By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Lens of Truth: Assassin's Creed 2 Analysis

lol @ deneidez dude they gave 8 games to the ps3 and 20some to the 360 i dont call this biased to the ps3.........



Around the Network

^ I think he meant anti-PS3.



Rockstar: Announce Bully 2 already and make gamers proud!

Kojima: Come out with Project S already!

Nice.

I will be getting the PS3 version.



                            

i think they both look similar, i doubt one will score higher than the other.

ps3 does have better lighting to its advantage, but again best buy the game on what console you play on most.

i think devs have done a grand job on this multiplat game.



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

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.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Around the Network
almcchesney said:
lol @ deneidez dude they gave 8 games to the ps3 and 20some to the 360 i dont call this biased to the ps3.........

And? I doubt you can say that apple is orange, but you surely can say that between these two oranges I think this orange looks better. ;)



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.

Have you see the gametrailers review? I was starting to feel a little nauseous with all the screen tearing going on there.

I'd like to play through it, but wow....



beandip said:

I have found these guys to be fairly accurate on their comparisons. Heck, they are like one of three groups that even do frame rate and tear analysis.  As for color and capture methods they post all details in their faq page. And lastly, one of the staff posted regarding the global average numbers:

"I’m glad someone brought this up! Something we’re working on is the display of the statistics. What you’re looking at is a “weighted” average. Basically, the tearing in longer clips means more than the tearing in the shorter clips.

Do you find this more useful? Or would you prefer an “unweighted” average where the FPS and tearing of each clip are considered equal?"

yes, though there is not much difference in FPS and tearing in almost all multiplatforms.

and biggest problem, washed out can be fixed easily.



IllegalPaladin 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.

Have you see the gametrailers review? I was starting to feel a little nauseous with all the screen tearing going on there.

I'd like to play through it, but wow....

Yeah, that one made it pretty obvious.  I'm looking forward to it, but on the evidence so far I'd have preferred them to dial back the visual detail a little to something the engine could cope with better.  Really, unless we're talking about a new engine (like say with the first Uncharted) there is no reason for this in such a high profile game with such a huge budget.  It should have been obvious they either needed to optimize the engine to cope, or dialed back aspects of the visuals to get a better performance.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

The best is still the ps3 version because of the psp connectivity.