Xbox One & PS4 Tomb Raider assets are identical, Square Enix insists

The Xbox One and PlayStation 4 versions of Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition both run at native 1080p and share identical assets, including textures, character models and particles, Square Enix has insisted, responding to speculation that the frame rate may not be the only difference between the two versions.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Chaostar1635d ago

So it must be some kind of terrible AA implementation that makes the textures look blurry on Xb1?

MRMagoo1231635d ago

Hmmm yeh kinda odd how the PS4 version look a lot better especially in some areas, ill wait for DF i think, unless that xbone fanboy does the comparison then whats the point in even reading lol the xbpne version could be in 240i and he would say the difference compared to the ps4 1080p version is tiny.

cleft51635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

This is more telling than they think.

If the assets are the same, yet the Xbox One version wasn't able to achieve [email protected], even an unsteady 60fps, then it speaks directly to the power of the console in order to generate a performance that allows for [email protected]

I don't know if they thought they where doing damage control here, but saying hey both games look the same. But we know one runs better than the other is more telling than saying the assets for one was high quality than the other. The reason being that you could write off performance disparity if the assets for the PS4 or Xbox One version was higher or lower than the other. Knowing that it isn't the case, means the difference in performance is on the console itself, not the assets.

Bathyj1635d ago

Good point cleft. The reason formula one and NASCAR cars are so heavily regulated is to keep them relatively equal so the race is between the drivers, not the cars. Saying the game is the same means the advantage lies elsewhere.

Of course, that's just an analogy. We know that not all the cars are built equal. Some designers are just smarter than others.

erathaol1635d ago

Do they need to clarify? Either way consumers buy the game.

creatchee1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

You know what was cool? When the game was summarily dismissed by both Xbox and PS fans alike as being a cash-grab and not worthy of full-priced game status.

Now it's just more fuel for the fanboy war.

ABizzel11635d ago

The main thing to remember is that two different teams developed these games. That alone guarantees that there's going to be some difference off top.

truefan11635d ago

Why is this still a problem when the ps4 staple infamous is running at 30fps. It can't be a big deal for TR and not be a big deal for one of your staple exclusives. FPS gate is closed, unless they want to continue being hypocrites.

Docknoss1635d ago

It's kind of weird that people with lives don't notice or even care if their is a difference.

Unspoken1635d ago

What's even more interesting is the fact PS4 fanboys concoct stories of how the XB1 version is worse, not just in frame rate, but in the rest of the game itself. Even when the developer themselves come and explain to them that the graphics assets are identical and both are running at 1080p.

Now we know for a fact who is blowing it out of proportion, the sony failboys.

DigitalRaptor1634d ago (Edited 1634d ago )

@ truefan1

That spin. Trying to falsify hypocrisy.

Tomb Raider is a last-generation game struggling to run 30fps on next-generation hardware, and significantly lower resolution textures. The reason this is criticised is that even with these lower textures it's still a last-gen game at 30fps.

inFamous: Second Son is built from the ground up for next-gen hardware, with an astoundingly next-gen LOD, particle effects, and dynamic attributes. As a completely next gen game, it has complete reason not to be running above 30fps considering all it has going on in a dynamic open-world.

@ Unspoken

Concoction? Try inspecting at Digital Foundry's comparison, and you'll see that the Xbone version's textures are not nearly as sharp as the PS4 version and drops to 900p in some scenes.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1634d ago
Charybdis1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

Interesting seems like both sides are saying textures on their version or better.

Xb1 supporters saying "anti-aliasing, more dense particle effects, and in certain areas, slightly better textures (some textures on PS4 are better and vice versa, but only slightly so)"

Even if using same assets they might look better or worse depending on how fast (which method etc)the textures are 'loaded'. Either way with higher frame rate ps4 has advantage.

FanboyKilla1630d ago

Whaaaaaat infamous is 30fps? then what in the hell are you ps fanboys talking about? Hey i dont mind it. The game looks great and i happen to enjoy infamous. i bet half of you braging about it never even played it. I mean it wasnt like it was a blockbuster. But anyway, cant wait to hear if you sony fanboys will be upset with infamouss 30fps. Or will it be titan fall runs 60ps buttery smooooth but infamous graphics are amazing best looking game bla bla bla.

GribbleGrunger1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

This is just a compete lie. There's no other way of describing it.

Unspoken1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

Wow, screen shots. Simply amazing! These PS4 fanboys will accept anything as fact. Show 'em a screen shot and it is automatically fact! I'd like to see this followed up by a few legitimate sites.

Let's wait until a real site does a thorough analysis between the two.

Digital Foundry Comparisons
Tomb Raider Definitive Edition: PS4 vs. Xbox One Cut-Scene Frame-Rate Tests

Tomb Raider Definitive Edition: PS4 vs. Xbox One Gameplay Frame-Rate Tests

Xbox One Vs PC (Ultimate Settings)

Tomb Raider: PS4 Definitive vs. PS3 Comparison

GribbleGrunger1635d ago (Edited 1634d ago )

They've already updated the analysis. You won't like it I'm afraid ... Read it all:

To begin with, let's address the differences between the two versions of the Definitive Edition on offer. PlayStation 4 users get a comfortably delivered 1080p presentation backed up with a post-process FXAA solution that has minimal impact on texture quality, sporting decent coverage across the scene, bar some shimmer around more finely detailed objects. Meanwhile the situation is more interesting on the Xbox One: the anti-aliasing solution remains unchanged, but we see the inclusion of what looks like a variable resolution framebuffer in some scenes, while some cut-scenes are rendered at a locked 900p, explaining the additional blur in some of our Xbox One screenshots. Curiously, the drop in resolution doesn't seem to occur during gameplay - it's only reserved for select cinematics - suggesting that keeping performance consistent during these sequences was a priority for Xbox One developer United Front Games.

For the most part the main graphical bells and whistles are lavished equally across both consoles, although intriguingly there are a few areas that do see Xbox One cutbacks. As demonstrated in our head-to-head video below (and in our vast Tomb Raider comparison gallery), alpha-based effects in certain areas give the appearance of rendering at half resolution - though other examples do look much cleaner. We also see a lower-quality depth of field in cut-scenes, and reduced levels of anisotropic filtering on artwork during gameplay. Curiously, there are also a few lower-resolution textures in places on Xbox One, but this seems to be down to a bug (perhaps on level of detail transitions) as opposed to a conscious downgrade.

Unspoken1634d ago

Looks like both consoles had to sacrifice a bit in order to play this game. Even the PS4 couldn't handle this at max settings.

"The differences here are interesting, because they suggest that the developers of both PS4 and Xbox One versions of Tomb Raider have made some sacrifices to allow for the key range of upgrades on offer in the Definitive Edition.

A direct comparison with the PC version set to the ultimate quality preset reveals some large discrepancies between the Definitive Editions compared with the full-fat PC experience. Aspects such as tessellation are missing on the characters and environments, with some of these elements appearing more blocky on the PS4 and Xbox One as a result. Meanwhile, motion blur is used much more sparingly, while texture resolution is noticeably lower in some cases. On the flip side, all the Definitive Edition graphical extras - such as the dynamic foliage and the impressive sub-surface scattering - are absent from the PC, which represents another (albeit smaller) compromise.

That said, the extra crispness and clarity available on the PC game due to higher-resolution assets and better filtering are a big draw for the platform - those with top-spec dual GPU configurations can dial up the settings to the 'ultimate' preset and still enjoy extras such as SSAA (super-sampling anti-aliasing) for vastly superior image quality, or even ramp up the resolution to 4K - though beware TressFX bugs if you push resolution that high.

Tomb Raider is also one of the most scalable PC games we've played - producing great results in our GPU tests across the spectrum, and at its very lowest presets, we even managed to play it quite successfully on a Surface Pro."

GribbleGrunger1634d ago

Nice try. The PS4 has better framerates and better graphics. DF tried their hardest to damage control this article but in the end had to admit Tombraider is better on PS4.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1634d ago
lifeisgamesok1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

LOL get over it guys they look exactly the same

With the Xbox One upscaler the games on the PS4 don't even look 2% better

Sorry guys just being honest

Bathyj1635d ago

You want to believe that so bad don't you?

Have you actually LOOKED at the comparison?

sourav931635d ago

Thanks for the laughs :D

Kayant1635d ago

"With the Xbox One upscaler the games on the PS4 don't even look 2% better" - Right which is why Crytek felt the need to bypass this *Magically amazing upscaler*.

Or how AC4 looks worse or XB1 at the same res pre-patch and many other games. Nope. Totally the magic upscaler at work /s

GarrusVakarian1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

I really am sick and tired of people like you just not accepting facts and burying your heads in the sand.

They DON'T look "exactly the same", just check out the links GribbleGrunger provided...I'll even re post them. Please....actually look at these instead of posting your usual garbage.

Not only does the PS4 version run better, it also looks better on the cheaper console....continuing the trend. I am SO glad that the PS4 will be my main console this gen, X1 is getting the short end of the stick with every multiplat.

Kribwalker1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

All multiplats looked and ran terrible on ps3 vs xbox 360 for years. It all has to do with OS imprints and learning how to properly utilize certain aspects of the system To their benefit when porting. I expect it to get closer as the complexities of the Xbox one hardware gets sorted out. Ps4 won't get much easier then now as developers have already stated how easy it is to get the necessary power out of it, there is less of a learning curve. If anything I expect multiplats to get closer with time

Ps:there were 2 different companies that ported the game. One for Xbox and one for ps4. Of course there will be differences

tagan8tr1635d ago

@lifeisgamesok Oh thank goodness you are here to bring honesty Mr.OneBubble, here is my thought you are wrong and we all know it.

FITgamer1635d ago

You are sad. I really wish they'd add a delusional bubble, it would give the trolling bubble a run for it's money.

GamersHeaven1634d ago

They don't look exactly the same you will keep telling your self that to justify your console of choice.Just deal with the truth move on and enjoy your console of choice.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1634d ago
ceedubya91635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

I can't speak for the PS4 version, as I don't have it. But on the XB One, I have yet to see anything the looks blurry. The game looks really good. I'm sure its easy to see the difference when you put them side by side or switch from one to the other on the same tv, but I've had no problems with the game since I've been playing it.

Edit: Okay stealth disgree people. I'd be happy to have a nice conversation with you in which you explain to me that I'm wrong about how a game looks on MY TV in MY HOME. Man, some of you guys/gals will downvote anything even slightly positive about Xbox.

DragonKnight1635d ago

Just take a look at Gribble's links above and you'll see the blur.

You won't notice a difference if you've only ever seen one version.

ceedubya91635d ago


"You won't notice a difference if you've only ever seen one version."

Isn't that pretty much what I just said? And I've seen the comparison videos and pics, and on my tv, the Xbox One version looks a lot better than what I've seen in comparison shots. Again, this is just my home and my tv. It is very likely that if I had the PS4 version that it would look a lot better as well. But I don't. Still, for all of the crazyiness going on about resolutin and fps with xbox games, all I'm saying is that my experience has been great with this game.

GarrusVakarian1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

If you have the X1 version and never plan to play the PS4 version then good for you, enjoy your game.

But for people who can't accept the fact that PS4 multiplats look and run better and constantly say otherwise, comparisons need to be made. They bought the more expensive console and can't accept that the PS4 is more powerful, resulting in better looking games. They better get used to it.....because this is only going to continue for years to come.

ceedubya91635d ago

Thanks for the reply. I agree that comparisons are important. When I finally have both consoles under my roof, then my multiplatform decisions will be helped due to such comparisons. Until then, I have to play on what I have, whether it houses the best version or not. Someone with both consoles should definitely buy the version that better suits their gaming needs, for whatever reason that may be. Still, there are too many people here that look for every reason to take a shot at the XBO and its console owners, knowing good and well that they don’t care about this game. Before the resolution differences were made known, the main narrative was “I’m not buying this game at full price just for updated graphics.” Now, the focus has shifted to 30-vs-60 and this game matters again. The game is just another argument point now for trumpeting console superiority/inferiority. That’s unfortunate.

WickedLester1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

Same argument was made last generation with PS3/360. 360 owners bragged all day long over side by sides posted at websites like The Lens Of Truth. PS3 owners argued "well unless you're looking at them side by side you'd never know the difference." Now its just the opposite. Frankly, they are close but the PS4 version is better because of frame rate alone. No matter how much Square/Enix, Microsoft, and Xbox One owners try to downplay it, the 30/60fps difference is pretty huge IMO. It's like going from a game looking/moving like cinema to a game looking/moving like real life.

You can't tell me that this...


Doesn't look better than this...


DragonKnight1635d ago

@wickedlester: The difference between then and now is that the difference then really was ridiculously minimal to the point comparisons had to be made to really notice.

Today the difference isn't minimal by any means.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1635d ago
+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1630d ago
Kayant1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

Well if DF's face-off says otherwise then it will be a real shit storm.

DivineAssault 1635d ago

Theyre covering their asses so MS dont sue em for breach of "equality contract".. But soon enough, devs might not even bother making games for both & have em shove that contract where the sun dont shine

Volkama1635d ago

Oh man still banging that imaginary "parity policy" drum? It's not a real thing. And it wasn't a real thing for the 360/PS3 retail games either.

You're thinking of XBLA terms for release date and content parity.

You only need to look at Ghosts and BF4 to know there is no visual parity clause.

GribbleGrunger1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )


Here's a small section for those who don't want to read the article (for some reason). You really need to wake up people:

Dyer pointed to the "litany" of requirements for getting a game accepted for Xbox Live, where Microsoft can dictate exclusivity periods, IP ownership, and even ask that developers work from an office to qualify.

"We're not pushing that. In fact, we've gone the other way to try and encourage publishers through our Pub Fund ," he added.

"We want to welcome the indies and we've seen that become a very big part of our business because indies are recognising that we aren't demanding a pound of flesh in order for them to get a game published on our network."

However, Dyer believes that Microsoft has now extended these demands beyond smaller companies to "B and A level publishers".

"So potentially any time we've gone out and negotiated exclusive content of things that we've announced at things like DPS or E3, publishers are getting the living crap kicked out of them by Microsoft because they are doing something for the consumer that is better on our platform than it might be perceived on theirs."

"So from a creativity standpoint and what we are doing to try to make it better for the consumer, our view is Microsoft's doing everything they can to eliminate that because they have an inferior technology."

Volkama1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

OK Gribble, you just educated me. Retail games demanded content and release date parity as well.

I'll join you in shaking my fist about that one.

Edit: That article isn't really very telling, as it's a rant from Sony. The Eurogamer source it links to is more interesting.


Microsoft's Content Submission and Release Policy, seen by Eurogamer, details its third-party publisher guidelines.

"Titles for Xbox 360 must ship at least simultaneously with other video game platform, and must have at least feature and content parity on-disc with the other video game platform versions in all regions where the title is available," it reads.

"If these conditions are not met, Microsoft reserves the right to not allow the content to be released on Xbox 360."

This also applies to Xbox Live Arcade games.

Bathyj1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

Man, Dyer doesn't mince words does he?

Whether this is a case of parity or not I don't know. It doesn't seem like MS is holding publishers to that now. It doesn't seem like they have the power to with no lead in sales.

I still think they like to cast their dark shadow over things and big publishers are treading a careful path, not dumbing down the ps4 version but trying not to rub Microsoft's face in it either. Basically trying to keep everyone happy. Hey, they can say what they like. As long as I can see the ps4 version has not been gimped, then I'm happy.

Charybdis1635d ago

Parity contract is a thing, but relates to content and release dates for indie titles.

Graphics or not covered, having an higher resolution or frame on another platform is not covered by said contract.

DragonKnight1635d ago

Have you seen the contract first hand to be able to make that kind of claim?

Charybdis1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

@Dragonknight: It has already been widely discussed with the [email protected] parity gate. (pretty sure that specific clause has been quoted somewhere)

If there was such a clause it would already have been leaked.

If there is such a parity clause Microsoft obviously isn't very successfully in enforcing it looking at number of multi-platform games with higher frame rate and resolution.

jackanderson19851635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

so that means MS are gonna sue Activision, EA and Ubisoft yeah?

the parity clause is release date based...

Dark_king1635d ago

MS can't sue them, only refuse to let it on the system.There not really about to do that either because that would be a pretty stupid move.A new console needs the multiplat games.

jackanderson19851635d ago

@dark_king i know it was in reply to his comment about square enix lying due to the fact MS would sue them otherwise.

MasterCornholio1635d ago

I've seen comparisons between the two versions and the Xbox One version appears to run st a lower resolution then the PS4 version. We will find out the truth once Eurogamer completes their analysis.

LostDjinn1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

You mean the same eurogamer that's already had Leadbetter busted for lying in the first faceoff? The minimum FPS on Xbone was 18. Not the mid 20s number he refuses to take down. The Xbone then froze for 12 frames.

Go ahead. Check the update to the faceoff. RL strikes again.

Edit: to add info.

Edit 2: LOT Doesn't do anything anymore. Theit twitter account and site haven't been used since last year. Funny that.

MasterCornholio1635d ago

Well lately Eurogamer is the only site willing to do comparisons between multiplats on the PS4 and the Xbox One. Sites like Lens Of Truth haven't done anything recently so Eurogamer is the only source that we have.

captain_slow821635d ago

have a read of this and then read the MODS replys in the comment section

mite give a better idea why theres no ps4 vs xbox one comparisons :D

MasterCornholio1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

@edit 2

OMG you know what this means? That lens of truth was created by Microsoft. Just think about this for a second before disagreeing with me. Imagine that Microsoft knows that the majority of multiplats are inferior on the PS3. Knowing this they create a website called LOT to promote multiplats on the 360 and to convince people to buy their console with superior multiplats. Fast forward to today and Microsoft knows that the Xbox One is weaker then the PS4. So what do they do? They tell LOT to stop their comparisons. Because if LOT continued their comparisons with multiplats then that's just another source of bad PR for Microsoft. After what they did on YouTube I wouldn't be surprised if they did this.

But this theory sounds a bit crazy to me which probably means it isn't true.

But if it is......

@captain slow

The response from the mods further adds fuel to my theory.

jackanderson19851635d ago

if you read the update and the link to the neogaf post you'd see that the counter was wrong and it was at a low of 24ish... they also said they'd fix the issue for the proper faceoff as that article was effectively to stay level with the rest of the sites reporting on it

LostDjinn1635d ago (Edited 1635d ago )

LOL WTF Captain Slow?
You link to an article from June last year that has comments from June last year and say that'll explain?

The LOT site was active until the start of December? Where the hell are you going with this?

Edit: Are you saying they were telegraphing it way back then?

Edit 2: Oh Jackanderson I completely agree. They'll "fix it" for sure. That's what Leadbetter just got busted trying to do so I hope he has better luck next time. ;)

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1635d ago
Mikelarry1635d ago

this is too funny, its not like we haven't seen screens of the game running. lets say this was before we had screen then OK but we have proof of both games running side by side i mean we are not that stupid square

Show all comments (66)
The story is too old to be commented.