Tech Interview: WipEout HD/Fury

Studio Liverpool on re-igniting the 1080p dream.

It's one of the crown jewels of the PlayStation Store, and last week SCEE updated the brilliant WipEout HD with a brand new Fury expansion pack. However, describing it as a mere add-on is something of a disservice: the £7.99 download offers almost as much new content as there was in the original game, and while the core gameplay is initially very familiar, the execution of the new game modes really is WipEout as you've never played it before. The game scored an immense 9/10 on Eurogamer this week, meaning it is utterly unmissable.

Of course, from a technical perspective, WipEout HD and its furious pseudo-sequel are of prime interest to Digital Foundry not just because they are beautiful-looking, technically adept games. Studio Liverpool made 'full HD' the target resolution, making it one of the few developers to make good on the 1080p dream, coming up with brand new PS3 rendering technologies in order to create a game that runs as close to a sustained 60FPS as possible. We talked about the game's dynamic 1080p resolution back when the original launched, and Sony itself discussed the technique in more depth at its recent Develop presentation, but we wanted to know more the implementation and some of the other technologies Studio Liverpool used to create this superb game.

In this revealing technical interview, the developer provided three of its finest to answer our questions: game director Tony Buckley, WipEout HD graphics engine lead Chris Roberts, and finally WipEout HD: Fury lead programmer Stephen Taylor. And while we had access to these gentlemen, we thought we'd get some of the most popular WipEout HD FAQs out of the way first...

Digital Foundry: The first and perhaps most obvious question. WipEout HD is an excellent game, and in age where exclusivity is very rare on any platform, you can only buy the game via PSN. Isn't this deliberately limiting your potential audience? Why no presence at retail? Isn't an HD/Fury combo more than worthy of a Blu-ray release?

Studio Liverpool: Being a PSN-exclusive title does obviously limit our audience a little due to the fact that there are people out there who do not have access to broadband or a credit card, or simply prefer to purchase physical media. However, before we started to develop WipEout HD we had made the decision to release the game as a PlayStation Store title to highlight that download content does not have to be the preserve of 'small games' and that it can be used as a vehicle to provide larger-scope games. Releasing a WipEout HD and Fury combo on Blu-ray is an option for the studio. However, at the present time we are happy to keep WipEout HD and the Fury expansion pack as exclusive PlayStation Store content.

Digital Foundry: The Fury expansion once again mines the rich vein of content you created for the PSP WipEout titles. A lot of people will be wondering why the focus has been on those tracks as opposed to the Psygnosis-era games. Will we ever see 2097 tracks within the WipEout HD universe?

Studio Liverpool: This is without doubt the most commonly asked question: why do we not have tracks from the PS1 era? The answer is pretty simple really, we don't have the art assets readily available for the PS1 tracks and as a result the amount of work required to recreate them for HD would not be cost effective. We have 30-plus tracks from the previous PSP versions that we can choose from all of which provide us with the assets required, [but] even with these assets it still takes the art team eight months of solid effort to get one HD/Fury track to look like it does.

Digital Foundry: The WipEout heritage predates the launch of PS1 - a lot of us old-timers remember the pre-rendered demos of the first game revealed by Sony before PlayStation launched. How many of the original Psygnosis team are still working at Studio Liverpool? Is there a continuity in the team or are new developers picking up the baton?

Studio Liverpool: Although there are still a couple of members from the original Psygnosis team working at Studio Liverpool the PSP and PS3 versions of WipEout have been developed by the influx of new talent that has joined over the last five or six years. On the whole the WipEout team retains a degree of continuity with a good percentage of the team working on Pure, Pulse, HD and the Fury content. However, as the studio has other projects to resource it is difficult to keep people exclusively for the WipEout projects.

Digital Foundry: We learned last week from Epic Games' Mark Rein that less than 50 per cent of gamers played Gears of War 2 in HD. Do you have similar figures on the breakdown of how many people are playing WipEout HD in standard def, 720p and 1080p?

Studio Liverpool: Unfortunately we don't have these kind of figures available.

Digital Foundry: From a purely business perspective, does it make you think that maybe WipEout HD is in a sense over-engineered if, as we assume, only a tiny minority of the people playing it will be doing so at 1080p?

Studio Liverpool: You could certainly argue that point. Personally I'd prefer to take the stance that we are pushing boundaries and demonstrating what is possible from today's hardware. If teams don't attempt to push the hardware then things will never move on.

Digital Foundry: Aside from a more stable frame-rate and far less noticeable tearing, are there any other actual advantages to running in 720p? GT5 Prologue for example offers 4xMSAA in 720p versus 2x in its 1080p mode.

Studio Liverpool: Yes, 720p offers 2xMSAA whereas 1080p has only 2x2 filter to smooth jaggies. Also with the reduced resolution at 720p the fill rate becomes less of an issue and you can afford to increase the amount and size of alpha'd particle effects not to mention shader complexity. This would have allowed us to achieve more weather effects and atmospherics had we wanted to go down that route. Conversely, we really wanted that clean utopian feel so 1080p was the right choice for us to realise our vision and push the visual fidelity.

Comments (37) Latest comment 3 years ago

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

  • VandelayIndustries #1 3 years ago

    Interesting interview.
  • xandoodle #2 3 years ago

    I hope this DF series stays around, its pretty fascinating stuff...
  • Ryze #3 3 years ago

    ...Then my PS3 is looking dapper in its WipEout HD suit.

    This interview has made me eager to grab a Fury suit to better it.
  • Bagpuss #4 3 years ago



    Didnt understand a word of it, but nice interview.
  • JohnnyWashnGo #5 3 years ago

    Great interview - some interesting points raised which I hadn't really considered.

    The main question I now have is this: On my 1080i TV with the PS3 set to 1080i mode, will I be getting the 720p version of the game from the PS3? Because the interview makes that version sound better than the 1080p version.
  • Miths #6 3 years ago

    Yep, great interview - more of those please. I'm also lost on many of the specific details, but I do like to think I understand just about enough to make it worth my time reading articles like these :).
  • knightmt #7 3 years ago

    The tech is really well balanced witht he gameplay, I think that the comments about 720p are a bit redundant as having a clearly defined environment has produced so many benefits. Having upgraded from 1080i to 1080p, I think that there is significant future proofing for this game if there is such a thing.
    The slogon for this game should be "slick as fuck"
  • PaniK #8 3 years ago

    There shouldn't be any tearing in any games ever.

    It's the single most disgusting thing about Wipeout HD's image quality IMO and almost kills it for me. For this reason, 1080p mode is unplayable and it's baffling they even targeted this res in the first place given all the performance hiccups. I'm constantly having to switch to 720p in the XMB which is a pain in the ass for how my system is set up, and even then there's still tearing. The Fury expansion game modes can be brutal to performance as well which is sad to see. It's only really a 60fps game in the lower speed /AI classes.

    'occasional screen-tearing' is never a good compromise ever. Visual fidelity should be lowered accordingly to hit your target framerate and eliminate immersion breaking anomalies such as tearing.

    Framerate>IQ>visual fidelity. Always.
  • septimus #9 3 years ago

    Minimal screen tearing for me at 1080P. Hardly noticeable. If you have a Bravia that might be something to do with it.

    The interview on the 1080i bit is contradicted by DF. They say the PS3 treats 1080i the same as 1080P so theoretically any 1080P dynamic changes will also occur at 1080i. But I trust Studio Liverpool more and they say the changes only happen at 1080P setting. So 1080i gets the same as 720P.
  • Moz #10 3 years ago

    The easy answer to "why bother with 1080p when so few people have 1080p TVs" is future proofing, in theory we could still be playing Wipeout HD in 10 years time with various add-ons, in the long term it's a very economic way of developing a game, one that works really well for racing games, and could also be well used by most sports games. Why both spending time and money creating a game different enough to warrant full price when you can spend a fraction of time and money creating a add-on or update that you can probably sell for half the price but with equal if not improved profit.
  • Darren #11 3 years ago

    @PaniK - Got to agree with you there.

    Screen tearing is a pet hate of mine, one which has turned me away from console gaming where it is rife onto the PC where it is at least optional. The irony is that last gen gamess also had plenty of tearing but it was a lot less noticeable on the smaller, poorer quality cathrode ray screens than it is on the larger, superior quality HDTVs many of us have now. Tearing is a magnificent way to make your expensive new TV look like its developed a fault! Oddly, despite the inferior hardware specifications I've noticed a lot less tearing in Wii games (in fact none of the games I own have any), perhaps because Nintendo have stricter quality control.

    @septimus - I own a Sony Bravia HDTV and uses high quality HDMI leads. I notice screen tearing in games that have it as much as I have with any other HDTV I've owned or seen (which includes Pioneer, Samsung, Panasonic, Toshiba and Hitatchi). Tearing is a game issue which occurs because v-sync isn't used, it has absolutely nothing to do with the type or quality of the display you're using. In other words, if a game doesn't use v-sync then it'll exhibit tearing whether you play it on a 14" black & white portable or a 50" LCD HDTV. Of course, you won't notice it as much on the 14" screen because of its smaller size but it's still there.
  • septimus #12 3 years ago

    Odd, but I have not seen tearing occurring on Samsung, Pioneer or LG with this game as much as Bravia's. Not sure which engine was in the Bravia (could have been a W).

    I use a Samsung personally. Only tearing I have really noticed is RE5 on 360 and Uncharted. But neither were so horrid I couldn't play them... seems an exaggeration.
  • lukaz #13 3 years ago

    Studio Liverpool, if you are listening:

    Please let me disable that awfull blur in F1CE that happens at cornering.
  • patchbox360 #14 3 years ago

    wipeout is sick - the zone laps have filled that geometry wars gap since getting rid of 360.
  • 3william56 #15 3 years ago

    Still no Gare d'Europa??? :'(

    The price has been awesome (despite some spoilt brat whingers about 7 quid for Fury), but seems sad it has painted them into a financial corner wrt new courses. I'd have paid full price for this if it justified new and retro tracks.

    I still suspect they're keeping them for WOHD 2 as a full price release. We can but hope. Anyone got any idea how well this has sold so far?

    /joins notmyrealname crying in the distance for GPol3. Can you imagine how mind blowing they could make that look with this tech...
  • Alkeno #16 3 years ago

    Brilliant article, very interesting. I like that approach, reducing the resolution when needed rather than reducing quality, seems to give a less noticeable result. To me the worst part of the interview is that it showed very clearly what we all knew already, 1080p at 60fps is an impossible task on this generation of consoles.

    Talking about the different brands of HDTVs, I own a Samsung and it has a beautiful "Game mode" meant to minimize the amount of processing done by the TV, thus reducing the input lag and making the image look closer to what is being rendered in the console's framebuffer. I cannot say that I can feel the difference between normal or game mode (either normal mode in Samsung is fast enough or it's my own slow brain not working properly, hehehe). Maybe Sony Bravias have a noticeable lag and it can affect the way the game is drawn, I cannot tell.

    The point is that HDTVs are not like old school lag-free CRTs. The easiest way to see it is to go to any big store with many different HDTVs showing the same movie, everytime the scene changes rapidly it obvious that every brand and model has it's own different response time.

    Dear DF guys, when will we have a "HDTV for gamers" article? We want response time analysis of brands and models! I bet many Street Fighter fans would happily choose one model over another it there was a 16ms response time difference (that is... ONE FRAME! most championship-level players would kill to have a permanent 1 frame advantage...).
    Edited by 1 at 02/08/09 @ 01:44
  • xavier_dragoon #17 3 years ago

    Dear Studio

    The game is BRILLIANT (haven't bought the XP pack - i'm a poor gamer with too many platforms to support) and I understand the need for Studio Liverpool to focus on pushing the tech to its limits (1080px60, DLC, et al) and the fact that it seems that no one who made it [the PSone version] still works at the studio but I played Destruction Derby the other day... ;)

    Just think for a moment:

    > Wipeout Hd style download only
    > 20 player online mode (or 16 or 32 - whatever)
    > Burnout Paradise/ Race Driver GRID level of deformable cars
    > User created/Premium Liveries and/or tracks
    > A Resonable price
    > What ever res/frame helps you sleep at night

    And so to summarize: Go on... ;)
  • discobunnywalker #18 3 years ago

    Been playing Fury since it came out, its a really good game, wish more games were made at 1080p to truly show off my HD TV!!!
  • toy_brain #19 3 years ago

    Excellent artice, most of the tech-speak is way over my head but I did gain at least a couple interesting insights out of it (like why the game tears in the unique way it does, the selective use of LOD, and how much they leveraged processing away from the GPU).
    Personally I find this sort of interview far more interesting than the usual drivel we get when a publisher is trying to sell a new game and going on about how many guns/levels/characters they have.
  • Chufty #20 3 years ago

    Nice read, very technically in-depth which makes for a fascinating read.

    About tearing, I see no tearing at all in WHD on my 1080i Sony TV in my bedroom, but noticable (but still minor) on the 1080p Panasonic TV in my living room. So your TV definitely makes a difference.

    Tearing is unusual in console games - it looks completely different to screen tear in PC games and the comment in this article about the software vsync implementation 'missing' the sync by a partial frame was a real eye-opener for me. I would guess a lot of PS3 games have a similar implementation which is what makes the actual position of the tear on the framebuffer much more consistent.

    This generation of consoles don't seem to double-buffer vsync very well, and I expect the next generation will have a large enough graphics buffer to triple buffer 1080p frames, making screen tear a thing of the past.
  • hiscore #21 3 years ago

    As some people already mentioned, the 1080p60 dream for this console generation is still not happening.
    First of all: Wipeout HD is not true 1080p60 and if it wasn't for Digital Foundry (kudos!) we even wouldn't know it wasn't.
    Secondly: even at launch Wipeout HD suffered from screen tearing and framedrops, after patch 2.0 (and even 2.01) it even got worse.
    Conclusion: witnessing an increasing amount of screen tearing in console games since last gen (developers "decided/agreed" screen tearing would have less "impact" om gaming than slowdown), the next generation of games/consoles haven't been able to eliminate this problem unto this very day. I'd rather have Studio Liverpool focus on a PERFECT 720p60 than a flawed 1080p60. Sometimes it is better to maintain realistic goals than so called "barrier pushing" games which... aren't what they were told they would be.

    Nevertheless, I like the Wipeout series and so Wipeout HD and Fury are on my PS3, but it's a pity Studio Liverpool aimed too high. Hopefully, a 720p60 menu display option with additional performace gain will be made available, although I fear SL/Sony wants to keep the 1080p60 dream alive (even when it will remain a dream for some time).
  • PaniK #22 3 years ago

    @ hiscore - precisely.

    "I'd rather have Studio Liverpool focus on a PERFECT 720p60 than a flawed 1080p60. Sometimes it is better to maintain realistic goals than so called "barrier pushing" games which... aren't what they were told they would be."

    This a million times. I couldn't give two poos about 1080p and I have 1080p panel. My panel upscales 720p just nicely and I suspect any decent LCD from that last 2 yrs does as well. Wipeout HD was clearly gimped the minute they decided to target 1080p which I think was more for sony's marketing benefit. Unless they prove me otherwise with a patch that clears up the nasties - doesn't look likely at this point given that performance got worse with Fury.

    And on top of that we've now got annoying random micro stutters during gameplay that was supposed to be fixed in 2.01 but actually wasn't. It's still there for me.

    As ridiculous as it sounds I now refuse to buy games unless they're v-synced, it just looks crap otherwise IMO and it gives me a headache. I don't think devs realise how sensitive/put off by it some people are. Why you'd ever want the game your making to have tearing as a compromise is just baffling. It looks dumb.

    Overall it's sad to see so many games with rubbish framerates this gen - i'm not sure if the jump to 'HD' was too much for devs or if the consoles just aren't good enough, but one thing is for definite, there's far fewer games that run decently compared to the PS2 days (which also had tearing in a couple games, but also many many more 60fps games as well).

  • viper51989 #23 3 years ago

    @PaniK

    You're either completely unrealistic or the biggest snob I've yet seen in this garbage heap they call the interweb. Instead of calling out Studio Liverpool, why don't you take some time to observe before opening your mouth and spouting nonsense. People who argue for the sake of argument make me sick

    Trying playing halo 3 four feet from a 50 inch screen for hundreds of hours (for competition's sake) and see if the sub 720 resolution doesn't bother you. To complain about minor screen tearing (it IS minor--I don't care what you say, it's minute compared to other games that lack v-sync) and near imperceptable drops in frame rate in a game that looks like nothing else and runs as smooth as butter is disgusting.

    Oh, and for the record, 720P Wipeout HD/Fury doesn't look nearly as sharp as 1080p from distances within 5 feet (assuming screen size is 46-50 inches or so--larger and the benefits are more pronounced).

    If you can't see that, you're either blind or in denial. At least on my Kuro that is. Maybe on your crappy POS (probably CCFL) Bravia you can't. And NO, no Sony lcd (XBR8 is great but overpriced and still 2nd/3rd best), or any other brand lcd for that matter, can match Pioneer. Not last year and not this year either.
  • PaniK #24 3 years ago

    @viper51989

    First off, thanks for your kind words. Not sure about the arguing or nonsense either. Merely pointing out my opinion and stating the facts.

    Second, I have no idea what you're talking about RE Halo 3 or how that is even relevant to the discussion.

    I'm not going to keep banging on about framerate/tearing. It's there, good for you if you think it's imperceptible, cause I don't agree at all... I would actually question how far you've gotten into to the game cause when the AI/speed ramps up the performance definitely gets worse. And Fury in 1080p runs like shit - drops and tearing at almost every turn.

    And I never disputed the merits of displaying a 1080p signal on a native 1080 panel. Just saying, I'd have preferred they made it rock solid v-synced 60fps (if they stuck to 720 to begin with perhaps) and ended up playing the game upscaled as the only option. As a Kuro fanboy (which btw, definitely makes you a bigger snob than me), you should know that resolution isn't everything.

  • viper51989 #25 3 years ago

    The Halo 3 comments were relevant to the discussion because it's an example of the opposite being true (kinda). Bungie went with a sub 720p resolution because their engine couldn't keep up. As much as I love (and hate--competition at 50 is challenging enough) Halo3, I do wish it looked sharper. The downgraded rez is completely a blight in comparison to other shooters. As a Halo "fanboy" I've defended their decision because gameplay is my highest priority (and the game still has some excellent lighting, physics, super crisp/detailed textures despite the blockiness).

    With Wipeout HD and even Fury, that compromise didn't have to be made due to some clever programming on the part of S Liverpool. Even on the higher difficulties (yes, I race on phantom, yes I am certainly better than you), the tearing and [framerate] drops don't effect gameplay. They are obviously visible to anyone who's played the game enough, but people who aren't OCD about performance issues prefer a sharper game to a blurrier one that runs a fraction of a percent better most of the time.

    And the fact that I own a Kuro doesn't make me a snob (I payed less than 2gs). It makes me smarter than you. Sony (and every lcd manufacturer) still has a long way to go before they approach the overall black level performance, color temperature/ color point accuracy, grayscale linearity, 3 dimensional picture, perfect viewing angles with natural motion (900 horizontal lines is still better than any lcd that doesn't have motion enhancers engaged), and input responsiveness of a kuro. Get over it
  • gandhimaster #26 3 years ago

    firstly, i wanna say that studio liverpool have done an AMAZING job on wipeout hd.

    now thats out of the way, i wanna start whinging and complaining! ; )

    seriously, the fact that developers have to go through so many hoops and troubles to get their game running at 1080p/60fps makes me wonder about the power of these consoles. if the PS3 "struggles" so badly to do it and they need res drops at strategic times etc then where is this HD revolution they all speak of??

    all hype it seems!
  • el_pollo_diablo #27 3 years ago

    Well I'm playing Wipeout at 1080p and it looks GREAT.
    A lovely, lovely game.
  • xavier_dragoon #28 3 years ago

    Frame rate over resultion: all day every day. I LIKE nice graphics; I NEED quick response time.
  • lagoonalight #29 3 years ago

    Kuro's are awesome but the PRO in no way outclasses the 55XBR8 by any means. You act like the differences are night and day, Viper, and yet they are barely seeable. Go read the reviews on cnet again. Sony's new line is so close to the Kuro and the advantages of LCD are becoming much more abundant as the plasma dies a slow death. Soon the LCD's will be exactly the same as your beloved Kuro.
  • viper51989 #30 3 years ago

    haha, I didn't mean to turn this into a discussion about AV equipment. I don't care to have one of those because I know I'm right anyway. I respect David K over at Cnet, but I bet if you asked him which he would like to take home, he'd say kuro every time. Much like almost any other industry professional in the biz.

    And I had mine calibrated by D-Nice (one of, if not the, most knowledgable calibrators of high end tvs--well, he knows the most about the Kuros). You really don't know nearly as much as you think. After seeing all of them side by side in a darkened environment, I can tell you the difference still isn't slight. I'm not going to have this argument with someone that thinks cnet's review score means Sony's XBR8, or any lcd, has closed the gap with Pioneer.
  • womble #31 3 years ago

    "The Halo 3 comments were relevant to the discussion because it's an example of the opposite being true (kinda). Bungie went with a sub 720p resolution because their engine couldn't keep up."

    Keep up with what?

    Bungie went with 640p with no AA because they wanted to do things that gave a higher priority to than sheer resolution. Mostly notably, the rather amazing lighting systems (played Cortana in the dark, on a big screen?) that splits up the available buffer space, the large amount of geometry and the immense draw distances, all at a very solid framerate. (Which is nothing to sneeze at given just how many games tear these days.)

    Obviously, they COULD have scaled things back and made Halo 3 look like a typical shooter, enclosed in a small almost-rail-like environment (see: Gears 2) with a limited design scope and color scheme (see: Killzone 2), and simplified lighting model, but they chose not to. Although I'd love to see a higher resolution too, I don't want it at the expense of the game's amazing scale and variety of scenery.

    Compare apples with apples. Halo 3 pulls off stuff that most games do not even try. Sure, it's got its weakness, but its engine isn't one of them. It does what they wanted to do with it, given the resources available on the 360.
  • womble #32 3 years ago

    Good article. I would have loved to have seen Studio Liverpool's extended comments on their new in-game advertising!
  • viper51989 #33 3 years ago

    @womble

    I've heard all these arguments before (and made some of them myself), so I'm not going to spend a lot of time rehashing. I'll concede that Halo 3 definetely is an impressive game from a technical standpoint, and it's sometimes quite beautiful to look at. Most, if not not all, of the stuff you said is true, or at least mostly so.

    I'm not hear to bash on one of my favorite/most played games of all time. I was using it as an example to compare how different games prioritize elements of performance. Sure, Bungie pulled off some incredible things. I still think WO HD/Fury is cooler to look at/ more cutting edge. The Halo 3 engine is insanely good at some things, but it's still based on something that is pretty old by today's standards (Halo 2 engine)
    Edited by 1 at 04/08/09 @ 18:43
  • womble #34 3 years ago

    @viper51989

    Judging from the (meagre) comments on Reach, we may all be in luck with the new engine.

    Technical issues aside, I think a bigger mistake by Bungie was their decision to integrate the Covenant look alongside human terrains. The greens and purples of the Covenant look great onboard a Covenant ship, in dark spaces, with all the flickering lights. But out on a dusty plain, the same models and textures just look awfully garish.


  • SL33PY #35 3 years ago

    Very insightfull. Thank you!
  • Darren #36 3 years ago

    @Chufty - "About tearing, I see no tearing at all in WHD on my 1080i Sony TV in my bedroom, but noticable (but still minor) on the 1080p Panasonic TV in my living room. So your TV definitely makes a difference."

    That's not a valid comparison since 1080i is interlaced and is sending half the information per screen refresh that 1080p does! ;)
  • m0thr4 #37 3 years ago

    Minimal screen tearing for me at 1080P. Hardly noticeable. If you have a Bravia that might be something to do with it.

    Well, Bravia is a rather sweeping term for a large number of Sony TVs. I have a 40" Bravia 100Hz 1080p set and have never noticed any tearing in either Wipeout HD or Fury.