-
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.
Uncharted: Drake's Fortune - 3D screenshot and artwork from next GI
- Thread starter gofreak
- Start date
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Yoboman said:
*sigh*
And hopefully alot of fallen soliders will become of that first real screenshots thread. Jesus I kind of don't even want to see the game until it comes out. :|
Angelcurio
Member
I really agree with you, the difference between those two screens is huge.Maxwell House said:
I must live on a different planet from many people in this thread. These new screenshots look pretty awful compared to what was shown at E3. I can't even fathom why some people are going gaga over these shots.
Look at the difference in his face, the vegetation, the lighting, the shadows, etc. It is like night and day.
I really hope the keep the old character design, i really liked his old shirt way more than the new one.
OMG! Real life has been downgraded. The lighting isn't as real as it was before, and why does his skin look so plasticky? :yawnBad_Boy said:uhh.... muzzleflash?
:lol :lol
Nice attempt at logic, Bad_Boy, but we'll have none of that in this thread.
I posted the same basic thing on B3D. Not a pic, but it's clear that the lighting is different because of the proximity and intensity of the muzzle flash. Like this pic, there is no flash suppressor on the gun, so anything within a few feet is now washed in gold, casting hard shadows that are overpowering those cast by the ambient lighting. There is no repeat of this situation in the trailer. All the lighting in the trailer was ambient, no real point sources (not sure how it was indoors however) that drown out the ambient like that.
The same for the ground. The angle of the camera to the ground determines the clarity of the textures. As you rotate the camera around, you see there are many sharp textures of the quality seen in the trailer. They are, unsuprisingly, facing the camera pretty squarely. The ones at an extreme angle are looking blurrier due to texture filtering. You'd need like 16x AF to resolve some of those properly, but what do I know? They've clearly downgraded...amirite?
The most retarded part of this thread is not the know-nothings that are dropping the signal-to-noise ratio with their ignorant prattle, but the fact that they are doing all of this based on one single frame of animation. You may produce 10-100 individual screens from it, but it doesn't change the fact that it's still just one single frame of animation. The lighting, environment, etc... none of that will change in the pics b/c it's just 1/30th or 1/60th of a second from what could be minutes or hours of footage. Yet this one frame in this one location at this one camera level (the camera rotates around just one axis) is enough to deduce that not only have the textures been downgraded (something refutable once you actually rotate the image), but the environments and lighting as well. Might as well conclude that the animation has also been downgraded, there's just no logic in this thread. My last post in it. PEACE.
EDIT: I'm not gonna make a new post for this, so just added this shot from the original trailer:
Is that blurry, angular terrain I see? Can we stop cherry-picking against one new screen, please?
Ynos Yrros
Banned
It gets boring already. Stop telling (and I mean general audience, not just you) people to not judge the graphics. That's why the screenshots were released, for us to see them and judge whether we like what we se or not, then we go to forum like this one, to voice our opinion.rager said:
Doom_Bringer
Banned
AAK said:
The lead programmer who was responsible for that engine left Naughty Dog long time ago.
Doom_Bringer said:
They don't even use that language anymore, and Andy Gavin wasn't the only lead programmer on the team, Stephen White is around and is also the co-president, and I'm sure they have other, very talented programmers on the team as well. Why do you keep giving Gavin all the credit for the massive talent on the entire team?
Maxwell House said:
I must live on a different planet from many people in this thread. These new screenshots look pretty awful compared to what was shown at E3. I can't even fathom why some people are going gaga over these shots.
Look at the difference in his face, the vegetation, the lighting, the shadows, etc. It is like night and day.
I AM SWITCHING TO FOLGERS!!!
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Doom_Bringer said:
AFAIK, Mark Cerny is still nearby (still J&D's engine was not a single man's job)
.Also, the guy you are referring to IIRC is the guy behind the G.O.A.L. language and compiler and as you remember very well that technology is unfortunately not THAT useful anymore as when Sony bought Naughty Dog they had them transition away from G.O.A.L. and embrace C/C++ technology.
I think Naughty Dog is still an awesome pool of incredibly talented programmers
.travisbickle
Member
Doom_Bringer said:
Not this one again, just ban him before the meltdown
Doom_Bringer
Banned
I never said the game would look like shit cause Gravin is not with ND anymore. **** this will destroy many hyped PS3 games graphics wise.
But they really need to add motion blur in this game. That would make a huge ****ing difference
But they really need to add motion blur in this game. That would make a huge ****ing difference
nelsonroyale
Member
szaromir said:
no way...graphics equals technology plus art...in that respect ffxii beats most 360 and ps3 games hands down
peace
Doom_Bringer
Banned
szaromir said:
Lol
Most xbox games run at a crummy frame rate... Jak 3 - cloth dynamics, the best traffic density in any last gen game, runs at a solid frame rate, has no loading, has excellent particle effects....
Please tell me about a Xbox game that does all that
Don't forget about horrible textures and image quality, which basically broke Jak 3's appeal to me. Plus I don't get all this stuff about crummy framerates on Xbox - sure, there were games like Half-Life 2 with horrible framerate, but for example Jak 2 wasn't any better (Jak 3 fortunately was).Doom_Bringer said:
Doom_Bringer
Banned
szaromir said:
Hmm Jak II and III have some of the best image quality on PS2 and the textures are actually pretty good. Not to mention the games run at 480p. Jak 2 was 30 FPS in the city with no slowdown and 60 in dungeons. Jak 3 was 30 FPS locked everywhere...
I don't think you know what you are talking about...
xaosslug
Member
Chrono said:
if only it was like THAT. :lol Look, in pretty much every next-gen game thread, since the stellar ownage of MotorStorm, many (mods included) have stated next-gen cannot be judged by screenshots... why do you think mods are letting peeps run amok stupid in this thread? The ban-hammer's gonna fall, it's just a matter of when and how many will be taken with it.
Jak 2 had some slow down plus it had horrible screan-tearing. Image quality definitely wasn't good either (and it's the reason why I generally didn't play much on my PS2 - almost all games had very bad IQ) and so weren't textures.
*at least the ones I played
I finished Jak 1&2 and played a couple of hours the third one... They definitely weren't giving Xbox games* run for their money. Which is understable considering difference of console's capabilities.
*at least the ones I played
Doom_Bringer
Banned
szaromir said:
Dude the games are completely open and have no loading at all. I mean just sit and watch the traffic density in Jak games NO PC/Xbox/gamecube game has that kind of traffic density. Real time lighting, faked shader effects, dynamic lighting, good physics, completely open. Doesn't take much to appreciate the game's tech. As far I am concerned there is no Xbox game that does all that. Jak engine was awesome
Jak 1 had IQ problems, Jak 2 and 3 didn't. But there was screen tearing
and lol they even used the Havok physics engine for 2 and 3
nelsonroyale
Member
szaromir said:
Dont really agree, I think Jak games hold up very well to any 360 game, dont really know what image quality issues you are talking about
peace
It's like you read my mind. :lolPimpwerx said:OMG! Real life has been downgraded. The lighting isn't as real as it was before, and why does his skin look so plasticky? :yawn
Nice attempt at logic, Bad_Boy, but we'll have none of that in this thread.
I posted the same basic thing on B3D. Not a pic, but it's clear that the lighting is different because of the proximity and intensity of the muzzle flash. Like this pic, there is no flash suppressor on the gun, so anything within a few feet is now washed in gold, casting hard shadows that are overpowering those cast by the ambient lighting. There is no repeat of this situation in the trailer. All the lighting in the trailer was ambient, no real point sources (not sure how it was indoors however) that drown out the ambient like that.
The same for the ground. The angle of the camera to the ground determines the clarity of the textures. As you rotate the camera around, you see there are many sharp textures of the quality seen in the trailer. They are, unsuprisingly, facing the camera pretty squarely. The ones at an extreme angle are looking blurrier due to texture filtering. You'd need like 16x AF to resolve some of those properly, but what do I know? They've clearly downgraded...amirite?
The most retarded part of this thread is not the know-nothings that are dropping the signal-to-noise ratio with their ignorant prattle, but the fact that they are doing all of this based on one single frame of animation. You may produce 10-100 individual screens from it, but it doesn't change the fact that it's still just one single frame of animation. The lighting, environment, etc... none of that will change in the pics b/c it's just 1/30th or 1/60th of a second from what could be minutes or hours of footage. Yet this one frame in this one location at this one camera level (the camera rotates around just one axis) is enough to deduce that not only have the textures been downgraded (something refutable once you actually rotate the image), but the environments and lighting as well. Might as well conclude that the animation has also been downgraded, there's just no logic in this thread. My last post in it. PEACE.
EDIT: I'm not gonna make a new post for this, so just added this shot from the original trailer:
Is that blurry, angular terrain I see? Can we stop cherry-picking against one new screen, please?
Could you explain that real-time lighting thing? Because I didn't notice it. Maybe it was too subtle for me.Doom_Bringer said:
You should play Conker or Oddworld on Xbox and then you should Jak 3. Sure, maybe they don't have open world, but other than that you'll see every aspect heavily downgraded in Jak 3.
Doom_Bringer
Banned
szaromir said:
you seem like a pretty dense fanboy so I am not going to argue with you any longer. Those games don't do half the thing Jak does, all they do is push polygons which is lame...
Real time lighting - Day and night cycles, nothing is pre baked, real time dynamic lighting from weapons etc
Doom_Bringer
Banned
szaromir said:
yeah I did and I wouldn't compare those to Jak even though they are the same genre. Lots of loading broken levels, they don't have the sort of freedom that's in Jak. No awesome stream engine, less amount of stuff on screen etc
szaromir said:
dynamic lighting of that gen. No last gen games had the dynamic lighting like Just cause or oblivion
What Jak has over the other games
Really good traffic density - city packed with hovering cars - much better than any GTA game and comparable to Mafia running on a high end PC
Incredible Animation - Can't beat ND's animators
Really good cloth dynamics - For PS2 anyway
Solid frame rate with absolutely minimal slowdown in 2 anyway
Completely loading free - The streaming engine is one of the best out there
Good physics - floating cars have good collision detection, the hover board
Good poly counts - the game doesn't feel or look poly starved
etc.
So when exactly do you see loading screens in Oddworld? These games had better textures, superior effects, superior lighting and so on. And actually they did have plenty of things going on on screen. But ok, let's stop this discussion, I won't change your mind and you won't mine so it's quite pointless now.Doom_Bringer said:
Doom_Bringer
Banned
The game doesn't have a streaming engine. Of courses it uses the xbox HDD and more ram to cut it but still can't beat the streaming engineszaromir said:
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/advent...w.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&page=2gamespot said:
Doom_Bringer
Banned
Shompola said:
**** off with insults. I was talking about both Conker and Oddworld. Neither has uses streaming as well as Jak.
****ing xbots
There are only loading screens when you go into interiors, which is several times during the entire games. Other then that it has no loadings - it is actually better than Jak, when you have tto wait wait for a door to open, go into a small room, wait there until the second doors opens and then you have your level loaded.Doom_Bringer said:
Doom_Bringer
Banned
Is oddworld a GTA style game no it isn't? Does it have vehicle - no it doesn't. Jak 3's world is much bigger than oddworld's world. Why can you guys understand a simple point? Jak 3 does way more than Oddworld
nelsonroyale
Member
Shompola said:
There is no environmental loading in jak games though
peace