• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Castlevania: Lords of Shadow (PS3/360) Comparison Thread

Very few console games even run at 60fps, majority of industry seems to struggle with even getting steady 30fps. Why do some of you even bother with consoles if it's such a bother to you? I just don't see how you could even enjoy the consoles when so little of it reaches 60fps.
 
I NEED SCISSORS said:
Killzone 2 still has framerate drops and even dynamically lowers its resolution to 640p to maintain it. It also renders alpha effects in quarter of the resolution.

And god yes, 7.1 PCM ftw. At least Mercury Steam got something perfect.

Killzone 2 only really has framedrops in Multiplayer (aside from load stuttering once in a while), and it doesn't actually dynamically lower resolution. It's true that they render the alpha effects at 1/4, but then again so do most PS3 games, exclusive or not. It's one clear weakness that the GPU has (Fillrate) and rendering the Alpha channels at 1/4 is a great method of dealing with that for very little visible on screen compromise.

Heck, full res Alpha isn't even that common on the 360 despite the Edram.
 
daxter01 said:
wait what?

My mistake, I was referencing a post on Beyond3D that was actually talking about Street Fighter 4. I believe the connection being made between the two is that in KZ2, the resolution of the particle effects are lowered during intense scenes.

I did however re-watch the DF Killzone 2 feature. If anything, the performance in the first video very closely mirrors that of Halo: Reach.
 
I NEED SCISSORS said:
My mistake, I was referencing a post on Beyond3D that was actually talking about Street Fighter 4. I believe the connection being made between the two is that in KZ2, the resolution of the particle effects are lowered during intense scenes.

I did however re-watch the DF Killzone 2 feature. If anything, the performance in the first video very closely mirrors that of Halo: Reach.

Street Fighter IV only did that for ultra combos. And it's fixed in SSFIV anyway. But yeah, the Halo/Killzone debate is really stupid in this thread.
 
DenogginizerOS said:
....in cutscenes.

I am glad the framerate doesn't bother me in this game. I am thoroughly enjoying what I have played so far.

I'm with you here. I have no issues with framerates at all. I just really enjoy games I guess. I cannot even imagine someone that loses it in these threads how they would act in real life. In my mind, I just envision some of these posters, foam billowing out of their mouths, curses raining thru the air, controllers flying into TVs/wives/dogs and a laptop nearby to post rage.

Little hiccups won't spoil my experiences :) loving this on the 360! I'm not really finding much in the game that is game breaking. Even at the 24fps, it looks smooth enough to the eye onscreen for myself, being a locked camera view. I would like to give the PS3 a shot later on, but right now, the 360 is impressive.

I think anyone getting this on either platform will be happy.
 
BattleMonkey said:
Very few console games even run at 60fps, majority of industry seems to struggle with even getting steady 30fps. Why do some of you even bother with consoles if it's such a bother to you? I just don't see how you could even enjoy the consoles when so little of it reaches 60fps.
If only there were some kind of number between 20 and 60...

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 60, 61...

fuck
 
Segata Sanshiro said:
If only there were some kind of number between 20 and 60...

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 60, 61...

fuck

Well it seems if it's anything under 60, it's not good enough to some people.
 
whatevermort said:
A bit silly that you can't install then play with the one disc. And by silly I mean irritating.
That's really bad design and that alone would put me off the 360 version, even if it had superior graphics.

It must be a limitation of the 360 itself, rather than being the developer's fault. I really don't see why you can't just install all of the discs of a multi-disc game and then use disc 1 as a boot disc. You wouldn't be able to share different discs with friends, if that's what they're worried about, because disc 1 would always be needed to boot the game. I don't mind swapping a disc when it's done in a linear fashion from 1, to 2, to 3, but having to swap discs back and forth is a pain in the arse, especially when the game is installed in full to the hard drive!
 
Wow, the DF framerate analysis definitely demonstrates why there is so much judder. The framerate is constantly changing throughout gameplay. This sort of things absolutely kills any and all consistency.

I can't believe how low those numbers are.

Well it seems if it's anything under 60, it's not good enough to some people.
Such comment has no place in this thread. The complaints aimed as CV are perfectly legitimate.
 
Since this thread is about comparisons, I see that what is to be celebrated here is that Mercury Steam did a great job in keeping the two versions pretty darn close. Safe to buy on either system is something that is a bit rare these days.
 
BattleMonkey said:
Well it seems if it's anything under 60, it's not good enough to some people.
Heck, even Amir0x said 30 would be fine. Frankly, I don't expect a game that looks this good to have 60 FPS and I certainly don't need it to. But this game is below even my quite low expectations for framerates. I mean, shit, I do most of my gaming on the DS of all things. Framerates don't usually make me puke. But here we are.
 
Segata Sanshiro said:
Heck, even Amir0x said 30 would be fine. Frankly, I don't expect a game that looks this good to have 60 FPS and I certainly don't need it to. But this game is below even my quite low expectations for framerates. I mean, shit, I do most of my gaming on the DS of all things. Framerates don't usually make me puke. But here we are.
Sub 30fps framerates make you actually vomit? The cinema must be hell for you.
 
DenogginizerOS said:
Sub 30fps framerates make you actually vomit? The cinema must be hell for you.
This is literally the first video game I've ever played that made me puke. Obviously, there must be more than just the framerate at work there, but the framerate is a big part of it.

Haven't had any troubles at the cinema aside from Shakey-cam movies like the Bourne series, which also make me puke.
 
wow at Bink, 7.5GB for 53 minutes of 25fps 720p video? that's really horrible and even then PQ is still not that good. If some company makes a better middle-ware I think they can be very successful in this industry, I can see many developers give up bink for a more efficient codec anyday.
 
25fps encoded video? Uh that's strange, but thankfully I didn't notice the difference int he demo. I'm still getting the game, framerate woes be damned. Been too long since a decent Castlevania game.

Strange that there's a couple of people here that are made sick by this game. I wonder what would SotC do to you. :P
 
jett said:
25fps encoded video? Uh that's strange, but thankfully I didn't notice the difference int he demo. I'm still getting the game, framerate woes be damned. Been too long since a decent Castlevania game.

Strange that there's a couple of people here that are made sick by this game. I wonder what would SotC do to you. :P
Makes me feel blechhy, but not quite as bad as this. Which is why I say there must be more than framerate at work here.
 
DenogginizerOS said:
You should pick it up at some point. I think the comments in this thread are overshadowing an excellent game.

Will buy used for sure. I like good games regardless of frame rate, but I want to punish developers releasing games with such a bad frame rate as well.

I have so little time to play games these days, I'm being extremely selective in my purchase decisions. If it's not 99.9% awesome, I skip.
 
Tears For Fears said:
Shame you guys are having a circle jerk over the framerate and wont play the game. It's actually a really good game.

I thought about getting it but then I just went on living my life.
 
miladesn said:
wow at Bink, 7.5GB for 53 minutes of 25fps 720p video? that's really horrible and even then PQ is still not that good. If some company makes a better middle-ware I think they can be very successful in this industry, I can see many developers give up bink for a more efficient codec anyday.

Same. That was the most hilarious part of the comparison. God, bink is such utter garbage.
 
Tears For Fears said:
Shame you guys are having a circle jerk over the framerate and wont play the game. It's actually a really good game.
Yes, in every way except the framerate, it's outstanding. That just makes the framerate more frustrating.
 
non-gameplay should be 24fps minimum, I think. The demo for castlevania wasn't bad. I'm buying it today.

It does worry me to see all these new console releases with framerate problems. If we were in a normal console lifecycle we'd be seeing new consoles at least announced at this point. I hope we don't have 3 more years of developers pushing framerates to the lowest possible to get new effects and prettier scenes out of this hardware.

just scale some of that shit back! 30fps minimum.
 
miladesn said:
wow at Bink, 7.5GB for 53 minutes of 25fps 720p video? that's really horrible and even then PQ is still not that good. If some company makes a better middle-ware I think they can be very successful in this industry, I can see many developers give up bink for a more efficient codec anyday.

There's no need for a middleware solution as both consoles support all of the advanced video codecs currently out there. The Bink sales reps must be good at wining 'n dining.
 
Segata Sanshiro said:
And yet, it did. And does. So you can point that fucking finger up your ass.
That is a bit harsh. You can't fault me for questioning what sounds like an extreme physical reaction to a framerate. Sorry for your troubles, but I will be refraining from digit plumbing my ass, chum.
 
DenogginizerOS said:
That is a bit harsh. You can't fault me for questioning what sounds like an extreme physical reaction to a framerate. Sorry for your troubles, but I will be refraining from digit plumbing my ass, chum.
I don't take well to being called a liar.
 
miladesn said:
wow at Bink, 7.5GB for 53 minutes of 25fps 720p video? that's really horrible and even then PQ is still not that good. If some company makes a better middle-ware I think they can be very successful in this industry, I can see many developers give up bink for a more efficient codec anyday.
It's called H.264 and nearly every device nowadays supports it.
 
DenogginizerOS said:
I said it was hard to believe, Nancy. Not saying you lied. Even you acknowledged other things were at play.
Right, you said "hard to believe". When, in the history of humanity, has anyone ever uttered that phrase without the subtext screaming "I THINK YOU'RE A LIAR"?

And my name isn't Nancy. It's Mary.
 
TTP said:
I have so little time to play games these days, I'm being extremely selective in my purchase decisions. If it's not 99.9% awesome, I skip.

We have video evidence of you playing Kung Fu Rider.
 
Segata Sanshiro said:
This is literally the first video game I've ever played that made me puke. Obviously, there must be more than just the framerate at work there, but the framerate is a big part of it.

Haven't had any troubles at the cinema aside from Shakey-cam movies like the Bourne series, which also make me puke.

One thing I noted in the demo was that Castlevania does have a bit of a shakey-cam thing going on during the gameplay. It doesn't always arc smoothly along a path, it likes to bounce around a bit.
 
I thought the video quality was pretty decent in the demo, no horrible compression artifacts or anything like that. Seems MercurySteam went to great lengths to get both versions as similar as possible. Looking at the DF article the framerate issues of the 360 version(in comparison to the PS3) are greatly exaggerated. The difference is minimal. I can't believe I once thought this game ran at 60fps. :P
 
Feindflug said:
When you will find an FPS with the scale, the skyboxes, the amount of characters vehicles and (high-res) particles on screen with this good enemy AI and object motion blur, SSAO and beautiful lighting that runs at 720p with no frame drops and still looks better then Reach on the consoles then we'll talk again about Bungie's incompetence...until then leave Reach out of this graphics discussion because you clearly can't see/understand what makes Reach even at it's current state a very impressive achievement.

Basically the New Alexandria level alone is enough to make all this incompetence talk sound even more ignorant and irrational.
This has to be a joke post.
 
I haven't had any problem with the quality, but nearly 8 gigs for an hour of 720p video is crazy.
 
androvsky said:
One thing I noted in the demo was that Castlevania does have a bit of a shakey-cam thing going on during the gameplay. It doesn't always arc smoothly along a path, it likes to bounce around a bit.

Absolutely. If you stand perfectly still you can see an obvious "handheld camera" effect. It doesn't bother me but I can see how it could easily nauseate some people.
 
Top Bottom