|
(04-28-2012, 03:08 PM)
|
#51
Yes this is the resolution the vita is running the game at, actually, it's even worst then that since these screens clearly show the game is using subnative resolution, but when seen on an actual vita, since the pixel density is much bigger it gives it a super sampled look, making what you see actually much better. Eitherway it looks awful, it's like they were doing it for PSP and just decided to do a quick port. |
|
|
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:10 PM)
|
#53
|
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:11 PM)
|
#54
|
|
Banned
(04-28-2012, 03:12 PM)
|
#58
-- On topic, I'm disappointed by the visuals too. It disappoints me even more that Warner Bros used the footage from the console MK when they announced this game. |
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:13 PM)
|
#59
|
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:13 PM)
|
#60
I thought they used MT Framework on SFxT, which is an absolute beast of a cross-platform engine, but these devs must be pretty amazing anyway to get it looking that good on Vita with whatever engine they're using. It really shows a generational difference between MK and SFxT. |
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:13 PM)
|
#61
|
|
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
(04-28-2012, 03:13 PM)
|
#62
The character models in UMVC3 on Vita are actually downgraded from the console versions a lot more than they look at first glance. The difference is that the art style - smooth shading with inky shadow shader - hides it and makes them look really good.
It seems the differing strategies in porting the games was something like, 1. UMVC = port MT Framework directly, turn all effects and shaders on, then reduce geometry and animation (backgrounds) until the game hits 60fps 2. MKV = port the game detail for detail, including all animated effects, and evenly reduce the quality of everything in unison until it hits 60fps. There will be some people who actually prefer MKV because it will look and feel more authentic in some ways, but it's true the Capcom port looks much, much better in still screen shots. In the end, all of it is the price paid for launch window software and launch ports. Edit: the usual "devs are lazy" remarks are getting tossed out, but given the amount of new content and tweaks to the game, I don't think you can call Boon and Co lazy here. This honestly seems like a technological issue. I'm willing to bet the thoughts about UE3 support are on the money.
Last edited by Kai Dracon; 04-28-2012 at 03:18 PM.
|
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:13 PM)
|
#64
|
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:15 PM)
|
#67
I can't believe people still fucking post massive screens of games that will only be seen on small screens. |
|
(04-28-2012, 03:15 PM)
|
#68
They post them because that's the resolution that comes from the vita screens. |
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:16 PM)
|
#71
Then I had an even better idea--just bring up this thread on the Vita's own Web browser. In both cases, the screens looked marginally better (compared to blown up large on the PC monitor), but they're still a noticeable downgrade from the consoles, and well below the standards most people expect from Vita games. |
|
Licorice-flavoured booze?
(04-28-2012, 03:16 PM)
|
#74
|
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:17 PM)
|
#76
Vita Games at native resolution can still look good
Last edited by Spiegel; 04-28-2012 at 03:20 PM.
|
|
60 fps 60 fps 60 fps 60 fps 30 fps 60 fps 60 fps
(04-28-2012, 03:19 PM)
|
#80
What about Marvel vs Capcom 3? Nearly the same level of detail as the console game with multiple fighters appearing on screen at once at 60 fps and native resolution. Clearly the issue here is simply that UE3 hasn't yet been optimized for the Vita and this team wasn't capable of really delivering. They had to sacrifice a whole hell of a lot in order to hit 60 fps. Too much, perhaps.
Quote:
Last edited by dark10x; 04-28-2012 at 03:22 PM.
|
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:21 PM)
|
#84
|
|
(04-28-2012, 03:22 PM)
|
#87
It is, the point being that the pixel density on everyone's monitors will be different from the Vita. If you have a super duper 2048x1980 monitor it'll be misleading as well, only for the oposite reason.
|
|
Banned
(04-28-2012, 03:22 PM)
|
#88
MK to the lower-poly Vita version? |
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:23 PM)
|
#89
Think about what you said for one second. Do you believe they started on this game a few months ago?
|
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:23 PM)
|
#90
|
|
60 fps 60 fps 60 fps 60 fps 30 fps 60 fps 60 fps
(04-28-2012, 03:23 PM)
|
#91
The cutscenes were never in-engine on consoles (they are Bink videos). They used those cutscenes to hide loading between areas and seamlessly move the story forward.
|
|
Licorice-flavoured booze?
(04-28-2012, 03:23 PM)
|
#92
|
|
hide your water-based mammals
(04-28-2012, 03:24 PM)
|
#93
|
|
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
(04-28-2012, 03:24 PM)
|
#94
The screen resolution arguments are missing the point with the downgrades; regardless of resolution, it's texture quality and effects (shaders) that are missing.
Now, just about every Vita game, even the cheap rushed ones, have little trouble showing off much of Vita's effects and texture abilities. Folks don't seem to be taking into account who made the game; this was ported internally by Netherrealm, correct? If so, again, this looks like a UE3 on Vita kit issue. i.e Vita UE3 is crap port, not MK itself. It will be interesting to see if people challenge Boon on this and to hear what he says. There is some irony here. How often do we hear "devs concentrate on nothing but making bullshots, then the game runs like crap!" |
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:24 PM)
|
#95
(3DS resolution in 3D would actually be 800x240, not 400x240, but screens I stretched were 400x240) ![]()
|
|
Banned
(04-28-2012, 03:25 PM)
|
#96
|
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:26 PM)
|
#99
|
|
Member
(04-28-2012, 03:27 PM)
|
#100
|