Review: Sonic 4: Episode 1 (PS3/PSN)

Sonic’s had a tough time as of late. It’s been nearly fifteen years since his name was last synonymous with quality gaming, a quality that appeared to diminish as soon as he and his various cohorts made the jump to 3D. It’s not just that however, subsequent 2D instalments have also missed the mark, and the point by favouring speed and automation over skilled platforming action. With Sonic 4 Sega is looking to rectify this by delivering a title that not only promises to play like the Sonics of old, but also to look like them as well. But does it succeed?


Right from the outset Sonic 4 wears its heritage on its sleeves. From the chequered scenery of the Splash Hill Zone, to the low-fi, synth-inspired soundtrack throughout (by Sonic Team’s Jun Senoue), every part of the game wants to be one of those 16bit Megadrive originals. And for all Sega’s efforts it largely achieves that, minus a few unnecessary slips along the way, and perhaps a tendency to stick a little too closely in trying to remake past titles instead of delivering something new.

What you’ll find in Sonic 4 is what can only be described as classically styled Sonic action. You’ll be running and jumping across various platforms, speeding through loop-de-loops and corkscrew paths, whilst being propelled into the air via star-printed springs, and bouncing on enemies to release your fluffy comrades locked inside. There’s no embarrassing voice acting, no wannabe superstar, quasi-metal music, and no additional playable characters. Although the latter was never a bad thing in the MD Sonics.


Power-ups make their trademark return. And for Sonic 4 Sega have simply gone back to the basics here as well; the bubble shield, speed shoes, and invisibility are the only ones to be included. And each one looks, and acts very much like it did all those years ago, bar a few modern changes of course. These are activated by jumping onto the various monitors located throughout each of the game’s four main stages, and other than giving you the aforementioned abilities, you can also find ones which give you ten rings instead. Again, exactly like the old Sonic games.

In terms of moves the spin dash introduced in Sonic 4 remains, though slower in execution than before, and perhaps a little less useful this time around. And this is joined by a homing attack, which works pretty much exactly as it did in Sonic Unleashed. What’s nice is that Sega haven’t tampered too much with the basics here; the homing attack works really well with the standard Sonic mechanics and level designs, and although these have been heavily altered, the inclusion of a new move actually keeps things fresh rather than feeling broken.


There are some cool parts throughout the game which sees Sonic, after speeding through a series of tunnels and loops, being catapulted into the air before allowing you to use the homing attack to bounce off a line of enemies, thus going down a different path in the stage than you normally would. In fact, there are quite a few different routes to take through each zone in Sonic 4. Some simply take you down Sonic Advance-inspired speed runs through a wealth of gorgeous scenery, whilst others find you carefully navigating a maze of platforms, bouncing off more enemies before both paths converge back onto the main route.

It’s things like these which show how accomplished some parts of the level design is in Sonic 4, and are clearly touching lightly upon aspects which later played a large part in Sonic 3, and Sonic & Knuckles. Admittedly, not all of these ideas work as expected, or anywhere near as well as they should. A few areas in the later parts of the game are filled with bottomless chasms, and cheap traps leading to a quick death. These often feel like remnants from the Sonic Advance games, and at times cast a real shadow over the splendid work Sonic Team have done with much of the game.


Another area in which Sonic Team (and Dimps) seems to have missed the mark is with regards to the game’s physics, and handling of Sonic himself. And they seem to have missed this by some margin.

One of the main complaints about Sonic Rush, and the recent 3D games, was that Sonic was just too fast, so much so that you often collided with enemies, and flew off platform edges before you knew that they were coming. Now, while this has indeed been addressed in Sonic 4, the developers have instead gone the opposite way, balancing out a lower top speed with really slow, and somewhat sluggish acceleration. Sonic 4 is slower (though only slightly) and less responsive that any of the 16bit titles in this regard

Annoyingly, the game was supposed to bring back the feeling of building up momentum and reaching top speed through cleverly finding that ‘perfect path’ through each level. However, the physics in Sonic 4 don’t seem to conform to gravity, instead they feel rather floaty and pretty heavy at the same time. It is possible for Sonic to walk up walls, lose speed whilst moving downhill. Plus, on top of that, it takes a good few seconds for him to get going fast enough for the game to begin to feel responsive.


On the upside, once you get used to this you’ll scarcely find that such issues break the game, let alone appear frequently. Although later parts require you to be able to move and respond faster, and without delay, it is still possible to manage with the current mechanics without causing too much in the way of frustration. Saying that Sonic Team definitely needs to address these concerns if they are to really make an exceptional, or even great Sonic game.

Still, I found my self regularly enjoying large parts of the game as a whole, sometimes loving them regardless of the issues present. It was also rather nice to see some solid, and often well thought out platforming sections throughout the game, balancing out the fast/slow dynamic the originals were known for. The odd, out of place puzzle in the Labyrinth Zone notwithstanding, much of the level design is firmly crafted mix of action and exploration, with a few more frequent bouts of high-speed excitement to differentiate things.


Laid out for all to see, Sonic 4 is played across four distinct zones, each with three main acts, and a final boss act, in which the player is faced with another battle against Dr Robotnik, and one of his Egg Mobile contraptions. The entire game is one retro-styled remix of the first two games, with elements from 3 and Sonic & Knuckles, combined with some original ideas and a lovely HD graphical overhaul.

The boss battles in particular are classic ones lifted from past games, whilst each being given an unexpected twist at the end. Sometimes these are awesome to fight against (the first boss), while at other times they are long and drawn out for far too long (the final encounter against all of the game’s bosses, and then a remake of Sonic 2’s end boss), which serve to annoy rather than to invoke fond memories of the old games Sega are trying to recreate.


Visually, Sonic 4 looks astounding at times. The unique mix of pre-rendered 2D sprites and polygon-based enemies and characters looks fantastic, and totally in keeping with the series trademark look. If you’ve ever wanted to see just what a HD-remix of Sonic 1 or 2 would look like, then Sonic 4 delivers just that. On a slight downer, every one of the game’s four stages are pretty much direct remakes of levels found in the first two 16bit Sonic’s. And whilst it is nice to them lavishly recreated in HD here, this is supposed to be Sonic 4, and not New Sonic The Hedgehog. But even then, I quite like the obvious homage.

One thing that does stick out for the worse is that Sonic’s running animation is also a little off and out of time with how fast he appears to be going. Making the change between walking, running, and full, flat-out, leg-rolling sprint never looks particularly comfortable. It’s fluid for sure, but also a little disjointed. However, the rest of the game is positively beautiful, and is exactly how I’d expected a current-gen 2D Sonic game to look like.


I have no qualms about Sonic’s brand new look. Overhauled using textured, anti-aliasd geometry was definitely the right choice - although I would’ve loved to see a totally sprite-based presentation (it’s about 95% at the moment) - his design echo’s what I would describe as a natural continuation of his look based on unused Knuckles Chaotix sprites, along with being jazzed up to fit in with how the brand is currently portrayed.

The music, made using low-fi synthesiser samples, sounds tonally very similar to that of the classic 16bit games. Whilst lacking the same range, the compositions themselves are perfectly in fitting with the game’s stages, and the retro-styled nature of the whole production. The title screen, Splash Hill Zone, and the first act of Mad Gear Zone are by far the best Sonic 4 has to offer.

You'll also be pleased to know that most of the sound effects have been taken from past games - the 16bit titles in particular, although some Sonic Adventure samples have been used for the menu screens throughout the game. Like with the music and the style of the graphics, the combination of seemlessly integrating old effects with ones taken from modern Sonic games is a great way of keeping that 'old-school' feeling intact without making it seem dated.


Sonic 4 is definitely a homage release in the vain of New Super Mario Bros, and a partial remake of Sonic’s 1&2, rather than an all out sequel to Sonic & Knuckles. Although that is hardly a bad thing considering it could have turned out so much worse.

I’m sure plenty of fans will moan about the change of art style surrounding Sonic himself, the obvious re-tread of various stages from the first two games, and the fact that the handling and physics aren’t quite as they should be. But that said, we all have our own ideas about just what Sonic 4 should be like, and what we have here is a rushed middle-ground of sorts; an often flawed, occasionally messy, but also sometimes great first attempt at crafting a modern day Sonic classic.

Sega’s latest is a solid mix of combining the old and the new, lacking in originality, or any real inspiration. But at the same time finding its feet after being absent for the past fifteen years, and in places doing a reasonably good job at that too. All things considered, and a few problems aside, with some small improvements and a more unique identity, then Sonic 4 may just turn into the true sequel we’ve all been waiting for. And that is all anyone, fans and new folk alike could really ask for. Though sadly, we’re not quite there yet.

VERDICT: 7/10

Tech Analysis: Sonic Adventure (PS3 & 360)

I have many fond memories of the original Sonic Adventure on the Dreamcast, so much so that I thought I’d invest in a copy of the recent PSN and XBL HD re-release of this Sega classic. Mainly for fun at first. Although that fun quickly turned into investigating just how well this HD revision holds up for the latest IQGamer Tech Analysis.

On first impressions it looks like Sega has taken the liberty of porting and sprucing up the original DC version of the game. However, on closer inspection it is clear that this re-release is a bizarre combination of the GCN version of the game (Sonic Adventure DX), minus the extra content, with the DC original’s title screen tagged onto the end of it.

For those of you who don’t know, Sonic Adventure DX featured a few graphical upgrades over the DC game, including specular highlighting on Sonic and the other main characters, reworked texturing, and a boost in overall framerate. And this is exactly what we get here, but with some additional tweaks and changes. Unfortunately, the DX version also features far more in the way of potentially game-breaking collision glitches, and sloppy control issues, neither of which felt quite as bad in the standard DC game.


The first thing you’ll notice, is that Sonic Adventure comes in a bordered 4:3 aspect ratio, with thick stripy bars on each side of the screen, and thin ones at the top and bottom. While the overall output resolution of the framebuffer is in fact 720p (1280x720) the gameplay segment itself is presented in 920x690, being 1:1 mapped to ensure that the image isn’t being cut off.

Interestingly, the final output looks somewhat blurrier than what a 690p image would look like when occupying its space in a native 720p framebuffer. Instead we can see that the game is actually rendering in 480p, and then being upscaled to 690p to form the final displayed frame. It’s not rendering in bordered HD that’s for sure.

The difference between what the game looks like when running in native 720p can be found below. The top screen shows the PC version running in true HD resolution, while the bottom shows the PSN and XBLA version upscaled to 690p.


PC


PS3 & 360

Without doubt this has to be one of the most disappointing aspects of the port, rendering in SD, and is an indication of just how much of a rush job to market it initially appears to be. When you consider that both the 360 and PS3 could easily handle the PC version of Sonic Adventure DX running in 720p, and at 60fps, then it is a mildly bitter pill to swallow, and a worrying sign for future DC conversions.

Saying that the upscaling method itself is very good - better than we've seen on some full price titles - and although this PSN and XBLA re-release doesn’t use any form of anti-aliasing, the game looks reasonably smooth, being free of most harsh jagged lines and polygon edges.

So, with no AA being present the smooth look can instead be attributed to the game’s poor use of bilinear texture filtering, and blurred nature due to the framebuffer being upscaled, both of which affect final image quality heavily. In still screens the lack of AA is more easily noticeable, though that doesn’t always appear to be the case in motion.

Thankfully, resolution isn’t everything, and most of the enhanced visual effects introduced in the GCN version of the game have been included here; additional specular highlighting, greater use of defuse mapping, and texturing changes are all brought to the table.


PC


DC

Above you can see the changes between the DC and PC versions of the game. These also apply to the PSN and XBLA releases too, and give you an idea of the differences between SA DX and vanilla SA.

However, both the PSN and XBLA builds of the game also feature improved shadowing on the characters as well. This can be seen on Sonic’s mouth and belly in the screenshot below, and looks pretty odd in motion, seeming a little overblown and unnatural.


Unusually, this version of Sonic Adventure lacks the inclusion of the reflective water found in the GCN build, but still features the same updated texturing. Oddly, this is also apparent in the PC game, a telltale sign that highlights which code was used for the PS3 and 360 ports.

Outside of these slight differences, nothing else appears to have changed. The art assets used are definitely the updated GCN ones, and in some cases look a tad blurrier, or less detailed than some of the ones used in the original DC game. The sheen on Sonic in particular is unnecessary, and some of the texturing now looks murky and undefined. However, many textures actually benefit from being replaced with higher-res versions, and look much better than the ones used in the original DC game. Though these improvements are largely under-represented due to the upscaled nature of the final image distorting things somewhat.


One area in which the PS3 and 360 versions of Sonic Adventure have seen the biggest gains, is with regards to performance. It’s nice to finally see a version of the game running largely as originally intended with only a few dips in fluidity intruding on the action.

Sonic Adventure runs at a near constant 60fps for 99.9 percent of the time, and the difference is instantly noticeable. I only encountered the odd drop down to 30fps, which lasted only for a brief second or so, maybe less. Apparently, in the 360 version these little dips happen slightly more frequently. However, I can’t confirm this for sure as I only own the full PS3 game, and the 360 demo, but not the full retail release.

For those of you who don’t know, early demos and pre-release builds of SA on the Dreamcast ran at 60fps with frequent drops in framerate, often down to 30fps. However, the final game runs at 30fps, with heavy bouts of slowdown to 20fps in the most detailed areas. Many parts of the Lost World stage saw the game holding a near constant 20fps, before narrowly getting back up to the 30 mark.

By contrast the GCN DX port managed to hit 60fps pretty much all the way through the entire game, with regular and sometimes random drops to 30, sometimes even 20fps, regardless of whether or not detail levels were significantly higher. In particular, the game often juddered between fluctuating framerates, sometimes hitting the target 60fps for extended periods of time, sometimes not.

Going back to the PS3 and 360 ports, and rather bizarrely, SA’s cut-scenes completely side step the upgrade to 60fps altogether, and are delivered with a fifty percent cut in smoothness compared to the standard during gameplay. The in-engine cinematics are all locked at 30fps, with no real reasoning as to why this was done. It’s not as if these parts of the game would prove more difficult to optimise, since the rendering load does not change at the drop of a hat like in gameplay (it can be controlled and is utterly predictable), then if anything, guaranteed performance at 60fps should be easier to obtain.

Like with the upscaled nature of the game’s framebuffer resolution, it appears that the developers have simply been rather lazy, performing optimisations on the most obvious parts of the game, whilst leaving others almost completely untouched. What is stranger still, is that the addition of improveved shadowing can be seen in both the cut-scenes and the gameplay, meaning that some tweaks were in fact made to both the engine, and entire game as a whole.

As expected, SA is fully v-synced on both platforms and never so much as tears a single frame. Of course this was the case on both the DC and GCN, but is an increasing rarity with titles this generation. Either way it’s nice to see a title not only hitting its target framerate but also doing that without tearing frames. Although, for an even year-old game running on a current gen platform, in 640x480 no less, you should expect nothing less, especially in lieu of any major (or barely even minor) graphical upgrades.


All things considered, whilst the PS3 and Xbox 360 versions of Sonic Adventure aren’t exactly great ports overall, they are redeemable in some respects, and the upgrade to 60fps is both pleasing on the eye and beneficial to the controls. Sonic himself is far more responsive, and the flow of the action is better represented than ever before.

However, the conversion also reeks of laziness through and through. The lack of any kind of widescreen support, or even the option to change the colour of the border surrounding the gameplay is unacceptable in this day and age. And the absence of a true 720p HD presentation is baffling to say the least.

Outside of that, the use of the DX code means that there are more gameplay glitches than in the Dreamcast original, with characters getting stuck in scenery, and odd collision detection errors being quite commonplace - things that arguably should have been sorted out given the high-profile nature of the release.

In conclusion then, the PS3 and 360 release of Sonic Adventure is still perhaps one of the best versions of the game we’ve seen so far, even if it doesn’t quite play as well as the DC original. Seeing, and ‘feeling’ it running in 60fps makes it well worth a look despite the obvious criticisms. Although, at the same time one can’t help but feel somewhat cheated considering both consoles could quite easily handle a full 1080p60 port without breaking sweat.

Thanks to sonicretro.org for the additional screens used in this feature.

Tech Analysis: Enslaved Demo (360 vs PS3)

When most people talk about the PS3’s unique architecture and the games which really show off the machine’s graphical prowess, both Uncharted 1&2 often crop up, as do Killzone 2 and God Of War 3. However, many seem to have forgotten about Heavenly Sword. Because during a time when HDR lighting and anti-aliasing were thought near impossible to do on the PS3’s NVIDIA 7800 derivative GPU in combination, Ninja Theory’s cinematic action game was doing just that.

At the time using a custom HDR format known as LogLuv (NAO32) allowed the developers to include full range HDR lighting whilst also adding proper 2x multi-sampling anti-aliasing support into the mix. Combined with highly detailed texturing, advanced facial animation and complex character modelling, Heavenly Sword still holds up well today, and is the culmination of a collaboration between NT and other Sony studios in sharing technology to improve PS3 development.

Enslaved shares similar traits to that title. The game takes on a deeply filmic tone, cinematic in its execution, while the gameplay features slightly delayed response times with regards to the controls, and canned animations to keep the feel of an interactive move at the forefront of the experience. This is all backed up by superb voice work by Andy Serkis (who also did Heavenly Sword) and a solid script from Alex Garland, writer of the Beach and 28 Days Later.

However, there are a few differences between Enslaved and Heavenly Sword. The former was simply a PS3 exclusive, designed to get the most out of Sony’s machine in order to have a strong third-party offering for the format. Enslaved however, is a multiplatform release appearing on both PS3 and 360.

With this change of direction comes a change in game engine. Rather than to try and port over the tech powering their last effort, Ninja Theory has opted to use the Unreal Engine 3 for Enslaved. A common choice amongst third-party developers, it usually tends to favour the 360 as its lead platform with the PS3 often on the receiving end of some less than stellar conversions. Lower framerates, an abundance of screen tearing, and lower rendering resolutions are normal issues the PS3 faces with games using the engine.

That said, UE3 also provides a powerful, more familiar development environment in which to work on. And for Enslaved that is exactly why Ninja Theory decided to choose the engine over and above porting across their custom approach powering Heavenly Sword. But unlike other most other titles that use it, Enslaved manages to scrub up incredibly well on both platforms, almost hitting parity on the PS3. Apart from having one of two lower res / scaled back effects, and lower overall performance, both versions aren’t far off from being identical.


Most of the time with titles using UE3, it is common to find a discrepancy between the framebuffer resolution on one platform and on another. However, you’ll be pleased to know that Enslaved renders in 720p (1280x720) on both 360 and the PS3, with the game appearing identical in this regard.

Unlike Singularity, and both Gears Of War 1&2 on the 360, neither version of Enslaved features the standard selective 2xMSAA anti-aliasing solution used in most UE3 titles. Instead both versions lack AA altogether, and maintain similar levels of sharpness to each other.

Although, this isn’t quite as bad as it first sounds, seeing as the selective AA favoured by the engine usually has very little impact in real world terms. In still screenshots there is a noticeable, but slight improvement in overall image quality. However, this is simply restricted to either static objects, or the whole scene if nothing is moving. So in effect, most of the time you get practically no AA coverage anyway, thus making its inclusion of little worth when you consider the marginal gains on offer.

That said, even with a lack of AA Enslaved is hardly a jagged mess, and most of the harsher polygon edges are smoothened out by the game use of a stylish post process motion blur effect, and a little bloom lighting, which in effect negates the need for the jaggies reduction provided by 2xMSAA.


Although the inclusion of motion blur in Enslaved is mainly there for cinematic purposes. It also makes the whole experience take on a more cinematic tone, reproducing the camera blur present in fast action sequences found in movies.

A side effect of the blur is that it gives an impression of making the game seem smoother than it actually is. Usually this is done to make a 30fps experience flow slightly more like one that is perhaps running at 45fps, but obviously without truly achieving this. It’s a nice but subtle illusion, and in Enslaved it helps to briefly hide some of the game’s smaller drops in framerate. Though not the heavier ones, in which case there is nothing it can do.

As mentioned earlier the use of motion blur also has the effect of smoothening out jagged lines caused by the game’s lack of AA. The 360 version benefits the most, looking slightly smoother than the PS3 game. Albeit subtly so.

The reason for this, is that the use of the motion blur has been paired back on the PS3 build. It is clearly stronger on the 360 game, helping to deliver a slightly cleaner and more filmic look to the proceedings. Although, the difference is far less noticeable in motion than it is in the still screens featured on this page.

You may also notice that sometimes the PS3 version is missing blur entirely. This only tends to happen when use of the effect is so subtle that the engine doesn’t even activate it on the PS3, where it is cut down anyway. The result is that some scenes benefit from it, while others don’t.



Another area in which the 360 sees a handful of subtle graphical improvements, is with regards to the resolution of certain visual effects. Things like smoke, electricity, and certain lighting and particle effects are rendered in a lower resolution on the PS3. The two screenshots above show just how close both versions are; some effects like the electric power staff have harsher edges on the PS3 and appear slightly more aliased in motion, whilst the light coming through the ship on the right hand-side appears slightly softer owing to both seeing a reduction in resolution.

However, the differences are very subtle and hard to spot when playing the game, if not occasionally impossible. They certainly don’t take anything away from the PS3 build at all, instead showing that slight compromises don’t always lead to detrimental impact on overall graphical quality.


In terms of lighting and shadowing both are virtually identical as well. The 360 build gets a slight increase in bloom lighting, making hard polygon edges look smoother – much like the use of motion blur, the effect helps in reducing overall scene aliasing - whereas PS3 owners get a reduced version of the same thing featuring less image smoothing properties.


The shadowing model is reasonably accomplished, though somewhat basic compared to the likes of Uncharted 2, or even Bioshock 2 - that’s to say it has an effect of making parts of the game look very flat at times. In particular, with half of the objects in daylight scenes being covered by shadows, there is little depth to be had in these darkened parts of the environment. Instead, the only time in which the game really delivers a direct, noticeable sense of depth is with high contrasting light and dark areas.


Changing the intensity of the different light sources found in the game, along with expanding the range of colour provided by them would go a along way in circumventing this. As it stands the shadowing lacks a decent amount of tonal variations, and differing light values to do this. Neither PS3 nor 360 benefit from featuring any improvements or downgrades in this area, though the PS3’s shadowing looks slightly different from the way it is implemented on the 360, but not necessarily looking worse because of it.


Outside of the lighting and effects differences, for the most part, Enslaved actually looks identical across both platforms – a stark contrast to say, Bioshock 2, which had severe cuts made to its alpha buffer (effects) resolution, and an intrusive blur filter placed over the entire screen. Much like Singularity, the developers have done a rather good job in achieving parity on this front.

Ninja Theory have managed to get both texture detail and filtering looking mostly like for like across both versions, with the PS3 build in particular not suffering from lower res texturing than the 360 game, or gaining the usual bump in anisotropic filtering found in most titles running on the platform. It is definitely one of the better examples of multiplatform UE3 engine development, in which most changes don’t adversely affect either version in any significant way.

The same cannot be said in terms of overall performance though, in which we see the 360 build carving out a lead over the PS3 game. However, this is mostly apparent when playing each version one after the other, and not so much so when played on their own in a stand-alone fashion.


With Enslaved, the developers are clearly aiming to maintain a consistent 30fps throughout. And like with most titles using the unreal engine, the game regularly toggles between dropping framerate and losing v-sync in order to achieve that target. In this regard the 360 build fares better than the PS3 one. As we’ve seen before with Singularity, the UE3 engine appears to be more suited to Micrososft’s platform with less in the way of constant framerate drops happening, and definitely a lot less screen tearing.

The 360 version of Enslaved seems to take the most balanced approach between strictly maintaining v-sync whilst losing framerate, and dropping it ever so briefly in order to preserve it. Effectively this means that the overall amount of screen tearing taking place is regularly kept in check, with just a few small occurrences relatively subtle in their appearance.

By contrast the PS3 game tears more often, and when it occurs it is far more noticeable as a whole. Tearing isn’t just restricted to the top of the screen for short periods, but can be seen across the entire screen in parts. However, this only seems to happen in areas in which the engine becomes put under stress. The more stuff on screen, the more tearing that occurs, along with a larger drop in framerate. We're talking down to 24 - 20fps at times, though usually for only a few seconds at once. Most of the time the tearing is far more subtle in nature, and the PS3 version very often hits 30fps, with just smaller drops overall, before struggling in heavy load scenarios.

The 360 game also goes through a few heavy drops in framerate (mostly in cut-scenes), although it is feels more distinctly controlled, and doesn’t have the tendency to constantly tear frames when this happens. In which case we can see that the PS3 game largely isn’t v-synced at all, whereas the 360 game is, and often maintains it successfully, tearing less frames and keeping up its framerate.

However, the lack of v-sync on the PS3 version also leads to it having small additional spikes in performance over the 360 game. Some segments actually see it hit the target 30fps when the 360 build is lagging behind slightly. Though this certainly isn’t commonplace, and isn’t really a substitute for more even levels of performance.

Overall, it is clear that the 360 version performs better than the PS3 one, holding its framerate more solidly and tearing less frames. The use of v-sync can lead to heavy drops in performance, with frames being dropped significantly in parts – mainly the cut-scenes. But by and large it is manages to hit the target 30fps far more consistently than the PS3 game without suffering near constant screen tearing in places. The PS3 build may offer the occasional, slight performance advantage, but loses it with its lack of v-sync and generally more erratic framerate.

Saying that, much of the time the two can look virtually identical even when performance isn’t as good on the PS3 – especially when not going head-to-head against each other.


To be fair, despite issues with performance both versions of Enslaved are almost like for like. Other than a few lower resolution effects, and a downgrade in the usage of motion blur, most of the game looks identical across the board – that is to say that it can look lovely at times, both technically and stylistically, regardless of how it performs during gameplay.

Obviously, the same trends regarding the performance of the UE3 engine on PS3 remain; more unstable framerates and an increased amount of screen tear seem to be issues most developers haven’t been able to get around just yet. Though the gap does seem to be closing – we’re no longer looking at sub-HD UE3 PS3 ports anymore. Not for the most part anyway.

Granted, people who own both platforms should perhaps pick up the 360 version as it performs noticeably better across the board, though not in every instance. At the same time, the actual graphical differences outside of performance are so minor (motion blur aside) that there isn’t all that much in it. In fact you’d be hard-pressed to notice, and that certainly counts for something.

In conclusion Enslaved is better all-round on the 360, but is generally solid across both platforms, with pretty much no major differences outside of performance that you are likely to notice during gameplay. The use of high latency control also gives the whole game a somewhat laggy feel to it, and the fairly slow, Uncharted-like gameplay means that issues with framerate don’t tend to spoil things as much as they would do in fast-paced action titles that require far quicker reflexes.

Thanks go out to AlStrong for the pixel counting, and to videogameszone.de for the screenshots. The full gallery of uncompressed framebuffer grabs can be found here. I suggest that you check them out.

Eurogamer Expo: Hands-On Gran Turismo 5

Killzone 3 in 3D didn’t quite impressive as much as it perhaps should have done. Let down by some very fuzzy graphics, upscaled and artefact filled, much of the subtleties so obviously noticeable when viewing things in the third dimension were lost. Whilst depth perception still remained, its usage somewhat limited by your reduced line of sight, with enemies being made a little harder to pick out from a distance.

Thankfully Gran Turismo 5 doesn’t suffer from any of these problems; instead you could comfortably describe it as being Sony’s real flagship demonstration for the benefits of 3D gaming.


My first taste of GT5 came standing next to a player seated down next to me, right in the middle of a race. Putting on a second set of LCD shutter glasses provided for spectators to become acquainted with the 3D effect, I was initially a little disappointed. At an angle the 3D effect in GT5 looked rather strange. The car appeared to hover above the track whilst the scenery seemingly moved around it. However, when finally sitting down to go hands-on, positioned directly in front of the screen, things changed completely.

The 3D effect in GT5 is nothing short of superb. The vast levels of depth perception, and visual judgement of distance really come close to replicating the actual experiencre of being right there, hovering behind the car in the classic outside view, as I pelted around both the Tokyo and Rome circuits.

Not only can you accurately gauge distances between cars and the surrounding environment, you can also read with unparalleled precision the angle in which your car is situated in relation to others on the track in a real-world 3D space. Subtleties that previously had to be second-guessed from a 2D perspective in a 3D game are now opened right up allowing you to react and respond almost as you would in reality. I say almost, as the 3D version of the game was only controllable with a DS3 at the event. The 2D build was kitted out with a high-end Logitech GT Force wheel.

Also compared to seeing KZ3 in 3D, there is very little in the way of double image ghosting in GT5. The main reason for this is that Polyphony Digital’s driving sim runs mostly at a smooth 60 frame per-second, thus eliminating this unwanted effect. Some crosstalk was still present however. Although this is down to the nature of the LCD display it self not being able to provide a completely smear-free image, rather than the actual game, so it’s not really an issue.


Visually GT5 looked suitably stunning, in both 2D and 3D modes. The high levels of image quality gave way to a crisp and clean final image, both clinical in nature whilst appearing natural at the same time. Sharp, detailed textures are complemented with incredibly detailed car models, and lavish roadside scenery. A combination of real-time lighting, HDR, and pre-baked solutions also gave the game a bespoke sense of depth, whilst the overall quality of the rendering provides a photo realistic feel to the proceedings.

In terms of gameplay GT5 looks to have been given another massive change to its handling system. Compared to the Time Trial demo, the overall handling system feels far weightier, with under steer being as much of an issue as over steer. Not that this is a fault however, as you now have an even greater awareness of each vehicles weight and grip characteristics than before. In particular, racing at too high a speed can often lead to an excess of unwanted grip being produced, in which case careful braking and proper timing is required in order to quickly, but deliberately manuvere your way around sharp turns and constant changes around the track.

One thing I noticed is that it is actually a lot easier to not spin out of control this time around. More often than not going too fast leads you straight into a wall, or careering off the intended path, rather than having you car slide around in circles right in the middle of the road. Although that does happen when you try too hard to over compensate.


The balance is now even more determined by small incremental changes in weight, speed and grip than before, with much in the way to learn compared to GT5 Prologue – which now feels a little archaic in comparison. That said, I didn’t tinker too much with the few gameplay-based options that you have before each single race. And I believe that a variety of handling types may be available in what looked like an Arcade mode of sorts. I simply kept the ‘standard’ setting as that seemed like the most obvious choice in best representing the feel the developers had intended for the game.

Sadly I didn’t get a chance to sample all of the cars and tracks featured in the demo, and couldn’t compare how well the handling mechanics felt when using the GT Force wheel to the standard DS3 pad. However my short time with demo was more than enough to convince me that the game has gone through some serious upgrades over the last year or two alone, and that the 3D effect was one of the most promising I have ever seen.


Out of Sony’s line-up GT5 stood out by far as the most polished of all the first party games on display. It may not have delivered the high-level intensity of Killzone 3, or the same innovative talents as Little Big Planet 2, but it did provide a largely successful showcase for the 3D format, along with being one of the most accomplished driving games to be seen so far.

Update: looks like I should have switched to the 'professional' option for a more realistic, and less grounded approach to the games handling - the sources for the lack of oversteer almost certainly originates from this point. Although even the 'normal' option is considerably better than before. Going down the professional route will definitely be something I'll be doing in the final game. Shame I missed out on it at the Expo.

Eurogamer Expo: Hands-On Killzone 3

Killzone 3 was one of the most anticipated titles that I wanted to see at the EG Expo. It would not only be my first chance to gain some much-needed hands-on time with the title, but also get the full experience in 3D. Seeing as the game has been singled out time and time again as the reason not only to own a 3D TV, but also to feature the distinct tangible benefits of this latest picture format more so than any other title, I was intrigued to see on whether it could really live up to those promises.


Guerrilla Games latest begins with you on board the series trademark Intruder attack vessel, an open-top substitute for the traditional futuristic chopper. Equipped with a mini-gun at this point, the game takes you through a brief on-rails ride shooting down the various enemy energy rigs situated directly below you. Filled with pyrotechnics and tons of particle effects, the carefully orchestrated set pieces of destruction are immense. More, so in 3D in which various particles, such as snow, smoke and debris all coming flying out of the screen.

Moments later you are shot down, and then strung out across the cold icy ground, left for dead by the enemy. At this point the game ditches the mini-gun, and sees you taking on the Helghast forces on foot, standard guns in tow as you venture further into their territory for a spot of good old-fashioned tactical shooting. It’s here where Killzone 3 really comes into its own.

Initially not much appears to have changed; the same level of intensity found in Killzone 2 remains fully intact, and as brutally realistic as ever. Gunfights see the enemy troopers constantly going in and out of cover, flanking, moving between spots, and intelligently retreating when being pinned down by your fire. However, it is now even easier to go into cover than before. The system is more responsive, allowing you to use it quickly and decisively when needed. At the same time you can still go in all guns blazing. The environment is more open, and appears to allow a levelheaded mix of cover-point shooting, and head-to-head run and gun bloodbaths.


One of the things that I also noticed was that the game’s controls felt smoother and slightly more responsive this time around. In KZ2 there was a noticeably higher delay between performing a button press or stick movement on the controller before it actually registered on screen. Originally this added weight to the feel of the weapons, although it also made for a very slightly laggy experience at times - more noticeable than Halo 3’s 100ms of latency. For Killzone 3 this has been subtly improved. You can feel the distinct change on offer here instantly, while the weight of aiming and holding the game’s various weapons has not diminished. Instead it feels very responsive now.

Smacking someone in the face instead of shooting them in the head has also seen changes. Now the melee system looks to be context sensitive, with you performing different moves depending entirely on situation. No longer are you just pistol-whipping the Helghast into submission. Stabbing then with the knife is a common option, as is a brutally visceral stealth kill when creeping up from behind. I barely needed to do any of this though, with plenty of ammo and weapons around from fallen Helghast troopers, it was definitely more a case wanting to do it for pure satisfaction purposes.

KZ3 also features what looks like being the current HDR lighting of the time, but for gameplay. It has jetpacks. These are activated using the L1 button, and feel far more realistic than those found in Halo 3. Altitude is strictly controlled, as is flight time, so it definitely looks to be more of a realistic integration with the rest of the series grounded nature. Personally, I found the use of jetpacks slightly clumsy in KZ3, although only tried them out very briefly given the limited time I had with the demo.


Visually, there is no doubt that KZ3 looks to be a massive jump over the second game, despite the fact that the image quality of the 3D rendering mode leaves a lot to be desired. There’s far more in the way of particle effects filling up the screen; subtle snow effects are kicked up by both the enemies, and your soldiers feet, as well as being found flying through the air. Smoke and fire particles return with their volumetric look really adding to the sense of intensity when being on the battlefield, and the games lighting system seems to have had a nice expansion of the HDR styled bloom effect from the first game. Lots of nice real-time shadows, and small glimpses of SSAO are present.

All demo units of the game were fitted out with the latest Sony 3D ready HDTV’s, complete with LCD shutter glasses. And of course the game was fully playable in 3D. However, the experience in Killzone 3 was both a shining example of what was possible with the format, and a bitter disappointment given the game’s graphical quality in this mode. Props should be given to Guerrilla for not cutting back of any geometric detail, or pairing back the amount of stuff being displayed on screen at once. It’s incredible to think that in 3D that Killzone 3 is rendering everything twice with no reduction in art assets being used, which is no mean feat I can assure you.


2D


3D

Sadly the use of 3D in KZ3 is no work of a miracle. Instead massive cuts have been made to the game’s framebuffer resolution. Rendering in a mere 640x716 with MLAA, the game is extremely rough around the edges. Harsh jagged lines and bouts of pixelation littered the screen, as did the additional softness caused by some heavy upscaling. In fact at various points the game looked to suffer from as many artefacts as Wii games do when being upscaled. Not so great to be fair, and all these blemishes completely ruin the added depth perception and sense of immersion that the actual 3D effect provides.

The lower resolution effects in the standard 720p 2D mode also looked noticeably worse, suffering from all the same issues as the rest of the game. Now halved down to 320x360, smoke and particles appear heavily artefacted and really messy, distracting from the rest of the scene although still aiding in keeping you immersed in the experience.

That said the 3D mode in Killzone 3 still gives the feeling of bringing the player closer to the action. No matter how rough and poor looking most of the game appears in 3D, distance and depth are far easier to judge. And the impact of this can clearly be felt during play. It is easier to both accurately throw a grenade, and more natural to perform a close quarters melee attack knowing that they are pretty likely to hit as you expect them to. The use of 3D doesn’t improve poor judgement, but it does make things easier, when of course you can properly see what’s going on.


The build I played was the same Pre-Alpha code that featured at this year’s E3 - the very same one that I performed a tech analysis of some screens on earlier in June. Most of what I said back then still stands today. Other than perhaps when I mentioned that upscaling might well be less noticeable in 3D given the various reactions sighted by the gaming press in general. While this may be true for some, for me it was mostly the exact opposite, with the 3D separation limiting the rawness of the upscaling, but certainly amplifying its softness and the overall lack of image quality caused by it.

Of course there is still some six months to go before the game gets released, leaving plenty of time for last-minute optimisations, and a small but still slightly beneficial increase in overall framebuffer resolution. There’s also the exceptionally stunning looking 2D build, in which none of these aforementioned issues apply, and all the gameplay enhancements remain. So, either way you’re going to have a choice in the matter.


Overall, Killzone 3 is looking like a superb follow up to arguably one of the most technically accomplished titles this generation. The basic game plays even better than before, with larger set pieces and more responsive controls. And despite the extremely poor image quality, the use of 3D has obvious benefits amongst the heavy downsides required for its inclusion. Sure enough, in it’s currently messy state 3D isn’t going to blow you away visually, but it does take a vital stepping stone into showing what’s in store for the future.

Review: Resident Evil 5 Gold Edition (Move Edition)

After a thorough playtesting of Sony’s Move controller over the launch weekend I delivered my final verdict on the device and most of its launch line-up last Monday. A few games were missing however. One of those was Capcom’s seminal survival shooter (come on now it’s hardly a horror game is it) Resident Evil 5: Gold Edition; an updated version of RE5 containing two extra single player chapters, and via a patch available from the PSN, full PlayStation Move support.

Seeing as RE4 on the GameCube still ranks up there with some of my favourite games of all time (it’s in my top ten), and that the Wii Edition remains in my opinion, the definitive version to play, I was more than a little interested to see how the Move enabled RE5 would turn out. After all, surely the precision tracking and lack of latency on Sony’s motion controller would make for an even better experience than on the Wii? Sadly, that isn’t completely the case, with the developers arguably just including Move support without really thinking too much about the end results.

Okay, perhaps that’s a slightly harsh statement, because while RE5: Gold Edition does feature a few glaring flaws with regards to its new motion control implementation, it’s also still a reasonably playable experience, just not as much so as when using the standard Dual Shock or Sixaxis controllers.


Part of the problem lies in both the button choices used for each configuration (there are two types) and how the Move’s pointer has been implemented in place of using the standard analogue sticks. Character movement is handled by the analogue stick on the Navigation Controller, whilst all aiming and menu selection is done via the Move. Holding down the T-Trigger brings up your aiming cursor, and pushing the Move button shoots you gun. A quick waggle of the Move also delivers a delayed slice of your knife.

When using the Move there is no dual control for both moving and aiming at the same time, as is possible with the standard PS3 controller. Instead, you can only choose to either move, or aim and look around when stationary. The analogue stick on the Navigation controller allows you to look around freely, whilst the Move is used to aim. This will be familiar to those who have played Resident Evil 4 on both the GameCube and the Wii, and may come as a hindrance if you are not used to such a system. Thankfully, I didn’t find it to be all that much of a problem, though the lack of a Move equivalent to the dual analogue solution is somewhat disappointing.

Using the Move button to fire, rather than the T-Trigger also feels a little odd. When pressing down on the trigger, your thumb immediately uses the top of the Move’s surface to hold it in a steady position, maintaining a strong grip in the process. However, when you let go, and then push down again to make each shot (whilst still holding down the trigger) your initially steady grip is reduced somewhat. Surely, it would make more sense to have the Move button being held down in order to bring up the aiming cursor, and then using the T-Trigger as the fire button. That would make the whole experience feel far more natural.

Thankfully the existing set-up works rather well, and when blasting away at fifteen, twenty enemies pushing the Move button to fire whilst holding down the trigger isn’t particularly uncomfortable, just maybe not the most thought out choice.


What IS an issue, and by far the biggest oversight in implementing Move support, is how the aiming cursor constantly reconfigures itself in accordance to the Move’s position, often with unwanted results.

For example, when you push down on the T-Trigger to bring up your aiming reticule, the Move’s position is immediately determined at that point. However, after you’ve finished shooting, and thus releasing the trigger, the calibration seems to get thrown off. If you bring up your reticule with the Move positioned a little lower down than before, then it will appear higher up on screen than it should, or if you are aiming a little too far to the left or right before pushing down on the T-Trigger, the reticule also appears too far on either side of the screen.

By contrast, in Resident Evil 4 the position of the Wii Remote and pointer was always tracked from a specific point (I certainly don’t remember it being like this), so when you go to aim the reticule would automatically be positioned accordingly. Not so with Move and RE5 – the cursor on screen simply doesn’t line-up unless you position the Move at its starting position each time before hitting the T-Trigger.

At least the Move does provide noticeably greater accuracy than the Wii remote when it comes to lining up your shots, and quickly moving from target to target. Initially the default settings feel rather slow, and are in fact pretty sluggish compared to Wii Resi 4. However, you can adjust both the pointer speed and sensitivity in the options menu, which tightens up the controls considerably. Perhaps the only fault when doing this, is that when the game slows down, dropping framerate, the additional latency present is far more noticeable than if you had the cursor sensitivity, and speed set at lower levels.


Another issue is with regards to the use of the four face buttons found on the DS3 and Sixaxis controllers for performing certain moves, and to access your inventory screen. Running is done by holding down the ‘cross’ button, whilst ‘triangle’ is used to bring up the inventory screen. Now this doesn’t sound too bad, and in actual fact using ‘cross’ to run is perfectly fine. However, seeing as both ‘square’ and ‘triangle’ can be a little uncomfortable to reach it would have made more sense to make ‘cross’ or ‘circle’ the inventory and map buttons, leaving running to be done using the L2 trigger on the Navigation controller.

Playing in a dark room with the buttons obscured by the lack of visibility can be somewhat annoying, especially as the face buttons are divided by some length with regards to the Move button’s placement in between. The problem lies in being able to quickly toggle in and out of your inventory in the heat of battle, swapping weapons and items around between both characters, or just reorganising some space to equip new ones found along the way. Navigating these screens using the pointer is fine, as is using both the Move button to select items, and swap with other players. It’s just the ability to bring them up quickly that can be troublesome.

Other than that Resident Evil 5: Gold Edition does work reasonably well with the Move. Aiming in particular is faster and more accurate than when using a normal controller, and losing the ability to move whilst looking around or aiming isn’t a major loss. You can also see the reduced latency the Move provides over the Wii remote in terms of basic response time, although the game’s erratic framerate does on many occasions diminish this greatly.


Slight to heavy annoyances with the button configurations, and accentuated controller lag due to slowdown aside, it maybe isn’t quite as bad as you initially might think, once you get used to it. Sadly, it is a little behind the Wii version of Resident Evil 4 where the overall nature of fluid and intuitive controls are concerned. The Move might offer lower latency in moving the cursor around on screen, but it is also hindered by a game designed for far quicker reactions with a standard control pad.

Despite this, the actual RE5 game itself is still as fun to play as ever, though lacking any real sense of horror. Instead, most of the time you find it regularly turning into a crowded shooting gallery of sorts, with you becoming involved in a juggling act of babysitting your AI partner, and navigating menus as fast as possible. The storyline is classic b-move Capcom fodder, the character, and enemy designs are solid though sometimes uninspired. And visually. Well, it’s still one of the best looking games this generation. Resident Evil 4 may clearly be a better game all round, but there is still much to like about Capcom’s aging survival horror, turned survival shooter series.


Those after a state of the art reason to own the Move, or even just a finely tuned experience may want to look elsewhere. That said, even if you already own the Gold Edition of RE5, been playing through it to death, finishing every chapter, unlocking every little morsel of extra content, then it is more than worth another look if you so happen to own Sony’s motion control combo. However, it is also definitely not worth buying both a Move and Navigation controller specifically for. Or the other way around if you’re looking for more compatible titles.

VERDICT: 6/10

The above score relates solely to the use of Move controls in RE5, and not as an assesment of the overall quality of the game.

Feature: PlayStation Move: The Verdict

There is no doubting the Wii’s initial success; it was the right time, and the right place for motion controls to really start to take off. Promises of life-like, eventual 1:1 motion, combined with that feel-good, family fun factor when people come together to play were all jostled about like F1 cars battling for that coveted no.1 spot. However, amongst all the hype, the potential to change the face of traditional gaming forever, was the hard reality that, for all Nintendo’s promises the Wii had largely failed to deliver on them as a whole.

The lack of true 1:1 motion control led to what is known as the ‘waggle’ factor being included in games; a series of predefined moves in the game where by the data from the Wii remote and sensors would be processed and interpreted by the Wii console into these actions. The result: a mere illusion of proper motion control, in which you were simply waving your arms around (or the flick of a wrist) in order to do what seemed like a number of overly flashy button presses.

Nintendo finally brought in the Motion Plus upgrade to alleviate the problem, finally delivering on that original 1:1 promise. And although it did, by and large succeed, it was far too late, and the end results were less than impressive. There was still some form of waggle being present, and the lag in titles which actually used full 1:1 tracking was noticeably high. Suffice to say the Motion Plus was too little, too late, and by that time both Sony and Microsoft were eying up the market for them selves.


Whereas MS are clearly aiming themselves at the casual gaming market with their completely controllerless solution in Kinect, Sony, with PlayStation Move, are in fact attempting to cross over into the best of both worlds; luring gamers with the incredibly high-precision of their device, whilst also catering for the mainstream via a selection of highly accurate mii-too sports and entertainment titles.

Unlike Nintendo, who in the beginning promised accurate 1:1 motion tracking and a fast, responsive solution, Sony have actually delivered on just that. The sheer accuracy and precision of the Move is simply incredible. Not only is true 1:1 tracking fully available, along with advanced depth perception, it is also able to operate with in just 1 or 2 frames of latency (that’s between 66ms and 132ms of lag), with just an additional 22ms stemming from the Move device relaying data to the PS3 itself.

If those numbers at first seem a little high, remember that most 60fps titles operate with 66ms latency at standard, with 30fps titles hitting around the 100ms mark. Interestingly, both Halo 3 and the forthcoming NFS Hot Pursuit operate at 100ms, whilst Killzone 2 is around 150ms. Incredibly, that puts the Move right up there with standard controller response times in an average to best scenario. This completely overshadows Microsoft’s Kinect, which on average operates at around 200ms latency when using full body tracking.

Indeed, a few of the Move’s launch titles show off the device’s unflinching precision when it comes to movement tracking. Pin-point accuracy is commonplace in the best titles, whilst latency is noticeably well below levels found on all the best Wii games. What this means is that the most accomplished launch titles for the Move don’t suffer from having that bolted on, or artificial ‘waggle’ feeling to them.

Case in point: Sports Champions demonstrates uncannily realistic 1:1 motion tracking in it’s Table Tennis game, carefully replicating nearly every subtle movement of the player onscreen. Granted, the demo does seem to feature some kind of additional assist function auto-enabled, though this can be turned off in the final game for exact precision tracking.


All this is only made possible because of the unique make up of the Move hardware itself, and it’s relationship with Sony’s own PlayStation Eye camera. Whereas Nintendo went for a combination of infrared tracking, and built-in accelerometers to detect motion and positioning, Sony on the other hand have used a whole array of extra sensors, including LED marker tracking (by far the most important) in order to replicate true 1:1 mapping in a 3D space, whilst also using the PS Eye camera for a simpler form of full body tracking like seen in MS’s Kinect.

The combination of Move’s motion sensors, LED light, and PS Eye camera is just what gives its incredible accuracy. The glowing orb on the end of the controller is tracked by the PS Eye camera, which in turn uses both the data from the internal Move sensors, and the LED light on the front, to intricately track the position of the controller in full 3D. Effectively, it uses the size of the orb within its viewpoint as a guide to determining the distance of the Move, and thus tracking it accordingly.

It’s only when the Move is obscured behind various objects (people, furniture, etc) does the precise nature of the tracking go off-kilter, instead briefly, for a moment reverting back to Wii methods of determining position and movement. When this happens the precision is temporarily lost, resulting in less accurate tracking and an increase in controller latency. However, the Move quickly corrects this as the LED orb on the front of the controller comes back into view.

From a technical standpoint then, the Move offers not only the best of both worlds; precision 1:1 motion control, and full body tracking as well, but also manages to clearly be the most responsive and overly accurate of all three current motion solutions.


Onto the actual hardware itself, and you can see that both the Move and the Navigation Controller (Nav Con) have been lavished by Sony’s high-end design expertise. Both are very comfortable to hold, and benefit from their ergonomically crafted, curved and rounded shape. Compared to the blocky Wii Remote, the Move remains comfortably in your hand for far longer, weighing less, whilst providing better grip and control. The same principles apply to the Nav Con, which feels weighty, but light at the same time.

The fact that both controllers effectively almost weigh the same, and pretty much feel the same, is a big plus. Where as Nintendo went for the most iconic handheld device in the home (the TV remote control) as the base of it’s Wii motion controller design, complementing it with a more traditional feeling Nunchuck, Sony have instead unified their design in a more succinct, albeit stylish manner.

Both the Move and the Nav Con are wireless, working off bluetooth like with the Dual Shock 3 controller, and feature rechargeable lithium-ion batteries. Charging is done via the same USB cable that the Sixaxis and DS3 use to connect up to the PS3, and you can expect each full charge to last between seven and eight hours; which isn’t at all bad considering what the Move has to do, although far less than a regular Sixaxis pad.

Seeing as Sony doesn’t provide any additional USB cables with either the Move or the Nav Con, you might want to invest in one of the few double charging stations that are available. The Sony one in particular features a similar high build quality to that of the Move itself, although more expensive than the lesser third-party solutions available.


In terms of button placement and functionality, both Move and the Nav Con provide ample options as a replacement to the standard Dual Shock controller. The Nav Con features an analogue stick closely matching that of Sony’s DS3 and Sixaxis pads, whilst also having both an L2 analogue trigger and the L1 button (feeling much like the ones on a DS3) slightly beneath the front of it. The Move itself features a new custom T-Trigger on its underside (more like a trigger from a gun than the one from the DS3 pad, it has a softer resistance to it compared to the L2 trigger on the Nav Con) whilst also having the standard four face buttons situated around the brand new Move button, which serves as the units main action/start button.

Furthermore, the PS home button is featured on both the Move and the Nav Con; indented into the controllers to prevent accidental presses from occurring, and on the Move, the Start and Select buttons from the DS have also been lowered into the plastic casing for the same reason.

Annoyingly, the main face buttons feel rather small, and have a cheap, but strong resistance to them. Pushing down on these feels like it requires more effort than it should, as it also does with both Start and Select buttons, making using them slightly uncomfortable. It would have been better to not only make these buttons (the main four face ones) bigger, but also giving them a softer click when pressed.

Thankfully, the rest of the controller is a complete joy to use with no more such mishaps; a quick pull on the T-Trigger, a move using the Nav Con’s analogue stick, or a push of the Move button is quite satisfying, reiterating the high build quality of both devices.

Perhaps the only real downside is that the Nav Con is lacking any kind of motion tracking at all in its innards, making its use somewhat limited compared to the Wii’s Nunchunk. Instead, games that may well work best with two motion controllers require the user to have two Move’s, thus limiting the experience in other areas as the Move doesn’t feature either a d-pad or an analogue stick.


Another, is that the PS Eye is maybe a little too basic in its spec for advanced full body tracking without lag, and that its relatively low resolution display (640 x 480) sometimes makes tracking the LED sphere on the Move difficult in brightly lit areas. I personally found the bright morning sun shining through a window behind me, to the side, mildly affecting its overall performance.

The onscreen image produced from the camera is also very grainy. It’s not so bad in daytime conditions, but in low light situations clarity is replaced with plenty of grain and some digital noise. Having the camera’s lower resolution feed upscaled to match the output resolution of the software using it doesn’t help much either, and the difference in sharpness between the two images (game and camera feed) only provide a disconnect from the experience. Having a HD camera would have been far more beneficial, giving not only better image quality, but also more accurate bright light and body tracking as well.

Saying that, outside of these issues there’s very little, if anything to complain about, and Sony have clearly produced something that is as functional as it is stylish. The accuracy and lack of any heavy latency in accomplished games is obviously the Move’s main talking point, secondary to it treading old ground where early ideas are concerned.


However, all this is in vein if the software doesn’t accurately represent what the tech is actually capable of, and this is one area where the Move is distinctly let down. Out of the Move specific launch titles there is only maybe one of two games worthy of your attention, with some of the best ones being PSN-based download titles.

For this reason alone, I decided not to purchase any games off-hand for review purposes, instead opting to playtest the various demos available via both the Starter Disc that comes packaged with the Move and the PS Eye, and from the PSN.

Sports Champions is clearly the main draw out of all the games and demos available. It is the game which really showcases the Move’s potential over and above that of both the Wii and Microsoft’s forthcoming Kinect. On the Starter Disc two separate games from this title are available for demonstration: Table Tennis, and Disc Golf. Both are incredibly accurate in terms of the way they play, the kind of 1:1 tracking expected, and with regards to their extremely low latency.

In Table Tennis pretty much all of my movements were accurately mapped using the Move, from the angle of my shots, to the speed in which I was moving. The amount of lag that was detectable was minuscule, practically absent, and better than most normal games in framerate dropping situations. To word it better: it WAS like using your arm as an instant controller. The only downside with the demo, is that it had some kind of assist function activated so that hitting the ball was made easier, though its reactions weren’t always as realistic as they could be. Apparently this doesn’t happen in the higher difficulty modes (demo is on easy) as no assist takes place.


Disc Golf was also very accurate and responsive. I could make both drastic and subtle changes to how I wanted to throw the disc by naturally throwing it differently each time, and the Move would pick up on this. The delay was slightly higher than in Table Tennis, with you needing to let go of the T-Trigger just a tad earlier to get the desired effect. Even then adjusting to this took only moments, and the result was still far in advance of anything comparable on the Wii.

Tiger Woods was a huge let down. Although the quality of the actual motion tracking seemed pretty good, there was still a noticeable amount of lag going on – not as much as say Motion Plus Tiger on the Wii, but still more than expected.

Thankfully putting fared much better than on the Wii title. Unlike with Motion Plus Tiger 10, the delay in my movements to the actions on screens was relatively small, and I could see my character’s club moving almost as the Move controller was. On the Wii I had to swing harder than I needed to for the game to respond to my movements, but not so here with the PS3 Move version. This meant that I could accurately gauge both my position and power of my shots quite easily in comparison.

Sadly, the controls are let down by having to hold down one of the face buttons in order to put spin on the ball, and that you need to use a Dual Shock in order to start the game and navigate the menus.


Start The Party was pretty much an enhanced Eye Toy affair, with the player using a virtual fly swatter to hit various insects that appeared on the screen. Video feed of the player is projected on screen, along with the image of the swatter you are holding in place of the Move itself. Control was really poor, lag was instantly apparent, and on many occasions it felt like the game wasn’t registering all of my hits. It was also difficult for me to determine distance in a 3D space on screen when 3D graphics are laid over a video feed, leading to missed shots and bouts of frustration. Despite the novelty of seeing you hold a virtual racket on screen, Eye Toy Play’s Kung Fu was a far better game.


EyePet: Move Edition seemed a little pointless. Although it uses the Move quite well, it’s also made redundant by the fact that the game is far more fun by simply using your hands to interact with your creature. Having Move support didn’t add anything to the overall experience, not when you can already touch and play with your virtual pal without it. The new stuff is a nice diversion for a short gaming (if you can call it that) session or so , but that’s about it.


Interestingly, my favourite game out of the bunch of demos that I played, was the PSN game, Tumble. The concept is very simple: the idea is that you have a certain number of blocks that you have to stack up onscreen, each having different properties such as size, shape and weight. The starting block at the bottom has to be touching the pressure pad on the floor, and you can only build on top of this. Obsticales are also presented to the player, such as avoiding moving objects, and another challenge sees you blowing up an existing tower seeing how far away you can blast the blocks.

The control seemed to me to be pretty accurate, although the cursor speed didn’t react quite as fast a my movements. This can be remedied by upping the Move’s sensitivity in the XMB menu however, so not really an issue. You can turn and flip blocks using a quick flick of the Move in any of the four main directions (left, right, up and down), and navigate the onscreen pointer around the on screen environment by literally Moving the Move controller around the room. The best part however, was both the simplicity and fun of the whole concept; the demo had me glued for about an hour repeatedly trying out new things. It’s hardly revolutionary, but lots of fun.


Other than the Move specific game demos found on the Starter Disc and PSN, there are a few other titles with added Move functionality worth considering. Ruse looks especially suited to the device, and the new Move controls in Heavy Rain are quite well thought out, definitely bringing the player even closer to the game than before. There’s also Resident Evil 5 Gold Edition, which has Move support enabled in the latest download patch, although its implementation leaves a lot to be desired. But more on that in another report if I get the time.

Overall, the range of software for the Move is decidedly a mixed bag of sorts. On one hand, you’ve got the likes of Sports Champions clearly showcasing just what Sony’s motion controller can do, Ruse and Heavy Rain showing genuine improvements over the standard DS3 controller. On the other, there’s shovelware type rubbish as seen with Start The Party, and missed opportunities with the latest Tiger Woods, neither of which really make you feel that the Move was a worthy investment. Even the impressive Sports Champions suffers from a total lack of personality. It feels bland and completely soulless like many of the other Move-specific offerings. At least the art style doesn’t try and patronise you like say Start The Party or anything.

So software-wise the Move doesn’t quite deliver on all accounts. Despite some genuinely impressive flashes of brilliance, there’s a lot that needs serious improving. Nothing out of the current line-up of titles screams of being an essential purchase, a real reason to own the Move. Hardcore gamers are likely to enjoy downloading and trying out the various game demos that are available on PSN, especially Heavy Rain and Tumble, whilst casual gamers may well wonder just what all the fuss is about.


Going back to the hardware though, and it is apparent that Sony have absolutely succeeded in delivering something that not only works as promised, but also something manages to offer a level of precision and accuracy not found in other motion control solutions. Sure, the full body tracking capabilities of the Move + PS Eye camera may not be able to match the Kinect in this area, but the tracking of the Move itself and the upper body is easily as good, with overall accuracy being to a far higher standard with vastly lower latency.

Certainly, the experience of proper 1:1 tracking with precise depth perception is undeniably impressive, and seeing it implemented here with minimal latency – were talking about 1 to 2 frames as standard (66ms to 132ms) - is arguably Sony’s coup d'état against both Nintendo and Microsoft. But it remains to be seen if that’s really enough.

There’s no question that for a variety of experiences, from family party games, to high-end hardcore FPS’s that the Move unquestionably provides the strongest baseline to work from; you’re going to need an additional control device for some types of game to work on kinect, but not with Move. However, the issue is whether or not Sony can convince developers to spend the extra time in crafting advanced AAA Move experiences. Unlike Kinect, there doesn’t appear to be the same amount of processing overhead when using the device so I don’t see why not. But time, and consumer spending will dictate whether or not that uptake will happen.

For the time being then, PlayStation Move is definitely worth a look. The technology is clearly up to scratch, and there is a fair amount of free content to try out if the likes of Sports Champions isn’t quite your thing. It’s just a shame that some of the software fails to live up to the Move’s potential, failing to expand outside of the mii-too clone market and into something a little more polished and unique.

So, at this very moment the Move represents an impressive technological demonstration, but lacks any true must have titles to really back it up. The promise of what it was supposed to be able to do has been fulfilled. All that’s left is for more games to do the same thing.