By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Another comparison of GTA IV PS3 vs X360

IllegalPaladin on 27 April 2008
DMeisterJ said:
This thread is growing at an alarming rate.

 And growing into what looks like the same stuff as the other threads.. lol, the same people too. 

Whatever, it's an interesting argument that both sides make here. 



Around the Network
DMeisterJ on 27 April 2008
NJ5 said:
NJ5 said:

Here's my version of the score card with all the caveats I can think of:

PS3 wins in:
- Some motion controls.
- Less loading times
- Less pop-in
- Free network play

360 wins in:
- Frame-rate
- Aliasing/paint filter
- No install
- Rumble (unless you have DualShock 3 which will cost you extra)
- Achievements.


Do people agree with this list or not? Anything missing there?

 

 

Everything except frame-rate which they said,"but both versions seemed to regularly run at a similar clip."

And install, which goes hand-in-hand with Pop-in.

 



BCNR34 on 27 April 2008
starcraft said:
starcraft said:
DMeisterJ said:

starcraft said:
So the scorecard:

PS3 wins in:
-SIXAXIS support. (but you'll probably leave it off)
-Loading

-Pop-in

 

360 wins in:
-Frame-rate

-Aliasing/paint filter
-No install
-Rumble
-Achievements.

Note that neither future DLC or future online capabilities are recorded as advantages as all are speculative.


Fix'd.

Meant to put pop-in under the PS3. Rumble is universal on the PS3, whereas it isn't available in the PS3 bundle.

 


Quoted for BCNR's benefit. Keep up buddy.

 "meaning" to do something and actually doing it are 2 completely different things, obviously if you had been an objective person you would have edited your post, but since you are clearly biased beyond belief, you felt it wasn't nessesary.



The_God_of_War on 27 April 2008
starcraft said:
The_God_of_War said:
starcraft said:
The_God_of_War said:
starcraft said:
The_God_of_War said:
Clearly "no install" can't be used as an advantage, it's the reason the 360 is slightly inferior.
I gave the PS3 props for loading and pop-in advantages.........

I know, but you made it sound like "no install" is a good thing for the 360. I can understand a mandatory install being annoying, but it clearly reduces technical issues. Mass Effect could have benefitted from an install and so could GTA 4, from the looks of it.

Accepting that I already gave the PS3 props for the conceivable technical advantages installs bring, how is it not an advantage that 360 owners will play the game the moment they pop it in the console whilst PS3 owners will have to wait around?

 


True, that's an advantage. But the (albeit minor) technical problems it brings are a disadvantage. This whole hard drive install thing a double edged sword if you ask me, perhaps we can agree on that.

We can

 

Good

 



  

TheRealMafoo on 27 April 2008
DOATS1 said:
to be fair, without the install, the ps3 version could have been a train wreck. it being being mandatory says alot more than just minor technical advantages. why not make it optional? i wonder why...

For the same reason every PC games requires an install. Because it would be stupid not to.

You want developers to think like this: 

"Hey look, we have a HD in every console, we could install to the HD and get faster load times, and faster texture loads. Then we can  taylor our engine to expect those load times and deliver a better game. Bah, screw it, let's make it an option, save the people 7 minutes, and deliver a worse game. Yea, I like that idea!"



Around the Network
starcraft on 27 April 2008
DMeisterJ said:
NJ5 said:
NJ5 said:

Here's my version of the score card with all the caveats I can think of:

PS3 wins in:
- Some motion controls.
- Less loading times
- Less pop-in
- Free network play

360 wins in:
- Frame-rate
- Aliasing/paint filter
- No install
- Rumble (unless you have DualShock 3 which will cost you extra)
- Achievements.


Do people agree with this list or not? Anything missing there?

 

Everything except frame-rate which they said,"but both versions seemed to regularly run at a similar clip."

And install, which goes hand-in-hand with Pop-in.

 

The review highlighted a DIFFERENCE in the console's ability to maintain a constant frame-rate.  It said the difference was marginal, but that the 360 does it better.  By the logic you are using, the IGN review should be taken as showing both games are equivelant, as there wasn't a significant enough difference to justify different scores.

Pop-in reduction is an advantage of having completed an install.  Not having to sit through an install is an entirely seperate advantage. 

 



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

DOATS1 on 27 April 2008
TheRealMafoo said:
DOATS1 said:
to be fair, without the install, the ps3 version could have been a train wreck. it being being mandatory says alot more than just minor technical advantages. why not make it optional? i wonder why...

For the same reason every PC games requires an install. Because it would be stupid not to.

You want developers to think like this: 

"Hey look, we have a HD in every console, we could install to the HD and get faster load times, and faster texture loads. Then we can  taylor our engine to expect those load times and deliver a better game. Bah, screw it, let's make it an option, save the people 7 minutes, and deliver a worse game. Yea, I like that idea!"


so....why not make it optional??? people who want to install, will install, people who don't want to, don't have to.




Press_the_Button on 27 April 2008
IllegalPaladin said:
DMeisterJ said:
This thread is growing at an alarming rate.

 And growing into what looks like the same stuff as the other threads.. lol, the same people too. 

Whatever, it's an interesting argument that both sides make here. 


Tell me about this thread growing. I'd read the others and throught people would have got bored of arguing and this thread would die a quiet death as a result.

 Alas, I step away from my PC for 5 minutes and 20 comments get added!



I am largely platform agnostic. I fail to understand why some people get overly fanboyish about what is an inanimate piece of electronics that's obsolete even before it's launched, when there are far more important things to champion, such as preventing environmental destruction or preventing millions of people dying unnecessarily from illnesses. This fact however, doesn’t mean I am not someone who doesn’t enjoy gaming as a pastime (as I have done for the last 20 years) or doesn’t have a strong interest in how the market is evolving – hence my presence on this site.

Platforms owned – PC, DS, X-Box 360, PS3, PSP and Wii.

FJ-Warez on 27 April 2008
NJ5 said:
NJ5 said:

Here's my version of the score card with all the caveats I can think of:

PS3 wins in:
- Some motion controls.
- Less loading times
- Less pop-in
- Free network play

360 wins in:
- Frame-rate
- Aliasing/paint filter
- No install
- Rumble (unless you have DualShock 3 which will cost you extra)
- Achievements.


Do people agree with this list or not? Anything missing there?

 


I agree, but you know... now this is some kind of pointless war...



By me:

Made with Blender + LuxRender
"Since you can´t understand ... there is no point to taking you seriously."
DMeisterJ on 27 April 2008
starcraft said:
DMeisterJ said:
NJ5 said:
NJ5 said:

Here's my version of the score card with all the caveats I can think of:

PS3 wins in:
- Some motion controls.
- Less loading times
- Less pop-in
- Free network play

360 wins in:
- Frame-rate
- Aliasing/paint filter
- No install
- Rumble (unless you have DualShock 3 which will cost you extra)
- Achievements.


Do people agree with this list or not? Anything missing there?

 

Everything except frame-rate which they said,"but both versions seemed to regularly run at a similar clip."

And install, which goes hand-in-hand with Pop-in.

 

The review highlighted a DIFFERENCE in the console's ability to maintain a constant frame-rate.  It said the difference was marginal, but that the 360 does it better.  By the logic you are using, the IGN review should be taken as showing both games are equivelant, as there wasn't a significant enough difference to justify different scores.

Pop-in reduction is an advantage of having completed an install.  Not having to sit through an install is an entirely seperate advantage. 

 


Yes, a game that gives you ~100 hours of gameplay, plus Multiplayer, having to wait 440 seconds is a disadvantage...  okay.