Support NeoGAF

[FirewalkR]

Slightly OT:

Back then, people complained about its baked shadows. Now, in the final version, it's dynamic, with dynamic hair.

I noticed the baked shadows (the shadows buildings cast on the ground etc), but... are you sure shadows are fully dynamic in MGS4 final? Lighting conditions seem pretty much fixed in each area, but I can't say for sure, I was too busy playing the game o.

Snake's hair looked a bit better too I think, there was even that talk about "60000 physics vertices etc" for the hair alone and the moustache with as many polys as an enemy soldier on MGS3. However, what really impressed me the most was the beginning of the trailer, from the PMC soldier perspective, with all those environmental effects, dust in the air, debris floating in the wind, great smoke... It was realtime, you can see proof in the video from this thread at B3D: http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=26396 (you've probably seen it if you remember the baked shadows complaint )

As I said, taking technical and artistical prowess as a whole, for me MGS4 is the most visually impressive game on consoles, but that early demo still looks a bit beyond the final version.

Oh well, 2005 is long gone, what's done is done, and finally there's a PS3 game out that I believe it's actually truly TRULY worth buying a console just for it.

 

[kaching]

As for my vote, game visuals tend to impress me more with scope and the ability to juggle lots of moving parts, so I'd personally be more inclined to vote for something like Super Stardust HD because sometimes the shit they throw at you in Endless mode is more visually stunning to me than the ability that games like MGS4 or Uncharted have in simulating different kinds of surfaces (which is still impressive, BTW).

Oh, and Warhawk. Still looks great to me because it achieves a balance between large levels, stable framerate, lots of moving parts.

 

[jett]

Does anyone understand how Uncharted can get those visual textures consistently everywhere in the game and also have ZERO install time and space? I don't get it. What is this magic tech that they're using?

I'm aware of the funnel design of the game, but really? That's it?

Naughty Dog ftw. They delivered something that looks better than what they promised. Unlike the other company in ths comparison.

 

[Lord Error]

but... are you sure shadows are fully dynamic in MGS4 final?

Shadows from everything are cast on moving objects that pass through them, so yeah, they must be dynamic for that to be the case.

 

[Wollan]

Seeing the big leap between J&D and Jak 2, the jump with Uncharted 2 will be insane.

On another note: Don't underestimate Home (beta atm) visually. Definitely in the top five.

 

[FirewalkR]

Shadows from everything are cast on moving objects that pass through them, so yeah, they must be dynamic for that to be the case.

Can't they cheat by baking shadows from static objects on static objects (buildings/walls on floor for example)? And dynamically computing shadows in dynamic/dynamic and static/dynamic interactions?

Seeing the big leap between J&D and Jak 2, the jump with Uncharted 2 will be insane.

Especially if Uncharted 2 comes out after the next Jak.

 

[Naked Snake]

Slightly OT:



I noticed the baked shadows (the shadows buildings cast on the ground etc), but... are you sure shadows are fully dynamic in MGS4 final? Lighting conditions seem pretty much fixed in each area, but I can't say for sure, I was too busy playing the game o.

Snake's hair looked a bit better too I think, there was even that talk about "60000 physics vertices etc" for the hair alone and the moustache with as many polys as an enemy soldier on MGS3. However, what really impressed me the most was the beginning of the trailer, from the PMC soldier perspective, with all those environmental effects, dust in the air, debris floating in the wind, great smoke... It was realtime, you can see proof in the video from this thread at B3D: http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=26396 (you've probably seen it if you remember the baked shadows complaint )

As I said, taking technical and artistical prowess as a whole, for me MGS4 is the most visually impressive game on consoles, but that early demo still looks a bit beyond the final version.

Oh well, 2005 is long gone, what's done is done, and finally there's a PS3 game out that I believe it's actually truly TRULY worth buying a console just for it.

I think I agree with you. I also thought the first trailer for the game looks better than the final version. I'm still in Act 2 though.

 

[FirewalkR]

I think I agree with you. I also thought the first trailer for the game looks better than the final version. I'm still in Act 2 though.

You still have much greatness to see.

 

[NullPointer]

Haven't read the whole thread, but after beating MGS4 last night I'd have to say its a toss up between MGS4 and Uncharted.

I might be biased though, because I happen to really dig the style of the presentation in MGS4, but believe me, as the game progresses there is no shortage of jaw-dropping moments. So, to me:

MGS4, followed closely by Uncharted, but its kind of a matter of taste.

 

[nib95]

No. 1. Uncharted.

---

No. 2. Gran Turismo 5 prologue.

---

No. 3. Metal Gear Solid 4. (not the best screens in the world, took most with the in-game camera)

---

No. 4. Ratchet & Clank 5: tools of Destruction.

---

No. 5. Heavenly Sword.

The machine is really starting to shine in regards to visual/technical prowess. Bring on Resistance 2, GOW3, FFXIII, Killzone 2, Motorstorm 2 etc.

 

[FirewalkR]

Hey nib95, can I have your Kuro?

 

[dk_]

shots

Nice, man.

 

[Houston3000]

Nib, nice shots

I hate to count racing games in the running though. That's throwing artistic impression straight out the window and going solely for technical realism. Are you saying Uncharted looks more realistic than Gran Turismo? I don't think that's even a question, Gran Turismo is obviously more real looking but you gave the nod to Uncharted because it's more stunning and artistically beautiful. So I don't think it's much of a stretch for everyone to agree that MGS4 is more "artistically beautiful" than Gran Turismo even though it doesn't look as real for obvious reasons (people and facial animation vs metallic surfaces racing on spinning cylinders).

Just throws a wrench in the whole debate IMO.

 

[AmMortal]

I still can't believe the fact that some reviewers said that Metal Gear Solid 4, had "meh" graphics.


Throws, their credibility right out the window.

 

[GauntletFan]

I still can't believe the fact that some reviewers said that Metal Gear Solid 4, had "meh" graphics.


Throws, their credibility right out the window.

It impresses in cutscenes, but in-game it's not up there with the best this gen has offered.

 

[neojubei]

I still can't believe the fact that some reviewers said that Metal Gear Solid 4, had "meh" graphics.


Throws, their credibility right out the window.

Don't go into the Gears 2 thread.

 

[King_Slender]

It impresses in cutscenes, but in-game it's not up there with the best this gen has offered.

Agreed - Uncharted blows it away, IMO. The character models are insane, but much of the environment is meh.

 

[nib95]

Nib, nice shots

I hate to count racing games in the running though. That's throwing artistic impression straight out the window and going solely for technical realism. Are you saying Uncharted looks more realistic than Gran Turismo? I don't think that's even a question, Gran Turismo is obviously more real looking but you gave the nod to Uncharted because it's more stunning and artistically beautiful. So I don't think it's much of a stretch for everyone to agree that MGS4 is more "artistically beautiful" than Gran Turismo even though it doesn't look as real for obvious reasons (people and facial animation vs metallic surfaces racing on spinning cylinders).

Just throws a wrench in the whole debate IMO.

I totally see your point. However, with everything you said in mind, I still chose to put GT5P above MGS4. Even racing games to a degree have an art style, just compare GRID to PGR4 and GT5P (not in this thread please). They all look very different. GT5P goes for that clinical ultra realistic look, and because it does it so unbelievably well (better than any game before it) I gave it the nod. Plus, it also runs at 60fps at a close to 1080p resolution. Which grants it extra bonus from me from a technical point of view.

I'll admit, it was close. But the thing that dropped MGS4 below GT5P, aside from the amazing lighting, realism, polygon count etc of GT5P, was MGS4's slightly weaker textures in areas. Aside from the odd weak texture here and there, I will say the game is a technical marvel. From lighting, shadows, level diversity, effects, character models, amount on screen etc. But all that imo isn't quite enough to top GT5P for me personally. I'm a car nut, and honestly, GT5P has nailed it. The car models are pretty much as close as you can get to the real thing but in a game.

Uncharted still and fairly easily for me retains the top spot. Mainly due to it's colourful and refreshing art style, amazing lighting and shadows (the best yet in a console game imo), mainly because they are dynamic, amazing animations (imo still better than MGS4's in-game one's) but also because of the sheer potency of the textures. They are not just high res or well mapped, they are totally unique. It feels like every wall and area in the game is completely unique because of it, each texture has it's own personality and character, be it in the shape of a crack, erosion, moss, vines, markings, a different brick or cement type etc etc.

R&C5 deserves major credit for looking so clean and Pixar like, having so much on screen whilst retaining that golden 60fps. And then Heavenly Sword, just pipped Assassins Creed for my list. Mainly because of the fantastic lighting, again animations and character facial expressions, plus of course the thousands of enemies on screen and more going on element. A user earlier mentioned Dead Rising as an example of tonnes of characters on screen at once, that's nothing compared to what Heavenly Sword achieves. It not only has several hundred more enemies on screen at once, but each is a lot more detailed than a zombie in dead rising, and also has decent AI, shadows and great lighting as my screens above show.

 

[GauntletFan]

Aside from the odd weak texture here and there, I will say the game is a technical marvel. From lighting, shadows, level diversity, effects, character models, amount on screen etc.

How is it a technical marvel when it moves substantially less polygons than many other titles, consistently suffers from slowdown (sub 30fps) and has jagged, pixelated shadows? You can call it a marvel of art direction, but a technical marvel it certainly is not. (Also, a true technical marvel would not require an install every time you want to replay a level, but I digress..)

 

[Houston3000]

I totally see your point. However, with everything you said in mind, I still chose to put GT5P above MGS4. Even racing games to a degree have an art style, just compare GRID to PGR4 and GT5P (not in this thread please). They all look very different. GT5P goes for that clinical ultra realistic look, and because it does it so unbelievably well (better than any game before it) I gave it the nod. Plus, it also runs at 60fps at a close to 1080p resolution. Which grants it extra bonus from me from a technical point of view.

I'll admit, it was close. But the thing that dropped MGS4 below GT5P, aside from the amazing lighting, realism, polygon count etc of GT5P, was MGS4's slightly weaker textures in areas. Aside from the odd weak texture here and there, I will say the game is a technical marvel. From lighting, shadows, level diversity, effects, character models, amount on screen etc. But all that imo isn't quite enough to top GT5P for me personally. I'm a car nut, and honestly, GT5P has nailed it. The car models are pretty much as close as you can get to the real thing but in a game.

Uncharted still and fairly easily for me retains the top spot. Mainly due to it's colourful and refreshing art style, amazing lighting and shadows (the best yet in a console game imo), mainly because they are dynamic, amazing animations (imo still better than MGS4's in-game one's) but also because of the sheer potency of the textures. They are not just high res or well mapped, they are totally unique. It feels like every wall and area in the game is completely unique because of it, each texture has it's own personality and character, be it in the shape of a crack, erosion, moss, vines, markings, a different brick or cement type etc etc.

R&C5 deserves major credit for looking so clean and Pixar like, having so much on screen whilst retaining that golden 60fps. And then Heavenly Sword, just pipped Assassins Creed for my list. Mainly because of the fantastic lighting, again animations and character facial expressions, plus of course the thousands of enemies on screen and more going on element. A user earlier mentioned Dead Rising as an example of tonnes of characters on screen at once, that's nothing compared to what Heavenly Sword achieves. It not only has several hundred more enemies on screen at once, but each is a lot more detailed than a zombie in dead rising, and also has decent AI, shadows and great lighting as my screens above show.

Well, I should of specified Gran Turismo specifically. Racing games can have an art style but GT5 doesn't, it's just built to look as photoreal as possible. So, I would think, if you were going to cite it as one of the best looking games you would just cite is as the best since it looks more real than anything else. Usually, when having similar debates on graphics with friends we sort of have an unspoken rule to not mention racing games, flight sims, etc...

I get your point though, you were just so blown away by Uncharted's visuals that it surpassed realism while you were still looking for MGS to look more realistic. Personally, I still like Metal Gear Solid's graphics better - Uncharted looks amazing but IMO it mostly all falls in with the fantastic texture work. The animation and character models didn't stick out to me nearly as much as they did in Metal Gear Solid. I guess I hold those two aspects in higher regards than I do texture work.

 

[roxya]

So, I would think, if you were going to cite it as one of the best looking games you would just cite is as the best since it looks more real than anything else.

Thread is about best looking games, not most realistic looking games. They aren't the same thing.

 

[DC R1D3R]

VF5

 

[nelsonroyale]

GT5 looks great in many ways, but the trees are still 2d damnit, and the some of the tracks look a little sterile, the cars are phenomenal though

 

[dark10x]

I noticed the baked shadows (the shadows buildings cast on the ground etc), but... are you sure shadows are fully dynamic in MGS4 final? Lighting conditions seem pretty much fixed in each area, but I can't say for sure, I was too busy playing the game o.

Just to touch on this, yes, the shadows from ALL structures are dynamic. The fact that the lights are static does not mean they are not realtime shadows. Doom 3 was one of the first games to present fully dynamic shadows (though they used a different method) and most of the shadow were completely static. In reality, you won't notice shadows from buildings moving around due to the rotation speed of the earth.

All of those shadows do cast properly on all moving objects, however, which is why they went with realtime shadows.

 

[Metalmurphy]

Just to touch on this, yes, the shadows from ALL structures are dynamic. The fact that the lights are static does not mean they are not realtime shadows. Doom 3 was one of the first games to present fully dynamic shadows (though they used a different method) and most of the shadow were completely static. In reality, you won't notice shadows from buildings moving around due to the rotation speed of the earth.

All of those shadows do cast properly on all moving objects, however, which is why they went with realtime shadows.

It's actually pretty easy to see they're dynamic as most of the the shadows "tremble" a bit on the edges, probably due to the upscale going on.

 

[wouwie]

From all the games i played on PS3, i find Uncharted to be the best looking game. I absolutely adored the graphics in that game. I'm still impressed on what Naughty Dog managed to achieve for their first PS3 title and i can't wait to see what they come up with in Uncharted 2.

Other titles absolutely worth mentioning: MGS4 (in which i'm only at the end of Act2) which has really nice graphics aswell and Ratchet & Clank: Tools of Destruction, which had superb graphics and brilliant cut-scenes. Assasin's creed looked great aswell, especially considering the scale of the game.

The PS3 is my first console and generally speaking, i never thought that games would already look as great as they do this generation.

 

[jax (old)]

Its uncharted. GORGEOUS GORGEOUS GORGEOUS.




thoughts on following games others might have mentioned:


MGS4. nice but not wow. It doesn't have next gen POW to its visuals. The lack of shader technology + overall look not the best looking. AND I LOVE MGS4


R+C. Talk about underwhelming. I bag it out constantly and will continue to do so. I was so underwhelmed by it. The shaders were off, the thing didn't look superb... I keep saying it looks like a somewhat souped up PS2 game. And it does. Meh Meh Meh

Heavenly Sword. Um, nice looking I guess but I thought the character models were somewhat overworked/designed and really ugly

GT5. Kind of pretty but its a car game but I got bored really quick so I didn't delve into it too much/

 

[Kittonwy]

Its uncharted. GORGEOUS GORGEOUS GORGEOUS.




thoughts on following games others might have mentioned:


MGS4. nice but not wow. It doesn't have next gen POW to its visuals. The lack of shader technology + overall look not the best looking. AND I LOVE MGS4


R+C. Talk about underwhelming. I bag it out constantly and will continue to do so. I was so underwhelmed by it. The shaders were off, the thing didn't look superb... I keep saying it looks like a somewhat souped up PS2 game. And it does. Meh Meh Meh

Heavenly Sword. Um, nice looking I guess but I thought the character models were somewhat overworked/designed and really ugly

GT5. Kind of pretty but its a car game but I got bored really quick so I didn't delve into it too much/

R&C's lighting and shadowing just wasn't on par with the likes of Uncharted and MGS4, maybe it was an attempt to keep the image clean because dynamic shadows and self-shadowing are tricky to get without flickering, and things like logluv might be expensive but with those two elements R&C's graphics could have been elevated alot further, proper lighting just brings that image to life. >:3

 

[nelsonroyale]

Its uncharted. GORGEOUS GORGEOUS GORGEOUS.




thoughts on following games others might have mentioned:


MGS4. nice but not wow. It doesn't have next gen POW to its visuals. The lack of shader technology + overall look not the best looking. AND I LOVE MGS4


R+C. Talk about underwhelming. I bag it out constantly and will continue to do so. I was so underwhelmed by it. The shaders were off, the thing didn't look superb... I keep saying it looks like a somewhat souped up PS2 game. And it does. Meh Meh Meh

Heavenly Sword. Um, nice looking I guess but I thought the character models were somewhat overworked/designed and really ugly

GT5. Kind of pretty but its a car game but I got bored really quick so I didn't delve into it too much/

meridian city in R & C looked insane....

 

[dark10x]

It's actually pretty easy to see they're dynamic as most of the the shadows "tremble" a bit on the edges, probably due to the upscale going on.

I don't think that's an artifact of upscaling. The quality of the shadows seems rather dynamic and adjusts itself depending on distance and angle. This is EXTREMELY common, however. Assassin's Creed, GRAW, and lots of other games using fully dynamic shadows have the same issue. Uncharted was a nice exception to that, however, as its method of casting shadows was on par with the likes of Crysis, believe it or not. Crysis was also quite variable, however, as it WAS a PC title. It can look insane if you tweak it properly, but it can also look really bad (and can be disabled).

 

[Doc Evils]

How is it a technical marvel when it moves substantially less polygons than many other titles, consistently suffers from slowdown (sub 30fps) and has jagged, pixelated shadows? You can call it a marvel of art direction, but a technical marvel it certainly is not. (Also, a true technical marvel would not require an install every time you want to replay a level, but I digress..)

Do you have the game?

 

[nib95]

How is it a technical marvel when it moves substantially less polygons than many other titles, consistently suffers from slowdown (sub 30fps) and has jagged, pixelated shadows? You can call it a marvel of art direction, but a technical marvel it certainly is not. (Also, a true technical marvel would not require an install every time you want to replay a level, but I digress..)

I'm guessing you haven't played the game? The game can drop to below 30fps, however, it generally stays at 30fps, and in many cases actually jumps/runs at 60fps. Characters are simply incredibly detailed, from facial detail, to model polygons, materials. Shadows are only pixelated on occasion, many/most are clean, as you can see from my screens above, where not a single shadow is pixelated.

Then there's other incredible attention to detail. Every bit of debree floating around the levels casts it's own dynamic shadow on everything from characters to the level (as do the birds). Gecko's and other vehicles have heat haze from their exhausts, cloth/bandana's etc moves more realistically than I've seen in any other game. There's tonnes of diversity in textures and geometry within the levels.

All enemies, allies, mechs alike are incredibly detailed. MGS doesn't do what other games do which is have variable levels of detail dependant on how important a character is. Every character in the game is hyper detailed.

Shadows and lighting are phenomenal (again as my screen above shows). They are also dynamic, trees sway, shadows sway (albeit not much, not very windy I guess). I mean damn. Even during the installs you complain about, the level of detail and lighting is amazing. See here. See how each puff lights up every crease in Snakes face dynamically, depending on how he inhales, how hard, even when he lights the thing. The stronger the flame gets the more of his face is lit up. It's just awesome.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/nchoudhury/MGS4/MGmain.jpg

 

[Kittonwy]

How is it a technical marvel when it moves substantially less polygons than many other titles, consistently suffers from slowdown (sub 30fps) and has jagged, pixelated shadows? You can call it a marvel of art direction, but a technical marvel it certainly is not. (Also, a true technical marvel would not require an install every time you want to replay a level, but I digress..)

I'm not sure how you got the idea that it's pushing substantially fewer polygons, the character models are as detailed as the best-looking games out there, the shadowing is dynamic, even with cascading shadowing techniques being used by other games nobody out there has gotten shadowing perfect yet, you sacrifice smoothness for detail and some games don't even have self-shadowing. Personally I think Uncharted looks better but MGS4 is no slouch. >:|

 

[GauntletFan]

I'm guessing you haven't played the game? The game can drop to below 30fps, however, it generally stays at 30fps, and in many cases actually jumps/runs at 60fps. Characters are simply incredibly detailed, from facial detail, to model polygons, materials. Shadows are only pixelated on occasion, many/most are clean, as you can see from my screens above, where not a single shadow is pixelated.

Then there's other incredible attention to detail. Every bit of debree in the level casts it's own dynamic shadow on everything from characters to the level. Gecko's and other vehicles have heat haze from their exhausts, cloth/bandana's etc moves more realistically than I've seen in any other game. There's tonnes of diversity in textures and geometry within the levels.

All enemies, allies, mechs alike are incredibly detailed. MGS doesn't do what other games do which is have variable levels of detail dependant on how important a character is. Every character in the game is hyper detailed.

Shadows and lighting are phenomenal (again as my screen above shows). They are also dynamic, trees sway, shadows sway (albeit not much, not very windy I guess). I mean damn. Even during the installs you complain about, the level of detail and lighting is amazing. See here. See how each puff lights up every crease in Snakes face dynamically, depending on how he inhales, how hard, even when he lights the thing. The stronger the flame gets the more of his face is lit up. It's just awesome.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/nchoudhury/MGS4/MGmain.jpg

I'm talking about the environments here, I agree the characters show impressive use of shaders and tech.

Dynamic shadows are hardly anything new, and they have been done better. Similarly, lighting a normal mapped face with a dynamic light source is hardly pushing new grounds in terms of technology. The game has lots of attention to detail - this seems to be what impresses you the most, but again, stuff like that isn't about technical prowess.

We could talk about standard features which MGS doesn't have - ambient occlusion baked into the environments for one, or any complex environment shaders on surfaces in-game. Normal maps are clearly generated using a 2D image cool, and the poly-count on props and objects is very low. Despite all this however, it's a really great looking game but I credit this more to art direction than any sort of technical wizardry.

 

[nib95]

I'm talking about the environments here, I agree the characters show impressive use of shaders and tech.

Dynamic shadows are hardly anything new, and they have been done better. Similarly, lighting a normal mapped face with a dynamic light source is hardly pushing new grounds in terms of technology. The game has lots of attention to detail - this seems to be what impresses you the most, but again, stuff like that isn't about technical prowess.

We could talk about standard features which MGS doesn't have - ambient occlusion baked into the environments for one, or any complex environment shaders on surfaces in-game. Normal maps are clearly generated using a 2D image cool, and the poly-count on props and objects is very low. Despite all this however, it's a really great looking game but I credit this more to art direction than any sort of technical wizardry.

Again, further evidence you have not played the game. There are textures in the game that are normal mapped/bump mapped and/or specular mapped. Mainly in Act III, with the wet surfaced cobble flooring of the French city, and puddle laden floors of the Crying Wolf Boss fight. I think people get confused because MGS4 doesn't over use the mapping techniques like other games, where walls that shouldn't be shiny end up being so. I seem to recall you having a history of PS3 exclusive nit picking, I'd just quit while you were behind if I were you.

 

[GauntletFan]

Again, further evidence you have not played the game. There are textures in the game that are normal mapped/bump mapped and/or specular mapped. Mainly in Act III, with the wet surfaced cobble flooring of the French city, and puddle laden floors of the Crying Wolf Boss fight. I think people get confused because MGS4 doesn't over use the mapping techniques like other games, where walls that shouldn't be shiny end up being so. I seem to recall you having a history of PS3 exclusive nit picking, I'd just quit while you were behind if I were you.

'cool' was a typo - I was talking about normal maps generated from 2D images using an image filter tool as opposed to a high poly mesh, which is clearly the case in this game. If you don't understand the technicalities of game development, I suggest you refrain from declaring titles 'technical showcases'.

 

[nelsonroyale]

are you on a mission?

 

[nib95]

'cool' was a typo - I was talking about normal maps generated from 2D images using an image filter tool as opposed to a high poly mesh, which is clearly the case in this game. If you don't understand the technicalities of game development, I suggest you refrain from declaring titles 'technical showcases'.

That's pretty much the same way most games have done it on consoles this gen. What's your point? Isn't that the point of a normal map/bump map, to give the illusion of a 3D surface when in reality it's 2D. The only mapping that really takes things differently is Parallax mapping, which very few games this gen have used. And outside of FEAR, Oblivion and some of the earlier RARE titles, very sparingly. As it removes diversity in textures in place of a more "3D" look to textures.

Seems to me like you are just nit picking for the sake of it.

 

[Lord Error]

Technical impressiveness of MGS4 environments doesn't come from advanced shaders but from really high quality and high amount of particle and post processing effects - just as I was hoping it would - and it didn't disappoint.

 

[filopilo]

There are textures in the game that are normal mapped/bump mapped and/or specular mapped

you get normal mapping from the get go ,first level first player start. not the shinny shine kind ,sure.NM is everywhere in mgs4.

 

[GauntletFan]

That's pretty much the same way most games have done it on consoles this gen. What's your point? Isn't that the point of a normal map/bump map, to give the illusion of a 3D surface when in reality it's 2D. The only mapping that really takes things differently is Parallax mapping, which very few games this gen have used. And outside of FEAR, Oblivion and some of the earlier RARE titles, very sparingly. As it removes diversity in textures in place of a more "3D" look to textures.

Seems to me like you are just nit picking for the sake of it.

I'm not nit picking, I'm calling you out for declaring a title a technical showcase when it really isn't. It's fine to say it's the PS3's best looking title, but to say it impresses technically does a disservice to titles like Uncharted and R&C which do a lot of groundbreaking stuff. As for normal maps, again, you completely missed the point. Many titles use a high poly>low poly mesh system for generating normal maps.. the crazybump/nvidia method is more prevalent as it's quicker and easier but it's not the norm for big budget titles. We're not discussing if normal maps are in MGS4 (they are) or the usage of parallax mapping, just the implentation and how they generated them.

 

[Deepblue]

It does which is why the only time Halo 3 looks good is in Deep's photo threads.

Yeah, that's bullshit.

 

[nib95]

I'm not nit picking, I'm calling you out for declaring a title a technical showcase when it really isn't. It's fine to say it's the PS3's best looking title, but to say it impresses technically does a disservice to titles like Uncharted and R&C which do a lot of groundbreaking stuff. As for normal maps, again, you completely missed the point. Many titles use a high poly>low poly mesh system for generating normal maps.. the crazybump/nvidia method is more prevalent as it's quicker and easier but it's not the norm for big budget titles. We're not discussing if normal maps are in MGS4 (they are) or the usage of parallax mapping, just the implentation and how they generated them.

MGS4 does a lot of things R&C5 and Uncharted don't. And you are an extreme minority when you say MGS4 isn't a technical marvel. Many game journalists and reviewers, industry insiders etc have labelled MGS4 as the most technically and visually impressive title yet this gen on consoles. So you might want to re-consider your own opinion before bashing other peoples. There's a reason why people in the industry (unlike random forum posters like you and I) are saying the things they are about MGS4.

Like I said, you are entitled to your opinion, but quit ragging on others when yours is the one in the minority. I had a quick gander through your post history, and I swear, the amount of MGS4 hate (and 360 exclusive promoting) is insane. Your opinion does not surprise me in the slightest. You've been ragging on MGS4's visuals and gameplay since day one pretty much.

I just ask anyone to go through your post history and it pretty much says it all. The person above got it right. It's like you are on a mission to bash or hate on MGS4 at every given opportunity. Just give it a rest already dude. We get the point.

 

[GauntletFan]

MGS4 does a lot of things R&C5 and Uncharted don't. And you are an extreme minority when you say MGS4 isn't a technical marvel. Many game journalists and reviewers, industry insiders etc have labelled MGS4 as the most technically and visually impressive title yet this gen on consoles. So you might want to re-consider your own opinion before bashing other peoples. There's a reason why people in the industry (unlike random forum posters like you and I) are saying the things they are about MGS4.

Like I said, you are entitled to your opinion, but quit ragging on others when yours is the one in the minority. I had a quick gander through your post history, and I swear, the amount of MGS4 hate (and 360 exclusive promoting) is insane. Your opinion does not surprise me in the slightest. You've been ragging on MGS4's visuals and gameplay since day one pretty much.

I just ask anyone to go through your post history and it pretty much says it all. The person above got it right. It's like you are on a mission to bash or hate on MGS4 at every given opportunity. Just give it a rest already dude. We get the point.

Don't make assumptions - I am a lead technical artist which means I work on pushing the tech side of art for games every day. I couldn't care less about the opinion of journalists or reviewers. Within the industry I don't know anyone holding MGS 4 up as a 'technical marvel', but I know plenty of people who are enjoying playing it and how it looks graphically. And please, give the post history thing a rest, I have nothing but praise for the best titles on any platform but I will always call out those who don't know what they're talking about. A lot of people in this thread are discussing the technical aspects of games and their graphics and I'm happy to discuss that area in detail.

 

[burgerdog]

I see Nib is back, and accusing Kiton of having a PS3 exclusive nitpicking? WOW :lol You're a true fanboy.

 

[TheOddOne]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10607597&postcount=134
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10792277&postcount=650
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11101391&postcount=209
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10591851&postcount=83
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10586367&postcount=139
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10536287&postcount=316
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10516301&postcount=329
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10411582&postcount=295
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=296878

nib95 isn't biased

Spoiler

so yeah i really have nothing to do

 

[Firewire]

Uncharted
MGS4
GT5
Ratchet & Clank
Heavenly Sword

 

[Luigison]

No. 1. Uncharted.
[Images removed]

---

No. 2. Gran Turismo 5 prologue.

[Images removed]

---

No. 3. Metal Gear Solid 4. (not the best screens in the world, took most with the in-game camera)

[Images removed]

---

No. 4. Ratchet & Clank 5: tools of Destruction.

[Images removed]

---

No. 5. Heavenly Sword.

[Images removed]


The machine is really starting to shine in regards to visual/technical prowess. Bring on Resistance 2, GOW3, FFXIII, Killzone 2, Motorstorm 2 etc.

1. Uncharted definitely gets the number one spot. I just downloaded the demo yesterday. Got my PS3 Tuesday.
2. GT5p is probably the most photo realistic. I'm not into racing games, but I'll probably try this when my brothers and I get together.
3. To me Ratchet & Clank: Tools of Destruction looks better than MGS4. I love the colors and textures of R&C and it's fun to play.
4. MGS4 has too much brown and gray from what I've seen, but I haven't opened it yet so I'm only basing this on images I've seen on the web now. I reserve the right to rerank it later.
5. Heavenly Sword looks good, but I've seen less of it than anything else on this list and probably won't ever get the game myself. I'll probably put something else in 5th place later.

I loved Excite bike so I'm considering Motorstorm. What's the news on Motorstorm 2?

Can Imsomniac still make Spyro games? Their PS versions were fun, but other developers lost something. I'm sure Insomniac would make a very good looking Spyro now. I'd definetly buy a new Spyro game if Insomniac made it. Are they working on Resistance 2 now?

What's the best looking PS Store game? The one with the rubber duck in the tub looks cool, but I haven't downloaded enough to say what's best.

 

[burgerdog]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10607597&postcount=134
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10792277&postcount=650
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11101391&postcount=209
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10591851&postcount=83
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10586367&postcount=139
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10536287&postcount=316
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10516301&postcount=329
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10411582&postcount=295
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=296878

nib95 isn't biased

Spoiler

so yeah i really have nothing to do

"The thing that makes MGS4 so much more beautiful than it already is, is the fact that it runs at 60fps. Seriously man, that's what separates the game. And is another testament to the capabilities of the PS3 when put in the hands of competent developers."

60FPS FACT!

I love mgs4 and it's the main reason that I bought a ps3, I just don't need to lie about it to make it better than it already is.

 

[fortified_concept]

MGS4 although the game is inconsistent. The best of MGS4 are easily the best graphics in consoles but Uncharted is consistently spectacular. MGS4 is one of those games you have to play to realize how amazing it looks plus the popular 1st act screenshots give a false impression to the people who haven't played it. The game is much much more spectacular than that.