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

[liolio]

He also says if you miss 60 then you drop to 30. So he's only talking about double buffering?

he was speaking of PC before stating the advantage of console with more flexible practices than what PC MS API allows. And hopefully they don't use triple buffering if they 're only fluctuating slightly from 60FPS that would never make for the extra input input lag and extra memory footprint.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Remember people, this is the analysis thread.

 

[Ruskie]

So...Square Enix finally got that "multiplatform parity" thing?:smile:
http://www.examiner.com/video-game-...s-xbox-360-e3-trailers-picture#slide=34241596

 

[COPS N RAPPERS]

So...Square Enix finally got that "multiplatform parity" thing?:smile:
http://www.examiner.com/video-game-...s-xbox-360-e3-trailers-picture#slide=34241596

hmmm, so are these for real? if so they did well.


Hey, can anyone find out what the rez is on the new tomb raider game running on 360? or find some clear footage on it? youtube has a 1080p vid of the demo, but the compression on it is pretty bad.

 

[Kasersky]

i've been investigating ffxiii-2 for a bit now, managed to figure out a couple things. number 1 that examiner comparison is complete shit its the same footage with replaced overlays. they did this for previous ff13 as well.

but i did find some pics undoctored taken directly off a television, its probably impossible to figure out the resolution but you can draw some conclusions.

EDIT: 4gamer disabled hotlinking

this is 360 version
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/013.jpg
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/031.jpg
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/030.jpg

this is the ps3 version
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/006.jpg
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/009.jpg
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/027.jpg

you can tell because the ps3 demos use sony branded televisions while the 360 used samsung branded televisions. anyways simple glance at the hair the image quality is quite obvious and suffering from the same ugly artifacting that was apparent in ff13 on 360. anyways i am disappoint square enix.

source: http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/

 

[COPS N RAPPERS]

i've been investigating ffxiii-2 for a bit now, managed to figure out a couple things. number 1 that examiner comparison is complete shit its the same footage with replaced overlays. they did this for previous ff13 as well.

but i did find some pics undoctored taken directly off a television, its probably impossible to figure out the resolution but you can draw some conclusions.

this is 360 version
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/013.jpg
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/031.jpg
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/030.jpg

this is the ps3 version
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/006.jpg
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/009.jpg
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/027.jpg

you can tell because the ps3 demos use sony branded televisions while the 360 used samsung branded televisions. anyways simple glance at the hair the image quality is quite obvious and suffering from the same ugly artifacting that was apparent in ff13 on 360. anyways i am disappoint square enix.

source: http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/

hmmmm, wow yeah i'd say from looking at these it looks about the same.

edit, i mean the rez for the 360 version hasn't seem to change.

I've been noticing a trend, It seems that every engine that picks a sub hd mainframe the sequels usually never tend to expand in pixels. they seem to stay about the same. I've been wondering, is resolution something a developer starts out with first before it's tested on a console or is tailored when everything is done?

If it's before then i think that's why it'll never go up.

 

[Ruskie]

i've been investigating ffxiii-2 for a bit now, managed to figure out a couple things. number 1 that examiner comparison is complete shit its the same footage with replaced overlays. they did this for previous ff13 as well.

but i did find some pics undoctored taken directly off a television, its probably impossible to figure out the resolution but you can draw some conclusions.

this is 360 version
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/013.jpg
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/031.jpg
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/030.jpg

this is the ps3 version
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/006.jpg
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/009.jpg
http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/SS/027.jpg

you can tell because the ps3 demos use sony branded televisions while the 360 used samsung branded televisions. anyways simple glance at the hair the image quality is quite obvious and suffering from the same ugly artifacting that was apparent in ff13 on 360. anyways i am disappoint square enix.

source: http://www.4gamer.net/games/127/G012733/20110608075/

No,the examiner shots that I posted are NOT the same.Take a better look at them,especially later ones.These are taken from the E3 trailers,one is 360 trailer other is PS3.

 

[Kasersky]

No,the examiner shots that I posted are NOT the same.Take a better look at them,especially later ones.These are taken from the E3 trailers,one is 360 trailer other is PS3.

they're from two different trailers of the same exact footage, they recorded the footage initially rendered on ps3 then just changes the 2d overlays, its why there are differences in the offsets since someone did a lousy job. there are differences because the person from the examiner also did a lousy job of matching the footage when he took screen shots.

the evidence i show is actual demos of the game so its legit, the examiner stuff is just square enix released media which could be doctored.

 

[Brad Grenz]

Yeah, the colors alone are too close for that to be genuine 360 footage. We all know what the 360 does to the gamma to make the blacks pop. There should be other discernible differences as well, even if the resolution was the same. Pretty obvious that they're passing off PS3 footage as 360 footage again for XIII-2.

 

[AlNom]

Interesting. Footage of Halo CE Anniversary with the classic graphics reveals 1152x648 (9/10 ratio in both axes).

The sections with the updated graphics are too compressed or too difficult to tell, but it looks like they have some sort of edge smoothing. *shrug*

 

[Kasersky]

alice: madness returns

it was mlaa after all
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-alice-madness-returns-face-off

 

[assurdum]

alice: madness returns

it was mlaa after all
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-alice-madness-returns-face-off

Yes but maybe more attentions for the bizzarre glitchs of the ps3 version would been better

 

[Omega]

Interesting. Footage of Halo CE Anniversary with the classic graphics reveals 1152x648 (9/10 ratio in both axes).

The sections with the updated graphics are too compressed or too difficult to tell, but it looks like they have some sort of edge smoothing. *shrug*

That is REALLY disappointing. Even Halo Reach ran at a higher resolution and that game sports better visuals.

 

[assurdum]

That is REALLY disappointing. Even Halo Reach ran at a higher resolution and that game sports better visuals.

Why it's disappointed? Crysis 2 on the ps3 has the same resolution & the difference with the 360 version isn't so disappointing.... I think counts more the final result than the number of pixels...

 

[kagemaru]

Why it's disappointed? Crysis 2 on the ps3 has the same resolution & the difference with the 360 version isn't so disappointing.... I think counts more the final result than the number of pixels...

He probably expected a remake of a 10 year game to be at least full 720p, though I agree with you.

I wonder if the updated renderer adds some overhead, making it hard to hit full 720p.

 

[Omega]

Why it's disappointed? Crysis 2 on the ps3 has the same resolution & the difference with the 360 version isn't so disappointing.... I think counts more the final result than the number of pixels...

I'm disappointed because I was kind of expecting an "HD" remake. At 640p it will be jaggies galore if there is no/selective AA.

 

[i nerini del buio]

He probably expected a remake of a 10 year game to be at least full 720p, though I agree with you.

I wonder if the updated renderer adds some overhead, making it hard to hit full 720p.

yeah well, as someone from 343i pointed out on gaf (frankie himself, iirc), when you're running with the old graphics, there's the new graphic layer running in background so it's basically two engines running simultaneously
proof is that you can just push the back button and jump without any delay from the old graphics to the new ones

btw, all this pixel/resolution stuff is becoming silly*
why don't we just go back to may payne or any other 10 years old game and push it a 5000*5000 pixels?


*not that i do not appreciate Al work, mind you. Al is awesome

 

[AlNom]

Folks, it's just an observation of the footage.

Ultimately, there are going to be trade-offs to building the new graphics layer on top of the old one. Besides, updating the graphics to current standards would imply that similar trade-offs to framebuffer format as current titles would have to be considered. Afterall, it's not just a simple port of Halo:CE PC, which could probably run at a ridiculous resolution using the old graphics if that were the goal.

 

[Kasersky]

they just wanted to be like the monkey island remakes. but thats 2d which makes it much simpler. what they're doing is horribly inefficient.

 

[Ruskie]

Lots of UC3 direct feed shots

http://www.lensoftruth.com/first-look-uncharted-3-multiplayer-beta/