-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
F.E.A.R. on PS3 at launch
- Thread starter StephaneC
- Start date
plagiarize
Banned
i compared it to ps2 purely because of the extra content the ps2 version got to make up for the graphical difference... which sounds like what we'll have again here.dark10x said:
there's no question in my mind that the ps3 could handle F.E.A.R. at something pretty much identical to the 360 version, but only with at least another six months of development as the tech that powers F.E.A.R. also powered Condemned and the engine has had that extra year to be tuned for the system... the 360 version started with a decent version of the engine and built from there as opposed to no engine existing tuned for that system.
that's the difference here really. it's just a quick and dirty port so as not to be too late to the party. i think we all know how ports of games from other systems that don't launch until months after the first release usually sell.
the F.E.A.R. sequel should be hitting all platforms at the same time, and hopefully looking just as sharp on all of them.
plagiarize
Banned
the old mantra 
i'm sure you're right on this occasion though. i'm just explaining why the ps3 version looks like ass next to the 360 version for those that think it has any bearing on the relative power of the two system. it doesn't as we both know.
i wonder if they could have gotten it to 60 fps without adding HDR? be interesting to know if that was a conscious decision or not.
still, i know that if it's a locked down 30 as it's appeared to be so far, that you'll be happy enough
i'm sure you're right on this occasion though. i'm just explaining why the ps3 version looks like ass next to the 360 version for those that think it has any bearing on the relative power of the two system. it doesn't as we both know.
i wonder if they could have gotten it to 60 fps without adding HDR? be interesting to know if that was a conscious decision or not.
still, i know that if it's a locked down 30 as it's appeared to be so far, that you'll be happy enough
I think they could reach 60 fps WITH HDR, though. It's all in how they handle the coding.plagiarize said:the old mantra
i'm sure you're right on this occasion though. i'm just explaining why the ps3 version looks like ass next to the 360 version for those that think it has any bearing on the relative power of the two system. it doesn't as we both know.
i wonder if they could have gotten it to 60 fps without adding HDR? be interesting to know if that was a conscious decision or not.
still, i know that if it's a locked down 30 as it's appeared to be so far, that you'll be happy enough
plagiarize
Banned
i know and i agreed with you, but i think that'd have taken longer to achieve. they obviously had a date to hit. feel free to blame sierra/vivendi
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
I think these shots are a direct result of the backlash against target renders. They are likely still heavily optimizing the game and improving the graphics as they get better performance from the engine. The game doesn't look filtered or blown up or over anti-aliased. It just looks like the PC version of F.E.A.R running on low settings.
