Rockstar: Getting GTA IV on PS3 more challenging than Xbox 360
By Dave Parrack
Grand Theft Auto IV is a mere five days away, and not only are gamers around the world eager to play the game, they are eager to see which console handles the demanding gameplay and graphics better.
Yesterday, we spoke about the game and which console was going to be the best choice to play it on. I ended the article by urging everyone, no matter what their allegiance, to just buy the game, and play it to death, as the chances are both versions will be the same.
However, Rockstar Games founder Sam Houser has admitted that the development of the game was different for both consoles, and even if the end result is near as damn the same, the PS3 version was more challenging than the Xbox version.
In an interview with 1UP, which has only recently been published in full, Houser explained the different hardware issues which initially saw the game’s release being delayed by months.
“Both machines are absolutely fantastic, but they both come with strengths and weaknesses.”
“Getting things running on the PS3 initially was challenging. I think it was challenging for a lot of companies, but it’s also a machine where, now that we’ve got comfortable with it — I don’t want to say we’ve cracked it, but we’ve got comfortable with it — we know we can make our games.”
“We’re at a point now where the games pretty much look identical side by side. There’s a slight difference in the way they look. I think that’s to do with really low-level technical stuff that I’m not the guy to explain.”
“The 360 games have a certain look to them; PS3 games have a certain look to them. I like the way [the PS3] renders. There’s a certain kind of softness without being blurry — some warmth to it — and then there’s a certain more clinical element to how the 360 looks. Both have plusses and minuses. As far as I’m concerned, they’re neck and neck now.”
So initially, the Playstation 3 was a hard nut for Rockstar to crack, with Sony’s console being much harder to develop for than the Xbox 360, which was described as “very, very accessible”.
This isn’t the first time we’ve heard this however, with some companies bemoaning the complexity of developing games for the PS3, when the Xbox 360 offers a simple, familiar and effective environment to work with due to it being built on PC standards by Microsoft.
At the end of the day despite any early struggles, it seems Rockstar have backed up my thoughts that GTA IV will be almost identical on both the PS3 and Xbox 360, so it doesn’t matter a jot which console it’s played on.
Related:
Stumble It!
Tips N4G
April 24th, 2008
paraphrased - the 360 version will look cleaner and crisper and the ps3 will look soft…. i’ll take clean and crisp.
April 24th, 2008
We don’t need your paraphrasing kevin, we can read the truth up there in blue, no one needs your spin.
Besides, doesn’t this quote imiply that the 360 version is blurry?
“I like the way [the PS3] renders. There’s a certain kind of softness without being blurry”
Doesn’t sound to me like the 360 version is going to be “crisp”
April 24th, 2008
@ kevin
I dont care which system handles GTA 4 the best… its a great game and Ill play it in any console I want… because they are basically going to be the same thing…
But sisnce you added your little stupid “twist”… Ill add mine as well…
Tell me again why the 360 is a next-gen console if it still uses DVDs which are Previous Gen technology???
April 24th, 2008
the article never said it was clean and crisp, thats your take on the article, what was said however was the 360 version was “clinical” and the ps3 was “warm” and “nicely rendered”.
April 24th, 2008
wait for it kiddies. the reviews will have the 360 having better graphics. one has to wonder tho; if the ps3 is REALLY that more powerful than the 360, why isn’t it showing yet? it’s funny darkwhitehair hypes bluray when better visuals are coming out on dvd. kinda proves that blooooray is as pointless for graphics as the ps3 is. clinical = tighter. the fact they’re whining about the “challenging” ps3 architecture PRE-LAUNCH should tell you something. it’s what developers always do when graphics don’t match the hype. it’s funny that the term “warm” has never been introduced in gaming before… until now. oh well…we’ll see soon enough… gerry - he was referring to the ps3’s “softness”. another word for blurry textures. watch.
April 24th, 2008
This pains me greatly, but I have to agree with Kevin’s interpretation of the graphical differences between the games. I interpreted it pretty much the same way. Still, we’ll all see. Native 1080p can work wonders, if you’re rich enough to have that kind of tv.
It’s pretty clear that developers prefer working on the 360 because of its PC base. It’s simple and easy. And as long as games lead on the 360, multi-plats will always tilt, graphically speaking, in the 360s favor. I’ve always assumed that devs would eventually “figure out” the PS3 architecture, in much the same way they “figured out” the original Xbox around the end of its life-cycle. But in this industry, there really are no guarantees.
-Arvis
April 24th, 2008
funny that kevin assumes his opinion is fact “its funny darkwhitehair hypes bloooray when better visuals are coming out on dvd”. WTF? if you want to think that then go ahead, but dont present them as facts to which you dont give any sign your presenting your OPINION not fact. Oh and why arent the ps3’s power showing through yet? thats because theres been longer development time on 360. game develpers will soon switch to ps3, hopefully, when exclusives like mgs4, little big planet and gt5 are released on ps3. These titles will present the power available on ps3.
April 24th, 2008
jd - you’re going to use the “hidden power” excuse that the ps2 used? c’mon… the storage medium isn’t what produces the superior graphics of the 360. it the Unified Shader Architecture, better allocation of RAM, and the extra ram embedded on the gpu. it has nothing to do with (regardless of what arvis says) “pc based”. Arvis - the xbox proved its power at LAUNCH with Halo and PGR. Easily head and shoulder above anything else on the market on consoles. oh well… bloooray has Talladega Nights…that’s GOTTA be worth something…
April 24th, 2008
Kevin,
I was referring to muti-plats looking better on Xbox during (roughly) the last two-years of its life. Not exclusives. PS3 exclusives easily look as good or better than 360 exclusives, but of course this is a matter of opinion, since graphical fidelity has become so crazy-good that you can’t really say for sure that one game looks “better” than another when talking about the super-top-tier games.
And yes, developers use a very familiar PC-based system to program games which works very well with the 360s architecture. Of course, I wasn’t making any kind of reference to graphics when I brought this up, just mentioning that it is easier to develop on the 360.
You know, you’d make a great Inquisitor.
-Arvis
April 24th, 2008
the 360 version is going to be better. too bad for the ps3 owners who once again get the inferior multi platform game.
April 24th, 2008
Along with Kevin, I am also eagerly waiting for the reviews to confirm the 360 version is better. Maybe that will shut the PS3 fanboys up about this game once and for all.
April 25th, 2008
How do YOU know the 360 version is going to be better?? Did you make the game?? Did you play it?? Keep your stupid assinine retarded comments to yourself…
I know that the 360 version will have additional missions… I understand that.. if I was living in the US I would buy the 360 version… but since Im not.. and I dont have access to LIVe.. so Im gonna buy the PS3 version.. ( also because Im not gonna buy the Pirated 360 version… GTA is worth the ORIGINAL version)
I happen to like the 360 a LOT… (like LIVE which I had access to for a month) but I have to keep proving your stupid conjectures wrong… and then people think Im a fanboy…
Even though kevins statement was filled with Indian food wrapped in a used diaper… I started thinking.. WHY does the 360 games look so good even though they use DVDs??
Then I remembered… before the dawn of the “next-gen” the developers and the Critics said.. the games that REALLY pushed the limit of the PS2 was the games Black and God of War 2… these games came out 5-6 years AFTER the console was released… so we can assume that it took them that long to get accustomed to that technology and actually push it to the limit…
In comes the 360… it doesnt have a new format… its easy to develope for… and the developers were already familiar with the DVD system… so they could take advantage of the extra RAM and the graphics card
The PS3 has a new CD format.. the Blu-ray is a completely different format from the HD dvd and DVD… (the HD DVD had a similar format to DVD)
and it has the SIXAXIS… so it is a new technology for the developers to master.. so you cant expect them dish out games with “out-of the world” graphics… you have to give them time…
And let me see if I rememeber this correctly.. but when was GTA EVER about graphics??? this is a game about free roaming and killing cops… thats all I care about… I want good graphics in games like HALO or Crysis or God of War…
Microsoft decided to play it safe… make a console that was basically of the same design as the last one… which was a great idea… and it was great for their biggest weapon… LIVE…
whereas Sony took chances.. they created something totally new with no connection to their previous consoles…
Both of the consoles have pros and cons… so deal with it and stpop claiming one to be better than another one…
But at the end of the day… after kevin and other 360 fanboys’ silly comments… someone has yet to answer my question…
How is it a next-gen if you use previous gen technology?
and
What happens to the Elite owners who are stuck with obsolete hardware??
and
WHEN IS GOD OF WAR !!! GOING TO COME OUT???
April 25th, 2008
The 360 will be much better. The key phrase in that statement is “The 360 games have a certain look to them; PS3 games have a certain look to them”. Well that is so true the past has shown that the 360 always has the better look and graphics. There is always this bluryness to PS3 Games mean while the 360 games just look crisp, clear, not bright as the sun, no jagges, Better shadows and colour. I believe that he is just saying that because really Rockstar wants the game to sell on the PS3 too not just the 360. It is very obvious that getting the 360 version make the most sence but they have to support the PS3 too otherwise making the game for the PS3 and delaying the huge Christmas sale would have been a huge waste of time and money.
April 25th, 2008
I can say with great confidence that Kevin and winner have to be the biggest xbox fanboi’s I have seen for a long time…The game hasn’t even come out and they are hailing the 360 as the far superior game. Here’s an idea, how bout waiting the game to actually be released and then you play it on both formats then make an informed choice and then maybe some people here may take your mindless opinions with more than a pinch of salt…….
Me personally, when it comes to performance, gameplay and graphical performance, both systems are pretty well on par. My only problem with 360, (personal opinion) is the reliability issues it has suffered.
April 25th, 2008
i said the 360 version will be better. not winner. get your facts straight. and anyway we are reading between the lines fed to us from rockstar. they all but indicated the 360 version will look better. call us fanboys, but we’ll be fanboys playing a superior version of the game.
April 25th, 2008
Wu tang,
No doubt that, in the end, the 360 will have the better version. But by the time you guys have your DLC, most PS3 owners will have moved on to Metal Gear Solid and LittleBigPlanet. So it’s actually good for Rockstar to have the DLC on the 360 only, since they’ve already made millions off of it, and it will sell better than it would have on the PS3 since PS3 owners will have so many more games to spend their money on come August than 360 owners.
See? Anyone can make baseless sweeping statements and pass them off as fact.
-Arvis
April 25th, 2008
“clinical” to me means cold and disconnected. It’s not a good descriptor at all and nothing you want attached to your brand.
April 25th, 2008
winner - the ps3 fanboys won’t admit anything. the VAST majority of multiplats are clearly better looking on the 360. The fanboys forgot about their “ps3 has more powah” theory when this happens and change excuses to “they had more time on the 360″. Now, with the parallel development of both the 360 and ps3 with the new GTA, it’ll be clear which gives better graphics. Rule of thumb is the better the gpu, the better the graphics. sony has never hyped their gpu. the reason is; it’s using outdated technology while the 360 uses next gen technology in their gpu with Unified shader architecture. even pc gpu are moving to this. pfreak - how can a graphic seem “cold and disconnected”. that’s the lamest excuse i’ve seen since spidey’s. clinical means clean and crisp.
CAD - the reason for the ps3’s blurriness is that full scene anti aliasing (fsaa) is not done on the ps3’s hardware, but has to be programmed ingame, taxing resources, eating space, creating new challenges, and never quite being up to par.
arvis - you have no data supporting 51% of ps3 owners (most ps3 owners) will be buying mgs4. given history, they’ll be lucky to sell 2 million. btw; sony has never stated they have more games releasing than ms. gotta link?
darkwhitehair- to answer your question the “next gen technology” the 360 has over the ps3 is the next gen gpu. a storage medium is only that. a storage space. one has to wonder, how next gen the storage medium truly is when supposed last gen technology offers better gameplay and graphics than “next gen” formats? you lost all cred when you said the 360 (tricore w/ detachable hdd) is the same design as last gen’s xbox (one core, integrated hdd).
i can’t wait to read the excuses why a console with “more powah” and BLOOOORAY can’t match the performance of the 360 and “last gen technology”.
April 25th, 2008
‘whereas Sony took chances.. they created something totally new with no connection to their previous consoles…” - funniest quote ever consider kuturagi claimed the ps3 was designed the way it was BECAUSE of the ps2′ success as a movie player. gawd…you know it’s bad when you don’t even know the history of the console you’re so rabid about… LOL…
April 25th, 2008
Kevin
I already knew that I just never stated it. They did not do anti aliasing on the PS2 and then they make the same mistake and did not do it on the PS3. They were to “Cell” Minded and Blurayed to think about something so important.
April 25th, 2008
Kevin,
My post was satirical. I don’t actually believe that.
-Arvis
April 25th, 2008
arvis - oops. missed it. hard to detect satire and sarcasm sometimes. so many posts are disquised as fact.
April 25th, 2008
@ kevin
How do you know that the PS3 version will be blurry?? Any proof that ANYONE has said that GTA 4 in PS3 will be blurry???
THanks for answering my question.. I admit he 360 has that GPU… it has more RAM… this is fine now.. but later on when games get bigger in size.. what will they do???
and you carefully didnt answer my second question.. I wonder why???
April 25th, 2008
how can it be cold & clinical? oh i don’t know, you ever see cold and clinical art? a lot of people refer to games as art. you ever see a room that just has a cold, clinical look to it? sort of like a doctors office or a hospital or mortuary. cold and clinical is how i would describe them, not crisp & clean. if he meant crisp & clean he would have said it. he’s talking about the graphical look not a can of 7up.
April 25th, 2008
darkwhitehair - what about when games get bigger? this is pure speculation. who’s paying the developers for their extra manhours for these “bigger games”? so far, no game is any longer than last gen’s games, so the point of bluray is still not proven.
pfreak - just point out any game that hypes itself as “warm” graphics. they’re all going for the cleanest, tightest graphics possible. clean = clinical. the lack of fsaa by the ps3 is what keeps it from creating graphics on par with the 360. as developers further exploit the superior gpu and memory of the 360, expect the gap to widen over ps3 graphics. after all the ps3 was not designed as a game console as the paramount consideration.
April 25th, 2008
Kevin,
Something about the way you worded that last post has given me pause.
I don’t know if you would agree, but I have noticed that the PS3 is better than the 360 when it comes to the performance and convenience of multimedia functions, whereas (all evidence considered) the 360 seems to do that whole “playing games” thing better as far sharp graphics go. Now, considering what these two consoles were DESIGNED to do, it kinda makes sense that we find ourselves in this position right now. If the 360 was designed with amazing graphics in mind, then it would make sense that its multimedia functions would seem somewhat like an afterthought. Same with the PS3: Since it was designed for multimedia use, then as a consequence it would be more difficult for developers to get multi-plats to look as good on the system (with a few exceptions i.e. Oblivion, Burnout).
So why does everyone seem so surprised that each console is better at what it was designed to do?
-Arvis
April 25th, 2008
arvis - the ONLY “media” features the ps3 that the 360 doesn’t is the bluray drive. where is the LlamaSoft music visualizer that’s on the 360? where is the 100% custom soundtrack capability on the ps3? what about the the seemless integration between pc and 360 with media extender? no such thing exists on the ps3 where you stream your mp3’s into games. the ps3 was designed as a movie player. but if it makes you feel better to call it “multi media”, okay. the architecture was not designed for gaming, but bluray movie playback and online integration. the fact sony turned their backs on their “120 million loyal” gamers has got to hurt. Could be why most gamers are not buying the ps3. if sony would have concentrated on gaming, they may have stood a chance this gen. but alas, greed can be fatal as sony is learning. anyway, i agree with what you say to a point: as a bluray player the ps3 is about the best on the market for the price. For gaming and online gaming, not so much.
April 25th, 2008
Kevin,
I feel you on the “custom soundtracks” issue. I thought my PS3 would have that feature standard by now. But patience is a virtue, especially for this generation of consoles.
I have to say, though, that I consider the PS3 to be much more adept at streaming media from a PC, since standard wi-fi means that the console is ready, out of the box, to receive and process information in a wireless network. My best football buddy (go Dolphins, try not to suck!) just bought a PS3, and this feature is one of the first ones he used.
-Arvis
April 25th, 2008
arvis - don’t lie. the ps3 is ready for little “out of the box”. it requires updates, updates and more updates. the ps3 doesn’t stream media ingame. patience is NOT a virtue when you’re spending $600 for a movie player and it’s unfair to expect gamers to be patience. so i have to wonder; what “media” do you stream thru your pc to your ps3?
April 25th, 2008
Kevin,
I stream your mom from my pc to my PS3.
God, I’m hilarious.
To be honest, though, I don’t use that feature, since it’s not something I ever felt like I needed. I’ll ask my football buddy what he’s using for (probably to watch bootlegged videos, since he’s such a freakin pirate).
Also, the PS3 needs ONE update when you first connect it to the network. Whatever the latest firmware is.
And patience is a virtue for all three consoles:
PS3 - Home and in-game XMB, dammit!
360 - Give me back my broken console so I can play Mass Effect, dammit!
Wii - give me a good game without Mario, dammit!
-Arvis
April 26th, 2008
@ kevin
ohh so Sony is concentrating on EVERYTHING but the games… what would you call the “Netflix-LIVE” deal?? Youre telling me the 360 ISNT trying to become a movie-player/TIVO??
Yes the PS3 requires updates… so WHAT?? That just shows improvement… it shows that the consumers can get more out of their console later on and not have to pay for it…
Ohh and games NEVER get bigger… thats why the Playstation NEVER had a game with more than one CDs… if the games are going to have better graphics they are bound to get bigger…
You cant stream PC to PS3… yet… atleast they are trying to improve their consoles by providing updates… meanwhile you cant browse the net on the 360 (When is that update coming??)
You still havent answered my second question kevin… and Im getting tired and impatient…
April 26th, 2008
kevin,
u obviously have never played on the ps3 because you’d know that when you connect to the psn, you only need 1 installation, as arvis pointed out. That update takes AT THE MOST 5 minutes, however it never has taken 5 minutes, even though i do it wirelesssly, which apparently has a really laggy network which doesnt happen and is made up by 360 fanboys.
also, if i wanted to stream anything of my pc to my ps3, i’d use a usb stick, which i have done to upload my music/pictures off of my pc.
April 26th, 2008
DarkWhiteHair,
Uh… yeah, you can stream from the PC to the PS3. I’ve seen it happen. With my own eyes. It works great.
This is why I sometimes question your posts… that and all the ellipses.
-Arvis
April 26th, 2008
CORRECTION: Did you mean streaming media in game? Yeah, I wouldn’t know if it can do that… but… I can’t really think of a reason why anyone would want to…
Anyways, apologies if that is, in fact, what you meant, but you weren’t exactly clear on the issue.
-Arvis
April 26th, 2008
IGN says GTA4 looks better on the PS3:
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/869/869381p5.html
April 26th, 2008
I cant connect my ps3 online so I didnt know about the streaming.. sorry…
April 26th, 2008
Kevin,
The way you are defending the 360’s “honor”, i gotta tell ya, Microsoft should share their profits with you or at least include you in one of their commercials . But they’re not.
And you are admiring graphics soo much. Lemme tell ya, if u think ur 360 is next gen cuz of “graphics” think again, Its atleast 3generations behind the pc, which for me is absolutely the most powerful gaming machine there is.. Just look at Crysis for gods sake, (oh wait, u can’t cuz ur liiiitle 360’s “apparently super” gpu can’t handle it).
And I dont know where the hell you got the idea that the 360 version is gonna have better graphics Kevin. Hell even rockstar said both versions are identical. Unless you are a rockstar
employee ur in no position to make a statement like that. I suppose you saw some low quality gtaIV footage on Youtube nd thought
“This must be the Ps3 verison. Wait i’ll download some HD footage of the 360 version from gamespot and see what that looks like. Yees this looks much crisper than the ps3 footage i saw on Youtube”
April 26th, 2008
Nomad,
Yeah, you can have a PC gaming rig with graphics better than those on the 360… for about $3000.
-Arvis
April 27th, 2008
IGN SAYS-
“For those wanting to know which version looks better, the edge goes to the PS3. The textures and framerate are comparable, but the PS3 has far less pop-in. The PS3 has better anti-aliasing making it look a little cleaner.”
Now you 360 fanboys can take your idiotic argument about graphics to Ign. I’m sure you’ll tell them that you know better than them without even playing the game.
So next time keep your crappy remarks to yourself unless you have solid proof.
April 27th, 2008
Alvis,
I have a pc gaming rig so I can say whatever I want. We’re comparing “Powahh” not price.
And you are tell me that you get a good 360 gaming experience at a reduced price? You gotta be kidding me. The 360 maybe cheap but you still need a $3000 HD Tv or you won’t be able to tell the difference between Master Chief’s face and his butt.
April 27th, 2008
HAHHAHAHAHA!!!!
its true.. in order to get the ULTIMATE nex-gen gaming experience.. you are going to have to buy an HD TV… (and PC world rated Sony Bravia the best… just another example of Sony’s “failure”)
so either way.. you are going to have to spend a lot of money…
April 27th, 2008
well said nomad
April 27th, 2008
Nomad,
Even WITH an HD set I can’t tell Master Chief’s face form his butt! OOOOHHHHHHH, SNAP!
Seriously, though, the HD set sitting in my living room right now cost about $1000. Still pretty steep, but cheaper than a PC rig that has a crappy selection of games… ignore the fact that I just might be buying Mass Effect when it comes out on PC this May…
-Arvis
April 27th, 2008
Arvis,
A crappy selection of games? Is that what you are telling me? A crappy selection of games.
More or less every 360 game comes out on the pc (example : Gears of War, Bioshock etc.). And they all look a lot better than the 360 counterparts even with the 360 hooked to an HD Tv.
And I would love to hear you say Crysis is crappy. Its probably worth more than every 360 game put together. And you won’t need a $3000 pc to play it. It runs on high with a $200 Geforce card, (namely the 8600GT). Add that to a Core2 Duo processor and 2gb of ram, it barely comes close to $1000.
And the game runs on high which Crytek says even the 360 can’t manage.
April 27th, 2008
aWE….. now why did you have to say THAT??
I expected crap like that from kevin NOT you…
I guess you dont like Crysis… or World in Conflict… or Company of Heroes… or Stalker… or the Witcher… or World of Warcraft…
but mostly CRYSIS!!!
you really disappointed me arvis… oh well… back to killing North Koreans…
April 27th, 2008
this was directed towards arvis… not nomad…
damn you beat me to the punch…
April 28th, 2008
DarkWhiteHair and Nomad,
1. You still need a nice high-def monitor to make those Crysis visuals look so yummy. So altogether, you’re never going to get a comparable console experience on the PC unless you spend significantly more. There is no way around this fact.
2. When I said the PC had a crappy selection of games, I qualified it by stating that I was planning on buying a PC game in the near future. So… the PC can’t have THAT crappy of a selection, can it? I was being ironic, you see.
3. DarkWhiteHair, just for the record, no I don’t give a crap about any of those games you listed. I don’t like shooters and I generally hate playing games at the computer no matter what genre they are (with the possible exception of RTS titles). Keyboard and mouse is uncomfortable, a monitor is not as nice as my nice big tv, and the couch is far more comfortable to sit on (more leg room for my long legs). Plus I work at a computer all day, so I don’t really want to be at one when I get home.
I’m sorry you’re disappointed, but know that that is more a result from your own petulant attitude rather than any action on my part.
-Arvis
July 18th, 2008
on ps3 the game runs at mindblowing 1080p and looks better