Face-Off: Batman: Arkham Asylum

By Richard Leadbetter Published 17 September, 2009

Holy anti-aliasing.

Some might say we're late to the party with the face-off coverage of Batman: Arkham Asylum, but we've got two very good reasons to explain the delay. First up, our demo showdown did a fairly effective job of discerning the key talking points with the console versions. Secondly, developer Rocksteady has put a great deal of effort into the PC build and we wanted to cover that in-depth too. Since Eidos wouldn't supply PC or indeed PS3 code, we ended up buying them, which meant waiting for the official release like everyone else.

In many respects Arkham Asylum is a perfect convergence of technology, art and design. While some developers have managed to break free of its stylistic shackles Rocksteady has instead embraced the core look of the Unreal Engine 3 technology, with a hardcore-pleasing rendering of Batman and his world that looks fantastic. On a similar theme, the gothic renderings of Arkham Asylum often have echoes of some of the architecture seen in Epic's own games featuring UE3 technology.

Combine this with a game design that truly reflects the character of the Dark Knight, the key voice actors from the animated series plus a great story from Paul Dini, and it's pretty easy to see why Batman: Arkham Asylum is one of the best games of the year.

In terms of the usual face-off shenanigans, it's no secret that the Microsoft platform has clear advantages in terms of performance and image quality - but the variation between the two games is nowhere near as pronounced as some other Unreal Engine 3 projects. You can see for yourself in the 720p and 1080p comparison galleries we've put together. The 720p area offers up like-for-like shots from all three versions of the game, while 1080p pitches the upscaled 360 image against the PC's native 1080p mode at nigh-on max settings.

Here's the obligatory Xbox vs. PS3 Face-Off video, and be sure to check out the HD version available via the EGTV clickthrough, which has more clips, more pixels and is generally a much more comprehensive way to check out the differences between the two console games.

First up is that perennial old favourite: anti-aliasing. In common with most UE3 games the Xbox 360 version does have smoothed edges, significantly reducing the "jaggy" factor. However, the 2x multi-sampling (MSAA) effect is not quite so obvious as it is on other games. It seems to be the case that the AA is selectively deployed. The best theory to explain this is that additional processing is undertaken after the AA is applied, and the effects of that are not edge-smoothed.

Regardless, the PS3 version still manages to hold its own. In a dark game like Arkham Asylum, the edge artifacts are naturally diminished - certainly in the demo, the overall image quality of both games was pretty much like-for-like.

However, the final retail game has far more varied backgrounds and the more you play, the more noticeable the differences become. Similarly, the more subtle effects that the Xbox 360 gets, such as the ambient occlusion, also become more evident, in this case serving to give the game's visuals more depth. Over and above that there are texture differences too: there's a slight downgrading of some detail on PS3 (only really noticeable on close-ups) and the normal maps have taken a knock. Also quite bizarre is the fact that the camera work on PS3 has been subtly altered in many situations: the view has been pulled back, changing the look of many of the cut-scenes.

Raw performance, in terms of the sheer number of frames being pumped out, is very close indeed between the two consoles - but once again, the Xbox 360 version offers the smoother, more visually coherent experience. Both games are locked at 30FPS, and will drop v-sync in order to maintain that smoothness as much as possible. The introduction of tearing is what sets these games apart: it's rarely noticeable on Xbox 360 (though it is there), but is far more apparent on PS3 in certain areas; generally speaking, the larger the gameplay arena, the more tearing you'll get.

The performance deficit on PS3 probably won't be noticed by many, and will be irrelevant if you don't have the Xbox 360 or PC games to hand as points of reference. And while the differences are technical realities, the impact this all has on the gameplay is thankfully minimal. Where it counts, each version is just as much fun to play as the other. Indeed, PS3 claws back some brownie points is via its exclusive PSN download content: the Joker Challenge Rooms.

By default, the game gives you plenty of challenges "out of the box" regardless of the platform you play it on. Aspects of the Arkham Asylum geography are exploited for specific tasks - usually involving all-out fighting or more involving stealth-style gameplay. The big difference is that a 107MB download from PSN opens up exclusive challenges for the PS3 where you get to "be" the Joker. The success of this bonus content is somewhat double-edged, however: the whole gameplay concept behind Arkham Asylum is built around Batman: who he is, what he does and how he does it.

There is a definite sense that the Joker character has been shoehorned into that concept and the result is less satisfying. It's entirely in keeping with Batman's character that he would engage a gang of cons head-on and defeat them all, seeing that he is one of the DC universe's pre-eminent martial artists. Witnessing the Joker do the same doesn't quite compute: he's more of a thinker than a fighter, a fact brought home by the single-player mode's excellent storyline. While the idea doesn't seem quite right, there are a number of great things about the DLC over and above the plain and simple fact that you're getting more content for free. There's new voicework from the Batman cartoon cast, and the Joker does have some nice toys to play with, including an enormous single-shot pistol. Plus you get the chance to repeatedly pummel Commissioner Gordon.

Console-wise then, you pay your money, you take your choice. It's content versus performance. In terms of personal preference, I'd take the performance over a nice, but not essential bit of bonus DLC, but fair play to Eidos and PSN for a canny bit of marketing - there is the sense that in terms of the gameplay you're only getting the full thing on PS3 and that's a powerful motivating force in what is the undoubtedly the biggest game of the summer.

The introduction of the PC version of Arkham Asylum sets the cat amongst the pigeons somewhat. In all of the most recent PC Tech Comparison features (Red Faction: Guerrilla, Street Fighter IV, and to a lesser extent, Resident Evil 5), we've seen that the PC conversions of the console games basically buy you extra frames and more pixels, but very little else. You might get the odd graphical effect unseen on console, or NVIDIA 3D Vision support, but that's it.

Batman: Arkham Asylum on the other hand is just about everything I would want from a PC conversion, and the best thing is, I haven't had to wait untold months to get my hands on what is clearly the ultimate iteration of the game. A lot of the game's success is down to the Unreal Engine 3 framework from Epic Games. While the middleware has been used on a significant proportion of this generation's console titles, the fact is that Epic is comprised of PC people, its engine performs best on PC, and you don't need stupidly expensive hardware to get excellent performance.

In terms of a direct comparison between console and PC, here's the requisite face-off video. The video kicks off with Xbox 360 up against PC, then repeats with the PS3 version. A clickthrough to the HD version via the EGTV link makes all the difference here, and if you want to engage your own "detective mode", the comparison gallery is probably the best place to start for a forensic analysis.

An initial glance at like-for-like 720p video shows that the PC version is much the same, but with much more in the way of visual refinement. We can comfortably up anti-aliasing to anything up to 8x with little performance impact on the hardware we used, detail is significantly increased (most noticeable on close-up objects), and texture filtering is also much better on PC. Characters have higher details levels and a more impressive detail shader to boot. The best thing about all of this is that these improvements will scale upwards too, meaning that 1080p is even more impressive.

It's often been the case with the PC games we've looked at that the developer has merely ported over their existing console work to the platform, added some resolution settings and not much else. You can run the game in 1080p but the assets weren't really designed for it. With Batman: Arkham Asylum, the PC version has superior quality artwork and an engine that thrives on PC. It's the best platform for getting the most out of the game.

So, just how good is the performance and what sort of graphics card do you need? Batman: Arkham Asylum has its own benchmarking tool. I decided to use its preset sequences in concert with Digital Foundry's own FPS analysis tool to give a better indication of performance. In terms of settings, everything's set to the max, aside from PhysX (off) and anti-aliasing set to 4x MSAA.

Two GPUs are used here in concert with a base-level i7 at 2.66GHz: the GTS250 lower end enthusiast card (also known as the 9800GTX) alongside a top-of-the-line GTX295. At 720p, there's actually no point showing the video - performance is entirely identical. Here, at 1080p, we see that the GTX295 runs at max frame rate while the GTS250 hits a minimum of 44FPS, but still manages an overall average of around 58FPS. This is v-synced too. If you're looking for a sustained frame rate, a quick tweak of the config file seems to be able to cap frames, so you could limit yourself to 30FPS if that's what you want, but I'm not sure I'd recommend it - the benchmark seems to put more stress on the GPU than in-game action does.

Batman: Arkham Asylum doesn't exactly tax the CPU either. I'd say that just about any decent dual core CPU should run the game just fine, and a 9800GT/9800GTX/GTS250 level of GPU should give you an excellent performance at 1080p60. In fact, one of my colleagues has had a console-bettering experience using a 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo and NVIDIA 7950GT, meaning that even much older PCs stand a great chance of running this game very well indeed.

For those willing to invest a bit more cash into their PCs, there's also the matter of PhysX support, which comes in two flavours. The "normal" level is tailored to those using higher end NVIDIA GPUs - specifically the GTX260, or better. Additional effects you'll see in the video are added to the scene, and in some cases, the difference is visually quite dramatic. However, at "high" level, Rocksteady has really gone to town on the effects - so much so that using a single GPU is effectively disastrous, giving slideshow like performance. Indeed, the developer recommends that you have a 9800GTX level card in addition to your main GPU simply to run the physics, and here's a sampler of what you get:

There are some very nice effects: volumetric smoke/gas pervades the asylum, adding to the atmosphere, and it has gameplay uses too, providing additional cover. Paper and cloth are emulated nicely, tiles smash, scenery crumbles and there are some major bonuses in the Scarecrow's nightmare visions. It's by no means essential to the gameplay experience, but it is impressive, it is exclusive, and at times the impact is striking. The PC version already has clear graphical advantages over the console offerings, and this adds additional loveliness to the proceedings that are very welcome indeed.

The disadvantage is that depending on the GPU, performance is impacted significantly with PhysX enabled in "normal" mode - to the point where to maintain 1080p60 you really need a second graphics card dedicated solely to the physics calculations. Now we're starting to talk serious money, but at least SLI users can deploy their hardware in a different fashion to get the top-end experience.

I'm very much an advocate of the PC as the "fourth console", with the platform having just as much right to sit under your HDTV as the Xbox 360 or PC. Indeed, for those with 1080p displays, the PC is just about the only hardware available capable of offering a true "full HD" experience on virtually any game. But my recent experiences with console conversions have left me a little cold: the interminable delays waiting for the games to appear months after the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions is bad enough, but poorly performing software for those with top-end kit is shocking.

Batman: Arkham Asylum on the other hand does much to restore the faith. It is palpably and measurably better than the console versions and I haven't had to wait three to six months to play it. It generally looks better, has more in the way of bonus bling (depending on your hardware) and crucially, being able to run the game at 60FPS has a tangible, positive impact on the gameplay.

Controller lag is noticeable on the console versions, more so than on other Unreal Engine titles I've played. It's still there running at 60FPS on PC, but it is significantly reduced to the point where the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions feel rather sloth-like in comparison. More than that, the "FreeFlow" combat system greatly benefits, feeling far more responsive and enjoyable to use than on console. Put it this way: you wouldn't want to play Tekken or VF5 at 30FPS, and after enjoying Batman combat at 60 frames, it's very difficult to go back.

Whether it's down to the Unreal Engine underpinnings, or simply Rocksteady's efforts to get the most out of the platform, the bottom line is that the PC version makes a great game even better, and you don't need prohibitively expensive hardware to get a top-class experience. As a textbook example of a cross-platform project that exemplifies the PC's performance advantages, Batman: Arkham Asylum is absolutely superb.

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 (115) Latest comment 2 years ago

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

  • StrayBezza #1 2 years ago

    Knew it.

  • JohnnyWashnGo #2 2 years ago

    I play it on the PS3 and enjoy it immensely. I have no regrets.

  • JahB #3 2 years ago

    I play it on the PS3 and enjoy it immensely. I have no regrets.

    that's because what makes a game great isn't resultion, frame rate or AA. this game would be awesome even if it was on a last gen console

  • StrayBezza #4 2 years ago

    Most differences are only visible if viewing via official Microsoft Gnats Japs Eye variance goggles.

  • Collymilad #5 2 years ago

    "I play it on the PS3 and enjoy it immensely. I have no regrets.

    that's because what makes a game great isn't resultion, frame rate or AA. this game would be awesome even if it was on a last gen console"

    At least not until the PS3 pulls ahead in the visual department. Eh? Eh?? Yeah...

  • timpig #6 2 years ago

    I haven't read the article but please could you STOP! PLEASE STOP! STOP DOING THESE FANBOY BAITING COMPARISON ARTICLES! yeah sure it's a great way of drumming up some traffic but please can you STOP! PLEASE STOP! STOP!

    Sigh.

  • SeesThroughAll #7 2 years ago

    @ timpig: You're missing the point.

  • sneetch #8 2 years ago

    @timpig

    Some of us have all three platforms and like these (mind you, I normally just skip to the conclusion, generally just PC is best and the console choice is six of one, half a dozen of the other).

    However, you can just not read the article, you know: you have the power.

  • gourry #9 2 years ago

    This article was at least interesting to read the improvements in the PC version. Looking at the video and having played the 360 version, you can really SEE the difference with the extra physics stuff. Nice bonus if you can afford the kit.

  • cianchristopher #10 2 years ago

    But, but, but, but, but........ TEH POWER OF TEH CELL

    Lens of Truth told me it looked better on PS3, they swore.......... :(
    Edited by 1 at 17/09/09 @ 15:57

  • cianchristopher #11 2 years ago

    Mark my words, 2014 will be THE YEAR OF THE PS3.

    You'll see, you'll all see.............

  • Nithron #12 2 years ago

    I like these comparisons. Not because I actually give a shit, beyond my initial purchasing decision, which console is the more powerful.The PC always wins anyway, and i'm a PC gamer. But because some people do, and it's funny when fanboys get proven wrong.

    Granted it's almost always PS3 fanboys that get proven wrong, but I hate all fanboys equally.

  • TSYNDMonkfish #13 2 years ago

    Its great to hear that Rocksteady seem to of got the most out of every platform they released on.

    They didnt have to go mental on the PC version - the game would of sold loads regardless - but its great that they did. I wish more companies would follow that example.

    Good work.

  • timpig #14 2 years ago

    @sneetch

    Also have all three platforms, and my buying choice is made over how important the online side is - personally much prefer XBL to PSN. SHOCK HORROR: most people don't though. Most people only buy one console/platform. This is where the whole fanboy thing starts, shortly followed by the yawning.

    Yeas, I don't have to read it. In fact, as I stated, I didn't :p Concern is more that it's a waste of EG staff time, when they could be writing about something more interesting. But hey, just IMHO.

  • Bagpuss #15 2 years ago

    I havent read the article, but do i need to, to know that my Ł400 Pc will be better than the consoles....?

    Phenom II Quad Core 955 and Radeon 4850........

    No brainer really.




  • the_dudefather #16 2 years ago

    It's good that one of the best games of the year is just as playable on all 3 formats, usually I go for the 360 version, but the joker won me over to the PS3 side for this one, and I was no worse off in the end really (except for the incredibly useful and worthwhile achievement points)

  • BOBBYLUPO #17 2 years ago

    The Joker levels are great (and free!) Sure, the fact he beats up rooms full of guards is a bit far-fetched, but the game's about a man who dresses as a giant bat....think about it.

    Plus the Joker's non-fighting levels offer a different (ground based) dynamic with different gadgets, so I think it'd be worthy investment if they charged for it.





  • hello_fi #18 2 years ago

    playingbatmanwithmouseandkeyboardlol

  • TopKatt #19 2 years ago

    So the console versions are pretty much identical and the PC version blows em both away? Funny thing is I have a PC that would run this fine but I'm still gonna go for the PS3 version. I spend most of my day hunched over a PC, my back won't stand doing it for hours in the evening as well.

  • the_dudefather #20 2 years ago

    @hello_fi

    Yeah it would be awesome if you could plug in a 360 controller and use that

    but alas, that type of innovation is only possible in our wildest dreams

    as for hooking up a pc to a big tv and playing it on that, don't get me started on how impluasable that is

  • menage #21 2 years ago

    Already finished it on PS3, greta time, and technically still superb. It may be the lesser version but I didn't really care.

  • TopKatt #22 2 years ago

    No need for sarcasm dudefather! I know full well I could unplug my pc from the office upstairs, carry it downstairs, plug it into the PC connector on my TV and then unplug it and carry it back upstairs when I'm done, but excuse me if I'd rather not. It's a big PC and that would definitely do my back in!

  • KayJay #23 2 years ago

    "And while the differences are technical realities, the impact this all has on the gameplay is thankfully minimal. Where it counts, each version is just as much fun to play as the other"

    Thats great to hear thanks for that.
    Hold on there is more...

    "It's content versus performance. In terms of personal preference, I'd take the performance over a nice, but not essential bit of bonus DLC"

    But you just said there is almost no noticable difference in performace, just the odd tear and frame... :-)

    damm you... :-)

  • Bravestinsane #24 2 years ago

    Xbox broke the other day so i got a new elite, but fuck that im getting this on PC, Downloaded the demo on Steam and it was amazing, gonna test it out later to see if i can get physics working on my ATI card but thats doubtful for the obvious reasons but still its dual GPU so hopefully it will work.

    Will pick this up from Game tomorrow for Ł25 cheaper than steam haah

  • gourry #25 2 years ago

    @the_dudefather

    You can plug a 360 pad into a PC (wired) and it will pick it up no problems and map the buttons automatically to the 360 version so you don't even need to configure it.
    Edited by 1 at 17/09/09 @ 16:22

  • ps3owner #26 2 years ago

    I have to agree. the game play is quite important yet I also have to say that watching the PC vid brought tears to my eyes... I haven't played proper PC games for quite a while (years) and I just realised that I am missing a whole lot of eye candy.

    shame really.

  • ChthonicEcho #27 2 years ago

    @the_dudefather

    Trolls don't even try hard nowadays.

  • Subquest #28 2 years ago

    @topkatt - folks into the whole living room thing have a PC which stays there, in the living room, permanently connected to the big telly for gaming, web browsing, watching downloads etc. Visions of people carrying big beige boxes up and down the stairs are, frankly, ridiculous, as I'm sure you are aware.

  • Azazel #29 2 years ago

    Regrets? I've had a few.

  • mcmonkeyplc #30 2 years ago

    PC wins! Wasn't expecting that. Good show. Let's not do this again.

  • skillian #31 2 years ago

    Best effort for a PC version of a multiplatform game in...months?...years?

    Best superhero game ever?

    Free DLC?

    And this only the second game ever from a small independent British developer. I'm so happy for their success I could practically burst :)

  • GamesConnoisseur #32 2 years ago

    I m one of the idiotic people who occasionally bought more than one version of the same game, I got X360 version first then weakened and got PS3 version (second hand at local blockbuster) for the Joker map and hey just boost up my trophies as well!

    First thing that hit me was the opening movie, the tearings and stutters was visible in the first pan down from the rains in PS3 whereas there was none in X360. But ignore the rare fps drops, the games plays the same and I got few more trophies on PS3 only cos I knew what to do etc.

    No major difference really but it is there, I noticed few occasions where I wished was playing X360 the same way as people who played PC would prefer to go back if trying for X360/PS3.

    PC will always win and I know if I got it on PC would be the best but at work all day... same story as other just wanted to kick back on the special gamer friendly armchair and massive HDTV in front of me!

    PC can be set up that way sure, but its not what i want from my PC so set it up different way. Different strokes for Different folks!

  • Rodafowa #33 2 years ago

    I've got a 4850 card and a decent dual-core CPU and the game's butter-smooth at 1680x1080 with the graphics settings maxed out (but no PhysX, obviously). Game cost half as much as the console versions, as an extra bonus.

  • Artemus #34 2 years ago

    How will I ever live without ambient occlusion and normal maps!?

  • skillian #35 2 years ago

    @TopKatt, subquest, GamesConnoisseur

    I know it depends on the layout of your house/flat, but I just drilled a hole in my bedroom floor and ran an HDMI cable (and a USB hub) through the floor to my HDTV downstairs.

    I play pad-friendly games in the living room, M+K games upstairs. Also means I only have to maintain one computer, so can push decent graphics in both situations without spending twice the cash, plus it means there is zero fan noise.

    Seriously, getting all my games, music, internet and video on the big screen downstairs as well as in the bedroom/study was the best thing I ever did. And it only cost me about Ł20 for the cables.
    Edited by 3 at 17/09/09 @ 16:56

  • ChaK #36 2 years ago

    super thanks devs for your work on PC, I'll receive the game by saturday, but demo conquered me.

  • Darren #37 2 years ago

    I'm hoping my PC copy has arrived this morning but it's nice to see a developer putting a bit of extra effort into a multiformat game on the system after a string of disappointments on the PC including Bionic Commando and FUEL, and not delayed the game months to do so!

    One thing the article doesn't mention is that you can edit the UserEngine.ini file to limit the framerate to 30 fps (like the console versions), which allows for the use of the High PhysX setting without the erratic performance dips in the framerate you'd get when the game drops suddenly from 62 fps to 35 fps, say. I tried it on the demo and it works well making the game feel much smoother on my single GTX 280 but I still have all the PhysX effects.
    Edited by 1 at 17/09/09 @ 16:57

  • BBIAJ #38 2 years ago

    @timpig:

    This is done by Rich, of Digital Foundry, technically not EG staff, more of a collaboration ;o)

  • hiddenranbir #39 2 years ago

    Woo PC!

    That's what I use, everyone. Look I'm using it now! On the PC!
    Edited by 1 at 17/09/09 @ 16:59

  • patchbox360 #40 2 years ago

    uncharted 2

  • byron_hinson #41 2 years ago

    Pretty much agree with whats said here - apart from one thing, I own the PS3 version and haven't seen any tearing at all, i might just be blind though

  • Subquest #42 2 years ago

    @skillian

    Nice. very nice. I think there's something like a 5 metre limit on USB, but good idea if it suits your house setup. Doesn't with mine unfortunately, so I just stream everything from one PC to another.

  • TopKatt #43 2 years ago

    @subquest

    I was talking about my own personal situation where my pc is upstairs, thus explaining my own personal choice to get the console version of the game. Not ridiculous, just fact.

  • Hotcooler #44 2 years ago

    @Darren You can do much more with config files, tweak Ambient occlusion for example and increase shadow resolution xD Better quality AO and 2048px shadow resolution FTW xD

  • morriss #45 2 years ago

    Yet again TEH C3LL POWA disappoints.

    Maybe the next gen will be better.

  • ps3owner #46 2 years ago

    @skillian
    really nice... I'd do the same. I have to buy a house/flat first though. anyone got any money?!

  • Subquest #47 2 years ago

    @topkatt, what's odd is that you have a gaming-capable PC set up in an office, but don't like playing games in that environment - which is understandable if most of your day is spent at a desk, but why waste your cash on said PC?

  • smelly #48 2 years ago

    *sigh* I *REALLY* love these articles.. Im SURE that a bit of jaggy-ness makes the game PLAY much worse...

    Afterall, when we're playing a game and enjoying it - we spend the whole time looking for slight imperfections in the visuals!

    *sigh*

  • triple_a #49 2 years ago

    These comparisons are great for people who own both systems. If some fanboys use these as ammunition for their pathetic console wars, so be it. The articles themselves lay out the facts as they are.

    I think I'll go for the PC version on this one. I won't get the physx effects as I have an AMD/ATI video card but at least I'll propably get 1600x1200 at 60fps with my HD4870.

    This game supports the 'Games for Windows' or whatnot, does that mean that I'll get achievements and gamerscore for this?

  • Feanor #50 2 years ago

    "If you must include the PC version use comparable hardware to the consoles (E6600/1GB DDR2/1950Pro or 7800GTX)."

    He mentioned that as well as the performance you get from a modern gaming PC. Quit whining.

  • skillian #51 2 years ago

    The PC version is always going the cream the console version with a few well documented exceptions.

    You'd be surprised.

    That this is a good (great) conversion is actually pretty big news for PC gamers and well worthy of inclusion in the article.

    edit: @subquest, you can get around the USB length limitation if you use a powered hub. But yeah, I realise the setup isn't practical for everyone.
    Edited by 1 at 17/09/09 @ 17:28

  • ron_aldo #52 2 years ago

    Maybe I need someone to drive me to Specsavers but having studied the comparison video I can't tell the difference

  • Feanor #53 2 years ago

    "*sigh* I *REALLY* love these articles.. Im SURE that a bit of jaggy-ness makes the game PLAY much worse..."

    As the article said, fighting gameplay is much worse at 30 fps than at 60 fps. Do you people even read these fucking articles, or do you just start crying as soon as the platform you own/like best doesn't come out on top?

  • skillian #54 2 years ago

    Plus of course, tech stuff is interesting to some people even outside of consequences for gameplay. It's a shame that the face-offs are fanboy magnets, but that's not (usually) the fault of Digital Foundry.

  • Arwin #55 2 years ago

    Isn't the PS3 disc also a dual format disc, being both a game and a BD-video disc? I heard there are some nice behind the scene features on the video part of the disc. It's also interesting in terms of a technical achievement, in that you can start the game under Game and watch the video content under Video, as if you had two discs in your system at once.

    Also, the camera difference - I thought I read somewhere that the 360's camera is actually anamorphic 4:3, and that the slightly more pulled back camera for the PS3 is actually proper 16:9, much like Bioshock before and after patch to fix this issue, if anyone remembers that. Did that turn out to be false and is it just a camera distance thing, or is this really what's going on? Hope someone can find out.

  • Hotcooler #56 2 years ago

    @triple_a
    Yes you get all the Achievements and Gamerscore with that.

  • penhalion #57 2 years ago

    Also quite bizarre is the fact that the camera work on PS3 has been subtly altered in many situations: the view has been pulled back, changing the look of many of the cut-scenes.

    Er am I being thick here or doesn't this just show that the developers were aware of the slightly less detailed textures and wanted to give the PS3 players a better experience than just sticking close-ups of blurry faces into the game. To me this shows a great attention to detail and a real care for the end users experience.

  • Shabtai #58 2 years ago

    No word about MSAA being 'exclusive' to Nvidia cards? That's probably one of the most heinous moves in recent time.

  • GamesConnoisseur #59 2 years ago

    Skillian:

    Thanks.. I realise that it could be achieved with a bit of an effort or next to none, but as you acknowledged dependent on the layouts/setups.

    I lives in a four floored terrace house, the gaming room is at the basement and a goody distance from the office space on the next floor and other side of the house.

    Good suggestion for people to set up their PC to take advantage of HDTV, and I did so couple of years ago when I was operating my office out of the basement and had a blast of the time playing with HDTV on PC. Worth it. This time around... maybe if I get another PC but... her indoor wont allow that!

    Too many priorities to come before boy toys!

  • TopKatt #60 2 years ago

    @Subquest

    Mainly to play games that aren't available on either of my consoles. I'm not knocking PC gaming at all by the way, I still think they're by far the best machines when it comes to playing RTS's and the like.

  • youhavenomail #61 2 years ago

    What about the Sixaxis' motion control functions in this game? Why not mention those in an article that looks at the differences between versions rather than worrying about trying to uncover graphic differences that are unnoticeable to the naked eye?

  • TRUTH #62 2 years ago

    Again, and again, and again the 360 suppose ally inferior to PS3 manages to surpass the x4 more powerful (As stated by Sony) again!. The fact is it is better on 360.

    If you have both consoles as myself - download the demos and you start to notice detail missing in PS3 compared to 360, and lighting effect is less in areas.
    Edited by 1 at 17/09/09 @ 18:03

  • smelly #63 2 years ago

    >detail missing in PS3 compared to 360, and lighting effect is less in areas


    oooooh.. detail... and lighting.... oooh.. i bet that makes a huge difference to how it plays!

  • Pachinko #64 2 years ago

    "volumetric smoke/gas pervades the asylum, adding to the atmosphere, and it has gameplay uses too, providing additional cover."

    Where exactly does that happen? I failed to notice any such occasions, for example the snipers in the garden sniped my Batman-y butt in the fog without problems.

  • SAH1977 #65 2 years ago

    Such articles and the responses are why videogames aren't taken seriously by the mainstream media.

    I expect we'll see an NFS Shift comparison in a few weeks time, reportedly the 360 version is a touch better graphically with fewer dropped frames.

    The fact the 360 version doesn't work with Logitech wheels won't be considered, yet that is a massive technical failling which is far more important than any graphical differences when deciding which version is superior, which afterall is the standard justification for these articles.

    Edited by 2 at 17/09/09 @ 18:46

  • 43n1m4 #66 2 years ago

    As such, I have a problem with Richard looking as the PC as a fourth console - nothing could be farther from the truth.
    PC have way too many configurations (which in turn makes it difficult for developers to optimize their games), requires a lot more maintenance (drivers, patches etc.), requires frequent upgrading and still misses out on a lot of games as well. The PC is not a convenient gaming machine, as Richard makes it seem - you have to have keyboards present and other peripherals consuming a lot of space on the living room table - something I will be pretty sure my wife would not be too happy about. And don't let me start on laptop gaming etc. Sure, you could make a HTPC but the cost and work to make such a machine is far beyond what it requires to plug in and setup a console.

    Don't get me wrong, the old desktop is still a fine gaming machine, but it is NOT a console, a have few of the same advantages. Rather, I would consider console and PC gaming as worlds apart.

  • GreyBeard #67 2 years ago

    There's also the horse-shit about latency again.

    Riddle me this: The test is carried out by pointing a 60fps videocam at the screen and observing the changes. So how can it test for latency when the evidence collection method is reliant upon the subject (the target console) actually DISPLAYING an image.

    Because its a visual test, the speed of capture is irrelevant - you could capture at 1000fps and the result would still be the same because WHAT IS BEING PHOTOGRAPHED IS STILL BOUND TO THE GAME'S REFRESH RATE WHATEVER THAT HAPPENS TO BE.

    Its a glorified frame-rate test! You cannot visually detect latencies below that of the source titles refresh rate because you need something to photograph!

    The data collection methodology is fundamentally flawed as it is incapable of registering events occurring asynchronously with the video refresh, which should not be uncommon in a multi-thread application and definitely not in a game which uses frame-compensation to avoid lag during times of varying GPU load.

    Frankly you'd be better off using sound, as at least that is almost certainly guaranteed to be running at a constant rate on its own thread.


  • TRUTH #68 2 years ago

    Why have 2nd best ?

  • lavalant #69 2 years ago

    @smelly no they play the same, the 360 just pips the PS3 in most things in these comparison videos, insanely PS3 owners are expected to pay a premium for that.

    I would take a drop in resolution for an increase in frame rate, 60fps is more important to me and it's where it's at for games. I doubt Forza 3 devs or GT5 devs use the unreal engine.

  • bad09 #70 2 years ago

    "The PC is not a convenient gaming machine"

    Well true not all gaming is easy on PC but it is getting easier. Anyway seeing as this kind of article is for tech graphics whores (and silly fanboys who just want to see a "win";) they will likely already own a shit hot PC.

    Personally I see no difference in these videos it's just fun watching the rants :)

  • 43n1m4 #71 2 years ago

    @bad09

    "Well true not all gaming is easy on PC but it is getting easier. Anyway seeing as this kind of article is for tech graphics whores (and silly fanboys who just want to see a "win";) they will likely already own a shit hot PC. "

    Whether or not you have a 'shit hot PC' is not really my point; I'm talking about the differences between PC and consoles, which both have their distinctive advantages and disadvantages, and why I wouldn't call a PC the 'fourth console' - after all, how many has their PC permanently hooked up to the big screen in the living room? Few, I would wager. Few. And there are a lot of reasons for that, some of them I covered in my previous post.

  • bad09 #72 2 years ago

    @ 43n1m4

    erm...I'm posting from my girlfriend's living room. My PC at home is hooked up to my 42" TV with controllers and steering wheel (thank you Mr Microsoft for your 360 controllers), the days of being hunched over you keyboard are gone...well they are not completely I still do for doom :) but PC is gaining some ground back I reckon. I was playing Alone in the Dark and Grid today as easy as a 360 or PS3, personally I think "4th console" is apt for it, we've come a long way from MSDOS.
    Edited by 1 at 17/09/09 @ 20:28

  • élbéróss #73 2 years ago

    I recently bought a GTX 260 graphics card and it came with a voucher so I can download Batman AA for free, have to wait till tomorrow though! Great article by the way.

  • StooMonster #74 2 years ago

    'Batman: Arkham Asylum' meet tri-SLI ... well, tomorrow when Steam unlocks you. :D

  • GamerG #75 2 years ago

    Thanks for the update EG, when the game gets to Ł30 i'll buy it on 360

  • bad09 #76 2 years ago

    "'Batman: Arkham Asylum' meet tri-SLI ... well, tomorrow when Steam unlocks you. :D"

    Holy kick arse PC Batman! Can I play to?

    / wishes he had more money to spend on his new PC!

  • Uncle_Spanks #77 2 years ago

    Eurogamer:

    "I'm very much an advocate of the PC as the "fourth console", with the platform having just as much right to sit under your HDTV as the Xbox 360 or PC"

    Say what?!

  • TRUTH #78 2 years ago

    PC simply don't run as easily or simply as a console - put disc in play!...it's all a bit fiddle here and fiddle there with PC gamimg.

  • cianchristopher #79 2 years ago

    Look, I've got a PS3 (like many others). But the only people who comment things like "stop posting these articles" and "this is a waste of time" are PS3 owners. And it's cos the Xbox 360 always comes out on top!

    Just deal with it, guys! This time around the PS3 is to the Xbox 360 as the GameCube was to the Xbox*. (As in, almost, but not quite as powerful - the gap is probably closer between PS3 and Xbox 360, though!)

    *And yeah, just like this time around the GameCube had a few exclusives that were better looking than exclusives on the Xbox (Resident Evil 4, for one)! If you design your game to the strengths of the system it'll be played on, then you can have amazing looking games (like Killzone and Uncharted)!!!

  • septimus #80 2 years ago

    /sigh. Have the 360 version, but Richard I wouldn't give a flying fuck if I had this on PS3 or PC. Great game makes this comparison pointless. As with most of these articles.

    Meh, got the PC version for free download tomorrow. Might switch to that as the occasional v-sync issue on the 360, which I _still_ haven't seen yet, might utterly ruin the game for me.

  • Darren #81 2 years ago

    The PC version is great, at least this works along with Resident Evil 5... unlike {spits} Need for Speed SHIFT which crashes to the desktop after the introductory video upon starting the career. Nice one, EA!

  • Grayvern #82 2 years ago

    I really need a new pc/ sighs.

  • 324110493 #83 2 years ago

    The most fanboyistic comparison I've ever seen, Way to go Richard, no wonder there are so many 360 fanboys in this website, stupid Xbots. Richard, try to lie better next time Xbot, the 360 has a slightly better frame rate? Why don't you shove this game right up your ass! If you want to watch true comparison, then go here, they present proof to backup what they state unlike fucking Richard.http://www.lensoftruth.co m

  • Gaol #84 2 years ago

    I didn't notice any tearing on PS3 either.

    The Joker content isn't 'shoehorned'; a lot of time has been spent on the Joker's unique animations and gadgets and even on a single playthrough it gives you at least an hour of content over the other versions.

    Likewise, more should be noted of the wider FoV in the PS3 version - this frequently makes combat more satisfying as it's easier to spot the next villain in your combo is wielding a knife or stun baton.

    I agree with the above poster, the Lens of Truth article is more balanced on this occasion.

  • StooMonster #85 2 years ago

    If you want to watch true comparison, then go here, they present proof to backup what they state unlike fucking Richard.

    The five 1:1 comparison videos and HD versions of videos, plus 720p and 1080p comparison galleries of screenshots are both taken with a pixel perfect captures of HDMI output, plus the framerate analysis and other technical approaches presented by a company that works in the games industry are outdone by nine screenshots on Lens Of Truth blog?

    Pathetic.

  • 43n1m4 #86 2 years ago

    @324110493

    Having read both articles, I can safely say that Lens of Truth and Digital Foundry have different opinions that both can be substantiated through their articles. The main reason Batman AA won the LoT test was because the camera angle (yes, that was the winning point, I asked the staff on LoT about it), which for some reason is different in the Xbox360 and PS3 games. Some would say that the camera angle is a somewhat subjective point, but Digital Foundry looks mostly at technical side of things, and found the Xbox360 version to be slightly, I repeat, slightly superior in terms of visual fidelity and framerates. Thats it. Both sites agree that you will not be disappointed no matter what version you buy, and that should be the crucial point, imo.

    So, instead of lowering yourself to namecalling, perhaps you should see that while two sites might disagree doesn't make one of them wrong. That is why I rarely just read one review of a game, but try to get the general impression of game through many different sources.

  • Buztafen #87 2 years ago

    I got to agree with bad09 here, PC as 'the 4th console' is perfectly legit.
    (Now how can i word this without sounding like a fuckin show-off)

    I upgraded my PC over a year ago for Ł250 (Quad 6600, 4gb ram, *FREE* 8800gtx from work Gigabyte Mobo). Its hooked up to a 50" panny and 5.1 system. Keyboard and mouse are wireless and ive got a the xbox dongle for a pad meaning i can use it sat on my sofa. The games ive played over the last year on both 360 and PC (Fallout, Farcry, COD4 and now Batman) run just as well or in most cases much better on PC. So the way i see it, for cost Ł250 3 years ago for my 360 bundle and Ł250 1 year ago for PC which also allows me the internet and iplayer/downloaded films to be watched on the big screen and in surround sound is a bargain for a 4th console.

  • Dave52 #88 2 years ago

    I can't see any difference (again).

    The only time these things ever throw stuff up is when comparing something utterly shite like GI Joe, and I am never gonna buy that sort of rubbish anyway.

  • muscleblade #89 2 years ago

    "once again, the Xbox 360 version offers the smoother, more visually coherent experience. "

    I like it smooth.

  • cianchristopher #90 2 years ago

    @donnie: Lay off the PC man, it's nowhere near as bad as you make it out to be.

    Actually, once you get the hang of it, PC gaming (even with the inherent technical hiccups) ca be relatively smooth and pain free. And the cost amortises well over the comparative lifetime of a console, too!

    So it ain't all doom and gloom, kid ;)

  • 43n1m4 #91 2 years ago

    @bad09, buztafen

    I'm not disputing the fact that you can connect the PC to the big screen. My point is that even if you do - and I still think we are talking about a very small minority of the total customers - the end result is still not the same, smooth, console experience. You may get a console-like PC, but it does not have the inherent software and ease-of-use OS, guaranteed working games and no waiting, automatic patching etc. etc.

    In other words - there are more to a console than just the hardware, and the PC platforms biggest advantage is its ability to be just about anything you want it to be - gaming machine, working machine, media hub (etc. etc.) - but the flexibility comes at a price, which is a lack of focus - and often under-utilized hardware with under-optimized software, depending on your hardware combination.

    The very distinction, and the reason I don't wan't to compare consoles with PCs is the fact, that consoles only have one primary focus - games (though their secondary features have expanded greatly this generation) . PCs do not, and cannot, have that luxury. That you may or may not be able to hook up your PC to the big screen does not alter this distinction in my point of view, but I could be wrong.

    Edit:
    And I may sound like a big console player, but 'till late 2008 I was an avid PC gamer (and has been since the late 80's), but due to the reasons I've explained earlier I sold my gaming system (Q6600@3.2 Ghz, 4GB ram, 1 TB HDD, HD4870 512 MB, 64 bit OS), bought a laptop instead and focused gaming on my console. Which I have found to be immensely more relaxing.
    Edited by 2 at 18/09/09 @ 11:47

  • Darren #92 2 years ago

    I noticed on playing the retail version that some of PhysX effects in the PC version have been toned down from the demo. For example, you could knock chunks out of the walls on the right hand side of the opening room by punching it in the demo but in the final game you can only do it with a batarang. I guess the developers thought Batman shouldn't be able to break tiles with his fists.

  • Diomedes #93 2 years ago

    Richard ,Richard ,Richard ...why do you continue dragging your name into the mud week after week?
    You are the only one turning imperceptible things into"noticeable performance issues" in the industry .....
    You should take some rest and think a bit about it.

  • muscleblade #94 2 years ago

    "*And yeah, just like this time around the GameCube had a few exclusives that were better looking than exclusives on the Xbox (Resident Evil 4, for one)! If you design your game to the strengths of the system it'll be played on, then you can have amazing looking games (like Killzone and Uncharted)!!! "

    You tell me KZ2 looks better than Gears 2? Thats arguable for sure. RE4 on Gamecube did look great but not as good as Ninja Gaiden Black on the Xbox. I owned both an xbox and a Gamcube because i needed both these games. I dont need KZ2 or a PS3 as there are better alternatives on the 360 imo.

  • Darren #95 2 years ago

    @Diomedes - Just because you don't find it useful or informative doesn't mean no-one else does. This is a technical section for those that want to know and is outside of the normal EG website, if you don't like it then ignore it. Can't be that hard, surely? ;)

  • cianchristopher #96 2 years ago

    @muscleblade: It's really subjective arguing over exclusives, though! The only time you can be objective in comparing graphics is when you compare the same game across different platforms. Facts and Opinions man, facts and opinions.

    Fact: the Xbox 360 is graphically better than the PS3 in most games available on both systems!

    Opinion: the PS3 has better looking exclusives than the Xbox 360!

    As for Resident Evil 4 and Ninja Gaiden Black, we can only ever be subjective about it! Like I say, when a really talented dev makes a game specifically for one console, they can perform wonders with the technology! Look at God of War on PS2, Resident Evil 4 on GameCube and Ninja Gaiden Black on Xbox! Amazing, each of them!

  • muscleblade #97 2 years ago

    @cianchristopher

    Exactly!

  • youhavenomail #98 2 years ago

    "isn't it a graphics face off?"

    It say's face-off, not graphics face-off. Leadbetter finds a way to make the 360 version 'win' on graphics despite the PS3 version offering more in terms of gameplay, both through DLC and motion controls, while effectively having the same quality of graphics to the naked eye as its 360 counterpart.

  • muscleblade #99 2 years ago

    Shouldnt the PS3 ( next gen starts when we say so ) have superior graphics and not the other way around? The console did come out a year later. Is it fair that the PS3 owners has to live with inferior versions of fantastic games like this?
    Does KZ2 really look better than Gears 2? Is Uncharted really a fantastic game when the average reviews put it in the 80s and not the 90s?

    Should your one and only next gen console if you only need one be the PS3? Would you settle for the next best graphics just to have a Blueray player and free but lackluster online service?

    Not me!

  • Dave52 #100 2 years ago

    @Muscleblade: "Is it fair that the PS3 owners has to live with inferior versions of fantastic games like this?"

    It's not inferior, the differences are imperceptable unless you are super-human, and there's more content with the PS3 version.


    @Muscleblade: "Does KZ2 really look better than Gears 2?"

    Yes.

    @Muscleblade: "Is Uncharted really a fantastic game when the average reviews put it in the 80s and not the 90s?"

    Subjective... but check outthe draw distance. ;)

  • Darren #101 2 years ago

    The fact that the PS3 launched a year after the Xbox 360 leads to expectations that its games should look better, both multiformat and exclusive. The original Xbox launched almost two years after the PS2 and its multiformat games regularly looked better than its competitor despite being lead developed on the rival format.

    The fact that most multiformat PS3 games still don't even now is somewhat disappointing but at least the quality is improving all the time and the gap is narrowing in spite of the shortcomings of the hardware; the difficulty of coding for it and the relatively weak (compared with the Xbox 360's) graphics chip that struggles with anti-aliasing in many multiformat releases.

    It's not that the PS3 is a bad piece of kit, it's just a bitch to program, something I've heard time and time again from various developers. Only the very best developers with generous deadlines seem to be able to get the best out of it. You'd have thought that Sony would have learnt by now but they repeated all the same mistakes they made with the PS2 it seems.

  • StooMonster #102 2 years ago

    Darren: did you turn on the maximum PhysX effects? Although I never played the demo on PC so don't know if PhysX has been toned down.

    Tri-SLI goodness does 2560x1600 everything maxed out (except AA set to 4x) and average 59fps with lowest about 35fps. :)

    Looks lovely, and pretty good fun too. Has gone to the top of 'currently playing' list; definitely going to be completed.

  • StooMonster #103 2 years ago

    The fact that the PS3 launched a year after the Xbox 360 leads to expectations that its games should look better, both multiformat and exclusive

    From what I hear / read that's true of many people's expectations, I have acquaintances who claim the PS3 is better than Xbox 360 simply because it is 'newer'.

    Such people forget or don't know that PS3 was designed at the same time as Xbox 360, but that the launch was delayed due to availability of Blu-ray drive components. So despite being launched a year later, the PS3's technology is not a year 'newer'.

  • o_ci2007 #104 2 years ago

    People forget the ps3 has a 10 year cycle and so its still in its infancy. Wait for gt6, lbp 3 and resistance 5 you will see the true power of the cell.

  • muscleblade #105 2 years ago

    @StooMonster

    Thats true

    @Dave52

    LOL

  • Lemming81 #106 2 years ago

    "It's content vs Performance"

    No it isn't. The ps3 version does not under perform under any circumstances that the human eye can percieve with this game.

    This shit is getting ridiculous EG, wipe your face... you still have some of Bill Gates' jizz on your chin.
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/09 @ 20:22

  • 324110493 #107 2 years ago

    "The five 1:1 comparison videos and HD versions of videos, plus 720p and 1080p comparison galleries of screenshots are both taken with a pixel perfect captures of HDMI output, plus the framerate analysis and other technical approaches presented by a company that works in the games industry are outdone by nine screenshots on Lens Of Truth blog? "

    Um DUHH I was talking about frame rate, and DigitalFoundry presented no evidence to backup that 360 has slightly better frame rate than the PS3. And FYI, there is also a video comparison made by LensofTruth, unlike DF they state what settings they run on ie RGB Full on PS3 and Expanded on 360. SO STFU! xbot. And what really grinds my gears is that they said 360 has slightly better frame rate when the frame rate is same on both systems.

  • Dave52 #108 2 years ago

    Muscleblade: "@Dave52 LOL"

    Thank you, thank you very much. I'm here all week. Try the clam chowder - it's lovely...

  • cloudskipa #109 2 years ago

    I really appreciate Richard Leadbetter's comparisons, he's a guy who truly knows his games and I have always trusted and respected his views ever since reading Sega Saturn Magazine back in the day. I also own both PS3 and Xbox 360 and find these articles to be an invaluable source in helping me decide which version of a multi-platform game I'm going to get, plus they are written without any fanboy agenda!

  • Dave52 #110 2 years ago

    So which are you gonna go for...? The XBox one, which is better. Or the PS3 one that looks the same, but has more content and motion control...?

  • BBIAJ #111 2 years ago

    Oooh, motion control... *rolls eyes*

  • septimus #112 2 years ago

    Really disappointed by the PC performance though. I can run Crysis happily at high (1440x900), but this drops frames like mad. I suspect ATI 64 drivers.

  • Simplex #113 2 years ago

    "A clickthrough to the HD version via the EGTV link makes all the difference here"

    I guess it would, if the links to videos were bloody working.

  • Janyamik #114 2 years ago

    "In all of the most recent PC Tech Comparison features (Red Faction: Guerrilla, Street Fighter IV, and to a lesser extent, Resident Evil 5), we've seen that the PC conversions of the console games basically buy you extra frames and more pixels, but very little else."

    Yeah. It is another way of seeing the fact that videoconsoles offer in these games 1280 x 720p & an a 30 FPS mutilation-a resolution of Max Payne 1 Ages- in F.E.A.R. 2, DIRT 1 or 2, Batman Arkam Ashylum, or Wolfenstein. Borderlands, Operation Flashpoint Dragon (WITH an editor), Dragon Age Origins... so why pay more for limited to one resolution videogames version ? VRAM is not enough nowdays for certain games. Not only CPU matters.

    Maybe if you run with a 5870 these games, you will see how PC gamers like to play games. Videoconsoles are cheap, games doesn´t not. Seems like if you spend the same money that a PSP Go costs on a GPU it is bizarre or something like that.

    The fact of why pay more for a game which offers you less resolution and less frames ? (TIP: If you want to reach an A on Capcom´s benchmarks, it will be a good thing to desactivate V-Sync. A GTX 260 on R.E. 5 gets the A, same on DMC 4t. Same for a "GTX 295 on SF IV";) No Vsync like in Dead Rising or some other games on videoconsoles.

    The intention is good, the interpretation of the facts is very relative. So if you wanna give a real uses of a 1080p TV on Resident Evil 5, Batman Arkam Ashylum or Red Faction Guerrilla, try on PC. Same on DMC 4.

  • Oskool #115 2 years ago

    Great article. Probably my favorite writeup by Digital Foundry thus far. I really enjoyed seeing what Nvida Physics can do. Most impressive!
    Edited by 1 at 15/02/10 @ 04:24