Split/Second demo showdown

By Richard Leadbetter Published 10 May, 2010

PS3 and 360 sampler code on the grid.

Probably one of the most criminally overlooked racing games of recent times, Black Rock Studios' Pure was a hugely impressive off-road title, combining ATVs with SSX-style gameplay to produce superb visuals with deeply satisfying gameplay.

Split/Second: Velocity sees an evolution of the excellent tech that powered Pure, brought to us this time in a high velocity Burnout-style of game with a twist: it's not just your opponents on the road you need to do battle with, it's the environment itself. Similar to Burnout, a power meter gradually fills as you perform skillful racing - whether drifting through corners or drafting behind opponents. However, while Burnout concentrated on car-to-car battling, Split/Second opts for a different approach.

Filling up the power bar allows you to detonate areas of the track, causing different routes to open up and environmental hazards to be sent hurtling towards your opposition. The result is a game - and a demo - that offers up a range of different race permutations each time you play, some of which have their own impressive set-pieces. For example, in the demo's airport stage, bringing down the air traffic control tower not only switches the route, but also causes a jet to crash-land on the next lap. Impressive stuff.

Demo content on the PS3 and Xbox 360 versions of the Split/Second demo is exactly the same, offering an insight into how the enhanced Pure engine operates on both consoles. Long-time readers might recall that we said that Pure was "virtually identical" on PS3 and 360, so how does its spiritual successor fare?

In-game performance is analysed with our tools in a range of like-for-like scenarios.

Just like Pure, Split/Second operates with a steady 30FPS, with only slight deviation from the standard when the engine is really under stress: the fire effects in particular clearly introduce some small performance issues, for example. In these cases, it's the Xbox 360 build that runs a touch more smoothly. It also exhibits lower levels of screen-tear, though the human eye is unlikely to really tell the difference between the two versions - in this level, at least. Statistically though, in the sample above, Xbox 360 produces around four per cent torn frames while PS3 is at 11 per cent.

Gameplay-wise? The demo code suggests that nobody is going to be disappointed. The technical differences aren't massive, and more importantly, they don't affect the way the game plays: it's solid on both systems. It does look as though post-processing is pared back a touch on PS3, but it also seems to be the case that the 360 version of the game operates with a slightly lower vertical resolution - something like 1280x672 or thereabouts - up against the native 720p on PS3. You can get an idea of how this manifests during gameplay in this comparison shot.

360
ps3

A like for like Split/Second shot taken from the demo code.

Based on this sampler, Split/Second is looking good and it'll be interesting to see how the PowerPlay "world-changing" concept works in the other stages. Right now our only concern is that there's something of a disconnect between engaging a PowerPlay and causing a building toppling set-piece way down the track. Maybe it's something that will become more natural in the full game but there's an odd sensation that cause and effect don't feel quite as close as they should based on this initial playthrough.

Regardless, the pedigree of Split/Second is beyond doubt. Not only does the game feature Pure tech, but there's a decent array of ex-Criterion Burnout talent working on the game. A proven engine utilised by accomplished developers with a recognised track record in the racing genre? Our hopes are high for this one.

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 (32) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • IronGiant #1 2 years ago

    Looks nice but is missing that sense of excitement, actually seems quite dull which is a shame given the ideas behind this.

  • mashk #2 2 years ago

    The 360 version is SUB HD?

    Pre-order cancelled.

  • BitmapBrother #3 2 years ago

    I like the look of the PS3 version. It has a shiny look to it. Thankfully, they didn't try and lather quincunx all over it. The 360 version looks a bit blurry, though. Interesting to read that the 360 version may be running sub-HD.

  • dpb135 #4 2 years ago

    Having played both demos i did prefer the look of the ps3 version

  • Retroid #5 2 years ago

    Played the demo on both machines over the weekend and they're pretty bloody close. Considering it's just the one track the amount of variation you can trigger is really rather impressive! \o/

  • Goodfella #6 2 years ago

    Wow, if you own both consoles I think it's a no-brainer, the PS3 version is clearly much sharper/higher res?

  • waggy79 #7 2 years ago

    Agree with you IronGiant. I kept wishing for a boost button to inject a bit more pace, especially on the longer straights. I can see the Criterion influence in the graphics and handling, just needs some 'oomph'.

  • markymark22 #8 2 years ago

    Does sub HD really matter if they both look equally good?? Its the ps3 version for me anyways but just sayin...

  • Goodfella #9 2 years ago

    Hardly. You wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

    Really, so I just imagined it from looking at the video?

  • Moz #10 2 years ago

    Meh, good to see another game that's more or less on par on both systems. Though getting really tired of everything being sub HD on the 360 is really noticeable on big TVs and sub 720p games on either system look oddly blurry and overly jaggy on my TV.

    Though as far as this games goes it doesn't really matter as Blur (the game not the effect) is just better.

  • ant72 #11 2 years ago

    The lack of AA in the PS3 code seems to give a the cars a more "stuck on" look, as opposed to looking like they're in the scene, which is not good for a racer.

    But this is not a good racer, the handling is too heavy and sluggish for my tastes. So I shall stick with Pure/Ridge Racer, which are great.
    Edited by ant72 at 10/05/10 @ 10:58

  • FogHeart #12 2 years ago

    At first I was a little disappointed at the speed of the cars, which is certainly less than the Burnout series, but I recognise that if the cars were faster then the triggering of powerplays would have to be done before they appear on screen, and often they would flash by so quickly you lose a sense of spectacle.

    To me the games seemed to vary tremendously each time you play. It might be full-on with towers falling, buildings exploding and planes crashing, the next game it might be just dropped barrels from helis. Multiplayer would be much more exciting with the bigger powerplays more prominent every game.

    I'm told the demo is functionally equivalent to the demo at EG expo - maybe the same demo code was polished and packaged up for download? In which case the final game may see some substantial improvement over this tech analysis.
    Edited by FogHeart at 10/05/10 @ 11:05

  • bodypopper #13 2 years ago

    Based on the demo it's like the team tried to make a more faithful Burnout sequel than the marmite Paradise. A great idea but my impressions are that pseudo-QTEs just aren't as satisfying as takedowns.
    It might be more engaging online though and it does look tops.
    /awaits review

  • Dylbot #14 2 years ago

    It's a looker, but it's a shame that the driving model is a bag of cocks. After hammering the Blur beta this really seemed inferior. Which is a shame, because Pure was awesome in its own way, and went like stink on my (now relatively humble) laptop.

    I dunno, maybe I should get back to Forza 3 where I belong.

  • Jonathan_Fakenham #15 2 years ago

    I'm intrigued by this one. Looks like it could be a really sweet adrenaline-pumping arcade racer. Bombastic mayhem aside, it seems kinda slow and gimmicky compared to Blur though, and I don't know about the depth and longevity of it, so this will play second fiddle to Blur as far as I'm concerned. My finger is still hovering above the preorder button though..

  • swisstony #16 2 years ago

    "Though as far as this games goes it doesn't really matter as Blur (the game not the effect) is just better. "

    I agree Moz, having played both full games I...oh, no I haven't. I'll have to withhold judgement :)

  • 00.00.01 #17 2 years ago

    *GT5 release delayed due to implementation of destructible environments.*

  • waggy79 #18 2 years ago

    "Out of interest what version are you playing? I just had another go of the demo on both consoles and the 360 version has much better motion blur than the PS3 version and as a result seems quite a bit faster."

    Only played 360 version so far, not had the chance to DL ps3 one yet so cant compare. If i were buying this on day one i'd probably scrutinise a bit more.

  • Darren #19 2 years ago

    This is a strange game.

    I first tried the demo on the PS3 and was confused about how the whole PowerPlay thing worked so the races felt completely random and it seemed like blind luck whether you won or not. Then I tried the 360 build and started to grasp the concept and liked the way each lap changed the layout of the race. The sense of speed was good, the graphics were pretty nice - reminiscent of Burnout 2's airport track - and it seemed pretty thrilling.

    I wish it was coming out on the PC, not so sure I'd want to play it on the consoles really as the higher price point makes it a riskier purchase as I'm not sure how long the buzz would last for me. Might wait for Blur though and see how that turns out...

  • sfp_noodle #20 2 years ago

    I noticed no difference between the versions personally. The only thing I notice in games is frame rate and screen tearing. Since this game appears to have neither I'll pick up the version that caters towards which set of friends buy the game most. If more of my 360 friends buy it, so will I. Similarly, if more of my PS3 friends buy it, then I'll follow suit.

  • rodpad #21 2 years ago

    Fluidity & torn frames > resolution.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #22 2 years ago

    "there's a decent array of ex-Criterion Burnout talent working on the game"

    That'll be why it feels exactly like Burnout, then.

  • BBIAJ #23 2 years ago

    @Mentalist:

    What are you, a mental!? Wait...

    It feels nothing like Burnout, the drifting dynamic is far more akin to a heavier Ridge Racer or OutRun model.

  • DoctorFouad #24 2 years ago

    I tried the ps3 version, there is a lack of speed...I hope with faster cars this wont be a problem...

  • Chufty #25 2 years ago

    Why the fuck is this a sticky?

  • TRUTH #26 2 years ago

    Just tested both, the 360 and PS3 do look almost identical, but the 360 just but only just, looks a tiny bit softer (though some prefer this). The PS3 motion blur effects are a bit less compared to 360, also PS3 looks a bit more well clean but fake - if you know what I mean. 360 did seem to run a tad faster.

    This just a demo, and demo always never run 100% right at most times, as there usually developed before the game is even finished.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #27 2 years ago

    @BBIAJ:

    I'll give you that, the handling is different. I meant 'feel' in terms of atmosphere, presentation and in-game graphical style. Specifically it reminds me of Burnout 3.

  • Collymilad #28 2 years ago

    All i noticed from playing both demo's was that the AA seemed to be lower on PS3, but that could just be me. I'll be getting the PS3 version anyway.

    Also, i please wish people would stop crapping themselves about "sub-HD" - it's what comes out on the screen that matters, and both versions look practically identical.

    EDIT: Yes, softer is a better way to put it. Personally I preferred it, but friends have a PS3 so...
    Edited by Collymilad at 11/05/10 @ 01:09

  • scorch #29 2 years ago

    Tearing :)))))))))))

    Weak. This gen is years old and still we have tearing in racers.

  • The-Jack-Burton #30 2 years ago

    Just played the PS3 demo and the 360 demo and to my eye they run the same, but the PS3 version seems to look better though. The game itself isn't much of a looker, it has the feel of a game you would download from the PSN store or XBL for $15-20 dollars. Hopefully Blur looks better cuz I ain't gunna buy this

  • helvetica_bold #31 2 years ago

    I think the 360 has more atmosphere and color contrast its something about the post processing effects that look better IMO.
    The PS3 is cleaner / sharper looking but I think that kind of hurts the look of the game.
    Its supposed to look like you race through a M Bay movie, dramatic w/ lots of lens flares...
    Day one purchase for me!

  • Clover4ever #32 2 years ago

    The PS3 version definitely look sharper despite the small difference in native resolution.
    Edited by Clover4ever at 23/05/10 @ 11:25