March 14th, 2011
Posted in 
“The Rise to Power Begins…”
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||||||
| EA |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
EA | |||
| BioWare | 1 | 1 |
BioWare | |||||||||
| RPG | 3.4 gigs | Opt. |
RPG | |||||||||
| Release: 05/08/2011 | sec | sec | Release: 05/08/2011 | |||||||||
| ESRB: M |
5.25% | 0.56% | ESRB: M | |||||||||
 |
 |
|||||||||||
 |
||||
 |
 |
|
Head2Head – Dragon Age II Analysis: This week we go Head2Head with Dragon Age II between the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 |
|
 |
 |
|||
 |
||||
Welcome back for another exciting Head2Head Analysis! First off we’d like to thank our sponsors over at Play-n-Trade Oviedo, FLfor providing us our test copies of this game, and this week that game is BioWare’s latest creation, Dragon Age II for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. From the time we completed our H2H screenshot comparison last week, we couldn’t wait to dive deeper into this RPG powerhouse and uncover the differences between each version. So without further adieu, let’s put Dragon Age II under our Lens and see which version comes out the true Champion!
Mouse over the image to see through our “Lens”.
Graphics: Dragon age II is definitely a nice looking game, and this time around it’s apparent that BioWare has made some significant changes to their render engine before release. This change improved the visual aspect of the game when compared to the demo code. Now let’s jump in and discuses the graphical differences between the two systems.
The first thing we noticed in the final code were the differences in each version’s anti-aliasing methods. It appeared the Xbox 360 implemented the usual 2x MSAA, while the PS3 implemented its MLAA algorithm, which isn’t very common. As demonstrated in our rollovers below, both version supported AA, it just seemed to be more noticeable and executed better on the PS3 - making the PS3 look “smoother” to the naked eye.
Mouse over the image to see through our “Lens”.
Next on the list is lighting and shading. This time around it seemed as if the Xbox 360 had the upper hand in this department. As shown in our rollovers and sliders, the implementation of dynamic light and shadows used in both games looked virtually identical between the two builds. Beside the contrast differences (which are not accounted for in our analysis), and shadow filtering techniques, this category ended in a wash. However the self shadowing methods applied told a different tale. Based on our sliders, its quite obvious this is where the Xbox 360 looked slightly more polished. Again, not that big of a difference but a difference indeed.
With that being said, it’s only fair that the graphics department end in a tie. On one hand, the PS3 seemed to have a smoother implementation of AA, on the other hand, the Xbox 360 seemed to implement self shadowing better. Either way, both games looked rather close to one another and only when these two versions were side by side could any differences be seen.
Mouse over the image to see through our “Lens”.
Performance: Once again we’re faced with difficult decision to make; by watching our video analysis you can see that both games suffered their share of screen tearing and frame dips. Screen tearing and frame dips were most noticeable when gameplay got hectic, and when a lot of geometry and particles needed to be rendered. When this happened, we saw the PS3 holding a slightly smoother frame-rate, but this came with a cost of some pretty robust screen tearing. On the flip-side, when things got intense the Xbox 360 performed in the exact opposite way.
With that being said, this category ended in another tie. Once again, we see the Xbox 360 having less screen tearing, while the PS3 held a slightly better frame rate. Below are the samples we gathered from our Analysis video.
| PlayStation 3 Frame Analysis | Xbox 360 3 Frame Analysis |
| Clip 1 info: Length of clip: 3670 frames Average FPS of clip: 28.51 Percent of torn frames: 10.94 |
Clip 1 info: Length of clip: 3670 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.41 Percent of torn frames: 0.24 |
| Clip 2 info: Length of clip: 3721 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.38 Percent of torn frames: 1.96 |
Clip 2 info: Length of clip: 3721 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.91 Percent of torn frames: 0.05 |
| Clip 3 info: Length of clip: 5790 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.70 Percent of torn frames: 1.58 |
Clip 3 info: Length of clip: 5790 frames Average FPS of clip: 26.26 Percent of torn frames: 0.58 |
| Clip 4 info: Length of clip: 3009frames Average FPS of clip: 29.58 Percent of torn frames: 03.5 |
Clip 4 info: Length of clip: 3009 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.19 Percent of torn frames: 0.02 |
| Global percent of torn frames: 5.25 Global average FPS: 29.34 |
Global percent of torn frames: 0.56 Global average FPS: 28.36 |
Loading: Finally, a category that was easy to decide. Based on the load times we gathered this category again, ended in a stalemate.
Note: the PlayStation 3 version does require a mandatory install which weighed in around 3.5 Gigs and took 15 minutes to complete. Below are the gathered load times.
| PlayStation 3 Load Times | Xbox 360 3 Load Times |
Sample 1: 27 seconds Sample 2: 28 seconds Sample 3: 26 seconds Sample 4: 21 seconds Sample 5: 25 seconds |
Sample 1: 23 seconds Sample 2: 32 seconds Sample 3: 25 seconds Sample 4: 24 seconds Sample 5: 25 seconds |
| Sample Average: 25.4 seconds |
Sample Average: 25.8 seconds |
Rollover to see the Difference. Textures look identical on both platforms.
Move the Slider to see the Difference.
Move the Slider to see the Difference.
Rollover to see the Difference.
Move the Slider to see the Difference.
More Roll Overs, Conclusion, Technical Score, Video and Staff Choice on Page 2. >>
Pages: 1 2
Tags: *To ensure color accuracy from the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and Wii U output, the PlayStation 3 has RGB Full Range set to "Full" and Super White "On", and the Xbox 360 has Reference Level set to "Expanded" and HDMI Color Space set to "RGB". Our capture card we have captured segments from the AVS HD 709 . Blu-ray, HD DVD, & MP4 Calibration suite.
As you will see, each system matches each other at the SOURCE LEVEL. No contrast or gamma settings are manipulated before or after capturing our images/videos. We strongly believe that these types of corrections are done on a individuals preference and should not be adjusted by us. Finally, washed out looking images that are due to contrast or gamma differences will not have any influence on our final verdicts. Please Read through our F.A.Q page if you have any questions or concerns.*
It basically comes down to small tearing with great performance to no tearing with decent performance.
I’m going with the PS3 version since I bought DA:O for it and I don’t mind the rare tearing as much as framerate drops.
No point in me commenting on this anymore, as you’ve said pretty much what i was gonna say. Thumbs up.
In my opinion lightning and shadow isn’t inferior or superior on any platform, as it is more like personal preference(Just like ME2) because it isn’t like they polished Xbox 360 version more the two using different render techniques, that is why
As for AA, let’s be honest, there isn’t personal preference here, no gamer likes jaggies and PS3 version has less jaggies.
Also where is smoke on fire in 13th picture on Xbox 360 version?
@Mooman:
Yes!!! Where is the smoke on xbox??? I will not buy it because it LOL. Omg man!
Now for real. I will not buy a game that runs at -20fps sometimes. Whats up? They forgot to do nice graphics/effects without pushing the gpu to the max???
Stop exaggerating it, I didn’t say it is a big thing. I noticed something and I wanted to let people know about it. Go 13th picture slide it, you see smoke missing? Yes. No one gonna change their choice because of that but is it a fact? YES. So shut your trap.
in that image there’re two fires(in the corner image) one of them has smoke…the other one doesn’t…
you’re right ….that so weird…
I liked the xbox 360 version of the textures in some places are better, the darker in the photos but this is not a problem because it can be solved with a small adjustment to contrast the TV, so you can get more beautiful graphics.
Both has drop frames but one of them has more screan tearing…
Ps3 has Better AA but seems to wash a little bit the image…that or Xbox has better textures…virtually look like the second option….based on the last “rollover” image…or maybe it’s another technic being used on xbox…
I like the better self shadowing on Xbox…
“I like self shadowing on Xbox…” fixed for you.
you’re right…if you please read my comment below and you’ll understand.
Sorry dude, didn’t see your second post before I posted. Anyway I get your point
I would like to have an “edit option”
There’re to many differences on each console(AA, Self-shadowing, textures, things missing).
in My last comment maybe i went a little fanboy…
anyway i beat DA:O on Xbox…so i’ll be able to import my world…
If you played it on Ps3 …buy it for Ps3…the same on Xbox…
Best Graphic on PC, second XBOX 360, last PlayStation 3.
Please
Best PC, Second Xbox360 and Playstation3
If there is a better console version is the Playstation3
no argue on this one its a tie everywhere put aside all fanboyism both games are simply equal by watching all those sreen shots l have both game console and this time l cannot decide which one is better here it s tie buy the copy you want and it s no mistake or regret end of story
TIT FOR TAT REALLY…
across all the screenshots here imo. With each picture I had a preference and it never one lay with either PS3 or 360 – it varied each time.
Pretty much a tie I’d say. well, I vote for ‘tie’ anyway – although, unlike LOT I can stand Screen Tear more than Frame Drops. Nothing irks me more than a sh*tty framerate…
This one is basically a coin toss. If I had to choose I would say PS3 for the controler but either one is a win really.
It’s def a tie.
Not sure why Aaron said the PS3 has a lot of tearing. 5% is not a lot.
When things get really intense, the PS3 version will tear like hell while Xbox 360 will experience some abysmal frame dips, so pick your poison.
About the AA, Digital Foundry did mention that the MLAA implemented on the PS3 version is about as efficient as the 8xMSAA on the PC version. Just thought that I should point that out.
Anyway, both console versions of the game is pretty much equal here, give or take, so pick whichever you like. But I say pick the PC version if your PC can handle it, it’ll offer a better gaming experience.
I initially bought PS3 version. One thing not commented on above is the audio, and for me there was a MASSIVE issue with audio clipping on PS3. Every time the camera would switch to a new character there would be a freeze and a stutter in the sound. Drove me insane, so I took the PS3 version back and got the 360 one – no issues this time.
So you know, my PS3 is a launch day 60gb PHAT version.
I don’t have that audio issue, dude.
May be you should double check your PS3? It’s just a suggestion
No audio problems here on the PS3 version…PS3 version also supports 5.1 and 7.1 LPCM for a more immersive audio experience.
A case of pick your poison. I think developers should give gamers the option to turn v-sync on or off. Some of us prefer higher frame rates to tearing and vice versa. I’m sure there are PS3 owners who would take the lower frame rate over screen tear and 360 owners who would prefer a higher frame rate at the cost of tearing.
Also Bioware did a mistake allowing it to tear in the cut scenes on the PS3. It kills immersion. Can v-sync not be selective? As in turned off turing gameplay but on during cut scenes. Loving the use of MLAA on PS3 though in screenshots you can see a slight blur.
Most PS3 games released should be able to fearure MLAA as all the work is done on the SPU.
I really don’t see how so many voted for ps3. Honestly, look at it, they both look almost the same. Some pics I’d go ps3 others 360.
But the 360 does look to have less jagged edges to me.
I’m not sure which one I’ll go with. I do have the first on 360, so maybe 360.
Either way, I can’t wait until I get it
I played the crap out of this game.
And unlike the raging fans in the Bioware or other forums, i am really satisfied with this game.
Both versions ran well in my opinion. However while the frame rate ran good for both games, they still had major frame rate problems.
Check out 1:05 on the PS3. It hit 6fps. But hey. What about the 360? It had three major frame drops, like at 2:48 when it went to 19fps, but I suspect it was much worse than that as it was a dead stop for almost a full second.
The real question is whether you want screen tearing or lower frame rate during cutscenes. 20fps during cutscenes is fine honestly. It’s something that’s hard to notice. The screen tearing is worse, but I don’t get bothered much by screen tearing unless it’s really bad. Battlefield Bad Company 2 on PS3 for example. No problems in my opinion and the only time I really start to notice screen tearing is when you’re on the vehicle portions during story mode.
Another game owned by PS3. It’s about time the superior machine started handing Xbox its own ass. Microsoft are such agressive tools. Getting where they are by standing on the shoulders of giants, releasing sub-par technology and then spending more on marketing than actual development. Eg – Nescape-Explorer, Yahoo messenger-MSN messenger, Ipod-Vuze, Playstation-Xbox. The list goes on.
The stats at the beggining say that the PS3 does not have 1080i or 1080p.
I take it from comparing the pictures that’s a mistake, right?
I’m guessing they captured footage and screenshots in 720p. The 360 has a scaler chip inside of it, thats why every game on it can be output in 1080i and 1080p. Most games on PS3 runs at 720p by default, with no way of upscaling.