God of War III: demo vs. review code

By Richard Leadbetter Published 9 March, 2010

You ain't seen nothing yet.

Back in 2005, Sony Santa Monica redefined the technical limitations of an entire console generation with the epic God of War. Five years later, the team has done it again with its debut PS3 outing. God of War III is magnificent.

But you've played the game already, right? Last year's E3 demo received a limited release in Europe before the code was circulated widely with the US release of the God of War Collection, and the sampler was recently made available as a general release on PlayStation Network.

Checking out the final God of War III review code, it is obvious that while impressive, the demo is simply not fully representative of the finished game. Understandably, extensive amounts of content didn't make it into the sampler, but more than that a range of visual effects have been added and performance has been improved considerably.

For the sake of not spoiling the game, we won't cover the additional content (cool though it is!), but a comparison of effects and performance offers an intriguing window into just how much the Sony Santa Monica tech team squeezed out of the hardware in the final months of God of War III's development.

Perhaps the most obvious change to the game is an extensive retooling of the lighting scheme, which for the most part is now much richer and more realistic. Dark areas of the demo level now seem to more accurately represent the effect of the ambient light on the environment.

'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot lighting-demo
'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot lighting-final
'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot lighting2-demo
'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot lighting2-final

The most obvious change is in the lighting of the entire level - far more of the art detail is now more readily apparent.

A realistic, per-object motion blur has also been added to the game. This has the effect of giving the game more realism in motion, but does have the unintended side effect of not looking so clean in screenshots.

'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot motionblur-demo
'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot motionblur-final

The final God of War III has a much more 'film-like' quality about it owing to the excellent motion blur implementation.

It's interesting to note that the Sony Santa Monica team has made a number of graphical improvements across the board, some very noticeable, others subtle. The changes on the Titan are immediately apparent, with an obvious level of increased detail in the skin texture.

'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot titan-demo
'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot titan-final

Close-ups of the Titan in the demo show a lack of detail compared to the version in the final code.

Smaller tweaks to the level are also apparent. In this brace of shots, we can see that the team has added additional shadow effects that were not present in the demo.

'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot shadows-demo
'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot shadows-final

Note how shadows have been added to the boxes on the left of the screen in the review code, compared to their omission in the demo.

The fire effect on Helios's circling chariot now looks much more detailed, and you can also see how the main light source that influences the environment has been changed between the demo and retail versions of the game.

'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot fire-demo
'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot fire-final

Many of the effects optimisations appear to give God of War III a less CG-like feel.

It's also interesting to note that Helios himself now looks subtly different compared to his debut in the demo. There's dither on his hair in the demo that is much reduced in the final version. Could it be an effect of God of War III's new anti-aliasing technique? According to posts on the internet by Sony Santa Monica itself, God of War III is using an implementation of morphological anti-aliasing, carried out by the SPUs. This achieves superior edge-smoothing, and is another example of how offloading tasks typically done on the graphics chip can result in both performance and quality increases.

'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot helios-demo
'God of War III: demo vs. review code' Screenshot helios-final

Again, the more 'game-like' elements of the scene have been refined.

Bearing in mind just how much of a visual upgrade the game has had, it's impressive that the improvements do not restrict themselves simply to visual quality. Sony Santa Monica has achieved all of this while creating a faster, smoother game. In this video we have several different clips taken from a playthrough of the God of War III demo. These have then been matched with action taken from the same areas in the review copy of the game.

Not only has there been a huge improvement in visual quality, performance has also been boosted significantly. Blue line indicates review copy performance, while cyan follows the demo's frame-rate.

The conclusions from the video are enlightening: the video above shows a significant improvement in frame-rate in like-for-like scenes. In our analysis of the E3 demo, we were curious about why the game ran with an unlocked frame-rate when in the thick of the action, frame-rates were around the 30FPS area anyway. Looking at the final game, the performance increase speaks for itself, and while there is still noticeable judder incurred by the variable frame-rate, the effect is mitigated somewhat by the quality of the motion blur.

We'll have more on God of War III soon.

Picture of Richard.

About Richard Leadbetter

Rich has been a games journalist since the days of 16-bit and specialises in technical analysis. Commonly known around Eurogamer as the Blacksmith of the Future.

Read more articles from Richard by visiting the Richard Leadbetter archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (49) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • JHuxley #1 2 years ago

    @kj66246

    I suspect that's the motion blur or some depth of field effect coming in to play.

    It looks a lot better in motion, anyway.

  • KayJay #2 2 years ago

    Ahh, Okay.

  • DrDamn #3 2 years ago

    @kj66246
    As JHuxley pointed out this is covered in the article ...

    "A realistic, per-object motion blur has also been added to the game. This has the effect of giving the game more realism in motion, but does have the unintended side effect of not looking so clean in screenshots."

    Also glad to see this sort of article, was interested to see what had changed since the demo which was very old. Brings in to question to idea of releasing it again now. Why not redo it with the new engine?

  • DiamondIce #4 2 years ago

    Good article that addresses a few questions I had about the game. Cannot wait for it to be released!

  • KayJay #5 2 years ago

    Twat... Missed this bit...
    "A realistic, per-object motion blur has also been added to the game. This has the effect of giving the game more realism in motion, but does have the unintended side effect of not looking so clean in screenshots."

  • KayJay #6 2 years ago

    Im gonna delete my first post now...

  • davisorle #7 2 years ago

    I agree with kj66246 . The odd thing is that the screenshots are tagged correctly cause the dynamic liughtning which seems to appear in the final coded screens isn't present in the demo ones. Nowhere in the article though doesn't mentioned the dropped texture quality. If you notice on the second set of screens specially and in many more, the detailed cracked spots of the stones are flly gone, pointing out the lower texture quality. Thats too obvious that'snot a result of motion blur or anything. The details in many textures like those are fully gone which is weird. To the point of the difference you would realise back in the days if bumpmapping/SM3 was off. Richard could you enlighten us on that one please?Cause it's really out there and no comments about it. Or even on the whole changed background in the screenshots missing the burning cities, its the only ones that seem better detailed on the giant dude yet the rest are missing in that case.

    I know, ill be buying it with a PS3 slim pretty soon but this article is missing basic elements since its DF comparison Id expect to read about thi9s like the rest of the viewers. :/

  • superjag86 #8 2 years ago

    Glad to hear there's been improvements but not surprising considering the demo was over a year old!
    Still after everything I've seen I can not wait for the 19th to come round.
    (Even though I have FF13 and BF:BC2 to keep me busy!)

  • Buztafen #9 2 years ago

    Binarybob is a cunt!
    Edited by 1 at 09/03/10 @ 15:20

  • berelain #10 2 years ago

    I still don't really find the visuals all that impressive- don't get me wrong, they look good, and the sense of scale is impressive- but I just dont see why so many are hailing it as the best looking game in the history of anything ever. I am glad to read about those improvements over the demo code though, and I'm eager to see how the finished article shapes up.

    EDIT: @ Davisorle - ouch, see what you mean about those backgrounds where the titan is. The burning cityscape has dissapeared completely and been replaced by barren wasteland..?
    Edited by 1 at 09/03/10 @ 14:12

  • DrDamn #11 2 years ago

    @davisorle
    Which examples? They all look better to me :/

    Edit: Ok background change a bit - that's not huge though really is it? Hardly consequential.
    Edited by 1 at 09/03/10 @ 14:16

  • Xnoybis Verified Senior Software Engineer, Holition #12 2 years ago

    Despite the effusive praise, i'm sure some cretins will still find a way to accuse DF of 360 bias.

    Can't wait for this, the demo was impressive enough as it was :-)

  • brazzauk #13 2 years ago

    I can't wait for this game, replayed the first two recently after importing the GoW Collection from Canada. Even the old PS2 games put some of the current next gen games to shame.

    Great to see they have tweaked this further, roll on Kratos!!

  • Clover4ever #14 2 years ago

    Increased details, better lighting, high quality motion blur, MLAA, smoother framerate...The final build completely destroys the demo code. Very impressive indeed.

  • freakzilla #15 2 years ago

    Kratos head rip scene!! :o. Sony wasn't talking shit when they said PS3 was crazy powerful. We have yet to see GT5, which will probably show some serious improvements too.

  • freakzilla #16 2 years ago

    @berelain
    I think the devs have proritised the right things, the level of improvement on the titan is more than a fair trade for the background.
    Edited by 1 at 09/03/10 @ 15:16

  • EvilBob_leeds #17 2 years ago

    Excellent. That the improved lighting seems to have made Kratos bustier only sweetens the deal...

    While I see what some of you guys are saying regarding the backgrounds, all they've done is swap a very blurred city in the background with a few piddly smoke effects for a very blurred waterfall with some very blurred water effects. Besides, admiring the backgrounds whilst a mile high titan made of lava is smashing the fuck out of a mountain is like going to National Gallery and commenting on the white emulsion they've stuck on the walls rather than the paintings...
    Edited by 1 at 09/03/10 @ 15:31

  • DirtyDubs #18 2 years ago

    Got rid of my PS3 as it wasn't getting used much (was offline at the time and I had better games on the xbox). But GOW3 is looking great. When the bundle comes out with GOW3,2 and 1 I may purchase a PS3 again. Hope it's not too pricey.
    Edited by 1 at 09/03/10 @ 15:33

  • spengos #19 2 years ago

    Much 'beta' lighting in the final game.

    :)

  • Flying_Pig #20 2 years ago

    @ DirtyDubs - The GoW3 SE which includes GoW 1 & 2 will RRP at £110 AFAIK!

  • UKLL #21 2 years ago


    Wow, I actually thought the demo looked incredible so this is most impressive.

  • Storm1672 #22 2 years ago

    @davisorle
    Actually, the waterfalls and the remains (behind Kronos, not to his right) look better than the non-detailed burning city.
    I think because the game runs smoother, they were able to put the greater looking waterfalls, not the other way round.

    All in all, yes, i think DF should have commented on that.

  • convercide #23 2 years ago

    Shame I don't have a PS3. :(

    The demo screenshots look impressive and the finished article looks pretty damn amazing. I finished the first on PS2 and will eventually get a PS3 to play II and then III methinks.

  • twoism #24 2 years ago

    This is one of the most impressive examples of demo->final I've ever seen.

  • hesido #25 2 years ago

    Doesn't 40 fps create judder on a 60 hz screen? it would have to draw a frame at odd intervals?

  • holsty101 #26 2 years ago

    So when is the SSM interview? :D

  • Drpwnage #27 2 years ago

    The full DF article should be interesting....Judging by the FFXIII comments pages, fanboys are expecting Richard's 'bias' to shine through in the full article, heavily influenced of course by his nefarious agreement with Microsoft to discredit the technology inside the PS3 and claim that GoWIII could easily be replicated on the 360 without even needing to turn the console on.

  • man.the.king #28 2 years ago

    I am interested in knowing how GOW 3 stacks up against Uncharted 2. Would appreciate it if Rich could make an article regarding that.

  • Anufea #29 2 years ago

    Why down-rank hesido? I was thinking the same thing - there's no way to neatly fit 40fps in 60Hz, or is there?

  • Goodfella #30 2 years ago

    I don't understand these comments regarding 40fps and 60Hz.

    I play World of Warcraft on my 60Hz monitor and the framerate can fluptuate anywhere between 30fps and 60fps and I don't see any 'judder', and believe me I would know it if I saw it, same as screen tear. I'm very aware of these things. :p

  • neonxaos #31 2 years ago

    The demo actually put me off the game, so thank you for this!

  • Law07 #32 2 years ago

    Is it just me or does the colours and lighting look way better in the demo?

    In some shots they've just faded everything out and took away the darkness in some areas. Aside from the Titan and the frame rate improvements, I'd take the demo tbh!

  • Spydy #33 2 years ago

    Painting come to life BIIAAATCH!

  • NinjaWilliams #34 2 years ago

    CUMS!...

  • LordVonPS3 #35 2 years ago

    GoW III final is clearly significantly improved over the demo, so Richard Leadbetter, are you prepared to acknowledge that a demo IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE of the finished game?

    Producing an analysis of a demo is fine, it is what it is and I have no issue with that... However, you've gone on record as stating that the "GT Academy" Time Trial demo (a ~200MB download road track @ Indianapolis) WILL BE REPRESENTATIVE of the finished game (Gran Turismo 5). Lets see about that. For the record Lord Von PS3 has said & still says otherwise. Lets see who was right - Digital Foundry or Lord Von PS3.

    Good day Sir!
    Edited by 1 at 10/03/10 @ 01:07

  • Hunam #36 2 years ago

    Erm, what the fuck are you on about mr Von PS3? First you entirely misunderstand representative as an absolute statement and then ignore the point about how the entire article is about how much better and impressive the main game is over the demo then compare something he said about something else as some sort of proof that he is an evil, evil man rather than someone who just points out what he sees.

  • Scimarad #37 2 years ago

    Wow, I've seen some posters that have clearly jumped to the wrong conclusion but that is a particularly amusing one:)
    Edited by 1 at 10/03/10 @ 07:11

  • seasidebaz #38 2 years ago

    Perhaps the most obvious change to the game is an extensive retooling of the lighting scheme, which for the most part is now much richer and more realistic.

    Screenshots make it look like Gamma+1 to me...

  • woodnotes #39 2 years ago

    I think what DF is basically saying is that the demo would already have been at the retail version's quality if it had been developed on the 360.

  • MiY4MOTO #40 2 years ago

    In an article that has no reference to the 360 or Microsoft, and one which praises both the developers & their game some people still manage to accuse them of 360 bias!? Did you read a different article to the rest of us?

    'tards.

  • E2K #41 2 years ago

    "redefined the technical limitations of an entire console generation with the epic God of War. Five years later, the team has done it again with its debut PS3 outing"

    what is this bullshit?

    I wish my dust collecting 360 had all these technical limitations :')
    Maybe then it would be able to produce ps3-level graphical quality.

  • EvilBob_leeds #42 2 years ago

    Saying "redefined the technical limitations" in this context would be synonymous with saying "pushed back the technical boundaries", and seems entirely appropriate.

    BTW this thread has one comment from Lord Von PS3 complaining about bias, one clearly sarcastic comment from SPAM, and in a big win for irony, 3 comments by people wanting to bitch about some largely non existant PS3 hardcore hijacking the conversation. May I be the first to complain about the "anti PS3 bias" bias which is hijacking our threads!
    Edited by 1 at 10/03/10 @ 12:34

  • valli #43 2 years ago

    I've never thought motion blur gives anything to a game (esp. a high FPS game) until Killzone 2. GG did their per pixel motion blur, as opposed to most other games who did that on the full screen image (racing games with radial blur, etc). So how does it compare to KZ2's in terms of visual quality and difficult cases such as "fast object moving behind static object"? Thanks.

  • SteveV #44 2 years ago

    The finished game had better run smoother than the demo does.

  • Darren #45 2 years ago

    Amazing. I was blown away by the visual quality of the E3 2009 demo and, framerate aside, would have been ecstatic if the final release had looked the same. That the retail version looks even better is impressive, particularly as the framerate hasn't taken a further hit but has actually been improved upon while adding extra effects.

    The PS3 really does have some incredible looking games doesn't it?

  • Darren #46 2 years ago

    @Goodfella - The drop from 60 fps to 30 fps (or vice versa) wouldn't create judder as such, it just affects the perceived smoothness of motion and some people can spot it, either visually or via the controls. Ideally a game should have a capped framerate which it never drops below, either 30 fps or 60 fps, but that seldom happens unless you're playing a console port on an uber-powerful PC for example.

  • buggerlugs75 #47 2 years ago

    having just played through and finished the god of war collection, loved them, then replayed the GOW3 demo, i have to say, there is a noticeable difference between 60fps and the 30(ish)fps of the demo. the demo felt VERY clunky. usually, i'm a bit sceptical of things like this, but it was really obvious.

    i really hope that the final release feels more like the remastered versions than the demo. this seems to say that it will. good.
    Edited by 1 at 11/03/10 @ 02:04

  • Rens11 #48 2 years ago

    I personally thought the demo looked gorgeous apart from the titan which looked a bit bland but now even that looks great, Its amazing how much the graphics and framerate can be improved in under a year! colour me tickled pink!

  • Furfoot #49 2 years ago

    No buy from me now I have seen that they don't lock the framerate. Sure having the judder there in an e3 demo is fine but in the final product; No thanks! Why not just lock it at 30 when it isn't running anywhere near 60 fps unlocked.