Jaime | 
May 29, 2009 | “Which version of Bionic Commando extends its bionic gripper to the ledge of victory, and which one falls short?”
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||||||
| Capcom |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Capcom | |||
| Grin | 1 | 1 |
Grin | |||||||||
| Action, Adventure |
1.5 gb | 0 mb |
Action, Adventure |
|||||||||
| Release: 05/22/09 | 20 sec | 20 sec | Release: 05/22/09 | |||||||||
| ESRB: M |
Low | high | ESRB: M | |||||||||
 |
 |
|||||||||||
 |
Head2Head – Bionic Commando
Length: 00:04:27 Which version of Bionic Commando pulls it way to the top? |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
||
Welcome back for another exciting Head2Head battle! This week the Lens of Truth had an opportunity to play Bionic Commando. This Head2Head was made possible by the staff at Play N Trade (Lake Mary, FL) who let us borrow their store copies. Thanks Play N Trade! This is our third Head2Head with a game produced by GRIN. The last two GRIN Head2Head’s the PlayStation 3 won, out performing the Xbox 360 in multiple categories. So did GRIN finally get their Diesel engine working at full power on the Xbox 360 or could this be a three-peat? Stick around to see which game was bionically-enhanced and which game was built with spare parts.
The story: The first true sequel to the classic 1988 NES original, Bionic Commando, and time has not been kind to “Rad” Spencer. Ten years after his heroic defeat of the Imperials, he is betrayed by the government, and sentenced to death for crimes he didn’t commit. But then, terrorists detonate a massive experimental weapon in Ascension City, unleashing an intense earthquake that turns the city into rubble, wipes out the population, and results in the city’s air defense grid in the control of a massive terrorist force. There is only one option left, a behind-the-lines assault by a Bionic Commando. Bionic Commando was developed by GRIN, the same guys that brought you Wanted: Weapons of Fate, and Terminator Salvation. Our Head2Heads proved that the PS3 versions of both games were superior to the rival 360 versions, mainly due to missing effects and hideous screen tearing. So how did Bionic Commando hold up you ask? Well let’s just say that third times isn’t always the charm.
First and foremost let’s talk about screen tearing shall we? The Xbox 360 version had some pretty bad screen tearing, again. In my opinion it wasn’t as bad as Terminator Salvation but nonetheless the amount present is still unacceptable. On the other hand, the PlayStation 3 version didn’t show any signs of performance issues and there definitely wasn’t any indication of screen tearing. For the third time it’s quiet obvious which system GRID developed the game for. Okay, moving on to textures.
In my opinion both games looked almost identical. Unlike Terminator Salvation (where the Xbox had random and misused normal maps) this game looked very close. The only difference we noticed was the Xbox 360 had screen space ambient occlusion (SSAO) throughout the levels. This made contact shadows more pronounced on the Xbox 360 creating a more detailed environment. But the question remains if the SSAO was removed for the Xbox 360 version would the horrific screen tearing have been eliminated. Unfortunately, we have no way of knowing this so let’s bounce over to lighting.
At first glance it seemed like the Xbox 360 was bagged again in the porting process. When the game begins you start off inside an office building looking for your bionic arm. In certain areas on the PlayStation 3 version you walk by these windows where a nice volumetric light is shining though the blinds and onto the floor. Well if you haven’t guessed it yet the Xbox 360 didn’t seem to have it. At this point we weren’t surprised. We thought, “Here we go another Terminator disaster”, but to our astonishment it wasn’t. Although the lighting effects were missing in the office building when we got outside the effects were there. It’s really difficult trying to compare games when effects are inconsistent. With that said, I’m sure you’re not surprised that the PlayStation 3 got the win here. It wasn’t missing effects and was clearly more consistence with lighting.
Roll over to see the differences. Notice the PlayStation 3 version has more realistic lighting.
Roll over to see the differences. Notice vehicles seemed to have random colors upon entering the stage.
Roll over to see the differences. Textures are very close.
Roll over to see the differences.
Roll over to see the differences. Notice Xbox 360 seemed a little darker and featured SSAO.
Roll over to see the differences. Notice Xbox 360 has screen space ambient occlusion throughout the environments (look at the pipe).
For this Head2Head the PlayStation 3 wins, and if it wasn’t for the screen tearing I think things would have been a bit different. It was definitely an improvement from the drastic Terminator Salvation Head2Head but by no means fixed (At least I didn’t puke on my brother’s face). I think GRIN needs to consider paying a littler more attention to the porting process and they really need to do something about the screen tearing issues they’re having with the Xbox 360. Overall this was a decent game and if you like the original Bionic Commando I really think you’d have fun with.
| G R A P H I C S | ||
 |
Tie. While the PlayStation 3 had better looking lighting and cleaner looking effects, the Xbox 360 countered with having screen space ambient occlusion throughout the levels creating a more detailed environment. |
 |
| P E R F O R M A N C E | ||
|
PlayStation 3 wins by having a more solid frame rate and no screen tearing. The Xbox 360 version had screen tearing every time the camera moved and was just not limited to in-game. The screen tearing was also found in all the in-game cut scenes and pre-rendered cut scenes. |
 |
| C O N T R O L | ||
|
Tie. Both controllers button felt comfortable and easy to understand. Also the button layout for swinging and firing your weapon were mapped identical making the game very enjoyable while swinging and firing simultaneously. |
|
| L O A D I N G | ||
|
Tie. The PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 were very close when it comes to load times, around 20 seconds. Note the PS3 did have a mandatory install which was very fast, about 2 min to be exact and took up 1.5 gb of storage. |
|
| O U T C O M E | ||
|
Bionic Commando looks very close between versions, but the screen tearing found on the Xbox 360 version killed a tie. Obviously GRIN has chosen the PlayStation 3 as their primary SKU as evident in the last three games they released- all where superior on the PlayStation 3. |
|
Loading ...
Nice Head2Head, keep them up! It’s a nice change of pace how the PS3 won this one. I expected the 360 to win this one though in the beginning.
Are you guys freakin blind!?!?!? it looks waay better on the 360!
lol! Ironic how your name is clever guy!
Poorly written article. Judging by the screenshots, 360 version shows richer and more vibrant colors. PS3 pics appear washed out. Note that I own both systems so this is no fanboy opinion.
Judging by still images alone the Xbox 360 is by far the superior version with the screen space ambient occlusion. However, games are not static…so you really need to watch the video. The frame tearing is a deal breaker.
The color differences is a moot point. There are many games that match perfectly in a multi-platform. The color matching is the responsibility of the developers.
Corey you are 100% correct. Based on the images the Xbox 360 looks better and would win if we were basing our Head2Head’s on graphics alone. Fortunately we don’t. There are many other factors we take into consideration when we choose a winner. Looks don’t automatically declare a winner therefore, the PS3 won.
I’m getting really sick of PS3 versions of games getting the shaft when it comes to shader effects and details. One prime example of this is in the inclusion of Screen-Space Ambient Occlusion shadows, which almost always appears on the 360, but gets cut out of the PS3 version. First it was 007 Quantum of Solace. Then it was FEAR 2. Then it’s Batman Arkham Asylum. Now it’s Bionic Commando. These are all examples of games that feature SSAO shadowing on the 360, but is absent on the PS3.
You must have missed the point of the whole article, the PS3 won. The article mention that the SSAO is present in the Xbox 360 version but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s implemented correctly. If the Xbox 360 suffered screen tearing then effects should have been taken out. Meaning if the Xbox 360 can’t handle the amount of effects rendering to the screen, remove it. PLane and simple. Having removed SSAO from the Xbox version would have eliminated the screen tearing than so be it. The fact is the PS3 won because the games runs better, and overall looks better on the PS3 like sated in the post. You should have read a little more and actually watched the video.
Rudesole: When did I ever make any statements either way about which version won overall? I’m just commenting with regards to shader effects, in this case SSAO shadows, which commonly appears only on the 360 version and not the PS3 version. I never made any judgments either way about which version performed better overall, although there must be a reason the devs felt they could happily implement SSAO on the 360 version and not the PS3 version. In most multiplatform situations, it’s been shown again and again that the 360 has a stronger GPU component and thus can render more complex shader effects; I have a feeling that the same situation is the case here. The PS3 version might run slightly better overall with this particular game, but it’s missing one graphical effect that’s very integral to overall look of the game, compared to the 360 version. I guess the devs felt they could implement SSAO on the 360 without much of a performance/framerate deficit, whereas the same couldn’t be said for the PS3 version.
PS3
Pros
-Rock solid frame-rate with no tearing
-Much more intensive shaders with extensive use of normal maps
-True HDR lighting!
-Excellent dynamic lighting with multiple real-time lights
Cons
-No SSAO (lesser sense of depth to scene)
-Not rendered in HD
-Geometric complexity and variety is acceptable but not impressive
360
Pros
-SSAO resulting in a better sense of depth (no effect on detail despite claims by article above)
Cons
-Severe frame-rate/tearing issues
-Significantly less shader use
-Too much static (faked) lighting resulting in lighting inconsistencies
-No HDR (only FP10 MDR) resulting in severe loss of detail in bright and dark areas
-Strange repeating textures to compensate for lack of shader detail looks cheap
-Not rendered in HD
-Geometric complexity and variety is acceptable but not impressive
You correct and the PS3 wins, and that’s that. Just because the Xbox has SSAO doesn’t necessarily mean its done correctly. If any game has screen tearing then effects need to be removed because the game play is directory being effected and if that happens you need to compensate by removing effects. End of story. The Xbox could have had a higher quality normal map and better textures but if there screen tearing on the Xbox and not on the PS3, the PS3 wins. Because the Xbox can’t handle what its rendering to the screen, and by having those added effects mean absolutely nothing. Bionic Commando runs and PLAYES better on the PS3 end of story.
I hope you aren’t talking about the console but the game, because majority of games on both platforms seem to run better on the 360, PS3 versions of games seem to suffer from frame drops, and resolutions lower that 720p, like 640p and 576p. In turns of full HD (1080p) neither consoles is playing games at that resolution unless the game doesn’t have Anti aliasing (AA) or Anisotropic filtering (AF). A game with 720p 2xAA and 4xAF would look better than a game in 1080p without any AA or AF.
Comparsion from true professionals-Eurogamer
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/bionic-commando-on-console-ssao-vs-v-sync-blog-entry
1 the Diesel engine’s lack of v-sync on 360 remains in effect on Bionic Commando, whereas the PS3 version benefits from improved image coherency thanks to zero tearing whatsoever.
2 The Xbox 360 version does have some unique properties though, with the inclusion of SSAO (screen space ambient occlusion), lacking from the PS3 build. These ‘contact shadows’ are subtle, but serve to add a lot more depth to the scene.
3 Onto lighting: Bionic Commando appears to employ the NAO32 pixel format on PS3, allowing for the inclusion of HDR, which can dramatically transform the appearance of a given scene when deployed. Its weakness is the lack of alpha channel (hence a heavy flickering artifact on the blinds in the second shot). The Xbox game on the other hand seems to use the more conventional FP10 format, only offering a medium dynamic range, but alpha is available to the developers.
4 GRIN has retooled some of the textures on the 360 version, as seen in the bottom set of pictures in the last gallery, where more detail appears to be resolved.
————————————–
Clearly PS3 is NO winner
in this game
Thanks for the link! If you read the article they pretty much confirmed what we did. The PlayStation 3 version out performs the Xbox 360. What’s the point of adding SSAO and detailing a few extra textures on the Xbox 360 version if it screen tears a majority of the time? GRIN should have sacrificed those features in light of performance.
The PS3 IS the winner in this game.
“Comparsion from true professionals-Eurogamer” Eurogamer is a joke of a website. Professionals that funny.
#1 Eurogamer needed to hire a third party website to do their technical break downs for their comparisons, because they lack the experience needed to do it themselves. (http://www.digitalfoundry.org/showcase2/clients.html)
#2 That 3rd party website, Digital Foundry, does contribute some really good information, but they need high tech equipment that cost thousands of dollars to help guide them through their comparisons. If a 5 year old had that equipment they would get the same results as Digital Foundry or Eurogamer. Actually I have found that LOT Head2Head have found more differences in their comparisons than Digital Foundry or Eurogamer had with similar games. For example check out Eurogamer SFIV comparison. The amazing fact is the LOT staff only need their eye balls to see differences not a piece of hardware confirming a game has screen tearing, frame drops or SSAO. BTW they stream their Head2Heads live over Justin T.V. http://www.justin.tv/lensoftruth for people like yourself to try to prove them wrong.
#3 I agree with Corey. Whats the point of adding additional textures, lighting effects or anything else if your game performs like poop. It’s like having a Hyundai engine in a Lamborghini body!
So instead of sounding like a Jack Ass who can’t spell comparison correct, why don’t you watch them live when they do these Head2Head’s and comment about the “Comparsion” then?
Gauging all the pros and cons of both versions of the game, which I’ve garnered from both this site’s and Eurogamer’s comparisons, I would say that it’s more or less a tie between the two versions, rather than an obvious win for the PS3. You could make the argument for the PS3 version, but one could also make an argument for the 360 version. Thus, it’s more or less a tie.
Okay, after looking over the Eurogamer comparison screens, I’ll have to change my mind and say that the PS3 version probably takes the cake as far as the version that looks and runs the best. The 360 does have one unique advantage with its SSAO shadow effects, but the PS3 version overall is better, with less frame tearing, presumably better framerate, and better lighting/specularity effects.
The PS3 version looks better in some places and worse in others. In the beginning of the video, look at the guy walk through the hallways. This part looks a lot better on the PS3. However, when they are near the airplane, the Xbox 360 version tends to look crisper. The screen tearing allows the PS3 version to surpass the Xbox 360 version.
The Bionic Commando H2H HD Download, is the deadspace H2H, so we arent able to download the bionic commando H2H,its the wrong upload link
Thanks for the heads up, it has been fixed.
Can someone tell me if the PS3 setting for RGB color was set to full or limited?
By default its on limited which causes washed out color on High Def outputs, when its set to RGB full, the color is great, contrast and black color are better.
This only works through HDMI and we are capturing through component. We’re not able to capture through HDMI (Yet) on the PS3 because of the HDCP protection. Believe me, I know how much better it looks with that on. It really does make things look a lot better, in my opinion of course.?
ok great. Well its good that you don’t base your reviews on the amount of whiteness in the ps3 version. Seems a lot people have that as the main complaint.
Hopefully Capcom can patch the Xbox 360 version for the screen tearing issue… because right now even with the tearing Xbox 360 is my best bet anyhow as the PS3 version does not support 1080 resolutions.