Silent_Buddha
Legend
It's been discussed ad nauseum in another thread, but many of the textures are also half the resolution on PS3 compared to X360 and PC.
Regards,
SB
Image Quality and Framebuffer Analysis for Available/release build Games *Read the first post*
- Thread starter Farid
- Start date
It's been discussed ad nauseum in another thread, but many of the textures are also half the resolution on PS3 compared to X360 and PC.
Regards,
SB
Oh, I wasn't aware of that.. the irony of this being technically a Sony property (and timed exclusive in Europe) Regardless, it still doesn't resemble an upscaled PS2 game.
And the models are pretty primitive on occassion. Look at the lion statue entering the Library in the demo for example. That looks very PS2.
Having played the demo, I feel this is such a wasted opportunity. The inclusion of the original Ray and Egon lends immediate authenticity to the game. Given over to a top-tier, triple A dev, the game could have been amazing. What I played, apart from a couple of golden moments of a true Ghostbuster's vibe, was sadly awkward and dreery. Perhaps the final game does feel sufficiently Ghostbusters to be worth it, but it could have been so much better.
Sony want to get Naughty Dog creating a sequel. That'd be
if only it was true:smile:Sony want to get Naughty Dog creating a sequel. That'd be
Maybe it's the fact that I still play PS2 games often that I can't agree. However, the game's art direction on the whole doesn't compensate for any technical deficiencies on any platform. It's not a pretty game.
I just don't know why on earth was the game v-locked on the PS3 with all the downgrades.
I don't think V-sync generally makes that much of a difference in framerate. I've seen some pretty poor-performing games overall turning V-sync on, yet games such as Uncharted which is still one of the PS3's shining technical showcases has V-sync off. I guess it comes down to developer choice as to whether screen tearing is distracting enough for them to bother turning it on.
I remember an Uncharted (or was it Heavenly Sword) dev explaining how V Sync affects framerates. In a certain scene with Vsync on the framerate woould go from 30 to around 20 while with Vsync off to around 25 or even higher.
From my experience with PC gaming, i can say that Vsync does have a notable impact on performance especially when you are trying to squeeze as many frames as possible.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
I always play with vsync off if responsiveness is required. Even the small hit with vsync + triple buffering can introduce an infuriatingly small bit of input lag. And the fps variation without triple buffering can be extreme if the min fps isn't at or above the threshold most of the time.
That said, in anything that's a bit slower paced, like say an RTS or traditional RPG, I'll usually have vsync on.
Regards,
SB
That said, in anything that's a bit slower paced, like say an RTS or traditional RPG, I'll usually have vsync on.
Regards,
SB
brain_stew
Regular
Which is why you enable triple buffering. There's basically zero performance hit that way so long as you have the memory spare. Sure, console developers are memory starved but the memory required for an extra buffer at 720p and below with zero or 2xaa is a pitiful amount anyway.
That's what puzzled me when the RE5 team was interviewed. Not only was the PS3 version v-locked, they opted for triple buffering (the 360 one used double buffering).
The hits in the frame rate were quite noticeable at times. The last patch helped a bit with the worst case scenarios, but it's still not as solid as the 360's frame rate.
I got Arkham Asylum today for PS3, and seems that there is tearing in the larger areas (nowhere as nasty as Uncharted's or Ghostbusters). The odd difference I've noticed between it and the 360 version is a pulled back camera on the former. It's only the larger areas but puzzling nonetheless.
Other than that, the initial comparison made with the demos seem to stand.
Other than that, the initial comparison made with the demos seem to stand.
Lens of true site has done an interesting comparison with the two version. It seems to compensate SSAO absence on the ps3 version there are better self shadowing. Not mentioned particular difference in the tearing. But probable the 360 hit the ps3 version. UE3 tend to be better on the 360, it isn't a surprise.
I doub it honestly. But I haven't the game.
Why because Joystiq says so? It's not true until B3D or Digital Foundry confirms it.
Similar threads
