GTA IV runs at lower resolution on PS3 than on 360

Interesting, as it seems universally agreed that the PS3 version looks marginally better.

There’s stuff in that thread that makes my brain bleed.

Beauty isn’t all about the pixel count.

Oh, and I believe brains hemorrhages rather than plain bleed

Tell that to Quaz51.

*farty noise smily*

*faints*

I’m not sure I could ever care if something ran at a lower resolution that something else unless it made a major difference to the way it looked. Which it evidently doesn’t in this case.

I love the way they zoom into 400% to examine the dithering, do they actually enjoy PLAYING games?

These guys are real hardcore and about twenty levels above my cognitive abilities.

They outed Halo 3 too for the same ‘crime’.

Is it the same guys? BAck for another round of 15MB of fame…

Axle: The guy doing that is a notorious fanboy over there. They aren’t all that nuts… though most are!

Could some admin check their job application email. I sent one about 2 weeks ago but haven’t got a reply. I imagine they don’t get many emails so don’t check often.

But yeah, it still seems the PS3 version is better in graphics.

I would take a guess that the reason the PS3 version looks better is because its running at a lower res. Thats a little less processing going to resolution and a little more to graphical effects.

Its a real shame to be honest if this is in fact true. The PS3 advertises itself as the HD console when yet one of the biggest games of the year doesn’t even run at 720p native. Not a dig but its like what happened with Halo 3. You would expect these types of games to run at least at 720p.

…except isn’t this game proving that running games at 720p is fairly pointless, other than to put it as a bulletpoint on the box?

If the 360 version runs at 720p, and the PS3 version runs at 630p and looks better, then why on earth should all games run at 720p?

Because every game is different?

GTA IV applies a HUGE amount of post-processing to the basic image. You can see it in those 400% blow-ups on the page linked on the main story.

The last Eurogamer face-off shows Viking on 360 (1280×720) and PS3 (960×720) and it’s pretty damn obvious which looks better. The same feature also has Dark Sector which looks virtually identical even though the 360 game has 20% more resolution.

Horses for courses, basically.

It’s worth pointing out that Quaz51 – who is unerringly accurate on these things – hasn’t yet played either game and you’ll note he asks in that thread for like-for-like screenshots for a proper comparison.

Because isn’t that the whole point of buying these consoles like the 360 and the PS3 because they run at 720p and 1080p. There HD consoles why aren’t the biggest games for those consoles running at 720p. Not that the average Joe will know the difference it just brings up questions why games like GTA 4 or Halo 3 have to run at that resolution. Only answer is performance which is fine but 720p is the standard and starting HD resolution.

Since GTAIV and Halo 3 are two of the best games in recent history, I don’t see why it matters.

Yeah. High resolution doesn’t a great game make. The opposite is also true. And the polar opposite for that matter.

Or to make it easier for you. Resolution has little bearing on game quality. But it’s not an exclusive or for that matter.

so if A = HiRes and B = great game we would get something along the lines of

A B
1 1
0 1
1 0
0 0

And all being true… Where is my maths book when I need it.
I think I have to pair it of with C or something

Ironically, one of the most rational responses to this news that I’ve read recently is:

“76.9 less doodads means 12% drop in kajiggers. How can the game possibly be any fun knowing this?”

*laughs*

Just shows the whole pixel counting shite is shite

EDIT: You might want to contact R* confirmation, fair bit of fanboy confusion out there

Oh noes! It’s teh END!