*Game Tech*

Status
Not open for further replies.
I was thinking that maybe the teams responsible for 360 and PC versions were working together closer, hence sharing bugs if any... Just a thought.
 
MazingerDUDE said:
few more shots
[...]
Click to expand...

That's unbelievable the difference in not just specular, but textures. It's like comparing the 360 to the PC version.

Keep the comparisons coming though, can you make more character comparisons and more outdoor comparisons please.
 
A question for one of the tech guys - a texture like the one on the roach, how much space does that take up on disc?
 
Arwin said:
A question for one of the tech guys - a texture like the one on the roach, how much space does that take up on disc?
Click to expand...
It would be interesting if one can estimate texture resolution for sure.
Between you're speaking of the texture weight or the normal map's one?

For the disk usage it's pretty tough depending on how agressive the compression is, maybe from an ISO?
 
MazingerDUDE said:
few more shots
[...]
Click to expand...
Differences seem to be consistent for the whole game then. The most apparent difference between the two (for reviewers) was probably the AA, therefore were quickly to label the PS3 version as the inferior version. But then again, weren't there some reviews stating that the PS3 version had inferior textures? :???:
 
It looks to me like algebraic Phong specular on PS3 vs some sort of image-based effect (cubemap environment mapping) on the 360. Not lower texture resolution.
 
djskribbles said:
Differences seem to be consistent for the whole game then. The most apparent difference between the two (for reviewers) was probably the AA, therefore were quickly to label the PS3 version as the inferior version. But then again, weren't there some reviews stating that the PS3 version had inferior textures? :???:
Click to expand...

It seems that most reviewers tend to put more emphasis on AA than texture quality in this instance. It's understandable that the 360 will have better AA on most occasions as it's a simple process for them to implement (compared to the PS3), whereas certain developers have obviously chosen not to include AA (ie Mirrors Edge) whether this is to emphasize the sterile look of the game or not, who knows.

Grandmaster:

Would you be able to take direct feed comparisons for both games to see what the textures and specular is like in a direct feed environment.

That would be great.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can all of you (readers and newcomers etc etc everybody) quit with the "I think it looks better" routine. This is a TECH FORUM. We are not analysing your preferences, just the games' apparent technology use. ;)

I'm still working out some things for the thread.
 
davygee said:
It seems that most reviewers tend to put more emphasis on AA than texture quality in this instance. It's understandable that the 360 will have better AA on most occasions as it's a simple process for them to implement (compared to the PS3), whereas certain developers have obviously chosen not to include AA (ie Mirrors Edge) whether this is to emphasize the sterile look of the game or not, who knows.

Grandmaster:

Would you be able to take direct feed comparisons for both games to see what the textures and specular is like in a direct feed environment.

That would be great.
Click to expand...

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=285507

More shots there than you can shake a stick at. With regards reviewers, it is worth bearing in mind that they are not generally technically minded. Nor do they have the tools to back up a perceptual opinion with cold, hard facts. Hence, comments like GTA IV on PS3 running at a superior framerate, 'looking better' etc. The latter is an opinion which is fair enough, the former can only really be thoroughly tested if you have the right tools and the right methodology.
 
liolio said:
It would be interesting if one can estimate texture resolution for sure.
Between you're speaking of the texture weight or the normal map's one?

For the disk usage it's pretty tough depending on how agressive the compression is, maybe from an ISO?
Click to expand...

Ps3 versions roadroach/ant seems quite similar if not the same as PC version.

radroach.dds --- DX1 ARGB 512x512 10 mips 170KB
radroach_n.dds --- DX1 ARGB 512x512 10 mips 170KB
radroach_m.dds --- DX1 ARGB 256x256 9 mips 43KB

giantant.dds --- DX1 ARGB 1024x1024 11 mips 683KB
giantant_n.dds --- DX1 ARGB 1024x1024 11 mips 683KB
giantant_m.dds --- DX1 ARGB 256x256 9 mips 43KB
 
assen said:
It looks to me like algebraic Phong specular on PS3 vs some sort of image-based effect (cubemap environment mapping) on the 360. Not lower texture resolution.
Click to expand...

Are you sure not lower texture resolution (as well)? Looking at the tire threads on the tire on the left in the first picture and comparing those really looks to me like a clear difference in resolution, or do you think whatever different effect the 360 is using can make that much of a difference?
 
It would be interesting to know what pushed Bethesda to make this decision, (whether they use lower res texture, or a subpar effect). It has to be performances as there is room left on the disk and RAM might not be the problem.
 
If someone wants to provide hosting for my videos that is more reliable, please PM me. These videos take hours to render, more effort in editing, then around an hour each encoding into high quality VC1. Seeing them disappear like this is becoming irritating.
 
some more shots


http://www3.telus.net/public/dhwag/FOE360.jpg
http://www3.telus.net/public/dhwag/FOEPS3.jpg

http://www3.telus.net/public/dhwag/FOF360.jpg
http://www3.telus.net/public/dhwag/FOFPS3.jpg

http://www3.telus.net/public/dhwag/FOG360.jpg
http://www3.telus.net/public/dhwag/FOGPS3.jpg

http://www3.telus.net/public/dhwag/FOH360.jpg
http://www3.telus.net/public/dhwag/FOHPS3.jpg

http://www3.telus.net/public/dhwag/FOI360.jpg
http://www3.telus.net/public/dhwag/FOIPS3.jpg


the last 3 sets are from the giant ant cave under the school.

The lack of specularity is also seen on the walls for the 360, which makes the whole level look very different along with the 'different looking' ants. The PS3 version look all wet and moist, where the 360 look dry.

Another interesting discovery is a complete lack of fog effect on the ceiling for the 360 as shown in the last set.

It seems as I'd get more and more out of this as progress further into the game, but this would be my last post on fallout 3. It's just way too time consuming, it's not like I get paid for doing this or anything ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
Xbox 360 and PS3 top graphics
3 4 5
Replies
99
Views
9K
Liandry
L
S
Discussion about lighting (usage of lighting techniques).
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Frenetic Pony
F
Shifty Geezer
Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2024]
51 52 53
Replies
1K
Views
79K
Cyan
Cyan
P
A17 Pro interview
Replies
17
Views
4K
Chiimaero
C
S
2024 may not be kind for game developers.
8 9 10
Replies
188
Views
10K
arandomguy
A
Back
Top