Image Quality and Framebuffer Speculations for WIP/alpha/beta/E3 games *Read the first post*

Right, sorry about that, keep forgetting about that thread.

 

LoT is definitely wrong about the motion blur. The DF shots will show the difference more clearly, but they are indeed using a better blur mask for objects and higher number of samples (both object and camera).

They're both 720p.

 

Thanks man, that explains the almost jaggie-free but also sharp IQ.

After reading the DF article this is some impressive tech from the FU2 team and a big improvement in almost every area - can't wait to see the retail version.

 

Weird that the wet effect is missing in the chase sequence (PS3). It's definitely there when you are outside.

 

Bug maybe? Same for missing winkles.

Impressive tech but no vsync makes me sad

 

The tearing is barely noticeable, though. I only spotted it on my second run through the demo because I was actively looking for flaws.

 

Maybe. The comparison shots were of the scene directly after coming inside and having to do the dashing section, so any "dry-off" time should have been negligable and comparable.

 

Maybe what? I just mentioned that the wet effect is there when you are outside.

 

Ack, meant to insert the "bug" post as another quote.

 

I'm usually the first person to cry bloody murder when a game ditches vsync but in this case it was the obvious choice (on 360 at least), the game drops frames so rarely that its a complete non issue.

There could be a case for the use of triple buffering on the PS3 I guess, but its hard to mandate that when we really don't know how tight the memory situation was on that platform.

 

Dark environment in the demo makes tering less noticable, but other levels could be much brighter. PS3 definietly needs TB, tearing in 360 version isn't so bad.

 

Both Juno and the player character don't have the normal mapped wrinkles, so I wouldn't think it was a bug. It seems to only be used in the cut-scenes as well, so perhaps it's a matter of memory (high resolution normal map), and omitting it entirely would be better than having a highly compressed and artifact-ridden set of details on such an important part of the scene.

 

I'll take a couple of frame drops anytime over simply ditching the effect. Another thing I still don't understand, since the cutscenes are prerendered, why would memory constraint be a concern at all?

 

Not all the cut-scenes are FMV. It's pretty obvious which ones are and are not.

 

Still... cutscenes usually are 100% designer controlled... thus I have a hard time believing the PS3 couldn't do that.

 

The AA implemented gives the game a soft, almost sub hd look.I should mention I don't know the res of the game, I assume it's 720p.I was impressed with it from my playthrough.

 

It's actually an animated wrinkle map IMHO - there's a base normal map that's blended together with this map based on facial expressions. Ie. he wrinkles his brows, his nose, or the crow's feet in the corner of the eyes.

Uncharted and Mass Effect were some of the games to first utilize this in their close-ups as far as I know. Relatively simple but you basically need two or three normal maps for the face which does it texture memory.

 

Some HDMI pic of NFS Hot Pursuit on XBOX 360 demo
http://i51.tinypic.com/mbk490.png
http://i54.tinypic.com/34gvh40.png
http://i56.tinypic.com/121wto8.png
http://i56.tinypic.com/2r2ceup.png
http://i51.tinypic.com/nn5w2h.png
http://i54.tinypic.com/rh74nt.png
http://i52.tinypic.com/8xugjo.png

It look sub HD to me.

 

Seems to be 720p/noAA.

 

It's 720p 2xAA (AA on cars, not on environment it seems). IIRC, they render the cars in a forward pass separate from the environment (which is done deferred).