[AlStrong]

Originally Posted by big4ared

4. Just like Gears 2, they don't have SSAO on moving characters. When characters die and lay on the ground, they get SSAO, but if you look at Batman's feet, he doesn't get any.

Geras 2 does have SSAO for characters on the environment, but it's not very noticeable most of the time. Self-SSAO would be pretty hard to see given the colour palette though.

[Richard]

First screnshots supposedly from the XBOX version.

here, here, here, and here.

[grandmaster]

The complete lack of any form of aliasing whatsoever makes that claim a bit suspect...

[rekator]

Originally Posted by grandmaster

The complete lack of any form of aliasing whatsoever makes that claim a bit suspect...

Probably Press shoot for console version…

[Statix]

Personally, I'm not especially impressed by the lighting technology of Rage. Pre-baked lightmaps with drop shadows done per-character (and the character shadows don't even realistically intersect with the precomputed environment shadows). No SSAO or motion-blur (per-object or camera-based).

But if the game does manage to achieve the purported 60 fps on the current-generation consoles, then it would still be a commendable technical achievement.

The megatexture technique seems to allow for some beautiful outdoor vistas from a distance view, however.

[Shifty Geezer]

Please remember this is the IQ thread, not the RAGE discussion thread. Thanks.

And looking at those screens, we can't tell squat about IQ as they're promo shots.

[AlStrong]

They're the same ones from the Game Informer magazine, probably the source material (not scans).

[AlStrong]

http://www.gamersyde.com/news_meet_t...2-8362_en.html

1024x576....... Also quite a lot of post-processing.

Some pretty high quality character assets on the other hand..

[nightshade]

Originally Posted by AlStrong

http://www.gamersyde.com/news_meet_t...2-8362_en.html

1024x576....... Also quite a lot of post-processing.

Some pretty high quality character assets on the other hand..

No thanks Bioware.....But I think I'd rather have an HD game with models like ME1, than that.

[AlStrong]

Btw, this isn't the thread for such... discussion. Just a friendly reminder about post 1 (rules) and that this is indeed the Tech Forum.


At first I thought it was some sort of post-processing issue for background objects as the characters *appear* fine for 720p; the emissive lighting on those structures in the fourth shot gave away the vertical resolution. I suppose the high poly-count and muted colour palette surrounding them helped mask what I was eventually able to determine. It was actually a particular edge on one of the characters giving away 1024 horizontal res.

So that's theoretically a 36% drop in pixel shading and fillrate load.

[PhilB]

So it's pretty much confirmed then that 1024x576 is the final res? Can't say I blame them though considering how the first one ran.

[brain_stew]

Originally Posted by PhilB

So it's pretty much confirmed then that 1024x576 is the final res? Can't say I blame them though considering how the first one ran.

Agreed, something had to give as the framerate was really atrocious in the original.

[AlStrong]

Just for those screenshots, but it makes you wonder why they'd release it as such if it weren't final. They're definitely not bullshotting anyone.

[AlStrong]

gah, made a mistake.

False alarm.

[Arwin]

Originally Posted by AlStrong

gah, made a mistake.

False alarm.

JC man, thank god. I thought I was going crazy.

[AlStrong]

did a 4/5 instead of a 5/4 multiplication.

(Thanks Mazinger)

I blame Friday morning.

[Silent_Buddha]

Are you sure about that res? Did they upscale the shots they provided to Gamersyde then?

And if that's 1024x576, that's the best 1024x576 I've ever seen. Actually looks better than many 1080p shots I've seen. Well, until I got to the 3rd shot with the high contrast aliasing (/sigh).

Regards,
SB

[AlStrong]

Apparently downscaled from 1600x900. Yeah. haha would explain the high quality crispness of the characters.

edit: Even had the blown up pixels and steps labeled correctly 20 steps, 16 pixels. Brain not functioning.

[dah145]

any word on the Lost Planet 2 demo Xbox 360 demo?

[obonicus]

These may be Bayonetta on PS3 screenshots (but I somewhat suspect they're not):
http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/ar...2105621262.jpg

From here: http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/142/14253676/imgs_1.html

Any res change from what we'd seen before? All my untrained eyes see are jaggies.

[SG79]

They're not from the PS3 build, and look at the date. The PS3 game hasn't been shown in public... yet.

IIRC, it's 720p with no AA on the 360.

[AlStrong]

Originally Posted by dah145

any word on the Lost Planet 2 demo Xbox 360 demo?

From what I could see... it's not any different than previous games from the team. 720p and dynamic MSAA.

[Gitaroo]

hopefully PS3 version will atleast lock at 2X MSAA, not QAA and no more 5 gigs install capcom. Btw, anyone check dirt? Seems like it could be QAA.....

[Aeoniss]

This was probably touched on before, but I couldn't find it- why is QAA more reasonable on the PS3? Is it cheaper? I suppose if it cuts back on memory\bandwidth it's an obvious choice. I've heard people state that it -isn't- though.

ergo my confusion.

If so, why doesn't the 360 also use it? (I know the Edram benefits.. but if the goal is to simply conserve memory\bandwidth.. Wouldn't it work on both all the same?)

[Silent_Buddha]

Originally Posted by Aeoniss

If so, why doesn't the 360 also use it? (I know the Edram benefits.. but if the goal is to simply conserve memory\bandwidth.. Wouldn't it work on both all the same?)

QAA is an Nvidia form of AA. ATI hardware doesn't support it.

ATI does have the wide and narrow tent filters, but those were introduced after Xenos. And don't exactly serve the same purpose as QAA.

Regards,
SB