Apple Unveils iPhone 4

The significance of the iPhone’s grip on the mobile gaming market is not to be taken lightly, with the system adopting the kind of multimedia space first eyed up by Sony and the release of the PSP. Since its launch people have gone crazy over Apple’s sleek, and incredibly stylish entry into handheld telecommunications, whilst developers have salivated over its mass market gaming appeal and the financial goldmine it potentially brings to those clever enough to exploit it.

All of the above makes Apple’s official unveiling of the brand new iPhone far too important for us at IQGamer to ignore. The new unit (dubbed the iPhone 4) - showcased along with the new iPhone OS4 - is almost as powerful as the recently released iPad, but at under half of the size and with improved motion sensing capabilities integral to getting a decent gaming experience, along with a higher resolution screen, HD video recording capabilities, and a new multi-tasking operating system.


The iPhone 4 comes in at just 9.3mm thick, some 24% thinner than the iPhone 3GS - what Apple is calling the ‘thinnest smartphone on the planet’, and for the first time will be available in either black or white. The design is remarkably close to the prototype photos that were leaked over the Internet by tech site Gizmodo, with a glass finish on the front and the back, and silver metallic strip going down the sides separated only by two horizontal black lines.

As per usual the unit looks very stylish, but then again it IS an Apple product so that’s only to be expected.

In terms of features, the iPhone 4 has two cameras, one at the front and a more powerful 5-megapixel one round the back complete with digital zoom function and LED flash. It is also capable of recording high-definition video in 720p and at 30fps - exceptional for such a small device. Two microphones are also present along with an increasingly more common noise reduction button.

The impressive 3.5” screen has a wider viewing angle than before, and has seen a resolution boost over previous models as well, packing a total of 326 pixels per inch, across a 960x640 resolution screen. This is around four times as many pixels as the 3GS, which should allow for greater clarity and detail whilst watching movie clips and more importantly, playing games. Furthermore an 800-to-1 contrast ratio was also confirmed, so expect deeper black levels and better upper end luminance making for a brighter, more eye-popping screen.


Moving on, the same A4 processor that powered the iPad now powers the new iPhone 4, thus providing a noticeable jump in graphics quality should developers decide to take advantage of that fact, and of course if Apple’s restrictive software API doesn’t still get in the way.

This A4 processor basically contains the system’s CPU, GPU and video decoder all on one chip, delivering solid 3D performance whilst being incredibly energy efficient. Apple has stated that through the inclusion of the A4 over previous chips, that battery life has seen significant improvements with the no less than 7 hours of talk time, 10 hours of Wi-Fi web browsing, 10 hours of video playback, 40 hours of music, and 300 hours of doing absolutely nothing on standby. That’s pretty impressive, considering Apple’s incredibly poor track record when it comes to battery life on older iPods.

Included inside the A4 processor is one Cortex-A8 CPU core, an Imagination Technologies Power VR SGX535 GPU, and one VXD375 video decoder. All of which provides significant extra grunt over the existing 3GS model making the iPhone 4 a true successor, rather than an incremental upgrade like the 3GS was to the 3G.

Backing up that horsepower is some much-needed, enhanced motion sensing capabilities designed to be more responsive and better suited for gaming as a whole. The gyroscope inside features 6-axis motion sensing capability - reportedly ‘perfect’ for games according to Steve Jobs at the event - and can handle things like full pitch and roll, sensing in a 3D space, not do dissimilar from Sony’s PS3 controllers. Apple demonstrated the improved capabilities of the device using party game Jenga, in which tilting the iPhone forward and backwards, and side to side manipulated movements onscreen with minimal lag and much greater accuracy than before.


Other than the aesthetics and hardware tweaks the most significant upgrade comes with a change of software. The iPhone 4 is the first to use the un-imaginatively titled iOS 4 (previously known as the iPhone OS 4), which brings the hotly rumoured multi-tasking feature to users for the first time outside having to jailbreak their iPhones. Finally you can run multiple apps at the same time without having to close one down to use another while only having to reopen it again later. All you need to do is push down on the Home button and the task-managing interface will pop up allowing you to access applications that are still running in the background.

Unfortunately there was no sign of any flash compatible web browsing software, with users having to make do with the integrated YouTube app for Internet video only. Maybe at some point Mr Jobs will finally lift his ‘no flash’ policy much in the way he did with iTunes DRM restrictions after numerous complaints.

However, Jobs did say that the new iOS 4 would be available for free to older iPhone and iPod Touch users starting 21st June, except those with first-gen iPhones.

Price wise the 16GB version will retail for $199, and the 32GB for $299, both on contract only. No word was given out in how much these would be available for on ‘pay as you go’ or when this was likely to happen, although previous models went on sale via ‘contract only’ for a few months before other alternatives became available.

No pricing information was given for the UK, but we do know that the iPhone 4 will be hitting stores on 24th June, with preorders starting on 15th June onwards. As usual you can expect preorders to sell out within a couple of hours, along with another battle for any free stock to take place on launch day.


So that’s the iPhone 4 in a nutshell. Interestingly, we see the iPhone, iPod Touch and the iPad all eating further into the handheld gaming space. As the both the technology and functionality improves so to will the software. That could in turn leaded to bigger and more ambitious titles being produced, whilst also feeding the casual market with smaller, but more polished experiences, experiences that many people already associated with Apple’s entry into the gaming space, and one that Sony and Nintendo will both have to look out for.

We don’t expect to be getting a hold of the iPhone 4 upon release, or even to have available access to one, but we’re sure to encounter Apple’s latest world dominating handheld at some point, and when we do, we will no doubt endeavour to report our findings.

Movie Review: Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time

Originally I was never intending to review ‘Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time’ (TSOT) after I’d seen it, not having the time to do so and all. However its recent return to public consciousness, with the revelation that the film has so far dramatically failed to reach anywhere near its $200 budget, has made me revisit the my initial thoughts on the film, with enough time passing to gather together any mixed feelings and write up what I could consider to be my final opinion on the matter.

I will say that against all my initial prejudices against most game to film adaptations made since the late nineteen-nineties, I actually quite enjoyed Prince Of Persia. It was ‘alright’, ‘not bad’, and could have been so much worse. I was surprised to see just how much more polished and professionally directed it looked to be from other videogame adaptations - a far cry from the DTV or music video look some of these films tend to take on. Whether that be from poor direction or just a lack of a decent budget I don’t know. Maybe both. But one thing is for sure, that TSOT ranks as one the best game adaptations to date, even if in terms of story and characterisation it is even shallower than some that have come before it.

Surprisingly, the film also feels much like it belongs in the POP franchise as a whole, featuring art direction that is partially simillar to ‘The Two Thrones’ with elements of ‘The Warrior Within’ put in for good measure. The costumes, especially with regards to the film’s Prince Dastan have clearly been adapted from the ‘Prince’ character in the last two games, representing a halfway house between the ‘emo badass’ look he had in the second game to the ‘hardened Persian adventurer’ he became in the third. One scene in particular, in which Dastan accidentally activates the dagger of time, demonstrates this perfectly. He becomes a half-human, half mystical being closely representing the dual light/dark prince on the cover of ‘The Two Thrones’ videogame.


The main reason behind this, and other such similarities, is that one of the film’s lead writers (who is also one of the producers), is in fact the original writer behind the ‘Sands Of Time’ game, which has no doubt left a lasting influence on the production team as a whole with regards to the film’s artistic style and rather superficial storyline. I thought it was quite nice to see someone paramount to the overall game design process finally being allowed to take on such a large responsibility in shaping the film, clearly keeping the overall look and feel closer to the franchise than most of these adaptations have done before. Other influences coming from Director Mike Newell and Producer Jerry Bruckheimer obviously creep in too, and this can be seen both in the way the film is lit and how the action is directed.

The yarn told in ‘Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time’ isn’t particularly original, though it works well enough for the film, while also closely representing the kind of narrative to be told through the prince’s many videogame adventures. In that respect it’s still reasonable solid, if nothing but superficial, and makes for entertaining if unremarkable movie.

It’s a pretty straightforward affair in which a young Persian Prince (Jake Gyllenhaal), who is not of royal blood, gets entangled up in the death of the Persian King and an apparent plot to seize the throne. Naturally he’s innocent, and along with a mysterious Princess (Gemma Arterton) set off to find the truth and enjoy some adventure along the way. That and something about a sacred time-controlling dagger, with whoever possessing it having the ability to alter a few minutes of time and space for their advantage.


This dagger is the main plot moving device in the film, along with the almost non-mystery surrounding the King’s death, and is used largely for story purposes than for any meaningful action sequences. Though it does come around full circle towards the end, but that is to be expected. Unlike the videogames there are only one or two scenes in which the Prince actually uses the dagger to reverse time to evade danger, and this is deliberately limited, mostly it seems to expand the story about the resting place of the mythical sands of time which power it.

Other than the use of the dagger of time, and the surprisingly accurate dress of its characters, which match the look and feel of the later games perfectly, there isn’t much else to be found in ‘TSOT’ that feels like a Prince of Persia movie. There are no fiendish scenes of Dastan escaping diabolical traps, or traversing an elaborate maze of different surfaces, although there are a fair few elements of rooftop acrobatics which depict the style of the games, if not in a slapstick kind of manner.


The dialogue is entertaining whilst being drenched in the obvious cheese and cliché that is to be expected from any summer popcorn flick, although at times the modern day language and constant wisecracking was somewhat off-putting. There are some convincing locations, marred by some strangely poor CG. But most of all, ‘TSOT’ displays a noticeably clear degree of professionalism and solid film-like qualities that most game to film adaptations lack, instead looking more like DTV releases masquerading as box office material (Mortal Kombat Annihilation, Resident Evil).

A thick layer of grain covers the image looking unmistakably filmic, and most scenes are filled with an over-saturation of colours, all representative of a standard Michael Bay production. Comparisons can be drawn with Pirates of the Caribbean, and definitely Transformers in this regard. This stylised look certainly aids in trying to create atmosphere for the film, and makes things seem that little bit more real than in the usual artificial looking videogame adaptations. Plenty of location shooting and solidly designed sets also do this, and is only let down by the sometimes-poor nature of the CG. At times it blatantly looks like something out of a videogame cut scene and is jarring compared to the live stunts in the rest of the movie.


Most of the films performances are by the numbers, with some of the actors going through the motions. Both Jake Gyllenhaal and Gemma Arterton both seem guilty of this. Then again the scrip leaves them very little to work with and is the main cause of the performers failing to deliver any chemistry between characters, and any suspense in the film. Both their characters are equally strong willed, with Jake being the wise-cracker, and they all too often argue like adolescent teens despite the severity of the situation they find themselves in, taking more than a leaf from the Pirates book of characterisation.

Entertaining? On occasion, surprisingly so, especially when Afred Molina is drawn into the mix. His character, a tax-evading, modern day businessman of the time, brings some added fun and charisma to the film. Clearly he’s enjoying playing up his role (which appears to be a loose parody of Oliver Reed’s character in Ridley Scott Gladiator). Just one of a few obvious nods to other box office hits. Ben Kingsley is an obvious choice as the film’s villain. It’s a role that he’s played many times before, and as such requires him to do very little. The sheer stage presence he commands is enough to fill the part, and as a result he calmly sales through on autopilot without so much as of a hitch.


Frequently the story and action sequences can appear to be flung together rather quickly. Although individually they are okay, and the action sequences themselves are well directed and easy to follow, with plenty of explosive scenes. At one point during the middle of the film, the feeling of time passing and distances travelled for the characters and the audience, which is so important in building up a large scale and epic feel to the proceedings, seemed to be obviously absent. I noticed the same thing during my viewing of ‘Clash Of The Titans’, in which the entire film felt like an endless string of scenes being put together. Thankfully ‘Prince Of Persia’ mostly avoids this, and after the small blip in the middle keeps pushing forward relatively naturally.

Despite these issues ‘TSOT’ is a fun and pretty entertaining movie. Definitely more ‘Pirates’ meets ‘Clash’ than true ‘Prince Of Persia’, and this is clearly evident throughout. However the film isn’t bad at all, nor is it particularly good. Instead I would say that it’s alright (the exact word I used as I left the cinema), and comes off as a lot more polished than most game to film adaptations, even if it isn’t the most deep or coherent pick of the bunch.


One thing that I will add, is that is very refreshing to see a game adaptation look and feel so much like a standard by the number summer blockbuster than the obvious ‘not a proper movie’ that so many of these films seem to take. If it wasn’t called ‘Prince Of Persia’, then it could be mistaken for a Persian ‘Pirates’ movie, or a competitor to ‘The Mummy’ franchise. It does however maintain an overall artistic style that resembles in no small part the ‘Two Thrones’ and ‘Forgotten Sands’ videogames. A sure sign that these things are being taken far more seriously.

Ether way, it is a solid enough, and reasonably entertaining movie, if not slightly boring in parts, which is all to be expected really.

Alright… Yeah, that will definitely do it.

You may have noticed that unlike our game reviews we haven’t given TSOT a verdict out of ten. For any movie reviews we do at IQGamer we’ve decided to drop the arbitrary one-to-ten marking system, and instead let the tone of the review speak for itself.

For another take on Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time, and loads more movie goodness head over to Beames on Film.

NVIDIA GPU Not Inside The 3DS

We had high hopes for a 3DS powered by NVIDIA’s Tegra chipset technology, allowing Nintendo’s upcoming handheld to deliver visuals somewhere in the region of the GameCube and the original Xbox. And whilst that still may be true - with some unconfirmed sources stating that it could be even more powerful, though almost certainly unlikely - the previously rumoured NVIDIA deal has been unofficially ruled out.

Both IGN with their ‘everything we know’ article, and the Eurogamer affiliated Digital Foundry blog are sighting unnamed sources inside the development community as the ones revealing this tantalisingly interesting piece of information.

With NVIDIA out of the equation, the question is who is going to partner with Nintendo on providing the graphics power inside the 3DS?

Apparently they have chosen another Japanese company to deliver the GPU solution inside the new machine. Who, as of yet we don’t know. And no details were forthcoming on how powerful this architecture might be, although I’m still expecting something around GameCube level graphics, but enhanced with proper support for shaders. Somewhere in between the iPhone and the original Xbox sounds pretty accurate to me, given the power usage and manufacturing cost behind higher-end chips.

So, with this in mind we can expect any GPU used to be very energy efficient, and relatively cheap to manufacture, as in the past Nintendo have always sold any new hardware at a profit - unlike Sony and Microsoft, who still continue to follow the ‘loss leader’ business model chosen by Sega for their Saturn console way back in 1994.

To find out more we may well just have to wait until E3, with Nintendo’s press event due to start on 15th June. Hopefully they will divulge at least some of the system’s internal make up, ending months of rumours and speculation.

Snot a problem – Earthworm Jim Returns!

Earthworm Jim was at one point one of my favourite MegaDrive games, with the original title and its sequel regularly being plunged into the cartridge slot. I still remember renting the first one and sighing with disappointment as I initially didn’t really like the game all that much. It was hard, unusual, and not quite how I expected it to be. After composing myself and trying again, I found myself opening up to Jim’s brand of humour and chaotic nonsense, along with finding some of the most inspired gameplay design I had encountered outside of Treasure’s much loved titles.

So it’s no surprise that a smile came over my face when I discovered that not only was a remake of original Jim game on the cards, but that there was also a trailer now available for it too. Groovy!


The remake, unsurprisingly called Earthworm Jim HD, contains both the original single-player game you remember, but also a brand new four-player co-op mode as well. New levels have also been added to the core gameplay experience, which include bizarre new enemies such as a distinctive keyboard-playing cat - attacking you with musical notes no less - and a granny jet packing herself across the stage like James Bond in Thunderball. Naturally this goes down well with a game sporting a varied cast of off-the-wall characters, ranging from a goldfish with delusions of world domination to an evilly posh cat and a crow in a yellow space suit.



As you can see in the trailer, rather than going down the 2.5D textured polygons route developers Gameloft have instead seen fit to be rendering the title in lovely hand drawn, high definition 2D. The look is not too dissimilar from Capcom’s Super Street Fighter II Turbo HD Remix, in which the game’s visuals appear to consist of flash type 2D graphics rather than the highly detailed pixel art to be found in SNKPlaymore’s King Of Fighters XII.


So far it does look pretty cool, though visually it is missing plenty of the little per-pixel details of the 16bit games, which is a shame. Plus something seems to be off with the sound. The effects are different, rather strange, and not like they were in the original game.

Either way, it is nice to see someone bring the character back to live in a form mildly respectful to its original source material. Gotta be better than some uninspired 3D sequel right? And hopefully, even if the visual charm isn’t quite there, that the gameplay will be back on fine form as we remember it to be. Certainly not like those awful GBA ports released a good few years back.

Earthworm Jim HD will be released for Xbox Live Arcade on 9th June and for PlayStation Network and WiiWare on 9th July. So one month later then.

Sony Announce PS3 3D Plans For Japan

Earlier on in the year we reported that Sony was planning to role out 3D game support for the PS3 sometime in June to coincide with the launch of their first 3D enabled HDTV. The firmware to enable 3D support for the PS3 console itself was deployed a few weeks back, but now gamers will actually have the software to finally take advantage of that, assuming of course you have a 3D compatible HDTV set.


On June 10 Japanese gamers will get their first taste of 3D gaming as Sony plans to release updates for certain PSN titles. Making the list we have: Super Stardust HD, WipeOut HD, and Pain. Both WipeOut and Stardust will receive free updates to enable the use of 3D, whilst Pain on the other hand will require users to shell out 300 yen (about $3 ish) for the privilege.

For those who don’t own any of the above titles, Sony are also going to be releasing a 3D enabled demo of MotorStorm Pacific Rift, which will be available on June 10 but only to purchasers of a shiny new Bravia 3D LCD screen. Individuals who purchase one of Sony’s 3D HDTV’s will receive a code allowing them to not only get a hold of this MotorStorm demo exclusively, but also free downloads to all of the PSN compatible 3D games available from that day.

No announcements were made as to what Sony have planned for Europe or North America, but we think that talk of those territories can’t be far away.

With E3 fast approaching there is no doubt Sony are going to be pushing hard on the 3D front. Even if the format remains an expensive niche for the first few years, it definitely looks like it could be one of the next standards in gaming - especially for the next generation - and it’s with this that Sony looks to stamp their feet firmly into the ground with.

Tech Analysis: Split Second (360 vs PS3)

Earlier on today we posted up our technical analysis of BlackRock Studio’s Split Second. However it was brought to our attention that there was a mistake in our original article, which stated that the PS3 version of the game didn’t have any kind of anti-aliasing, when it did in fact have 2xMSAA just like the 360 version. Our reasoning behind this was the PS3 version's constant jagged lines made it look awfully like there was no AA. Although in hindsight the high contrast nature the game is actually the cause of the issue, creating problems for the MSAA in generating good enough samples for the anti-aliasing to work.

We did pick up on this in our original article (highlighted in bold)with regards to the 360 game, and it is still featured below in our updated version, but failed to spot this as the cause in the PS3 version. Despite this, in light of the above information, it doesn't change our initial feeling towards either version in any way.

We appologise for any mistakes and do try our best to maintain absolute accuracy in all the content we provide. However we are only human, and even the best of us can at times make the occasional error. What follows below is our updated and re-published article.

When BlackRock Studios first unleashed the critically praised pure onto consoles last year, it was a shining example of just how to approach multi-platform development. Highly optimised for both platforms strengths and weaknesses, it was largely identical, with only subtle differences between them, barely noticeable unless both versions were running side by side.

For Split Second the fine team at BlackRock seem to have done an almost equally stellar job, with the concessions made for each platform being remarkably low, and the differences again being hardly visible in motion, apart from perhaps the PS3 version's seemingly less successful use of AA and the 360's slightly blurred image.

Surprisingly, it is the PS3 that appears initially to get the arguably superior version this time around, on paper at least. Further inspection shows however, that things might not be so clear-cut. Whilst the PS3 build is in fact the sharpest, it also has some dialled back post processing effects and what appears to be only very little in the way of jaggies reduction through the use of MSAA.

In a game like Split Second - where high contrasting edges are everywhere - the 360’s use of AA isn’t as perfect as we’d like it to be either, with jaggies regularly appearing at certain points, although not to the extent of the PS3 version. But it’s eradication of more jagged lines does make a difference during gameplay, though not enough to make any version an initially clear winner.

So that’s the gist of it. Now, lets delve into those all-important details as we take a closer look at both versions of the game.


In terms of rendering resolution it’s the PS3 build that takes the lead with its crisp and clear 720p display. It’s a full 1280x720 on the Sony platform, and 1280x672 for the 360 game. Both seem to use the standard issue 2xMSAA (multi-sampling anti-aliasing) that is commonplace in most titles on MS’s machine, although its inclusion in the PS3 build doesn’t do much to reduce aliasing.

From the screenshots on this page it’s pretty clear that the PS3 build is shaper overall than the 360 one. However the reason behind this isn’t quite so straightforward as you might think. Obviously the 360 build’s lower 672 resolution does have an impact on how sharp the final image will be, although as we’ve seen before with Splinter Cell and to a much lesser extent with Alan Wake, that an upscaled image can still look rather clean and artifact free. And with BlackRock’s latest that certainly seems to be the case, being pretty sharp in motion.

The upscaling appears to be rather good, and only a small amount of softness seems to come from this process. It can be pretty hard to tell though, as the game features heavy usage of a screen blurring post process effect which distorts the entire image. Thankfully we can still see that regardless of post processing, that the overall composition of the image is still superior in terms of raw sharpness in the PS3 build.

Unfortunately this raw sharpness coupled with what looks like no anti-aliasing in motion - due to the lack of good samples being available to the MSAA, largely because of the game featuring constantly high contrasting edges throughout - simply heightens the game’s already visible jagged lines, with the PS3 version crawling in shimmering edges. The 360 on the other hand, handles this a little better with it’s combined use of MSAA, greater amount of post processing, and from the extra blur added by the upscaling process, in which the overall result is a smoother final image despite the small vertical upscale taking place.

This is particularly noticeable during gameplay as the PS3 build’s constant edge shimmering make it just a little bit harder to read the road up ahead when things get chaotic. By contrast, the cleaner 360 game allows you to see small details coming up ahead without the screen crawling in as many aliasing atifacts, though they are a little blurrier than on the PS3.

Despite this issue both versions are equally playable, and at times the 360 version is no stranger to these effects, though they manifest themselves less frequently which is definitely a plus.


What about the game in motion then? Well, both versions run at thirty frames per-second (30fps) for the most part, with both slowing down on occasion in certain situations – usually when powersliding around a corner whilst all hell is breaking loose. Like with Pure both versions are remarkably similar and very solid at maintaining their framerates. Both seem to be v-synced, and suffer from only minor frame drops.

The 360 build seems keep up with the demands of the action slightly better than the PS3 one, although the difference is tiny with it rarely dipping below the intended 30fps target, and only occasionally loosing the odd frame to screen tearing. PS3 owners get a version that is mostly identical with very few drops in framerate - just a little more than the 360 - but this barely impacts in any meaningful way during gameplay, still providing a solidly smooth experience for the vast majority of the time.

Whilst both versions seem to be v-synced, I did notice that the PS3 game would tear the occasional frame more often in stressful situations compared to the 360 one, although this difference is very hard to detect by eye, requiring you to be looking out for it. The small amount of screen tear on ether version is only visible for a fraction of a second, and only appears right at the top of the screen, so it isn’t particularly noticeable at all.

In the end both versions perform excellently, with each one rarely dropping framerate for more than a second or so, and the tearing that arises in either build is barely worth mentioning. BlackRock have basically achieved parity across both platforms with any differences being purely un-intrusive and not detrimental to the game in any way.


Texture filtering and detail is like for like across both platforms, as is the modelling and general shader effects. Most alpha effects and particles seem to be rendered in the same resolution on both platforms, with the PS3 getting an equally high-end experience with regards to the games often impressive visuals – especially the lighting which looks incredible when in full bloom. Some smoke and flame effects look slightly lower on PS3, but it's hard to notice when playing the game.

Post processing is another matter, in which it is clear that the effect has been dialled back slightly on the PS3 game. You can see this in the shot below where the 360 game features what looks like a slightly stronger blur-styled effect over the PS3 one.

It’s this effect in tandem with the lower 672 resolution, that gives the 360 build a clear loss in sharpness, but also a greater reduction in jaggies than what 2xMSAA would usually provide. However, there is also a strong case for the PS3 build and the sharper overall display it provides, although the differences are less apparent in motion than they are in still screens.


Overall, BlackRock have done a mostly excellent job in maintaining platform parity to the point where there really isn’t all that much in it.

The PS3 definitely benefits from having a slightly higher vertical resolution and the shaper display it provides. From a raw technical perspective is arguably superior, but then again, the 360 version features less jagged lines due to both the use of anti-aliasing combined with the slightly greater post processing effects over the PS3. The upscaled nature of the game may also help in this regard, with the slight blur adding more AA in areas in which the MSAA would usually fail.

Either way both versions perform smoothly with very little in the way of framerate drops or troublesome screen tear, and the differences in screen composition when the game is in motion are not as apparent as they are in still screens. Certainly, I'd say that most people will be satisfied whichever version they decide to go for.

It’s tit for tat, and given the choice I would probably take the 360 game with its reduced amount of jagged edges, along with a controller that is more suited to racing games if I absolutely had to pick - although I do prefer the sharpness of the PS3 version, and the higher resolution overall.

So in conclusion, Split Second is solid on both systems with your choice most likely coming down to which controller you prefer using, or which online network all your friends will be playing on. BlackRock’s latest is a good example of balanced multi-platform development, and where the differences between each version isn’t at all detrimental to the experience.