Lens of Truth: Assassin's Creed 2 Analysis

[Reasonable]

Squilliam said:

Reasonable said:
Seems better than their usual analysis. I noticed tearing and issues in pretty much every video released for the title, so this isn't a surprise. I feel from what I've seen they pushed the content and detail further than they could optimize the engine.

I also note that, with a cross-platform engine, the PS3 takes a slightly higher hit as the code doesn't leverage the more specific PS3 architecture vs the easier to leverage 360 architecture.

It'll still play well enough, though. Reading reviews, I'm just glad that, a poor start aside, it seems to offer a better game than AC, which impressed me a lot in many ways, but also annoyed me with its glaring flaws and barely developed gameplay, which I felt left it resembling more the best tech demo ever than a finished game.

You've got it wrong sorry.

The differences are very easy to explain and don't really result from a porting process at all, this game was lead on the PS3 in any case!

1. MSAA vs QAA is simply due to the 2x sample rate advantage and the extra memory bandwidth.

2. Loading times are simply due to the faster DVD-Rom on the Xbox 360 and the fact that the game isn't suited to HDD caching like with Uncharted 2 due to the fact that the player can move so quickly. If they tried a similar system it would lead to cache thrashing.

3. Tearing is due to the fact that the PS3 architecture has a more variable frame time due to the > number of cores and the Cell -> GPU programming model.

4. The lighting differences are due to the additional performance given by the Cell CPU for this task.

The game couldn't have been made exclusively for the PS3 and had these issues dropped out. If it was the same game then the same design decisions would lead you back to the same problems and the only difference is that you wouldn't have an Xbox 360 version to point out the flaws.

Didn't think I mentioned anything specific, simply that the code itself clearly runs better on 360.  The load times are obvious and I wasn't referring to that at all - simply the tearing and frame rate.

Reading up on the engine below KZ2 and U2 I do feel that an exclusive engine would be able to reduce the screen tear, etc. but it would need to be different from the basic design as it is now.  Are you sure PS3 was the lead as this seems out of alignment with the results.  Taking say Burnout Paradise as an example, if PS3 is the lead then the title normally shows a better ability to align to the PS3 architecture while porting readily to the 360.  AC2 has pretty much every hallmark of a title developed more for 360 or simultaneously for each (as with say MW2).

I agree with your points, which I think actually back up my point, as they show the areas where the current engine hits issues on PS3 architecture.

Personally, if I was coding I'd rather code for the 360 due to the design and clearer memory, GPU distinction and the better support for AA approaches.

I'll be really surprised if any multi- title ever looks totally even.  In every case I expect 360 to be slightly superior.