Good captures of the PS3/360 version of Skyrim.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-skyrim-texture-problems-on-xbox-360
(Click on the images)
hmm... LOD issue on PS3 in shot 13. Lower draw distance by the looks of it. Shadow offset issue in shot 18 as well, which may explain why the shadows are missing in some scenes.
Shot 5... yikes. The lighting just looks completely screwed. Then in shot 6, it's the opposite with 360 textures looking more washed out though it's not quite lined up right, so I wonder if there's something funky going on with their tonemapping (if that's the issue).
Looks like 720p.Good enough for counting?
hm.... shot 18 actually looks like an edge post-process on 360, not MSAA, which would explain why it seems no AA in a lot of places there (failed edge detection). Shot 27 is probably the best example of it.
I wonder if they switched from 4xAA (first trailer) to one of the FXAA profiles (less aggressive ED than PS3 version).Though I might have just been fooled by compression, plus sometimes FXAA produces rather MSAA-like gradients (2x or 4x), but of course, in motion is another thing entirely.
Weird how alpha items (e.g. foliage, misc paper-thin items, some snow decals, and the sort) don't get detected at all.
If this is FXAA then I really don't see the reason to use it over MLAA on PS3.
Given the extensive HDD caching and streaming, it's plausible they're doing quite a bit with decompression. Who knows how they've got the engine setup, but FXAA is just a post-process shader that doesn't cost extra memory. I've already discussed some reasoning earlier, but this is pretty off-topic.
From an image quality standpoint, FXAA does try to minimize edge contrast issues that MLAA doesn't, so it's not a 1:1 comparison (for choosing either). It does quite a job on the foliage too, albeit with rather aggressive ED it seems.