Gram Negative Cocci
Member
[Nintex] said:Dice said it best
Splendid but I expected even MORE differences
BF3 PC and PS3/Console screenshot and video comparison
- Thread starter Joel Was Right
- Start date
Splendid but I expected even MORE differences
SneakyStephan
Banned
Mr_Brit said:
MLAA doesn't smoothen all edges right?and adds significant softness to the edges it does (fuzzy softness)
fake edit: ah unscaled? Super poor IQ due to super shitty screengrabs then.
Why'd that glorified blog even make the article then.
Dorfdad
Gold Member
Ubersnug said:
Yea I noticed that as well and the PS3 version seems to have Blue Trucks instead of the ones on the PC. Guess I cant buy it for the PS3 than...
I know thats not what you were going for, but and I am being a bit sarcastic because some of you are way to critical. The game looks fabulous on either system. While I have a PC capable of playing this easily on high settings I will be getting the PS3 version simple because I will enjoy sitting on a couch YES a FPS on a Couch more. As I will be putting a good chunk of my time into this game as it looks vastly superior to COD in every way IMHO.
I work at my desk all day, do not want to sit there all night as well... But I think DICE has done a great job on the console version. I feel the 360 version will be on par with PS3 as well.
GhostWriter24
Member
Might want to look again...Stairs said:
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Yeah, there's definitely some secret sauce missing on the PS3 footage. It's visible even in videos. It's very impressive regardless.NemesisPrime said:
*edit* it also looks like PS3 version has no motion blur, or it's not as obvious as on the PC anyway.
It doesn't smooth all the edges, true, subpixel lines are unaffected in particular, but it doesn't cause any blurry softness to those it does either.SneakyStephan said:
CorkyFromLifeGoesOn
Member
That Fallon video in 1080p just confirmed my ps3 purchase. Looks really good!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLCFQyqEoHA&feature=channel_video_title
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLCFQyqEoHA&feature=channel_video_title
SneakyStephan
Banned
[Nintex] said:Dice said it best
I feel a strong sense of manlove for Johan andersson.
Seriously whoever bitches n whines about the two versions not looking the same is basically bitching and whining that consoles most likely get the best version humanly possible, and that the pc version gets the best version (graphically) possible for it.
It's like that kid in the park who kicks away his leather Nike Soccerball because another kid on the grass has one that was signed.
I think the video comparison is more useful. It's pretty clear that the PS3 version is looking surprisingly close to the PC version. I was expecting more significant differences apart from image quality (where the PC wins by default). It really does look very close.
Impressive job by DICE.
Impressive job by DICE.
casuallyhardcore
Neo Member
nice one man... real funny.
Always-honest
Banned
touched up a bit (for media use). It will look a bit rougher on your high end pc.24FrameDaVinci said:
Gram Negative Cocci
Member
PC Master Race, please be honest:
didn't you expect a bit more difference between PC/ console SKUs?
I did and am somewhat, somehow a little bit disappointed.
didn't you expect a bit more difference between PC/ console SKUs?
I did and am somewhat, somehow a little bit disappointed.
BattleMonkey
Member
Looking at HD footage of the PS3 version, it looks ok, but you can see lot of meh texture work. Big difference to me is the gun models on PS3 are very different. The model of the M4 is very flat and nowhere as detailed as the PC version. You can see the entire left side of the receiver is practically flat with a texture providing the details instead of actually modeled correctly.
Looks lot better on PC still. PS3 looking good but you can see the obvious trade offs and nowhere near as sharp as what we have seen on PC. The crappy gun models is a big disappointment for the PS3 version.
Gram Negative Cocci said:
Looks lot better on PC still. PS3 looking good but you can see the obvious trade offs and nowhere near as sharp as what we have seen on PC. The crappy gun models is a big disappointment for the PS3 version.
DanielJr82
Member
Looks good enough to me. I'll be getting the Xbox version, though.
Cornbread78
Member
I just can't wait for this, it's gonna look great either way from what I can see. Too bad it'll be played a lot less since R3 comes out a couple months before it, but still sooo good lookin'
SneakyStephan said:
MLAA's problem is with sub-pixel edges, things like powerlines and lightposts; small thin detail. It doesn't cause noticable softness.
A least, that's the case with Sony's MLAA. I think there was a talk of DICE having a new take on MLAA at GDC that could be different.
DanielJr82
Member
Seriously? PC is going to have 64 players and better graphics and you still want more justification for your pricey PC or something?Gram Negative Cocci said:
nelsonroyale
Member
Yeah, in motion the difference is pretty large...the lighting is the main difference...it is just more subtle and detailed on PC, which makes it look more realistic.
Looking at the footage again though, it is pretty impressive. Would like to see how some of the more spectacular set pieces stack up though.
I have never bought a military shooter in my life, but this may be an exception. On PC of couse, since my PC is alot more powerful than the PS3
Looking at the footage again though, it is pretty impressive. Would like to see how some of the more spectacular set pieces stack up though.
I have never bought a military shooter in my life, but this may be an exception. On PC of couse, since my PC is alot more powerful than the PS3
Gram Negative Cocci
Member
DanielJr82 said:
Yes?
I want something not doable on consoles
some effects/ features that simply cannot be done on them without framerate going down to single digits....A man can dream, can't he?
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Why? It means that the engine looks great and it's well optimized too.Gram Negative Cocci said:
Mr_Brit said:
I really couldn't see how much AF there was, too much compression (though I'm not expecting any). There is noticable shimmering but we don't know how it compares with no AA or 2xMSAA on PC.
I'm not expecting image quality to be spectacular or anything, especially compared to PC. Just that it's a really poor source to draw comparisons of IQ from.
angular graphics
Banned
I replaced all PC pics with the best I could capture. Here's the comparison again:
ncsuDuncan
Member
So does the console version come with that in-game HUD video of Jimmy Fallon watching the game? That's a pretty nice feature.
Will it work with the EyeToy or Kinect, so Jimmy Fallon can watch YOU play?
They could probably improve the console graphics if they just removed that feature, seems like it would be a resource hog.
Will it work with the EyeToy or Kinect, so Jimmy Fallon can watch YOU play?
They could probably improve the console graphics if they just removed that feature, seems like it would be a resource hog.
Gram Negative Cocci said:
Sure. I mean, Playing it on the console with a Sub-HD resolution, MLAA to completely rape fine details ( See barbed wire ), 30FPS and below and textures that look like vector graphics and 24 players online with a controller.
Compared to whether resolution you like rendered natively, with proper AA applied to objects without destroying the looks, AF for that great look even past the 2ft mark, 60FPS+ and enough RAM to actually have the finest textures with 64 Players chaos online.
I'm torn
Unknown One
Member
Not bad at all. There were some frame drops though, hopefully Dice smooth those out.
Dynamite Shikoku
Congratulations, you really deserve it!
enough with the huge pictures
WarMacheen
Member
Stairs said:
really...I give this troll a 3/10
the power of the Cell...lol
Gram Negative Cocci
Member
Sethos said:Sure. I mean, Playing it on the console with a Sub-HD resolution, MLAA to completely rape fine details ( See barbed wire ), 30FPS and below and textures that look like vector graphics and 24 players online with a controller.
Compared to whether resolution you like rendered natively, with proper AA applied to objects without destroying the looks, AF for that great look even past the 2ft mark, 60FPS+ and enough RAM to actually have the finest textures with 64 Players chaos online.
I'm torn
Uh... ok. I guess me and Deadbeat are alone in this.
I personally (from this video) cannot see anything impressive about the ps3 version. Anyone expecting it to look close to the PC version is just crazy. I would much rather parity in scale and scope rather than visuals, because after a while of playing the visuals just become secondary.
Mr. B Natural
Member
PS3 looks good. Definitely good enough to play the game and not-not-enjoy it.
PC looks better.
Being able to create a game for static specs will always warrant better results in the hands of talent (per dollar) than making a game for a "system" that isn't static and each customer has something different. Behold the benefits of a console. But even still, nobody is going to be able to make up for 6 years of tech. PC was of course going to look superior. The days of a $800 - 1000 dollar PC just having higher res and AA over the $300 console are over. This gen has lasted too long for that.
PC looks better.
Being able to create a game for static specs will always warrant better results in the hands of talent (per dollar) than making a game for a "system" that isn't static and each customer has something different. Behold the benefits of a console. But even still, nobody is going to be able to make up for 6 years of tech. PC was of course going to look superior. The days of a $800 - 1000 dollar PC just having higher res and AA over the $300 console are over. This gen has lasted too long for that.
Phonomezer
Banned
Waiting to compare direct-feed footage would make more sense.
Gram Negative Cocci
Member
Mr. B Natural said:
TW2 and BF3 are exceptions to the rule. Any other titles that will take advantage of PC power?
Maybe Half-Life 3... oooooooooooooooh.
Miggytronz
Member
terrible comparison in the OP. those screens should of never been posted.
The HD video from the Fallon show blows those captures.
The HD video from the Fallon show blows those captures.
looks GREAT imo. the lighting and shadows are noticeably simpler, but the game still looks to be among the cream of the crop on consoles.
taking a wait and see on the game still, as the campaign looks a bit to CoD for my liking and i've never really gotten into BF MP in the past
taking a wait and see on the game still, as the campaign looks a bit to CoD for my liking and i've never really gotten into BF MP in the past
That kind of kills the original comparison. It's not exactly fair to draw a comparison between heavily compressed PS3 shots and much cleaner PC shots, is it? The point of the original post was to show both games in a similar light (shots from video with compression artifacts present). Not a great comparison, but it gives you an idea of what it looks like.