The Technology of GTA IV/RDR *Rage Engine*

green.pixel said:
But you can't actually go there as far as I understand it? That's just backdrop mix/LOD.
Click to expand...

That's right. Beyond a certain point, you can't proceed further (It's just desert anyway, with a crashed starship nearby).

The play area is comfortably big -- a sniper's heaven to be exact.

Pyrrhus Rise: http://www.gametrailers.com/user-movie/killzone-2-multiplayer-pyrrhus/305584

I believe you can indeed walk to all the buildings you see in the distant/background (in the video) though. Only the crashed starship is out of bound, but I'm not sure anymore.
 
Nebula said:
Yeah, cant believe so few talked or even noticed the indirect lighting with color bleeding like CE3 does. Yes FC2 had it although not as robust but still. That and so much more.
Click to expand...

Really? I never noticed. Any obvious places I should go look for?
 
Can anyone look into the PS3 ver of Episodes (or RDR) & tell how the QAA is being applied to the scene ?

I mean there have been lots of complains over RDR PS3 having various aliasing issues which is kinda odd given that QAA is better at reducing aliasing than 2*MSAA. (even if at the cost of inflicting added blur). I mean 640p/2*MSAA vs 720p/2*MSAA should already look comparable enough....now swapping the 2*MSAA for QAA for the lower reso version you should get an even better edge smoothing atleast. (again, the additional blur is not my point here).

Also, the age old question returns...what could possibly be the reason for R* to choose QAA instead of 2*MSAA....considering the cost is nearly the same.
In most of the cases where devs opt for QAA on PS3 the 360 ver is usually the one running 4 samples of MSAA...so its understandable for them to choose QAA as they would want both ver to have equal amount of edge smoothing. But in case like this where the 360 ver itself is 2*MSAA, I find it odd that their design choices would include opting for QAA especially considering their game is already subHD.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Damn, video's not in english.But it appears that x360 has less pop up?, ps3 versions has some objects missing in the background.What do you guys make of the tree comparison? I noticed the mountains in the texture pop in comparison to be more sharper? than the ps3 version.

I guess we'll have to wait to eurogamer gets a hold of both version to compare.

Being an x360/ps3 owner, I'm still not sure.

I mean I would buy the x360 versions based on being proper hd and better aa method, but there's the fact that the console is more louder than ps3 ( it bugs me) and my x360 uses component instead of hdmi so the picture will be a bit softer.

I'm sure there's some minor performance differences similar to GTA4.


Are they using proper SSAA this time?

Does the ps3 version require an instalation?

Apologies if this has been discussed on b3D or if I'm posting in the wrong thread.

thanks.
 
Couldn't see what they were pointing at in the tree one.

Proper SSAA? It's quincunx on PS3 and MSAA on 360. Ps3 has a 600MB install but there are large differences in load times favoring 360.
 
ultragpu said:
Really? I never noticed. Any obvious places I should go look for?
Click to expand...

Put colored stuff against surfaces that could reflect color (metal or house walls etc). Make sure sun is out and that light reaches object direct or indirect.

http://img142.imageshack.us/i/fc2ilvis.jpg/

Heres a comment from a post by PhilB in screenshot thread though his images wont load.

Things to look at - car tires, directly to the left and right of where the tires end, and the tombstone to the left of the car. It seems the color does bleed on other objects (it's hard to tell in the green shot because of compression) like the color of the car and tombstone (also specular seems to have changed a bit as well). Light reflects better from the sand as opposed to the green grass texture. It's limited though (the actual radiosity) to just ground and wall textures (e.g. rock cliffs and sand); things like objects in the scene (cars, and barrels) won't bleed their color onto other objects but they do seem to be affected by the actual lighting. Pretty nice but it's a bit glitchy at times.
Click to expand...
 
Karamazov said:
maybe the fact that you can't fly high in RDR helped the devs to put more details than in GTAIV.
Click to expand...
Indeed, reducing verticality should help in some way for sure.
Maybe that's how they gained an increase in the draw distance for landscapes ?
 
N_B said:
Couldn't see what they were pointing at in the tree one.

Proper SSAA? It's quincunx on PS3 and MSAA on 360. Ps3 has a 600MB install but there are large differences in load times favoring 360.
Click to expand...

Load times are incredibly fast on 360, but the main thing is you basically only see loading screens when a cutscene is about to start, and it takes about 5 seconds. Even if it's 10 seconds on the PS3, it happens so rarely in the game, and should be fast enough, that it won't hamper the experience at all.
 
nightshade said:
Also, the age old question returns...what could possibly be the reason for R* to choose QAA instead of 2*MSAA....considering the cost is nearly the same.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure there's quite a few people out there who prefer smoother edges over a slightly sharper image. I'm one of them personally. Why? I don't stare at stills when I'm playing games. As soon as things start moving, the blur (which isn't exactly huge to begin with) becomes a complete non-issue. Edge-aliasing on the other hand I find very distracting at all times, especially on a large display when the base resolution isn't all that high to begin with. (I preferred the blurry mess that was the pre-patch Ghostbusters on the PS3 to the shimmering mess it is now)
 
I am MUCH more concerned about framerate than anything else. GTA4 was on the lower end of my acceptance scale, on PS3... playing the Episodes now on PC... it's just day and night... even disabling bling makes the game "feel" much better, as the framerate is simply stable.

That video by gamepro.de isn't really the best there is, though. Horrible compression, low resolution (and Flash video^^). I didn't see much that would make the game a "persona non-grata" on my PS3, though.
 
Sigfried1977 said:
I'm pretty sure there's quite a few people out there who prefer smoother edges over a slightly sharper image. I'm one of them personally. Why? I don't stare at stills when I'm playing games. As soon as things start moving, the blur (which isn't exactly huge to begin with) becomes a complete non-issue. Edge-aliasing on the other hand I find very distracting at all times, especially on a large display when the base resolution isn't all that high to begin with. (I preferred the blurry mess that was the pre-patch Ghostbusters on the PS3 to the shimmering mess it is now)
Click to expand...
You seem to have misunderstood the question I raised (or maybe I didn't put it correctly). even I used to be one of the advocates of QAA cause it provided me better edge smoothing [until I saw MLAA ;) ] but in case of Episodes & RDR the QAA is clearly not getting applied to all surface, so why choose the extra blur when you can't provide the benefit of better edge smoothing of QAA uniformly ?

If the QAA was indeed good here in this game at reducing jagged edges, then we wouldn't be hearing complains about aliasing issues plaguing the PS3 ver. specifically in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

X
Shimmering lines, common in menus, HUDs: Term for the artifact? And possible to "fix" with post-processing?
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
Davros
D
S
Discussion about lighting (usage of lighting techniques).
2
Replies
21
Views
3K
Frenetic Pony
F
B
Game Engine Convergence And The Problem With UE5
4 5 6
Replies
104
Views
17K
cheapchips
C
I
The first Evil Within still has remarkably sophisticated lighting
Replies
2
Views
1K
Phantom88
P
N
Hellslave (Saturn Homebrew)
Replies
6
Views
4K
Nesh
N
Back
Top