http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJOZ9Bw60tM

A few reasons I listed on the video description...

Blood spatter is glitched out on BFG while its fully present on xbox 1

Gunfire no longer lights up the environment on BFG, fully present on Xbox 1

Imp fireballs no longer cast shadows on BFG, casts shadows on Xbox 1

Plasma gun's blue light no longer casts on the gun and environment in BFG, works fine on Xbox 1

Much less bullet hole decals from the shotgun on walls in BFG than on Xbox 1

Cutscenes on BFG Edition are cropped from the 4:3 original, Xbox 1 are true 16:9

1:30 of the video you'll notice the main character's shadow is completely glitched out on BFG Edition

Obviously the textures, resolution and level size are better in BFG and the PC original, but so many other details are worse in the BFG Edition than both the Xbox 1 version and the 2004 PC original.

Obviously you don't read patch notes....All of these issues are bugs that are going to be fixed with the next patch release.

What patch notes? There's no guarantee all these issues will be fixed.

Stop feature peddling the developers, odds are they will wait to release the code till after the first patch. Anything that you don't like in doom 3 bfg you will soon be able to fix yourself, everything you noted is really really nitpicky stuff. Why does this small, insignificant details bother you so much?

How am I going to use the source code on the console version? Do you even think before typing?

Seriously? Anyway there are some things you can possibly modify on the console versions(these are asset based modification only), via moving files into the d3 user folder on a portable USB. You could also hook your controller up to your pc, get the PC build and fix anything that has to be changed code side.

All your doing is feature peddling very nitpicky stuff.

You can't do that with the console versions. WTF are you talking about? And no it isn't nitpicky at all.

Different hardware is different.

A point that people seem to completely fail to understand is that video hardware does not evolve in the same way as CPUs. CPUs get higher clock speeds, more cores, more cache, more instructions; everything scales up. Video hardware does not evolve in the same way; it gets different capabilities, new ways of doing things, different tradeoffs and bottlenecks. In particular since the advent of hardware T&L pipelines have become much much deeper, latency is now a hugely significant problem, and CPU/GPU synchronization is something that everyone has to be aware of. None of these were problems back in the old days.

It's possible to set up test cases even now where a 15 year old 3DFX will completely annihilate a modern GPU. This is not a joke. Hell, there are even some things you could do in a pure software renderer that you wouldn't dare do with hardware acceleration even today - the overhead is just too high. And that's because the bottlenecks that didn't exist in the old days do exist now, just like newer hardware has faster ways (frequently much faster ways) of doing many other things. But you have to be aware of the faster ways, work to take advantage of them, and work to side-step the bottlenecks.

_____________

This is a fairly rambling and roundabout way of saying that you shouldn't be surprised if a port of a game that was originally targetted at older hardware ends up displaying a completely different set of tradeoffs to those the original did.

On the 360 you can store game saves/cfg's on your usb drive , the PS3 most of you probably have hacked anyway so it's a non issue for you guys. And yes it is very nitpicky, "there isn't enough bullet holes", who cares .


What test cases are you referring to?


It's not quite as simple as that, and you don't ever try and invent new rasterazation techniques on the fly on a production project usually. Doom 3 is 100% realtime, 99% of the console games out there are not realtime, instead they bake everything. Doom 3's realtime approach was really ahead of it's time, but with any rendering technique there is trade offs, realtime on consoles mean you have to cut things here and there to ensure a fluid refresh rate. Even with games like grand theft auto look at the baked lightmaps and diffuse maps there almost 1/4 the original quality of the PC version. In fact grand theft auto and other games that use something like virtual texturing work the best on consoles, specifically the 360 because of the shared memory model. So you got two things going for games with a offline approach and 2 against doom 3's realtime approach.

That's not easy for anyone to do though. And lot's of people care about all these missing things, haven't you seen all the posts around here?

Yeah. Why have graphic effects at all! Who cares!
You know what? I was wrong to call Jimmy Shelter the Chief Apologist. He is actually much better in my eyes now because he doesn't apologize outright flaws. Which you do. You are the Chief Apologist.

In many ways it actually is that simple and needn't involve invention of new techniques.

It can be as basic as knowing that storing all your geometry in static buffer objects and animating on the GPU is going to go much better for you than animating on the CPU and needing to re-up everything every frame. Of course by doing that you may lose a certain amount of finer control over the animation (e.g. because CPUs are better at branchy code than GPUs), so in exchange for significantly higher performance you may have to give up some cool animation effect that you previously had. That's as simple as it can get really.

GPU Skinning is already in there, and when I added it to idTech 4 you did see a huge speed boost, but you guys are forgetting the xbox 360 is a old ass system. GPU skinning on a dx9 level card is going to eat more gpu cycles than a newer dx11 card. Any optimization you think of isn't going to save you as much speed on stuff like the 360 because it's just old hardware.Think of this way, HL2 back in the day had gpu animations, but the game still bogged on some pc's at the time, low FPS kills immersion, sacriifies have to be made to keep a constant FPS>

I would've preferred all the original graphical effects and maybe some new effects even if it meant 30 fps, but that's just me.

Trust me that is just you : ).

I've done GPU skinning on a DX9 card and it's not that slow. The trick is to upload the bone matrixes all in one go (rather than one at a time - which obviously if you're using Effects can be difficult). The main problem comes from pressure owing to lack of constant registers - the original target hardware for Doom 3 only guaranteed 96 (and with a 4x3 matrix that's 3 per bone), but within a couple of years that had gone up to 256 which was more than ample for most cases. The option to split the model is always there of course. Nowadays with 4096 per cbuffer it's a non-issue, and - in the rare event that does cause problems - you can split them across multiple cbuffers.

I'm interested in how you did GPU skinning in Tech 4 since the original did it's skinning from the game code. Surely that would have broken compatibility quite badly? More info is welcome.

Search the doom3world forums idtech 4 cdk, I think I even posted up a tutorial on this on the doom3world forums as well, but I left the joint calculations as they were I believe and instead of calculating the final vertex position in software I did that part on the gpu.

No actually, most people preffer 30fps to get amazing graphics instead. That's why just about every FPS on consoles is only 30fps, but no one complains, in fact no one even notices because they are too busy having fun and enjoying the graphics
60fps shooters are RARE on consoles, that's why id made a big deal of Rage and Doom3BFG being 60fps.

But yeah, alot of people would rather they be at 30fps, so the graphics can be improved alot. It's not a "just a few people thing," most people actually preffer that because most people don't know the difference between 30 and 60fps.

The Virtual Reality HMD support (Oculus Rift) requires a really high FPS because EVERYONE can tell the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS with head-tracking, even when they can't on a normal screen.

OP, to even *make* this statement would be such and obvious smear attempt being that I don't know what else to call it. Quit being ignorant. The game is light years ahead of the original Xbox release both graphically and content-wise. You've made your point thoroughly on these same arguments in previous thread. You've even received DIRECT response from id software/Bethesda that they are addressing these issues in a patch and as quickly as they can. And you *still* make this post with this title. You are now TROLLING. If you or anyone even *ARGUES* againt that, your statement is null and void.

And said ways include all the cut graphic effects, mentioned in the OP. Not all of them are confirmed to be patched - only the flashlight shadows and disappearing decals are.
BFG Edition is better than the Xbox version not because they added anything better, but because it's based off the already-superior PC original, of which Xbox was a butchered port. Both graphically and content-wise.

Please use your first thread for this discussion. No need for two:
http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1417405-the-main-complaints-i-have-for-this-port-on-ps3-please-fix-bethesda/page__fromsearch__1