I think it's fair to say that given this is a remaster, there was an expectation that there wouldn't be a cost.
-
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.
Digital Foundry: Journey Face-off (PS3/PS4)
- Thread starter Vashetti
- Start date
I think it's fair to say that given this is a remaster, there was an expectation that there wouldn't be a cost.
FranXico
Member
Yes, since it is cross-buy.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
I don't understand the posters claiming that the tech side of Journey doesn't matter because it's an art game, or a beautiful game nonetheless, etc.
I have plenty of artsy movies that I like to have a proper, accurate digital transfer of on Blu-Ray. Sure, Blade Runner looks good on DVD, but I'd be pissed if the Blu-Ray was poorly done (but it looks great and really shows the beauty of the film). Same with animation - there's The Sword and the Stone Blu-ray, which fans are rightfully pissed about because Disney blurred over the whole image to remove artifacts and grain.
If you like a game, it's natural to want an accurate and proper remastering done to it. Getting the tech right is important for all mediums.
I have plenty of artsy movies that I like to have a proper, accurate digital transfer of on Blu-Ray. Sure, Blade Runner looks good on DVD, but I'd be pissed if the Blu-Ray was poorly done (but it looks great and really shows the beauty of the film). Same with animation - there's The Sword and the Stone Blu-ray, which fans are rightfully pissed about because Disney blurred over the whole image to remove artifacts and grain.
If you like a game, it's natural to want an accurate and proper remastering done to it. Getting the tech right is important for all mediums.
Backfoggen
Banned
I hoped they would up the resolution of the sand deformation. Very distracting even on PS4.
laughingmood
Banned
Ooh great. Another linked DF article. Time for another board derail.
What?
SerTapTap
Member
Don't actually like motion blur outside of racers, the sand glitter change is a bit of a bummer though.
Yes, cross buy is always all ways (except physical due to not really being cross buy in the same sense).
Yes, cross buy is always all ways (except physical due to not really being cross buy in the same sense).
I played Journey at launch on the PS3, and I jumped on my crossbuy copy the moment it became available on PS4.
Never in a million years would I have picked up on some of the omissions in the DF article without having been told. I doubt many would, even in an enthusiast community like GAF. The game looked magnificent then, and it looks magnificent now.
Never in a million years would I have picked up on some of the omissions in the DF article without having been told. I doubt many would, even in an enthusiast community like GAF. The game looked magnificent then, and it looks magnificent now.
I wouldn't. The 60 fps makes the game look and play better.
Insane Metal
Member
How the hell do you port the game after more than a year (or 2?) to a more powerful platform and cut off effects from the original version that ran on a much slower machine? WTF?
So it's fine that they're missing right? They should still be fixed.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
Most users wouldn't consciously notice that the Star Wars Blu-ray set is substandard compared to most transfers of that era, but I don't think you could argue that it shouldn't be fixed anyway. Which is why there are rumors that Disney's remastering them right now.
Journey still looks great, sure. I think that's all the more reason to care about the details. If it's an important game that communicates almost completely through the visuals, then they should be given the care they deserve. I can still love Star Wars, recognize that the film can be communicated just fine on the existing flawed Blu-ray set, and still criticize the flaws and ask for a better, cleaner transfer. We can do the same for Journey.
are you watching or playing
People tend to miss the point of these DF articles. Yes, we know the game is still enjoyable and totally playable despite missing some effects. It's still worth pointing out what's wrong with a port or a Remaster so people are aware and hopefully devs take notice and fix what's wrong.
IIRC there was a frame pacing issue with a game last year and devs were able to fix it thanks to DF pointing it out (I think it was Diablo III).
IIRC there was a frame pacing issue with a game last year and devs were able to fix it thanks to DF pointing it out (I think it was Diablo III).
Yes, frankly. I wouldn't be against them re-instating the missing effects where possible, but the game still looks about 99% identical to the original, while at the same time including a nice selection of improvements. Very few remasters can offer that.
Yeah... I dunno. If the changes (if we can even call them that; is it not possible that some of the differences are simply down to the resolution change, or something unavoidable related to the porting process?) were something significant enough that people were noticing without a DF article to point them out, I might feel differently. As it stands, it just feels a little nitpicky to me.
Both? The spectacle is a large part of what Journey is about. This is actually on of those games where I don't think 60fps is actually all that important. There's very little accuracy required for anything, and the character feels floaty to control by design.
I was looking to replay this once it hit PS4 (and probably still will to make my own mind up about it), but I can see myself reverting to the PS3 version for future playthroughs tbh.
Seriously? That's basically the baseline for a remaster benefitting from a generation leap. This is definitely looking like one of the least competent remasters I've seen so far this gen...
matrix-cat
Member
That missing sand glinty-ness makes a pretty big difference in that comparison video. Hopefully they'll patch that back in.
No need to exchange anything, PS4 can eat it for breakfast, hope they will patch it but I'm not holding my breath, it's probably a pretty cheap project.
If you own it digitally on PS3, you don't need to. You would already own the PS4 version (I sure as hell wouldn't have bought it again otherwise).
GifGafIsTheBestGaf
Member
yeah, it really sucks they took some visual effects away instead of adding more fancy eye candy. still if you didnt play this on the PS3 you should give it a go, game is great and should be experienced at least once.
The IQ is definitely better overall than the PS3 version based on the video Eurogamer put up during the week.
But I did notice a difference with the texture of the sand, for want of a better word. There's a 'graininess' to the PS3 version's that seems missing or diminished in the PS4 version.
But I did notice a difference with the texture of the sand, for want of a better word. There's a 'graininess' to the PS3 version's that seems missing or diminished in the PS4 version.
Yikes. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
The Youtube compression kinda smears it, but the glinty, sparkly sand is still there.
I kinda figured that was just the result of smoother IQ and the resolution boost. A 720p sand dune with average IQ will naturally look more "coarse" than a 1080p sand dune with smoother filtering/AA/whatever the relevant technique for a sand dune is.
I love a good debate, discussion, argument and all but sometimes i think these digital foundary analysis bring out the worst in the complainers.
It's like, someday some magazine will happened to take shot of angelina jolie with a pimple below her cheek....and she will suddenly turned from one of the sexiest woman alive to an old ugly hag....?
Missing effects or not, whoever that said that journey ps4 look like 'shit' clearly needs to re-evaluate his self-worth in life.
It's like, someday some magazine will happened to take shot of angelina jolie with a pimple below her cheek....and she will suddenly turned from one of the sexiest woman alive to an old ugly hag....?
Missing effects or not, whoever that said that journey ps4 look like 'shit' clearly needs to re-evaluate his self-worth in life.
FranXico
Member
I hoped they would up the resolution of the sand deformation. Very distracting even on PS4.
I noticed that the glittering is reduced in scenes where the lighting was changed, like that screenshot. In other sections, there is just as much sand glitter as in the PS3 version.
What it looks like to me is that DF is misinterpreting differences in lighting as removal of the sand glitter effect (which indeed gets reduced, but as a side effect).
This as well.
panda-zebra
Member
How about you wait until you actually have seen it before mouthing off?
laughingmood
Banned
A million times this. Each new DF thread should be subtitled "Missing The Point"
Hoho for breakfast
Member
At the part where he's siding sideways (where you can see the mountain and sun) the fence/guardrail looks blurry as hell on PS4 compared to the PS3.
Well, I mean... I haven't been buying the Prototypes of the world, but yea.
But I have seen it? That's what this DF stuff is all about.
Sure, I haven't played through my PS4 copy yet... but I already know what to expect from it graphically, and outside of 60fps, I already know what to expect from the gameplay due to the PS3 version. It's not like I'm going in blind here.
visiblemode
Member
This is similar to my take on it.
They seem to present these changes as failings, but in my view when you look at the comparisions, they come across more as decisions.
The game was gorgeous when I played it on ps3 and it still looks gorgeous, just a but different, perhaps a little more restrained as that is sometimes a consequence of being more refined.
...hardly a reason for people to start acting like this is some kind of garbage port, though.
You only have to buy it if you didn't own it on Ps3...if that's the case and you've never played it but are prepared to possibly miss it altogether because the sand looks somewhat different, then I honestly think you're likely to miss the point of the experience, anyway. Not having a go at you, I honestly believe that.
What it looks like to me is that the noise texture details on the sand are in both different resolution and blend strength. This is reflected in specular changes (the bigger areas of "sparkle" effect) and sand on PS4 having more distinct low-res repetition patterns (I noticed this at the begining of the game) - but this is something you'd control with a few parameters and texture resolution (ie. not a problem of effect being there or not).dark10x said:
That said - as far as I can tell, the glitter is not just the result of specular highlights on PS3 - and this second contribution does appear to be missing on PS4 atm. The non-specular sparkles look a lot like stuff you'd see in some PS2 games back in the day, so they could be geometry driven.
I sort of disagree about necessity for motion-blur @ 60 - given the poor motion resolution of 99% of panels in use nowadays, LCD/OLED will smear the picture at 60fps anyway.
Did you guys try to do the same for PS3 version? Flower was running a distortion shader on the framebuffer, so you'd get different pixel count depending on the part of screen you're looking at - sort of like VR panels, but you get the lowest pixel density in center of the screen. It was particularly noticeable on Vita version because you actually see the gradient between "supersampled on screen edges" to "sub-native" in screen center. I wouldn't be surprised if Journey did something similar - and in age of sub-720p games last gen, wouldn't be particularly noticeable either.
Right...
So if anything this thread is proof that the medium, and many (most?) of the people invested in it are too immature to have an honest conversation about the importance of authorship and preservation. Something other mediums have no issue addressing, even when mistakes have been made with good intentions in mind (see: the recoloring of a classic comic, or questionable subtitles on a Criterion disc).
And it's exacerbated by corporate obsession and the insistence on more, more graphics, more content, no matter the cost to cohesion or intent. It's the wrong message to be sending publishers and really blows for someone like myself that actually cares about the game.
Everything should be included from the original games when remastering them, it's pretty basic stuff. Still, I'm not the type to be silly and throw around words like "worst" when things like this happen and describing it. It seems like a pretty decent remaster for the most part, but the missing effects are baffling.
Zombie James
Banned
No motion blur and weaker AA are huge letdowns. Maybe they can patch it :/
The Artisan
Member
I watched the whole video, what are these missing effects people are speaking of?
hitsugi
Member
This happened to me. I didn't know I was missing the shimmering sand but I couldn't put my finger on exactly what was different. Seeing this video was eye-opening. The shimmering sand effects make a huge difference, BUT, I do think the overall smoothness and flow of the game was greatly improved on PS4. Perhaps, for one reason or another, the removal of some added visual effects was necessary to do this....?
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
Such a big let down. The revelation, inspiration and enlightenment is completely destroyed by the removal of motion blur. God missed a trick.
Vire
Member
I don't know how ya'll can tell me that the one on the right looks better than the one on the left, but whatever floats your boat.
Amusing comment from DF:
And if PS4 version launched first:
"The PS3 introduces a distracting shimmering on the sand, breaking the cold flatness that defines the emptiness of the desert. The sand looks coarser and younger as a result, less worn down by time than the PS4 version. The introduction of motion blur, necessary to add fluidity to the lower framerate, obscures the fine details and detaches the player, making it appear as if you're watching something caught on camera rather than being there yourself*. The toned down bloom reduces the intensity of the sun and removes some of the sense of its scorching presence. All in all, a commendable port but missing a few of the qualities that made the original PS4 version of Journey the perfect masterpiece it was."
Amusing comment from DF:
And if PS4 version launched first:
"The PS3 introduces a distracting shimmering on the sand, breaking the cold flatness that defines the emptiness of the desert. The sand looks coarser and younger as a result, less worn down by time than the PS4 version. The introduction of motion blur, necessary to add fluidity to the lower framerate, obscures the fine details and detaches the player, making it appear as if you're watching something caught on camera rather than being there yourself*. The toned down bloom reduces the intensity of the sun and removes some of the sense of its scorching presence. All in all, a commendable port but missing a few of the qualities that made the original PS4 version of Journey the perfect masterpiece it was."
FranXico
Member
The small presentation changes did not personally hinder my experience in the slightest. Finishing it on the PS4 felt exactly as satisfying as the first time I finished it on the PS3.
But, if people are indeed vocal enough about these changes, I suppose that a patch that re-introduces the original presentation is a possibility.
I mean, SSFIV which was really broken became playable, right?
But, if people are indeed vocal enough about these changes, I suppose that a patch that re-introduces the original presentation is a possibility.
I mean, SSFIV which was really broken became playable, right?
GenericUser
Member
I just played it trough on the PS4. A much smoother and in total better presentation if you ask me. Feels like a remaster.
they probably elected to preserve the framerate over the missing effects. i have to say, i wasn't particularly struck by them in my first playthrough of the ps4 version, so in that sense i suppose it was a success. they could have added a 30fps lock that brought them back, i suppose, a la TLOUR.
Zombie James
Banned
Here's a good example:
edit: I could have just taken this from the screenshot comparison further down their page. Oh well.
I never said that but any remaster that takes away effects that were present in the last-gen version is a letdown, yes.
FranXico
Member
I don't know how ya'll can tell me that the one on the right looks better than the one on the left, but whatever floats your boat.
There it is. The sand grains are thinner when rendered at higher resolution. Who could have guessed?
InsaneTiger
Member
This. Thank you, so many people complain about the smallest detail possibly being missing or slightly reduced when the experience isn't hindered in anyway whatsoever.
Frustrating that people equate minir graphical effects to their enjoy of the game.
MGS, looks awful by today's standard but I still it enjoy and get the same emotions despite it's graphics.
The thing that bugs me about this, is that anyone who has strived to get a very specific look when doing something creative knows what huge differences tiny changes can subconsciously have to the impact of a product/image. The angle and intensity of a light source being tweaked four hours to get precisely the right look. Or in the case of Guilty Gear Xrd (for those who didn't see the GDC talk), the insane levels of tweaking they did to make a 3D animation look almost flawlessly 2D. Any compromise would have reduced the final result from "WOW that's incredible and adds to the magic of this game" to "Meh, close. The gameplay/story had better be good." Which is why that effect had never been done so convincingly before, even though by their own admission it could have been achieved years ago. No one had cared to put in that level of care, effort and attention to detail until them.
The original Journey team obviously strived to create an extremely specific and cohesive look too, especially with the sand. It was a massive feature of the game, both graphically and gameplay-wise, and obvious it was VERY important to them that it looked and behaved in exactly the way it did. And as a result of that time and effort, it is one of the first things in the game that captures your imagination before the story kicks in. Who didn't walk around in circles observing and playing with the sand dynamics when they first played the game? We hadn't really seen sand look and behaved this good before in a game. It was clearly a pillar of importance to the original team.
As soon as I saw the side by side comparison video the other day, I knew something was "wrong". It was smoother, sure, and a little crisper, but I wasn't being blown away by a smoother, crisper version of the original vision. I was seeing a smoother, crisper version of a slightly inferior copy. Where care, time and a desire to match or even surpass the original in one if its most unique aspects wasn't there. And my reaction wasn't the "WOW" I was hoping for, but more of a slightly deflated "Oh... That's a little disappointing".
I'll play it and still enjoy it, I'm sure, but I feel a little robbed of the wonder and amazement I could have experienced if they had cared as much (or were as talented... Maybe they did care but just couldn't do it) as the original developers.
The original Journey team obviously strived to create an extremely specific and cohesive look too, especially with the sand. It was a massive feature of the game, both graphically and gameplay-wise, and obvious it was VERY important to them that it looked and behaved in exactly the way it did. And as a result of that time and effort, it is one of the first things in the game that captures your imagination before the story kicks in. Who didn't walk around in circles observing and playing with the sand dynamics when they first played the game? We hadn't really seen sand look and behaved this good before in a game. It was clearly a pillar of importance to the original team.
As soon as I saw the side by side comparison video the other day, I knew something was "wrong". It was smoother, sure, and a little crisper, but I wasn't being blown away by a smoother, crisper version of the original vision. I was seeing a smoother, crisper version of a slightly inferior copy. Where care, time and a desire to match or even surpass the original in one if its most unique aspects wasn't there. And my reaction wasn't the "WOW" I was hoping for, but more of a slightly deflated "Oh... That's a little disappointing".
I'll play it and still enjoy it, I'm sure, but I feel a little robbed of the wonder and amazement I could have experienced if they had cared as much (or were as talented... Maybe they did care but just couldn't do it) as the original developers.