We saw exactly the same thing in Resident Evil 5, and while it seems Capcom has improved a touch since then, it's still extremely off-putting.
While performance is often parallel between the two systems, PS3 drops frames much more frequently than 360 tears. In the like-for-like video of the initial arrival for example, 360 seems to maintain 30FPS fairly effortlessly, but PS3 struggles rendering what is the exact same scene (sans anti-aliasing). While Lost Planet 2 copes reasonably well with the icy domain of the initial levels, once we get into the rich jungles created for the sequel we start to see some big performance issues. This obviously incurs the usage of more memory (as three frames are required to be contained in RAM), but does eliminate tearing. PS3 on the other hand is triple-buffered, and completely v-synced. So, with Xbox 360 we see a double-buffered setup (rendering one frame while displaying another) with a capped 30FPS that resorts to screen-tear when the game dips below that. The results are interesting in that we see the Framework MT engine operating in a very similar to fashion to Resident Evil 5. The performance analysis of cut-scene and gameplay excerpts allows us to gauge Lost Planet 2 frame-rate in both exact like-for-like scenarios, and also more generally in terms of gameplay. However, all is not rosy when it comes how the games play. Binning off quincunx (hopefully for good) with its art-blurring side effects means that the insane level of texture quality isn't compromised at all, and the games look that much closer across the two platforms. For the revised Framework engine, Capcom has stuck to 2x MSAA on 360 and none at all on PS3.īearing in mind the amount of post-processing going on in this game, it's not so much of a big deal. The old Framework MT games used variable levels of AA - anything from none at all to the full-on 4x MSAA on 360, depending on engine load, while PS3 would engage and disengage quincunx much more aggressively. The only difference comes down to the usual variances in anti-aliasing. In terms of texture quality, filtering and effects the games are both extremely similar to one another. So how does the game look on both platforms? Now with Lost Planet 2, Framework MT is back in a revised rendition, capable of better-looking visuals than we've seen before.
While Devil May Cry 4 redressed the balance somewhat, other Capcom tentpole titles such as Resident Evil 5 have clearly favoured the Microsoft machine. Unfortunately, Framework MT didn't work quite so well on PS3, and Lost Planet fared badly on the Sony platform: poor frame-rate, less responsive controls and inferior anti-aliasing weren't exactly what PS3 owners were hoping for when the game was eventually released on their console.
In a world where Unreal Engine was beginning to dominate, Lost Planet didn't just look cool, it looked different. Dead Rising augured well in terms of the firm's commitment to the HD consoles, but it wasn't until the company's next 360 release that we could really see what it was capable of in terms of art quality, lighting, motion blur and other advanced post-processing effects.
The original Lost Planet was the first real workout we saw for Capcom's in-house Framework MT technology.