Hands-On: The Xbox 360 S 4GB Console

We’ve already taken a look at the 250gb Xbox 360 S last month in our in-depth hands-on with the unit, and now today we sit down and do the same with the cheaper 4gb model of the console. For those looking for a more comprehensive report, you should check out our original feature, as what we have hear is more of look at the differences between the two models rather than a complete showcase.


Billed as the replacement for the previous Xbox 360 Arcade, the new 4gb S is £50 cheaper (retailing at £150 against £200) and comes complete with the same feature set as the 250gb unit. You’ve got the five USB ports (two on the front, three on the back), AV out, Optical out, HDMI output, Ethernet port, a custom connector for hooking up Kinect, and the inclusion of the built-in Wi-Fi adaptor previously speculated to remain exclusive to the larger unit S console. Effectively the only difference between the two is the size of the memory contained within the console, and the unit’s aesthetic finish.


The 250gb model 360 S went for a decidedly high-end approach to aesthetic design, featuring a glossy black plastic finish with some shiny chrome highlights complementing the style set chosen to represent the ‘elite’ of Xbox gaming. It was pretty stylish and really looked like a premium product of sorts. Although the shiny finish caused no end of problems if you weren’t careful with it. The unit easily picked up fingerprints, and attracted dust like it had just been cleaned with some kind of window polish.

By contrast the 4gb model features a matt finish and only subtle touches of the chrome highlighting; present only on the touch sensitive ‘power’ and disc tray ‘open/close’ buttons. The sides of the unit, which also previously had touches of chrome, now have a glossy black surround instead, complementing the matt black aesthetic found on the top, bottom, front and back of the machine. The contrast between the shiny edges and the rest of the machine is further accentuated by the difference in the shade of black used for the two parts of the console – it’s noticeable lighter on top.


I have to say that I actually much prefer the more traditional look of the 4gb unit above the overly shiny 250gb model. Sure, the 4gb unit lacks that ‘high-end’ look that most shiny products display so proudly. But at the same time I find that that the standard matt approach is far more functional, and still looks rather stylish overall. There’s no chance of accidentally leaving loads of smudged finger marks on the console, and in terms of cleaning the unit, a simple duster will more than suffice. Comparatively, cleaning the 250gb model required delicate use of a micro fibre cloth. And even then, there was still a small chance at marking the console.

I also think that the new matt finish better represents the 360 brand as a whole, owing to the fact that the overall look of the 4gb unit is much closer to an extension of the previous 360’s design, rather than an attempt to follow Sony and Apple’s idea of shiny meaning ‘top of the range’, as it were. Personal preference for sure, but I do think that having a glossy finish for the 250gn was a light miss-step for the company. Although it IS their brand, and having it unified with two black Xbox 360’s can only be a good thing, even if one happens to be annoyingly shiny.


In terms of storage space, the latest version of the Xbox 360 S features 4gb of inbuilt flash memory compared to the 250gb hard drive found in its bigger brother. The compartment containing the hard drive is still correct and present though, so a HDD can later be installed if need be, much like on the existing Arcade and Core 360 consoles.

According to both Microsoft, and the picture on the side of the box, a 250gb HDD will be available separately at some point in the near future. One US-based online retailer already has it up for preorder, listing it at $130, so we can also expect it to arrive in the UK for around the £100 mark shortly. Unless of course, that Microsoft tries to change us a premium £130 in a like for like exchange, which would be most unwise seeing as Kinect will be retailing for the same amount.




Other than the smooth matt exterior and the use of internal 4gb flash memory, the rest of the package is identical to the 250gb model. The very same controller can be found in the box, along with the new style AV Composite cable, and the curvy looking power supply unit, all of which can be seen in the screenshots above.

You may have noticed that we’ve used them before in our hands-on report of the original 250gb unit, but seeing as these components are identical, then what is the point in photographing them all over again. Impressions of these items can be found in our 250gb Xbox 360 S feature, if you’re interested.


Operating noise is identical to our 250gb S console, with the fan noise being barely audible in a quiet room, and only ever ramping up when placing a disc in the drive and booting up the game; DVD playback is, like with the original 360, at idling levels.

Seeing as there isn’t enough space to install disc-based games onto the flash memory (of which only 3gb is left after the OS steals the rest) we could only test out small XBL demos to determine the impact of playing games off the internal memory versus an actual disc. As with the 250gb machine, operating noise drops down to idling levels comfortably, only rising up slightly after twenty minutes or so of prolonged use. I also left the console on for another half hour or so with the game still running, but didn’t encounter any further rises in fan speed.


The 4gb Xbox 360 S then represents a solid upgrade for anyone looking to replace their existing Arcade or Core model 360’s, or even their 20gb Premium or Pro units if they haven’t the need for the extra space the hard drive provides. Like with the 250gb console the 4gb S has the same stylish design, and all of the additional features of its bigger brother, but without the overly shiny aesthetic of a ‘supposedly’ premium item. The advantage is that you don’t have to treat the 4gb S with kid gloves, and more importantly still have access to inbuilt Wi-Fi and a direct, all-in-one link for the Kinect.

Unfortunitely, for those looking to upgrade to this model over an old 360 with a hard drive, there is a distinct lack of storage space available going from 20 to 100 gigabytes to 4gb of flash of memory. However, a separate 250gb HDD will be available shortly, and when it arrives the 4gb model will actually represent a good, if not slightly more expensive, upgrade path for existing owners of the old 360 console.

Personally, I prefer the smooth matt exterior, with the glossy black and chrome highlights over the shiny finish of the 250gb S. And in turn, definitely feel that the 4gb machine represents how the new S console should look like when seen as a genuine continuation of the existing Xbox 360 brand. Then again, it makes perfect sense from Microsoft’s point of view to have two differently styled machines, with the 250gb leading the way with its ‘elite’ look about it, and the 4gb with its more traditional finish becoming a solid, yet barely lower-end alternative.

Demo Hands-On: Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X 2

For those expecting some high-octane aerial action taking you right to the edge of the danger zone, you need to look elsewhere because Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X 2 is a far more sedate, realistic take on airborne combat. Enemies appear as tiny dots ready to be engaged over the distant horizon rather than up close in intense choreographed battles, and the sense of speed expected by thrill-seekers hoping for a ‘Top Gun’ experience is also largely absent.

Instead Ubisoft are once again delivering a controlled slice of hybrid arcade action, arcade in the sense that most of the time all you have to do is move and shoot without needing to know the in-depth complications surrounding the difficulty of flying, and controlled in the sense that you can perform many intricate movements using the joypad without having to hit the various buttons required by a flight simulator. Realism then, glossed over in a more accessible package of sorts, more fun than non-fiction.


H.A.W.X 2 maybe fairly simplistic in what you are tasked to do; shooting down enemy aircraft in a slow-looking ballet below the clouds, however, there is much to learn with regards to manoeuvring your aircraft and successfully acquiring targets for takedown without stopping to blink. The control system, although initially daunting, allows for finite movements of your aircraft and subtle adjustments where a more direct method would hinder your accuracy.

The left analogue stick controls your aircraft’s position and roll, allowing you to turn slowly as well as perform a basic rolling manoeuvre much like After Burner’s trademark ‘barrel roll’. Pushing gently towards either direction, left and right, makes your craft turn subtly; just enough to keep up with other fighter jets at long range, whilst pushing down slightly more makes your craft perform a quick roll, allowing you to spin around in all 360 degrees of motion. It is also possible to slowly roll, and then reverse again. Or, to slowly turn and then enter into a quick roll as an evasive technique to avoid incoming missiles, but not really other aircraft.

Additional control for turning at high speeds is provided by the L1 and R1 shoulder buttons, whilst the L2 and R2 triggers are used to accelerate and brake your aircraft. Using the brake in combination with the analogue stick and either the L1 or R1 buttons allows you to ‘brake right’ or brake left’, much like seen in the film Top Gun, although not in anywhere near as dramatic a fashion. The implementation, like with the rest of the game’s controls, and realistic sense of motion, is delivered subtly.

Shooting missiles and firing off rounds from your ‘cannon’ is done purely on the face buttons, with X controlling missiles, and O the cannon, much like any other combat flying game, while lastly, the right stick is used to move the camera around your aircraft giving you almost 360 vision.


In the air enemies are represented as small yellow icons, with your next target surrounded by a yellow box which changes colour after you’ve highlighted it for a brief second with your cursor. Once this has happened you can fire missiles ‘off target’ and still make a direct hit possible. However, when using your machine cannon you need your cursor to be inside that box in order to successfully take down the target, although it is possible for skilled players to still do the same by firing off rounds when scrolling past and over enemy fighters.

Reading the air, and whether or not you’ve taken down the enemy is easy. Getting to grips with the game’s initially depthy control scheme isn’t. The first time you fly off and go for a spin for the benefit of the Soviet Union, control is both confusing and unwieldy. Seconds after picking up the joypad for the first time I was unintentionally performing barrel rolls instead of simply turning my craft around like I wanted to. Using both L1 and R1 to perform this manoeuvre instead of the stick didn’t feel right at all, and I felt a distinct disconnect between what I wanted to be doing and how the game wanted me to do it.


After a few minutes H.A.W.X’s somewhat in-depth approach to flight control (for a console) became wholly apparent, as did the need for subtlety rather than the quick-finger reflexes required for the likes of After Burner, or Blazing Angles. I would say that anyone not versed in the H.A.W.X series will need at least an hour or two to really adjust to the controls, and maybe a few days to become completely proficient in using them second nature. But I guess that is simply a requirement seeing as the right stick is sometimes essential in successfully tracking enemies from behind by providing an all round viewpoint of the action.

Strangely for me I also found that the camera system, in combination with the initially fiddly controls, were a catalyst for motion sickness. Usually I only suffer from the condition when playing first-person shooters, or shaky cam action games. However, in H.A.W.X 2 the need to be turning and constantly changing position in battle made me nauseous within ten minutes or so, having to adjust by taking a more relaxed approach to combat with slow turns and none of the Top Gun inspired stunt work that I’d been using so successfully juts prior to this.

Saying that, I suspect most people won’t suffer from this at all, and after getting to grips with the controls the chance of this happening by rolling around too much isn’t likely to be a regular occurrence.


Another point of note is with regards to the game’s graphics. The developers appeared to have re-tooled the overall graphics engine, placing emphasis on slightly more detailed visuals at the expense of having a blisteringly high framerate. The first H.A.W.X game ran at an incredibly smooth 60 frames per-second, reiterating the message that a higher framerate does more for a game than simply making it look pretty.

Sadly, for this sequel this has been paired back down to a more respectable 30fps to allow for more detail and additional effects. Although initially, the extra layer of visual polish doesn’t look quite enough to justify such a downgrade. Thankfully, in reality the lower framerate does very little to harm the overall experience, with the slow-paced nature of the gameplay meaning that very little is lost as a result of the change. The controls may be slightly less precise, but in the end I didn’t find the drop in smoothness to have an adverse effect on the action.


Aside from the graphical changes outlined here, the basic dog-fighting found in the demo, and a somewhat fiddly landing sequence, the developers are also looking to expand upon the types of missions that made up the list of things to do in the first game, along with providing a larger selection of controllable aircraft, and a greater range of weaponry that can be added to each one.

All of this should make H.A.W.X 2 a more enjoyable experience, or at least a more varied one. The demo however, barely provides us with a good enough look at the game to make any solid judgements though, and in many ways it appears to be a regression of the first H.A.W.X in terms of visuals alone. Well in terms of framerate that is. Plus, it’s also hard to see just how much has really been improved, given the fact that the gameplay taster provided is so similar to before, and that the control scheme, although still allowing for plenty of additional accuracy, is still a little too fiddly for its own good.


Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X 2 isn’t likely to redefine arcade realism combat flight game in any way, but it’s certainly shaping up to be a rather polished, if not nauseous, alternative to another instalment in Namco’s upcoming Ace Combat series. Whether or not that will be enough to make it as worthwhile the second time around is anyone’s guess, though it does have solid foundations on which to build upon.

The PS3 'Hack' Updated

On Thursday we ran a story sighting that the PS3 system had been effectively cracked now allowing it to run custom code and copied games without an internal mod chips. Initially the jury was still out on whether the supposed ‘hack’ was real or not, although it can be confirmed that it does indeed work exactly as described, thus presenting a small problem for Sony.

However the hack itself isn’t exactly anything special. From what I gather the USB device contains a chip that has some code taken from a Sony recovery device, which is used to boot up a PS3 that has been bricked due to a corrupted firmware update making the machine supposedly unbootable, and it’s this that signals the standard retail PS3 to boot up in a service mode of sorts.

The tools used to rip games from their BluRay discs comes in the form of a variant of Sony’s own download manager, and is the second aspect which makes this hack work; without it you can enter the PS3’s service mode and run custom code, although you can’t copy any games over to the system.

The USB device is exactly the kind of thing that Sony approved repairers use in fixing broken PS3 consoles, bypassing the actual system firmware, and contains what can only be described as an easy short-term exploit into unlocking the console.

I say short-term as part of the boot exploit can be patched by a simple firmware update stopping unsigned games from running, and by requiring all new software to have this latest firmware update. This would stop people from running the newest releases on the console until either: the latest system update was installed, or until the hackers can create their own custom version of said update. However whilst patching the boot sequence may be relatively easy, curtailing use of the exploit may not. At least not without some kind of internal hardware revision.

The area in which the USB stick seems to exploit is the use of the system’s bios chip, which controls how and in what mode the PS3 boots (amongst other things). The USB is recognised as a Sony recovery device, and thus gains full access to the hardware. So in order to patch such a flaw you would need to be able to flash the bios chip to update the controlling software, thus preventing the exploit from taking place. And this is potentially a huge issue as usually this part of the hardware isn’t accessible to anyone. At least it wasn’t in the PSP, and may not be in the PS3 either.

What this means is that even if Sony patch the firmware and change the boot sequence stopping custom code from running, there’s still the very real possibility that the USB stick hack will continue to work. However, as new software will still require the latest firmware updates, some releases simply might not boot regardless.

Of course all this is assuming that the PS3’s bios cannot be flashed - something we don’t yet know. Although if it can, then the whole USB key and current exploit will be null and void in an instant. If not, then Sony will need to make changes to the internal hardware itself through new motherboard/bios revisions in new PS3 units leaving potentially all of the old consoles wide-open to the exploit, and the obvious route of re-written custom firmware – an ongoing problem with the PSP.

In the end Sony can easily make changes to their own security system through new firmware updates to circumvent the issue, along with new ‘game’ plus ‘disc’ checking features making running new releases much harder to do even if the bios flaw cannot be patched. There’s also the ability to change the boot system making the USB dongle rather useless in its current form. Instead hackers will need to continuously patch it in order to keep compatibility with PS3’s featuring the latest firmware.

Perhaps the only problem left is if the hardware bios cannot be flashed via a firmware update, in which case it would be possible for hackers to repeatedly break any new security measures Sony decides to implement. However, even if they do regardless (which is no easy task), this still means that ‘day one’ use of copied games is effectively ruled out, plus even with the hack in its current implementation you cannot run PS3 games downloaded from the net on the console; you need to have copied it over to the HDD directly from the BR disc.

Whatever seems to be possible at present, it appears that this certainly isn’t the PS3 equivalent of the PSone modchip, and that a definitive way of cracking the console allowing for true custom code and downloaded software to be run is still some ways off. At least compared to the PSP.

PS3 Finally Cracked?

The ongoing battle between Sony and the pirates looking for a clean way of cracking the PS3 may have just taken an unexpected turn. Today, an Australian company (OzModChips) selling mod-chips revealed via YouTube that the PS3’s security system might finally be completely compromised supposedly allowing for copied games and custom code to be run on the console. Or so various mod sites have been claiming.

Apparently, the company was sent a USB dongle with software from an unknown source in Hong Kong, and has since been very keen to show off the device’s potential. This dongle looks to contain software which effectively converts a users home PS3 system into a Sony certified debug unit with a few button presses upon start-up. Shown in the two YouTube videos posted today here and here from the same source, is the complete process of activating the hack and getting retail games copied across to the PS3’s HDD.

The hack, called PSJailbreak, now allows for full retail games to be copied and run over the hard drive on any model PS3 without the aid of any internal modification. Quite what is happening here we’re not sure, but it looks like the dongle either contains some software keys from Sony, and some kind of custom hardware built in allowing the PS3 to be converted into a debug unit of sorts. This would mean that it is likely that someone from inside Sony at least provided the unknown hacker in Hong Kong with the keys, usually signed and locked down deep within developers.

Since OzModChips displayed the hack working on YouTube several other mod chip sites have also confirmed that the hack is apparently real; that the PS3 has been cracked wide open through a rather simple procedure, and what looks like some stolen software keys from Sony. It has also been revealed from an unknown source that Sony are working on a patch to fix the problem (officially unconfirmed), and that this will entail a modified boot sequence for the machine, along with coded game discs for all new releases in order to only make them playable on systems using the latest firmware.

So far Sony has yet to comment on the situation, and the jury’s still out with regards to how authentic the actual hack is itself. Still, this certainly looks like being the first truly successful attempt at completely unlocking the PS3, and a rather bad day for Sony.

Sony Announces New Slim PS3 Models

In what could been seen as a reactionary move by Sony is there ever was one, the company announced at their press conference at this year’s Gamescom in Cologne, Germany that they were planning to replace the two current models of Slim PS3 with ones containing larger hard drives.

The existing 120GB console is to be replaced by a slightly larger 160GB model, and the 250GB one gets upgraded to 320GB. The pricing structure for both machines is to remain the same as the current models. So expect to pay £249.99 for the 160GB version, and £284.99 for the 320GB one.

While these newer models are due to arrive in stores from 15th September, Sony also point out that there might be a cross over with old stock as the old models are phased out, meaning that it is likely that some places may be run additional ‘clearance’ deals for those not too fussed by having a smaller amount of storage capacity.

Currently, PS3 sales are officially standing at 38 million worldwide, whilst the 360, on 41.2 million, leads by a small margin. However, in Europe the situation is reversed with Sony commanding the largest lead in console sales between the PS3 and the 360 in any territory. With this in mind Sony’s Andrew House commented that the launch of these new models of PS3 was to ‘maintain leadership’ in that particular territory.

After the slow start in sales following the launch of the PS3 in March 2007 in Europe for a whopping £425, it appears Sony is well and truly back on track with the PlayStation brand, and that means the battle can only get more interesting from here on out. Perhaps now’s the right time for the company to turn their attention around to the ailing PSP brand, and the inevitable PSP2.

Tech Analysis: Mafia II Demo (PS3 vs 360)

It is pretty commonplace to say that titles which feature much in the way of dense foliage, high levels of geometry and plenty of alpha-based transparency effects usually have serious issues with performance on consoles. The framerate often tends to suffer, texture detail gets scaled back, and sometimes the framebuffer resolution takes a massive dive. All of these things not only impact on overall image quality but also take you firmly out of the lavish world the developers have tried so hard to create.

Large, open-world, sandbox type affairs is where this kind of thing happens the most. These types of games are rarely suited to the constrained nature of home console hardware specifications. Even when properly optimised, they still require a large memory footprint, not to mention a hefty chunk of GPU power - a commodity not quite as widely available as you might think given the Uncharted’s and Killzone’s of this world.

Mafia II is one of those games. But unlike the with Red Dead Redemption, the game isn’t anywhere near as polished, with the developers attempting to cram in every last detail of the lead PC version onto the consoles with somewhat mixed results. The world created here is huge and incredibly detailed, with not only high poly counts, but also lots of small intricate touches which really bring out the noticeable attention to detail that has gone into nearly every facet of the game’s visual make up. It’s this approach, which not only provides a genuinely immersive experience, but one that also causes the game no end of problems on both platforms.

It’s also these problems that at times really threaten to derail the experience - the feel that you are indeed part of a living, breathing 1950’s videogame world, and your enjoyment of that world. Although after playing each demo for several hours this doesn’t always seem to be the case. But the problems are pretty distracting at times, and at the very least the game could have benefited from additional polish and optimisations before release. Maybe in the final game we shall see some changes, but we’ll just have to wait and see.



Despite what the screenshots on this page might be telling you on first glance, Mafia II actually renders in 720p (1280x720) on both platforms, with the blurriness found in some of the screens down to an additional blur filter being layered over parts of the image during the final stage of rendering.

As per usual the 360 version of the game receives 2xMSAA (multisampling anti-aliasing), while the PS3 is left with no AA at all, which is pretty much what we’ve come to expect from most multiplatform conversions these days. However, it is apparent that the 360’s use of AA here in Mafia II isn’t quite as good as it could be, as although 2x is applied largely to the whole image it also fails to succeed in managing the amount of jagged edges which appear throughout the game.

In any given scene some parts of it clearly get 2x AA, whilst other obviously do not. This faliure of dealing with aliasing also doesn’t appear to be due to any high contrasting pixel edges, as even in mid to dark areas with very little in the way of drastic contrast changes the AA fails as effortlessly as it does elsewhere. Instead, it simply appears that 2K Czech’s method of implementing 2xMSAA simply isn’t all that effective when mixed with all the other rendering elements in the engine. Comparatively, the PC version also suffers from this problem also, proving that it is definitely something with how the AA conflicts with other parts of the graphics make up.

As we mentioned earlier Mafia II also includes an additional blur filter on top of the 2xMSAA found in the 360 build, and no AA in the PS3 one. This is basically a 1-pxel wide edge blur, and it is applied to surfaces after the anti-aliasing has been done, much like the effect we saw back in the Dante’s Inferno demo on the 360.

Effectively, this results in a heightened amount of softness in the overall image which almost negates the use of rendering in full 720p. Instead the developers could have cut out the blur, rendered in slightly lower sub-HD resolution, and clawed back some of the performance they so seem to be missing.

The PS3 build also gets the same method of blur. However, the lack of AA means that despite this additional effect the overall image is sharper compared to that of the 360 build.

Bizarrely, this effect on the PS3 is pretty inconsistent compared to the one found on the 360 game, and also doesn’t seem to be as strong either. Sometimes the entire scene is completely blurred, while at other times it only seems to affect certain objects rather than everything on screen. The blur doesn’t appear to be selective either, so we’re not sure quite what is going on. It’s rather strange to say the least.



Now given the overall open world nature of the game the use of a full 720p frame buffer with or without AA is pretty impressive, especially when you consider how much stuff is being rendered in order to make up the richly detailed game world. It is no surprise then, to learn that certain effects have had to be paired back in order to allow for this feat to happen.

For one, much of the game’s foliage - simple 2D sprites which always turn and rotate towards facing the camera – and other such parts of the world are rendered in a lower resolution compared to the rest of the scene. And this applies to both platforms, which generally share similar compromises in maintaining high detail levels. There are of course some differences between the two versions, mainly pertaining to the use of varying blend effects for transparencies, the amount of foliage on screen, and the higher saturation of lighting in the 360 game.

As you can see in the screenshots below, the 360 build is using A2C for blending all of it’s alpha effects on foliage, while the PS3 is using some other method, though apparently it isn’t plain old alpha coverage.



A2C is normally chosen in order to save on overall memory bandwidth costs and additional processing power. Basically transparencies and objects which use it are rendered in an interlaced manner of sorts, effectively halving their resolution. The result is a screendoor look to everything that uses it, and a distinctly grainy appearance. This grainy look is usually blended away through the use of high levels of MSAA making this side effect far less noticeable. However, since the 360 build’s implementation of AA is less than successful it fails to work in doing this.

Combined with the blur filter and broken AA solution the foliage, like the rest of the game, appears very soft and distinctly sub-HD even in areas when it is not. By comparison, the PS3 build features much sharper looking foliage due to not using A2C, and by skipping over the broken AA solution entirely.

This additional sharpness, along with using a different blend technique for transparencies means that unlike on 360 the foliage tends to suffer from terrible shimmering, and plenty of crawling jagged edges. Pretty much everything from the foliage, to the buildings and power lines are affected by this, and it can be really unsightly.

Furthermore, the PS3 version has also seen additional cut backs to the levels of detail on offer throughout the game, and lacks the distinct shading method known as SSAO (screen-space ambient occlusion).

In order to work around the tighter memory constraints found in Sony’s machine, including the lack of available EDRAM (read: none) the developers have paired back much of the foliage on the PS3 game, reducing certain areas from densely packed fields of front lawn grass into a series of flat looking texture maps. It’s pretty disappointing to say the least, and really gives the game a flatter look overall compared to the other versions of the game.

Another thing is that the LOD system appears to be slightly more forceful on the PS3 build leading to higher levels of pop-up and less immediately visible on screen details. Thankfully it is only subtly worse than the 360 build, with the LOD issue being more noticeable in certain areas than others.

However, the foliage and LOD is really the only elements which has been noticeably cut back in terms of creating environment detail on PS3, leaving the rest of the game looking basically the same. This is both a good and a bad thing as it means that the un-optimised code constantly struggles to maintain any kind of consistent framerate, with lots of screen tear and heavy dips in smoothness.



In terms of shadowing differences, on the 360 side of things you have the inclusion of SSAO, which used to create an extra sense of depth to the image that you wouldn’t find with traditional shading alone. Sadly the use of this effect is particularly bad, and so inconsistently poor in its implementation that I have to wonder why the developers even decided to include it. Instead they could have feed up additional GPU power for other things if it simply wasn’t there. Certainly, the additional impression of depth wasn’t worth the effort.

The SSAO in Mafia II is clearly rendered in a very low resolution and suffers from noticeable pixelation at times, leading to shadows that can appear fuzzy and rather shimmery as a result, making the game look more rough around the edges than perhaps it should.

Shadows also appeared dithered on the 360 causing further artifacts which stick out noticeably compared to the PS3 build’s cleaner approach. Like with the use of A2C on the foliage, shadows look somewhat grainy, and are pretty fuzzy around the edges. The PS3 game also features slightly dithered shadows, but thankfully not to the same extent as found on the 360.

Outside of these graphical differences both versions of the game look very similar, if not mostly identical. That is to say that they are both lavishly detailed, and contain lots of neat little touches throughout. Everything from power lines to small backyard and side street fences are represented here, along with cracked kerbside slabs and subtle differences in similar building architecture have been meticulously implemented. It’s pretty impressive to say the least, and accurately matches up to the high-spec PC version.

Having this level of attention to detail on any console game compared to its PC counterpart is looking for trouble, especially when trying to achieve a decent level of performance without sacrificing playability. And this is exactly where Mafia II falls down. The game simply cannot hope to achieve a stable framerate when so much is being pushed around on screen at any given time, not to mention a near constant lack of being able to hold v-sync.

It is pretty obvious that the developers were originally aiming for a baseline framerate around the 30fps mark, with the overall framerate being allowed to drop off in heavy load situations. However, the game very rarely reaches that point at all throughout the demo. Even when starting out in the confines of your home, free from all the dense levels of detail visible outside, the framerate still takes a heavy dive below the expected 30fps, ending up somewhere in the mid 20’s, or often less.

In fact, the game regularly runs at between 20 to 25fps with drops venturing down to the 15fps mark in busy situations, and this causes no end of problems from erratic controller responsiveness, to an increase in noticeable jagged edges and aliasing artifacts. The additional controller lag when such constant drops in smoothness happen is what really impacts on the gameplay experience on offer here. I would even go as far as to say that it can make the game near unplayable at times, with your ability to accurately aim and take out the enemy being compromised continuously.

Most titles that suffer from such heavy framerate drops do so because the developers have decided to use v-sync in order to prevent the noticeable screen-tearing that would otherwise occur due to the constant changes in screen refresh. Sadly, Mafia II isn’t one of them. And as far as I can tell the game doesn’t even try to employ any kind of v-sync to help balance out the terrible framerate issues. Instead, what you are left with is a title that suffers from both large constant drops in framerate, and heavy screen tear – mostly at the same time - which affects both platforms to an almost equal extent, with the PS3 version coming off worse in the end.

Most noticeable is the fact that a large percentage of the tearing is happening right in the centre of the screen, thus greatly impacting on not only your overall field of view, but also providing a clear distraction which serves only to further hinder your progress. At worst, the game will decide to drop down to around 20fps and allow for heavy mid-screen tearing to occur, during which a reduction in controller response time, and the uneven refresh rate make any kind of quick and concise play completely useless in larger action sequences.

The PS3 game also tends to tear slightly more frequently than the 360 one. Thankfully this occurs mostly in the overscan area of the screen, so it’s not noticeable in real-world terms. However, the game does drop its framerate more heavily in the same situations as the 360 build, which is a different story altogether.

Overall, there’s simply no question that Mafia II’s general performance is sub-par, and is perhaps one of the worst titles that I have come across this generation when comparing games on either platform to other similar releases.

Despite featuring copious amounts of detail, and lots of subtleties everywhere you look, Mafia II clearly suffers from huge framerate issues, intrusive screen tearing, and a host of other noticeable graphical problems, all of which really show up the game’s original ‘made for PC’ heritage. Failing to properly optimise the title for consoles is exactly why, unlike Red Dead Redemption, Mafia II fails to command your senses in the way Rockstar’s title does so effortlessly.

It’s such a shame as 2K Games have created a world that is so full of personality, packed with intricate little details that it is so easy to initially become immersed in when you are first starting out. Unfortunately the game’s poor framerate, terrible jagged edges, and overall soft looking display completely take you out of the experience. Also hampering your potential enjoyment of the title is the laggy control which manifests itself whenever the framerate drops. And sadly that is pretty much continuously, regardless of whether anything intensive is happening on screen or not.

In conclusion, it is hard to recommend either console version of Mafia II. Both builds suffer terribly from various performance and graphical related problems. Although in the end it is the 360 version which is slightly less unsightly to look at, due to less edge shimmering and aliasing, even if the result is a blurrier image overall. The use of low-res SSAO and dithered shadows is a strong negative point however, and does distract from the noticeably more detailed foliage.

Personally, when it comes down to it I’d track down the vastly superior PC version of the game, in which it should be possible to achieve at least 720p with 2xMSAA at 60fps on a mid-spec gaming rig - something which both the PS3 and 360 can only dream of with regards to this release.

Thanks to Mr Deap for our comparison screens, and as always to AlStrong for his superb pixel counting skills.