Some of the examples are very clearly being upscaled, not rendered at a higher res.
Even if it looks bad it does not mean it was upscaled. It may just be the limit of the source material. I mean, a shitty texture will still look shitty even at 4k.
I'm not talking about the texture, I'm saying it's clearly visible that it is upscaled from a lower resolution background image
It's the same. A shitty background will still look shitty even at 4k. If the source asset is created poorly, bumping the resolution will just make its flaws even more evident.
Again, that's not what I'm talking about, it isn't the same.
There a difference between models with low res textures rendered at 1920x1440, and models with low res textures rendered at 640x480 upressed to 1920x1440
That is my point. The lower quality of some of the backgrounds does not mean they were necessarily upscaled from lower resolution images.
That is my point. The lower quality of some of the backgrounds does not mean they were necessarily upscaled from lower resolution images.
Cant wait to play this again.
Putting in a third voice for the train. One of the best areas in RE, right up there with RE4's village.
More comparison shots, this time between the Wii and 360 version
http://www.capcom-unity.com/brelston/blog/2014/10/08/more-resident-evil-comparison-images
Backgrounds like this are definitely upscaled. The door and paintings have very apparent aliasing, and you would not get that kind of aliasing if the renders were of a high resolution. Low res textures or simple mesh geometry would make it look bad in a different way.
This is not a direct feed screen. What you are seeing here are likely the artifacts introduced when they resized the original image. And besides aliasing, upscaling from 640 x 480 to 1080p would also introduce some noticeable pixellization, which I don't see here.
They're trying to avoid the look of scaled up blurry pixels by various techniques (various filters, sharpening, and some parts are probably touched up by hand or redone). And yeah, that isn't a screenshot, but it is a screengrab from an HD video. The real game will look clearer, but not very different from that.
I think this is an even better example:
http://40.media.tumblr.com/df13fcd539a9215b22eb8bb144ef6403/tumblr_na3mznB1dP1tiz823o7_1280.png (REmake)
http://40.media.tumblr.com/101b2680c757f6a0bc219f04a137749e/tumblr_na3mznB1dP1tiz823o4_1280.png (REmaster)
Look at the wall behind Chris. The reflection on the wall is extremely aliased, and you can even recognize the same pixels on both versions.
It's not that easy. And why going through all that effort to upscale low resolution images, when you can simply render them from the source file and be done with it with no effort at all? We really need to make a comparison with direct feed screens before jumping to conclusions.
It's not that easy. And why going through all that effort to upscale low resolution images, when you can simply render them from the source file and be done with it with no effort at all? We really need to make a comparison with direct feed screens before jumping to conclusions.
Erm, because they clearly don't have the source files to re-render from.
Because what we're seeing are clearly touched up versions of the exact background images used in the Gamecube version. They've done a pretty good job on some of the backgrounds, but that is clearly what they have done.
We're not jumping to conclusions here. It's apparent. Look at the comparisons. You can see the *exact same* stepping in them. That's as if it wasn't possible to recognize what an upscaled image looks like vs a scene with low resolution textures. Which it is.
The last screenshots linked to are screenshots, not screen grabs from video. If you want even more, here's a bunch I took a couple of months ago, and they're all based on official screenshots:
http://quackfluffy.tumblr.com/post/93881607532/comparisons-of-remaster-with-remake-wii
http://quackfluffy.tumblr.com/post/93882202437/some-more-comparisons-of-remaster-and-remake
http://quackfluffy.tumblr.com/post/94347226792/so-i-decided-to-take-even-more-comparison
http://quackfluffy.tumblr.com/post/94347455577/and-heres-the-remaining-screenshots-i-took
They've done a pretty good job with some of the backgrounds, but it's very obvious majority has been upscaled with minimal work. I imagine they applied the same filters and settings to all backgrounds with a batch operation, and then touched up specific ones which required extra attention.
Super glad we're finally gonna have a legit version of this game on PC forever.
Can't wait for this.
Yeah I think that's the best thing about this release. No more buggy Dolphin playthroughs, and as a person who never owned a GameCube, but almost did thanks to this game, I really look forward to properly playing through this game.
Where is the Dolphin emulation buggy?
Just curious, because I played it very often on Dolphin, and everything worked fine.
I also have played it on original Gamecube, couldn't see any buggy mess.
Maybe he kept forcing 60FPS which the game can't do?
Improper 16:9, lights/flames on candles being moved, motion blur, stuff like that.
I'm talking about the Dolphin emulation, not the Gamecube version.
Z order bug is fixed already on 4.0 and forward.
I think Motion Blur is there already too. Nothing you can really do with the 16:9, since the BG were designed 4:3.
So you work for Capcom and know this sure? Because if you don't then yes, you are jumping to conclusions here. And when you say "we" are you talking about other people as well? Because other people here are saying that some backgrounds look upscaled, while some clearly don't.
Can somebody explain what´s going up with the controls?
The character moves pretty fast, it looks strange for someone who played the original with the tank controls, which BTW gave the character a better feel of weight.
If they ditched the tank controls, do you have to readjust the direction everytime the camera angle changes?
It's just the scrub game "journalists" playing with the new controls which butcher the animations completely.
Original tank controls are still an available option though.
Some backgrounds have had more work on them than others. I don't need to work for Capcom to know that, I just need to know what the original backgrounds look like. Your gif shows a background that has had more than minimal work done on it, but the person you quoted didn't even suggest that *all* the backgrounds have just had minimal work done on them.
Thanks. I´ll be playing with the tank controls for aforementioned reasons.
Sorry but not even the wizards at Capcom can magically create detail that was never there. It's obvious that this was not produced by upscaling a low resolution image. And if by "more work" you mean they had to basically redraw the whole thing, then this would be equal to creating new high resolution assets.
No.
There is no magic being done. We are only seeing more detail in a handful of the backgrounds and only in specific areas of them. I haven't seen any that have been completely redrawn (though there might be). There is nothing redrawn about the screen I posted, for example. No extra detail there.
Most likely they are taking the upscaled backgrounds and where there is something that looks particularly bad, simply just painting over it. That's why you're seeing spots that are more detailed. But they're just that... spots. Of some of the backgrounds.
Again, look at the two screens I posted. NOTHING in the new backgrounds looks like a high resolution render. Because they aren't. Because they don't have the original assets to rerender from.
If you want to keep hoping they've rerendered from the original assets, I'm not going to bother talking about the clear evidence that demonstrates that your hopes are wrong, because if you're going to ignore clear evidence, then there is no point.
Enjoy your disappointment when you find out that the backgrounds are just upscaled and touched up in the final version.
So what you are saying is that this jump in image quality is possible with some minimal work.
Well, then we can agree to disagree.
What evidence? You only posted a screen that is not even 1080p. Is that from the final game? Do you know for a fact that this is how the final game will look? Then again, please provide actual PS4 direct feed 1080p screens if you want to make a serious comparison.
It's not that easy. And why going through all that effort to upscale low resolution images, when you can simply render them from the source file and be done with it with no effort at all? We really need to make a comparison with direct feed screens before jumping to conclusions.
Improper 16:9, lights/flames on candles being moved, motion blur, stuff like that.
I'm talking about the Dolphin emulation, not the Gamecube version.
Was the panning thing ever explained in detail? Basically the original image zoomed in cutting the upper and lower "strips" and panning vertically when required, right?
I'd think Capcom would be amazing us with super sharp 1080p screens boasting their re-rendered backgrounds if they did.What evidence? You only posted a screen that is not even 1080p. Is that from the final game? Do you know for a fact that this is how the final game will look? Then again, please provide actual PS4 direct feed 1080p screens if you want to make a serious comparison.
"oh, they're serious? Let me laugh even harder"
"oh, they're serious? Let me laugh even harder"
Its a good solution to a difficult problem.
You probably meant after RE4.
I think you're mistaken.
I said majority of backgrounds has been upscaled with minimal work done to them.
Yeah, but you didn't play the final game so you don't actually now whether the majority of backgrounds have been upscaled or not.