*Game Tech*

Status
Not open for further replies.
The PS3 pics are clearly showing lower texture resolutions in the computer displays and rather hokey filtering of some of the textures. Looking at the grills on the right, both the floor grill and the one in the wall, some ofthe PS3's grill-fins are blurred out.

Facetious comments about R2D2 (present in both images...) don't really add constructively to the discussion, either.
 
Gerry, I have no idea how you can not see the differences pointed out by the above posters and me.

@upnorthsox, Nothing to do with the colour palette. The PS3's ground texture is blurry and undefined in comparison to the 360's.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The PS3 pics are clearly showing lower texture resolutions in the computer displays and rather hokey filtering of some of the textures. Looking at the grills on the right, both the floor grill and the one in the wall, some ofthe PS3's grill-fins are blurred out.

Facetious comments about R2D2 (present in both images...) don't really add constructively to the discussion, either.

Helps if I maximise the images in Firefox of course. :oops:

Ah yes, the computer displays I can agree with. And the floor does seem to have a certain bluriness about it.

Still think a lot of the differences are pretty marginal.
 
The PS3 pics are clearly showing lower texture resolutions in the computer displays and rather hokey filtering of some of the textures. Looking at the grills on the right, both the floor grill and the one in the wall, some ofthe PS3's grill-fins are blurred out.

Facetious comments about R2D2 (present in both images...) don't really add constructively to the discussion, either.

I see lights standing out a little more against a darker background, nothing more and consistent with what I said earlier. I count the same number of grill fins in both versions and see only slightly darker shadows between them in the 360 version which is again consistent with that version being a little darker. My R2D2 comment was obviously over-the-top sarcasm but if you see an R2D2 behind the guy in the 360 version then no doubt we are not seeing the same things. If I wanted to be facetious I'd have said that the guy is missing a left foot in the 360 version.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
The PS3 pics are clearly showing lower texture resolutions in the computer displays and rather hokey filtering of some of the textures. Looking at the grills on the right, both the floor grill and the one in the wall, some ofthe PS3's grill-fins are blurred out.
Funny thing is that we've had anisotropic filtering for about 8years in commercial hardware now (and for about 7 years usable in consoles, not counting the PS2) and people still cling to it as evidence of "grossly inferior/superior textures" when title has different filtering on two platforms.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I see lights standing out a little more against a darker background, nothing more and consistent with what I said earlier.
I've adjusted the brightness to be equal and increased brightness to make spotting differences easier in case you have an extra dark display or something. The following compare XB360 and PS3 versions in mixed order between top and bottom sections.

SWFUa.png


SWFUb.png


SWFUc.png


In your opinion, are top and bottom images identical in clarity? To me there is a clear distinction, and even though I didn't record which platform I used for image 1 or 2 in each picture, I can identify the platform at a glance as the differences are so apparent.

Gerry said:
Still think a lot of the differences are pretty marginal.
That is true, and they don't impact the game to any degree. They are still there though!
 
Funny thing is that we've had anisotropic filtering for about 8years in commercial hardware now (and for about 7 years usable in consoles, not counting the PS2) and people still cling to it as evidence of "grossly inferior/superior textures" when title has different filtering on two platforms.
Yes, you're right and I'm very wrong! I should have said 'lower texture quality' instead of 'lower texture resolution'.
 
Funny thing is that we've had anisotropic filtering for about 8years in commercial hardware now (and for about 7 years usable in consoles, not counting the PS2) and people still cling to it as evidence of "grossly inferior/superior textures" when title has different filtering on two platforms.

Indeed, the sequence of pics I posted earlier should demonstrate that there's more at work than texture resolution.
 
Nesh said:
Well then the PS3 has lower quality AF than the 360?
That much seems obvious on these shots.
What I always wondered was whether it was really that hard to rig selective anisotropy into your assets. Not everything needs it, and on PS2 it was standard practice to fudge mip factors on small polygon groups, but it seems like it's so much more common to go with the all or nothing thing on these platforms.

Shifty Geezer said:
I should have said 'lower texture quality' instead of 'lower texture resolution'.
Sorry didn't meant to come off as a pompous smartass. Was just reminded of things like Oblivion where texture arguments were blown out of proportion (IIRC it was even passed off as example of BluRay improving texture quality or what not).
 
PS3 shots taken with ''Full range RGB'' feature turned off probably if you change camera angle a little textures will look almost equally
 
PS3 shots taken with ''Full range RGB'' feature turned off probably if you change camera angle a little textures will look almost equally

Would provide some as I play like that on a wonderfully calibrated TV but I cannot cap screens from the source. Off-TV-pics are worthless.

In any case, I really wonder why the PS3 version seemingly has less AF. If memory serves correctly, it was the opposite for other games, where the 360 had less AF or any at all.
 
PS3 shots taken with ''Full range RGB'' feature turned off probably if you change camera angle a little textures will look almost equally
people need to realize that RGB Full and RGB Limited is pretty much RGB PC level and RGB Video level. PC level (0-255) where 0 is black, has a wider range that most TV's do not support or do not expect; if thats the case (your TV does not support this range) you may be clipping black detail. all HDTV's support RGB Limited (Video) levels (16-235) where 16 is black. in most cases, if you own an HDTV, the correct way is to set it to RGB Limited and set your TV's brightness control to the correct level. for PC monitors, the opposite is true. you should be able to achieve essentially the same image just by adjusting the brightness control. some TV's (Sony and Samsung in particular) have the option to switch between PC and Video levels within its own settings, so if you own one of these sets with this option, then you can go either way. i don't know what the PS3 outputs natively, so i don't really know which one is best. my Samsung has the option, but i just leave it at Limited and calibrate my TV accordingly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Nesh: You mean different mipmap levels? Probably not that - cam position is pretty much the same and difference is uniform across entire set. If mipmaps (or LODs) mattered, you'd probably get zones with same quality and small sections in between where mipmap/LOD levels don't match.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can we suspect LOD differences?

How about we just suspect that it could possibly be the way both machines handle AF? The differences dissapear the closer you get to any texture in the ps3 version, so can we chalk this up to an actual non-dissapointing port.....

I'm actually thinking that the duller reflection in the ps3 version is also a byproduct of it's AF level, considering that it is a simple reflection map.
 
Well I just downloaded the demo again to see as I didn't remember the "monitors" looking that blurry when I played it, and they don't.

And the reflections are far better in the PS3 version, unless there is supposed to be water running over the floor the 360 reflections are just plain wrong.
 
What I always wondered was whether it was really that hard to rig selective anisotropy into your assets.

It's easy to selectively set that up. The problem is that the stuff on screen that benefits from it the most also tends to have tons of screen coverage (like the ground or walls), so the performance hit from anisotropic can be very measurable. Maybe they ran out of juice from RSX's 6 pixel shader units so they decided to drop aniso totally on that build. For the typical gamer, framerate drops are more noticeable than some blurry textures anyways.
 
And the reflections are far better in the PS3 version, unless there is supposed to be water running over the floor the 360 reflections are just plain wrong.
"Better" meaning more appropriate to the floor type (closer to what you'd expect), or graphically superior (sharper, more detailed)?

The third shot (PS3, 360) seems to offer the best floor comparison, though it's still imperfect b/c the distance and maybe angle are different.

thatdudeagain, would a lower level of AF also explain the more pronounced edges (and aliasing) b/w floor plates and the (much) greater waviness in the reflection?

The second shot (PS3, 360) is also interesting because of the apparent differences in lighting, most evident on the right and left sides of the background (those lighting bays/recesses and whatever's happening on the right edge of the displays [the choppy edges of the lighter panels and the clipping errors or weird reflections on the extended window frame abutting that almost-triangle of circle-perforated mesh]).

 
"Better" meaning more appropriate to the floor type (closer to what you'd expect), or graphically superior (sharper, more detailed)?

The third shot (PS3, 360) seems to offer the best floor comparison, though it's still imperfect b/c the distance and maybe angle are different.

thatdudeagain, would a lower level of AF also explain the more pronounced edges (and aliasing) b/w floor plates and the (much) greater waviness in the reflection?

The second shot is also interesting because of the apparent differences in lighting, most evident on the right and left sides of the background (those lighting bays/recesses and whatever's happening on the right edge of the displays [the choppy edges of the lighter panels and the clipping errors or weird reflections on the extended window frame abutting that almost-triangle of circle-perforated mesh]).

From those shots, it looks like the ps3 version employs heavy mipmaping, as you can see in the detail between the floor panals being construed the further away from the camera. The waviness in the refect map of the 360 might be because of the camera being suddenly rotated or angled, which could also add aliasing as the lines straighten out.......

Due to a slight advantage in memory, the 360 might not need the mipmapping pulled so close, giving it a shaper apperance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top