Support NeoGAF

[Lonely1]

What problems do you have with Wipeout? I think that game is pretty amazing for controls.

The menus for once. Is nothing mayor, but it does bothers me a bit. About Wipeout, what I miss the most is the classic tournament only structure, I never liked time trials and I don't like being forced to take them. Still like the game very much, just not love it like I did with Pure.

 

[Skilletor]

The menus for once. Is nothing mayor, but it does bothers me a bit. About Wipeout, what I miss the most is the classic tournament only structure, I never liked time trials and I don't like being forced to take them. Still like the game very much, just not love it like I did with Pure.

That structure was introduced with HD, I think. I don't much like time trials either.

 

[Tain]

Here's my issue. We have an observation: The Vita version of Ridge Racer looks nicer than the 3DS version. Okay. That's nice. Anyone with a functioning pair of eyes can tell them apart, and most of GAF is obviously aware of the tech difference. The problem is that this observation comes with absolutely no justification for posting whatsoever. There's no greater points trying to be made. It's pointless and a waste of time.

If this was posted on IGN you'd have pages of "lol games journalism," so why is this notable for our forum?

I wouldn't mock IGN for posting comparison shots of the same tracks, assuming there's zero pretense. It's a clear visual demonstration of hardware, developer, and asset differences. That the Vita game looks better isn't even the point! The shots are the point. I can understand indifference, sure, but not hostility.

 

[dark10x]

The menus for once. Is nothing mayor, but it does bothers me a bit. About Wipeout, what I miss the most is the classic tournament only structure, I never liked time trials and I don't like being forced to take them. Still like the game very much, just not love it like I did with Pure.

Interesting. The layout and menus for 2048 actually added a LOT to the game, I thought. It gave it a structure that I always felt was off in the previous few games. It just makes it feel as if there is real progression happening and reminded me very much of the Explorer menu in Ridge Racer 6.

The problem is that this observation comes with absolutely no justification for posting whatsoever. There's no greater points trying to be made. It's pointless and a waste of time.

You don't enjoy these comparisons? I absolutely love seeing how different hardware copes with similar tasks. It's a very fascinating thing and gives you an idea of what the developers were dealing with.

 

[Maedhros]

I'm certain I'm playing the 'wrong games' when it comes to touch interfaces, but for me touch so far seems more like a nuisance than an improvement. I'm always thinking "why won't let me control this with the buttons" on Wipeout and Uncharted. Also, I'm disappointed by the gyro implementation, gyro aiming at Uncharted doesn't feel quite as good as aiming in RE:R, but I'm sure it isn't fault of the hardware. But I don't like gyro aiming on either console (or my phone) anyway, which is strange since I love pointer aiming.



Well, there's comparisons shots with the Ps3 version.

You're the first one I see complaining about gyro aiming from Uncharted. I've heard nothing, but praise,saying that it's better than the default options (right analog).

 

[plainr_]

 

[crazygambit]

The hell is the point of this topic? Vita has better graphics - no SHIT.

True, but I for one didn't know how much better. Those 3DS screens look like shit to be honest. It probably looks much better on the actual device, but those screens... yeesh.

This is totally OT, but.

You're the first one I see complaining about gyro aiming from Uncharted. I've heard nothing, but praise,saying that it's better than the default options (right analog).

You're not supposed to only aim with the gyro. You do the general aiming with the right stick and then make slight tweaks and corrections with the gyro. Great for getting head shots. Though I had to change the settings (inverted some axis or another) to get it to feel right for me.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

I wouldn't mock IGN for posting comparison shots of the same tracks, assuming there's zero pretense. It's a clear visual demonstration of hardware, developer, and asset differences. That the Vita game looks better isn't even the point! The shots are the point. I can understand indifference, sure, but not hostility.

On the hostility: Because without a greater point to be had, what other motive is there to be assumed than a simple "x is better than y" garbage thread? The hostility makes perfect sense, because it's the simplest assumption. I'm not hostile myself, I'm just wondering why this waste of time thread is being defended.

If this thread was about the Ridge Racer series, and comparing shots through the ages (comparing PS1, arcade, modern), that might be more interesting. Hell, even a technical discussion, Digital Foundry style, would have been enough. But we don't even have that much. All we have are the screenshots, and those are not interesting in the least bit.

You don't enjoy these comparisons? I absolutely love seeing how different hardware copes with similar tasks. It's a very fascinating thing and gives you an idea of what the developers were dealing with.

I like reading about tech differences. I can sit around and read developer comments about various platforms all day. Sometimes I can find comparisons fascinating.

But you're assuming a motive just like everyone else, because as far as we can tell this thread was posted without one explicitly stated.

 

[gkryhewy]

Both sets of shots were taken off screen with a camera. Why should you compare direct-feed 3DS shots to camera shots taken from Vita?

Off screen is fair, but it doesn't capture the main sell of RR3D (the 3D). After playing RR Vita heavily for the last two days, I love it -- looks and plays fantastically.

Personally though I actually think RR3D has the better graphical high points. Nothing in RR Vita has wowed me yet like the new desert/canyon track (Redstone Canyon Road?) in 3D.

Though Sunset Heights is pretty close.

 

[The_Endgamer]

It also includes a bannable slur. I hope you enjoyed your NeoGAF experience.

But I used it in direct reference to jargon people use on 4Chan and not towards anyone on this thread and I also mentioned them in the same phrase on top of that elaborated on it's meaning.

Kind of silly if that's a bannable slur... The whole thing was completely self-contained...
*starts becoming paranoid*

 

[crazygambit]

On the hostility: Because without a greater point to be had, what other motive is there to be assumed than a simple "x is better than y" garbage thread? The hostility makes perfect sense, because it's the simplest assumption. I'm not hostile myself, I'm just wondering why this waste of time thread is being defended.

If this thread was about the Ridge Racer series, and comparing shots through the ages (comparing PS1, arcade, modern), that might be more interesting. Hell, even a technical discussion, Digital Foundry style, would have been enough. But we don't even have that much. All we have are the screenshots, and those are not interesting in the least bit.



I like reading about tech differences. I can sit around and read developer comments about various platforms all day. Sometimes I can find comparisons fascinating.

But you're assuming a motive just like everyone else, because as far as we can tell this thread was posted without one explicitly stated.

Like I just mentioned the screenshots are useful to tell what the degree of the difference between the 2 versions is. I of course knew the RR Vita would look better than on 3DS, but how much better? I found that interesting.

Could I have looked thorough the web for screenshots for both games and compare them myself? Sure, but I wasn't interested enough. Now I don't have to.

 

[Ruud_Luiten]

Which version of Ridge Racer (vita, 3ds) has the least loading times and the most content?

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

Off screen is fair, but it doesn't capture the main sell of RR3D (the 3D). After playing RR Vita heavily for the last two days, I love it -- looks and plays fantastically.

Personally though I actually think RR3D has the better graphical high points. Nothing in RR Vita has wowed me yet like the new desert/canyon track (Redstone Canyon Road?) in 3D.

Though Sunset Heights is pretty close.

I think this is the bigger issue I take with the comparison. Offscreen shots just negatively impact the 3DS game much more due to the nature of the technologies involved (OLED vs LCD, 2D vs 3D). Those shots really aren't well representative of what RR3D actually looks like in person.

Direct feed isn't the best representation either, but offscreen 2D shots really do inherently favor Vita.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

Like I just mentioned the screenshots are useful to tell what the degree of the difference between the 2 versions is. I of course knew the RR Vita would look better than on 3DS, but how much better? I found that interesting.

Interesting in what way? That word continues to be used. Perhaps we don't have the same barometer of "interesting." Personally, I would want a coherent thought connected with the shots before I considered the thread "interesting." Something to spark discussion. Instead, we have five pages of people guessing why the OP posted the pictures.

Could I have looked thorough the web for screenshots for both games and compare them myself? Sure, but I wasn't interested enough. Now I don't have to.

Then include it in the official threads for the games. Those threads are designed to be useful, and there it would make a lot more sense.

And why would you want to compare the two Ridge Racers? That's another question to ask. They don't use the hardware to its fullest capacity, one of them is a port and the other is content-less. As a barometer for system strengths, it's pretty useless. As a barometer for game quality, it's even more useless.

 

[Cmd. Pishad'aç]

After playing Resident Evil Revelations and Uncharted Vita, I'm not sure if the graphical power is what truly sets the 2 handhelds on a league of their own.

 

[SuperDowns]

Is the Vita version in 3D?

Spoiler

No.

Seriously I won't be a part of a Vita, 3DS comparison unless Nintendo completely ditch 3D with a revision (i.e. to focus more on graphics).

It is a graphical trade off I really value in my 3DS games and it cannot be shown in screenshots.

If this is the start of many graphical comparisons between Vita, 3DS I will bring this up every time. There is a trade off for the graphics with 3DS and it so happens I like that trade off in most games.


If you want to do comparisons talk about features: tracks, online play, single player campaign, cars, etc...

Spoiler

P.S. I own both Vita and 3DS. And I have NO interest in Ridge Racer.

 

[SmokyDave]

Interesting in what way? That word continues to be used. Perhaps we don't have the same barometer of "interesting." Personally, I would want a coherent thought connected with the shots before I considered the thread "interesting." Something to spark discussion. Instead, we have five pages of people guessing why the OP posted the pictures.

There are a ton of threads on this forum that wouldn't meet your personal bar for 'interesting'. Do you intend to police them all?

Then include it in the official threads for the games. Those threads are designed to be useful, and there it would make a lot more sense.

And why would you want to compare the two Ridge Racers? That's another question to ask. They don't use the hardware to its fullest capacity, one of them is a port and the other is content-less. As a barometer for system strengths, it's pretty useless. As a barometer for game quality, it's even more useless.

You don't see the point, you don't find it interesting. Fine. Why are you telling others they should feel the same way?

The reason this thread is going nowhere is because most of the posts are spent justifying it's existence to some makeshift thread-police that appear to have crawled out of the woodwork.

 

[djSyndrome]

Still pissed both use generic tachometers.

 

[KingHippo1967]

Jesus GAF, he just wanted to compare the visuals.

Then he should have done it properly. All his comparison shows is that his Motorola Droid X takes better photos of the Vita's screen than the 3DS's screen.

The only way to compare visuals properly is with two direct feed pics. Otherwise there are too many variables messing things up. For example, his camera took the Vita pic with a shutter speed of 1/20 sec and the 3DS one with a speed of 1/40, which explains why the 3DS one looks so washed out.

Yes, the Vita version is without a doubt more detailed than the 3DS one. But the difference between the two is nowhere near as bad as those photos make it look.

Disclaimer - I own both versions. I played the career on the 3DS version for around 20-25 hours, and am already bored doing single races on the Vita one after a few hours. That's what's more important to me.

 

[SmokyDave]

Still pissed both use generic tachometers.

Did you see the tacho on the iOS shot I posted? Looks like it was ripped from Test Drive on the C64.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

There are a ton of threads on this forum that wouldn't meet your personal bar for 'interesting'. Do you intend to police them all?

I'm not "policing." I'm attacking the notion that this thread is worthy of this board with some vague notion of "it's interesting though, it really is." If you had a better definition of "interesting," or had been able to point out what makes this thread anything but a waste of time, than you would have offered it.

I'm still curious as to why this one is special. Most threads of this quality are buried within minutes, even with the usual "this thread is a waste of time" posts. The responses to my posts have been either vague or extremely suggestive of a motive that wasn't there.

You don't see the point, you don't find it interesting. Fine. Why are you telling others they should feel the same way?

Why are you defending this thread?

For the record, I'm not trying to convince you that it's not interesting. Please don't attribute motives to my posts.

The reason this thread is going nowhere is because most of the posts are spent justifying it's existence to some makeshift thread-police that appear to have crawled out of the woodwork.

You can't go anywhere when there wasn't a direction to begin with. Trying to claim the OP was actually doing a relatively sophisticated technical analysis - or anything worth reading, honestly - is far more ridiculous.

 

[SmokyDave]

Only the ones that are defended. *snipped for brevity*

I really don't have anything to say that I haven't already said and we're totally off-topic. Let's find a picture of Ridge Racer 7 downscaled to Vita resolution to move things on or something....

There we go. I didn't personally downscale it though so I don't know what method was used.

 

[dark10x]

Which version of Ridge Racer (vita, 3ds) has the least loading times and the most content?

3DS version has the most content but the longest load times.

 

[BruiserBear]

On the hostility: Because without a greater point to be had, what other motive is there to be assumed than a simple "x is better than y" garbage thread? The hostility makes perfect sense, because it's the simplest assumption. I'm not hostile myself, I'm just wondering why this waste of time thread is being defended.

If this thread was about the Ridge Racer series, and comparing shots through the ages (comparing PS1, arcade, modern), that might be more interesting. Hell, even a technical discussion, Digital Foundry style, would have been enough. But we don't even have that much. All we have are the screenshots, and those are not interesting in the least bit.



I like reading about tech differences. I can sit around and read developer comments about various platforms all day. Sometimes I can find comparisons fascinating.

But you're assuming a motive just like everyone else, because as far as we can tell this thread was posted without one explicitly stated.

You seem to care way too much about comparisons being made.

Who cares?

Some of us find these comparisons interesting, from a technical perspective.

3DS version has the most content but the longest load times.

and a less stable framerate.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

You seem to care way too much about comparisons being made.

Who cares?

Some of us find these comparisons interesting, from a technical perspective.

And why would you want to compare the two Ridge Racers? That's another question to ask. They don't use the hardware to its fullest capacity, one of them is a port and the other is content-less. As a barometer for system strengths, it's pretty useless. As a barometer for game quality, it's even more useless.

Also, trying to frame my argument as getting worked up about the comparisons is not going to do you any favors. I'm not worked up about the comparison. I'm attacking the notion that this thread is worth defending because it's "interesting."

If this thread drew any conclusions, made any points, or did anything other than post terrible screenshots next to each other, you would have a point. As it is, we have off-screen shots of two mediocre portable racing games of a once excellent series, and absolutely nothing to discuss about them.

 

[AgentOtaku]

didn't see anything posted yet but what did the Vita RR patch fix anyway?

EDIT: nvm

 

[MadOdorMachine]

shitty off screen pics but this is the first game I can think of where you have a nice direct comparison of graphics. Namco rushed both titles as well so you cant blame that. That being said I truly hope sony makes the right moves with the Vita. Although both will have their own greats, the tech truly is a leap above the 3ds.

The Vita version also had quite a bit longer dev time. There's no denying that Vita has better graphics than 3DS but I'd still rather play the 3DS game due to content. I know you're trying to give a direct comparison, but there are a lot better looking games on 3DS than RR.

 

[chickdigger802]

Might just be retro goggles... but didn't the psp ridge racers have better car models than the 3ds one?

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

and a less stable framerate.

Only slightly and under certain conditions. Pre-patch the Vita version was quite a bit worse.

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

RE4 vs RE4 HD "what a difference 5 years make."

Jet Set Radio vs Jet Set Radio xbla "what a difference 10 years make."

Smash bros 3DS vs Smash bros Wii-U "What a difference no year make"

truestory.jpg

 

[SmokyDave]

Only slightly and under certain conditions. Pre-patch the Vita version was quite a bit worse.

There's an interesting point. The £16.99 Vita version got a patch to improve the framerate and yet the full priced 3DS version did not. Is it because of difficulty patching on the 3DS, different expectations on each platform, technical issues, or something else?

I doubt we'll find out without breaking into Namco and looking through some memos though.

 

[Anasui Kishibe]

After playing Resident Evil Revelations and Uncharted Vita, I'm not sure if the graphical power is what truly sets the 2 handhelds on a league of their own.

pssst, it's all about the screen

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

There's an interesting point. The £16.99 Vita version got a patch to improve the framerate and yet the full priced 3DS version did not. Is it because of difficulty patching on the 3DS, different expectations on each platform, or something else?

The infrastructure for patching wasn't there when RR3D launched, though the frame drops really are pretty minor anyway. It really didn't need a framerate tune up as much as RRVita did.

US standard pricepoints were $39.99 3DS to $29.99 Vita (card) to $24.99 Vita (dd) at respective launches. Now they're $19.99 3DS to $29.99 Vita (card) to $24.99 Vita (DD).

 

[Insane Metal]

You also have to consider that the main concern of the 3DS wasn't with the visuals.

I know you only wanted to compare the graphics, but it makes no sense nonetheless. Nintendo didn't use the most advanced graphics technology available for portable machines, for what is worth.

 

[Windom Earle]

Resident evil looks pretty neat

No it does not. I love my 3DS, but personally I think the IQ (and framerate!) of this game is a mess.

 

[AzureNightmare]

No it does not. I love my 3DS, but personally I think the IQ (and framerate!) of this game is a mess.

you need a pair of glasses because your eye sight is absolutely horrible.

 

[dark10x]

The Vita version also had quite a bit longer dev time. There's no denying that Vita has better graphics than 3DS but I'd still rather play the 3DS game due to content. I know you're trying to give a direct comparison, but there are a lot better looking games on 3DS than RR.

There are also better looking games on Vita than RR (which is just average for the system).

I think they make for a fair comparison as both had short development cycles and both were launch titles.

Might just be retro goggles... but didn't the psp ridge racers have better car models than the 3ds one?

No, not at all. The PSP version didn't feature as much detail on the whole, but it DID run at 60 fps with 60 fps reflections. The 3DS version is 30 fps with pixelated 15 fps reflections (which I find distracting).

 

[Anasui Kishibe]

No it does not. I love my 3DS, but personally I think the IQ (and framerate!) of this game is a mess.

things I'm readin'

 

[Raytow]

things I'm readin'

You mean shit like this?

After playing Resident Evil Revelations and Uncharted Vita, I'm not sure if the graphical power is what truly sets the 2 handhelds on a league of their own.

pssst, it's all about the screen

Oh wait that doesn't fit your agenda, sorry dude.

 

[dark10x]

You also have to consider that the main concern of the 3DS wasn't with the visuals.

I know you only wanted to compare the graphics, but it makes no sense nonetheless. Nintendo didn't use the most advanced graphics technology available for portable machines, for what is worth.

So what WAS the main concern of the 3DS then?

The machine was clearly designed for 3D, which is an element of visuals.

The touchscreen and motion control both took a back seat to 3D as neither work well in conjunction with it. It's a less focused machine than the original Nintendo DS.

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

So what WAS the main concern of the 3DS then?

The machine was clearly designed for 3D, which is an element of visuals.

Is it an element of the OP comparison though? And if not, how do we do an accurate visual comparison between RR3D and RRVita?

 

[tkscz]

No it does not. I love my 3DS, but personally I think the IQ (and framerate!) of this game is a mess.

Only time the frame rate ever drops is when the game is loading a room, or spawning a bunch of enemies, and even then it feels likes it's loading and not a frame drop.

And graphically, game looks extremely close to RE5. *sneaking suspicion he doesn't have to game*

 

[dark10x]

Is it an element of the OP comparison though? And if not, how do we do an accurate visual comparison between RR3D and RRVita?

I was talking about the 3DS in general.

As for Ridge Racer, well, I'd say side by side shots of the game are pretty fair. Both sets of shots were captured via a camera, you know.

You're probably thinking "but 3D adds so much" but, to be fair, so does viewing a Vita game on its actual OLED (most people are viewing these shots on an LCD, I'm sure). The shots fair to account for the displays on each system but they DO accurately demonstrate technical differences between the games.

We can see that the Vita version sports a higher level of detail, more advanced lighting, a higher resolution, and sharper textures. Just one element of comparison but still fair.

I'm not sure what else you could want. Sure, the OP has a clear bias here, but if you look beyond that, those comparisons are pretty good.

And graphically, game looks extremely close to RE5. *sneaking suspicion he doesn't have to game*

Revelations is incredibly impressive and has fantastic image quality, but it definitely doesn't look "extremely close" to RE5. It's doing things on a MUCH smaller scale with simplistic (in comparison) environments. The maps in RE5 are much larger and loaded with geometric detail. It also features much better post processing (per-object motion blur, for instance) and many more enemies on screen at once.

That's not to take anything away from Revelations, however, as it's an amazing looking game that DOES actually look better than some 360/PS3 games. Hell, Silent Hill Downpour is much uglier and choppier than Revelations on 3DS. I just think RE5 is just that damn impressive looking.

 

[sixteen-bit]

looking forward to the Unbounded comparison.

 

[thirty]

Then he should have done it properly. All his comparison shows is that his Motorola Droid X takes better photos of the Vita's screen than the 3DS's screen.

The only way to compare visuals properly is with two direct feed pics. Otherwise there are too many variables messing things up. For example, his camera took the Vita pic with a shutter speed of 1/20 sec and the 3DS one with a speed of 1/40, which explains why the 3DS one looks so washed out.

Yes, the Vita version is without a doubt more detailed than the 3DS one. But the difference between the two is nowhere near as bad as those photos make it look.

Disclaimer - I own both versions. I played the career on the 3DS version for around 20-25 hours, and am already bored doing single races on the Vita one after a few hours. That's what's more important to me.

Wow. I'll have video later.

 

[Android18a]

I really liked RR3DS. Loads of content and I actually prefer the 90s colourful look to the next gen shininess. Although if the Vita version hadn't been a sham I'd be all over it too.

Still longing for one to top R4 though. It'll never happen.

 

[dark10x]

I really liked RR3DS. Loads of content and I actually prefer the 90s colourful look to the next gen shininess. Although if the Vita version hadn't been a sham I'd be all over it too.

Still longing for one to top R4 though. It'll never happen.

As a game, Ridge Racer V absolutely tops R4. It remains me absolute favorite installment in the series with the perfect blend of gameplay and style.

 

[Windom Earle]

Only time the frame rate ever drops is when the game is loading a room, or spawning a bunch of enemies, and even then it feels likes it's loading and not a frame drop.

And graphically, game looks extremely close to RE5. *sneaking suspicion he doesn't have to game*

Ok... If you don't notice the huge drops in the first action stage (Where you run through the skyscraper) then I don't know what to say. I haven't finished the game, but I assume this is not exception. And yes, the loading stuttering is also bad.

The game is super jaggy in 3d and super blurry without. Not a great tradeoff for me. Too inconsistent.

 

[dark10x]

Ok... If you don't notice the huge drops in the first action stage (Where you run through the skyscraper) then I don't know what to say. I haven't finished the game, but I assume this is not exception. And yes, the loading stuttering is also bad.

The game is super jaggy in 3d and super blurry without. Not a great tradeoff for me. Too inconsistent.

Super blurry in 2D? No way, it's beautifully clean and about as good as you can expect from a screen with a 400x240 resolution.

 

[Phife Dawg]

No it does not. I love my 3DS, but personally I think the IQ (and framerate!) of this game is a mess.

It's a tradeoff between 3D and AA (and no it does not look blurry) so it gives you the option. Framerate is far from a mess, only real issues are during loading transitions (elevators etc.).

Might just be retro goggles... but didn't the psp ridge racers have better car models than the 3ds one?

I think so too. 3DS RR seems to be taken directly from the ios version or something.

And graphically, game looks extremely close to RE5. *sneaking suspicion he doesn't have to game*

I have only played the PC version of RE5, don't know how much worse it looks on consoles but RE:R does not come close to RE5 (on PC).