• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Alan Wake - The First 12 Minutes (German)

Dogenzaka

Banned
Klocker said:

Wow, looks like I was wrong.

Heh. I thought there were only a few games with 720p as a native resolution.

Klocker said:

Thanks for the link. However, I counted the titles there and if I counted correctly, there are 197 disc titles on that list, and there are 732 Xbox 360 games currently released and announced (according to Wikipedia). Although that number includes titles that have not been released yet, it's still a huge number compared to 197 so I'm not sure if those 197 720p titles are the majority. I doubt the PS3's 720p titles are in the majority, either.
 

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
brain_stew said:
Its standard practice and the smart way to do it. No need to have a blurry HUD no matter how low resolution your rendered 3D image is, its not going to affect performance.
It's a terrible way to do it. It means scaling twice. That affects the overall look of the game far more than having a slightly higher native resolution for HUD elements that take up little screen real estate and you'll barely look at anyway.
 
Dogenzaka said:
To be honest, I thought both. I'm surprised to see that so many run at native 720p.

It use to be one of Microsoft's requirements, and only "special cases" were allowed to let the specification slide, that rule became more and more relaxed unitl around ~18 months ago it was abolished altogether. 720p games are definitely in the majority, although the proportion of subHD games is definitely increasing as time goes on.
 
evolution said:
totally off topic but damn, I had no idea GTHD ran at 1440x1080. I wonder if that was there initial target for GT5 and actually scaled back from there.

It is 1440x1080 but without AA.

The latest GT5 build runs at 1280x1080 with x2 full screen and x2 temporal AA. Compared to GTHD, the resolution has decreased slightly (~12%) but IQ went up considerably.
 

deepbrown

Member
Death Dealer said:
It is 1440x1080 but without AA.

The latest GT5 build runs at 1280x1080 with x2 full screen and x2 temporal AA. Compared to GTHD, the resolution has decreased slightly (~12%) but IQ went up considerably.
Let alone being 4xAA at 720p
 

SamuraiX-

Member
WickedLaharl said:
doesn't really matter to me if you don't believe that i canceled my preorder. i'm not gonna buy it at full price after they so obviously tried to mislead people.

i'll either just rent it, get it used, or wait for a pricedrop (somewhere below $30 seems about fair given the res).

qkDqh.gif


Seriously. The topic title needs to changed right now. I feel sorry for people who are still walking into this shit storm of embarrassment.
 
Ok, I just read three pages about bitching about 'wah wah developers lied! FUCK THIS GAME' and 'Wah wah wah neogaf gaming is clearly pro ps3', and my brain will probably leak out of my ears if i try to go further back.

So... I don't care about that much about the res being 540 or 720 - but how does the game look? I am really hoping it won't be too shooter-y or action-y (though a bit will be fine, i know they want to sell :) ).. big big fan of remedy. probably my most anticipated game of the year

i don't want to watch the video, don't want to be spoiled..
 

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
CadetMahoney said:
pretty much :lol
While I do agree I think it is mainly with the best of the best looking game. Stuff like GT5, KZ2, GoW3, Uncharteds, etc. Let's not falsely lay that layer of bricks down please.

And to comment on this thread, Alan Wake was the reason I got a 360 last year. It looked great then and it looks great now. Enjoy the game.

Regarding resolution and overall visuals, the game looks nice and the lighting is really good. It will definitely add to the games atmospheric approach. I think the hits for this thread came along after some were stating this to be better looking than anything else on consoles and unfortunately set yourselves up for some backtracking. I don't think this needs to be compared to games like GoW3, Gears 2, KZ2, Uncharted 2, or GT5. Those games area in a class all their own and really do Alan a discervice to put it toe to toe with them.

Like Bobthefork said, at least we know that it isn't just PS3 threads that get stepped on for visuals.
 

Mr_Zombie

Member
Dogenzaka said:
People are making out things to be worse than they are.
It's just a thread.

No, it's a thread that turned from "Omg! Great graphics! Day 1!" into "Sub-HD <lol>; what a blurry mess; I cancel my pre-order!" just because someone posted pictures saying the game doesn't run in HD resolution. It's still the same game that people were prising a day ago, the visuals didn't change since then, nor did the gameplay and atmosphere, yet somehow that one information, that the game's resolution is 960x547, made (some) people hate the game.

"A console gamer gives you two seconds. It sucks or it fails and you're either the top or a flop. They don't respect any value you put into your development, either it works or it doesn't work.", Cervat Yerli
 

derFeef

Member
Mr_Zombie said:
"A console gamer gives you two seconds. It sucks or it fails and you're either the top or a flop. They don't respect any value you put into your development, either it works or it doesn't work.", Cervat Yerli

I start to love this, it fits so perfectly.
 

wizword

Banned
graphics are no different even if the developers lied with idiotic numbers. I still don't think the game is that great looking since its announcement but I am the only one. Hate the art style, but going to play the game because I like remedy software games. I still can't believe the developers lied if this is true. Doesn't make much sense to lie.
 
Phaethon0017 said:
This thread is like a pure vortex of what-ery. I wonder if this thread
will tie into the game's ending somehow, it's just that crazy.

The introduction of the term "respected pixel counters" has redeemed it.
 

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
Mr_Zombie said:
No, it's a thread that turned from "Omg! Great graphics! Day 1!" into "Sub-HD <lol>; what a blurry mess; I cancel my pre-order!" just because someone posted pictures saying the game doesn't run in HD resolution. It's still the same game that people were prising a day ago, the visuals didn't change since then, nor did the gameplay and atmosphere, yet somehow that one information, that the game's resolution is 960x547, made (some) people hate the game.
I hope the resolution crap doesn't turn any. I only seen WickedLaharl's post but really, stick with this game. It's only unfortunate when the internet gets ahold of pixel analysis fodder to comb through a games visuals that it gets this bad. Not that some of the backfire regarding the visuals isn't suprising but I must insist on the game experience being unshaken by the visuals. PC crowd may disagree since this could've been on PC too.
 
I used to make fun of those people who whined about resolution and such. But the first time I saw Halo 3 on a nice Sony 47 inch LCD, I seriously thought there was something wrong with the connection or settings. There's a clear difference on some lower resolution games and certain people are much more sensitive to it. I don't think it's a matter of trolling or exaggeration, there are people who seriously disappointed.

I still play games primarily on a SDTV so it doesn't really bother me much.
 

ShogunX

Member
marathonfool said:
I used to make fun of those people who whined about resolution and such. But the first time I saw Halo 3 on a nice Sony 47 inch LCD, I seriously thought there was something wrong with the connection or settings. There's a clear difference on some lower resolution games and certain people are much more sensitive to it. I don't think it's a matter of trolling or exaggeration, there are people who seriously disappointed.

I still play games primarily on a SDTV so it doesn't really bother me much.

The thing is nobody could tell until the pixel count was posted.
 

Shurs

Member
Shogun PaiN said:
The thing is nobody could tell until the pixel count was posted.

I'm sure that most people watched compressed video of the game on their computers. I know I did. When it's on their televisions, that's another story.
 

bj00rn_

Banned
marathonfool said:
I used to make fun of those people who whined about resolution and such. But the first time I saw Halo 3 on a nice Sony 47 inch LCD, I seriously thought there was something wrong with the connection or settings.

Wow, we've circled back to blaming Halo... This thread is amazing :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol
 

skyfinch

Member
Remedy has lead us to believe a lot of things. I bet that in the final game, Alan isn't even a writer, his flashlight is really just an old toilet paper roll, and his wife is a Taiwanese ladyboy.
 

Yasae

Banned
Shogun PaiN said:
The thing is nobody could tell until the pixel count was posted.
But Halo 3 did actually end up looking bad. Forgive people if they're just a touch apprehensive.
 
Yasae said:
But Halo 3 did actually end up looking bad. Forgive people if they're just a touch apprehensive.
Correction: it looked bad to some people, just like Alan Wake looked a lot better until some numbers hit the scene. A lot of us liked the look even if it was lower-res than it could have been. Certainly, millions of others probably didn't mind or didn't and still don't notice its lower native resolution. This is the primary problem with knowing the under-the-hood numbers...for a lot of people, they simply wouldn't have guessed, noticed, or thought about it until someone gave it some level of importance that got out of hand and tainted their enjoyment. A sort of serpent in Eden even if it's a fair and factual assessment.
 

nilam01

Banned
MightyHedgehog said:
Correction: it looked bad to some people, just like Alan Wake looked a lot better until some numbers hit the scene. A lot of us liked the look even if it was lower-res than it could have been. Certainly, millions of others probably didn't mind or didn't and still don't notice its lower native resolution. This is the primary problem with knowing the under-the-hood numbers...for a lot of people, they simply wouldn't have guessed, noticed, or thought about it until someone gave it some level of importance that got out of hand and tainted their enjoyment. A sort of serpent in Eden even if it's a fair and factual assessment.

No I gotta agree with the guy, halo 3 looked pretty bad on my 1080p set.
 

surly

Banned
Yasae said:
But Halo 3 did actually end up looking bad. Forgive people if they're just a touch apprehensive.
Halo 3 is the same resolution as the PS3 version of GTA IV. Did people go crazy over that being sub-HD on here? Were pre-orders cancelled and cries of "you're crazy if you buy the PS3 version!" being tossed around? :lol

EDIT - BTW, for any UKers, I've just seen that Zavvi are taking pre-orders for the collector's edition at £36.45 (with the code "MVC3"), plus you can get 3.5% cashback via Quidco. Time to cancel my Play.com pre-order..........
 
nilam01 said:
No I gotta agree with the guy, halo 3 looked pretty bad on my 1080p set.
And it didn't and doesn't on mine. Do I notice the aliasing and lower resolution of edges? Yeah, but what does it all mean? Right. Not everyone is as picky about shit as others. Might vary across games, across platforms, across sets and their calibrations, or just might all come down to being opinions on whether it matters or not...whether it's a big deal or not.
 

mujun

Member
LiquidMetal14 said:
Like Bobthefork said, at least we know that it isn't just PS3 threads that get stepped on for visuals.

How can you even say this? Best console graphics threads are always filled with people praising PS3 games. GIF spam is pretty much only PS3 games when it's a console game. The Eurogamer face off things are mainly filled with people saying that it's irrelevant if the PS3 version isn't quite as good. I'm pretty confident that if a neutral observer was to investigate they'd come away thinking that the 360 gets trolled for it's graphics more than the PS3.

Part of that is probably because it obviously can do better graphics now that the majority of devs are comfortable with it. Part of it might also be because PS3 fans seem a little more keen to defend their console of choice.
 

Risette

A Good Citizen
surly said:
Halo 3 is the same resolution as the PS3 version of GTA IV. Did people go crazy over that being sub-HD on here? Were pre-orders cancelled and cries of "you're crazy if you buy the PS3 version!" being tossed around? :lol

EDIT - BTW, for any UKers, I've just seen that Zavvi are taking pre-orders for the collector's edition at £36.45 (with the code "MVC3"), plus you can get 3.5% cashback via Quidco. Time to cancel my Play.com pre-order..........
There was a huge thread dedicated to GTA4 comparisons.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=286527
 

-viper-

Banned
Game looks good. Shame I don't have a 360 though. Until Microsoft make XBL free I won't buy any of their consoles. Too bad they cancelled the PC edition.
 
Better this one than the official thread in couple of weeks. Honestly, I think resolution talk for all console games should be kept to a special official thread of pixel warfare.
 

Shurs

Member
mujun said:
Best console graphics threads are always filled with people praising PS3 games.

Is it possible that the PS3 has some exclusives that, graphically, are a cut above anything on the 360?

mujun said:
GIF spam is pretty much only PS3 games when it's a console game.

If you want gifs, check the Halo threads.

mujun said:
The Eurogamer face off things are mainly filled with people saying that it's irrelevant if the PS3 version isn't quite as good.

If we're talking about a middle of the road 3rd party effort, that's one thing, but people have put Alan Wake on a pedestal, saying it's equal to or better than the PS3's best looking games graphically.

It really doesn't matter much. Whether or not Alan Wake is a good game won't come down to its resolution. Remedy is a developer with a good reputation that has been well earned. The game has been given a lot of production time. It's offering an interesting world and an atmospheric setting. The game won't suck.

What I do find interesting is, and I pointed it out in the last Alan Wake thread as well, is the apparent need for some people to anoint an upcoming game the equal or superior to its exclusive PS3 counterparts. We saw it with Forza 3, we're seeing it now with Halo: Reach and Alan Wake. It's apparently not enough for some people to say the game looks great, or that it could be the best looking game on the 360, it must be as good or better than the best games the PS3 has to offer as well. To me it seems like an unnecessary comparison that ultimately short changes the 360 game.
 

~Kinggi~

Banned
Hey guys how about talking about how awesome this game is gonna be, right? Its a radical idea i know but give it a shot!
 

beast786

Member
bj00rn_ said:
Just wow.....(read: sad) this would never happen in a ps3 exclusive thread, don't kid yourselves


I guess you never seen the GT5 thread and the talks about the 2D TREES

or
KZ 2 thread regarding the COLORS
or
Heavy Rain reagrding its only QTE
or
Uncharted 2 its doing nothing new


Seriously. Wellcome to neogaf.

:lol

As per AW. I wish it was on my PC. But even then if the atmosphere is there then thats all that matter to me.
 
Top Bottom