meehan666 said:
mirgro said:
CGI-Quality said:
mirgro said:
@CGI
I highly doubt that is even remotely possible. My PC can push many times more polygons and shaders at a higher resolution than a 360 ever will be able to and I can't even play it on highest settings because when things get busy on screen my FPS drops to 20. Have to play it on High to have a consistent FPS over 40. Don't kid yourself, the 360 version can't even come close to the PC version in therms of graphics. Although reading some of the 360 reviews it seems that there's a lot more things inferior on the 360 than just graphics or, and this is far more probable to be honest, reviewers are just idiots.
|
Quite Possible
I'm not arguing which version is better, obviously PC will win there. I'm arguing that there IS a place I got that from.
|
Look at shots #3 and #7, because that's what the game is like for the most part, and it's clear that the 360 suffers from its hardware in it. Also there's a much larger resolution on the PC. Though it looks like thos pictures weren't screencapped but just pictured with a digital camera because I can't believe how you can have such large dark splotches.
|
For the record, here is what the developer states as the differences between PC and console:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-interview-metro-2033?page=4
Digital Foundry: Does PC hardware offer up any additional bonuses in Metro 2033 aside from higher frame-rates and resolutions?
Oles Shishkovstov: Yes and no. When you have more performance on the table, you can either do nothing as you say, and as most direct console ports do, or you add the features. Because our platforms got equal attention, we took the second route.
Naturally most of the features are graphics related, but not all. The internal PhysX tick-rate was doubled on PC resulting in more precise collision detection and joint behavior. We "render" almost twice the number of sounds (all with wave-tracing) compared to consoles. That's just a few examples, so that you can see that not only graphics gets a boost. On the graphics side, here's a partial list:
- Most of the textures are 2048^2 (consoles use 1024^2).
- The shadow-map resolution is up to 9.43 Mpix.
- The shadow filtering is much, much better.
- The parallax mapping is enabled on all surfaces, some with occlusion-mapping (optional).
- We've utilised a lot of "true" volumetric stuff, which is very important in dusty environments.
- From DX10 upwards we use correct "local motion blur", sometimes called "object blur".
- The light-material response is nearly "physically-correct" on the PC on higher quality presets.
- The ambient occlusion is greatly improved (especially on higher-quality presets).
- Sub-surface scattering makes a lot of difference on human faces, hands, etc.
- The geometric detail is somewhat better, because of different LOD selection, not even counting DX11 tessellation.
- We are considering enabling global illumination (as an option) which really enhances the lighting model. However, that comes with some performance hit, because of literally tens of thousands of secondary light sources.
Seems like a big difference if you have the hardware to take advantage of everything. If you look at some of the pictures on the hi-res PC screenshots thread on neogaf you can see how tessellation makes a difference.
|
