The 'polygonal' Truth about the PC version compared to XB360 version

[Knot3D]

I do 3D character modeling, I've worked on a Xb360 game as a 3D modeler ; i can 'read' ingame assets like character models ; thus i'm able to compare polygon budgets a bit better than anyone who doesn't know graphics.

Anyway, I made some comparison screens. The white outlines show the polygon quads / rows of poly edges. Always look at the silhouette to get an estimation of the model it's polygon count. As you can see ; the PC version is a clear downscale of polybudget compared to the Xbox360 version, and it's certainly not only that particular Sam model ; also NPC's and other ingame Sam models which feature more polygons in the XB360 version. Some other dude posted Okhotst screens where you can clearly see the more detailed textures on the guard his trenchcoat arm ; the guard on PC version also features less polygons than on the XB360 version. Count the poly edge rows. Ubi tried to compensate the lack of polygons in the PC version by adding strong normal maps where polygon geometry would be in the Xbox360 version : but normal maps can't fool the eyes of a 3d modeler and gamers who want 100% value for money.

...and yes, the screens were taken on my PC (X1900XTX) with "MAX Next Gen settings"
PC screenshot 01 : less polygons
http://members.home.nl/hkonings/PC_lowerPoly01.jpg

PC screenshot 02 : less polygons
http://members.home.nl/hkonings/PC_lowerPoly02.jpg

Xbox360 screenshot 01 : more polygons
http://members.home.nl/hkonings/PC_lowerPoly04.jpg

PC versus XB360 screenshot : more polygons and better textures on XB360
http://members.home.nl/hkonings/PC_lowerPoly03.jpg

Why does the PC version features lower polygon assets ? Well because of the lowest PC denominator : graphics cards of yesteryear like the 6800's with only 6 vertex pipelines ; those can't push the Xbox360's polygon budget.

Anyone who thinks the PC version = Xbox360 version, graphically speaking, or even better ; is fooling him/herself.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"You're MINE !"

[S.a.S-Akbari]

Good job knot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Interesting http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I used to be a hero, Now I'm a no lifer, I am a WoW Geek" - Akbari, the
day he started World of Warcraft -- WoW addict till June 2006 R.I.P.

"salami akbari", "Amalahad Akbari" -- LoGiCaL_ - Proof nubs do get older then 2 years.

Xfire (http://www.xfire.com/profile/akbari) -- Thanks Dojomann for the siggeh!
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/562/akbarisnewsig2ed5.jpg

[CaedusSaevire]

Damn, 60 Minutes couldn't have done it better.

[Ashura287]

I figured they dumbed it down somewhere, but wow. I hadn't actually seen a direct comparison.

And here we thought almost no one could run it the way they released it. Imagine if they had given us a direct port.

This second wave of 360 titles is starting to use the extra power of the machine. I knew there was a performance gap, but I guess it didn't occur to me that it was this large. Only way to overcome that will be with the DX10 cards, I'm afraid.

[Cirap]

I pretty much knew this already, but it's good to see it White On Black

[zootia]

The only reason the x360 has better frames with better graphics is because the game was built for the x360. Take a look at quake4. They had to dumb down the graphics for the x360 version and it still runs choppier than the pc version.


THe whole key is in optimization and native platform

[Ashura287]

Not necessarily. It still beats anything short of the 8800GTX. A couple 7800s or newer in SLI can probably match it or close to it, but thats a $1000 setup for the cards alone... The 360 wins on power for the time being, and probably will continue to be the more economical choice for graphics junkies for about a year.

[Knot3D]

^^ Like i said earlier : the pc version has lower polygon budget, hardcoded ; because of mid range graphics cards.

probably a single 7950GTX, single X1950XTX or 7900GTX Sli or 8800GTX could do the polybudget of the XB360 version, with reasonable framerates ...

BUT,

they decided to scale it down otherwise the people with 6800's, 7800GS's and X1600's wouldn't be able to play reasonably at all ; the geometry load would be too much for those cards.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"You're MINE !"

[braiog]

Knot, you seem to have a knack for 3D, so I got a question.

To your knowledge, how what aspects of SCDA make it so that I can only play it at 800x600 with all effects off and still just get 20FPS, when Ubi "claims" that this is a modified version of their SCX engine, where I could run what "looks" like the same quality graphics/polygons at 1680x1050 at Med/High and get 30-45FPS?

That's such a huge performance drop. Even with everything disabled, what is it about SCDA PC that makes the framerate so low?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.aaronmartone.com/misc/braiog_sig.jpg
Death by Lethal Injection?

PC does NOT mean a Ported Console version.

[MCPO.PA]

Originally posted by S.a.S-Akbari:
Good job knot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Interesting http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I agree. Nice Comparison.

But why are they considerated of ppl who have a GeForce 6xxx when they require SM 3.0, it would not make a big difference if those with a GF6 could not play the game either because of the `low` performance with their card. I would favor a NICE looking game over a reduced number of polygons and being considerated of ppl with a GF6, there r so many people out there that r not able to play it, so why does UBI reduce the # of polygons just to make the game run faster on GF6

[braiog]

I guess the limitation is on-screen polys. Even with graphics low and special effects off, if the game has more polys on screen than the card can handle, it starts to crawl.

Either way, I'm not upgrading until Q4 2007. That way I'll have had this computer for 3 years. It'll retire as a business machine, then I'll make a topline rig with SLI DX10 cards.

Wonder if QuadCore CPUs will be out. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.aaronmartone.com/misc/braiog_sig.jpg
Death by Lethal Injection?

PC does NOT mean a Ported Console version.

[daFlea5]

Wow, I know I'm late but WOW! Really good job Knot<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/7118/scomingmultscris8qx.png

[Knot3D]

Hmmm.. for what i could tell, the head, torso, arms and head of the Sam model are still about the same in the PC version : that means the upper half of the model is still packloaded with polygon detail like the XB360 version.

That is a constant geometry overhead : because your gpu will always have the Sam model on screen to calculate.

current PC GPU's have vertex and shader pipelines ; whereas Xbox360's GPU has Ati unified architecture. So, the Xbox can dynamically allocate either more power to geomerty needs or shader needs.

Braiog, you have a 6800GT, right ? That card has 6 vertex pipelines compared to 8 vertex pipelines in cards like the 7900GTX and X1900's. Those older cards with a mere 6 vertex pipelines will have to cope with such a, still pretty big polygon load. That's bogging down those cards' performance, amongst other factors.

I work in Cinema 4D and Maya ; if i have my 3D model at 0 subdivisions ; viewport interaction is smooth. At subdiv 1 it's still smooth ; But once i set subdivision/ meshsmooth at 2 or 3 ; then my work viewport's framerate will bog down because the GPU has twice or 3 times as much polygons to take care of... and that's only rotating my camera.

In a game a character model deforms ; the geometry is bound to a joint (the non smoking ones. lol) skeleton : more polyons mean more calculations for deformation of the character model it's limb joints.

What else ? Remember the E3 preview of CT's Hokkaido level with those ultra slick reflective floors (where you eavesdrop on Nedich meeting). In the final CT version, Ubi cut out that shiny reflective floor because it was made with a high end DX9c shader ; Now those shaders do feature in SC DA and there's lots of it, even in refractive version : the ice shaders, alot of windows.

So, from the top of my head ; i'd say a big polygon budget, though smaller than Xb360's ; and alot of reflective & refractive shaders are what bring down performance on a 6800GT.

Of course, I'd bet if they'd optimize code for another 6 months ; performance would have been better.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"You're MINE !"

[Ashura287]

I'm guessing they didn't do as much to Sam for that same reason - he's on the screen all the time, you're constantly looking at him, he needs to look good. Also, I don't find myself with a reason to stare at his legs very often, so there you go.

[Knot3D]

Well, 3D modelers will always appreciate quality character models in the games they play. Also, in my humble opinion, pc gamers who invested alot of cash into their expensive pc's deserve well made ingame assets, like highpolygon character models for example.

Since the whole game is 'controversial' from start, i thought it was a good idea to make an objective technical analysis.
It's good to know what you got for your money, right ?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"You're MINE !"

[braiog]

Well, you did a damn good job explaining that. It sounds like, even at lower resolutions and nixed goodies, there's just too much of a load for the card to give acceptable framerates for. Especially with forced Shader 3.0 features.

Ugh. I guess nothing less than nixing out a lot of polys is going to do me much help then.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.aaronmartone.com/misc/braiog_sig.jpg
Death by Lethal Injection?

PC does NOT mean a Ported Console version.

[MCPO.PA]

Originally posted by Knot3D:
Also, in my humble opinion, pc gamers who invested alot of cash into their expensive pc's deserve well made ingame assets, like highpolygon character models for example.
right ?

exactly!

[Knot3D]

^or i should say : the CHOICE to choose high poly models or medium detail poly's.

Bethesda goes to such lengths in their Oblivion game. Lower presets draw less geometry in that game. So, the pc gamer can adjust the game to his/her PC.

SC DA's assets are hardcoded : they cannot be swapped for mid range polygon assets in some .ini file ; that means, Ubi only gives 1 option.

On the other hand ; the DVD is already installing 8 - 10 Gb......<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"You're MINE !"

[Ashura287]

Originally posted by Knot3D:
Also, in my humble opinion, pc gamers who invested alot of cash into their expensive pc's deserve well made ingame assets, like highpolygon character models for example.

I have to agree. The game uses way too much power and doesn't do enough with it.

I don't want to pull the HL2 card, because that game took seven years to write, but the compatibility and the eye candy it gave for the power it used were basically ideal. I wish more devs at least tried to match that.

And yeah, I was going to mention the medium-quality models, but held off for the space reason. A two-disk dual-layer DVD game would just be ridiculous in this case.

[warl0rdc]

look at his arm in the first screens
the cloth stand out in the xbox360 screens and it's flat in the pc screens.
there seems to be better materials in 360 too, that guard got snow on his suit and his gloves and mask are more reflective.
can you provide more screens so we can have fun searching the differences? XD


Originally posted by Ashura287:
And yeah, I was going to mention the medium-quality models, but held off for the space reason. A two-disk dual-layer DVD game would just be ridiculous in this case.

maybe who got half a game for the same reason.. :/<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

My devart account (http://o0warlord0o.deviantart.com)

[MR.Mic]

Originally posted by goodkebab_00:
^^ having 2 meshes for characters is only a matter of a few kilobytes.

It would still be possible to have the highRes models for PC if they used LODs that u can turn off for differerent game settings.

PC still should be having more advanced fx (they claimed so) and sould still have higher res textures.

Also, because this game uses normal mapping extensively, the lower polygon count doesnt exactly hurt the graphics. With normal mapping, you are essentially looking at a million polygon model and only the profile of the model will reveal the real time model.

Don't forget the topological parallax of the real-time model as well.

[Honeycomb_Ck]

From the last two screens posted, it looks that even though the PC has lower poly count, the texture quality is much higher, giving the game a much more realistic look. Even in the pics in the OP, you can see that there's a lot more detail on the clothes in the PC than in the X360 version.

The PC version is quite a paradox. We all clamored for the "next-gen" version, and then people are upset because the system requirements are very steep. The x360 is still new and can still keep up with the latest PCs.

[Knot3D]

^ It's a preference thing. Real hardcore pc players will prefer the PC version because of ULTRA crisp AF16x'd textures and accepting a lower polygon game.

Screencaps of the NTSC XB360 version will of course show 'muddy' textures. Fortunately, there's PAL60 on a RGB scart cable. Personally i'd prefer ultra high polygon + good textures over that PC version.

I think the PC version also lacks some realtime lightsources here and there.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"You're MINE !"

[Honeycomb_Ck]

Well, people in the states aren't ever going to see/play the PAL version, so the point is moot.

[Knot3D]

Uhmm, Monster Cables, the 360's 1080i mode on HDTV.

Also, i question Gamespot's screen capture method. It's probably using plain NTSC S video with some cheap capture card like Pinnacle's.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"You're MINE !"

[ori1]

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2006/289/reviews/926934_20061017_screen018.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y117/jonelo/SplinterCell42006-11-1816-14-06-42.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2006/289/reviews/926934_20061017_screen015.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y117/jonelo/SplinterCell42006-11-1814-42-11-29.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2006/289/reviews/926934_20061017_screen013.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y117/jonelo/SplinterCell42006-11-1803-28-29-20.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2006/289/reviews/926934_20061017_screen001.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y117/jonelo/SplinterCell42006-11-1814-03-17-45.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2006/289/reviews/926934_20061017_screen016.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y117/jonelo/SplinterCell42006-11-1814-49-46-12.jpg

[ori1]

Originally posted by Knot3D:
Uhmm, Monster Cables, the 360's 1080i mode on HDTV.

Also, i question Gamespot's screen capture method. It's probably using plain NTSC S video with some cheap capture card like Pinnacle's.

That quality cannot be obtained with S-video. It is seen just as by components of the cable of HD of the 360 - but with JPEG compression , and resized to 1024 x 576 . Maybe a PCI HD video capture card like Matrox RTX100 Extreme , or HD capture kit like Avid liquid pro .
And in those screens , the 360 look better http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif in my opinion .

[JasonFMTX]

To the OP. your nuts man. theres no way ill take the 360 version over the PC. who cares how many polygons it has if its all "foggy" looking. Look at the detail on the PC. You can see the water running down the wetsuit on sams head... you can see the cross hatches in the rubber... come on dude !... no way the 360 is better. And not only that, remember the 360 is running less resolution than most computers. The PC version runs all over the 360.

[ori1]

Originally posted by JasonFMTX:
To the OP. your nuts man. theres no way ill take the 360 version over the PC. who cares how many polygons it has if its all "foggy" looking. Look at the detail on the PC. You can see the water running down the wetsuit on sams head... you can see the cross hatches in the rubber... come on dude !... no way the 360 is better. And not only that, remember the 360 is running less resolution than most computers. The PC version runs all over the 360.

SC DA run about 15-20 fps or minus - 10/ 12 fps - in my 1900 xtx http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ,in 720p .The 360 ... hummm maybe about 20-25 fps or minus - 15 fps - ? - XD

[OniLinkSword]

Wow, and I thought Ubi jipped us alot already. Now I don't think that I'm even going to buy the PC version. This was the last straw. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

[goodkebab_00]

those are nothing but gamma tweaks

The greyish tones is removed by tweaking the gamma, thats all. I wouldnt put it beyond a website to tweak the images for a better display. What is missing is the specular highlights in the greyer pictures...so i am thinking the shaders are turned off...or something.

Mr.Mic..i doubt the characters have parallax but only normal maps. Mostly because parallax occludes pixels in order to create the illusion of displacement where as normal mapping is a bumpmap with xyz depth (bump has only z depth).

Parallax has more use and looks better when deep displacement is necessary...things like brick walls or a rock face where the texture has to bend warp according to the surface. Normal mapping does not do this, but i am curious how flexible parallax mapping is in a real time engine with multiple lights and view angles (tangent vs world space).<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/9603/goodkebab4vs.jpg
<span class="ev_code_GREEN">xfire:: goodkebab :: byts-FS ::</span>

[SCDuRiN]

Cool seems there are quite a lot of differences.

[TonyMP5]

Originally posted by ori1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JasonFMTX:
To the OP. your nuts man. theres no way ill take the 360 version over the PC. who cares how many polygons it has if its all "foggy" looking. Look at the detail on the PC. You can see the water running down the wetsuit on sams head... you can see the cross hatches in the rubber... come on dude !... no way the 360 is better. And not only that, remember the 360 is running less resolution than most computers. The PC version runs all over the 360.

SC DA run about 15-20 fps or minus - 10/ 12 fps - in my 1900 xtx http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ,in 720p .The 360 ... hummm maybe about 20-25 fps or minus - 15 fps - ? - XD </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow thats too bad. Your fps is way too low for that card. I have the same card and I get more than double what you get. Granted my gpu and system has been tuned and optimized to with in an inch of it's life , but I havn't used any monster overclocks. They are ust mild , it's my bios tuning that really helps.

Anyway I am dissapointed with what you are getting. You say you get 10-20fps at only 1280x720p and I doubt you are even using AA.

I am playing with every setting maxed out including high quality testures, soft shadows, harware mapping shadows etc etc. I also have HDR on with 4xAA and 16aHQ AF. The greatest thing is that I do all that at 2560x1600 monster resolution. I have crossfire , but the game can't use it so I get all that with a single £250 gpu, so all that rubbish about PC being too costly is a moot point. There is no need for dual gpu since the game can't use it anyway.

My frame rates are also more than playable. I havn't checked them at 2560x1600 but at 1680x1050 it felt like 60fps all the way and at 2560x1600 it feels like 30fps all the way with a min of 15-20.

So you really need to take a good hard look at your X1900XTX if that is all you get.

In case anyone doubts my credentials ...

My PC:
http://img439.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img25523ko.jpg

Dell 30 inch 3007wfp 2560x1600 (now what Xbox360 can do that lol)
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g152/TonyM16/Picture008.jpg

Dell 20 inch 1680x1050
http://img71.imageshack.us/img71/3014/imgdesktop1uj.th.jpg (http://img71.imageshack.us/my.php?image=imgdesktop1uj.jpg)