Tech Analysis: Crysis 2: Multiplayer Demo (360)

Crysis is synonymous with graphics… that much is obvious. With each instalment in the series, Crytek subsequently included everything but the kitchen sink in their approach to real-time rendering. If performance suffers, then you simply throw in a new graphics card, or two. Now, while that might be fine in the PC space, consoles on the other hand, are somewhat more limiting. That said, with Crysis 2, the developers are still implementing their ‘as much as possible’ philosophy, perhaps only downgrading certain parts of the game in accordance with memory and performance restraints.

To that end, the recent multiplayer demo of Crytek’s upcoming tour-de-force, demonstrates that with a bit of chopping and editing, that is possible to deliver some of the high-end visual components usually seen in either the top-end of real-time rendering, or found in lower-quality CGI, but on consoles. We only have the 360 demo to hand – there isn’t a PS3 one yet, nor has there been anything shown of the Sony version since the initial unveiling of the CryEngine 3. But what we have here is a mightily impressive showing of just what can be done.

So, just how good does Crysis 2 look on consoles, or more specifically, on the Xbox 360? Well, before we begin a proper, it’s fair to say that the game is running on the console with what looks like ‘medium’ detail settings on the PC; which means that you get most of the good stuff, but not without some very obvious pairing back of overall image quality as a result. There have also been a few added effects over and above that of the ‘medium’ setting found in the original Crysis, although not compared to the same setting in the sequel.

Let’s take a closer look.



As always, we start off by looking at the framebuffer. Straight away, via both looking at the screens and by playing, it appears that Crysis 2 seems to be rendering in a sub-HD resolution. Initially, this looks like being somewhere in between that of the Call Of Duty games (1024x640) and Halo Reach (1152x720). However, pixel counting reveals that Crysis 2 actually features a 1152x720 FB just like that of Bungie’s title.

Why on first impressions, it doesn’t look as clean around the edges, is down to the fact that Crytek are using a lot of post processing effects on the screen, along with a low resolution depth of field implementation, whereby objects either in front or behind the DOF feature an addition cut in resolution. This means that Crysis 2 does look slightly softer than other games with similar resolutions. Although, there are other factors which also affect this.

In addition, like with many games operating on the more bandwidth restricted PS3, Crysis 2 uses low-res buffers for all its visual effects. Things such as water, smoke, fire, and other effects are all rendered in a resolution that is significantly lower than that of the framebuffer. Sometimes this goes unnoticed, like in the case of small particles and such, but with the larger effects it is far more apparent.


Moving on, in terms of anti-aliasing, when we first looked at Crysis 2 it appeared that the game seemed to have no AA at all. However, initial looks can be somewhat deceiving, as the screenshots tell us a slightly different story. There seems to be evidence of 2xMSAA on some surfaces, but not on others. Perhaps Crytek are using some kind of selective MSAA routine? Although, delving deeper confirms that a selective, plus temporal approach is what is being used.

The effect of this is clearly evident in the screenshot below. Here, we can see a manifestation of double-image ghosting, a common side effect of the frame blending used in creating temporal anti-aliasing. Where Crysis differs, is that the engine is performing AA on both static and dynamic scenes: selective AA is applied to certain parts of the scene in motion, and on more of it when there is no movement. In comparison, games such as Halo Reach on 360, and DMC4 on the PS3 only apply AA on static scenes.

For the most part, the end result is that Crysis 2 looks like it has no AA at all. There is plenty of edge-shimmering and sub-pixel artefacts that extend across the whole scene. Furthermore, this isn’t helped by the high-contrast nature of the stage present in the demo, nor the upscaled FB, both of which accentuates this further.


Image quality then, leaves a lot to be desired. And this isn’t helped by the use of what looks like an aggressive LOD and texture streaming system, in combination with poor quality texture filtering. Though it is comparable to titles such as Halo ODST, which sacrifice IQ for more advanced effects in other areas. Crysis 2 does the same.

In the demo, we can see a few high-resolution, detailed texture maps, alongside many lower quality ones. In fact, to balance out memory usage Crysis 2 actually has more lower res textures than higher res ones. Most look good all things considered. However, actual filtering is decidedly basic. Crysis 2 appears to be using bilinear filtering for most of its textures, with what looks like the occasional bias towards certain surfaces. Then again, the LOD could be affecting this.

As a result of this, and the LOD, many details in the distance are blurred, and lack sufficient sharpness, which isn’t helped by the consistent, and sometimes varied nature of both geometry and texture pop-up.


While playing, you can notice that various textures, and geometric environmental details – such as grasses, metal railings, etc, tend to pop-up as you come close to approaching them. It’s very obvious in nature, with a few instances of high resolution textures not actually appearing until we got around a metre away from the effected surface.

That said, memory constraints, along with the desire to include real-time lighting and shadowing techniques, means that some compromises have had to be made. Even with the Xbox 360’s fast, bandwidth monster that is the Xenos GPU, there still isn’t enough available in order to have hi-res effects, mild LOD, and top-end IQ. But the choice that Crytek have made, appears to be the right one for the game, especially it seems, when you see how most surfaces are normal mapped, and are affected by the surrounding lighting.

You also have to consider the 360’s 10MB EDRAM limit, by which you have to fit the entire framebuffer into, or get an additional penalty in terms of having to use tiling. And, that’s exactly what Crytek are doing for Crysis 2. By opting for a 1152x720 FB they can avoid tiling.


But as I said earlier, this compromise appears to be worth it given the advanced, tech-heavy lighting engine used throughout every area of the game. For those who don’t know, Crysis 2 – on both consoles and the PC – uses a real-time global illumination system for all the main lightsources in the game. We have hear what Crytek are calling ‘single-bounce global illumination’, whereby, as one lightsource casts a light, it is then reflected once back out into the environment on another surface, casting dynamic shadows as it does this.

Not all light sources in the game cast shadows, nor would you expect them to. However, when there is a few lightsources on screen at once in close proximity, a single, main lightsource – of the few - will cast a dynamic shadow onto the environment instead, thus partially negating this. As a result, there is not only a greater sense of depth to the environment and everything in it, but also a more natural look to any given scene as a whole.


The level of accuracy present from this advanced rendering technique is stunning to see compared to other games which simply fake it, using pre-baked environmental lightmaps, or many local dynamic lights – and a fair amount of baked ones too – in order to emulate this. Crysis uses both a single GI solution, along with additional local lights, thus yielding the best results when processing power is a limited commodity.

For example, there are some really cool touches, such as the light reflections coming off the barrel of your gun when fired, or as it passes through other lightsources in the environment. We can also see light reflected off of shiny surfaces, weapons fire, explosions, etc. and sunlight. All of which is very impressive for a console title using what equates to five year-old technology. But then, that’s the magic of closed box architecture; being able to push the envelope in ways not possible on the PC with similar specifications.


Also impressive, is the use, albeit quite limited, of secondary – or indirect – shadowing on a few surfaces. However, seeing as this comes with a heavy impact on performance, in order to keep the game running smoothly, and in-line with memory contrasints, there is a very aggressive LOD controlling the display of these effects. In-direct shadows only appear mere feet away from the player, often too late to really be noticed when playing the game. They are there however, but in limited amounts.

Complementing this, we have the expected return of SSAO (screen-space ambient occlusion), which features heavily in the core make-up of the CryEngine technology – it’s actually a custom implementation I believe, one that works with the company’s GI solution, and as usual bringing additional depth to the scene.


Other nice touches include high quality specular reflections, whereby the actual light point is reflected more sharply than as a simpler rounded shape. The light reflection has less spread, being more focused. Although, this in turn also depends on the level of specularity of the surface light is supposed to be reflecting from. Either way, specular, and indeed diffuse reflections – the two combined – are handled much more convincing than in most titles.

In addition to the standout GI solution, and the lighting in general , we also have a high-quality implementation of high-dynamic-range lighting (HDR), which not only creates a strong bloom effect when the player is facing the sun, but also a nice transition between both the top and low end of the spectrum. Although, as is evident in the screenshots, Crysis 2 definitely favours the extreme top end in various parts of the demo stage – bloom appears almost too overblown at times, with colour tinting on surfaces that this shouldn’t be occurring on.


We can also see that occasionally, and on some surfaces – mainly on background objects – that the game’s use of lighting appears to be simplified, perhaps even paired back by LOD again. Take the buildings in the distance for example, while appearing slightly basic in construction (textured, polygonal boxes basically), the lighting surrounding them has been reduced - It almost looks like the GI lighting model doesn’t apply to them, or that in some cases, real-time lighting isn’t present.

A fogging effect is also present, no doubt to help hide/blend in the distant low-detail objects produced by the LOD system. Perhaps, this is having an additional affect on the lighting in these areas. In addition we see what looks like a basic skybox. Plus, the smoke effects that cover the sky are flat, and also inconsistent in the way they cover the scene compared with the accuracy of the surrounding lighting.


That said, there’s no doubt that Crytek’s use of such an advanced lighting scheme pays dividends to the overall look they are trying to create. The Crysis 2 multiplayer demo is home to some of the most accomplished lighting seen on a console title. It’s not just the use of dynamic lighting – which many games have now anyway, but the extra level of realism provided by the GI system.

Given the limitations in working on aging, memory starved hardware (compared to today’s top-end, even mid-low-range PC’s), some cuts are always going to be made. Although, when you see just how well the demo performs, these look like being worthy compromises.

Crysis 2 targets a 30fps update, and for the most part, manages to near constantly hold it all throughout the entire experience of the demo. The game only very rarely slows down, and even then, it’s only for a split second or so, dropping what looks like a very small amount of frames. Impressively, it even manages to achieve this feat when there is not only a varying amount of particle effects on screen, but also on the rooftops with several people in one place, where the full force of the game’s GI lighting can be felt.

However, on occasion, when outside and there is lots going on, or as I’ve found, after getting killed and seeing a third-person replay of my death when combat is still breaking out, some slowdown will occur.

So, performance in terms of framerate is solid, but here we also see evidence of the game being fully v-synced too. Without equipment to measure if there are any frames being torn – even if it is just a single one in the whole rendering cycle – we can’t say for sure, 100%. But, what is clear, is that throughout the time spent in the company of the demo so far, no screen tearing seemed to be apparent.

In any case, even if one or two frames were being torn, unless there is a steady succession of torn frames in a row, then any screen tearing simply won’t be visible to the human eye. So, it stands to reason that Crysis 2 maintains some kind of v-sync: either a hard sync, or a soft v-sync dependant on rendering load.


One thing that doesn’t feel quite right though, alongside Crysis 2’s smooth 30fps refresh rate, is the noticeable input lag felt when jumping or performing other moves. You can also feel the very same thing as you aim and fire too. So, what could be causing this?

Well, my best guess - seeing as the game appears to be v-synced - is that Crytek could be using a frame buffering technique in addition to a soft v-sync, such as double buffering, whereby two frames are rendered for every one displayed with one being held in reserve just in case the first tears. That would at lest explain the additional latency that we seem to be feeling, although this isn’t a solid conformation on the matter.

Looking at how the game performs under load, the solidness of the 30fps update, we can understand just why some of the less attractive compromises were made. The experience as a whole is a smoother, more succinct one. It’s very impressive on the whole. There has been a balancing act between trading off certain elements in order to get others up and running in budget, per frame no less, and without increasing overall cost in other areas to do so.

In that respect, this is all to be expected on a console release dealing with GI solutions and plenty of dynamic lights. Crytek’s engine does indeed render various parts of the pipeline in different passes, and with varying degrees of quality. Although, it also delivers many high-end effects all in one package, which is something that most console releases fail to do.


The fact is, Crysis 2 currently looks great on consoles. And that can only be a good thing. Sure enough, there have been some downgrades. But, realistically, when you’ve got GI, SSAO and object-based motion blur, that is only to be expected. Plus, in any case, the admittedly low quality IQ does little to spoil the experience, considering what’s included.

Like with the very sub-HD framebuffer in Alan wake, the lack of AF plus a solid AA solution in Crysis 2, are all negated somewhat – though not completely - by the sheer beauty of the game’s real-time lighting, and the interactivity between it and various surfaces present in the world. Near rock-solid performance at 30fps with no screen tearing doesn’t hurt either.

Perhaps all that’s left, is to wax lyrical about the possibilities surrounding the currently MIA PS3 version of the game. However, if you’re looking for talk of the system’s bandwidth limitations potentially resulting yet further downgrades, loss of IQ, then you’ll be somewhat disappointed. If a recent, internal config file of the game is to be believed - the info contained within specifically puts the two versions on a par with each other, with the implementation of v-sync in relation to performance separating them – then this shouldn’t be the case.

The most likely scenario, in the weight of no further evidence being available at this point, is that the compromises found in the 360 demo have been brought about by optimising the engine to run comfortably, and within range of both systems specs, taking into account various nuances, such as 360’s EDRAM, and PS3’s additional CPU processing power. But then gain, we’ll just have to wait and see.

With the demo out of the way, it will be interesting to see what the final game has in store for us - specifically the single-player campaign. Usually, the multiplayer aspect often sees some graphical cut backs in order to maintain better performance for online purposes, and unpredictable load. The demo also showcased a definitive improvement over the old campaign code I played at the EG Expo back in October. So, by that reasoning, it is entirely possible that we could see additional improvements to the game in the final retail version.

Thanks go out to Mazinger Dude for the pixel counting and Shinnn for the screenshots.

Read More

The Latest CryEngine 3 Global Illumination Demo

The IQGamer Crysis 2 demo analysis is on its way. But in the meantime I suggest you take a look at the video below. It’s a rather impressive demonstration of global illumination using the CryEngine 3 – using multiple light bounces rather than just one!



All the shadows and lighting, along with the actual rendering is being performed in real time. Although there is no in-direct shadowing taking place, there are other neat touches, such as diffuse shadows and HDR. You can also get a brief glance of CryEngine 3’s day/night lighting cycle.

Similar things can be done using pre-backed alternatives, which are obviously static – not great for scenes with noticeable changes in the lighting cycle - but cost far less, especially if baked directly onto textures themselves. Unreal Engine 3’s Lightmass solution springs to mind. It’s good alternative for games which feature a fixed sun position, relying on many local, dynamic lights to create a similar effect.

Crysis 2 uses a single bounce form of real-time global illumination: it's clearly visible in the Xbox 360 demo. But more on that shortly.

Read More

Tech Analysis: Little Big Planet 2 (PS3)

Little Big Planet was a game that really got those creative juices flowing. On the surface it was a simple, physics-based platformer. But under the hood it became apparent that it was so much more. The tools given to create and design your own levels could be used in such a way that went well beyond the platform confines Media Molecule had envisioned for the title. And for LBP2, things have been taken a step further, with a complete set of tools designed to allow for just that: building your own creation that bypasses platforming altogether.

Of course, outside of the successes such unique custom content has found - and indeed there are millions of user-created downloads to be hand - the engine powering the game was always there to facilitate a natural realism, bound by real-world properties, and developed to augment the title’s physics-based approach. To that end, the original LBP featured both a realistic lighting and shadowing system, even emulating light passing through dense objects, along with a range of impressive, though perhaps restrained, visual effects.

For LBP2, Media Molecule have gone back and re-written most of their original engine, expanding on various graphical concepts simply toyed with in the first game, to delivering a fully-realised implementation here. This sequel incorporates comprehensive changes to nearly every part of the engine: lighting and shadowing for one, anti-aliasing and core rendering make-up to name but two more. All these tweaks and upgrades have not only made for an impressively organic visual look, but are also far more accurate in nature.


Take the baseline framebuffer for a second. LBP2 renders in 720p, like the original, but ditches the standard 2xMSAA (multi-sampling anti-aliasing) for Sony’s custom MLAA (morphological anti-aliasing) solution instead. The end result is a clean and sharp look, with incredibly smooth edges, free from most obvious edge shimmering and other such artefacts. Here, we see up to 16x MSAA on some surfaces in-line with the level of edge-smoothing this technique regularly provides, along with 4x and 8x on other smaller pieces of geometry.

The only aliasing that we can frequently notice on some areas, appears to be from various sub-pixel edges. There are also examples of what we like to call ‘soft’ edge shimmering on a few AA’d edges at certain angles. Although, most have competently been dealt with. Indeed, a lot of the aliasing present on screen is very similar to the kind seen in supersampled, in-game trailers; that is to say, its impact is very small in diminishing the high level of image quality we can see in Media Molecule’s sequel.


A change in the method of AA used is but one upgrade LBP2 has seen. The developers have also completely re-written their engine to work as a standard forward renderer, thus making certain visual effects much easier to do. Previously, parts of LBP1’s core rendering make-up was differed, meaning that some elements of the engine were sufficiently bottlenecked – use of alpha effects for example, had to be done via the less desirable A2C method, thus inducing a screen-door effect on many transparencies, like smoke and fire.

In LBP2, this isn’t at all the case. Here we see that all transparent effects are rendered using the more standard alpha coverage, with alpha blend method, free from the dithered, pixelated look they had before. Not only are these effects now easier to do, they are also better blended too. Particle effects, other elements, such as smoke and fire, are still rendered in a lower resolution. However, they are nicely smoothed over to avoid any pixelation, or other similar side-effects, much like the use of alpha in both Killzone 1&2.


Far more interesting, is the way that these effects now interact with the game’s light sources, in changing the intensity of the lighting and in turn, the way shadows are cast as a result. This is down to the game’s brand new lighting engine, which accurately simulates global illumination in how the entire game is lit and shaded. LBP2 uses something called volumetric lighting, whereby individual lights affects how other objects all around them are lit, with elements such as reflections and specular highlights changing dynamically.

A single light source in LBP2 now has the ability to change the lighting composition of the entire scene. Shadows are cast via every light source – and indeed every object - and move accordingly with changes to the lighting present. This is best observed as Sackboy traverses his environment, moving in and out of contrasting areas of brightness, and through more subtle changes in environmental shadowing, along with when there is lots of objects being randomly thrown around the screen, each with their own shadow.

We can also see evidence of ambient occlusion. Previously, we thought that LBP2 was simply using SSAO to deliver AO on various surfaces, characters etc. However, that isn’t the case. LBP2 actually features real-time ambient occlusion as a consequence of its volumetric lighting engine. For most games, this would perhaps be too resource intensive to do. Although, the simpler nature of LBP’s world, and being far more tightly controlled in terms of the rendering workload on screen, allows this to be possible.


In addition, we can also see that LBP2 also makes use of volumetric alpha effects, whereby flat, 2D spites can contain three-dimensional volume, having an incredibly obvious, depth look to then, whilst controlling the light output through the effect. A series of values contain that volume inside say, a cloud of smoke, giving the object depth, but more importantly accurately limiting/changing the amount of light that passes though it.

It’s a nice effect, one that appears to be only subtly used in what I’ve played of the game so far. On some downloadable, user-created stages however, ones with plenty of explosions, smoke and particles, the result is more obvious. Seeing the amount of light reduce underneath, or very mildly to the side of a cloud of smoke or mist, but not simply a pre-calculated dimming, but what looks looks like physically less light output is a key demonstrator of the effect in action.

In combination with the game’s use of light and shadow, this helps to emphasise the realistic look that MM have sort to create for the fantastical world of LBP2. Added depth is one consequence, but mostly, having all objects accurately look like they exist tangibly in the world is another.


Going back to LBP2’s use of shadowing, we’ve already mentioned that the game engine casts shadows for every object on screen, wherein a clear example of shadowing would realistically take place. Although, what we’ve failed to mention is that the game also uses soft shadows for all objects too.

These shadows, like with the game’s alpha affects, are rendered in a lower resolution to the framebuffer. However, this is negated somewhat – though not totally – by the use of high quality shadow filtering, which helps blend in the lower res soft shadows onto their environment and other objects.

There are still some examples of flickering shadows, and jittering edges where the use of filtering isn’t enough to hide their low-res nature. But, then again, outside of a in-engine, pre-rendred cut-scene, or in the obscenely high-end PC space, shadowing errors are simply part and parcel of current real-time rendering with performance-sapping, hardware limitations.


Another impressive part of LBP2’s technical make-up to look at, is the game’s use of real-world physics in how objects in this artificial world react. Swing on a rope, and you can almost feel the pull of gravity; push over a stack of lightweight boxes, and watch the ease of how they tumble, knocking others over, pushing and falling in accordance to their physical properties. Heavy objects also have weight behind them: Sackboy himself, bounces and flows through the air like stuffed and stitched toy – all of which adds a sense of real tangibility to the world these items and characters inhabit.

Also, these elements allow you to have an understanding of how many of the objects, challenges and puzzles work, before even attempting them. Once you know which objects have which properties – and some are obvious as soon as you see them, then all you have to do is master their usage, but using your own worldly understanding to do so. And of course, the technique required with the Dual Shock controller.

Occasionally, objects, characters etc, react with a ragdoll-like effect, which partially breaks the illusion that Media Molecule have created. Although, with so much going on technically, you can’t expect perfect representation of physics. Even in high-end CGI productions, replicating certain properties flawlessly, even just accurately, is a lot of the time, beyond what is feasible, let alone possible in a real-time rendered environment. In which case, the developers have done an absolutely stellar job with LBP2 as a whole, carefully balancing out what works and what doesn’t.


Moving on, and in addition the numerous advancements in lighting and shadowing, we can also see the inclusion of both a depth of field effect present in the background on some stages, and motion blur on fast moving objects.

Interestingly, the implementation of motion blur seems to be relatively simple – it affects the whole screen, rather than being done per-object, like in Killzone 3, and the original LBP. The reason for the downgrade – even though the effect still looks very good – seems to stem from having such an accurate, and performance-heavy lighting system as part of the core rendering engine. As such, there is less rendering time per-frame left for object-based motion blur. Instead, blur appears to be done as a simpler post-process effect.

On the off-set, all these advanced visual effects; the accurate, real-time nature of the game’s shadowing and lighting, motion blur, and depth of field, you would assume to have quite an impact on performance – that a heavy performance hit wouldn’t be unusual. Although, whilst sampling a few levels from the game’s campaign and some additional user-created stages, that doesn’t seem to be the case


Little Big Planet largely runs smoothly, simple dropping a few frames when the load increases beyond the engine’s capacity to resolve it, with v-sync being completely absent and some noticeable screen tearing sometimes being apparent. Media Molecule targets a solid 30fps update, and rather than allow for the framerate to drop heavily whilst encountering a heavier load, prefers to go over budget with rendering the next frame instead. Thus, we can see that a 30fps update is maintained in situations whereby if the game was v-synced, would drop down to 20fps for a brief moment or so, maybe longer, with some screen tearing being apparent as a result.

While the engine does successfully attempt to hold a steady 30fps for the most part, we can see that it does occasionally slow down, sometimes quite obviously down to around what looks like 20fps or so for a brief second or so, sometimes far less so. However, for much of the time what we are seeing as framerate drops, are actually manifestations of very mild tearing, in which the screen wobbles briefly for a split second or so, instead of tearing noticeably.

The engine frequently misses its window for rendering the next frame however, and as a result, we see a large amount of tearing on fairly frequent occasions, where the effect is clearly visible across the middle of the screen when it happens, sometimes mostly to the left, or all the way across, depending on how much the engine stalls.

At it’s worst, there can be many torn frames manifesting one after the other: the end product is what looks like a juddering in combination with a tearing of the screen. When this occurs it looks like the game is both dropping frames and tearing, but in reality is still holding a mostly solid 30fps.

But despite this, the overall engine’s performance is largely solid - sans perhaps the screen tearing, but otherwise, given the strain due to the complexity of the game’s core graphical, and indeed physics-based make-up, you can’t really complain too much. All that additional oomph goes a long way to further immersing you in Sackboy’s world, so I think that the performance trade-offs are worth it.


At first it might seem surprising to see such a technically accomplished rendering engine, for such a quaint, although very impressive platformer. But, when looking at how the core graphical make-up really adds a sense of immersion, a sense of increased believability to the world contained within, then it becomes completely beneficial.

Many of the elements that make LBP as magical as it is to play – not to mention to watch up close or from a distance – is down to how most elements in this virtual world act according to what we know about reality, the physical world around us. Things such as objects casting shadows which change as a result of the direction of a light source, or the smooth edges found throughout (MLAA) that hides the per-pixel, blocky nature of digital rendering. All definitively add something to the table, however small they initially appear to be.

In which case, Media Molecule has done a stellar job at creating a game that is as technically advanced as it is visually accurate. I doubt anyone will actually play LBP for its superb graphical make-up, but instead be fully engrossed in its fresh and addictively unique gameplay. The visuals, as it were, are simply there to facilitate the atmosphere and add an extra sense of realism to a cute, but cool, fantasy world. In that respect, LBP2 can be really nice to look at, but even better to play. And that’s exactly the point, really.

Thanks to Cynamite.de (gamesaktuell) for the screens and AlStrong for the pixel counting. Various galleries can be found here. Plus, a special no thanks to my phone cam, which failed to pick-up a very clear example of volumetric fog in a really dark area of the game.

Up Next: Crysis 2 analysis due for late tomorrow evening.

Read More

PSP Titles To Be Emulated On NGP

In an interview with Japanese site Impress Watch, Sony’s Kaz Hirai stated that the NGP would indeed be backwards compatible with original PSP games. However, there is a catch; as the company’s new handheld doesn’t have a UMD drive, only downloadable PSP titles will be compatible. There won’t be anyway to play non PSN-based PSP games on the new handheld.


How PSP games are handled on the system though, is somewhat more interesting; we all knew that UMD was effectively out a good few years ago, but software emulation of the original PSP… that’s something of a heavy undertaking to get 100% right, although not really unexpected given the device’s incredibly high-end specifications. According to the Sony executive, downloadable PSP games will be fully emulated on the NGP, much like in the way current PSP Mini’s are playable on the PS3.

As with other PSN releases, users will be able to transfer over their downloaded purchases to the system so long as their ‘download limit’ hasn’t been reached – it’s currently five downloads in total per-game across multiple systems. Thankfully, since the release of the PSPGo, Sony have been steadily upping the amount of PSP games available for digital sale across PSN, with the company suggesting that developers actively support this method of distribution ahead of the NGP’s eventual debut.

Other details, such as whether or not original PSP games would be rendered in a higher resolution to match the NGP’s display, weren’t forthcoming. But, seeing as PSP Mini’s aren’t when running on the PS3, then a similarly upscaled image is expected when these titles are played on the NGP.

Read More

NGP (PSP2) Specs Confirmed: A Brief Analysis

Yesterday a French site posted up likely specifications of Sony’s upcoming PSP2, which saw the inclusion of a quad-core ARM Cortex A9 CPU and a IMG Tech SGX 543 MP4+ GPU inside the system. Today, Sony officially broke their silence on the device, revealing both the console itself, along with the final internal specifications of the unit.


We can safely put an end to multi-core CELL processor rumours, and word of a GPU to rival that of PS3’s RSX – the quad-core SGX 543 MP4+ is certainly powerful when used in tandem with four A9 CPU’s, but still pretty far away from delivering the same level of performance as the PS3 itself. Although, in a string of highly-impressive gameplay demonstrations, via video trailers, we can see that games on the system emulate PS3-level complexity with relative ease, and are way beyond the level of games shown running on the iPhone 4.







There’s no question that the NGP, as Sony are officially codenaming the system, is incredibly powerful for a handheld device. The SGX 543 features full Open GL 2.0 support, along with what looks like Pixel Shader Model 4.1 capabilities, allowing for potential cross compatibility with devices that share similar hardware, but also the capacity for current-gen, PS3 and 360 level of visual effects.

Less overall geometry and texture detail is a given, as is what looks like lower shadow quality on some of the titles shown, although, many of the demos use some PS3 level assets which helps in bridging the gap. And, on the small screen – one that packs a 960x544 16:9 OLED display – the differences are even less likely to be noticed.

In addition, while the use of a quad-core CPU may seem like overkill, various developers have stated, that a lack of overall processing power on the CPU-side is what’s holding back high-end iPhone titles. So, the NGP set-up of a quad-core GPU, and four CPU cores looks like a solid solution to that problem. The GPU definitely packs enough punch, from what we’ve seen so far. Plus, the use of tile-based, differed rendering of the PowerVR tech will provide an additional performance boost over traditional forward renderers; regardless of whether being coded for directly to metal, or by higher-level software API’s.

All in all, the NGP definitely looks like being at the very high-end of handheld tech… at least until 2011, by which time many smartphones are likely to have caught up. But despite this, ether way, Sony have clearly demonstrated that their next-generation portable is fully capable of delivering PS3-style graphics on the small screen. Like-for-like or not, that's certainly a pretty impressive talking point.

Here's the final specs sheet in its entirety:

CPU:
ARM Corte-A9 core (4 core)

GPU:
SGX543MP4+

External Dimensions:
Approx. 182.0 x 18.6 x 83.5mm (width x height x depth) (tentative, excludes largest projection)

Screen:
(Touch screen) 5 inches (16:9), 960 x 544, Approx. 16 million colors, OLED Multi touch screen (capacitive type)

Rear touch pad:
Multi touch pad (capacitive type)

Cameras:
Front camera, Rear camera

Sound:
Built-in stereo speakers, built-in microphone

Sensors:
Six-axis motion sensing system (three-axis gyroscope, three-axis accelerometer)
Three-axis electronic compass
Location
Built-in GPS
Wi-Fi location service support

Keys/Switches:
PS button
Power button
Directional buttons (Up/Down/Right/Left)
Action buttons (Triangle, Circle, Cross, Square)
Shoulder buttons (Right/Left)
Right stick, Left stick
START button, SELECT button
Volume buttons (+/-)

Wireless Communications:
Mobile network connectivity (3G)
IEEE 802.11b/g/n (n = 1x1)
(Wi-Fi) (Infrastructure mode/Ad-hoc mode)
Bluetooth 2.1+EDR (A2DP/AVRCP/HSP)

A fuller, more intricate analysis of the hardware will be performed at a later date. There’s still many aspects of the internals that we don’t know: the clock speed of the GPU, and the amount of VRAM/memory bandwidth, to name but three. But we’ll cover this, and other concerns, more thoroughly when we get a chance.

Read More

PSP2 Hardware Revealed?

Recent rumours have put the PSP2 has being as powerful as the PS3, to having a quad-core GPU and cut down CELL processor, neither of which seemed to make any sense given both the power draw and overall cost requirements usually adhered to by the vast majority of handheld devices. However, the latest rumour does indeed shed some light on past statements – particularly the one about the system using a quad-core GPU, whilst firmly de-railing others.

According to French site 01.net, more concrete evidence of the PSP2’s hardware specs have surfaced via supposed information taken directly from the system’s development kit. Interestingly, the specifications reveal a system that features the very same CPU/GPU combo that will power the upcoming iPad 2 and iPhone 5, thus firmly shooting down reports of the machine being ‘as powerful’ as the PS3. Instead, the system looks to be at the forefront of mobile technology, but still behind both the RSX and Xenos found in the PS3 and 360 respectively.

Other details include a 5″ OLED multi-touch screen (that’s the front screen and not the rear touchpad), up to 512 MB LPDDR2 RAM and 16 GB’s worth of flash memory. The system also is said to feature an SD card slot for games, although it isn’t known whether this supports either SDHC, SDXC, or both.

Seeing as many PSP titles are currently approaching the 1.8GB capacity of the system’s UMD discs, and PSP2 titles are going to require far more, SDHC – which currently supports up to 32GB of storage space – isn’t going to be enough for storing lots of downloaded content from PSN. In which case, it’s almost certain that SDXC – which can hold up to 2TB (64GB in current sizes), and indeed SDHC for completions sake, will be supported.

In addition, as recent rumours suggest, the system will reportedly feature 3G support, thus having full wireless support via the use of a mobile phone network (although no phone support is planned), along with both standard Wi-Fi and Bluetooth. Two cameras will also be present; one on the front, and one on the rear, while in terms of size, the PSP2 won’t be as wide as the PSP3000 but will instead be slightly longer.

Interestingly, like the 3DS, the PSP2 is said to sport motion control via the use of both an accelerometer and a gyroscope, thus covering another base in the market. 3D however, is currently out of the question. Perhaps, given the already high-spec nature of the device, the use of a quad-core CPU/GPU, and OLED screen, that inclusion of such a feature would raise the cost significantly more than what would be acceptable. Although, the current spec and feature-set will put it way above that of the 3DS in terms of pricing anyway.

A full list of the PSP2’s specs can be found below:

Screen: 5″ OLED multi-touch screen
Control: A Multi-touch trackpad (rumored to be on the rear of the unit), four face buttons, two shoulder buttons, two analog sticks, directional pad
Resolution: 960 x 544
CPU: Quad-core ARM Cortex A9
GPU: PowerVR SGX 543 MP4+
RAM: 1GB LPDDR2 in the Debug unit, with 512 MB possible in the retail unit
Storage: 16GB flash internal (like the PSP Go) and an SD slot
Connectivity: Wi-fi, 3G, and Bluetooth

At the moment, all the details are simply rumour and well-informed speculation. However, we’d be rather surprised if there wasn’t more than a fraction of truth to these and other such reports.

In terms of the hardware spec, if true, it seems that Sony have taken a reasonable step in balancing raw hardware capability with heat dissipation and power draw – two of the largest concerns when designing a handheld; that is to say, that it is possible that titles could display PS3 and 360 quality visuals, but certainly not in a like-for-like manner. Various cuts, such as less in the way of geometry and advanced hardware effects are a given. Although, seeing as the screen will be only a fraction of the display sizes most people play their PS3/360 titles on – and still a reasonably high 960 x 544 resolution – simulating current-gen console graphics in this way shouldn’t be a problem.

So, while exact PS3 quality visuals remain firmly – whatever hardware Sony actually has under the hood in the PSP2 – something of a pipedream, and judging by developer comments, pure PR hyperbole, the system’s hardware make-up still makes it an incredibly powerful device, especially compared to other handhelds.

Certainly, despite using the same CPU/GPU combo as forthcoming Apple products, direct access to the hardware via the development kit – and without needing to conform to Open GL standard for cross compatibility with older devices – will easily lead to a noticeable leap in performance by comparison. There’s nothing really standing in the way of coders from extracting every last drop power from the machine via low-level optimisation of the hardware in ways where software API’s often restrict.

The real question though, is today’s hardware reveal actually what’s inside Sony’s next-gen handheld at all? All that, and more I expect, we will find out tomorrow, at the company’s worldwide unveiling of the device itself. Until then, the specifications listed on this page are perhaps the most tangibly convincing we’ve seen, representing both a powerful but power conscious device; one that is well above existingly comparable mobile products.

Read More

Tech Analysis: Mass Effect 2: Final Game Update

When we took a look at the PS3 Demo of Mass Effect 2 for our initial - and rather in-depth - tech analysis, we found that Bioware seemed to have delivered an incredibly strong conversion of the game, one in which most differences were said to be ‘tit for tat’ -especially the lighting - with no one version coming out on top. Both had their own plus points, and unique quirks which set them apart.

For the most part, content found in game demos rarely feature any drastic improvements when sampling final retail code. However, with ME2 things are a little different. Bioware have tightened up the PS3 code, thus resulting in a few select optimisations that bring that build even closer to that of the Xbox 360 game.

While many of the somewhat subtle differences still remain, both performance and certain shader effects have been tangibly improved for the final PS3 release. But before we talk about those, lets quickly recap.


As expected, Mass Effect 2 renders in 720p across both formats, with the 360 game getting broken use of 2xMSAA and the PS3 having no AA at all. Due to the deffered nature of how the UE3 renders certain elements of the scene – it does so in separate render passes – much of the anti-aliasing in the 360 build is completely absent, with only a select few edges having the smoothing shade applied. In that respect, both versions look basically identical. In motion and in most screens, there’s nothing to tell them apart in this area.

In the demo, we described how the PS3 version of ME2 had some sacrifices made in order to work around the system’s well-documented memory constraints, along with improvements in other areas over the 360 game. Elements such as skin shaders and use of normal maps on the characters were both paired back, though we also saw the use of higher quality shadow filtering as well.

Looking at the retail build, and we see pretty much the same result, minus some small upgrades to the shader effects on Commander Shepard’s face along with higher res normal maps. The rest of the characters seem to be rendered exactly as before.


For the most part texture detail and filtering are largely identical as well. Here we see a few higher resolution texture maps on the characters in the PS3 game to compensate for the lack of normal mapping on some areas. Miranda’s hexagonal suit for one, lacks the normal mapped surface of the 360 game, but supplants this with clear use of higher res texturing. Occasionally, these changes make certain details appear a little flat, but mostly Bioware’s rebalancing of certain details works rather well.

Reduced levels of normal mapped textures on the environments are still present, as is the lack of HDR-styled bloom lighting. Although, we can also see that many environmental textures on both versions are simply hi-resolution ones, lacking normal maps and specular highlights. Instead, we have some diffuse reflection maps, along with the higher resolution artwork being used to compensate for the lack of depth normal mapping usually creates – depth is obtained in these cases via the texture maps themselves – in order to save on memory bandwidth on both systems.

There are also parts of the environment on the PS3 game that lack the same specular layer to represent sheen found on the 360 version when light passes over affected surfaces. This seems to be down to both an absence of the effect in addition to the lack of bloom. On some occasions, lighting composition in a scene often affects the amount of specularity that is present on certain surfaces. Although, it is also clear that some parts of the environment have the effect, while others obviously do not.


The lighting system found in the PS3 version of ME2 was perhaps the main talking point of the demo. In order to prepare for the upcoming, multiplatform release of Mass Effect 3, Bioware used an upgraded version of the UE3 for the PS3 build of ME2, resulting in a few noticeable differences in how lighting is handled across both versions of the game. But rather than being technically superior, or worse in any way, these differences seem to be more artistic in nature, with some scenes featuring more in the way of shadow detail, and others less so.

Outside of this change in overall composition, any oddities are likely to be a side-effect of the upgraded UE3’s lighting system not being completely compatible with the one used in the original PC and 360 versions of the game. And to that end, it's unlikely that Bioware had enough time to tweak thus any further, not with ME3 around the corner.

In any case, the reworked lighting engine in the PS3 game appears to be more ambient in nature, with less in the way of what looks like more direct light sources. Instead, characters and parts of the environment don’t always seem to be lit up according to specific object placement, but more inconspicuously throughout. Although, there are plenty of examples where this isn't the case, and in which the origin of the lighting is overly apparent.

As a result of this inconsistency, there are some shadowing errors present – characters that either look to dark, covered in shade, or too flat, lit up more strongly from various angles. We see this on both platforms, though at the expense of featuring lighting that looks a little out of place at times.

Both version display imperfections in this regard and, as to which one is the visually superior, technically better of the two. Well, that pretty much comes down to personal preference. Both implementations look great in general, with the PS3 game occasionally lacking depth in certain scenes and the 360 one over accentuating elements in others. The more subtle PS3 approach is more comfortable to look at overall - especially up close, and I do prefer it, but there’s nothing wrong with the 360’s lighting at all.

It will be interesting however, to see just how this part of the engine fares in the upcoming Mass Effect 3. Have Bioware opted for the PS3’s more ambient approach for the new game, or will we see the title displaying similar lighting properties to 360 ME2? If the lighting changes are equally artistically and tech based, then perhaps a better balance between the two will be found. We’ll just have to wait and see.


Now, in terms of performance, when first sampling the final retail copy of Mass Effect 2 compared to our demo findings, there were two things that we noticed; that the PS3 build no longer featured any screen tearing, and that the framerate appeared to never rise above 30fps. In fact, as a whole it looks like both versions are now basically almost equal in this regard, with generally more even levels of performance overall, but at the expense of the previously smoother jumps above the 30fps mark on the PS3.

What this means, is that the PS3 game is now v-synced across both gameplay and cut-scenes, and now also imposes a top end framerate cap at 30fps. As a result we see the lack of any screen tearing, but at the expense of having as much top-end smoothness on the whole. This varies between gameplay and cinematics, with the cut-scenes taking a prolonged dive down to 20fps on occasions where both systems cannot cope with the load provided by the engine.

Both initially appeared to be the same, although there are times when it looked like the PS3 game was dropping down to 20fps for ever so slightly longer periods.

Gameplay-wise, and we can see that the differences are much more pronounced. During the demo we sighted small up-shoots going beyond 30fps and into what looked like something around the 50-60fps mark. But in the final game, this isn’t the case. Like with the 360 version, ME2 on the PS3 starts off confidently running at 30fps, before dropping frames in heavier load situations – areas with multiple enemies and noticeable explotions all at once, as a good example.

Here we can see dips varying between what looks like 30 and 20fps, with both versions suffering in similar situations. However, the 360 game manages perform slightly better in an overall sense – both versions seem to suffer from slowdown, but seemingly at different points, whilst the PS3 tends to hold a reduced 20fps for slightly longer. In addition, both versions also slow down at different points: PS3 again tends to suffer slightly more, but also, we find that the engine is balancing different loads when this happens.

Compared to the demo, and we find that the PS3 build’s more stable, albeit slightly lowered framerate, is in fact preferable to the uncapped, 30fps plus refresh seen before. On the whole it simply feels smoother whilst also being a near like-for like match for the 360 game. In conclusion, performance is largely solid, with no unexpected drops beyond what we’ve already experienced before in 360 ME2. Some additional slowdown aside, Bioware have done a great job.


As we’ve already said before in our demo analysis, there are other factors besides graphics when considering which version of Mass Effect 2 to buy. Visually, both versions stack up rather nicely, with the subtle downgrades in normal mapping and shaders in the PS3 build having very little impact in the grand scheme of things. Also, the differing lighting implementations, which is the better of the two, is largely down to personal preference than technical superiority.

In that respect, the PS3 version of the game is perhaps equally as impressive as the 360 one, with other non-graphical features perhaps defining which game to go for. Take both content and pricing into account. The 360 game can be had for around £12 new in some places on the high street, £7 second hand, while the PS3 version retails for a full £40. Another thing to consider, is that the PS3 release comes with all of the DLC that came out last year over Xbox Live on the disc. Whereas, the 360 game is simply the bare bones original, but at a bargain price.

Ultimately, in terms of which version you should really go for, this will I expect, simply come down to whether or not you feel the extra money spent on the PS3 game is worth it over the saving of buying either a cheap copy of the 360 original. Personally, I think it might be, despite not being able to own all three games in the trilogy all on the same format. Either way, Mass Effect 2 is a superb experience and, the fact that owners of both system get to play it, is yet another bonus.

As ever, thanks go out to AlStrong (pixel counting) and to Videogamezone.de (screenshots). A full gallery of high quality shots can be found here.

Read More

Update Schedule And Crysis 2 Multiplayer Trailer

Apologies for the lack of content so far this week, but I’ve been doing a full 40hrs straight at work so far, with another stretch coming up next week, so coverage might not be as regular as I’d like. That’s not to say there won’t be any in-depth updates at all though, I’m going through the first few hours of both retail copies of Mass Effect 2 for a final tech, due for this Sunday, before moving onto LBP2, and then finishing up with either the Bulletstorm demo or a short look at the Crysis 2 multiplayer trailer.

If all goes to plan, expect LBP2 on Wed and the rest sometime on the weekend. Other than that, the usual tech-related news pieces will continue, and Dead Space 2 is on the agenda for the week after. Hopefully, I get time to plow through all of the above. It’s going to be a very busy, and utterly tiring, week. But should be well worth it.

Out of interest, just before head you decide to head off, here's a very quick look at the Crysis 2 multiplayer trailer:



Despite looking like console footage, Crytek have infact created the trailer from footage of the game running on the PC, with what looks like medium detail settings applied. The IQ appears far too clean to be running on consoles, and we see some extremly high quality effects, along with what looks like a framebuffer around the 720p mark. Although, the alpha-effects appear to be rendered at a lower resolution. Just look at those smoke and particles.

By contrast, the 360 build of the single player campaign I played at the EG Expo looked decidedky worse. Sub-HD framebuffers with no anti-aliasing seemed to ruin any chance of decent image quality being present, whilst the framerate also appeared to be, at times, well below the 30fps targeted by the developers.

That build of the game however, is now very old. And it's more than likely that Crytek have made some serious headway with both console ports since then. Although, the complete lack of any PS3 footage since the original CryEngine 3 trailer is a cause for corncern.

Expect more later, after we've sampled some high quality footage that hasn't been compressed into something that approaches sub-SD quality.

Read More

Kinect On PC - Now To Be Official

A few months ago, Microsoft’s Xbox 360 motion control entry into gaming, the Kinect, was hacked and custom coded drivers developed which enabled it to run on the PC. So far, some of the homebrew demonstrations have been even more technically accomplished than much of the official software for the device, with a 3D webcam and competent FPS controls being the highlights.

However, the Kinect was never really hacked as such. The device has always been ‘open’ as it were, only requiring creation of software drivers in order for it to work on other platforms. Plugging it into the PC for example, and you can use it as a basic webcam with relative ease.

In addition, much of the custom software solutions using Kinect on the PC have been using a depth buffer with four times the resolution than on commercial games. The Kinect’s official depth buffer spec indicates it to be 320x240 in size, whereas the actual hardware is capable of producing 640x480’s worth of depth information. This means that some homebrew applications have features significantly more advanced – if not incomplete and more rough around the edges – than the intial batch of Kinect games.

Seeing as the hardware is actually capable of working around its original PrimeSense spec – all the functionality and tech is there – signs point to Microsoft’s software API restricting the device’s full use. In particular, the resolution of the depth buffer, maybe due to the additional amount of processing workload it would have on the 360’s CPU. However, MS has also stated, that in time, via software updates from Xbox Live, that the Kinect will see more of its potential unlocked – I.E: developer support or using full-size depth buffers.

But ultimately, all this is already possible now, albeit via homebrew software applications on the PC. Although, that is all about to change if fresh rumours are to be believed.

Previously MS have commented on the Kinect hack as being expected, even welcome. That they didn’t have any plans to restrict the tech, and were instead looking to broaden its use beyond the confines of the Xbox 360 and into a wider market – into the PC space. Now, that seems to be closer to becoming a reality. A new report – via WinRumours - clams that in the next few months, MS will themselves reveal an official Kinect software development kit (SDK), along with driver support for Windows-based PCs.

Interestingly, Microsoft’s next operating system, Windows 8, will feature gesture-based control in addition to traditional mouse and keyboard support. Perhaps making Kinect an open-platform device was part of that plan from the beginning. Certainly, some of the impressive user-coded demos show that there is much potential for it to be used in the way MS are hinting at... and more. Whilst pointer support is let down with lack of precision and high latency, a simpler gesture-based solution, maybe using more complicated tracking for only specific functions, would be an ideal starting point.

Also, on the gaming side of things, Kinect’s implementation on the PC could well show us a small glimpse of the future regarding the technology. Without being held back by the 360’s aging CPU spec, and instead opened up by the possibilities of high-end PC hardware, we could see far more in the way of advanced tracking with considerably more accuracy, but with a minimum amount of lag – only slightly more than Kinect’s USB data transfer limitation.

The prospects behind this, and indeed unofficial Kinect applications, are particularly intriguing, given just what appears to be possible. And with a full MS SDK only a few months away, we shouldn’t have to wait long before some of the more originally elaborate ideas envisioned for the device to come to fruition.

Read More

3DS Internals Sighted/Analysed

A few days ago a teardown of the 3DS was posted on TVGZone, which reveals a few more interesting details about the innards of the system. The unit appears to be a final, production-grade unit. It features the slightly modified aesthetic of the final model displayed at Nintendo’s World Event in Japan; a grey analogue slider is present, along with the now flat, what looks like touch-based ‘Start’, ‘Select’, and ‘Home’ buttons. But far more relavent, the images reaveal some vital info on the internal hardware present in the system.


On to the inside, specifically the motherboard itself, and we can see two distinct pieces of silicon that stand out. The first appears to be a single package containing both ARM CPUs, and one DMP PICA200 GPU. Initial impressions seem to hint that it is a SoC (system-on-a-chip) with the individual components most likely all on one die.

The other, is what looks like a block of memory – possibly the entire 96MB that the system is supposed to have – unified as one single pool, from which, due to the overall hardware configuration, it looks like both the CPU and GPU can use. Markings on the chip indicate that it is FCRAM made by Fujitsu, possible a custom solution just for the 3DS as the company doesn’t make FCRAM chips higher than 64Mb.

The use of a unified memory pool is also interesting. Usually this can be limiting for the system if the GPU cannot access it directly. However, from what is known about the main memory and CPU/GPU configuration at the moment, all things point to this not being the case.

In addition to the main 96MB of memory, sources indicated that the 3DS also contains a separate pool of VRAM dedicated to the GPU (rumoured to be around 4MB), which is believed to be located on the SoC. This is most likely to be fast access eDRAM, used just to hold the framebuffer, with the GPU being able to directly access the system’s main memory pool for other things as and when it needs.


From what we can see, the use of a SoC and a separate large block of memory clearly showcases Nintendo’s cost-centric approach when designing the internals of the 3DS. It also looks like being a tidy, efficient set-up. Having all the main components on two separate packages (well the memory appears to be a single chip) keeps cost down, seeing as there is less in the way of overall silicon being used.

It will be interesting to find out just what process node both chips are on. Usually having individual parts groped together on single dies indicates a low process node in the first place, meaning that cooling and heat dissipation should be easy to achieve. In other words, Nintendo have carefully chosen components that not only provide the best ‘bang for your buck’ where the cost/power ratio is concerned, but also ones that should be easy to make future savings on for later revisions of the hardware.

Hopefully, we should find out more shortly after the 3DS’ Japanese launch, when someone else performs a slightly more in-depth teardown of the system, thus allowing us to get a better look at those two chips and the internal hardware make-up as a whole.

Read More

Tech Analysis: RE: Revelations Gameplay Video

Nintendo showcased a small variety of software at its recent World Event in Japan. However, it was the first time that Capcom demonstrated Resident Evil Revelations running in real-time, with a short, but no less impressive live demonstration of the game. A trailer focusing on the title’s in-engine cut-scenes was also shown just before, proving that what we were seeing during gameplay is a match for the detailed cinematics.

Perhaps more importantly, Capcom’s first proper reveal of RE Revelation’s gameplay comes as a relief for anyone expecting a hectic, RE5-like pace, in which horror and tension is subdued with all out violence in a almost fear-less shooting gallery of shorts. Revelations, although sharing the same over-the-shoulder viewpoint, is a far slower affair focusing on unsuspecting scares and fewer, but far tougher enemies. In this respect it faithfully builds upon the original PSX games whilst bringing all the benefits of RE4’s vastly superior control and camera system.

So, lets take a look.



Visually, from what we can see, it looks like the quality of both the character and environment modelling is basically identical across the cut-scenes and gameplay. Almost nothing has been lost in terms of detail and precision, sans a small error in lighting when in targeting mode, but we’ll talk about that a little later. Characters feature a reasonable amount of geometric detail, but mostly, the really fine stuff – like the small elements of clothing, round look of the arms – is accomplished through the use of normal mapping in combination with solid texture work.

Through the use of the 3DS’ fixed-function, multiple texture-layered approach to rendering effects, we can see clear implementation of normal maps, adding finer details to the characters, along with specular reflections to highlight gloss, moisture and other similar properties.

Environments too, benefit from having similar effects. Parts of the walls, floors, and various other objects are normal mapped, with some surfaces – like metal pipes – getting specular, and others simply using the more common diffuse map in order to scatter light across the surface. However, these are used somewhat sparingly, with the majority of the environment using less of a multi-layered approach.


Alongside the game’s use of detailed normal mapped characters and enclosed, but also reasonably intricate scenery, the lighting engine is perhaps the most impressive component of the title’s feature-set. RE Revelations takes full advantage of the 3DS’ ability to handle per-pixel based lighting calculations, and as a result sees some key environmental objects casting dynamic lights which actively illuminate and shade both the characters and surrounding environment.



The lamp hanging above the stairwell for example, whilst swinging from side to side, projects a shadow which moves and changes according to the position of the light source itself. The environment also seems to be accurately lit according to where the lightsource is projecting from, the angle, intensity etc. Other elements, such as the texture layer based shader effects – reflections in particular, especially on normal mapping – are affected, with certain surfaces shining as light passes over them, before dimming as levels reduce.





The characters benefit greatly from the real-time, per-pixel lighting implementation, with considerable depth being added to them, and the scene as a whole. This is nicely backed up with subtle use of self-shadowing, which complements the dynamic nature of the lighting and its accuracy.

Occasionally though, there are times when the game’s lighting system perhaps isn’t quite as accurate. When switching to targeting mode there is some noticeable polygon jittering, along with what looks like slightly flatter lighting. Like with the PSP, the reason from this seems to stem from both a lack of precision with geometry co-ordinate calculations, and what looks like a lack of per-pixel lighting when in this mode – on the character’s arm at least, its still present in the environment.



We can also see evidence of low quality shadow filtering, no doubt used to save on bandwidth, and what looks like low-resolution shadows in general. Take a look at Jill’s shadow, paying particular attention to her right hand. The effect looks like PCF, a cheap method of filtering used on some PS3 titles in order to save memory.


Of course, the plentiful use of such an advanced feature-set comes at the cost of environmental size and scope. From what we’ve seen so far, RE Revelations mainly takes place in tight, enclosed spaces with little in the way of distant, horizon-based scenery. The enemies we’ve seen so far, also rely a lot more on being normal mapped than constructed via lots of geometry.

Having the game set in mostly enclosed environments not only allows Capcom to bring a foreboding amount of atmosphere to the proceedings, but also to carefully budget the engine’s graphical load. High levels of bump-mapping and shader-like effects have a large memory and processing cost, so by restricting the draw distance and sheer overall complexity of any given scene, more of that budget can be spent on these effects whilst retaining that target 30fps performance.


In its current state, Revelations frequently runs at 30fps in areas which doesn’t tax the engine too greatly – usually in sparse corridors or when there are no enemies around. In more complex scenes, ones which currently add in a human-size foe into the mix, framerate dips below 30fps and down to around 20fps for brief periods. No visible screen tearing seems to be present (although the poor video encoding makes it hard to tell) so the game appears to be running with v-sync enabled. This would explain the drop to 20fps when the engine is pushing a heavier load – drop to 20fps rather than tear frames when the engine cannot render them in time.

Although, with nearly a year to go and at only 20% complete at this stage, such performance issues are likely to be sorted out by the time of release. Regardless, RE Revelations is still a mightily impressive display of the 3DS’ capabilities. Here you’ve got some nice precision lighting not seen in any iPhone title to date, and plentiful supply of shader-like effects being generated by the system’s fixed-function hardware. There’s nothing else that is quite on the same level currently on competing mobile devices, and this is effectively first generation software.


Beyond the visuals, it’s great to finally have what looks like a classically inspired instalment in the Resident Evil franchise, based on fear rather than adrenaline-centric action. Resident Evil 4 was a great leap forward, with arguably the right balance of action and atmosphere in order to generate horror. RE5 however, was a huge disappointment. Focusing purely on shooting… lots and lots of shooting, it massively diminished the series trademark tone. With Revelations, Capcom appear to be putting this right.

Read More