves.

  • secombe #311 4 years ago

    Am I the first genuinely neutral person to drop in? I don't have a 360 or PS3 and don't intend buying either, but in the past I've owned an XBOX, PS2 and pretty much everything inbetween, as I said, neutral.

    With that in mind, reading this article it's clear that the 360 version appears to have the edge in nearly every respect, but only by fairly minute differences.

    At the end of the day though, it doesn't really matter, seems to be a great game either way.

  • Darren #312 4 years ago

    Sounds to me like Swam is desperate to prove that the PS3 version is better but completely forgetting that at the end of the day which one you ultimately prefer the look of is purely down to personal preference. Arguing which version is better is pretty pointless really, at least as far as looks go, everyone will have different views.

  • CiDhed #313 4 years ago

    I see. It is pointless to try to discuss anything with swam due to him not caring about facts and only replying with emotion based zingers.

  • ElMariachiPJO #314 4 years ago

    Swam said:


    ---
    Longer loading: - Check.
    More popup: Check
    Lower quality audio: Check
    Smaller TV in Nikos Flat: Check.
    Fuzzy/dotty/stippled ugly texturing: Check.
    Colder/Clinical look: Check.
    £40 to play online: Check.
    Jet engine noise throughout playing, even when not at airport: Check.
    RROD risk night and day: CHECK.
    Screen Tearing: Check.

    Yep, the XBOX version has it all.
    ---

    360 pro's:

    -sharper and cleaner overall look: check
    -Frame rate is better: check
    -true 720 rendering over 640p: check
    -2X FSAA over no FSAA: check
    -Live blows the socks off PSN, asd you get what you pay for(free=not much)
    -60 Gig PS3's freezing with GTA:IV: Check
    -background music can be played in the game: Check
    -achievements: Check
    -upcoming DLC (1st in August): Check

    Now I actually prefer the PS3's graphics slightly, however any GTA fanatic would have to be nuts to go with the PS3 version over the 360 version.

    So thankfully i have both versions. :)

    [10 % done on both and playing each storyline differently]

    [Playing both versions of the greatest game in the past 15 years, PRICELSSS]





  • Dizzy #315 4 years ago

    Kinda funny that I said most of this when the game was released :)

    Time to go on holiday I guess... this place is imploding.

    /goes to bask in the sun

  • Dizzy #316 4 years ago

    Kinda funny that I said most of this when the game was released :)

    Time to go on holiday I guess... this place is imploding.

    /goes to bask in the sun

  • Psychotext #317 4 years ago

    Ahh... good to see swam is still at it. I'd take him off ignore but I'm moderately concerned that his mental condition may infectious.

  • CiDhed #318 4 years ago

    Ahh... good to see swam is still at it. I'd take him off ignore but I'm moderately concerned that his mental condition may infectious.


    So this is normal for him?

  • Khanivor #319 4 years ago

    Swam, it certainly appears you put your brain in a blender.

  • SteveB #320 4 years ago

    I don't understand why Sony persist with these strange architectures for their consoles if it means their games consistently look worse. It's like they purposely like to make things difficult for themselves.

  • Psychotext #321 4 years ago

    @CiDhed: Check his comment history... if you dare. \o/

  • Khanivor #322 4 years ago

    Before you do that you might want to put some padding on your palms as you'll be Picarding a lot and you don't want to hurt your face.

  • CiDhed #323 4 years ago

    [link url=http://www.ebeforethei.com/m ediagallery/mediaobjects/disp/9/9_picard-no-facepalm.jpg
    ]http://ww w.ebeforethei.com/mediagallery/...[/link]

    Rofl... I only clicked on a few other threads and read them. Wow.

  • Kryon #324 4 years ago

    Swam is a pillar of the EG society! He's been providing golden fanboy entertainment since 2007 (except untill last month he was called headbog)

  • the_sas_man #325 4 years ago

    what's with the porn music

  • Madlax #326 4 years ago

    This is still going on ?

    Who am i kidding....600 comments FTW !! ;)

  • bonker #327 4 years ago

    "I went for the PS3 version in the end just got my 3rd 360 back from the menders and the warranty runs out next month. "

    Your 360 is 3 years old??

  • bonker #328 4 years ago

    "I went for the PS3 version in the end just got my 3rd 360 back from the menders and the warranty runs out next month. "

    Your 360 is 3 years old??

  • LeD #329 4 years ago

    swam is just fantastic. Or spastic. YOU DECIDE!

    Look at him go!

    IN YOUR FACE YOU PS3 LOVER BOY! YOU LOSE! AGAIN!

    "I don't care what universe you're from, that gotta HURT!

  • Kryon #330 4 years ago

    TBH, I own a PS3 and a 360 (did own a Wii but sold it because it was shit) but I haven't bought this game on either system because GTA is one of the shitest franchises ever to grace a console. I'm just here for the shits 'n' giggles.

  • mattniche #331 4 years ago

    This is magic.

  • dk_rare #332 4 years ago

    I don't know about anyone else, but just looking at the pictures of the better anti aliasing on things like the cars body kit and Nikos teeth makes me think the 360 version is quite a lot better than the the PS3 version. They might look almost identical, but when you compare the two the lack of anti aliasing looks offensive on the PS3 version.

  • p00ntang #333 4 years ago

    I didn't want to post something like this BUT I'm a little sick of all the spidey-station twits trying to justify the fact they've spent a lot of money on what is ,so far, an inferior machine. If your only argument is that it WILL have better games in the future, then why not buy one when they are affordable and the games perform to the same standard of a machine that is older? THAT is common sense, and THAT my friends is what I intend to do. If I had bought one at launch I would be angry and disappointed.

    /rant over

  • ElMariachiPJO #334 4 years ago

    "Indeed, if the texture-dither filter could be turned off with a selectable option in a forthcoming patch, I'm almost certain that it would be the superior-looking game simply by virtue of the extra resolution and edge-filtering. But as it is, right now, there's not much in it."

    The question here should be:

    Why did Rockstar turn on texture-dithering?

    It's will be a multi billion dollar game, and they make this mistake?

    Or was it done to make the PS3 version sell as well as the 360 version, and be an ofset(of sorts) to the 360's upcoming DLC?

  • Widge #335 4 years ago

    To be honest, I can see FUCK ALL difference, can't tell about dithering this and blurring that from the screenies. Quite why we're all going SPASTIC about it, I don't know.

  • wingzerosys #336 4 years ago

    These Head To Head's are pathetic, they just show us how much of a 360 fanboy they really are.

  • Psychotext #337 4 years ago

    How quickly they forget... http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...

  • wingZero21 #338 4 years ago

    Yeah how much did Microsoft pay eurogamer this time ;).. nothing to see here

  • adesweb #339 4 years ago

    who the fu*k cares? why do Eurogamer persist with these pointless debates? More of these questions in the next exciting episode of Microsoft Vs Sony...

  • Khanivor #340 4 years ago

    Swam, have you tried clicking on one of those links you keep posting? :D

    And props to Psycho for the timely use of that phrase.

  • Madlax #341 4 years ago

    Why cant people make there 'own' impressions and opinions ?

    Why do they have to be fed the 'facts' (lol) by media outlets and advertizing sites ? ;)

  • wingzerosys #342 4 years ago

    Im only gonna read there reviews, previews and news section, Eurogamer are 360 fanboy's.

  • VMerken #343 4 years ago

    Cat fight, meow! Although it's not really fair - the PS3 only needs to wait until the Xbox 360 keels over and red-ring-of-dies ;)
    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 22:02

  • wingzerosys #344 4 years ago

    They prefer the 360 version in every Head To Head they have, what a waste of space.

    Scrap the fanboyist Head To Head comparisons and stick to reviews and previews.

    The 360 version suffers from framerate issues, if anyone says it doesn't is.

    A. A 360 fanboy

    B. A Bullshitter.

  • Psychotext #345 4 years ago

    That's another one for the ignore list. Great thread for weeding out the idiots!

  • MrsPacMan #346 4 years ago

    L O fucking L. I love it. PS3 IS officially CRAP. L O fucking L

  • MrsPacMan #347 4 years ago

    @ wingzerosys. erm perhaps it's that truth

  • TRUTH #348 4 years ago

    Two of the best games to hit the next(now)gen console has had problems on PS3. Half Life 2 - had major graphical glitches and framerate problems, also less graphical detail compared to 360. GTA not to extent to Half Life 2 does play better on 360!...though having both consoles I ended up getting the 360 version due to better framerates, and res 720p. I'm sure sooner or later the patches will be downloaded both for PS3 & 360; though I think this will put the 360 further ahead, not forgetting the exclusive 360 downloads too.

  • GamesConnoisseur #349 4 years ago

    You can never convince the diehard zealots of the truth, as they re so sure they know it better than anyone else who thinks differently! Accusing EG of editorial unprofessionalism or being in the pocket of the company. Now EG been accused of siding with one side or another at one time and another.

    You know its okay to love your preferred console, its okay not to buy or like another console? But its not okay to ignore the objective comments and keep repeating your version of truth in hope that it will wash?

    I havent mentioned which I am referring to as can equally applies to Sony or Xbox diehards and people who have both consoles do have a factual experiences of how the games run, those who picks apart based on others opinion, blurred video or photos do not really give them as informed opinion.

    I will get back and enjoy both version, been only on X360 so far (165 points) as PS3 not arriving until tomorrow.

  • ch3w84cc4 #350 4 years ago

    Well I have heard a lot of interesting posts and the usual fanboy crap about which console sucks etc however just to put the record straight on a couple of issues.

    GTA4 was ready to ship on the 360 some time ago however there were a number of issues with the PS3 version which delayed it.
    Due to the agreement Rockstar signed with both manafacturers the game had to be released at the same time.

    The engine used does actually run better on the 360 and a lot of time was spent on the PS3 version to try and get it up to speed however a number of issues kept on coming up.

    Btw before I am flamed I am a dev myself and know a number of the guys involved with the project. The whole team worked some crazy hours to get the game to the standard that was required and I think that is something that needs to be acknowledged.

    Its just politics at the end of the day that shouldn't detract from the fact that regardless of 360 or PS3 you will have a thoroughly great gaming experience.

  • Psychotext #351 4 years ago

    @GamesConnoisseur: Report to the forums, you're too good for the comments pages. \o/

  • Sid-Nice #352 4 years ago

    What a complete waste of time and money considering the technological wizardry that was used to compare each version I can still recall the time when I felt a degree of inferiority looking at the Amiga, PC and ST screenshots on the back of game boxes. Obviously I was an Atari fan; but if a game warrants a 10/10 on multi-format then why go to the trouble to arm the fan-boy trolls with irrelevant ammunition? Although there isn’t any conclusive evidence that either version is superior; I can’t wait for the PC version.

  • BartonFink #353 4 years ago

    Learned a couple of things tonight reading through both the article and the comments.

    1: Some of you lot are batshit crazy fanboys (swam stands out from the crowd)
    2: There is very little difference between the two versions
    3: Why did R* add the dithering - was it to bring the two versions more in line with each other? Seems metal - hopefully they will do a patch for this and remove it.
    4: After reading the article it does seem that the 360 version comes out on top for almost every aspect.
    5: Considering they are so close I will have to go with the 360 for the DLC and far superior XBL even.

    And finally swam is a complete bell end that deserves to go on everyones ignore list (I don't ignore anybody on EG but I am prepared to make an exception in this case). Sheesh what a fantard. Honestly I am begining to thing it's a regs sock taking the piss, can anybody be that ignorant and deranged?

    Edited by 1 at 08/05/08 @ 22:22

  • Kryon #354 4 years ago

    OK, anyway, so it's now official, the PS3 is actually really shit and the 360 pisses all over the retarded piece of Japanese shit.

    /End of thread

  • GitSomE_UK #355 4 years ago

    Predictable outcome and totally pointless.

    Those that were looking for an informed choice will find this article useless as they already bought a particular version.

  • morriss #356 4 years ago

    I've never seen the game tear. That's bollocks, that.

  • Kryon #357 4 years ago

    GitSomE UK? GitSomeCockUpDaArse more like.

  • CiDhed #358 4 years ago

    Swam is entertaining. The name 'Pot' would be a more appropriate name for him though. Sony fanboi hating on 360 fanboi's... Hello pot, You are black too.


    The game plays the same on both systems. 360 has a stronger online community.


    He says MS paid EG off for this but what about Sony and netflix/best buy. I like both systems. Swam, get a life and quit making online petitions to censor other peoples opinions.

  • rawburger #359 4 years ago

    After reading and carefully weighing all the pros and cons of both systems, and evaluating all the comments herein, I have come to the conclusions that.

    A. ps3 version is clearly the best.

    B. Xbox360 version is clearly the best.

    C. Eurogamer should somehow declare itself a sovereign state, with all forum members its loyal serfs.

    some suggestions for cabinet posts are.

    Swam secretary of defense.
    ps3_2310 department of the interior
    Razz ministry of education
    morriss ministry of funny walks
    Psychotext secretary of winding people up
    Kryon special envoy to the UN
    Darren ministry of reasonable argument

    /Eurogamer + Alcohol = win
    /is sad
    / Eurogamer best spelling check comes up heterogamous
    /mmmmmmm whisky.

  • CiDhed #360 4 years ago

    Swam, Not having that cheap sixaxis doesn't bother me at all. I don't care what system I play it on because it is the SAME!!! Lmao, you are full of fail. I play on the system that allows me to play online against my friends. That obviously isn't an issue for you because you lack just that, friends.

    Lmao@rawburger...

  • BartonFink #361 4 years ago

    morriss wrote:
    I've never seen the game tear. That's bollocks, that.

    Well he did say that the torn frame only lasts 1/60 of a second (60Hz) so you will never see it.

  • InsoFox #362 4 years ago

    "It makes the Ps3 version playable in a way that 360 owners can only dream of. "

    Ahahaha. Ahem.

    They both look good, but judging from the comparison vids, I like the sharpness of the 360 version. You can really notice it on buildings in the distance, and such.

    Framerate issues... eh. Well, neither of the versions seem to run flat out, but the 360 version that I have played never seems to have framerae issues in the Mass Effect sense of the phrase. It rarely produces jarring moments of slowdown, which is quite impressive for what it is. The first time I lifted up high in a chopper and saw the whole city open out underneath me seamlessly was unlike anything I've ever seen... if anything it was similar to that reveal during the Bioshock opening.

    I'm all for the stunning long shots and don't find it too clinical, so I like my 360 version just fine. I won't be 'dreaming of' that sixaxis any time soon, but I'm glad you're having fun with it too.

  • SniperZoz #363 4 years ago

    Thank you Eurogamer for such an exhaustive comparison ... i'm sure fanboys on both sides will twists the words to make them feel better about themselves!

    Cheers.

  • goon-uk #364 4 years ago

    Most of this is fanboy rubbish but somebody pointed out the vsync problem. That comes out in the frame rate results that are the only solid difference in this again slightly biased face-off.

    Turn off the v-sync on the PS3 and it's frame rate might even be higher than the 360's.

  • TheJuriel #365 4 years ago

    "They prefer the 360 version in every Head To Head they have, what a waste of space."

    That is hardly surprising, given how most cross-platform games are developed with 360 as the main platform, and PS3 as the second-stringer. It's just the way it goes, as long as there's so many more 360 owners out there. Also, Sony's machines are always annoying to program for, and that didn't change with PS3.

  • wingzerosys #366 4 years ago

    I have both versions of GTA IV (Been playing the 360 version since the 25th), my 360 version has framerate issues and I dunno about my ps3 version, its still sealed.

    Reviewers have mentioned slowdown in both versions, so stop talking shit.

    Maybe I'll have to buy another version and take mine back.

  • BartonFink #367 4 years ago

    @goon-uk
    Turn off the v-sync on the PS3 and it's frame rate might even be higher than the 360's.
    Did you actually read the article?

    Eurogamer wrote:
    One curiosity I found was that the PS3 version has v-lock enabled, whereas 360 can produce the odd torn frame. This might be seen to skew results in 360's favour were it not for the fact that, typically, a torn frame is only on-screen for 1/60th of a second before v-sync is re-established.

    There is no v-synch problem, you are not going to see the odd torn frame at 60Hz. Even turning it off on the PS3 is never going to recoup a 17% difference as the PS3 never gets above 30fps.

    Not that it makes any difference as we perceive smooth movement at lower frequencies.
    Anyhew as the article states they are both very inconsistent with wrt framerates

    However PS3 should be doing much better with the lower res.
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 00:40

  • myke6699 #368 4 years ago

    the ps3 version looks smooth while the shibox360 version is oversharpened piece of crap. you don;t have to look hard enough to tell the difference.

  • BartonFink #369 4 years ago

    Yup the 360 version does certainly look better

  • KEELr #370 4 years ago

    Christ, some of these Sony fanboys are just sad sad people.
    This is without a doubt the deepest and most well done comparison made in the history of a multiplatform game (frankly, I couldnt see a difference) but since the PS3 version didnt come out on top the Sony fanboys come up with some of the most ridicules claims I have ever seen.

  • Sid-Nice #371 4 years ago

    In a perfect world this game would/should have been a Wii exclusive.

  • ElMariachiPJO #372 4 years ago

    If they patched both versions, the 360 would have the edge, because it's handling 720p w/2XFSAA(but something a good pc would laugh at) and all that is needed is an option to have a 'movie' tint(yellow/orange heavy) and for the dithering to be fixed.

    If they patch the PS3 version, they would still be stuck with 640p w no FSAA, because it's running slow enough already to even think about 720p.

    So if they patched the PS3, the only option would be to fix the blurryness issue, or to give a choice on it.

    I will say this after 20+ hrs on each version:

    Yes, the PS3's main advantage graphics wise(not perfromance) is it's better dithering(especially on shadow heavy scenes), but for me it's a HUGE issue, because the small signs are more readable, and the mid range textures are more defined.

    Mabye not many gamers care about dithering, but to me, in this type of game, it's huge.

    And I really hope R* patches up this annoying problem on the 360 version.

  • p00ntang #373 4 years ago

    Can we move on? The differences are so minor it's not worth talking about. It's a great game. If anyone cares to remember, GTA III had plenty of issues but that didn't stop anyone enjoying it. Compared to that it's nigh on perfect!

  • BartonFink #374 4 years ago

    Problem there is if they did remove the vasaline then we would be left with a complete jagfest. PS3 just does not do FSAA hence the need for all the blurriness and vasaline wash.
    and what P00ntang just said :D
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 01:25

  • xAx #375 4 years ago

    I cant imagine the pain of trying to get all that gameplay footage to match up

  • CiDhed #376 4 years ago

    @xAx

    The reviewer did a great job.

  • ElMariachiPJO #377 4 years ago

    [link url=http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articl es//a/1/3/7/8/8/6/gen9.jpg.jpg
    ]http://im ages.eurogamer.net/assets/artic...[/link]
    Notice how across the street you cannot read the left most store sign on the 360 version?
    While on the PS3 version all the signs across the street and the stores are more alligned.

    The 360 version is the sharper version, however the PS3 version has the better image quality, because of the heavy 360 dithering.(especially when shadows are involved, which is alot in this game)I personally would take less dithering over a more sharper picter quality, as the overall PQ is just plain better.

    Even in 640p and no FSAA, the PS3 IQ is better, imho.


    Edited by 5 at 09/05/08 @ 03:17

  • jynxce #378 4 years ago

    Okay, fanboys. Let's strip away the PS and 360 brands.

    One version runs at a faster framerate, has a higher resolution and doesn't need an installation to accomplish this.

    Really, is there any room for arguement?

  • davisorle #379 4 years ago

    LMAO! Some dudes like Wingzerosys just can't face he fact that STILL even after so long and in huge tittles like GTA he so counted on his PS console for and paid for and only, that he could have actually got the best ot of his games in another console and specially rom an xbox... Makes you sick doesnt it? Well, im glad. Specially since on ur 1st post you say that they are fanboys if they don't admit fps issues and then on the next post u say u got a PS3 version sealled still and read they both have same issue... I mean, o.O DOUGH. ffs

    Keep playing gamers. I just got all my Vengefull in WoW so im happy.
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 03:49

  • Andee #380 4 years ago

    Tbh, i'm now reluctant to give to give my opinion. Basically they're both the same but different. 360 with the higher res, and ps3 with the higher accuracy lighting effects. But who cares? seriously, play the game folks, it makes no difference if one is marginally different from the other, it's the same (somewhat flawed) game.

    I've got both versions, and if I had choose it'd be the ps3 one, slightly better lighting effects (higher fp hdr), and quicker texture draw, but it really doesn't matter, it's the same f*cking game people! and the pc version will be better regardless..

    I wish eurogamer would avoid this crap tbh. It only attracts an undesirable bunch. It'll never be fully accurate, and a brief mention in the review would be all we need, though (understandably i guess) the page hits are more important :(
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 04:18

  • Andee #381 4 years ago

    If I can also add, despite the good intentions, the non-interactive fps comparisons are somewhat useless. From what i've read anyway, the ps3 non-interactive sequences are not the same res as in game( ie 720 vs 640), and tbh this is somewhat noticable playing both back to back. And the AF differences are missing as usual.. FFS, I don't understand why this attracts so many posts, just play the game (please)...

  • Calgon #382 4 years ago

    The PS3 version doesnt have better lighting effects at all... its the renderer, perhaps some post processing(which I doubt), its just got a warmer look to it as the devs pointed out(if its hue then there could be a 360 patch which will give it the same feel). As for the HDR there were some thoughts about it over at Beyond3d but they were complete guesses... theres only so much you can tell by looking at the pixels, also logically that would have been one of the first things they reduced before the resolution even, to get the framerate stable.

    Its pretty clear with the side by side video comparisons theres no difference in lighting so stop trying to state advantages that dont exist, did you read that part of the article or not?... perhaps watch and see for yourself.

    As for AF? Clearly theres no difference there either... does either version even have it?

    Listen the PS3 version turned out fine... both versions deserved the 10 so why bother if the 360 version performs a little better? You can enjoy the game fine on either console.
    Edited by 3 at 09/05/08 @ 04:58

  • theFonz #383 4 years ago

    Nerd Alert!

  • Andee #384 4 years ago

    @ Calgon
    Yes, some of it was conjecture from the beyond3d forums, but personally, on the same 55" 1080 hdtv (and 720p projector) calibrated for both the 360 and the ps3 inputs, the difference in lighting (and related dithering) is clearly noticeable. But again, it really doesnt matter, both have advatages in different areas, it's still the same game regardless...

  • Kryon #385 4 years ago

    I'm filing a petition to have two new words put into the Cambridge dictionary.

    swam (meaning uber cunt)

    headbog (meaning past tense of swam)
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 07:42

  • Calgon #386 4 years ago

    Andee I can see quite clearly that theres no difference in the lighting, I dont need to have both versions infront of me for that, the footage was shown at the native res and in slow motion... the overall image of the PS3 version is warmer perhaps thats what you are confusing it with(like I said the 360 version could well be patched especially if they think most people prefer it).

    I agree they do both have their advantages but lighting isnt one for either of them really. PS3s are less pop-in, no dither, warmer image which some people prefer, slightly blurred(as a result of upscaling or post processing or both) image which gives it a softer look which again some people prefer.
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 05:59

  • ElMariachiPJO #387 4 years ago

    The differences in tint were done so because of the nature of the PS3 version's style. Since it's using a post processing blurring effect(to smooth out the lack of AA and other artifacts) and to give it a more uniform look overall, it made sense to make it's tint more on the cinematic side(yellowish).

    But that can be fixed in a patch easily, if Rockstar wants the 360 to look simular.
    Let's be honest, the PS3(for whatever reason) version is the weaker version in terms of specs(640p, no FSAA, lower frame rate), however if you have both versions(like i do) and played each one extensivily, you know the biggest difference visually is the annoying dithering of the 360 version, especially on shadows.
    Visually it's a huge difference, much moreso then 2XFAA and the added 130*80 extra resolution(difference from 720p to 640p).
    Just look at the pic(full screen) and you have to be blind to not see that you cannot read the signs across the street on the 360 version. You can talk numbers (720p/2XFSAA) all you wish, when the PQ looks like a mess at times, it means nothing.
    [link url=http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articl es//a/1/3/7/8/8/6/gen9.jpg.jpg
    ]http://im ages.eurogamer.net/assets/artic...[/link]

    Now i'm sure that's not a hardware issue, but rather a software bug/problem, that Rockstar overlooked.
    Edited by 3 at 09/05/08 @ 07:21

  • Dizzy #388 4 years ago

    It is official. Rockstar are 360 fanboys and/or lazy.

  • Xerx3s #389 4 years ago

    swam: You truly are a sad fuck aren't you? This is EXACTLY the reason why people don't take anything you write seriously. Not that the rest of this thread is much better...

  • Clive_Dunn #390 4 years ago

    FACT !

  • #391 4 years ago

    So basically the xb360 version is superior in every way but the Ps3 inferior version looks better and Rockstar added the dithering to make the xb360 version look bad?

    I just watch a comparison video on GTrailers, why doesn't EG say that the Ps3 version has more shadows and much much better looking explosions clearly evident in this video. ( watch the HD one ). Personally I like the look of the Ps3 version more although I hve neither version as I cant seem to get the thing anywhere, it has softer and more natural looking colours and i actually like the soft focus. It blends well with the backgrounds.

    [link url=http://y oda.dip.jp/Game/GTA4/GTA4_12_PS3.png
    ]http://yo da.dip.jp/Game/GTA4/GTA4_12_PS3...[/link]
    [link url=http://y oda.dip.jp/Game/GTA4/GTA4_12_360.png
    ]http://yo da.dip.jp/Game/GTA4/GTA4_12_360...[/link]

    in this shot its the same time but why is there more people in the ps3 version, surely it would have the same amount of assets showing?

    [link url=http://y oda.dip.jp/Game/GTA4/GTA4_27_360.png
    ]http://yo da.dip.jp/Game/GTA4/GTA4_27_360...[/link]
    [link url=http://y oda.dip.jp/Game/GTA4/GTA4_27_PS3.png
    ]http://yo da.dip.jp/Game/GTA4/GTA4_27_PS3...[/link]
    [link url= http://www.vertigogaming.net/PSP/GTA/gtacompare2.jpg
    ]http://ww w.vertigogaming.net/PSP/GTA/gta...[/link]

    [link url=http://forums.gametrailers.com/showthread.php?t=388602
    ]http://fo rums.gametrailers.com/showthrea...[/link]

  • Xerx3s #392 4 years ago

    "I don't understand why Sony persist with these strange architectures for their consoles if it means their games consistently look worse. It's like they purposely like to make things difficult for themselves."

    That's not true. There is no such thing as a strange architecture. One is not more advanced than the other, they just have 2 different visions in doing things. Part of it is cultural, both social and economical. Another part is that sony approaches things from a hardware pov while ms approaches things from a software pov.
    MS has brought over a lot of previously pc exclusive developers. They have a very large chunk of the console market now. In that respect the 360 is easier to work with for them ergo things are easier (especially since the development environment is very similar).

  • Atropos #393 4 years ago

    I've played both versions of the game, and they're both excellent... Rather than all this technical nerdery, the sticking points are actually

    1: Do you want an easy online-experience? Go X360.

    2: Do you object to having the equivalent of a loud vacuuming machine on at all times during play, obscuring the dialogue unless you crank up the TV to dangerous volumes? Go PS3.
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 07:51

  • Kryon #394 4 years ago

    To be fair though the game looks pretty cack on both systems...Oh, and where is Apololol with his list of upcoming PS3 games that will be the bestest games ever?

  • Dizzy #395 4 years ago

    "why doesn't EG say that the Ps3 version has more shadows and much much better looking explosions clearly evident in this video"

    They said so in the article. Did you ever read it? They said that basically the differences in that movie are due to time of day and explosions are the same if the viewing place in exactly the same.

    You guys keep on trying do you?

  • muscleblade #396 4 years ago

    After reading all the PS3 VS 360 articles i wouldnt say its about wich version of the game is the best. Its more about wich console is the best. Easily the 360 is the superior console. It has the best exclusives, the best versions of the multiplatform games, best online service, lowest price, achievements ( dont underestimate them). The PS3 has blueray for the movielovers. I prefer the cinema though. I have almost unlimited cash to use on consoles and games. I own two 360s and a Wii + DS and about 70 retail games so dont say i cant afford a PS3 i just dont want one. I actually bought one and sold it again when i found out that Sony was full of bullshit when talking about the superior PS3. They didnt fool me though. I agree to a point that the 360 can be noisy if you use it the wrong way. Use headphones during singleplayer sessions. Online you wont hear the fan noise cause of all the talking and screaming in the headphones. Its not as loud as 5-10 year old PCs anyway.
    Edited by 2 at 09/05/08 @ 08:02

  • #397 4 years ago

    Dizzy I did indeed read the article but there is a major difference in the quality of explosions on Ps3, they look more volumetric and cloudy, and pleasing to look at.

    I really need to get this game. :(

  • Widge #398 4 years ago

    well I think the article is about which kind of bread is the best, granary or wholemeal.

  • #399 4 years ago

    muscleblade so instead you went with Microsoft who denied for nearly 2 years the 360 had no problems ;)

    just joking m8.

  • Widge #400 4 years ago

    why on earth would anyone want to sit with headphones on for gaming?!

    anyone been in here:

    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=137886
    ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...[/link]

    to look at the vast gulf of difference between the two?
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 08:07

  • Lucien21 #401 4 years ago

    I don't really give a shit about which one is marginally better. The difference is so slight that it is meaningless to the actual gameplay experience.

    As someone who owns both consoles I thought about which one to buy.

    In the end I went for the PS3 version for 2 reasons:

    * Multiplayer: I only have a silver live membership and don't see a need to pay to upgrade it. PS3 multiplayer has worked fine for me in the past with Resistance and Hot Shots Golf.
    * less noise and more reliability: The 360 sounds like a frigging jet engine when playing games and i'm getting sick of disc read errors in recent 360 games.

    I have been more than happy with the game since.

  • keyboardmonkey #402 4 years ago

    why on earth would anyone want to sit with headphones on for gaming?!

    You either
    a) live by yourself
    b) live with your parents
    c) have an understanding partner

    My girlfriend seems to have super sensitive hearing (but only when i am playing games/ watching films by myself), and constantly nags about turning the volume down. So headphones are put on!

  • Kryon #403 4 years ago

    LOL, why would you do what your girl friend tells you? Just tell her to get back in the kitchen and make you a bacon sarny.

  • Yaz #404 4 years ago

    DaemonB wrote: "I just watch a comparison video on GTrailers, why doesn't EG say that the Ps3 version has more shadows and much much better looking explosions clearly evident in this video. ( watch the HD one )."

    If you read the article again, you will see that Richard has spoken about those issues. For example, he says "Time for a spot of myth-busting then. Aside from a slight tweak to the colour palette (going back once again to Houser's 'warmer' PS3 comments), the two games feature virtually identical lighting. Day and night cycles are basically the same, weather likewise. A case has also been made online with judiciously chosen screenshots that the PS3 version has better-realised explosion effects, but again, in CONTROLLERD conditions this is proven not to be the case. In fact, the only lighting issue between the two versions that stands out is a shimmering on shadows on the 360 version. Noticeably improved on PS3, but hardly earth-shaking stuff."

    You also wrote: "in this shot its the same time but why is there more people in the ps3 version, surely it would have the same amount of assets showing?"

    And am I to believe that everytime you decide to visit the same area at the same time, then the same amount of people will be there each time? Or is it possible that sometimes there will be more people, other times less people? Just like in a real city! Hence I believe we should be careful before coming to conclusions based upon (often) carefully selected videos and screenshots. :|
    Edited by 2 at 09/05/08 @ 08:33

  • muscleblade #405 4 years ago

    keyboardmonkey wrote:My girlfriend seems to have super sensitive hearing (but only when i am playing games).
    My girlfriend also has that super sensitive hearing. One of the reasons i have two 42 Full Hd TVs and two 360s. One for the livingroom and one for the bedroom. She also prefer watching TV instead of watching me playing games. Im considering dumping her though.LOL.

  • speedsix #406 4 years ago

    If you prefer the warmer palette, adjust the colour temp setting on your tv.

  • bad09 #407 4 years ago

    @ keyboardmonkey & muscleblade

    Put you foot down and demand loud games and movies, she may not like it but you are a man and proud and you wear the trousers. Roar guys roar like lions!!! :)

    \ wakes from dream where men were the trousers....

  • Amoebalove #408 4 years ago

    swam - 'I've been taking the piss out of you bunch of saddos for the last few weeks.

    Clearly I dont give a shit about what version is best.

    I'm an XBOT too, hence my high gamerscore.'

    @swam

    So you're not really a completely biased fanboy cock and you've just been having a laugh for the last few weeks? OK whatever you say!

  • ps3owner #409 4 years ago

    bollocks. I missed it somehow. 477 odd comments later... I can't be arsed to read them all

    overall it looks as though Xbox has the edge on this. Seems to me as though the PS3 is a bitch to write code for. Shame really and false advertising on sony's part (next gen bla blup, but nobody can code for it :( )

    Anyway, overall it looks good to me on the PS3. so no hard feelings. I guess R* could have made a bit of an effort on the PS3 front, but I suppose the port went from 360 to PS3, not the other way around.

    I wonder when they started the development of this game...

    1. when Xbox 360 was released (so 1 year head start on coding, no point in switching after that)
    2. when PS3 was released...

    I go for 1. and guess there is some sort of sausage machine that they use to port the code to PS3 with some (minimal) blurr options ;)

    *It would be interesting if they had 2 teams working on it. one for the PS3, one for the Xbox. Then see who wins (compete between the 2) instead of one team of Xbox programmers trying to learn whatever the PS3 uses ;)

    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 09:26

  • superdelphinus #410 4 years ago

    Is the dithering effect the one that makes it look like a runny oil painting in the distance? It looks really weird when it's sunny and you can see a long way into the distance (360 version). It's why i prefer playing it in standard definition - it's just a lot smoother and more natural looking, which is a sad waste of an expensive tv!

    Totally brilliant game though, it's my favourite since Ocarina of Time

  • Grayvern #411 4 years ago

    I never got any v-syncing issues on NWN 2 with or withought V-lock enabled, but with it on a large hit in frame rate occured.

    Also its a port from the 360 to the PS3 the only people who managed an immaculate one of them is Bethesda.
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 10:05

  • NickD7 #412 4 years ago

    It's simple really, the 360 version has a frame rate above 30 fps, the PS3 version doesn't. The 360 version is true HD, the PS3 version isn't.

    What's to discuss?

  • superdelphinus #413 4 years ago

    Having read some of this comments section - christ, you people

  • gaselite #414 4 years ago

    GTA4 is for the most part a good game but I think its wider significance for gaming (beyond its commercial success) has been blown out of all proportion. Is it really a huge (or even merely big) evolution of what's gone before it? It feels more like a natural evolution to me. I've played all the GTA games pretty extensively (admittedly I'm not their biggest fan) and I have to say I don't really think so. I think GTA4 is a magnificent satire and a pretty good game.
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 10:42

  • #415 4 years ago

    Yaz i don't wish to come across as argumentative but then Richard is talking Rubbish. For the love of God watch the HD trailer I posted and you will un-dienably and CLEARLY see better explosion effects on the PS3 version.

    you quoted "

    A case has also been made online with judiciously chosen screenshots that the PS3 version has better-realised explosion effects, but again, in CONTROLLER conditions this is proven not to be the case. In fact, the only lighting issue between the two versions that stands out is a shimmering on shadows on the 360 version. Noticeably improved on PS3, but hardly earth-shaking stuff."

    This is the typical type of poor journalism reporting that Eurogamer is guilty of. Why is it that when the Ps3 DOES DO something a little better, in this case the lighting, colours and explosions on this particular game its played down and " Hardly earth-shaking stuff"?

    If the shoe was on the other foot I have no doubt in my mind it would be significant. I mean the dithering issue they bring up. Eurogamer have absolutely no idea, as does anyone else why this effect was added but obviously it annoyed them, as the Ps3 doesn't have it therefore makes some weak case that its not justified, when in reality R* added for some reason other than pissing people off.

    Sorry ranting a little :), and today ill be out hunting the bloody town for a copy... again :(

  • Widge #416 4 years ago

    In Richard's defense, he does add "PS3 GTA IV looks absolutely fantastic, and even factoring in zero anti-aliasing support and a lower resolution, in many scenarios it looks as good as the 360 version, if not better." as a sweetner at the end.

  • miiiguel #417 4 years ago

    The bottom line is that no matter what material I put through the detector, 360 came ahead in all tests, sometimes dramatically so.

    Case closed.

  • monkie_king #418 4 years ago

    Free with every PS3 console: a complimentary persecution complex! This handy neurosis will prove invaluable when posting on popular websites such as Eurogamer!

  • Widge #419 4 years ago

    apart from the bit I posted above

  • vegard #420 4 years ago

    framerate on the 360 version sucks. and i'm sure the previous games were just as bad.

    that's what I get for being an ex-pc gamer who sold out to the 360. still, great game, framerate won't stop me from playing!

  • miiiguel #421 4 years ago

    Just one last rant - I need to get this ITIL bs going - I'm all pro "socialism" and shit, but ever since the (and even before) the debut of this gen, we hear PS-only crowd braging: "360 is Xbox 1.5"; "we're the real next gen"; "you'll see, the future"...
    The truth/facts proved you wrong, and now I just can't help myself, and for that I am sorry, but you, fellow gamers should have been more polite, imho.

    One can throw all the arguments in, like the "one year before"; "easier to code", but bottom line is, I, as a customer, do not want to indulge a company for releasing a product after, or a hard to code one. I need to deliver this ITIL project in time, and I need to make it clear, simple and that it performs in the end... see the relation ?

    Anyway, have fun with whatever version it because a minor or inferior version is not a reason not to enjoy a true piece of art which is this game. This is one of the few games that I consider is a real "next-gen" as I find myself enjoying its conceptual sanbox rather than nitpicking technical issues. I imagine this is like the movie industry a couple of decades ago, where we were amazed with technical issues, nowdays we look beyond that.

    Later dudes.
    ;)
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 11:20

  • Widge #422 4 years ago

    I've seen loads of people pulling this game apart, slating it visually... when I've found it one of the all time most stunning games ever!

    It seems that with the new generation of consoles, everyone has suddenly become massively critical all of a sudden. When I played GTA3, there were things like buildings appearing out of nowhere, the road vanishing, being able to see stuff load right in front of you, heavy traffic pile ups leading to chugging framerates... and then this held true right up to San Andreas, but they were still revered and rightly so. This game, I've not no pop in, the framerate is pretty much stable right the way through, it looks utterly amazing (when compared to something of a similar free roaming ilk)... and some people have been slating it as last generation and disappointing. Madness. Plus its nice not to play a game where you are some generic meathead marine type.

    I also think the differences between the version, are as you've said, minor, not the vast word you see bandied about. Certainly not as vast as the previous gen games.

  • Krusty #423 4 years ago

    360 > PS3, Amiga > ST, C64 > Speccy

    Bring it on :p


    Like others have said, author really went to town on this analysis - was probably expecting cries of foul play from the losers...

  • Yaz #424 4 years ago

    DaemonB wrote: "Yaz i don't wish to come across as argumentative"

    Too late.. :)

    "but then Richard is talking Rubbish. For the love of God watch the HD trailer I posted and you will un-dienably and CLEARLY see better explosion effects on the PS3 version."

    I HAVE watched the HD trailer, and it is CLEAR that those are not controlled conditions. The explosions themselves vary depending on a number of factors, and so it is clear that the HD trailer is not a comparison of like with like. To do so, you'd need to have the same vehicle(s) in the same location and blow them up in the same way, first on the 360 then on the PS3 and THEN compare them, i.e. CONTROLLED conditions. Have you done this? No, so you can't say Richard is talking rubbish just because you've watched a video. He says he's compared the explosions under controlled condititons (i.e. as close to being the same on each as possible), and they are the same. The lighting is the same too, except other factors makes each version look slightly different.

    "This is the typical type of poor journalism reporting that Eurogamer is guilty of. Why is it that when the Ps3 DOES DO something a little better, in this case the lighting, colours and explosions on this particular game its played down and " Hardly earth-shaking stuff"?"

    Ah yes, the good old bias claim. I would ask why is it that certain gamers always feel the need to take sides and feel hard done by if their console isn't getting all that *they* feel it deserves? Poor little PS3, Eurogamer are so mean to it all the time, and yet they shower the 360 with love and kisses. *rolleyes* :p

    "Sorry ranting a little :), and today ill be out hunting the bloody town for a copy... again :("

    Then stop ranting, and good luck on your search. :)

  • #425 4 years ago

    Sorry, poor little ps3 owners? You assume I have a ps3 because I defend the version which looks better to my own eyes from screen shots and videos? Erm isnt the 360 version superior yet looks worse than the inferior Ps3 version and its not even 720p? Says more about the xb360 m8 than the ps3 tbfh and no amount of numbers from Richard is going to spin it.

    The ps3 version does look better end of and for the record i use my sons xb360 therefore will be buying the xb360 version despite the fact I prefer the look of the ps3 version.

    good day.

  • Subquest #426 4 years ago

    So much for HD gaming, nothing on these platforms can compare with Orange Box or GoW running natively on my monitor (on PC) - not even close.

    +1. Here we are comparing the minute differences between two pretty shoddy gaming machines, one of which is essentially a standardised PC at a pretty low spec relatively speaking.

  • Vin #427 4 years ago

    500 comments.

    Utterly astonishing.

  • miiiguel #428 4 years ago

    Subquest, they should've used your PC to compare it too, then ?

    "essentially a standardised PC "
    That's really what makes the diference for me, I play games, I don't "do boxes". It could be a pocket calculator, what do I care? I was never into tunning, I prefer to drive.

  • neil_likes_bums #429 4 years ago

    It matters now how much the two factions war.. there will always be the occasional comment from somebody with a PC who has apparently wandered into the wrong thread and made completely inane comments, given the game it not currently available on the platform. That is not to suggest that most of the crap here is not completely inane. Ultimately, if you REALLY CARE about this stuff then you are an idiot, you should care about the game, not which one looks slightly better.

    You may as well argue about why Pi is not a whole number.

  • Dizzy #430 4 years ago

    "which is essentially a standardised PC at a pretty low spec relatively speaking. "

    Really? Do you know PCs running on those CPUs/GPUs?
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 12:12

  • Yaz #431 4 years ago

    DaemonB wrote: "Sorry, poor little ps3 owners? You assume I have a ps3 "

    I said "Poor little PS3", referring to the fact that gamers like to claim Eurogamer are biased against it. Which IS what you were saying.

    "Erm isnt the 360 version superior yet looks worse than the inferior Ps3 version and its not even 720p? Says more about the xb360 m8 than the ps3 tbfh and no amount of numbers from Richard is going to spin it."

    It's a matter of opinion which looks better. And I believe Richard is in a better position to compare the two version (having analysed both versions DIRECTLY) than any gamer online who is only going by screenshots and videos (myself included).

    "The ps3 version does look better end of and for the record i use my sons xb360 therefore will be buying the xb360 version despite the fact I prefer the look of the ps3 version."

    This is no "End of"...m8. Opinions are split between whether the 360 version looks better or the PS3 looks better. And so the slight differences between says little about either console, it only says something about the approach RS took to each in this respect.

    EDIT: I hadn't even checked all the videos when I mentioned the explosions under controlled conditions in my last post. Well look at the following video where Richard has done exactly that DaemonB. It's clear from those tests that the explosions are the SAME.

    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/tv_video.php?playlist_id=8743
    ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/tv_video.php?pl...[/link]

    So I repeat, you can't go by screenshots and videos from places like GameTrailers where each version is tested under different conditions and then draw conclusions in the way you had (whilst dismissing the evidence from those who have taken the time to make sure the comparison is a fair one!).
    Edited by 2 at 09/05/08 @ 16:54

  • Ranger101 #432 4 years ago

    PS£!
    Xbot£60!

    Don't you see! They're all in it to take your money! Don't fall foul of this corporate whoreing and consumerism! Free yourself!


    DUDE I OWN A PS2, XBOX, GAMECUBE, DS & GBA OKAYS?! I'M NOT BIASED! I DON'T HAVE ANY NEXT GEN CONSOLES THERFORE I WIN.

    YOU ALL LOSE.

  • ps3owner #433 4 years ago

    PS3 is better :p

    no wait... maybe the Xbox is... hm...

    no wait... it's sunny outside. see ya ;)

  • Kryon #434 4 years ago

    "no wait... it's sunny outside. see ya ;) "

    LOL! It seems the PS3 version is so extremely bad that PS3 owners have to actually 'go outside' to find something fun to do ;)

  • monkie_king #435 4 years ago

    What is 'go outside'? Is it to do with that big room with the blue ceiling?

  • neil_likes_bums #436 4 years ago

    outside is real hd

  • BullsharkJuicer #437 4 years ago

    Thanks for writing this piece. I was on the verge of trading in my 360 non-HDMI for an Elite because of the jaggy graphics. I now see this is "part of the experience". Still a great game, just saved myself a £150 trade in. Here's hoping for an options patch for the 360. One love bredren.

  • WinterSnowblind #438 4 years ago

    I hear there's good draw distance out there.

  • Kryon #439 4 years ago

    Outside...yes it's the room with the blue ceiling, it's a place where the dregs of society, street urchins, guttersnipes, PS3 owners and the like seem to spend their days.I ventured out there once ...A long time ago.

    /shivers at the thought

  • ps3owner #440 4 years ago

    @Kryon

    Cry On :)

    you'd be surprised how much fun "outside" can be... especially a pub along the Thames in the sun. great fun :). Although the Beeb seems to have got the forecast wrong yet again... where is the fucking sun!!!!!!!!!

  • Ranger101 #441 4 years ago

    Yeah... Xbox fanboys are so cool they can just shun the Sun and human contact altogether. Cos who fucking needs real life when you have XBOX360!

    The Third Place.

    Okay, okay guys just quick reminder if any of yous who have forgotton:

    There are these other types of human beings out there, that sort of look like you, but have softer skin, longer hair, higher pitched voices and are a bit more curvey and have these bumps on their chest that are nice to fondle. They're also missing a bit of kit down below, but that's a good thing for you. Play with that instead once in a while and you'll forget what the fuck you were going on about.*


    (* If you're Gay, then match the description appropriately to your preffered gay-type, be it queen, bear, metro, bi, regular homo, Amiga 500 owner - and get busy however you guys get busy in your fully consenting adult funtime behaviour that occurs in the privacy of your own bedrooms or any back alley down soho).

  • jetsetdemo #442 4 years ago

    @Bonker
    No it's not three years since a got my first 360 I thinks it’s just under two, but I have had to have it replaced 3 times. By the way hats off to Microsoft as I didn’t think I had any warranty left on it but when I ordered a service call the web sit still told me I had two months remaining. I never took out the extended cover so I guess Microsoft extended it for me for free!

  • Madafunkola #443 4 years ago

    @Ranger101

    I have recently started resenting the "outside" as due to various gigs, parents birthdays and glorious weather this week I have only played on GTA for about 2 hours... :(

  • Kryon #444 4 years ago

    @Ranger101

    "There are these other types of human beings out there, that sort of look like you, but have softer skin, longer hair, higher pitched voices and are a bit more curvey and have these bumps on their chest that are nice to fondle. They're also missing a bit of kit down below,"

    A fat child with no pants on? You Sir, sicken me! ;)

  • gizmo #445 4 years ago

    Love the Sony Fanboi comments.

    Can't argue with numbers girls :)

    360 has the smoother experience. And that, my friends, is the holy grail of gaming.

  • Lawlost #446 4 years ago

    Ok so as far as I am concerned Xbox360 has won the games battle (technically) but who will win the war??????

  • Kryon #447 4 years ago

    The PS3 will 'win' sales-wise in the end but after all of Sony's hyperbole "teh POWAZERZ of teh CELL" it will be a pretty hollow victory tbh...

  • Lawlost #448 4 years ago

    @Kryon you may be right but then again Sony are going to have to start competing on prices soon to be in this position and microsoft need to ensure product reliability. My 360 gets picked up for repair this afternoon RROD

  • Kryon #449 4 years ago

    Yeah, my 360 RRoDed last year, although, on the upside, my system was returned quickly, is slightly quieter and hasn't broken again.. I do actually love the PS3 as well, it's just the only thing I seem to play on it is Tekken5 (which I love) but it's hardly 'next gen'... All the games available are better on the 360.. I guess MGS4 will hopefully let me give the system a bit more use :)

    Edit - spillang mistakes

    Edit 2 - Yeah, I agree the PS3's price should go down but I'm quite sure it will. The thing is, its still (AFAIK) cheaper than an stand-alone BD player and with HD DVD now dead, that is a pretty compelling feature. When BD players go down though, so will the PS3 I reckon.
    Edited by 2 at 09/05/08 @ 13:50

  • stoopidgreg #450 4 years ago

    all i took from that was that the PS3 version runs 18% slower with 20% less resolution. tee hee hee

  • Amoebalove #451 4 years ago

    @Kryon
    A fat child with no pants on? You Sir, sicken me! ;)

    Pure class and one of your best yet!!

  • Kryon #452 4 years ago

    /Takes a bow ;)

  • superdelphinus #453 4 years ago

    I find all these bias accusations hilarious. I remember a year ago or so everyone was banging on about how eurogamer must be funded by Sony!!

  • monkie_king #454 4 years ago

    500+ comments in, it's pretty clear they're effectively funded by Sony vs. MS.

  • Gaol #455 4 years ago

    "That's really what makes the diference for me, I play games, I don't "do boxes". It could be a pocket calculator, what do I care? I was never into tunning, I prefer to drive. "

    Yet you spend hours comparing these tiny differences between console formats. That's PC benchmark whoring with less money.

    And believe me, the performance jump to top end PC is MUCH more subtantial. The point being raised (by me earlier in the thread) was that *both* HD formats have examples of sub-720p games, and that its a disappointing trend. I'd rather take a hit on visual quality and maintain at least the lower of the HD resoultions, but then I've always valued resolution over effects.

  • Kryon #456 4 years ago

    I just hate the word 'xbot'. It's what that utter bum hole swam likes to type in every single post he's ever written. 'xbot', it sounds like something the Starwars kid (of YouTube fame) would say.

  • Diomedes #457 4 years ago

    Wow ,this is damage control at its best.

    Its clear the PS3 version is better ,live with it.

    One more thing ,when the hell are you going to consider you are getting the same multiplayer on the PS3 without the fees ?


    Resume:You are such a fanboy....

  • Yaz #458 4 years ago

    ^^^ ALL fanboys are the same, whatever you call them. :)

  • systems #459 4 years ago

    I had a feeling this thread would still be running.

    Personally, I don't give a toss. I have the Xbox version because I know about 20 other people who went for the Xbox version. Had I known 20 people going for the PS3 version I would have gone for that instead (only 2 of my friends did). I don't really care either way and it's amazing that so many people do. So what if someone you've never met thinks they are right or that console X is better than console Y?

    Do fanboys all sit at home benchmarking their toasters and vacuum cleaners as well? Ha, you bought a Morphy Richards kettle. My Philips boils the water 5 seconds faster with less steam etc. [Hang on - I bet there is a forum somewhere for benchmarking household appliances so I'd better be careful.]

    It's Friday afternoon. I'm waffling and need to get out of work to the pub. A good weekend to you all!

  • Aloominum_man #460 4 years ago

    The kindest interpretation of this article (which, to the best of my knowledge, is the most thorough on the subject) would seem to be that both versions are near indistinguishable from one another unless you subject them to this kind of testing. Ignoring the framerate issue, it would still seem to be a pretty damning result for the PS3, since it's been promoted as being the only 'real' next gen console, power of the cell etc etc etc, but is being at the very least matched in performance by older hardware.

    If we do pay attention to the framerate issue which, to me at least, is more significant issue in terms of its impact on gameplay, we could conclude that the 360 is the more capable machine. If one of the best development teams in the world, creating one of the most important games - for gamers, Sony and Microsoft - can't do better with the PS3, who's going to? It's not just an issue with GTA4, but with numerous other examples where the PS3 performance is at least matched and routinely exceeded on the 360.

    It's all pretty trivial on the face of it, since GTA4 is a fantastic game on either platform, but this issue gets my attention because I hate being patronised by brands/companies like Sony, who persistently lie, oversell and behave so arrogantly towards the consumers that keep them in business. It's been constantly asserted by Sony that it's a more expensive and worthy purchase because it's so advanced. This is Lying.


  • Kryon #461 4 years ago

    @Arbiter

    You talk about robotic fanatics, hmm, swam/Apologie ring any bells? Yaz is correct in what he says.

  • InsoFox #462 4 years ago

    Swam/anyone else-

    I don't know if there's a bias or not. If there is then it seems like a trivial one at best. But even if there is, why is this such a huge problem? Sure, in their news reports you want the objective facts, but in articles and opinion pieces then you are supposed to be reading the opinions of the writers - if those opinions tend to be that the Xbox versions of games are better, then what's wrong with that? You don't have to go with those opinions...

    Personally I think the assessment was absolutely fair, after watching the videos. If anything, I think that he was understating the visual differences between the two and overstating the 'improvements' in the PS3 colour palette. But hey, they both look great.

  • dnbman #463 4 years ago

    I have a 360. I am by no means a fanboy and wouldn't even consider myself a serious gamer anymore. Whilst I used to do nothing but play on games, I seem to have lost interest in the majority of games over the past 3 years. I notice now all this fps, v-synch shit goes right over my head. I chose my 360 (actually I chose Wii after years of loving Ninty but traded by Wii in for my 360 because I personally think they are terrible) because I wanted a serious games console without the massive price tag.

    Anyway, after clearing up my lack of brand loyalty (other than Nintendo).... XBox 360 fan noise..... either mine is unique, you all have super sentitive ears or I'm deaf (something I can safely say isn't true) but when i'm playing a game I don't notice it at all. Granted it's a littel noisy when it's sat on the dashboard and Ii'm on my PC, but when i'm playing games... I don't notice it at all...

    Odd....

  • Feanor #464 4 years ago

    "Its clear the PS3 version is better ,live with it."

    Lower frame rate = better? Only if you're insane.

  • BigtimeSalvia #465 4 years ago

    Having both the 360 + PS3, I've been waiting for this 'face off' review. I have my PS3 connected to my projector via HDMI, and my XBox via component cable. So far I have been very impressed with PS3's cleaner + crisper graphics, but I just assumed it was because it's using the HDMI connection...which may possibly make the difference when your screen is 7 foot wide.

    After reading the whole review and watching the videos over and over I am still unsure. Blurry graphics due to bad anti-aliasing is not an issue on a small 42" screen or CRT, but obviously looks bad on a BIG screen.
    Call of Duty 4 looks shoddy TBH on my 360, but Devil May Cry 4 + GT prologue look amazing.

    I really couldn't decide, so I asked the wife to watch a couple of the comparison videos. Straight away she said the Xbox version looked better, as for exampole the writing on signs etc. looked clearer.
    It's sunny outside so I will go and spend some time out there....and wait for demos to come out and decide for myself at a later date :-|

  • stoopidgreg #466 4 years ago

    Diomedes - "Its clear the PS3 version is better ,live with it. "

    if you like 18% lower frame rates and 20% less resolution with no better popup then yes, the PS3 is far superior.

  • JANER #467 4 years ago

    Great article EG and thanks for the effort gone into it.

  • TRUTH #468 4 years ago

    Actually!... the PS3 GTA was in development before the 360 started. And still the 360 ran better.

  • XBoxDragon #469 4 years ago

    There has yet to be a demo of a 3d GTA to my knoelwedge, I suspect you may be left waiting quite a while on that.

  • TRUTH #470 4 years ago

    The thing is you won't notice the difference if you don't compare them next to each other. Though you might notice the sharper and better framerate on 360. Havinf both consoles with my PS3 running through HDMI, and the 360 running through HD AV Cable; I do notice that picture do look sharper and more detailed, better colors on the following games: Half Life 2, DMC 4, Stranglehold, Call Of Duty 3 & 4, Ghost Recon 2, Rainbow Six, Condmened 2, Virtua Fighter 2, Virtua Tennis..etc.

    I check by running (borrowing most PS3 games) the both consoles with same game and check by flicking channels. You do notice then.
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/08 @ 22:50

  • CHAZBIGPOTATO #471 4 years ago

    @King_of_hearts

    Right, done that, was over in about 20 seconds - she's off to bed now, so lets talk about how PS3 compares to Xbox again!

  • CHAZBIGPOTATO #472 4 years ago

    Does this one count as one more score to Xbox, making it 12-0?

  • #473 4 years ago

    headbog you said "

    The truth is, this is a game that was begun on the 360, developed on the 360, then ported to the PS3. "

    And yet the technically inferior ps3 version looks better than my shiny new xb360 version for soem strange reason! :) [ yes i finally got a copy! ]

    anywho, dithering aside, and yes its horrible, why did they add this? Its enjoyable and the story even more so.

  • Vic #474 4 years ago

    @ Calgon

    'Another point is the fact that not only did they delay the game to have enough time to make sure they both come out on par AND have Sony's engineers working alongside Rockstar... they still came out with a lower res and a lower framerate and no Anti Aliasing like the 360 version was able to manage, those pretty core issues regarding performance comparisons... its an indication of how well the hardware can cope'.

    Total bollocks from you once again. The resolution makes virtually no difference to the graphics. And no one mentioned resolution when Halo 3 came out...AA is also a minor issue. The reviews even say it is a matter of taste.

    Before you cream your pants, you may want to keep in mind that games developed for the PS3 (not ported to it) look better than any other console games. Thats why Uncharted, MGS4 and Killzone 2 look better than anything on the 360.

  • sargemat #475 4 years ago

    Hmm over all both versions look the same a lot of the time, but in a few places the 360 version is just better. Quite a difference in some of the FPS tests.

  • Psychotext #476 4 years ago

    "no one mentioned resolution when Halo 3 came out"

    lol

  • SageFrancis #477 4 years ago

    I cant believe this guy actually spent all that time doing this and actually getting paid for it.

    Good way to increase hits Eurogamer. As I think this "thorough face off" is all it was intended for.

    Ridiculous.

    If this guy was ever on This Is Your Life, he'd get an empty box and some foodstamps.

  • zooms #478 4 years ago

    It's becoming obvious now that the PS3 is lacking in the GPU department.

  • harrybauer #479 4 years ago

    both version looks great.

  • Xerx3s #480 4 years ago

    You know that you've got issues when you make reference to "XBOT" (specially typed in capitals) three times in one post.

  • bobmar360 #481 4 years ago

    after having looked at the side by side vids of both versions and after having played both versions, i come up with the conclusion that they are both extremely close and it is only when veiwing them side by side that any difference is noticed.

    For sure the 360 version seems to have crisper and clearer images whilst the PS3 seems as though a lot of blurring has been applied.

    Gameplay is exactly the same.although as everyone is aware of the so 'exclusive content' (microsoft and rockstar will make millions from this wether is stays exclusive or not).

    This PS3 v Xbox 360 thing will go on until the next breed of console unless Microsoft buy out Sony (Bill Gates will get pissed sooner or later).

    Microsofts big puncher is xbox live and Grand Theft on live runs well, where as the PS3 is a bit dodgy, as for the controls i prefer the xbox but that is all down to the players comfortability i suppose.

    Happy Eurogaming :o)

  • the_korben #482 4 years ago

    I take off my hat for the extraordinary amount of work that must have gone into this comparison. Great article, EG !

    However, I have to disagree on the FPS comparison, and wanted to stress a fact that has already been pointed out :

    The FPS-test is probably not statistically significant. You simply cannot say something about the nature of a specific quantity by comparing the average of 2 groups of a bunch of numbers, when one of the test groups has an artificial upper limit. It is mentioned in the article that this is negligible, but that simply is not true - and I'm a scientist, so I know what I'm talking about :o)

    Now, it could be that the PS3 doesn't ever manage to get above 30 fps anyway - in this case you can safely use the mean value of fps. However, if this was the case Rockstar wouldn't have capped the frame rate at 30 fps. I'm guessing that the 360 produces some outliers that push the average. The only sound comparison with these numbers that you can make is the following : if you removed all the values above 30 fps, what average frame rate does the 360 produce ? This would then tell you something about how the 360 is able to cope with the exact same situations that also force the PS3 to produce fps < 30.

    Or another suggestion : if the frame rate has an upper limit for one of the contestants, use the median instead of (or in addition to) the mean value. This gives you a much better measure of the frame rate experience for the user. Also, when stating the mean value, it is basically necessary to also give the variance or the standard deviation.

    Statistics need to be done right - and just stating some number to a specific quantity doesn't a scientific analysis make.


  • WinterSnowblind #483 4 years ago

    "games developed for the PS3 (not ported to it) look better than any other console games. Thats why Uncharted, MGS4 and Killzone 2 look better than anything on the 360"

    Uncharted is around the same graphical level as Halo 3. I find it astonishing that Uncharted is praised so regularly for its graphics, where as Halo is so often critisised. I can only assume those of you who think Uncharted looks so great have never actually touched a 360, am I right?

    MGS4 looks pretty nice, but I wouldn't put it beyond anything on the 360. It's another game that cheats a lot by using a lot of brown and grey, and it also has some very ugly textures. And as for Killzone 2? Show me some footage of the game that isn't CGI then we'll talk. If the game still looks like that when it's released, then yes, the PS3 will have a game that's even surpassed Crysis, but come on, show us some actual footage.

  • anonim1979 #484 4 years ago

    @the_korben

    I think you are under delusion that PS3 version is CAPPED 30fps.

    IT ISN'T.

    It certainly goes over that when you look at blank wall for example ;)

    If it had capped 30fps and v-synch is on - the game would jump from 30fps to 15fps to 7,5fps etc.

    Anyway - PS3 version has more slowdowns and it is a fact.

  • sirtacos #485 4 years ago

    All right then. I have both consoles though I only bought the 360 version. The differences seem so negligible that I don't care.
    Also, I agree with the_korben. I agree with him because he's a scienticist and he probably wears a white jacket and a stethoscope or something equally authoritative.

  • MyPointIs #486 4 years ago

    I also agree with the_korben. Those values were quite mean.

  • Widge #487 4 years ago

    Wintersnowblind, check the Killzone 2 article for some video of it... even the EG bods who looked at it had to note that they'd got it pretty much up to the same standard as the CGI vid.

  • TRUTH #488 4 years ago

    SWARM:

    I've played Uncharted - I honestly can't think why you think this has the best graphics ever ?...It's very liner, the jungle sections are nice but not outstanding, also not very interactive. The combat is weak compared to GOW.

    Killzone 2: The first one was shit, also seeing real time gameplay for KZ2; it's nothing beyond COD, Halo, Far Cry, etc at the moment. Also seems to be fairly liner tunnel vision from reading reports. Also remember Halo's jungle section had alot more action, effects, and larger detailed and much better AI going on then any section in Uncharted.

    As a PS3 owner I can honestly say I have yet to see 1 single game that can not be done on 360. All the best, I have to admit is actually on the 360.

  • Bonus #489 4 years ago

    Swam, have you played Halo3?

    I've yet to see you mention the fact that it has some of the best bloom and HDR rendering of any console game out there, which for someone who's mentioned post-processing elsewhere is surprising.
    Edited by 1 at 10/05/08 @ 18:54

  • qwerty123 #490 4 years ago

    Swam
    Did you see killzone 2 gameplay footage today on that playr show on bravo? wasnt looking as good as id expected

  • TRUTH #491 4 years ago

    Have you seen GOW2 gameplay - It's certainly looking ahead in the graphics challenge. The only game that I really play on PS3 is Tekken 5 Online. Completed Uncharted - was a good game, that's all.

    Assassin Creed had better graphics then Uncharetd, though less on the PS3 version. Also AC was less liner, but got a bit samey after a couple of hrs. It was also a lot more open/sandbox. Gears Of War, Lost Planet (360 version), Ghost Recon 2 (360 version), PGR 4 (weather), Assassins Creed (360 version) and moments in Dead Rising (esp all those Zombies onscreen..etc, all surpass Uncharted or equal it areas; I can't understand what you point is SWARM. Uncharted was nice, but nothing of leapfrog from the way you make it out. Also lush vibrant areas naturally naturally gives a more cleaner look.

    Too Human, Alan Wake, Banjoo & Kaziooe, Halo Wars, Splinter Cell Convection, Ninja Gaiden 2, Fable 2, Cry-On...all coming this year. With Left 4 Dead (the most exciting online game for PC/360).
    Edited by 1 at 10/05/08 @ 23:47

  • Cheekydaz #492 4 years ago

    I was a die hard sony fan from the start. PS1 purchased week of release, same with PS2. But regardless of which console is the best sony have messed people about to much, making promises that they never keep. I went and spent £2000 on a tv in preparation for PS3 and then they delayed it. So waited and they delayed it again. I jumped ship at that point and went for a 360. Best decision i've ever made. Have saved a bucket load of cash on the console and the games (which seem to be about £10 cheaper than the PS3). Microsoft are doing far more for there customers than sony are. Sony have forgotten who pays them.

    The same is true on the PSP. They urge you to buy it making big promises about all the titles that will be available and then don't deliver. I have a PSP and whilst it's superior to the DS the games are crap on it. Nintendo have wiped the floor with sony. The ds games are simple and bulge playability.

    So for me it isn't about which console delivers the better game it's all about customer service and value for money, and on that front microsoft are not only in the lead but they can't even see sony in the rear view mirror.

    And if i'm going to be totally honest Nintendo have lapped both microsoft and sony on their ability to deliver on their promises and provide enjoyable gaming to the masses.

    As for GTA i'm not sure it's as good as the hype would have you believe. Yes i've enjoyed playing the game but i'm getting a little bored with stealing cars for brucie and having to go and entertain roman etc etc. The game seems to be very repetitive and for me is just more of the same of previous versions of the GTA stable. I think rockstar should call it a day with GTA now.

  • mcmonkeyplc #493 4 years ago

    "Halo 2.5"

    NO!

    It's nothing like Halo 2, its more like Halo:CE dick weed, and I'm not talking about graphics.

  • CHAZBIGPOTATO #494 4 years ago

    Swam, MGS4 is so green it looks like its being played on an Amstrad CPC464 monocrome monitor!

  • Velios #495 4 years ago

    Why cant the PS3 version match the resolution or frame rate of the 360 version? It's the more powerful machine... is'nt it? Sony said it was.

  • MrsPacMan #496 4 years ago

    TRUTH:

    swam is a cocksucker

  • IneptPercy #497 4 years ago

    Got an idea for swam the SDF man...

    if the 360 is an xbox 1.5 yet can manage higher resolutions and frame rates, does that make the PS3 a... PS2.4

    You really do crack me up the way you defend the PS3 like you life depends on it.

    I just like good games right now the 360 ticks the boxs for me personally, its nothing to do with who makes which machine or how many polygons they can do. Personally the PS3 does not interest me right now (this can't be right or wrong as its an opinion). I do not wish for any console to win or lose as long as they all get enough money to keep making good games.

    In other words...

    In life not everybody will agree with you, when you grow up you will learn that sometimes its best to agree to disagree, it would seem me and a few other people prefer the 360 right now for different reasons, like wise you and a few people prefer the PS3.

    The reality is we all love games so why not just focus on that.

  • Xerx3s #498 4 years ago

    Swam: "OMFG your so BIASED! "

    Well that just broke my irony detector.

  • sonmi451 #499 4 years ago


    they're just plastic boxes assembled in China.

    there's more soul in a can of baked beans.

  • CiDhed #500 4 years ago

    Rofl... Still going on.


    Swam... You crack me up. Go get laid. PS3 isn't the holy grail.

  • bioreit #501 4 years ago

    Haha! I stop looking at this article for a weekend and the thread's still going. EG have a WINNAR! :-D

    Seriously though, what makes the fanboys (on all sides) come out and defend multinational corporations, that they presumably neither work for, nor own shares in?

    It's not like the geeky kid getting picked on by the football team at school, is it? I mean, each of the Big Three™ have teams of lawyers waiting to do their nefarious bidding; each of them has at various points in the history carried out acts both legally and morally questionable. Also, not a single on of these companies actually gives two figs what you think of them; their CEOs do not lie awake at night thinking "Oh my God - we'd better say thank you to all the forumites valiantly defending our corporate honour, as they slave away day in, day out copying and pasting huge tracts of Internet articles of dubious provenance." If they were ever to actually read some of the things written in their defence, their likely reaction would be either to laugh so hard their surgically-enhanced faces would fly off, or shake their heads in wonderment at the genuine stupidity which mankind has to offer. While shifting around into a more comfortable position on the huge piles of wonga.

    Fine: buy only one console for whatever reason (financial limitations; game-type preference; hardware preference; etc) but don't ever buy something out of 'loyalty' to a big company, because that really is a pathetic, useless reason. And don't ever feel the need to defend a company, because I'll let you in on a little secret - neither Sony, nor Microsoft nor Nintendo cry themselves to sleep because of what some idiotic PR buffoon said about them.

    swam, TRUTH, Apologie and all the rest of the rabid hordes - if you feel the need to shout about something, choose something which needs a voice: African nations getting penalised with EU tariffs, but blocked from doing the same; the white slave trade flowing through ports unchecked and unhindered; the poor getting stiffed with higher taxes while the rich go untroubled; the increasing pollution and wasteful practices engaged in worldwide. If those are too high and lofty for you, try helping out disadvantaged people in your area; make small but regular donations to worthwhile charities. But for Pete's sake, don't waste your time and energy defending a company because it only managed to scrape through a few billion pounds' worth of profit last year.

    /rant

  • CiDhed #502 4 years ago

    bioreit:

    Well done.

  • AJUK #503 4 years ago

    Nice post bioreit :)

    Unfortunately you won't see any of these rabid fanboys doing charity work unless there is an official Sony Homless Centre or Microsoft Hostel opened in their neighborhood.

  • TRUTH #504 4 years ago

    The fact is XBOX 360 has scored 11, PS3 score 0. GTA runs better on 360. GOW is still the best looking game on console.

  • TRUTH #505 4 years ago

    It was Sony who were pushing the PS3 is 4X more powerful then 360. That it's more powerful then any next gen pc card for the next 2yrs. That everything will run 1080p at 60fps. That all the FMV being shown is real time graphics. So if they can boast like that, they sgould take all the truth and criticism now aimed at them.

  • memeroot #506 4 years ago

    the_korben

    As a scientist you should very easily be able to see the issue with your calculations, if you cut out all the fps over 30 on the 360 you would be left with only those areas that it had problems with, the ps3 would likely include both these periods and other additional areas where the 360 had no problems.

    One solution would be to look at those areas where both consoles failed to deliver and average them or indeed to set an acceptable rate (say 20fps or 30fps) and see which console maintained that rate for the longest aggragate time.

    regardless the 360 seems to have the better technical application, the ps3 be better artistic application

    how about a patch with the ps3 filters for 360.

    btw - next gen can we hae our own standard effects that can be applied to all games? like the wreckless replay? Useless but fun.


  • muscleblade #507 4 years ago

    Gears of war is still hands down the best looking game on a console ever. Gears 2 will take that throne. Uncharted looks alright for a PS3 game, but only a PS3 owner ( that dont have a 360) can say it looks fantastic. Most AA titles on the 360 looks and plays better than Uncharted ( yes i have played it ). The best looking game on the PS3 is COD4 by a mile and it looks better on the 360 LOL.

    Im sure MGS4 will be great for the fans of the series and a loss for 360 only owners. Is it going to be as good as Gears 2 though. No way.
    Edited by 1 at 13/05/08 @ 13:55

  • mono_eric3 #508 4 years ago

    Excellent comments thread, one of the funniest in ages.

    But if anyone from Eurogamer is actually going to get this far in the comments there are a couple of things that could be addressed for future comparisons.

    The V-sync framerate issue. I'm of the old-school of thought that says that a v-synced game can only run at 15, 30, 60 fps etc, but of course HD resolutions and HDMI might offer differences to the old locked refresh rate, a clarification would be good, along with a deviation of somesort. Some people might prefer consistently lower frame rates, or inconsistently higher ones.

    It is well documented that the RSX chip cannot outperform the XENON (Sony states as much), and I'm pretty sure texture storage is hampered which results in some games using lower-resolution textures (Nico's face texture seems lower-res on PS3).

    The way that the PS3 is supposed to work is by using the SPUs to offload the work from the RSX. So in a linear cutscene where the only processing should be the rendering and a timeline update, the comparison between 360 and PS3 is a purely graphical one (one that the PS3 is likely to lose). If the comparison was of a gameplay segment (I'm aware of how incredibly difficult that is), the PS3 could use the extra SPUs to handle AI, Physics etc. as well as the rendering which should give it the edge over 360.

    : D

  • the_korben #509 4 years ago

    memeroot :

    Hm, you are absolutely right concerning the XBox 360 measurements - but that was exactly my point. If we assume that the PS3-version has some restrictions on the number of frames that are actually sent to the TV (and I take from the article that the number of displayed frames have been measured) in order to keep the v-sync intact, then you will only be able to compare those data points at which both consoles have problems and cannot keep up with the frame rate. This is simply because the opposite situation can only be quantified in the case of the 360 version, whereas the PS3 hits a brick wall and simply wouldn't send more frames to the TV even if it could. That, however, affects the average in a way that it simply cannot be used for a serious analysis.

    It could be that I'm completely wrong about this "upper limit" on the PS3. If that fps brick wall doesn't exist the average is perfectly fine as a measure of fps and the article is practically perfect ... but the idea I'm trying to convey (under the assumption of this upper limit) is undoubtedly correct and I don't see any flaw in my calculations. Of course, if the PS3 were capped at, let's say 30 fps, then you can't take all the 30 fps data points into account. Maybe I didn't stress that clearly enough.

    Anyway, I like your suggestion even better ... constructing a cumulative frames per second density distribution - very nice idea :)


  • TRUTH #510 4 years ago

    The fact is XBOX 360 has scored 11, PS3 score 0. GTA runs better on 360. GOW is still the best looking game on console. Only PS3 fans are still in denial!!!

  • syphon92 #511 4 years ago

    god dam, they havnt even tried to make ps3 version look good

  • m0thr4 #512 4 years ago

    I actually find these articles useful. I have an Xbox 360 and a PS3, but I tend to prefer playing on the PS3 because the Xbox 360 is so noisy. However, I'm sick of being burned by crappy ports on the PS3, so I like to know in advance what the differences are and, if the PS3 version is inferior, whether I can live with those differences.

  • m0thr4 #513 4 years ago

    "It was Sony who were pushing the PS3 is 4X more powerful then 360. That it's more powerful then any next gen pc card for the next 2yrs. That everything will run 1080p at 60fps. That all the FMV being shown is real time graphics. So if they can boast like that, they sgould take all the truth and criticism now aimed at them."

    Microsoft has spouted just as much shit about its own consoles. Your slavish loyalty to them is misplaced.

    EDIT: Oh, and WTMKF
    Edited by 1 at 14/05/08 @ 13:42

  • m0thr4 #514 4 years ago

    @bioreit:

    "the poor getting stiffed with higher taxes while the rich go untroubled"

    Not much you can do about that until the next election...

    ;-)

  • CiDhed #515 4 years ago

    Yawn... I am sure you have all the politics of taxes figured out. CNN taught sheeple.

  • mazzl #516 4 years ago

    @bioreit applaus! cheer! horaai!

  • Xerx3s #517 4 years ago

    "Microsoft has spouted just as much shit about its own consoles. Your slavish loyalty to them is misplaced. "

    So where did MS claim that it would do 2x 1080p at 120fps (and stuff like that)?

  • Gremo #518 4 years ago

    360 ftw

  • djed #519 4 years ago

    DOES THE XBOX VERSION SUPPORT MORE THAN 8 DIFFERENT CAR MODELS ON SCREEN AT ONCE?

  • Cruithne #520 4 years ago

    604 comments?

    Fuck that, I'll just skip to the chase.

    I've played both versions, both are great, no matter which one you choose you've got a great game.
    Having said that...

    Fact is the PS3 version is inferior.
    the loading times are noticably slower when you first start the game, and you get fewer choices in sound options, something I'm surprised no reviewer mentioned. Ps3 gives you two choices, stereo or headphones.
    Xbox gives you this and two different types of surround, depending on where your speakers are placed, it's a little touch, but nice to have all the same.
    Also, the controller felt better with the Xbox, I suspect because it was heavier, it felt just better, more heft, if you know what I mean.
    In conclusion, if you have the choice, go for the 360 version, if not, don't sweat it, like I said both versions are still great.

  • Yaz #521 4 years ago

    vercetti102 wrote: "if it wasnt for the 360, rockstar could have gave ps3 a massive GTA like san-an with the blu-ray, instead of the 360 holding us back with that disgracefully loud old DVD-drive."

    *Yawn* That tired old arguement again.

    The 360 is not holding the PS3 back anymore than the PS3 is holding the 360 back. Both consoles have their strengths and weaknesses, accept it.

    Moaning and groaning about how one version _could_ have been better in a parallel universe is not going to change anything. ;)

  • IneptPercy #522 4 years ago

    I am sure the PS3 version could have run at 720p if it was on blu-ray aswell...

    How about the fact we would have been playing this game 6 months ago if they didn't have to work on downscaling it to get it to run on a PS3...

  • Yaz #523 4 years ago

    ^^^

    ??? :|

  • mgillespie #524 4 years ago

    You would have to be a ibecile (or a Eurogamer Xbox owner/reviewer) to actually believe the Xbox version is better.

    3 very good reasons why the PS3 version is superior:

    1/ Load times (Vastly shorter on PS3, thank to mandatory install)
    2/ Popup (MUCH less Popup on PS3, virtually non-existant)
    3/ Significantly better looking, despite the slightly lower resolution.

    Check these screenshots out, if you want to see clearly how biased EuroGamer are:

    [link url=http://www3. telus.net/public/dhwag/C.jpg
    ]http://www3. telus.net/public/dhwag/C.jpg
    [/link]

    http://www3. telus.net/public/dhwag/D.jpg

  • Yaz #525 4 years ago

    mgillespie wrote: "You would have to be a ibecile"

    Oh the irony. ;)

    "3 very good reasons why the PS3 version is superior:
    1/ Load times (Vastly shorter on PS3, thank to mandatory install)"

    A few seconds off is not VASTLY shorter, it's a little shorter but hardly make or break for anyone playing the game. Great to have (at the expense of some disk space), but please don't exaggerate the differences.

    "2/ Popup (MUCH less Popup on PS3, virtually non-existant)"

    From my understanding, popup differences are not as noticeable on the ground, I believe it's more of an issue when flying over the city, which accounts for a fraction of the gameplay.

    "3/ Significantly better looking, despite the slightly lower resolution."

    Firstly, no-one plays the game at 2x or 4x magnification (incredible I know, but true :)), secondly, opinions are divided between gamers who prefer the higher resolution but dithered 360 graphics or the lower resolution but blurrier PS3 graphics with a slightly worse framerate.

    EDIT: As this is your first post, welcome to Eurogamer. :)
    Edited by 3 at 21/05/08 @ 00:27

  • IneptPercy #526 4 years ago

    I must say me and a few mates got together with both versions and overall we concluded the 360 version looked the best, I will admit I don't own a PS3 but we had an even mix of owners of both consoles and we all tried to look subjectively, as it was it was a 54" screen too so we did have a good look.

    As mentioned there was none of this screen grabbing and magnifying etc it was purely get them both in action and see how they both run and which has the better overall look.

    For some reason the textures for Nicos head seem to be worse on the PS3 and it was noticeable that frame rate drops seemed harsher and it looked jaggier.

    We came up with the only reason to buy the PS3 version was if you didn't own a 360, if you can use any console then the 360 is they way to go, plus the extra content could be fun aswell.

  • ScrewYouHippy #527 4 years ago

    LAST!

  • anomagnus #528 4 years ago

    NOT QUITE!

    LAST!

  • Verwandlung #529 4 years ago

    A new Gta ?!

  • ScrewYouHippy #530 4 years ago

    Cheeky Attempt #2

    LAST!

  • bitesize #531 4 years ago


    it's not gonna work...

  • Yaz #532 4 years ago

    FIRST!

  • TRUTH #533 4 years ago

    1. Framerate - better on 360
    2. Textures - more detailed on 360
    3. Pop up - well hardly noticeable comparing the 2 consoles.
    4. Loading - very slightly better on PS3.
    5. Lighting - slightly better on 360.
    6. Cost - can be found cheaper on 360.
    7. Online - 360 wins
    8. Exclusive Content - 360 wins

  • Jepas27 #534 4 years ago

    well, i really think i prefer the xbox 360 version... i bought it because it was 5 euros cheaper than the ps3 version(i own both consoles)... but theres something that makes me wonder, all multiplatform games for PS3, are actually ports from xbox 360... wich means PS3 could have done better if the game was an exclusive... using blu-ray data and cell chip processor... what if the multiplatform games for xbox 360 were ports from PS3?... it seems multiplatform games are adapted to the xbox hardware and then readapted for PS3, and none of the multiplatform explores the Ps3 hardware at its limits...

    its just a theory, i may be wrong... besides, i love both systems for the exclusives both have... but if i want to buy a multiplatform game, its allways for 360...

  • tnomad #535 4 years ago

    I'm a 360 owner with the 360 version of GTAIV but these troll fest articles are always the same. Any slight issue on the PS3 is blown out of all proportion and any slight issue on the 360 is claimed to be insignificant. To call Richard a little biased I think would be an understatement. The difference is always so minor it comes down to personal opinion of which strangely he always sides on the 360.

    I like the 360 but these articles are SHIT SHIT SHIT SHIT!!!!

  • Jepas27 #536 4 years ago

    Totally agree with you, tnomad... actually these console wars are really convenient to these magazines/media, they maintain the discussion and of course, readers are allways stimulated with this type of articles... it seems that we are the market target as allways, and the only one that benefits with this futile crap, are the console magazines... like george orwell would describe we're sheep manipulated by dogs...

  • Madafunkola #537 4 years ago

    LAST!




    ?

  • carlborrowman #538 4 years ago

    XBox 360 vs PS3, not only DLC in GTA IV, but more exclusives for the rest of the year:

    http://ww w.digitalmagazine.com.au/2008/0...

  • ElMariachiPJO #539 4 years ago

    This was a perfectly done comparision. Nice work Eurogamer.

    I have both versions played on a great HDTV(34" Sony XBR960, crt with great blacks..and superb detail), and each version has it's advantages.

    The main differences are these:

    -The 360 version is more sharper and clearer while the PS3 is using a blurry like filter across the screen. It's also rendered in 720p w/2X FSAA(the PS3 is rendered in 640p w/no FSAA) and it's colors are more precise.

    -The 360 version has an ugly dithering problem of which makes the signs look pixelated and unalligned. The PS3 is using a post processing filter to clean up the dithering of the 360 version, and it makes the whole image quality, more cleaner overall.
    The PS3 uses a yellow like tint(the 360 uses a blue tint), which gives the game a more 'movie' look and is more realistic looking then the more cartoon like look of the 360.


    On paper the 360 should have the edge with it's 720p and 2XFSAA, but it's has bad shadow and texture dithering which can make it look downright ugly at times.

    The brighter/warmer look of the PS3 version looks more movie like and less cartoon like, but it results in more unprecise color production.

    So in a nutshell, both versions have pro's and con's, and have a different graphical look to each.

    Both versions have a different style and after playing each version 15hrs in, if you had to ask me which version is better graphically, i'd still say it's a wash.

  • Jepas27 #540 4 years ago

    carborrowman

    sincerely, in my honest opinion, i prefer the PS3 exclusives... MGS4, Final Fantasy XIII, little big planet... and the ps3 list is not complete... what about final fantasy versus XIII, disgaea...? and half of the games for Xbox can be played in a good PC...xbox 360 does not have such great games coming out, the good games are already in stores... and it depends alot on the opinion of every gamer, wich console has better exclusives...

  • DAN.E.B #541 4 years ago

    I have both! the 360 is the best console by a mile!

    That is all.

  • mike_mgoblue #542 4 years ago

    95% of multiplatform games have either "noticably" or "significantly" better graphics on the Xbox 360, so it isn't a surprise that Grand Theft Auto 4 is also noticably better on the Xbox 360.

    Plus, the Xbox 360 version is significantly better in terms of online play, because there are so many people to play with on Xbox Live, and you can always play with your friends.

    Also, the Xbox 360 version of Grand Theft Auto 4 is the only version that will receive the two extra episodes available for download later in the year. Each episode will add 10 hours of gameplay to Grand Theft Auto 4...and the Xbox 360 version also has cool Achievements to unlock.

    Higher resolution, smoother framerate, extra episodes, more people to play online with, and achievements make it so the Xbox 360 easily has the best version of Grand Theft Auto ever released.

  • onedeadcop #543 4 years ago

    hmm.

    as i have no doubt many people have said before, i think ultimately the best system will be the [before you comment back, make sure you have read the whole comment, eh?] playstation 3, for several reasons;

    a) i may be wrong, but i am under the impression that the playstation 3 was the more "powerful" system (if only slightly). as the systems age i think the developers etc. will find more and more ways to exploit the additional capabilities leading to better games

    b) it's no longer super-expensive (compared to xbox 360, considering it (or, they both) does a lot more than play games)

    c) blu-ray may turn out to make the games better quality, if only because they're longer etc.

    d) one of the main problems with the ps3 was that it had "no games", but i expect this will become less of a problem as the developers "get used to" the hardware or software or whatever it is that makes it harder to produce games for

    e) xbox 360's reputation has been permanently tarnished (whether it had a good one in the first place is debatable) by the RROD; regardless of whether they sort it out, people will hold out on it


    personally i think the wii did the best. realistically it's the only one that did anything truly innovative.


    however, in spite of all that, i'm going to buy a 360 in the next few weeks :p

  • nick_ps308 #544 4 years ago

    Whats up chaps. Online arguments are fantastic. One month before this game was due to come out (back in 1989 or whenever) i strolled down to Comet and splashed out the best part of my inheritance on a PS3 thinking it was the best option. The whole PS3 vs XBOX 360 argument upsets me because from what i've picked up (sweeping statement alert) the 360 seems to have the edge.

    Anywho, i've got the ps3 version of the game and its fantastic... i would give it 10 out of 10 but i'm raging that the 360 version has the (very small) upper hand. I was clinging to the old view that R* loves the ps.. as with gta III + VC + SA.

    Good on you 360 owners... although a common pro ps3 viewpoint is that we know that by late 2008 the 360 will be obsolete and the ps3 will be the man... i don't see it.

    love you all.

  • Mavole #545 4 years ago

    Most of Ps3's inferiority is it's community. It seems 70% of Ps3 users are mentally deficient trolls who try so hard yet fail so bad.

    Thats truth and if there are some intelligent Ps3 users, they deserve a damn medal.

    I would also like to know how this whole Xbox360 hate thing happens. Does a full moon appear when you buy a Ps3? Do you see the Playstation symbol? Does it transform you into a troll? Or is it something that happens randomly? Like, brainwash.

    Honestly. Everywhere i go theres one or two Ps3 fanboys bashing. Give it a bloody rest.

    Late 2008 Ps3 will be the man? Don't make me laugh.

  • Les #546 4 years ago

    @ Mavole

    Not really sure if trolling to rage about other people trolling is the answer...Might want to check out your own mental faculties...

    I think this article could better have focussed on comparing GTA IV with GTA III. Differences (apart from graphics) would have been just as small. Which should be rather damning IMO. Don't believe the hype, again. Though judging by sales figures most of you did... :(

  • Mavole #547 4 years ago

    @Lex

    I think it is the answer. What else do you expect me to do? Agree with them? Laugh with them? They annoy the hell out of me. It's like constantly listening to a child shout the same thing for over an hour.

  • ScrewYouHippy #548 4 years ago

    LAST!

  • JimboTHX1138 #549 3 years ago

    Very nice article indeed.

    I don't care much for the 360 vs PS3 fan wars. However I do own a PS3 myself.

    Reading the article I conclude that there is not much in it and are both superb. With the 360 having the edge in looks/sharpness. BUT does anyone else think that it's mainly due to 360 being the lead platform rather than due to better hardware knowing what the cell is capable off. Something just tells me that if PS3 was easier to code for and/or the lead platform that the PS3 wouldn't need to be lower res etc. That's the way I see it anyway.

    Regardless, nice unbiased article and great website. A breath of fresh air. Cheers!

  • Schaden #550 3 years ago

    I maybe in the minority but to me, the PS3 version looks better. It might have more slow down, but as far as visuals go, I think it edges out the X360. I simply hate that oil painting look to the textures on X360. Watch the first comparison video

    http://ww w.eurogamer.net/tv_video.php?pl...

    around the :28 second mark when Niko gets on the motorcycle. Look at the glowing dash. The speedometer is nice and clear the whole time on PS3. While on X360 you have to admit it looks like a garbled mess.

    The comparison article talks about the X360's "dither" post process effect. There is a thread on B3D saying this is actually a rendering artifact. The edges of the shadows look much better on PS3. Any scene with lots of shadows, like underneath the L-trains looks better on PS3. The distant textures are a bit sharper on X360, but overall, PS3 version is more pleasing to my eyes. Smoothness is a big factor though. And if the X360 has higher fps, that is something to consider.

  • DFawkes #551 3 years ago

    I think I prefer the PS3 version, now my opinion is finally valid since I've seen both in the flesh. Both look great though.

  • Loghorn #552 3 years ago

    LOL. So much for the mighty PS3 being more powerful. Face it, most multiplats on PS platforms are like the horrible Sega Genesis (Mega Drive) multiplats in comparision to SNES (Super Famicon).
    Edited by 1 at 27/08/09 @ 17:29

  • cloudskipa #553 12 months ago

    That was a pretty cowardly article. I've played both version and there is no way the PS3 games "looks as good if not better" in any area of the game. When I first bought it on PS3 I could not believe just how worse it is to the 360 version, it actually put me off from playing, murky, blurry, loads of jaggies, frame drops and horrible resolution.. That's the bottom line, it's a shame you were so afraid to lose readership to tell the truth.