Fight Night PS3 Screens

that review was for a game released nearly one year ago... improvements are expected and the bar has been raised.

On the week FN3 360 was released it was the best looking game on any console.

edit:
oh and they also ding the PS3 version for slow down
I'm sure they also docked points for "bizarrely-pixilated crowds" :???: .
 
Visually, Fight Night sees a few upgrades as well -- but they're so minimal when in motion that its hardly noticeable unless you're actively looking for them (re: the sweat looks more realistic and the lighting has been enhanced). Despite this better appearance, though, the PS3 version of Round 3 does suffer from slowdown (it gets particularly choppy during the close-up replays or fast multi-punch combos) and is has bizarrely-pixilated crowds as well.

I can't believe those pixelated 2D crowds made it in..
 
Yes depth of field effect and full 3d crowd were lost in the port over. I'm pretty sure the game lacks the 4xAA used in the 360 version. Also motion blur on fighters has gone, which is kinda a bad loss, it helped smooth the animation and made the game feel faster than 30fps, the animation looks very juddery on the ps3 because of the lack of motion blur.

Overall the only thing that got improved where the fighter textures and normal maps, which is generally more related to the source models they're exporting that data from.

The framerate problems are unacceptable, 360 version was rock solid and overall is pushing a lot more geometry on screen and effects i think.
 
Would the fact that EA Canada made the PS3 version and EA Chicago made the X360 version be a factor, in terms of talent/policy on what makes the best overall experience etc?
 
Both versions started development at roughly the same time. Supposed PS3 footage was actually the first footage shown at E3.

EA supposedly had two seperate teams for each system to get the best quality out of each system. I don't think it had anything to do with one team being more talented than the other. And when you think about it they had 8 extra months of dev time for this version.
 
I can understand the slow down in a launch window title. True there was a 6 month delay and the game had a lot of extra dev time, but getting into the launch window is HARD. But the pixelated crowd... eww! Someone please introduce the devs to geometry instancing!
 
Both versions started development at roughly the same time. Supposed PS3 footage was actually the first footage shown at E3.

EA supposedly had two seperate teams for each system to get the best quality out of each system. I don't think it had anything to do with one team being more talented than the other. And when you think about it they had 8 extra months of dev time for this version.

What then did you think made the difference between both console versions if you're excluding the developer factor?
 
I think both developers were atleast evenly matched. And even if (extremely small chance IMO) the PS3 devs were inferior. EA still had 8 months for the "superior" 360 devs to help the "inferior" devs get the performance on this game up.

I don't believe for a second that EA would put an inferior developer on the PS3 though. That just seems silly given how the past 2 generations played out.

I'll make no claims to know what caused this version to turn out the way it did. And unfortunately this is not the first multiplatform release we've read to have performance issues. I'm sure we'll get the answers in due time.
 
I can understand the slow down in a launch window title. True there was a 6 month delay and the game had a lot of extra dev time, but getting into the launch window is HARD. But the pixelated crowd... eww! Someone please introduce the devs to geometry instancing!

No kidding! Those pixelly cardboard "people" stick out like lone neon sign at midnight! X_x

And these guys had like 8 months from the completion of the 360 version to port the game over to PS3, with at least 6 months on final dev kits. This is totally mind boggling to me. And inexcusable.
 
Why could they not just use higher resolution 2D sprites? I mean, this is like NES level era stuff, 12x12 pixel characters blown up 100x...wtf?
 
I don't believe for a second that EA would put an inferior developer on the PS3 though. That just seems silly given how the past 2 generations played out.
Kudo's (or whatever his name is) team had already started working on Def Jam had they not, which would explain why EA gave the porting duties to another team.
 
Kudo's (or whatever his name is) team had already started working on Def Jam had they not, which would explain why EA gave the porting duties to another team.

From everything we know this wasn't a port. They were being developed simultaneously.
 
Someone please introduce the devs to geometry instancing!

Well I don't think they were oblivious to this trick, since the 360 version uses it ALOT.

A crowd in the 360 version is fully 3d (except in the huge stadiums), and looks good, but it's basically consists of 4 character models, with no variation, all doing 2 animations, in synch, with no variation. To make it worse, they group em together, so you'll see like 6 "guy with the striped shirt" standing together, all waving their hand in the air at the exact same time, beside them wil be 5 of the 'lady in the white blouse,' it really falls apart on close inspection.

I really would've hoped that given the extra devtime, they would've actually improved this not taken a step backward, crowds should be more varied, with more animations, that are staggered and not in synch.

Must be a CPU issue.
 
IGN said:
EA Sports Fight Night Round 3 on the PlayStation 3 is nearly identical to its 360 counterpart. Ported over by the team at EA Canada, it looks and feels like the same code we threw punches at in February... with a couple of slight enhancements.
Is this the way for multiplatform games ; develop it for X360 and port it to PS3 ?..
 
Back
Top