Indeed. I won't believe it until I see it with my own eyes.
Anyway, I don't care if it's a little worse than the 360 version... as long as they don't go the Rock Star (the ones who develop the GTA series) way (PS3 graphics are way less sharp, 360 gets all the DLC first, etc.). Well I hate DLC to begin with... at least if it's overpriced, which it is a lot of times.

I'm pretty sure that the PS3 version of GTAIV had better anti-aliasing, a slightly better framerate, and way less pop-in then the 360 version. Not sure about Red Dead Redemption but I've heard they both look exactly the same. I just got finished re-reading the GTAIV review on IGN, and that's what they said anyways. I don't really care, but I just don't think it's fair to bash a company for something that might not be true at all. Though the DLC thing is true, but that's more or less Microsoft's fault.

What jive are you talkin?! When would a game company come out and say "oh sorry we made for you guys a piece of crap" cough cough..new vegas cough cough. It's kinda like newspapers...where do you find the retractions? Allllllll the way at the end it- a font the size of some sort of heinous contract I have to read for school.

I thought so too. Could possibly be high end PC version I suppose, but it is weird that every other screen and vid have shown nothing but the 360 version, and then there is this super high res, gorgeous looking mountain render. I have a feeling it is either concept art, or a target render. The lighting, textures, and effects didn't look 1/10th as good as that in anything else I have seen. As long as they get the PS3 version running smoothly, I will be happy though!

It's a composite image made of multiple screenshots put together I guess its 3 shots
File also have composite in file name.
Not sure of platform but guess high end pc as it looks better than the mountains in the trailer.

They have not shown pc or ps3 shots yet as they are not finished, yes they has to have the pc version running as they use it during design and they also have a PS3 version running but not optimized.

I don't think its modified..... I think they just pulled a gray look to make it look a bit better... instead of all clear and nice they made it kinda gray and depressing to hide the the bad graphics...

That's an well done artwork, I think.

Xbox360 and PC both have this feature.

From what I understand it doesn't work the same way. At least on the 360, because it wasn't originally designed to use this feature like the PS3 was. PC is irrelevant because it can always be upgraded farther than any current console, if the user pleases. The benefits of installing data on the PS3 are not as necessary for a high end PC.

Just read the rest of the pages. People are saying Todd said that all platforms will play the same. Now did he say "play" or "look" the same? I think he said look the same not play the same.

As for other comments that other people can make games on the PS3, again, they are PS3 exclusive, Sony makes sure they know how to take advantage over everything on the PS3.

Please answer this. How come Sony doesn't make sure that Bethesda uses the PS3 to it's fullest? Why doesn't Sony teach Bethesda how to use it properly? Why because Bethesda makes the games for PC and 360 as well and Bethesda will not pay Sony anymore money to be taught how to use the PS3 properly. Again, Bethesda is not to blame here, Sony is. Also if you keep blaming Bethesda why will you buy the game then? Sort of hyporcritical of people keep bashing Bethesda but will buy it still.

We still know so little, we have no idea how well it will even run on the 360. It can run so slow on the 360 if more than 3 or 4 characters are on the screen. We just don't know. Nothing is guarented. The PS3 could actaully run smoother and better than the 360, we just don't know.

If anyone is worred, don't buy it on 11/11/11 and wait a week or two and come to the forums and see how both platforms run.

Todd said "look" which is very different from "preforming" the same. It can look as good all it wants but if the framerate svcks when actually playing it... :shakehead:

As for the second thing... is that really fair to say? Why should Bethesda get special treatment from Sony when other developers seem to do fine with the PS3, such as DICE, Infinity Ward, Valve, Rocksteady, Crytek, Criterion, etc... It doesn't help matters that Bethesda seems bent on making sure Sony's rival company always gets DLC before they do.

I don't think it's fair to say it's Sony's fault at all. Other developers have proven that the PS3 can be utilized just as efficiently as the 360 can, if not more. Bethesda could easily hire programmers that are familiar with the PS3... they themselves should already be familiar with it after two full games on it.

Other developers have already said that the best way to make sure both console versions run similarly is to develop on the PS3 first. It is easier to port the game to the 360 from the PS3 than it is to port it to the PS3 from the 360. When this happens the games may look slightly better on the PS3... slightly... but if you do it the other way around the PS3 version often suffers a lot more than... slightly.

The only reason they develop for the 360 first is because the 360 has a higher install base so they make it a priority. That console sales gap is closing rapidly however, and this will no longer be a viable excuse by the end of this year.

I meantioned publishing, and publishing is a close nit royalty to the developer with extra benefits

it will work the same as the last games. Only better. Im sure Beth will try their best.

I suppose. I just think that being in a publisher/developer relationship is a lot different than Bethesda just taking money to ensure timed exclusivity for their DLC.