New Oblivion PS3 Screens + Info

[almighty]

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38255

How could you miss this? It's on the front freakin' page.

Actually the 360 is'nt getting ALL the upgrades the PS3 version has got, all the Cell optomizations and extra AF filtering etc that the PS3 version has wont be going to the 360. It was said in an interview but i did'nt save the link

Ill look about for it.

 

[pjbliverpool]

That would be Qarl's Texture Pack 3 folks.
http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=634403&hl=

dang im gonna have to re-install the whole game just to get that now! texture pack 2 sucks by comparison

Oh well, at least this time i'll make sure I install everything properly, and only the essentials.

 

[djskribbles]

Actually the 360 is'nt getting ALL the upgrades the PS3 version has got, all the Cell optomizations and extra AF filtering etc that the PS3 version has wont be going to the 360. It was said in an interview but i did'nt save the link

Ill look about for it.

the 360 actually is only getting very few visual upgrades in their patch. in an interview with Pete Hines here: http://www.gamesradar.com/us/ps3/game/movies/index.jsp?releaseId=20060726163237511007
the interviewer asks when 360 owners can expect the visual upgrades. Pete Hines responds by saying visual upgrades is kind of an overstatement and that there are only 1 or 2 things being upgraded on the 360 version. most of the visual upgrades the ps3 got are exclusive to the ps3.

 

[djskribbles]

also,
http://spong.com/feature/10109516?cb=580

SPOnG: Okay, back to the game! Some of the optimisations you've made on the PS3 version, you've said, are going to make their way over to the Xbox 360 and PC versions [via updates] at some point in the future.

Pete Hines: Yeah, there's a few things we've done that are non-platform specific that may be applicable to the PC or the 360.

SPOnG: But some at the same time will be PS3-specific?

Pete Hines: Yeah, quite a few of the optimisations done for this version are specific to the way the PlayStation 3 is designed, in the way it processes information… so those optimisations wouldn't be applicable to the other versions.

 

[PARANOiA]

the 360 actually is only getting very few visual upgrades in their patch. in an interview with Pete Hines here: http://www.gamesradar.com/us/ps3/game/movies/index.jsp?releaseId=20060726163237511007
the interviewer asks when 360 owners can expect the visual upgrades. Pete Hines responds by saying visual upgrades is kind of an overstatement and that there are only 1 or 2 things being upgraded on the 360 version. most of the visual upgrades the ps3 got are exclusive to the ps3.

Thanks for the heads up.

 

[Nesh]

Too bad the differences actually requires you to look for them to standout.

I didnt have to look for the textures. But I did have to search for those "missing rocks"

 

[Nesh]

I think I prefer this version:

Ehehehehhehhe..

(plz don't yell at me)

wow thats how Oblivion should have been on consoles too

 

[dobwal]

I didnt have to look for the textures. But I did have to search for those "missing rocks"

As if you set your eyes on the images to only enjoy their beauty. You are a rare person who can look upon a 360 frameshot next to a ps3 frameshot of the same scene and somehow doing so without the preconceived notion that the images are different. Thus allowing any noticeable differences to be the result of accidental discovery.

If the images were set 20 to 25 posts apart with no indication of platform or with no indication that they were different in anyway,then I guess the texture differences would of suck out to you.

 

[Mordecaii]

When I first got Oblivion for the PC, the distant LOD textures stuck out like a sore thumb to me, along with how flat a lot of the textures in the game were and how ugly a lot of the people in the game looked. So for me, the difference between the PS3 version and X360 version is huge and easily noticeable since I've seen Oblivion on the PC both with craptastic textures and Qarl's Texture Pack 3 installed.

I'm glad that Bethesda is finally fixing something that should have never been in the game, and I hope that their future work will not include such oversights.

 

[Polygon Crusher]

This is the console forum and I believe you've tried to make your point enough times in this thread already. That means, theres no more point in you posting up shots of your PC game everytime somebody posts some comparison shots in this thread. In the end, I personally prefer the one with the smoothest overall experience in terms of framerate and loading while at the same time looking acceptable.

Ahh so you prefer the PC version then as the loading times are short 5-10s (without mods, double with mods that use about 500-700MB VRAM constant) and the FPS is always 30+ on vanilla and average 25 on modded on a med end comp. Good ridance!

 

[rounin]

Ahh so you prefer the PC version then as the loading times are short 5-10s (without mods, double with mods that use about 500-700MB VRAM constant) and the FPS is always 30+ on vanilla and average 25 on modded on a med end comp. Good ridance!

No. If you don't get the implied points (ie average doesn't matter if framerates drop low, the PS3 version takes 3-5s to load vs 7-10s on Xbox360 and 5-10s on your unspecified comp, your mods will cause it to load longer, etc), drop the issue. That means that there is no point in mentioning the PC version because you will bring nothing new or clever to the discussion by doing so.

 

[pakotlar]

wow this just motivated me to play oblivion again. qarl's texture pack rocks damn.

 

[pjbliverpool]

No. If you don't get the implied points (ie average doesn't matter if framerates drop low, the PS3 version takes 3-5s to load vs 7-10s on Xbox360 and 5-10s on your unspecified comp, your mods will cause it to load longer, etc), drop the issue. That means that there is no point in mentioning the PC version because you will bring nothing new or clever to the discussion by doing so.

The "in gameplay" loading pauses (when the message "loading area" comes up) are much more important than the "pre-gameplay" loading time IMO and unless the PS3 virtually eliminates "in gameplay" loading pauses like a high end PC does then its most certainly inferior from a loading time point of view. Also, the "pre-gameplay" loading pauses vary wildly depending on the circumstances, i.e. you can wait 20 seconds when you load up a completely new area sometimes but only 1-2 seconds when say moving into a building.

As for framerate, Oblivion has very varied graphics and so whether its PS3, Xbox 360 or PC, the framerate will vary a lot and the minimum will be a lot lower than the average. The only way to avoid this is to lock your framerate somewhere close to the minimum assuming the minimum is high enough to be the average, which it isn't on any system. My framerate generally varies between 35 and 50fps in outdoor areas on a heavily modified copy although there are rare occasions when it will drop into the high 20's.

Bottom line though is that if you want the "smoothest overall experience in terms of framerate and loading" while holding graphics equal, you will have a hard time demonstrating that a high end PC isn't the better solution.

 

[warb]

No. If you don't get the implied points (ie average doesn't matter if framerates drop low, the PS3 version takes 3-5s to load vs 7-10s on Xbox360 and 5-10s on your unspecified comp, your mods will cause it to load longer, etc), drop the issue. That means that there is no point in mentioning the PC version because you will bring nothing new or clever to the discussion by doing so.

For Oblivion-360 minus the HDD?

Loading is usually around 3-5 seconds for buildings, ruins and caves; ~15-20s in and out of towns. For anyone suffering longer loads, try holding down A on startup to clear out the games HDD cache.

 

[TheChefO]

wow thats how Oblivion should have been on consoles too

RAM - would've been nice though.

Agreed on the ps3 upgrades on the visuals. They are noticably cleaner/more detailed. However I question if this would not have been the case on 360 as well if they were to do a sequel/port from ps3 version.

 

[Nesh]

RAM - would've been nice though.

Agreed on the ps3 upgrades on the visuals. They are noticably cleaner/more detailed. However I question if this would not have been the case on 360 as well if they were to do a sequel/port from ps3 version.

Yep I am sure it could since none of the console versions show their true capabilities. I am sure both consoles can do better than that (excluding the modded PC version)

 

[rounin]

Bottom line though is that if you want the "smoothest overall experience in terms of framerate and loading" while holding graphics equal, you will have a hard time demonstrating that a high end PC isn't the better solution.

For one, your high end PC doesn't cost $500-$600, which is a harsh reality that must be considered. Of course, theres the argument that you can build a powerful PC and have the ultimate experience, but when one steps into this section of Beyond3D, it is assumed that one drops such an argument because its rather pointless.

When I was refering to the "smoothest overall experience in terms of framerate and loading", I made the assumption that it was obvious that I wasn't making a comparison between the PS3 experience and what you could achieve on an expensive computer running the latest mods. I was refering to the fact that even on the mid to highend computers, running those mods (screenshots that some were putting up continuously) brought the experience down on those terms and thus there really was no comparison. To me, that is pointless and thats what I was pointing out, and thats what swaaye acknowledged.

Secondly, you and I have no idea how it compares right now but the previews suggest that the PS3 version does perform competitively to a high-end PC - which we can only assume them to mean that while looking reasonably similar, the performance of the PS3 version approaches that of the PC. There is the issue of the PC version running higher resolution, AA and such, but the point is either that it looks similar to enough people or that when running at that res with the "mods" that the PS3 version received, they are similar enough.

I hope I have elaborated enough on my points, but if you wish, you can further talk to me on PM. Honestly, like I said earlier and again in this post, there is no point in bringing in the PC version.

 

[Jesus2006]

Yep I am sure it could since none of the console versions show their true capabilities. I am sure both consoles can do better than that (excluding the modded PC version)

Well im quite sure they wouldn't, at least in this way. Bethesda already said when asked about the patch and what's the 360's gonna get taht most of the "optimizatins" are specific to the PS3 and especially the CELL processor so porting wouldn't be as easy as from 360->PS3.

 

[swaaye]

It most certainly will be fascinating to see how PS3 fares with its split RAM design. That's not a lot of RAM to work with, for sure. I'm not sure 360 is really better off though. They both have to squeeze the game into 512 MB total. I'm sure that the game uses a lot more than that just for non-graphics-specific usage on PC. Though I haven't loaded it up in months now. I'm sure most of that is more liberal caching. The game is much more frugal on RAM though than say EQ2 or Dark Messiah.

I don't think 360's problems were CPU or GPU power at all. I think the loading delays and cache issues described by people on the Bethsoft forum spell out that the devs had a really tough time optimizing memory usage and buffering. Working off a DVD-ROM must be a real killer, too. I know I've read many times on the forums here that the design of optical disk data streaming can make or break load times. You don't want to make that drive do any more seeking than necessary, for example. And the 360 HDD is a mere 5400RPM notebook drive. That could be slower than the Xbox's desktop-class HDD.

Not to bring up PC again as more flame bait, but I was really impressed with how fast Oblivion could load its areas. From Windows desktop and into the environment was a on par or faster than other games I've played with significantly less impressive environments or gameplay complexity. So, contrary to the popular route of ripping on Bethesda's programmers, I think the game is actually pretty efficient.

The PS3 GPU isn't all that exciting, but Oblivion loves CPU. If they can take advantage of Cell, it might offer a smoother experience overall (compared to 360). I'm fairly skeptical though. Cell is too new yet for any miracles, I think. Quite a complex challenge they have on their hands. Wonder if Sony is helping out.

I read somewhere (can't remember anymore!) that the 360's benefits from PS3's devel will be very minimal. A Bethesda fellow mentioned that the improvements weren't really graphics. Probably more along the lines of bugfixes/small tweaks.

 

[pjbliverpool]

For one, your high end PC doesn't cost $500-$600, which is a harsh reality that must be considered. Of course, theres the argument that you can build a powerful PC and have the ultimate experience, but when one steps into this section of Beyond3D, it is assumed that one drops such an argument because its rather pointless.

When I was refering to the "smoothest overall experience in terms of framerate and loading", I made the assumption that it was obvious that I wasn't making a comparison between the PS3 experience and what you could achieve on an expensive computer running the latest mods. I was refering to the fact that even on the mid to highend computers, running those mods (screenshots that some were putting up continuously) brought the experience down on those terms and thus there really was no comparison. To me, that is pointless and thats what I was pointing out, and thats what swaaye acknowledged.

Secondly, you and I have no idea how it compares right now but the previews suggest that the PS3 version does perform competitively to a high-end PC - which we can only assume them to mean that while looking reasonably similar, the performance of the PS3 version approaches that of the PC. There is the issue of the PC version running higher resolution, AA and such, but the point is either that it looks similar to enough people or that when running at that res with the "mods" that the PS3 version received, they are similar enough.

I hope I have elaborated enough on my points, but if you wish, you can further talk to me on PM. Honestly, like I said earlier and again in this post, there is no point in bringing in the PC version.

Fair enough, if your not talking about high end PC's then it changes the whole dynamic of the comparison. For me, all such comparisons are made on the basis of a high end PC because thats what I own (the cost of which is attributable to many things besides gaming) however I realise that such a basis for comparison isn't relevant to everyone.