Tekken 6 PS3/360: The resolution game
In Saturday's Digital Foundry "not so high definition" feature, we talked about the technical reasons why some console games don't actually appear to be running at the lowest HD standard: 720p. We revealed that Namco-Bandai's forthcoming Tekken 6 is one of those games, but also stated that the additional graphics processing introduced at the lower resolution, surprisingly, produced a higher overall image quality than the game's in-built HD mode which actually runs in excess of 720p.
Our analysis was exclusive to the Xbox 360 version of the game, and we promised an update on the PS3 rendition, so let's get going. To put it simply, there's good news and bad news here. Let's get the bad tidings out of the way first: while there is the option to switch between 1024x576 and 1365x768 modes on Xbox 360 (via tweaking the motion blur setting between on and off), the PS3 version is locked exclusively to the lower resolution. The good news is that even so, the PS3 version still manages to command a slightly higher image quality overall if you can do without the motion blur.
Let's get the pixel measurements out of the way first, courtesy of DF contributor and image quality specialist, MazingerDUDE.
The PS3 version (top) is locked to 1024x576 in both major display modes, but the omission of motion blur allows Namco to add in a 2xMSAA filter. Xbox 360's answer to AA is to supersample 1365x768 down to 720p and lower texture filtering.
Removing the motion blur filter frees up a lot of resources, and Namco has chosen to deploy these in two different ways on each console. Xbox 360 gets an enormous resolution boost to 1365x768, while the PS3 gets 2x multi-sampling anti-aliasing. In terms of overall image quality across the two modes and two consoles, the PS3 gets the nod in "blur off" mode thanks to decent enough upscaling based on an anti-aliased image, while in default mode with the motion blur active, the 360's enhanced texture filtering gives clear image quality advantages.
So why did Namco choose 1365x768 on 360? If the dash is set to 1360x768, you don't get close-to-native resolution as you might expect. Indeed, the image is scaled down to 720p internally, then scaled back up by the Xenos GPU. Namco's methodology here is to smooth off edges by rendering at a higher resolution then scaling down – the developers have done it before, not just in Soul Calibur IV, but also in Ridge Racer 6. It's an attempt at some form anti-aliasing without needing to tile video data out into main RAM. At 1365x768 with no AA, everything remains inside the 360's 10MB eDRAM, ensuring maximum performance.
Despite that, we can conclude that Tekken 6 at sub-HD resolutions gives a better-looking display at 576p. So, what's going on, particularly in the Xbox 360 game? How can the sub-HD mode give clearer, sharper detail when it's running at nearly half the resolution of the "motion blur off" mode? Time to call in an Xbox 360 development expert, someone used to pushing the hardware in obscure directions: Trials HD lead coder Sebastian Aaltonen.
High quality motion blur consumes a lot of performance. If you want something else than camera motion based blur, you have to save the motion vectors for each pixel, so the render target memory requirement rises as well. 88 (16-bit) would be enough for 2d screen space motion vectors, but for practical reasons you need an 8888 buffer.
1365x768 resolution 8888 color + 24S8 depth = 8386560 bytes, while 1024x576 resolution 8888 color + 24S8 depth + motion vectors = 7077888 bytes
Both configurations fit well inside the 10MB eDRAM. The 1024x576 is kind of a strange choice, as it's only around half the pixels of the 1365x768 and the cost of the blur filter comes nowhere close to the performance gained from the resolution decrease, and they are not eDRAM limited either. The resolution reduction itself is not something I consider strange, but a reduction this large means they have something else going on than just the motion blur. The better texture detail you are seeing could mean they have enabled anisotropic filtering for the lower resolution.
So, as we previously discussed, sub-HD is most often used to make up for performance deficits, but with Tekken 6, Namco-Bandai has opted to effectively include two different performance profiles.
In terms of how this works out during gameplay, the motion blur itself is quite a subtle effect, but pleasing nonetheless. Blur works best as a means of making motion look smoother than the frame rate suggests, but Tekken 6 is effectively locked at 60FPS any way, so the overall impression is not as impactful as the similar systems employed in Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2. However, the game includes at least two boss-style battles that pitch your fighter up against enormous, screen-filling opponents. And in those cases, the blur is much more evident. But in truth, as effects go, we can take it or leave it.
Overall, although there's really nothing in it in the heat of gameplay, we'd take the PS3's blur-off 576p 2xMSAA picture as the best IQ option available across both versions, the realisation of which suggests that the whole game would've benefited a lot more with the more traditional arrangement of native 720p and MSAA. Screen-filling bosses aside, there's nothing to suggest that this wouldn't have been possible. It's interesting to note that even when Tekken 6 is running at an HD resolution there is the sense that the game isn't quite all it could've been visually.
So, while we're here are there any other technical issues of note? There's a lot of Soul Calibur IV DNA in here, that's for sure, extending beyond the native resolution of the Xbox 360 game. Just like Namco's previous fighting game, the PS3 game gets an "install to HDD" optional feature (around 3.6GB in our preview code) and this is well worth using – load times can be laborious without it. It is worth pointing out that stuff like disc layout issues are optimised in the final period of development so in this case, the non-final nature of the code may be an issue, but there's nothing here that we didn't experience with Soul Calibur IV too. We'll be updating from final code in a future Face-Off, but with the game just weeks away from release, we're not expecting major changes.
One thing that is admirable is that there's also obvious evidence of Namco making use of the extra space on the Blu-ray disc. Tekken 6 data weighs in at around 20GB. Bearing in mind the size of the install, it's fair to assume that the rendered movies get the benefit here. That said, in the Tekken Force "Scenario Mode", cut-scenes are generally engine-driven using in-game assets, running at 60FPS on both consoles and are of essentially equal quality. Intro and ending movies tend to get the full-on CG treatment beloved of the Tekken series, and it's good to know that Namco-Bandai has taken a zero compromise approach to them, using the maximum bandwidth available that the freedom of a 25GB Blu-ray disc offers.
Moving away from DF issues and back into "preview mode", it will be interesting to see what the reception is to Tekken 6 from the media and gamers alike. Just like Soul Calibur IV, the core mechanics of the game harken back to previous games in the series, and the sense of re-invention we had in Street Fighter IV that made the genre feel somehow more fresh does appear lacking here. That said, it is interesting to note that the Tekken Force "Scenario Mode" is the first selectable option on the main menu - clearly Namco-Bandai wants us to give this a whirl first, and to try out the traditional one-on-one modes later.
Tekken 6 is slated for release at the end of the month.
You may also like...
-
Metal Gear Solid: The "Lost" HD Remasters
-
Face-Off: SoulCalibur 5
-
Eurogamer.net Podcast #99: FF13-2 and Amalur RPG Special
-
Eurogamer.net Podcast #98: Resident Evil and the Circle Pad Pro
-
Gotham City Impostors Review
-
Who Killed Rare?
-
King Arthur 2 Review
-
Skyrim patch 1.4 now live for Xbox 360
-
Street Fighter X Tekken Preview: Year of the Dragon Punch?
-
Skyrim makers create dragon riding, Kinect shouts, new skill trees
-
Diablo 3 release date narrowed
-
Double Fine Adventure raises $1m in less than 24 hours
-
Itagaki: Tecmo tricked me into releasing unfinished Dead or Alive 2
-
Activision promises "meaningful innovation" in next Call of Duty
-
Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning Review
-
World of Warcraft universe recreated in Minecraft
-
Apple to reveal iPad 3 in first week of March - report
-
UKIE lobbies to make crowd funding legal in the UK
-
Arkham City developer laments health of UK games industry
-
Jaffe: Developers should focus on gameplay, not story
-
The Darkness 2 Review
-
Psychonauts developer Double Fine making fan-funded adventure game
-
PlayStation Vita trailer demos PS3 cross-play
-
Spec Ops: The Line lets you shoot "unarmed civilians", "angry mobs"
-
Modern Warfare 3 has 12% more online gamers than Black Ops













Comments (24) Latest comment 2 years ago
Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I hope that for the PS4 Sony will review the way the main memory is accessed as well as who will provide the GPU horsepower and total memory available to the software running on their system.
Maybe then we will finally be able to see some real HD games coming to the console market. Unfortunately at this time the PC is the only platform that really supports HD gaming across all games. Eventough the quality of the HD game is dependant on the amount of money the pc owner wishes to spend on his or her system.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Motion-blurring in a game running at 60 fps seems pointless to me (as it does Richard Leadbetter) so I think I'll opt for the PS3 version anyway, not just because of the better image quality and lack of blurring but because it has a controller with a D-pad that is better suited to this game. Besides I've played all the previous instalments on the PS, why change now?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Movies are filmed in 24fps and look good because of temporal aliasing (in non-engineering jargon, bluring). Each frame in a movie is not a perfect still capture of the image, it is a blured image that averages all that has been going on for 1/24 a second. Pause a DVD or Bluray in an action scene and behold of the blured arm that is about to hit the bad guys face. That bluring makes it easy for the brain to interpolate movement and understand the flow of the frames.
Computer graphics are generated in a rather "too perfect" way. They are sharp as hell and show no bluring at all. So, a game running at 30fps is producing 30 perfectly sharp images, thus making the brain have a much harder time when decoding fast movement (the ball in one frame is one place, the next frame it has moved 1/3 the screen... nothing in between). Try pausing a game in a fast moving scene, the image will be perfectly rendered with no blur to help the eye.
That explains why a 24fps filmed movie is smoother than a 30fps game. That is why 60fps games look better, as they are making it much easier for the brain to decode movement. Still, most articles say that the more fps are put into digitally generated images the better (all extra frames above 72fps make the eye gain natural bluring on the images, just like real life, and creating a better and smoother perception of movement).
And that explains why lately all devs are so concerned about effects such as bluring (a good blur seems to increases perceived framerate), depth of field (bluring objects that are not being focused) and antialiasing (better image quality and also softer, natural-looking images easier for the brain to decode).
The following article sums up a pretty good number of interesting points:
http://ww w.daniele.ch/school/30vs60/30vs...
Note: Actually the article goes against bluring in games and defends higher framerate, but it's rather old (talks about 3dfx as cutting edge...) and I've read other articles that say bluring is good. Current developers are also heavy into bluring, so it may depend on good implementation or different kinds of bluring. It's not an easy issue on any case
Comment below viewing threshold Show
@Sl33py
ya Sony did make a few questionable decisions regarding their tech, but so did MS. CPU has to access memory through GPU bus? Either way these relatively low powered consoles still put out really good looking games like uncharted2, kz2, forza 3, gt5p etc.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Don't know if this is revelant or not, but someone in that article says this...
"In terms of overall image quality across the two modes and two consoles, the PS3 gets the nod in "blur off" mode thanks to decent enough upscaling based on an anti-aliased image, while in default mode with the motion blur active, the 360's enhanced texture filtering gives clear image quality advantages."
What do you think?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Why a one-on-one fighter that runs at 60 fps cannot run at 720p with AA is a total mystery because the almost four year old DOA 4 on the 360 managed it as did the later Virtua Fighter 5 on the same platform. Tekken 6 certainly doesn't look any better than either of those although it's a fine-looking game in its own right. Maybe the engine Namco are using isn't all that?
I suppose ultimately you should just judge it on what it looks like and in that regard it looks decent. Would I have know it was sub-HD if I hadn't read Digital Foundry? In all honesty... probably not.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I'm actually not quite sure that Sony made those decisions willingly. Don't forget they were partnered with IBM and Toshiba on the Cell R&D. I think IBM got themselves a really good CPU for research and server solutions, hence the limited availability of memory on the SPU's. There is good reason why researchers love the PS3.
In my eyes, the Cell is not a CPU designed to 'do games', it's a processor to 'do calculations really fast'. I know games require a lot of floating point horse power, but not exclusively.
Also a big problem now is that the memory of the playstation 3 is divided in 'work' memory and 'video' memory, and there is no way around that setting.
In a perfect world the SPU's would have about twice as much direct access memory on them and full access to the whole main memory pool. As I said before, a better GPU solution and a bigger memory pool would really help as well. I hope Sony changes these things with the PS4. I suspect they will increase the Cell horse power by adding more SPU's on the Cell, I hope they will not limit their changes to only adding more SPU's.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
"Sony did make a few questionable decisions regarding their tech, but so did MS. CPU has to access memory through GPU bus?"
I think that was a deliberate and shrewd design decision by MS, their CPU had no on-board memory controller so they needed something to do the job, rather than have a separate chipset for it they got the Xenos GPU to handle it. The big bonus of this being the GPU has direct access to all main memory and they don't need two fixed pools of memory like the PS3.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Soul Calibur IV had a bad, stuttering 50Hz mode (the demo, at least).
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Yeah but I'd have thought the PS3 version would still be easily the superior version due to sharing the same tech. Makes sense no? Games ported to the PS3 from 360 often look noticably worse.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
So basically what you're saying is though System 357 shares the same CPU, GPU and memory as the PS3, the 360 with it's totally diifferent CPU, GPU and memory allocation could produce the better looking version (due to a number of reasons)?
Interesting.....
Comment below viewing threshold Show
So true.Especially compared to KZ2 U2 and such like games.
Cross-platform games are unfair to PS3 owners,'cause the games could be better,the quality of Killzone 2/Uncharted 2 says so.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
that was no shader.
360 has bandwidth problem of memory because Memory controller unit under the GPU,
and shared memory (UMA) architecture it clearly shows a problem when accessing CPU and GPU same time.
what? UMA memory architecture is more better??
it means "notebook PC(UMA) outshines discrete GPU system" ??
it's ignorance's bullshit.
so why PC games are not support notebook PCs??
it's strange.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
1024x576 * 2 * (32/8 + 32/8) = 9 437 184 = 9Mb
Xbox 360 Tekken 6 (Blur-Off, no AA):
1365x768 * (32/8 + 32/8) = 8 386 560 = 7.998Mb
The PS3 setup is more demanding then the 360:s as we can see...
Comment below viewing threshold Show
the two PS3 version screenshots are obviously the same resolution, probably 1024x576. the 360 screenshots are horribly misleading however. the "motion blurred" screenshots are 100% obviously the same resolution as the PS3 screenshots, and yet they are clearly a higher resolution than the "1365x768" screenshots of non motion blurred. i think the screens are either mixed or or something is wrong, as the non motion blurred 360 screenshot looks blurred and lower resolution than the ps3 screens, and the "motion blurred" screenshot from the 360 looks exactly the same as the "motion blurred" screenshot from the PS3 version. so yes, the unblurred PS3 looks the best, but the supposedly higher resolution 360 unblurred is clearly not.
look at the size of the pixels on the supposedly 1365x768 image, they're the same size as the pixels on the 1024x576 version, except they look blurrier. something isn't right here.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
so click on the picture states.... the following calculation...
3:4 ratio = ( 3/4 ) * 720 = 576... check your math that's 540 actually
the resolution is actually correct 576 the actual ratio is 4:5 = (4/5)*720=576.
gimmie a cookie DF