![]() Based off the first level alone, the sequel targets a 60fps update and rarely drops below that level. Moving over to Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2, surprisingly we get a clear improvement in terms of performance, with higher frame-rates and more consistency. Here we dissect how the PS4 compares with PS3 - from the visual changes to the frame-rate differences. A decade on from its original 2006 release, Marvel: Ultimate Alliance returns on current-gen systems. The difference is night and day in these sections, and a 30fps cap (optional, if necessary) deployed across the entire game would solve most of the game's performance issues in both consoles. However, there are moments where the experience is clearly better on Microsoft's console: at points the game delivers a locked 30fps, and this provides a much better degree of stability. Performance is still variable, and stuttering can appear worse than PS4 due to the larger difference in lower and higher frame-rates. ![]() It's a clear upgrade over the often hilarious 15-20fps playback seen on PS3 in its native 1080p mode, but falls way short of the solid 60fps expected for a last-gen game running on modern consoles.įrame-rates are higher in the Xbox One version, with 35-55fps in matching scenes, though this doesn't always translate into smoother gameplay. Instead, on PS4 we're looking at a 30-40fps game, where uneven frame delivery creates stutter and variable controller response. ![]() The game does hit 60fps in scenes with little in the way of geometry detail and effects, but this level of performance doesn't last for long. The original Ultimate Alliance disappoints here with uncapped frame-rates that provide a highly inconsistent gameplay experience. Visual quality isn't really our point of contention on consoles, though - that comes down to performance. The sequel holds-up more solidly on consoles, while the original suffers from noticeable performance issues. A full-on graphics comparison of Marvel Ultimate Alliance and Ultimate Alliance 2. And on top of that, it's better than the PC version of the original game too. These are relatively small visual blemishes in the grand scheme of things, and don't always stick out noticeably during gameplay, but on the whole it's the PS4 version that provides the most refined presentation across consoles in both titles. For example, shadows are unfiltered on Xbox One and PC in the first game, leading to pixelation around these elements, while normal maps are handled differently in the sequel on Microsoft's console, with brickwork appearing slightly flatter as a result. A similar set-up is also present on PC, where graphical settings are limited to high, medium, and low presets, though you can of course adjust resolution and toggle v-sync.įor the most part all three versions share the same level of asset and effects quality, although there are some differences in places. This lends the presentation a smoother, more refined look over the 1080p mode found in the first Ultimate Alliance on PS3, which operated with the full pixel count but utilised no AA at all. Both games run at native 1080p on PS4 and Xbox One with post-process anti-aliasing in play. There's a massive difference between the first two games, with the original offering up shaky performance levels while bizarrely, the sequel delivers far more consistent frame-rates. Uneven frame-rates and some horrific bugs show up the lack of polish embellished on these conversions and to be frank, we deserved so much more.Īnd when we talk about variation in quality between the quality of the ports, we aren't joking. The extent of the disappointment is as variable as the quality of the ports themselves and indeed the platform you choose to play them on. A remaster that came out of nowhere, Marvel Ultimate Alliance and its sequel arrive on current-gen consoles (with a PC port of the sequel) but it's fair to say that the experience falls well short.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |