SolidusDave
Member
Not really. But I wish more PS1 games would have used FMV backgrounds back then, those still look good today (to buy on PSN etc.).
-viper- said:holy shit at the REMAKE shots. does it really look like that during game play?
looks better than 99% of the games released today.
Oh yeah cause current console situation is oh so much better when talking about high end visualsAmir0x said:Fuck that garbage. Fucking disgusting. We left the era when 3D visuals were so bad developers had to compensate with static, completely fucking dead pre-rendered backgrounds.
Time to move the fuck on.
Amir0x said:Fuck that garbage. Fucking disgusting. We left the era when 3D visuals were so bad developers had to compensate with static, completely fucking dead pre-rendered backgrounds.
Time to move the fuck on.
Teetris said:Yes. Yes. Yes.
Why the fuck didn't anyone do a HD game with pre rendered backgrounds of CG 2010 quality? Game developers are high as hell, especially Square Enix.
At least do em in 2D, Oddworld style
Oh yeah cause current console situation is oh so much better when talking about high end visuals
Terrascape said:Game of the forever (Why didn't Capcom manage to make RE0 that pretty?).
jett said:Do you really want a post spamming pictures of great looking games from this generation? Hell, I'll post this one just for kicks
http://gradly.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/20100328_2.jpg[IMG]
I don't need no fucking CG backgrounds.[/QUOTE]
Well thats nice but most people are talking about select few genres not every game in existence. There is room enough for all types, pre-rendered and not.
jett said:Of course it's gonna look good on those tiny ass pictures.
http://imgur.com/L6DNS.jpg[/IMG
No, it does not look better than 99% of games released today.[/QUOTE]
fair enough.
I haven't played the game myself but I guess the small pictures really helps make it look good.
Doesn't look so hot after all.
jett said:Do you really want a post spamming pictures of great looking games from this generation? Hell, I'll post this one just for kicks
http://gradly.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/20100328_2.jpg[IMG]
I don't need no fucking CG backgrounds.[/QUOTE]Funny that you mention this one. I'm actually playing this right now. Yeah, it looks amazing and is certainly the staple for this gen (but the far camera angles sure help it), but CG background would make it just a bit more amazing when put in the right places for this specific game, especially in the more epic grand views. It all depends on the situation, you can always go better with games.
Our studio was actually experimenting with the prerendered backgrounds but strictly for 2D games in HD. Some of the results that I saw were pretty goddamn good looking to the point you'd imagine why no studio has actually done this, there's some great money to be made here. RPGs and 2D games and games with not much camera usage in general would benefit greatly. Just imagine a 2D Toy Story game with the CG backgrounds of Toy Story 3. It would look fucking amazing.
In motion, played at SD resolution (480p) it looks fantastic. The backgrounds, though technically static, are animated. It never feels like pre-rendered background.-viper- said:fair enough.
I haven't played the game myself but I guess the small pictures really helps make it look good.
Doesn't look so hot after all.
Teetris said:Funny that you mention this one. I'm actually playing this right now. Yeah, it looks amazing and is certainly the staple for this gen (but the far camera angles sure help it), but CG background would make it just a bit more amazing when put in the right places for this specific game, especially in the more epic grand views. It all depends on the situation, you can always go better with games.
Our studio was actually experimenting with the prerendered backgrounds but strictly for 2D games in HD. Some of the results that I saw were pretty goddamn good looking to the point you'd imagine why no studio has actually done this, there's some great money to be made here. RPGs and 2D games and games with not much camera usage in general would benefit greatly. Just imagine a 2D Toy Story game with the CG backgrounds of Toy Story 3. It would look fucking amazing.
Suairyu said:In motion, played at SD resolution (480p) it looks fantastic. The backgrounds, though technically static, are animated. It never feels like pre-rendered background.
Of course it's going to look like ass if upscaled beyond it original resolution. Were it to be re-rendered at 1080p, the detail in it would support it and it'd look glorious.
KevinCow said:This is a terrible idea and a terrible thread and you're a terrible person for making it. Prerendered backgrounds mean fixed cameras, and fixed cameras suck.
I emulate it on Dolphin at high resolution then down-scale that bitch to a 480p sized window. It looks godly. I appreciate I'm in a minority when it comes to the ability to do this.jett said:Do you play in a 11-inch screen? The game will get stretched either way. It will not look good.
Emulate the Dreamcast or PS1 version. You'll get IQ that good.Clott said:Woah resident evil 3!?
Is that the PC version? how do I mod it to look like that!?
I need to replay that expediently
KevinCow said:This is a terrible idea and a terrible thread and you're a terrible person for making it. Prerendered backgrounds mean fixed cameras, and fixed cameras suck.
Baldur's Gate II sucks pretty hard! And every RTS ever made ever - even in 3D, you're still watching it in isometric mode 99% of the time - they all suck.Mama Robotnik said:Does this mean that games that used fixed camera angles also suck?
Suairyu said:Baldur's Gate II sucks pretty hard! And every RTS ever made ever - even in 3D, you're still watching it in isometric mode 99% of the time - they all suck.
Suairyu said:I emulate it on Dolphin at high resolution then down-scale that bitch to a 480p sized window. It looks godly. I appreciate I'm in a minority when it comes to the ability to do this.
Same thing I do with the PS1 Final Fantasies. Difference there is that anyone with a computer made in the last decade can do that.
Seriously, guys: emulate your classic pre-rendered games and SSAA the 3D character models. Run the thing in a 480p sized window and prepare to have new visual life breathed into your flickery CRT memories. It results are often stunning. FFIX benefits from this a lot.
I wouldn't blow up a 7" photo to fit a larger frame, so why do the same with your games? Enjoy art at its intended size/resolution if it has such a limitation.jett said:You're certainly in the minority of people that run their games on a 640x480 window. Have you tried 320x240? Think how much godlier it's gonna look like!
You have no idea how much that game sucks and how you probably suck for enjoying it, too.Mama Robotnik said:Damn, I guess that means Grim Fandango sucks too. That's a shame because I really like that game.
brain_stew said:No where in your post do you mention that both the games you were playing control terribly. I'll stick with 3D games that are actually 3D, thanks. Leave "pre rendered" 2D scenes for skyboxes.
Clott said:Woah resident evil 3!?
Is that the PC version? how do I mod it to look like that!?
I need to replay that expediently
Teetris said:Funny that you mention this one. I'm actually playing this right now. Yeah, it looks amazing and is certainly the staple for this gen (but the far camera angles sure help it), but CG background would make it just a bit more amazing when put in the right places for this specific game, especially in the more epic grand views. It all depends on the situation, you can always go better with games.
Our studio was actually experimenting with the prerendered backgrounds but strictly for 2D games in HD. Some of the results that I saw were pretty goddamn good looking to the point you'd imagine why no studio has actually done this, there's some great money to be made here. RPGs and 2D games and games with not much camera usage in general would benefit greatly. Just imagine a 2D Toy Story game with the CG backgrounds of Toy Story 3. It would look fucking amazing.
Suairyu said:Baldur's Gate II sucks pretty hard! And every RTS ever made ever - even in 3D, you're still watching it in isometric mode 99% of the time - they all suck.
Mama Robotnik said:Damn, I guess that means Grim Fandango sucks too. That's a shame because I really like that game.
The Take Out Bandit said:Pre-rendered backgrounds are as abhorrent as non-game engine cut scenes. It's an artifact of a dead era, and also conducive to terrible camera use.
See also: Devil May Cry 1
Pre-rendered backgrounds + terrible camera placement = game breaking.
In addition that that, it doesn't immerse me in the game world. I just feel like even more of a rat in a maze.
Cause one or two games with static backgrounds would cause all development on 3D graphics tech to stop forever.Amir0x said:Fuck that garbage. Fucking disgusting. We left the era when 3D visuals were so bad developers had to compensate with static, completely fucking dead pre-rendered backgrounds.
Time to move the fuck on.
Backfoggen said:Cause one or two games with static backgrounds would cause all development on 3D graphics tech to stop forever.
Static backgrounds can be a stylistic device just like everything else (2d games, pixel art, etc)
Amir0x said:Jesus fucking christ. Ridiculous. THE ONLY REASON WHY pre-rendered backgrounds were ever utilized is because old 3D was an archaic, pixelated mess. Pre-rendered backgrounds are a functional disaster compared to true 3D. You want those dead, zombie backgrounds with a little flickering light to try to pretend it's part of the world, go back to play PS1 crap titles.
There's a reason why pre-rendered backgrounds are inferior to 3D. 3D backgrounds are seamless with your character, and can provide as much life and vibrancy as is necessary. You can pan around and adjust camera angles cinematically or on the fly. The practical applications are endless. pre-rendered backgrounds are for nostalgia kiddos whose first experience with "good graphics" was in some scruffy looking version of Resident Evil.
we are at the point in 3D where we do not need pre-rendered backgrounds. Please, load up and emulator and stop giving the industry bad ideas.
Suairyu said:I wouldn't blow up a 7" photo to fit a larger frame, so why do the same with your games? Enjoy art at its intended size/resolution if it has such a limitation.
You have no idea how much that game sucks and how you probably suck for enjoying it, too.
Minsc said:What about hand drawn 2D backgrounds? Though I suppose those mostly died out and aren't coming back.
The assertion was made that pre-rendered backgrounds necessitated a fixed camera. As Baldur's Gate employs pre-rendered backgrounds, but has a moving camera, the natural assumption was that "fixed perspective" was the intended term. If that was not the case, then the original post I sarcastically argued against was wrong anyway.KevinCow said:The camera moves around in those games. It's not fixed. Do you not know what fixed means?
Oh come on, man. I was very clearly replacing size and resolution for the photography analogy. I even pointed it out in the post with the "size/resolution" bit. Last-gen pre-rendered backgrounds would look just as shiny on a 30" CRT SDTV. The point was about viewing art in its original size format, whether that size is defined in inches (as is the case with a printed photograph or painting) or resolution, as is the case with games.brain_stew said:GCN and Wii games were only intended to be viewed on <11" screens, were they? Guess I must have missed the memo.
I NEED SCISSORS said:Onimusha 3 sort of makes the bad controls argument irrelevant - it fixed the tank controls while still having mostly fixed camera angles.
brain_stew said:So the controls were finally fixed once they ditched the pre-rendered backgrounds? You're not doing your argument any favours here.
-viper- said:holy shit at the REMAKE shots. does it really look like that during game play?
looks better than 99% of the games released today.
brain_stew said:So the controls were finally fixed once they ditched the pre-rendered backgrounds? You're not doing your argument any favours here.
Flying_Phoenix said:But another huge problem was the technology at the time. How could the Playstation render a complex city street with a handful of zombies at an acceptable framerate? People may shit on the Nintendo 64's frame-rate, but in reality the Nintendo 64 could run games far better than the Playstation could. It was just that those Nintendo 64 games were actually in full 3D. The slowdown and choppiness was due to the fact that the games were producing more polygons than the RAM could handle. Now if the Nintendo 64 framerate was put on its knees due to Banjo-Kazooie, imagine if the then Squaresoft tried to render full towns in 3D on a far weaker console. It just wasn't going to happen. This is why by the time most 3D gameplay concepts were figured out and new hardware came out, that type of gameplay was nearly completely abandoned immediately.
Amir0x said:Fuck that garbage. Fucking disgusting. We left the era when 3D visuals were so bad developers had to compensate with static, completely fucking dead pre-rendered backgrounds.
Time to move the fuck on.
Himuro said:But do you think these will still be nearly AS expensive and take nearly AS long to develop? The answer is NO!
Backfoggen said:People are basing their opinions on pre-rendered backgrounds on some old-ass games. RE1 remake looks worse than RE5 hurf. No shit there's been 8 years in between.
Current-gen tech could do much more with pre-rendered backgrounds.
Himuro said:But do you think these will still be nearly AS expensive and take nearly AS long to develop? The answer is NO!
Backfoggen said:People are basing their opinions on pre-rendered backgrounds on some old-ass games. RE1 remake looks worse than RE5 hurf. No shit there's been 8 years in between.
Current-gen tech could do much more with pre-rendered backgrounds.