NinjaBoiX
Member
Also, your English is very good, I had no idea it wasn't your first language. It's easy to forget sometimes that GAF is a website on the world wide web!
Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 - DF face-off
- Thread starter ThaneKrios
- Start date
Cave Johnson
Member
Wasn't Resistance 3 at that resolution? The fact that BO2 is more open and has nearly 2x the frame-rate leads me to wonder if R3 could've been.
Johnny Dazzle
Member
And I was actually thinking of picking up Black Ops 2 on PS3, nonononono.
Dat blur, dat resolution. Damn.
Dat blur, dat resolution. Damn.
Resistance 3 ran at a 960x704, still looked amazing.
Because Treyarch is the master of Cell. Really, I don't understand what's wrong with Treyarch & ps3, I don't know what the hell is happened. Everything is mess when they tried to touch this platform. Blops 1 for example has the same issue in the netcode at launch, Blops 2 did it again (plus this marvelous feature of Gaussian filter). Honestly, I have some difficult to understand them.
shungokusatsu
Member
The PS3 version definitely looks better without the patch, but the difference isn't that much better. It's like comparing two piles of shit and trying to determine which is the least shittiest, sigh. I really hope Treyarch can correct this, but I'm pessimistic due to their attitude when they were confronted about the PS3 issues in the original Black Ops.
palpabl_purpura
Member
No insult taken. I realize that unfortunately, you have to tendency to believe what you see/read on the internet. Don't be so sheepish. To the rest of us, kudos for doing the analysis yourselves and observing that there was a discrepency in how DF portrayed the PS3 version (albiet unpatched), and the way is looks in reality. This is something DF should have discovered themselves.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I said on last page, maybe this was intentional. Without the patch it looks sharper but there's a LOT of aliasing. Maybe it was just a preference thing like how so many developers tend to have PS3 games run with VSync but disable it altogether on 360 versions.
papersleeves
Member
PC is where it's at if you want the best graphics! DX 11 and 1080p glory! Though, with an engine as old as the one they're using, consoles are just fine.
Next Gen:
PC is where it's at if you want the best graphics! DX 13 and 4K glory! Though, with an engine as old as the one they're using, consoles are just fine.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
Trilinear texture filtering in 2012. Remarkable.
Horse Armour
Member
Why are consoles unable to use something simple like 4x Anisotropic filtering? 16xAF has pretty much no effect on framerate on PC on any game even when using a midrange GPU, I know the consoles are getting old at this point but I can't imagine them being so weak as to not be able to handle 4xAF?
BurnOutBrighter
Banned
And not a single fuck was given by Treyarch on release day.
It's nothing to do with them being weak, even the GPUs that were already in market when the consoles launched could do 16xAF with no performance loss. The reason for this is the Console architecture being different, because of which AF does takes up memory and hence has performance issues. And since past few years not having AF has definitely been an exception rather than the norm, Bioshock, Killzone, GT5, Assassin's Creed, Fallout (8x) GOW, Dead Space,FFXIII etc etc all use AF.
AF does not take up memory.
The reason is consoles have a very low number of texture mapping units which results in a very low texel fill rate, important for AF:
Xenos: 8 gigatexels/sec
RSX: 13 gigatexels/sec
GTX680: 128 gigatexels/sec
astroturfing
Member
looks like i'm skipping COD once again... too bad, i was kinda interested in getting back into it.
was MW3 on PS3 as bad? last COD i played was MW2 and thought it looked great (in motion).
was MW3 on PS3 as bad? last COD i played was MW2 and thought it looked great (in motion).
GenericUser
Member
meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of black ops 2 players on the ps3 continue to enjoy the game...
They might enjoy it more without the blur, freezing and lag.
Having played it, it does not look that bad in motion. Although I allow the blur is shockingly noticeable in screenshots.
That said, if I ever resolve to buy the game MSAA would be the obvious choice.
electroshockwave
Member
I don't suppose Treyarch have said anything about the cause of the blur from the patch or if there would be an update for it? Performance seems good in multiplayer and I don't really have much of an interest in the campaign.
Always-honest
Banned
Same here. I'm not paying for this on ps3.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
More insulting is they play the game with highest quality textures then play it in 720p to compare.
lol. end comments pics
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
According to Timothy Lottes, the dude behind TXAA, the game's ambient occlusion setting was causing it to look blurrier than it should. Here was an example of how it is suppose to look:
According to Timothy Lottes, the dude behind TXAA, the game's ambient occlusion setting was causing it to look blurrier than it should. Here was an example of how it is suppose to look:
It looks superb. So this is what TXAA is supposed to look like ?
Unfortunately I don't believe we are going to see many convincing implementations of TXAA, unless Nvidia goes all out with their marketing.
Even in its blurrier form TXAA is fine by me, IQ takes a hit without doubt but I don't mind a cheap yet efficient AA solution. Obviously given the choice (and considering TXAA=MSAA performance wise) I would still go with MSAA.
dummydecoy
Member
lol. Glad I stopped buying Treyarch games since WAW while having all IW games.
Sucks that the game still sells millions. Fuck.
Sucks that the game still sells millions. Fuck.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
What's your justification for this? At least Treyarch seems to give half a damn about the PC.
fluffydelusions
Member
++ PC versions runs and looks quite nice. The only issue is the PS3 version which if that is the case I don't blame you for not buying. I personally purchased Blops 1 PS3 and regretted it. Sold it 1 week later due to bugs, framerate etc.
SuperSonic1305
Member
Soon Wii U owners will feel the touch of lazy devs.
I NEED SCISSORS
Banned
God I cannot wait to get a 7xx series card for my next upgrade. TXAA+SGSSAA is perfect image quality as far as i'm concerned and I agree with Timothy's filmic approach (more blur as a trade off for zero aliasing, especially the dreaded temporal 'crawling')
According to Timothy Lottes, the dude behind TXAA, the game's ambient occlusion setting was causing it to look blurrier than it should. Here was an example of how it is suppose to look:
Do we have an uncropped screenshot of it running properly? I've been curious about TXAA for a while. It looks really nice in that shot and seems like it actually achieves what it was originally meant to do. Clean up edges and give a more filmic look.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
I asked him too, but he hasn't posted anymore unfortunately. I don't have a 600 series card so I can't do it myself.
I don't remember the details. Because the MW3 maps, on average, were the worst in the new CoDs.
Kung Fu Grip
Banned
Was this comparison done with or without the patch?
N
NinjaFridge
Unconfirmed Member
Wasn't Blops 1 pretty shit on PC in the beginning? I remember reading about people having problems with it.
Hopefully Treyarch can get a patch out quickly for the ps3.
Edit: ha nevermind after the post right above mine. Wonder if that fixes the freezing issue too.
Other than the blur on the ps3 (which has to be a bug IMO) the IQ is actually improved over BLOPS1 on both consoles.
Edit: ha nevermind after the post right above mine. Wonder if that fixes the freezing issue too.
Other than the blur on the ps3 (which has to be a bug IMO) the IQ is actually improved over BLOPS1 on both consoles.
Why is this still ignored in the OP?
JohnnySasaki86
Member
A patch came out today and fixed the blur? can anyone else confirm this?