Unreal Tournament III Discussion *renamed*

again, that video is no indication of what the ps3 version looks like, i dunno whats wrong with that video... it almost looks like it was taken off-screen with a low res camera with the brightness set extremely low and upscaled to 720p. look at other videos on GT and you'll see. also, the jaggies are not that bad. most of the footage shown of UT3 has been on the PS3.

this video in particular looks great. http://www.gametrailers.com/player/24261.html
 
AFAIK

PS3 can do 2XMSAA max i think.
Per pass, like all GeForce7 GPUs. More passes means more AA per frame, though NV generally stopped at 4xMSAA with single GPUs up to that gen. Isn't Resistance 4xAA?
 
Locked doesn't always mean "stable". Locked a lot of times, at least used to mean, they would cap the framerate. So a game that averaged 40-50fps (with a few small dips below 30 and peaks above 60) they would "cap" or "lock" the game at 30fps instead of having a lot of tearing and slowdown to 30fps and peaks to 60fps.

I do believe Epic will hit a stable 30fps though as the game really needs it.
 
Locked doesn't always mean "stable". Locked a lot of times, at least used to mean, they would cap the framerate. So a game that averaged 40-50fps (with a few small dips below 30 and peaks above 60) they would "cap" or "lock" the game at 30fps instead of having a lot of tearing and slowdown to 30fps and peaks to 60fps.

I do believe Epic will hit a stable 30fps though as the game really needs it.

Yup that's what I meant (said) - they are above 30fps, but they are going to "lock" it ("cap it") at 30fps.
 
Anyone think they will dynamically adjust the graphics level to achieve the target framerate (seems to be a standard feature in Unreal engines since UT) or try for a consistent graphics quality, in which case they'd have to do worst case-scenario testing.
 
the trailer posted earlier has bad gamma. you can also tell this by looking at the concept art that was flashed for a few seconds.

for sure the PS3 (and 360) version underwent graphical optimizations to be able to fit it in <512 memory compared to the PC version, but I'd wait till a better PS3 trailer comes out to make any real judgments. the capture here is really bad, though I'm sure on an actual TV screen it'll look fine.
 
Even the PC version won't look like the uber-supersampled bullshots. Those images were rendered at 3K resolution with as high AA/AF settings as possible, before resized to 720p. They show off how incredible the artwork in the game is - but no computer would be able to run it at those settings... most people's PCs couldn't even reach the console's quality.
 
Care to elaborate? :???:

Keep in mind that QAA is sometimes described as being "like 4xMSAA at the cost of 2x, but with blurring".

Laa-Yosh said:
Even the PC version won't look like the uber-supersampled bullshots. Those images were rendered at 3K resolution with as high AA/AF settings as possible, before resized to 720p. They show off how incredible the artwork in the game is - but no computer would be able to run it at those settings... most people's PCs couldn't even reach the console's quality.

I get the feeling that this is a game that will age fairly well as people gradually migrate towards decent D3D10 and multi-cpu systems. That said, I wonder just how scalable they made the game for those lower end systems. Is it supposed to support SM2.0 cards even?
 
though not that implausible, must be hard memory-restrictions on PS3

Probably?!

Gears used texture streaming to free up lots of memory; which brings me to my question. Is the PS3 version of UT3 using the Blu-Ray drive for texture streaming or the HDD? I haven’t heard any info on the subject…
 
Back
Top