PS3: New Dirt Pics

[Shifty Geezer]

Totally agree here. These changes are too small to be performance related.

It'd need more comparisons though. The 2 images compared might be the two with the smallest amount of difference, and turn the corner...PS3's missing half the stadium! But if it's this level of variation across the board, that's not going to get the framerate up.

 

[Todd33]

well that's fine and dandy but I'm just saying my 360 retail version of dirt looked closer to that PS3 shot last night when I played it and not over the top.

the HDR and contrast were perfect IMO. :smile:

Of course it is, you paid $60 for it on a platform that you own, you are not being objective though.

sure you can.

I can make all kinds of adjustments on my Samsung to get different results. I have mine adjusted and Dirt looks awesome (one of the best looking games PERIOD released so far) as well as the Bioshock demo and other games at the same settings. Hell, just turning off or on DNIe can change it drastically.

The the choices the developer made make the game have high contrast and overblown HDR, you can mute it to a point with TV adjustments, but you are then calibrating to one game. You prefer the look as addressed above, many people simple don't like it.

IMO the devs read the critismsfor the 360 version and made the appropriate changes. Made the HDR/bllom more realistic and made some trade-offs/optimizations for better frame rates. It's not a mystery why the two versions look different, the people who made the game made it look different.

 

[Tap In]

Of course it is, you paid $60 for it on a platform that you own, you are not being objective though.

do not EVEN tell me what I'm doing in my brain.

ignore list for you

and your "I play both consoles so I'm not biased" crap does not fly.

 

[Todd33]

ignore list for you

Oh nos

I agree it is one of the best looking games out, I've said so before, but that does not mean the "nuclear sky" HDR is perfect. When you actually play it on another system and compare it, you see how over done it is, which is why it is brought up in all DiRT threads.

 

[tha_con]

I can imagine having to render fewer sections of grass, fewer tree's, and fewer billboards (which means fewer textures all together) can allow for more of those resources to be allocated to other things, which is where I think the frame increase comes from.

Considering that this build isn't 30fps faster, I don't think we should be looking for major changes to increase frame rate, rather, minor changes to stabilize it (which, looking at screens and comparing the two versions, is what happened).

Right?

 

[Todd33]

Right?

IMO yes. As I said, the 360 version looks a tad better to me, but it would be nice to have the best from both. The 360 sharpness/AA and trees/grass and the PS3's frame rate and more realistic HDR (or something between the two, or even a slider).

 

[rbushner]

I've played both, the X360 does look alot nicer to me, but at a cost of framerate. I would usually go with framerate over graphics eye candy, but I know other people have different tastes.

While the game looks nice, it does not play very well IMO. After playing the PS3 demo and going back to the X360 demo, I'm reminded why I passed on this when it came out for the X360. I really wanted to like it too.

 

[djskribbles]

honestly, other than Tap In, i haven't seen one 360 owner say they like the HDR intensity on the 360 version.

and i honestly don't see less grass, only less trees and fewer spectators in the stands. but honestly, the difference isn't noticeable enough while PLAYING the game. also note from the GAF pics that there is better particle effects on the PS3 version (more sparks and glass shards).