Finally, a book that captures the complexity of game development that anyone can pick up and enjoy. Jason Schreier of Kotaku spent two years traveling around the world to score in depth interviews with the industry’s most renowned gaming studios. Drawing from sources speaking both on and off the record, Blood, Sweat, and Pixels provides a rare glimpse into the pain and passion that go into bringing a modern video game to market. In ten absorbing chapters Schreier covers the downright grueling development process behind such hits as Blizzard’s Diablo III, Naughty Dog’s Uncharted 4, CD Projekt Red’s The Witcher 3 and, of course, Bungie’s Destiny.

Speaking of Destiny, it was Schreier’s crucial 2015 exposé that laid the groundwork for this wonderful little book. (Portions of his chapter on Destiny are taken directly from that article.) As fans of the blockbuster series will remember, that Kotaku piece brought Destiny‘s murky origin story to light. Importantly, it provided the necessary background for understanding how the company that gave us Halo could have produced — at least at launch — such a lackluster title. Subpar development tools, a strained relationship with publisher Activision, and the complete reboot of the story (following the departure of lead writer Joe Staten) a year out from release had much to do with it. As a source tells Schreier, “A lot of the problems that came up in Destiny 1…are results of having an unwavering schedule and unwieldy tools.”

What we learned then from Scheier’s keen reporting, and what comes across clear as day in his first book, is that making games is incredibly hard and almost impossibly demanding. Harder, perhaps, than any other creative medium. Thanks to their interactive nature and sheer potentiality, games are capable of delivering the boundless, memorable experiences we’ve come to love. But it’s those same elements that make them such a chore to create, even for seasoned veterans.

One of the designers at Obsidian (of Fallout: New Vegas fame) he interviews puts it this way: “making games is sort of like shooting movies, if you had to build an entirely new camera every time you started.” Indeed, the tools and technologies used to develop the latest games are constantly in flux, as is the creative vision of the producers and directors at the top. A change in either area can prove hugely disruptive to the overall process — one that hinges on pushing a marketable product out the door by an agreed upon deadline. It’s that constant give and take between concept and technology, between developer and publisher, that defines the medium.

Internal conflicts can also run a project off course. Artists and programmers might spend months, years even, sketching and coding characters, environments, quests, set pieces and combat mechanics, only to see it all thrown out as a result of higher-ups taking the game in an entirely different direction. When Naughty Dog replaced Uncharted 4‘s creative director Amy Hennig in 2014 — roughly two years into the game’s development — the story was more or less scrapped. That meant that cut scenes, animation, and thousands of lines of recorded voicework on which the studio had already spent millions of dollars got the axe, too. For an artist emotionally invested in their work, this can be heartbreaking and demotivating.

In other cases, such as the abortive Star Wars 1313, a decision by the publisher can bring it all crashing down. As Scheier recounts in the closing chapter, LucasArts, formerly a subsidiary of Lucasfilm, began work on a new action-adventure Star Wars game in 2010. The game debuted at E3 in 2012 to wide critical acclaim. Shortly afterward, the company was acquired by Disney. By 2013, Disney had shuttered the studio and canceled every one of its projects. For all the work the dedicated crew at LucasArts poured into their pet project, Star Wars 1313 was never meant to be.

Given the many technical hitches, logistical nightmares, corporate pressures, and unforeseen obstacles that threaten success, it’s no small wonder that any games are shipped at all. As Schreier points out, there’s hardly a game on the market today that doesn’t run up against insane crunch periods and dramatic setbacks over the course of its development. Whether it’s a small team working on a 2D side-scroller à la Yacht Club Games’ Shovel Knight or a massive effort spread across hundreds of staff in the case of BioWare’s Dragon Age, producing a quality game in today’s highly competitive environment is by any measure a herculean effort.

Virtually every insider consulted for the book talks about how taxing the job can be on one’s physical health and personal relationships. Burnout is common. And even with working around the clock for months on end — often sans overtime pay, as it’s not required in the U.S. — games rarely come out on time. Delays and cancellations are a feature, not a bug. To be sure, any successful career in game development is built on passion and an enthusiasm for creating unique playable spaces, but it comes with significant costs that only the truly dedicated may be equipped to endure.

Closing Thoughts

Leave it to Jason Schreier to shatter any utopic notions about game development. Behind the glossy visuals and destructible environments we take for granted on screen lies a hellish landscape of Sisyphean creative challenges and brutal working hours. As the title suggests, Blood, Sweat, and Pixels constantly reminds us that game production is as much about self-sacrifice as it is about crafting quality interactive experiences. And if these breezy oral histories are any indication, it’s a principle that holds true whether you’re a bootstrapped indie developer beholden to Kickstarter donors or a lowly cog in the big-budget corporate machine.

Schreier is a most welcome guide, bringing more casual readers up to speed on esoteric conversations ranging from rendering paths and game engines to bug testing and content iteration times. It’s a testament to his talents that the book never seems to flag, even when exploring games I didn’t particularly care about. While I wish Schreier had ventured deeper into the ethics of crunch culture, his penchant for meticulous, well researched investigative journalism is on full display here.

If you have even a passing interest in gaming be sure to pick this one up. I came away with a better understanding of the personal sacrifices and creative compromises that appear to go hand in hand with making video games, and a newfound perspective on increasingly commonplace monetization strategies like paid downloadable content (PDLC) and microtransaction (MTX) systems. Above all, it left me with a more profound appreciation for my most cherished hobby.

Note: This review is mirrored over at Goodreads and at Amazon.

 
 
Note: This guide has been publicly available in various places around the web since 2010. You can download a copy from my Academia research page here.
 
I.     Display Discovery
II.    HDTV Settings
III.  HDMI Color Space
IV.   Reference Levels
V.     Sources

Introduction

Following the release of the HDMI-equipped Xbox 360 in 2007, Microsoft issued a system update which added a set of new options under System Settings specifically for the HDMI interface. With its unified transfer of digital audio and video over a single cable, HDMI has quickly become the connection of choice in most homes. The HDMI spec itself has gone through a number of revisions since its inauguration in December of 2002, with terminology, feature support and cable designations all shifting ground. Getting everyone in the consumer electronics industry—from display manufacturers to set-top box producers to content creators—to speak the same language has proved a considerable challenge. HDMI-related settings buried in home theater equipment menus are often inconsistently labeled and accompanied by particularly vague descriptions. Thus it would appear the confusion does not begin and end with the consumer, but extends to manufacturers as well.

This guide is an attempt to demystify settings specific to the HDMI interface commonly found on HDMI-compatible devices. While this write-up will make clear the preferred settings for the Xbox 360 console, the information here is equally applicable to other A/V equipment. As will be apparent, there are no universally preferred settings due to the intrinsically complex nature of video interfacing. However, with minimal effort you can ensure that your Xbox 360 and other devices are configured correctly for the best possible image and audio quality.

Note 1: The HDMI out port is located directly under the AV cable slot, to the right of the serial number and manufacturing date label. You must have your Xbox 360 connected via HDMI to a display device to make use of the settings described here. If connected via different cables, many of these settings will be grayed out.

Note 2: The Xbox 360 console supports up to HDMI Spec 1.2. As the specs are backward compatible, there should be no interoperability issues when using AV equipment with different HDMI version numbers. Do note that feature availability is governed by the principle of lowest common denominator support: in order to take advantage of features found in any given spec, all devices in the chain must support that spec.

Note 3: A brief note about HDMI cables. Much internet bandwidth has been spent on protecting consumers from falling prey to Monster and similarly overpriced cable dealers. With digital signals, either the 1s and 0s are transmitted in their entirety, or they are not and the errors are immediately obvious; there is no degraded middle ground. Marketing duplicity notwithstanding, there is zero difference in audiovisual quality between the cheapest HDMI cable versus the exorbitantly priced “gold-plated“ Monster-branded bunco. Simply buy a High Speed cable from Monoprice and save. (Note that runs over 50 feet may require an active cable or repeating device to transmit the signal, as there are tolerances built around distance for the HDMI spec. But again, the cable will either work perfectly, or it won’t and you’ll be able to tell right away; if it works, buying any other cable won’t improve the signal in any way.)

Lastly, the labeling of HDMI connectors has gone through a number of iterations over the years. On the heels of Spec 1.3, the HDMI consortium sought to streamline the designations to minimize confusion. The previously used ‘Version’ and ‘Category’ monikers have now been relegated to two simple groupings: Standard and High Speed. A High Speed with Ethernet HDMI lead will prove hiccup-free for 99% of all A/V scenarios.

Getting Started

On the Dashboard, navigate to Console Settings –> Display, and you will see a list of output options. We will be discussing the following four items, in this order: Display Discovery, HDTV Settings, HDMI Color Space and Reference Levels.

Display Discovery

The 360’s Display Discovery feature makes use of EDID to automatically configure the output resolution for your Xbox 360. When this is enabled, the console will query your HDTV for its native resolution and adjust the console’s output resolution to match. This feature only applies to output resolution and does not impact color space or reference level settings. DD is usually harmless, except in the rare situation that your HDTV’s EDID is read improperly or returns invalid data. Either way, feel free to disable this setting and manually select the output resolution in HDTV Settings.

HDTV Settings

This screen allows you to select the output resolution of the Xbox 360. Generally, the output resolution of your A/V devices should match the native resolution of your display. For example, if your HDTV is 1080p (marketed “Full HD” by many manufacturers), your equipment should output 1080p. This will allow you to enable “Dot by Dot” features on your display, which preserves 1:1 pixel mapping of the input signal with zero overscan. However, several caveats apply:

• Scaling performance varies across A/V equipment. The rule of thumb is to allow the device with the superior upconversion software to handle the scaling. The graphics scaler in the X360 is top-drawer and optimized for graphics with minimal scaling artifacts. So if your display is native 1080p, for example, this would mean setting your Xbox 360 to 1080p, even if the game in question does not run natively at 1080p (more on this below). For video content, however, a high-end HDTV, AVR or pre-pro will generally have better upconversion than the Xbox 360. So for video it’s optimal to match the X360 output resolution to that of your source. For example, if the source is a DVD (480p), set the X360 to 480p and outsource the upconversion to the downstream device. If you have an intermediate device (e.g., AVR, pre-pro) between your X360 and your display that offers high quality upconversion you would again set the X360 output resolution to match the source resolution for video content, then set the intermediate device’s output resolution to match your display’s native resolution. This allows the superior device (the intermediate) to handle all image upconversion. In short, for games, it is recommended to allow the X360 to scale to the native resolution of your display, and to transfer the responsibility of video scaling downstream.

• Ideally, all source content would match the native resolution of your fixed pixel display, allowing you to avoid the lossy process of image scaling altogether. For example, sending sub-1080p content to your 1080p display will require the signal to be upscaled to 1080p at some point in the imaging chain. However, content resolutions can vary widely, especially for video games. Most Xbox 360 titles are not native 1080p. Many are below 720p, or somewhere in between 720p and 1080p. (When you look on the back of the game box, you will see: ‘HDTV 720p/1080i/1080p’. These are simply supported resolutions and do not refer to the resolution in which the game is internally rendered. Microsoft mandates that all games released on their platform are compatible with the above standard ATSC resolutions, but the GPU may draw at any number of non-standard resolutions before being scaled to the output format.) For games running at non-standard resolutions, configuring your Xbox 360 to send 720p to your 1080p display will cause two scaling steps to occur: 1) The X360 will first scale the source to 720p and 2) Your display will then upscale from 720p to 1080p. This dual scaling can introduce unwanted artifacts in the image as well as increase input lag, both of which are detriments to gaming. As above, this can be avoided by aligning the X360’s output resolution with that of your display.

• Any content that is truly native 1080p (e.g., a handful of Xbox 360 titles, some Xbox One and PS4 titles, Blu-ray movies) should be output in 1080p to a native 1080p display, eliminating any scaling of the signal.

• Just because you set your Xbox 360 to 1080p and you see a signal on your HDTV does not mean your HDTV is native 1080p. Some “720p” displays, for example, accept 1080p but then downscale to their native resolution (which is generally 1366×768; see below). Make sure you know the resolution of your HDTV.

• While many HDTVs are marketed as “720p”, no LCD TV or computer monitor or plasma display sold in the States actually has a native resolution of 720p (1280×720). Due to manufacturing considerations, any LCD TV or monitor labeled “720p” actually has a native resolution of 1366×768 (WXGA), while the few lingering plasma displays marketed as “720p” actually have a native resolution of 1024×768 (XGA). Due to the tricky, multi-step resizing required, and the fact that 1:1 pixel mapping is impossible as there is no popular content encoded in 768p, it is recommended to avoid 768p sets in favor of 1080p sets. If you do have a 768p monitor or television, the Xbox 360 offers 1360×768 as an output format over HDMI. While strictly speaking this isn’t an exact match to the pixel array of your display, the difference is negligible (there will be an imperceptibly thin border of unused pixels along the side). The X360 also offers a number of other resolution sizes for a variety of monitors, including WVGA (848×480), XGA (1024×768), WXGA (1280×768), SXGA (1280×1024), WXGA+ or WSXGA (1440×900) and WSXGA+ (1680×1050). As above, you should choose the resolution closest to your display, regardless of the game you’re playing.

Note: There’s one fundamental difference between console and PC gaming as regards resolution. While PC games are resolution-independent, disc-based console games are optimized for the fixed hardware of the console platform. So while PC games can be rendered up to whatever resolution your graphics card can handle, console games are programmed to run at a native resolution, which is then upscaled in hardware (if necessary) to the chosen output resolution of the Xbox 360.

HDMI Color Space

When HDMI output was first introduced with the Elite console in 2007, only the Reference Levels setting was available and the Xbox 360 only output RGB. A later system update added the full suite of color space options:

• Auto
• Source
• RGB
• YCbCr601
• YCbCr709

A color space is simply a mathematical representation of color based on a particular color model. Color spaces designed for the visual display industry are all based on the additive RGB color model, which is itself derived from the trichromatic visual system encoded in human biology. Since we want our reproduced images to be as lifelike as possible, it only makes sense that our imaging systems would be modeled after our tristimulus architecture.

It all started in the late 1920s with novel research by two vision scientists who conceived of a method for specifying color sensation in numerical terms. Building from experiments done by William David Wright and John Guild, the International Commission on Illumination (CIE) devised the first ever color space by plotting visible wavelengths of light in a three-dimensional figure. That figure, intended to encompass the full gamut of human vision, is the 1931 CIE XYZ color space. We’ve been refining and expanding upon this opening effort ever since as we’ve learned more about the eye’s sensitivity to different wavelengths and our technological capabilities have improved.
 

1931 CIE Chromaticity Diagram

Chroma Subsampling

Due to storage and bandwidth limitations in the analog era, the broadcast industry adopted compression techniques for reducing the size of the video signal. This was accomplished by applying a kind of triage to perceptual relevance. Because the human visual system is much more sensitive to variations in brightness than color, a video system can be bandwidth-optimized by devoting more overhead to the luma (brightness) component (denoted Y’) than to the color difference components, Cb and Cr (collectively, chroma). This technique, called chroma subsampling, is where you get YCbCr (often abbreviated to YCC). As an alternative to sending uncompressed RGB, YCbCr is a common compression format used to encode data within a particular color space and results in negligible visual difference.

So practical was YCbCr that the broadcast industry embraced it and never looked back. The ITU-R adopted it as the primary encoding scheme for use in their Rec. 601 and, later in 1990, Rec. 709 standards that govern electronic broadcasting. While modern digital distribution systems are not as capacity-conscious as legacy analog systems, there is still a need for video and color compression in order to allow dense 1080p video to be stored on a Blu-ray Disc, for example, or HD streams to be squeezed through crowded networks. So although the bandwidth of an HDMI cable is more than adequate for carrying uncompressed (4:4:4) RGB color format, there is still the twin bottleneck of optical disc media and internet infrastructure to contend with on the horizon. Today, all cable, satellite and OTA (over-the-air) video streams, DVD and Blu-ray titles, along with Netflix and other streaming services, store color information using this YCbCr format.

Rec. 601 and Rec. 709

The Rec. 601 and Rec. 709 standards specify, among other picture parameters, formulas for converting YCbCr to and from RGB. As the maths are different, the Xbox 360 provides both options and you will want to use the appropriate format for the content you are viewing.

For standard-definition video, such as DVDs and 480i/p content streams, you should use YCbCr601, which outputs the official Rec. 601 color space standard. For all HD video, including 720p/1080i/p video streams, you should use YCbCr709, which outputs the color coordinates for Rec. 709. The color decoders in most HDTVs can handle both matrices, so they will detect the incoming color space flags and perform the proper conversion to RGB without a hitch.

RGB

While video-based content speaks in YCbCr language, games are an entirely different animal. Naturally, different standards and recommendations apply. Similar to PC, console games are internally rendered by the GPU in native 8-bit RGB. This is true for games as well as the X360 dashboard, both of which run in native RGB space. Thus, to avoid any unnecessary processing you should always have your Xbox 360 set to RGB for games. Otherwise, the native RGB format is transcoded and resampled to YCbCr, which will then be decoded back to RGB once it reaches the display device. More conversions = increased opportunity for errors and input lag. As RGB is the universal color format of visual displays, all HDMI-compliant sets accept it.

(There really is no good reason why the X360 even allows for YCbCr output for games. In contrast, the PS3 allows games to run in RGB mode only; YCbCr is reserved exclusively for BD/DVD playback. If set to YCbCr, the PS3 will auto-switch to RGB when the game flag is detected, and when playing back Blu-rays you can switch between YCbCr and RGB. My best guess is Microsoft provided this option because the console at one time did not indicate the RGB quantization range correctly for the receiving device, so converting to YCbCr would force the 16-235 range for a display that expects that range—more on this in the Reference Levels section.)

Auto and Source

These two settings attempt to remove some of the guesswork on behalf of the user. Personally, I prefer to take the automaticity away from the machine and manually force the appropriate setting. HDMI negotiations between source and sink aren’t perfect, and mangled communication can de-optimize your setup. So unless specific options aren’t available, I recommend explicitly setting color space and reference levels.

Auto setting selects the color space format which your display is set to receive according to HDMI protocols. The Enhanced Display Data Channel (E-DDC) embedded in the HDMI chip of the X360 queries and reads the E-EDID data from the HDMI sink device (display), and then negotiates the optimal output, usually behaving like the Source setting below. The HDMI Auto setting found in Blu-ray players and other home theater components follow this process as well.

The Source setting adapts to the incoming color space format detected in the signal. If a DVD flag is detected, the X360 should switch to YCbCr601 output. If an HD video stream is detected, it should switch to YCbCr701. For games and the dashboard interface, the X360 will default to RGB.

Color Space Wrap-Up

To wrap up, some HDMI-friendly electronics, like the Xbox 360, offer both YCbCr and RGB output options over HDMI. These are simply different ways of sending the same signal, the former being compressed and the latter uncompressed. For video-based content, one is not necessarily “better” than the other because no matter which you choose, the same conversion steps are happening; all you are choosing is which device is performing the conversion. As you’ll recall, the pixels of a digital display are red, green and blue, so whichever color format is output from a source device, the display must ultimately have an RGB signal to work with before the pixels in the display can be illuminated. This is the same process no matter what display technology is being used, whether LCD, plasma, DLP or CRT.

The only situation in which this may matter (again, for video only) is if the color decoder in the source or sink device is faulty. Converting between RGB and YCC is simple math and is lossless (assuming the software uses enough bits of precision), but I have seen cases in which one device does not handle the conversion properly. (Using test material will help you identify if your setup has any issues of this variety.) If the conversion is handled properly, there should be no visual difference between the two formats.

The choice becomes important, however, in the case of gaming consoles. Since games are rendered natively in RGB, only the RGB setting makes sense here. Assuming there are no color decoding errors bungling the video chain, the principle of sought accuracy suggests sending a YCC signal for video and RGB for games.

Note 1: While NTSC region DVD video follows the Rec. 601 standard, most PAL region DVDs conform to the Rec. 709 standard.

Note 2: For streaming services like Netflix and Hulu Plus that optimize picture quality according to available bandwidth, it is less clear-cut which color standard will be present in the stream. For these services, it is generally best to use the Xbox 360 options Source or Auto, which adapt to the signal’s color space.

Note 3: All Blu-ray media is encoded in 8-bit YCbCr 4:2:0. (The three-part ratio is the subsampling format.) Some players give you multiple color format options, including YCC 4:2:2, YCC 4:4:4 and RGB (4:4:4). One caveat revealed by video technicians Spears and Munsil regards the native processing mode of the chip in the display device. Some HDTV chips are designed for only one color format and will process all incoming formats by first resampling to its native format. For example, a chip designed exclusively for 4:2:2 processing will convert an RGB (4:4:4) signal back to YCbCr 4:2:2, then upsample to YCbCr 4:4:4 before finally converting to RGB (4:4:4). In these cases, it might actually be disadvantageous to decode in the player. Finally, some Blu-ray players actually convert to RGB (4:4:4) before forwarding the signal through the HDMI output, even if no RGB output option from the player is provided. Good test material will aid in sorting out these nuances.

Reference Levels

Now we come to Reference Levels, far and away the most important setting, as choosing incorrectly (i.e., sending the wrong range) can muck up the hallowed black level you paid so much for. Reference Level is Microsoft’s terminology for quantization range, which governs the number of discrete steps or values that can be assigned to a subpixel. There are two and only two ranges used for visual displays. The first, 0-255, is formally known as PC or IT quantization range (used in computing, including PC hardware, gaming consoles and computer monitors). The second, 16-235, is formally known as CE or video quantization range (used in televisions and all commercial video).

First, a quick word about terminology. It is unfortunate indeed that equipment manufacturers don’t use consistent labels for these settings. Samsung, Microsoft, Panasonic, LG, etc. seem to all use different names. The easiest solution it seems to me is to just write out the range in the menus: 16-235 or 0-255. Alas, numbers can be scary and so most manufacturers use their own nomenclature. Those proprietary designations that map to 16-235 include Low, Limited, Video and Standard. Those that map to 0-255 include High, Full, Expanded, Extended, Enhanced and Normal.

You’ll note that I specified two ranges above, while Microsoft offers three. Reference Level Standard corresponds to 16-235, Expanded to 0-255, and Intermediate, well, Intermediate is not a standardized range at all. Microsoft appears to have invented this setting out of thin air. According to histogram testing, Intermediate outputs somewhere in the ballpark of  ~8…~245, so perhaps it was included as a compromise solution for people who can’t resolve the right negotiation for their setup. At any rate, Intermediate should only be used as a last-resort stopgap for deficiencies existing elsewhere in the imaging chain.1

0-255 vs. 16-235

Both PC and CE quantization range are based on 8-bit color depth. An 8-bit color depth allows for 256 possible gradations of color (2^8), varying from black at the weakest intensity (0) to white at the strongest intensity (255). The only difference between the two ranges is where reference black and white are positioned. With PC range, 0 is reference black and 255 is reference white, for a total of 256 discrete steps. CE range, on the other hand, places reference black at 16 and reference white at 235 along the same 0-255 scale, leaving 220 discrete steps to which values may be assigned.

Why the inconsistency? Ask the video engineers. Due to limitations intrinsic to video broadcasting—from capture to encoding to transmission—the final signal may not always fall neatly into the specified range. For a variety of technical reasons, data intended for grayscale level 2, for example, may slip to level 0 or be clipped altogether by the time it reaches your display. This is much less of a concern in the all-digital distribution pipelines of today, but engineers decided at the time on a 16-235 range, building headroom (235-254) and toeroom (1-15) around those upper and lower values so signals slipping outside the nominal range could still be reproduced by the end user if desired.

In the land of video, 16 and 235 are reference levels, not hard limits. Any data below level 16 is referred to as blacker-than-black (BTB), and any data above level 235 is referred to as whiter-than-white (WTW). (Note that these terms only apply when discussing video/CE range.) 0 and 255, on the other hand, are indeed hard limits.

It is important to understand that 0-255 does not result in “deeper blacks” or “brighter whites” compared with 16-235. Both ranges simply possess a different number of tonal gradations between reference black and reference white. As long as the display is set to receive the range the source device is sending, reference black and reference white for both ranges are the same intensity to the end user (i.e., black level 0 in PC mode should appear the same as black level 16 in video mode).

All of this has important implications for the type of content you’re sending to your screen. Anything you watch on cable or satellite, anything broadcast OTA, DVD and Blu-ray movies, and Netflix and other streaming media are all mastered according to the 16-235 CE range. We can now complete the circle we began in the section on color space above. You’ll recall that all of the same media is stored using YCbCr. It turns out that the HDMI spec stipulates CE range (video levels) for the YCbCr format.

Section 6.6 of the HDMI Spec reads:

 
Thus, YCbCr is limited range (16-235) by design. Because of this, it is unaffected by the Reference Level setting on the Xbox 360. And since YCbCr cannot be output at PC range, the Reference Level setting affects RGB output only. You can test this for yourself. Switch to YCbCr mode and toggle between the three Reference Levels; no effect. It would be less confusing for consumers if the option was simply grayed out when in YCbCr mode. Unfortunately it’s not, resulting in many a gamer straining to pick up differences that aren’t there.

For games, it’s a different story. They don’t use YCbCr. As with video-based material above, we can now complete the circle. Game graphics are rendered in the GPU’s frame buffer at PC range (0-255). (I’m not aware of any GPUs that can even output native 16-235 range.) Thus, everything other than video is rendered natively in 0-255 RGB space, making RGB Expanded the preferred setting for games. Using 0-255 end-to-end can also help reduce banding in-game due to the additional levels of gradation available. If instead you set your X360 to Standard, this will require the GPU to render at 0-255 which will then be requantized to 16-235 upon output. Configuring the console for 0-255 (Expanded) will avoid this unnecessary step.

Source and Sink Agreement

The ultimate objective here is to ensure that source and sink, and everything in between, are in agreement. This will ensure reference black and white output from the source are in sync with the reference tones the display is expecting. Which Reference Level to use becomes an easy answer if the display you are using can only reproduce one or the other. For example, most PC monitors have only one display mode (0-255), so using Expanded here is the obvious choice. As for HDTVs, most top-tier models can switch into both ranges over HDMI. If yours doesn’t have a PC mode or anything with 0-255 in the label, you will be stuck with Standard Reference Level.

Keep in mind that most HDTVs and other home theater equipment are configured for video levels by default. You may need to dig into your menus and toggle it over if you want to use Expanded Reference Level for games. Remember, while full range RGB is the best way to output games from the Xbox 360, it only works if the display expects full range. Make sure they match.

Here’s what to look for. If you send Standard range (16-235) to a display expecting Expanded range (0-255), the image will appear washed out and your contrast ratio will suffer: see Quadrant 3 below. Low-end detail gets the shaft because your 360 is placing black level at 16, while your display is placing black level at 0. Conversely, if you send Expanded range (0-255) to a display expecting Standard range (16-235), you’ll get a mixture of crushed black detail and crushed white detail, not a good combo: see Quadrant 2 below. Your game will look too dark because your 360 is placing black level at 0, while your HDTV is placing black level at 16; thus every gradation between 0 and ~16 is being crushed, and every gradation above 235 is also being crushed. Quadrants 1 and 4 are examples of Expanded-Expanded and Standard-Standard, respectively.

The image below is used here courtesy of NeoGaf forums user Raist in this post.
 

4-way comparison of Reference Level matching

Finally, for those serious about calibrating their display, I cannot recommend enough Spears and Munsil’s immaculate HD Benchmark disc, now in its 2^nd edition.

Note 1: Many games offer an in-game brightness tool with instructions for how to pass the pattern. This should be the last thing you touch, if at all. Make sure source and sink are in agreement first and your display’s brightness and contrast are calibrated properly. Then bring up the brightness pattern included with the game. If you’re not able to pass the pattern, then and only then should you adjust the in-game brightness control. This should be done on a case-by-case basis. You should never adjust TV controls to pass an in-game brightness pattern because those settings may be wrong for every other game, movie, etc., requiring constant recalibration. Instead, the preferred approach is to tweak the in-game brightness control per game, if necessary, to bring the game into alignment with your display calibration, not the other way around.

Note 2: If you’re using a receiver or other intermediate device, make sure it doesn’t clip 0-255 to 16-235. Some models are known to truncate whatever signal they receive such that they only pass 16-235.

Note 3: While most video mastering engineers strictly adhere to the 16-235 range, a few may intentionally place detail above 235. For example, white detail in clouds or sky, or white clothing may exceed reference white (235). If your display is calibrated to show a bit of WTW, you will see this extra detail. If the display is not calibrated to show it or is unable to show it, then the detail will be clipped. (Put differently, that image area will be the same grayscale level as your highest distinguishable grayscale level.) Calibrating a peak white level for your display is largely personal preference and you may be limited by the adjustment range of your system as well as your viewing environment. The same applies to BTB data. (This note only applies to video-based material and not to games.)

Note 4: In the PC world, many video cards do not remap levels with especially high precision and could introduce banding in the image. If optimal IQ is desired, reducing the amount of levels conversion will yield the best results. For PC games connected to HDTVs, this means making sure all equipment in the chain maintains 0-255 range. For displaying video-based content on a PC, there are a number of drivers out there that can map to video levels.

Note 5: One of the Xbox 360 system updates borked the reference level settings for the dashboard and a number of media apps (games were unaffected). The issue has now been fixed in most if not all video apps, as well as in the dashboard (bar the picture viewer). Games are still flagged correctly.

Sources

• Understanding Color
• Introduction to Colour Science
• Choosing a Color Space
• A Review of RGB Color Spaces
• HDMI Enhanced Black Levels, xvYCC and RGB
• xvYCC and Deep Color
• YCbCr to RGB Considerations
• Color Subsampling, or What is 4:4:4 or 4:2:2?
•  What is YUV?
• Understanding Color Processing: 8-bit, 10-bit, 32-bit, and More
• HDMI 1.2 Specification
• HDMI 1.3a Specification
• Post Processing in The Orange Box
• The ARRI Companion to Digital Intermediate
• Laser TV: Ultra-Wide Gamut for a New Extended Color-Space Standard, xvYCC
• Comparison of HDMI 1.0-1.3 and HDMI 1.4 Usages in the Commercial and Residential Markets
• Spears & Munsil official website
• Unofficial Oppo BDP-83 FAQs

1. On the Xbox One, the Color Space Standard setting is the equivalent of the Xbox 360’s Reference Level Limited setting (16-235), while Color Space PC RGB is the equivalent of Reference Level Expanded (0-255).

 
 
I know the console is but one day old, but it’s never too early to recommend improvements to the platform. I’ve been with Xbox from the beginning, having owned both the original Xbox and Xbox 360 from day one release. Here are some changes I’d love to see in the next wave of updates.

1. Auto sign-in without Kinect.

The Kinect is great for those who want to use it, but for those who’d rather do without (or have no room to place it), there should be an auto sign-in option consistent with the legacy console’s. On X360, you can select a profile to auto sign-in upon boot. You should not be required to have the Kinect running to auto sign-in your profile. Please include this in the next update.

2. Xbox 360 should tell us what our Xbox One friends are playing.

Why when I’m playing on X360 and bring up my friends list does it not display what game my friends are playing on Xbox One? Where is the integration the core base have been expecting? I understand the technological differences removing the ability to party chat cross-platform, but something as minimal as showing what games or apps other friends are playing across consoles should be in place. Let’s make this happen.

3. Integrate achievement lists across the two platforms.

As above, where is the integration between the two platforms? Currently there are two discrete achievement lists for the X360 and X1. When I bring up my profile on X360, I see one obnoxious entry titled “Xbox One Games”, which collects all gamerscore earned on the X1 platform. My friends on 360 are unable to see what achievements I’ve earned on my Xbox One games. This seems to me technologically lazy.

Instead, the achievement databases should be integrated such that each X1 game has its own entry when you bring up a gamercard on X360. I understand the achievement images are larger on the X1, but there is no reason why they could not simply be downsized for rendering on the X360 platform. From what I can tell, there are no other meaningful differences between the two lists. The core base of gamers are those that have been with the legacy console the longest. We deserve better than this.

4. Improved access and navigation for achievements.

If not already apparent, my biggest problem with the One is the achievements. I want to be able to pause my game and look at them JUST like I do on the 360. But as it is now, I have to leave the game to look at them and then I have to open the specific achievement to see its description. You have turned what was an efficient, addictive process into an annoyingly tedious chore. Either craft an even better way to browse achievements, or revert back to the legacy style.

Achievements were pivotal in cultivating the hardcore fanbase you have today. If you break the achievements system, much of that base will scatter to different platforms and leave the Xbox behind.

5. Better presentation for achievements.

I think we should be able to control how many games played/achievements are displayed on the screen at once. I much prefer the old scrolling list over the mega monster blocks that only show a few at a time. Think of it as how you can sort picture thumbnails in Windows. These blocky icons make it difficult to get a quick overview of what I need to work on, not to mention are an eyesore.

On a related note, there should be more stats for achievements on the One. In the 360 dashboard, it displays an overall percentage as well as total achievements earned / total possible (locked + unlocked). Why was this not ported over? I and many others really liked this.

6. Separate apps from games where it makes sense to.

I get it. This generation is all about apps. Nothing on the dashboard can function without one. But there is no reason we should be seeing all of these apps when I go to “Compare Games” with friends. Last I checked, ESPN, Internet Explorer and Redbox Instant are not games. I already hate that we’ve now added achievements to apps, but these should at least be separated from game achievements.

The same applies to Xbox.com. When I go to “Compare Activity” with a friend on Xbox.com, I don’t want to scroll past a list of 20 apps to get to the games. I propose that there be two options: Games and Media. Keep these lists consistent across all platforms. I can’t imagine this being difficult.

7. Unclutter the dashboard.

Organization and navigation have taken a step backwards.

8. Ability to toggle friend notifications.

With the Xbox One, your friends list and followers list come with a higher cap. To avoid the user getting notification pop-ups every minute or so, MSFT disabled this feature entirely. Instead, give the user the option to enable/disable friend notifications. Rarely is it better to disable a feature altogether than to give the user more flexibility. Notifications at the level of user-created groups would work very nicely.

The Xbox One has been touted for its social capabilities, when it’s failing to live up to the X360’s standards in this regard in a number of ways.

9. Option to quickly view online friends and send them invites.

On the 360, friends used to be two button pushes away. Now they are two, then wait, loading…loading…loading, then third click, and again loading…loading…loading, sometimes followed by “Error: sorry we don’t know what went wrong there try again later.” Meanwhile, the next match has already started and I’ve been able to send zero invites. Also, sometimes the friends screen doesn’t even load or load properly. This is unacceptable. Just putting everything into little square blocks doesn’t make things simpler. In this case, it just seems to bury things under more windows and load times.

Was there no UAT (user acceptance testing) for the One? I.e., count the number of steps and time it takes to perform action ‘X’ on the legacy console and then compare those values with the new console. The efficiency should be at least on par, if not better, but never a step backward. What happened?

10. Option to disable friend’s feeds.

Pure minutia

11. Music and other media streaming over network.

Streaming your own music while gaming is one of my most used features on the Xbox 360. Right now I use a program called Serviio, which shows up when I bring up the Xbox 360 Guide and click ‘Select Music’. As far as I know, there is currently no equivalent way of doing this on the Xbox One. The lack of DLNA support is appalling for a $500 console touted as a “media center.”

When I failed to find a solution, I then assumed you could at least use an iPod or a flash drive to play your own music, as with the 360. But it appears that currently the Xbox One cannot even stream music from a USB source (iPod or stick memory). What gives? Who is responsible for these lapses?

12. Multiple WiFi profiles.

For those who have to move the console to different locations frequently, it can be cumbersome to configure WiFi each and every time you return to a network you’ve previously set up. Most media devices today have this ability, especially ones approaching the sticker price of the Xbox One, including the PS4.

13. Battery charge indicator. Ability to disable vibration.

A helpful feature on the 360 is a battery meter that displays when you access the Guide. This allows you to swap out exhausted batteries so you don’t get caught with your pants down in the next multiplayer match. There also does not appear to be an option for turning off controller vibration (either altogether or trigger feedback only). For many, disabling controller vibration is a means to preserve battery life. I don’t currently see a system-wide option to disable it for all games.

14. Bring ‘Recent Players’ back.

Add this adjacent to the friends list, just like on 360. It’s incredibly convenient and I use it all the time.

15. Ability to mute a player and view their gamercard.

Bring back the ability to view other players’ gamercards in-game and make it just as effortless to mute them as on the 360. Why were all of these brilliant features removed? Someone call QC.

16. Ability to kick from Party.

More party chat options. Kicking players from a party has been really the best thing for party chats.

17. No retail labels on my game copies.

This one is an unapologetically aesthetic concern. I received my Xbox One copy of Assassin’s Creed IV yesterday and this is what I see plastered across the face of the box:
 

Click to enlarge

18. Add multichannel support (e.g., DD 5.1, DTS 5.1).

The fact that a console released in 2013 does not include this would be an April Fool’s joke were it not true. Quite honestly, the console should not have been released without functional surround sound audio.

19. Blu-ray 3D support.

There is now a huge install base for 3D. Every major manufacturer has been selling 3D televisions and 3D Blu-ray players for a few years now, and the players are often a fraction of the price of the Xbox One. Any product sold in 2013 touting itself as a “media center” should include 3D support out of the box. (See the PS3.)

20. Various bugs and other optimization issues.

Video playback on most apps still suffers from judder and frame skipping. Blu-ray still has audio sync issues (I’ve owned upward of a half dozen BDPs and have never had sync issues like this). The One is still plagued by memory issues when you multi-task too much. After a while, my Xbox One experiences some slowdown when switching tabs, and the achievement unlocked animations will crawl too. I am sure these issues will be addressed over time.

Wrap-Up

This is a list that, I hope, is not too difficult to implement in the near future. I’m sure further time with the system will occasion new ideas and possibilities to come. Overall, I and many of my friends are pleased with the console and want to see it be the best it can be, especially with the stiff competition it is facing this generation. Thanks for listening. And I’d appreciate if the mods or anyone else could push this through the proper channels.

 
Update: Microsoft has addressed several of these items in the monthly updates. More to come.

INTRO

For many, Id Software is a household name, conjuring up hallowed memories of beautiful sci-fi violence and “kindly turn on the lights” scarefests. It seems like just yesterday my freshman suitemate and I were huddled over a 15-inch laptop with Doom 3, restlessly anticipating what lay in wait for us around the next corner. With archetypal series like Quake and Doom, Id elevated the first-person genre to new heights and pushed forward the roadmap for technological innovation. With fanfare for the Texas-based developer largely focused at the feet of these two cherished franchises and the technovisual prowess they represented, any new IP is guaranteed to receive broad attention.

True to form, with its penchant for monosyllabic game titles and quick-twitch gunplay, Id has now dropped Rage into the first person fracas. It is their first major release in six years and the first product built with Id’s new game engine, Id Tech 5. Let’s see if Rage makes the cut.

Note: This review applies to the Xbox 360 version of the game, which is spread across three discs.

STORY

It’s no secret Id’s creations leave little to recommend them story-wise, and Rage is unfortunately no different. Following an historic collision of earth and asteroid, our pale blue dot is reverted to an unrecognizable state of ruin, with life’s remnants operating under terms of tribalism and disaccord. Besides a few sparse pockets of settlements which survived the blast and mutants roaming the wastes for flesh, there is you. A contingency plan codenamed Eden Project was enacted prior to the impact, in which a select few were stored in subsurface cryogenic pods. Once disinterred, their intended task was to repopulate the earth. The project was largely a failure, and you are its sole survivor, with nothing but corpses and a looped recording in your midst. It is in this maelstrom of post-apocalyptic desolation that you emerge from your pod and take your first, squinty-eyed look at the new vista.

Architecturally, the plot packaged here is a bit like a construction site that is never fully developed into a home. This is made all the more unfortunate because all of the brick and materials are there. A totalitarian state known as “The Authority” has formed above ground, with the inevitable resistance movement poised in opposition, and a race of mutant creatures add a darker dimension to what could have been. Yet you’re never introduced to the leader of your enemies or their motives. Nor are there any memorable clashes between the two factions.

This skeleton of a plot could have been bolstered by a palette of compelling characters who are just never unpacked. The first character you meet, voiced by John Goodman, stands as the high point in the cast, but his involvement in your quest is fleeting, along with the rest of the game’s narratival elements. None of the game’s back story is revealed, the quests are loot-driven rather than plot-driven, and, through it all, you’re only rewarded with one incoherent fizzle of an ending.
 

GAMEPLAY

Those less interested in the story than Id’s tried-and-true weapons combat have a lot to look forward to here. While Rage is three-parts shooter, one-part buggy racer, the majority of your time will be spent pulling the trigger. You’ll be taking aim with the conventional assortment of goods — shotguns, crossbows and scoped pistols — which can be modded with BioShock-esque secondary ammo like electro bolts for your bow and explosive ammo for your buckshot. To aid you in trickier situations, you’ll also amass a number of blueprints you can use to build various types of support fire, the most notable being a sentry turret, sentry bot and RC car. Having two sentry bots follow you around makes for some rather frenetic battlefield scenarios.

As you advance from fetch quest to fetch quest, you meet a generic but sufficiently diverse set of enemies, all of which react fantastically to each well-placed shot. The force of Id’s new engine is realized most completely in the way your arsenal sprays violence on enemies in creative ways and in the sheer tightness of the controls. Each of your AI foes recoils in sync with shot placement, and the AI interact with cover effectively enough to keep the combat fresh. It’s easy to ignore the insipid storyline when the shooting mechanics approach this level of vibrancy and satisfaction.
 

 
The balance of Rage is spent in the driver’s seat, zooming to the various locales around the wasteland. The game is navigated via two separate overworlds, split between discs 1 and 2 on X360. The regions themselves are much smaller than I had expected, and there’s frankly little to see. While the compressed landscape means you’ll be visiting some areas multiple times to accomplish slightly different tasks, it also means you’ll become quite familiar with vehicular combat and racing. As you near the middle segue of the game, both become repetitive, and the touchy steering controls leave a bit to be desired. The races in the city hubs are mildly enjoyable, but since their only purpose is to acquire new cars, it seems like an afterthought shoehorned in to add play time.

It won’t be too long before you notice the omnibus of missed opportunities that must have been left on the drawing board. There are simply not enough activities or areas to explore outside of the hackneyed missions. No secret areas, no meaningful side quests. The main quests never dip too far down into the innovation jar, either. While the environments are beautiful and built for firefights, they are linear to a fault, never giving the impression there might be more to see. Besides a handful of interesting areas and boss characters, the game world is overall less than memorable.

VISUALS

Silky smooth, disarmingly handsome. As Id’s first console game built with their proprietary Id Tech 5 engine, Rage’s announcement was met with high expectations and the team has delivered. As you step from your cryo pod, you are greeted by one beautiful view of the wasteland after another. This is the game Id had in mind when building their engine. Skylines approach photorealism. Every mountain ridge and stress fracture in the deformed planet is bursting with detail. While the variety of environments are fairly limited, what is here is rendered gorgeously and stands in stark contrast to the cel-shaded pseudo-realism of Borderlands.
 

 
Performance never dips as combat heats up, either, as Id uses an innovative frame-rendering technique that guarantees a rock-solid 60 fps experience. This is easily one of the smoothest, most responsive shooters to grace the console market. Two gripes, however. First, there is absolutely no environmental destruction to speak of, and second, there are simply too few character models to go around. Some of the NPCs are shamelessly reused even in the same city hub, as if we wouldn’t notice. All in all, Rage fills the shoes of its predecessors admirably given the limitations of the hardware.

Technical specs: native 720p at 60 frame/s. Vertical resolution is always maintained, while horizontal resolution is adjusted dynamically to maintain 60 Hz refresh (applies both to X360 and PS3 platforms).

AUDIO

Production values remain high across the board, with each weapon emitting its own guttural, wasteland-style oomph. The voice acting is hit and miss, however. While your first contact in the game is masterfully voiced by John Goodman, the later characters, particularly those of the resistance movement, fail to capture any interest and none of the characters have much to say. NPCs, likewise, are tight-lipped and tranquilizingly dull. It’s as if the writing team scheduled a brainstorming session to outcompete one another for the most generic lines. To the game’s detriment, you can proceed through the entire game without speaking to any of the characters other than the ones you’re forced to and never miss a beat.

MULTIPLAYER AND CO-OP

Disc 3 contains the multiplayer and cooperative modes. Looking forward to hopping right into a deathmatch, I quickly discovered that Rage offers no non-vehicle multiplayer component. All of the match types are vehicle vs. vehicle, ranging from strictly combat to rally mode to some banal version of capture the flag. This, understatedly, is a massive disappointment considering the legacies of the other titles in Id’s canon. The two-player co-op missions hardly raise the incentive to pop in the third disc. There are nine missions in total, many of which can be finished in a matter of minutes, and feature re-used locales from the campaign.

CONCLUSION

From the fountainheads of technical ingenuity that brought first-person shooters to the gaming masses comes the handsome and addictive Rage, clearly modeled after Doom and Quake, but reimagined for the current gaming market. While seasoned gamers will likely find several of the elements lacking, including the incohesive story, contrived questline, and overall lack of depth, those looking for some simple, mindless fun with deadly firepower will be plenty appeased.

Thanks to Id’s new engine, Rage is peerless in terms of sheer fluidity of combat and hyper-detailed visuals. Although I enjoyed Rage while it lasted (around 15 hours if you complete every side quest), overall I found its by-the-books, stubbornly linear nature lacking next to the batch of superior shooters in recent years. The multiplayer and co-op modes are disappointing to say the least, and I simply see no reason to come back to the game after playing through once. Short on depth but high on beauty and fun, give this one a rental rather than a buy.
 

INTRO

Veteran gamers have long anticipated a current-generation Deus Ex title. The original Deus Ex, released in 2000, is commonly labeled the greatest PC game of all time by fans and industry pundits alike, while the slightly less well-received sequel, Invisible War, amassed scores of new fans from the console crowd. Both were revolutionary in their day, masterfully combining first-person shooter with RPG elements, and remain two of the most memorable games of the previous decade. With Human Revolution, developer Eidos Interactive hopes to re-establish the prestigious franchise’s former relevance after an 8-year industry hiatus. This anxiously awaited prequel preserves the core gameplay mechanics and the uniformly dystopian setting the series is known for, while taking advantage of current-gen hardware to craft an immersive and addictive experience.

STORY

The year is 2027, 25 years before the events in Deus Ex. The era is characterized by humanity’s slow descent into chaos, where our uninhibited foray into biotechnology and cybernetics has engendered a culture of fear and uncertainty among the populace. Human augmentation development is rapidly approaching an existential impasse, and each camp has its share of vehement activists. One side claims that modifying the body will obscure what it means to be human, while defenders endorse the practice for its medicinal applications and the greater good. Control over human enhancement rests with a phalanx of high-profile corporate elite who wish to dictate the course humanity will take in the years to come, all in the name of power and greed. Think 18th century Illuminati escapade hewed to a 21st century context.

You play Adam Jensen, a former Spec Ops veteran whose DNA is found to be uniquely compatible with augmentation technology. Now chief of security for America’s preeminent biotech corporation, an attack on HQ triggers a manhunt for those responsible. As you slowly peel away the conspiratorial layers, you discover the truth is far more extreme than anyone anticipated. Honestly, the plot veers over the top, and the notions of global conspiracies are just as illogical today as they were two centuries ago. In my view, the plot was a bit too banal to be memorable, but the presentation and characters provide just enough motivation to care about how it all plays out. The ending isn’t as noteworthy as I had hoped, though there are four possible depending on your choices.

I should note that knowledge of the happenings in either of the previous Deus Ex titles is unnecessary to understand or fully enjoy the story here. Some lingering questions will be answered for those who have played the other two, but HR‘s story arc is equally intelligible as a stand-alone plot.

GAMEPLAY

Deus Ex is fundamentally about choice. HR fully embraces this core principle by crafting a rewarding experience for creative players. Expect a brilliant mix of stealth and combat mechanics. Indeed, each environment is masterfully designed to accommodate both styles of play. This multifaceted experience is aided in large part by perfect controls which ground you firmly in the game world from start to finish. Controls should never for one second undermine the immersiveness of a game, and this is a flawless example of one that gets it right.

Choosing an all-out assault approach is tempting, as the game packs a diverse mix of lethal and non-lethal weaponry, ranging from SMGs, sniper rifles and mines to stun guns and tranquilizer rifles. Each gun is unique and well-designed and, if you manage your inventory well, you can amass an impressive arsenal by the end of the game. Many are also compatible with upgrades, one notable being the Flechette attachment which, if you lack line of sight of your target, allows your bullets to curve around walls, breaking the laws of physics Wanted-style.

If you choose to stow your weapons instead, a stealth approach can be hugely satisfying, and you’re rewarded handsomely for it. Progressing through entire areas without being spotted or setting off an alarm grants XP bonuses. There are always alternate paths through each guard-laden area just waiting to be discovered.

Both styles are perfectly balanced in a way that makes neither tactic a superior option. Your armor, even on the lower difficulties, feels like a step below Kevlar; a few rounds of repeated fire and you’re looking at a reload screen. Conversely, playing stealthy is never lacking in intensity, as a single errant maneuver can devolve to an all-out firefight if you’re not careful. A more cautious approach when attempting stealth runs prevents trial and error gameplay, though I would unreservedly encourage players to save frequently no matter which approach you choose to take.

The heart and soul of the Deus Ex series has always been the augmentations, and HR’s selection surpasses all expectations. What’s here is so good that it’s difficult to even think of others they could have added. Cloak, super sprint, the ability to see through walls and a 9-feet vertical jump are all here. For non-stealthy players, one aug allows you to takedown an enemy behind a weak wall. Some are very useful depending on your play style, some are merely cool, and some can be both. By investing points in your strength aug, for example, you can either throw a vending machine at your adversaries or instead use it as mobile cover, carrying it around and placing it at will. Imagination is key to the experience.

Expanding your augmentation tree is an addictive process. As you level up, new abilities enable you to explore areas that were previously inaccessible. Depending on the augs you choose, you may not be able to reach every hidden passage, ledge or storage room on the map. Eidos designed the game world in a way that encourages exploration. Environments are intricate, though not overly labyrinthine.

Augs also greatly expand the diversity of tactics you can use to engage your enemies. While you never lose the sense of feeling human, once your aug collection is fully stacked, you can’t help but feel a bit like an Aston Martin in a dog race, a juggernaut fighting mall cops. That said, there’s still a fine line here between playing smart and playing carelessly. The latter will often result in death due to your thin layer of armor.

The hacking minigame in this installment deserves a special mention. It’s a splendidly geeky game of capture and defend where you attempt to capture all of the nodes while defending your I/O port from being detected by the network. If the network successfully traces your entry point, you will be booted from the system and forced to try again. I found it relentlessly addictive in a way that makes the versions in the Fallout and BioShock series seem downright pedestrian. Unfortunately, hacking becomes far too easy once you invest only slightly in your hacking skills, and the complexity of the sequences does not increase as you progress through the game. Level 1 hacks in later stages of the game pose no greater challenge than those earlier on. Once you’re familiar with the system, they start to be a bit too easy, and I found myself craving greater depth later in the game. The in-game tutorial is embedded below.

Rounding out the core mechanics are the social interactions. While certainly nowhere near the level of Mass Effect, you’re provided ample choices based on your dispositional preferences. Whether you prefer to be an arrogant, sarcastic brute or a chivalrous, charming pacifist, the options are there. Some social interactions act as challenges, in which you must select the appropriate dialog options to coerce an NPC to provide information or otherwise take some action that is essential to your cause. These challenges have real consequences and often have a ripple effect on how future events or interactions play out later in the game.

If there’s one knock to be made against HR, it’s irrefutably the boss encounters. To me these only seemed to conflict with the core experience. What’s worse, they cannot be skipped, no matter how stealthily you proceed through the game. One later battle in particular is highly obnoxious (Protip: Do NOT take the “upgraded” biochip when given the option). At the very least, they provide the chance to unleash all the ammo you’ve been hoarding from stealth-based play. Yet in a title that so rewards stealth and ingenuity, forcing you to engage and kill boss characters just seems out of place.

VISUALS

Eidos has managed to effectively capture the dystopian aesthetic here, conveying a volatile and oppressive ambience in every city and within every tucked away eBook. The urban settings are futuristic, yet not too much so (after all, the story is set just 15 years from now). Just like the first two games, the majority of missions take place at night, and the predominantly dark imagery complements the vision of the game.

Detail, detail, detail. Each environment you visit, from Detroit to Singapore, is hyper-detailed, with some vistas approaching photo-realism. The game artists had fun here, and their passion shows. Every object in every room serves a purpose and is interesting to look at, something I can really appreciate. There is some unfortunate repetition among indoor environments, however, and I feel this should have been given more attention.

Human Revolution uses a reworked version of Eidos’ Crystal Engine and, for the most part, delivers a top-notch visual experience. Frame rates are solid overall, as v-sync is auto-enabled for console versions. After multiple playthroughs trying out different techniques, I only experienced slight slowdown during a few heavy combat situations, but frame rates are generally rock solid.

This is one of the first console titles to apply NVIDIA’s FXAA (anti-aliasing) tech, which intelligently blurs the image to increase perceived resolution.

The game also uses real-time shadowing, which should really be a mandatory companion to dynamic lighting these days, as it helps to preserve visual integrity while in motion.

Eidos has included a custom version of screen-space ambient occlusion (SSAO), first used in Crysis in 2007. The shader technology appends an extra layer of depth to the image, giving textures a more refined look. This is perhaps most noticeable while in cover, properly positioning your character in the game space relative to his surroundings.

Unfortunately, the character models and the FMVs in the game are of poor quality, displaying a grainy, low-res look. It’s especially jarring since actual gameplay looks so fresh and detailed. This is likely due to the limited storage capacity on Xbox 360. The poor cutscene quality was regrettably ported over to the PS3 and PC versions of the game as a byproduct of lowest common denominator development. Instead of re-encoding separate, higher resolution FMVs for formats with greater capacity, Eidos optimized the data for the 6.8GB available to the 360 format and dropped it in all three.

Technical details: native 720p v-synced to 30 frame/s (Xbox 360 and PS3)

AUDIO

Audio production values are generally high as well. Weapon effects, your character’s footsteps and augmentation audio cues are all spot-on. While the voice-overs for lesser NPCs could be better, particularly those representing nations outside the U.S., the more essential actors put in a strong performance. The radio and news broadcasts could also be much more varied, as the repetition starts to grate the nerves about midway through the game.

Michael McCann, who also scored the Splinter Cell series, handled the soundtrack. Though some pieces are eerily reminiscent of Mass Effect, McCann achieves a rare symbiosis here which pleasantly syncs with the overall feel of the game. Listen for yourself below.

REPLAY VALUE

My first playthrough clocked in at just under 30 hours. That included completing every side mission, hacking everything in sight and otherwise attaining every shred of XP possible. Even with maximum XP, I wasn’t able to unlock every augmentation, which is OK. The copious aug selection demands additional playthroughs so you can try out new techniques. There are quite a few side missions to complete, many with alternate outcomes. The main missions and aforementioned social challenges add several more permutations, including four different endings to the game. Multiple playthroughs are welcomed to experience everything the game has to offer.

CONCLUSION

The one word that interlaces this review: addictive. Human Revolution offers a refreshing amount of depth not typically experienced outside of traditional open-world RPG titles. After multiple playthroughs and mixing things up on the fly, I can confidently say this is one of the few games where whatever approach you choose delivers an enjoyable experience. The engrossing collection of augmentations and variety of play styles ensure the experience never grows stale. 

The attention to detail here is tremendous and personifies a development team committed to uncompromising quality. The seamless controls, arresting visuals, and choice-heavy RPG elements make it difficult to put down. The overarching plot, intermittent boss battles, and low quality cutscenes are definitely low points, but don’t mar the overall experience. Truth be told, this is as close to digital crack as it gets. If you’re even remotely into the shooter genre, pick this one up.
 

The clever hack demonstrated in the video above allows passive 3D displays to render fullscreen views for each player in a splitscreen session. This allows both players to enjoy the entire screen area (albeit in 2D only), removing the ability for you or your friend to screen watch. The best part about this hack is that you only need a few items to make it work.

To recreate this effect for yourself, you need:

• Passive 3D TV
• 2 pairs of polarized glasses
• PS3 or Xbox 360 game with 3D capability and split-screen game mode(s)

How does it work?

You simply pop out the lenses in the passive glasses and place the two L lenses in one pair and the R lenses in the other. Now that the lenses match with respect to polarity, you then enable the appropriate 3D modes on both your 3D TV and in the game. It’s that simple.

Call of Duty: Black Ops supports the Top-Bottom 3D format, as do nearly all 3D sets. (Note: Top-Bottom may also be designated ‘Over-Under’ or ‘Above-Below’.) The PS3 console supports a variety of 3D formats, including Top-Bottom, Side-by-Side and Frame Packing, but most PS3 titles to date use Top-Bottom for 3D rendering. The important thing is that both your 3D TV and game match according to 3D mode.

Passive 3D sets typically come with 2-4 pairs of polarized glasses, but if you need some, you can also use the ones from theaters – if you choose not to return them at the end of the presentation. If not, they are very cheap in comparison to active shutter eyewear.

While the X360 does not “officially” support stereoscopic 3D, the console’s hardware is fully capable of rendering 3D gameplay which matches or exceeds the quality of PS3’s S3D output. The 360 does not have as many 3D-compatible titles as PS3 right now, but if you have one, such as Crysis 2, along with a passive 3D set, the effect will work precisely the same way. Simply enable Top-Bottom or Side-by-Side in the game menu and on your 3D TV.

Downsides

Since this hack reverts gameplay to a single view for each player, the 3D effect is lost. The same is true for active 3D implementations, such as Sony’s SimulView. There is no (cost-efficient) way to achieve this effect and 3D simultaneously on a single display.

I should mention that the resolution loss inherent to passive 3D sets will be exacerbated by this hack. For example, let’s take the game used in the video. Call of Duty: Black Ops is rendered on PS3 at a resolution of 960 x 544, which will be scaled to the resolution output you have selected in your PS3’s video settings. In 2D mode, this full resolution is displayed. In 3D mode, however, vertical resolution is halved as a byproduct of polarization, leaving each eye with 960 x 272 pixels of information. By interchanging the lenses as in the video, there are no longer two views later combined by the brain but just one view: a 960 x 272 frame stretched across the area of your display. The end result is certainly not pretty, particularly on a 50″ screen, but mileage may vary as it depends on your screen size-viewing distance setup. And, ultimately, the appeal of this might depend on how much you are enjoying capping your friend who can no longer screen watch to get an edge.

Of note is that the X360 version of Black Ops is rendered slightly higher at 1040 x 608, but this minor increase won’t make the extreme slice in resolution any less palpable.

Sony SimulView

I think it was largely because of this video and its viral effect that led to Sony’s implementation in its active shutter 3D sets. At the moment, Sony’s PS3-branded 3D display is the only active 3D TV with this feature, which Sony has dubbed SimulView. Its “quad speed frame-sequential display technology” essentially alters the way the separate views are transmitted by sending two side by side 2D images, one for each player. The effect is enabled by pressing a button on the top of the glasses. The prime advantage active has over passive in this case is that each player receives full 2D resolution. It’s not halved as in passive sets, where the loss is more pronounced due to the single, uncombined view.

It’s not all perfect, however. Sony only sells a single, 24” model, and it only ships with one pair of glasses. Additional eyewear is around $70. But perhaps the biggest drawback is that games must specifically support this feature, rendering all preexisting titles incompatible unless an update is issued.

I’m sure we’ll see this feature implemented in more active shutter sets down the road (assuming the Sony sells well), but for now, it’s easy to recreate the effect on all passive 3D sets.

For more information on the differences between active and passive 3D technology: The 3D TV War: Which One Should You Buy?

Introduction

Castlevania: Lords of Shadow is a 3rd-person action-adventure title from Konami. MercurySteam handled its development, while Hideo Kojima (of Metal Gear Solid fame) also contributed heavily to its creation. LoS is a 3D adaptation of the 2D side-scrolling titles from the NES days. The Xbox 360 version of the game is spread across two discs, attributable primarily to the vast amount of FMV data contained within.

Story

Rest assured: those unfamiliar with Castlevania lore will have no trouble becoming entranced in Lord of Shadows’ dark, Armageddon-themed story as this is a stand-alone plot. I will not spoil any story details, but as with any “end of days” scenario, the main character (Gabriel) is tasked with halting the demise of the human race, and is further motivated by reasons which will be made clear from the very first cutscene. The story served as a memorable companion to the gameplay and is lightyears ahead of the Ninja Gaiden series in this regard.

Gameplay

Combat, the core of the experience, is intense, fluid, hardcore, and ultimately satisfying. Those familiar with Ninja Gaiden’s controls and mechanics will feel right at home here. All of the usual suspects are present, including a chain-style blade, magic, and unique secondary weapons. The depth of the system feels just right. Continuous hits without taking damage fills your focus meter, after which all subsequent hits release magic energy. Blocking is a key element, as it more quickly fills your focus meter, and timing it right leads to devastating counterattacks.

The contrast between light and shadow magic creates unique combat strategies, as they can be combined with either your primary or your secondary weapons for different attacks. The combos are not only varied, but easy to memorize. My personal favorite goes to the Flame Cutter, in which Gabriel shoots out blades of fire while Shadow Magic is active.

The game is also puzzle-heavy in some levels. While most are not too difficult to decode, you are given the option to “unlock the solution” if your sanity is tested. Other sections of the game prioritize your platforming prowess, with long enemy-free stretches that force you to utilize Gabriel’s non-combat repertoire.

As might be expected with a title of this length, some levels are less enjoyable than others. A couple of the boss battles in particular are unnecessarily tricky, resulting in mild frustration and tedium. Most of the boss battles are highly satisfying, however, and were some of my favorite parts of the game. Unlike others in this genre, LoS uses a fixed camera perspective. While this sounds negative on paper, it accentuates the art direction and I only found it to be a hindrance in a few battles and platforming sections.
 

 
Regarding difficulty, LoS can be challenging in the beginning, especially for genre novices. However, as you level up Gabriel with more health, magic and combos, the game gets progressively easier. Providing some context may help readers better assess its difficulty. In my opinion, Ninja Gaiden II sits at the top of the genre in terms of sheer challenge, and LoS is decidedly more forgiving. Persistent checkpoints and a combat-specific strategy to regain health explain why. Make no mistake: LoS is a tough game (particularly on the highest difficulty); it’s just not nearly as challenging as the Ninja Gaiden series.

Visuals

In the past, there has been one title released each year which served to sustain my faith in current-gen console visuals. Dead Space was that title in 2008, Dirt 2 in 2009 and for 2010, it’s without a doubt LoS. The environments are highly stylized, and many jaw-dropping, in particular the outdoor enviros. Mercury Steam and Kojima did a superb job of creating a sense of scale, with the camera zooming far out from the player in non-combat sections to reveal the alluringly detailed backgrounds. The lighting is natural and realistic in both daytime and nighttime levels. And even though the single player is quite long, I never noticed any recycled set pieces as commonly experienced in other games. Fans can especially look forward to the Vampire Castle, an iconic set piece of the Castlevania series.
 

 
Animation is fluid, from the combat to the cinematics that connect chapters and significant events. Even hair texturing, one of the traditionally most difficult elements to animate, is handled very convincingly here. This is critical, as there are over 7.5 GB of pre-rendered FMV across the two discs. The many cutscenes look great and play out in an often fantastic fusion of gore, brutality, and flair. Clearly, they rival those of the Ninja Gaiden series. Accordingly, the many bosses in the game are both proportionally impressive and painstakingly detailed. From a visual fidelity standpoint, this is easily one of the best the 360 has to offer and is definitely one game you’ll want to show off to your friends on your HDTV.

Technical Specs: native 720p, v-synced to 30 frame/s (X360 and PS3)

Audio

Thankfully, the audio production values are equally as impressive as the visuals. The game was scored using a 120-piece orchestra. What results is an engaging and sweeping musical backdrop that not only provides authenticity to the sound but contributes to the “epic” feel of the story. The soundtrack was included in the limited edition of the game but can also be found online.

The voicework is about as good as it gets. Along with quality voice talent, the main thing I appreciated is that dialog is not clichéd or corny. Each line spoken is convincing and powerful. The narration prior to each chapter, handled by Patrick Stewart of X-Men and Star Trek lore, is a high point that should not be skipped by players. They really motivate you for the upcoming chapter.

Replay Value

With 12 chapters spanning two DVD-9 discs, the first playthrough took me around 20 hours (without skipping cutscenes). After you complete the story once, trials for each level are unlocked, along with Paladin (the highest) difficulty. It will likely take another 20 hours or more to complete all of these levels again to do the trials and complete on Paladin.
 

Conclusion

If not already apparent, I was enthralled with Lords of Shadow. From the immaculate production values, memorable characters, bosses and cutscenes, gorgeously striking visuals, enticing score, and addictive gameplay, I found it hard to put down. The game offers a nearly perfect balance of difficulty throughout the campaign and should be accessible to genre novices as well as the more hardcore. Despite a scarce few frustrating moments involving questionable design choices, this is a remarkably near perfect action-adventure game. While I think this should be in every 360 owner’s collection, if you’re a fan of this genre, it’s undoubtedly a must-own title.

Postscript: As an aside, I’d like to point out that I avoid the practice of assessing a particular piece of media in terms of originality. Virtually nothing is truly original anymore — whether it be music, film, or interactive media — as all concepts are inevitably inspired by those that came before. Here, the developers clearly drew inspiration from other reputable series such as God of War, Ninja Gaiden, and Assassin’s Creed. What’s principally important, in my view, is how enjoyable the experience is, and the combination of inspiration on offer in LoS is exceptionally executed.
 

 
 
Much confusion has arisen due to the recent ads by LG and others comparing their new 3D TVs to “conventional” 3D sets. Let’s be clear: there is absolutely a war among 3D television manufacturers, and it’s likely to intensify as more appealing 3D content hits the market. So what are the differences between the types of 3D displays, and more importantly, which one is better?

There are presently two types of mass-produced stereoscopic displays: those based on active shutter and those based on passive polarization technology. Both presentations artificially enhance the sense of depth in an image by delivering slightly differing views to each eye. Our brain then fuses the two images together, creating an illusion of depth. Note that all types of 3D content — including 3D Blu-ray, video games, and cable and satellite programs — are compatible with both types of 3D displays. While both formats can effectively convey a three-dimensional image, notable differences exist in how each format is perceived by the end user and in the glasses used for the respective technologies.

Active Shutter 3D

Active shutter-based televisions arrived on the market first, shortly following the massive success of James Cameron’s Avatar. These sets incorporate “shutter” glasses along with an active component, the mechanics of which are relatively simple. The display shows alternating L eye and R eye images in a rapid sequence that is synced to the glasses, which block one eye while leaving the other eye open (hence, its “shutter” designation). The sync between the display and glasses is maintained via either IR or Bluetooth, which also happens to be its biggest shortcoming.

Image via Digital Trends

As the 3D effect completely depends on the sync between the (emitter in the) display and the (receiver in the) eyewear, there is the possibility that the system will fail to maintain proper sync. Further, interoperability between other IR and Bluetooth 3D televisions and glasses continues to be a problem and will likely not be remedied until an official standard for 3D glasses is finalized.

Panasonic, Sony, LG, Samsung, and Toshiba produce active shutter displays in both LCD and plasma varieties.

Passive Polarized 3D

Televisions using polarized 3D technology require different eyewear called polarized glasses, which are passive in nature and, in principle, function just like polarized sunglasses. Polarized glasses use offsetting polarization filters in each lens that correspond to the filters applied to the surface of the television screen. As each eye only receives light that is polarized in the corresponding direction from the screen, each eye sees a different image. The biggest downside to this approach is that vertical resolution is halved as a byproduct of polarization. On the upside, any pair of polarized glasses will work with any polarized TV, and they’re much cheaper than active glasses.

LG, Vizio, and Toshiba market passive polarized displays for LCDs only.

Passive polarized TRON: Legacy Limited Edition by Oakley

So what are the practical differences between these two technologies? Each 3D display type has pros and cons, largely resulting from the glasses required to view the stereoscopic signals. We’ll break down the differences that involve the most salient considerations.

Weight

Most of the cons of shutter glasses can be traced to its active attributes. The receiver, along with the batteries required to power the glasses, add weight. This may grow uncomfortable during the span of a full-length movie and may be of considerable concern for those already wearing prescription glasses. On the other hand, polarized glasses are no heavier than standard sunglasses.

Charge Time

Active shutter glasses come in the non-rechargeable (30 – 80 hours) or rechargeable variety (2 hours). Rechargeable glasses typically top out at two hours, so it’s best to have a backup pair ready to go. Polarized glasses are entirely passive and thus have a theoretically infinite “charge time.”

Cost

Active glasses range from $50 – 250, depending on whether you buy your TV manufacturer’s glasses or 3rd party glasses (all of which vary in performance). Polarized glasses are cheap by comparison; they can be found for as low as $5. Note that polarized glasses are the same ones that are used for 3D movies in the large majority of theaters. If you’re able to make out with a pair, they’ll work just fine with your passive 3D display at home. As market saturation occurs, expect retail prices of active shutter glasses to drop considerably.

The price difference between the televisions themselves is quite small. The polarizer coating applied to passive displays adds significant cost to its production, so don’t expect passive TVs to be bargain-priced relative to its active shutter counterparts.

Picture Quality

While active shutter TVs maintain full picture information in the horizontal and vertical direction, polarized displays reduce vertical resolution by half. This effectively means a 1080p signal will be perceived as 540p per eye from a polarized display, while an active shutter system delivers full 1080p per eye. Depending on how far you are seated from the screen, this may be a noticeable or negligible trait. This is also content-dependent, as sharper content (e.g., CGI and digital animation) tends to look softer on passive displays. Eagle-eyed viewers who are familiar with good and bad image reproduction will likely notice the drop in resolution when comparing the two technologies side by side, and the disparity becomes more appreciable at suboptimal screen size-viewing distance scenarios. Note that the polarization effect does not affect 2D viewing; full 1080p is maintained in 2D mode.

Crosstalk

Crosstalk – the imperfect separation between the L/R eye images – occurs when one eye sees parts of an image intended for the other eye. This happens due to limitations or deficiencies existing in the display, the glasses or even in the source itself. If it’s present in the movie’s encoding itself, for example, it will be visible with every pair of glasses. Crosstalk can occur in LCDs if the liquid crystals do not switch quickly enough from bright to dark or vice versa and in plasma panels if the phosphor compounds have an afterglow that lasts too long.

While both display types can exhibit this artifact, generally, higher quality displays and glasses will mitigate crosstalk that is otherwise not present in the source. For active shutter implementations, plasma has been shown to exhibit less crosstalk than LCD.

Viewing Angles

While both active and passive possess wide horizontal viewing angles—meaning you and all your friends on the couch can see a coherent 3D image—only active boasts equally accommodating vertical viewing angles. All this means is that if you choose passive, you must ensure the television screen is angled toward your head. If mounting your screen, ensure it’s tilted down toward the viewing positions. Otherwise, the image will break apart and your friends will go home. Keep in mind that fairly marked differences exist among glasses. Crosstalk and brightness can vary along with horizontal viewing angles depending on which glasses you use.

Light Attenuation

The eyewear associated with both technologies reduces light output significantly. Total light loss is as much a function of the display technology as the specific glasses used; each combination of television and glasses is unique. Some 3D displays will auto-adjust brightness when engaging 3D mode. Thus, there is no clear winner here. If you notice the image is too dim when slipping on the glasses, you should boost the brightness on your television. Optimally, you’d have separate settings for 3D and 2D viewing to avoid constantly manipulating your display settings.

Those are the facts. Polarized 3D is lighter, thinner, cheaper and less error-prone, but cuts resolution in half. Active 3D preserves full picture detail, resulting in an overall higher quality 3D picture, but can have syncing and interoperability issues. If you’re a plasma fan, then active shutter is your only choice at this time. Remember, all 3D TVs can also be used to view standard 2D material. But in case you decide to watch some 3D content down the road, be sure to choose the technology that best suits your viewing environment, preferences and budget.

Image courtesy of Panasonic Viera

For those who would like even more in-depth information, Raymond Soneira has a top-rate feature at 3D TV Display Technology Shoot-Out.

Who has a 3D TV and what type? For potential buyers, which type more appeals to you?

Feature image via Cnet