Top
180°

Digital Foundry vs Starhawk

"The technology underpinning the experience also manages to impress. Large environments and battles are crammed with dynamic light sources, generous use of alpha and particle effects - all of which help to deliver a sense of spectacle and intensity to heated single- and multiplayer games. Of course, there are a few stumbling blocks along the way. Performance could be smoother when the engine is put under stress, and the sub-HD framebuffer in combination with an overly aggressive post-process anti-aliasing solution can makes things appear softer than we'd like." Digital Foundry

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
The story is too old to be commented.
IHateYouFanboys2194d ago ShowReplies(4)
givemeshelter2194d ago

Why is this surprising?
Consoles this generation had a combination of 720p and lower resolution depending on certain games.
It's a trade off to determine if running the game in sub HD resolutions will provide better performance or keeping the game at 720p for its visual appeal.

Almost all games on consoles this generation with large environments and numerous unscripted scenes with more advanced effects are Sub HD.
It's the necessary trade off to keep performance smooth.
It's the reason you see games like Halo, StarHawk, and especially Alan Wake Sub HD.
Who cares. They all still look great

MAJ0R2194d ago

That's true, but it was just my thought that PS3 exclusives would never trade that off to run in sub-hd.

Ha I'm joking, but I think we can all agree that there will be a double standard in terms of a PS3 exclusive being accepted as sub-hd, while a 360 exclusive would get ridiculed for being sub-hd.

givemeshelter2194d ago (Edited 2194d ago )

I fully agree. Unfortunately and this is really sad. If this were an Xbox360 exclusive, this site would light up like a Christmas tree bashing the game for being Sub HD, however this being a PS3 exclusive, no such "action" is taken.
What you find are very cleaver and ingenious game developers for consoles right now.
By limiting real time effects to a minimum and using LDR instead of HDR and using smaller environments and scripted scenes, little to no destructible environments as for one example, console developers can keep games looking amazing and running solid at 720p. Uncharted, KZ and Gears Of War come to mind.
It's a trade off that developers do to keep games running solid.

@Shaman

I think many people on this site forget this. As soon as a game on consoles are more open, use more A.I and dare to use real time effects such a Global Illumination and Real Time Eye adaptive HDR and sub surface scattering, frame rates OR resolutions will suffer or both. So a trade off HAS to be made.
When you look at games like Alan Wake, you see the trade off that had to be made to run that game on consoles.
The game uses HDR and a combination of real time effects, shadows etc. It's a performance killer.
It's a all about trade offs and quite frankly I believe for the most part, console developers have done a FANTASTIC job at this balancing act. Kudos to them working with limited hardware making games look amazing.

Shaman2194d ago (Edited 2194d ago )

If you have a big open game, lots of ai and alphas (grass, fire, explosion) you are either going sub hd or low frame per second, or both. PS3 didn't really have alot of open world games. Infamous 2 was last one and it had no AA. Its all about trade offs. When you have scripted game you can much easier control frame rate "spikes", its predictable, and engine is not thinking what to do next. When you have game like Starhawk or GTA engine has to know in every milisecond what to show on the screen no matter how far or high you go above the map. Not sure if Starhawk has real time dynamic time of day, but if it has like GTA than its even worse situation. You can't virtually cheat a single light or shadow, everything has to be real time.

Actually givemeshelter, AW was originally 2xMSAA and 720p according to DF at 2009 E3. The reason why they went 4xMSAA was to lower the shimmering and alpha aliasing on trees(they had ALOT of them). AW being fully deferred shading game had enormous frame buffer with 4xMSAA and 720p was not an option. GG said they cut their frame buffer in half by dropping QAA (same memory footprint like 2xMSAA) and that gave them alot of performances.

WrAiTh Sp3cTr32194d ago

Let's see how fast this place heats up...based on the double standards. There will be spinning...oh yes...there will be spinning.

raytraceme2193d ago (Edited 2193d ago )

Infamous Festival of Blood uses the same engine as infamous 2 PLUS it includes FXAA, Runs at a full 720p resolution, and is open world.

Also starhawk has a 40fps avg. and I would gladly take that over a 720p resolution. The ps3 has always brought out the top looking games (after the pc that is) and has proven itself to be the top console in terms of graphics. I still don't get why people still argue that eh ps3 isn't.

I still see people arguing about the Last Of Us' graphics those people still don't get the fact that uncharted 3 holds the crown for best graphics on a console. Yet these people still have their doubts... hmm smh

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2193d ago
MrDead2194d ago (Edited 2194d ago )

I’m just having fun playing a good game.

I'll leave the pixel counting and brand bashing to the sad children.

NaViTo2194d ago

I absolutly agree with you!

DarthJay2194d ago

That is what it is supposed to be about. Play games to have fun. Who cares what is exclusive to what? That's why I own everything.

BitbyDeath2194d ago

Exactly, it looks and plays just fine so that's all that matters to me.

suicidalblues2194d ago

Eurogamer said it best;

"It's a beautiful game that's superb to play and it's exclusive to PlayStation 3 - we highly recommend you check it out."

sandman2242194d ago

I'll be so happy when they can make all games at 1080p at 60fps. I'm tired of hearing about what the developers sacrifice in order to get a game to run smooth.

BitbyDeath2194d ago

Devs will always want something more, you'll never hear the end of that.

chukamachine2194d ago

This generation has been about rez,fps,aa,360,ps3.pc.

If a game looks great on PS3, a pc or 360 fanboy was state it does not look as good as pc.

If a game is lower rez on 360, it is slagged off.

But lets be honest here.

360 came out first and a year + later the Ps3 came out, and the amount of people slagging the ps3 off before release was unreal, never seen so much hate before.

Halo,gears were not for me.

I'm a pc gamer by heart, but after playing uncharted 1 i was sold. Loved the story and gameplay was fun.

You buy what you like.

PC'S These days top spec, are 15-20 times faster then PS3/360 in alot of ways.

Why argue with console owners over graphics, some of them still look fantastic.

The new GOD OF WAR, the last of us, the new halo look great for old tech.

Show all comments (21)