By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Zekkyou on 17 April 2015
Edit Thread
curl-6 said:
Zekkyou said:

It's also worth noting that ToD doesn't run at a native 1280x720, and is a much less stable 60fps than 3D World. A degree of that instability is due to Insomniac having believed that hundreds of bolts on-screen at once makes things more fun than a solid 60fps (and i'd agree with them; it's one of the highlights of the Future trilogy), but even outside of those situations it's still far from a perfect lock.

I think ACiT (released 2 years later) looks a lot better than ToD did though. It wasn't a huge graphical jump over its predecessor, but they made much better use of what they had:

[images]

(Both shots seem to have had their IQ bumped, likely for marketing, but outside of that they're both in-game).

Crack in Time was indeed a very good looking game. Holds up well today, even.

I'd still give the win to games like 3D World and Mario Kart 8 though. Crack in Time runs at a sub-HD 960x704, and frequently dips below its 60fps target. 

I probably would too, but it's hard for me to give many solid reasons as to why. They're both platformers, but past that they have such different technical and gameplay goals that linear comparisons are almost impossible without Tachikoma's level of knowledge :p (even if i can come to a general conclusion).

Out of curiosity though, if ACiT maintained a perfect 720p/60fps (even during the crazy bolt-fests), what sort of gap (or lack of, etc) would you put between it and 3D World?