With how the eDRAM works the framebuffer in system memory doesn't take much space because it is already resolved. So no AA does save some room on the PS3 in comparison to the PS3 using AA but individually it isn't really noteworthy and as a whole it doesn't do much to negate the difference. Which is impressive that with less memory they were able to go with more detailed textures.
New Oblivion PS3 Screens + Info
- Thread starter Hardknock
- Start date
With how the eDRAM works the framebuffer in system memory doesn't take much space because it is already resolved. So no AA does save some room on the PS3 in comparison to the PS3 using AA but individually it isn't really noteworthy and as a whole it doesn't do much to negate the difference. Which is impressive that with less memory they were able to go with more detailed textures.
Supernatural
Newcomer
A better screenshot comparison for you:
It's clear that the PS3 version lacks normal mapping on the city ground.
Thanks for the screenshots, but I think you should change your image posting habits, since your second and third picture is out of the limits of the rules in these forums.
Sorry to sound like repetitive, but I still think the images don't give a good enough comparison. The PS3 screenshot seems rather blurry and washed out, probably a bad combination of the PS3 gamma output and game time. The X360 screenshot seems to have higher contrast, which might enhance the darkness of the creases in the texture. Aside from that, the X360 screenshot doesn't actually look convincing - both in the sense that it doesn't look good and in the sense that it doesn't look more than a simple texture(s). For instance, look at the bottom left corner region of the X360 screenshot.
Sorry to sound like repetitive, but I still think the images don't give a good enough comparison. The PS3 screenshot seems rather blurry and washed out, probably a bad combination of the PS3 gamma output and game time. The X360 screenshot seems to have higher contrast, which might enhance the darkness of the creases in the texture. Aside from that, the X360 screenshot doesn't actually look convincing - both in the sense that it doesn't look good and in the sense that it doesn't look more than a simple texture(s). For instance, look at the bottom left corner region of the X360 screenshot.
Last edited by a moderator:
Supernatural
Newcomer
You can check the game if you don't believe the screenshots. The bright side of every rock is always the one toward the sun. The side in shadow is always the opposite side. No matter where the sun moves during the day. This is dynamic per pixel lighting that only normal mapping can do.
For the bottom left corner, normal mapping is not parallax mapping: it cannot bring true depth to the surface. The depth illusion is only caused by the lighting and the shadowing of every pixel. Then is obvious that from extreme angles you can see that the surface is really flat and that normal mapping is only a shader trick.
No one of such effects are seen on the rocks on the PS3 ground, they are flat shaded. Maybe you need to check some demo of normal mapping and switch it on and off to understand what I mean, because it seems that you are not very familiar with this shader technique.
I have to say I think it does seem pretty obvious that the normal mapping is missing from the PS3 shot. I actually recognize both of those textures from the PC version and the PS3 texture is definatly flat were it appears on the PC which is generally on outdoor paths.
I suppose I can only trust your word on the existance of normal mapping because from what I can see, the X360 doesn't look very convincing to me in that it doesn't look like theres any depth at all. This is probably because I haven't seen a light source moving around it and it just looks prebaked.
I suppose you have the game and have checked that there are no effects. From my point of view, it looks like the PS3 screenshot is from a different time of day under different weather conditions and is a version we already know has (better?) toned down effects and a system with a high gamma output. Unless someone else who has this game on PS3 steps in and tells me that I'm wrong, I think this can really only be settled with some sort of video again showing the ground under the same conditions. Other than that, I would probably want to see screenshots under the exact same conditions (maybe you can provide this if you have the game).
Edit:
2 versus 1 so I guess I'm wrong then.
The ground is different between the 2 and morning/evening time in the game is the best to show the normal mapping.
Very interesting! So it seems not only have you proven the PS3 version doesn't bumpmap that particular texture but this actually seems to suggest that the reason for that is a lack of HDR in the PS3 version.
On a side note, the quality difference in those textures compared to the console versions is astounding!
I had forgot how games looked without AF, that shot reminds me why AF is permanently on on my system.
The ground is different between the 2 and morning/evening time in the game is the best to show the normal mapping.
Thanks for that. And all the others who have worked to correct me. Now I'm curious about the HDR on PS3 version.
I know this is the console section but while we were on the subject I though this shot of the same scene with the Qarls TP3 would be interesting:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v68/pjbliverpool/OblivionNormals.jpg
EDIT: I must apologise for the total lack of AA in that shot by the way. Im running on G80 and I don't think the drivers support AA+HDR in this game.
You know, Qarls textures also exists with parallax mapping. Gives the textures quite some deep!
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w193/NebulasPhotoPocket/OB1.jpg
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w193/NebulasPhotoPocket/OB5.jpg
As for the lightning in the PS3 version it seems to be HDr although the precision may be different but the effect seems pretty much the same (video 1 an video 2).
Yep thats what im running. Im running QTP3 which has the parallax maps built in as far as I know.
Supernatural
Newcomer
Yes, but the normal mapping is still clearly visible. Every rock is more bright on the sun side, and more dark on the opposite side. Can you take a shot when the sun is on the right of the observer, instead that on the left as now? If the rocks will darken on the opposite side, we'll have the definite proof.
DeathKnight
Regular
Here you go:
Supernatural
Newcomer
Here you go:
Thank you. This screenshot proves my point: the darker side of the rocks is switched to the opposite side (left) compared to the previous screenshots (where the darker was the right side), so it's definitely normal mapping.
Actually it seems to me that the lack of HDR causes a lack of contrast, which means any highlights caused by normal-mapping iwouldn't be noticeable. The HDR shot just has a load more light, brighter everything, and more highlights. Doesn't prove the lack of normal-mapped ground - the ground could be normal mapped, but the lighting doesn't show it. Ideally you'd want some dynamic lighting, like a torch.
Supernatural
Newcomer
Exactly. If you compare the two images, the one with HDR and the one without HDR, the normal mapping lighting is still clearly visible:
And the same rock in the DeathKnight screenshot, with the sun on the right, is darker on the opposite side, as expected from the normal mapping shader:
Last edited by a moderator: