Not to mention the game seems extremely amateurish and sophomoric with regards to the cinematics, dialogue, and overall storytelling. A horror game, of all things, should be able to engross me with a solid directorial and artistic sense.
To me, open-world, nonlinear games offer more a more explorative and engrossing experience, and sometimes more replay value. Linear games are fine the first play-through, but all things equal, they feel more artificial and less compelling to me.
Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time would never have been hailed as one of the greatest games of all time if it was just a linear experience lacking a fully-realized, open overworld.
One game having problems that can be patched, versus millions of systems failing permanently? Why are they even trying to compare the two?
If every ADHD-ridden fanboy and geeknerd on this site would just read the article, and what he says, they'd find that he isn't really slamming the game. No, not so much slamming it as saying that it's not an example of videogames as art.
In terms of movie analogy, GTA games are more akin to your Hollywood summer action movies. Both are fun, entertaining, exciting thrill rides; no one is denying that much. But neither should really be considered "art." Art, or a videogam...
The PS3 version runs at 640p with no FSAA, while 360 version is 720p with 2xMSAA. (Source: Beyond3D.com forums).
I believe the dithering, or "graininess" of the XB360 screenshots is an intentional artistic effect/filter, to probably achieve a more painterly look. To make distant, far-away objects have a slight "oil paint" quality to them. Hardly noticeable to the average eye, as shown here by the fact that you have to zoom in by a factor of 400% to even NOTICE the effect. But it's there nonetheless, and I don't think it's a bad thing.
Actually, I think the PS3 version ha...
Here:
http://forum.beyond3d.com/s...
Quaz51 is the original, reliable pixel counter that everyone references. I asked him to examine some in-game screenshots of MGS4, as well as the April Fool's gameplay video footage, and they all indicate a 665p resolution.
FYI, it's a performance difference in the magnitude of around 200,000 total pixels (do the math). That means that the XB360 is rendering around 200,000 more pixels total per frame than the PS3 version is. This is in addition to the fact that the XB360 version is running with some FSAA, while the PS3 is not. Take it for what it's worth.
Additionally, MGO is confirmed 664p, while current builds of MGS4 are runing at 664p as well. Of course, neither of these resolutions are confirmed for the final builds, because nothing is set in stone until the game is released on store shelves (the resolution could get lower, or higher).
Dude, most of the PS3 games on that list are only UPSCALED 1080p, not native.
For example, The Darkness runs at 576p (1024x576) on the PS3, while the XB360 version runs at full 720p with 4xFSAA. (Source: Beyond3D.com)
Here's something that offers a little opposition to what you claim: MGS4. MGS4 is a PS3-exclusive game, but it only runs at 664p. (Source: Quaz51 at the Beyond3D forums)
This refutes your statement that all PS3-exclusive games are either native 720p or 1080p.
Anyone who doesn't see that the reporter of this news article is a biased PS3 fan, and writing the article description in a biased, pro-PS3 way, needs to wisen up.
This is just pathetic how shadow_hearts (the submitter of this news to N4G.com), or whatever his name is totally corrupting the neutrality and objectivity of N4G, by using it as some form of forum for his PS3-bolstering antics.
So are you suggesting that we move back to the SDTV era? It would certainly ease the developmental pressure on developers, and allow for better graphical effects, at the expense of screen sharpness.
I don't know about you, but I didn't pay a couple grand for my HDTV to play non-HD games.
640p for the PS3 version of GTA4 is fine by me, at least for now, but if I had my way for all games, I'd rather they ALL run in at least 720p minimum. Microsoft and Sony established ...
The reviewers didn't say it looked "sharper," they said it looked "cleaner" and "smoother" because of less apparent aliasing. This is due to the fact that the PS3 version only runs at 640p, a lower/blurrier resolution, thus giving the appearance of less jaggies/smoother image, but also blurring out the details. Like a haze of vaseline. You can arguably achieve the same effect on the XB360 by turning down the Sharpness setting of your TV.
Weird that t...
Actually, the PS3 version has no anti-aliasing (AA), while the XB360 version has 2xAA.
People were just fooled into thinking the PS3 version looked "smoother" or "cleaner" because it runs at a blurrier resolution (640p) and is upscaled, making the image as a whole look blurrier. This has a side-effect of hiding more jaggies, but it also blurs out the details.
Bottom line is, the PS3 version only runs at 640p with no AA, while the 360 version runs ...
The latest tests by Quaz51 at Beyond3D have revealed that the PS3 version HAS NO AA! Compared to 2xMSAA for the XB360 version.
So much for the idea that the PS3 version "has better AA." Looks like it just fooled everyone because the game is 640p, and the lower resolution results in a BLURRIER image overall (thus, looks "smoother," because the BLUR hides jaggies).
Awesomeness.
Not my idea of a good time.
When they say MGS4 "confirmed to run in 720p" they might just mean it's video output is 720p, but the game itself runs in 665p.
Quaz51 himself states that MGS4 probably runs at 665p, based on the April Fools gameplay video and many in-game screenshots.
Looks very good, but need to see more.