I agree with Taocha, it doesn't have to be on a better software console in order for it to be better than any other game. All that matters is the concept of the game, if it's good it sells.
Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance Volume II: The Search for More Money
- Thread starter Ronove
- Start date
|
REGISTER TO REMOVE ADS |
|
- Status
I own it and I can tell you there is a difference. The actual graphics don't change but the image is clearer, the textures look more vivid and the lighting is more fluid because of the hd.
I will also let you know I am not a hardcore fan I just happened to like shadow of the colossus and never played ico so I bought it yesterday and I know there i a difference.
Hd is not supposed to change the way the game looks its just supposed to heighten the quality. Anyone who believes its going to get 10X better like your supposed 20% are dumb asses and don't deserve to play it if they are going to be that stupid about it.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 901
No .
Forgive my extrapolation, but from personal experience, that's how it's seemed. I've had to correct people dozens of times on YouTube and/or other gaming sites who were excited for "[Insert collection here] to be like PS3 graphics!"
In retrospect, they were probably all 11 years old.
In retrospect, they were probably all 11 years old.
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2007
- Messages
- 1,517
You're being really silly, you know.
1) A second screen isn't a control option. It's actually a control hindrance when the main screen doesn't have touch.
2) Vita has Sixaxis controls, which are either exactly the same as or better than the 3DS' gyroscope. I doubt there's any real difference in terms of play possibilities, except for one thing: the 3DS has to choose between 3D and gyroscope because moving the system means losing the 3D alignment.
3) Trigger buttons can easily be emulated by the rear touchpanel. In fact, the rear touch gives significantly more options than two physical buttons.
4) 3DS, despite being far more advanced overall, appears to have a not-insignificant disadvantage to the PS2 as far as the amount of polygons it can throw onto the screen. This isn't that big of a deal given that PSP has an even bigger disadvantage in that realm and it didn't hurt BbS that much, but it might be the reason why it's similarly lacking in Disney guests (monsters are much less demanding on the system than Disney allies) and keeps using the annoying pixel-face models in cutscenes. It's also very unlikely to make the worlds less empty, which is something people have been complaining about since the first game.
You're probably one of those people who don't realize that the KH3D screenshots are complete and utter lies, aren't you?
Anti-aliasing and proper texture filtering makes a huge difference for people who have a problem with poor image quality. Look at this:
Notice the difference now? (If you have Firefox or Opera, use this instead -- it's an animated PNG, and it's much bigger)
That's what people want out of HD collections. Also, PS2 games are being sold for $10 on PSN now, so they'd definitely call shenanigans on any non-HD collection costing more than $20. =P
As I've said, what I said previously was quite a bit of an extrapolation. Regardless, if you'd like to prove to me that HD does more than just a spit shine, then I'd rather see actual Standard vs HD in a game. I know for a fact that FFXII does not look that bad on the PS2. In fact, I'm positive. I'm looking at it right now on my TV/PS2.
I've seen Standard SotC vs HD SotC, and I saw very, very minuscule differences. Not enough for me to consider it necessary by any means. Also, "collection" implies more than one game. KH1 may be sold on PSN for $10, for example, but KH1+KH2 for $20 non-HD is a fine deal.
As for whatever you're saying about the KH3D screenshots... I have no clue what you mean. None whatsoever.
I've seen Standard SotC vs HD SotC, and I saw very, very minuscule differences. Not enough for me to consider it necessary by any means. Also, "collection" implies more than one game. KH1 may be sold on PSN for $10, for example, but KH1+KH2 for $20 non-HD is a fine deal.
As for whatever you're saying about the KH3D screenshots... I have no clue what you mean. None whatsoever.
I wouldn't say SotC HD is unnecessary. There are plenty of people who heard of how good SotC was but never got to play it. To them, this is a good opportunity.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 901
No need to mock.
1. A second screen commonly allows you to view a menu, so you can use items faster.
2. I actually did not know that, thanks for telling me. But I never have any problem with the gyroscope, even in 3D.
3. I guess they're somewhat similar.
4. And now we do have party members. The graphics look PS2-level for the trailer and demo. Another demo-player said it was like good PS2 graphics on a small screen. It seems the 3DS can handle it.
1. A second screen commonly allows you to view a menu, so you can use items faster.
2. I actually did not know that, thanks for telling me. But I never have any problem with the gyroscope, even in 3D.
3. I guess they're somewhat similar.
4. And now we do have party members. The graphics look PS2-level for the trailer and demo. Another demo-player said it was like good PS2 graphics on a small screen. It seems the 3DS can handle it.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 901
Of course, but it's probable to have a less compelling story.
I don't even understand why compelling must equal the most powerful system. I just don't.
It is just as likely to have a really crappy game on a powerful system as it is to have a crappy game on a less powerful system. It is the creativity of the development team that makes the game good, not the processing power of the hardware it is developed for.
I loved Re:coded because the gameplay was fun (and even if the story was repetitive, the dialogue was fun to read and I loved the character interactions). TWEWY was fun because it utilized every aspect of the system it was on and in no way did it being on the DS hinder it and its story was compelling. Why do we assume a KH game on the 3DS will be less good as a KH game on the Vita?
It is just as likely to have a really crappy game on a powerful system as it is to have a crappy game on a less powerful system. It is the creativity of the development team that makes the game good, not the processing power of the hardware it is developed for.
I loved Re:coded because the gameplay was fun (and even if the story was repetitive, the dialogue was fun to read and I loved the character interactions). TWEWY was fun because it utilized every aspect of the system it was on and in no way did it being on the DS hinder it and its story was compelling. Why do we assume a KH game on the 3DS will be less good as a KH game on the Vita?
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2007
- Messages
- 1,517
If you have an old standard definition/CRT television, you probably wouldn't notice (because it just looks fuzzy in SD), but that's what 480i/no AA looks like when upscaled to 720p with no filtering. To be fair, HD televisions do have filtering enabled for upscaling, but there's still a significant difference.
At this point, I'm just going to have to suggest that you should probably have your eyes checked. =P
Square-Enix's screenshots for KH games are, essentially, HD collections on steroids. For reference:
Gif from the trailer:
Blatantly obvious lie screenshot:
Notice the round headphones versus the low-poly headphones? The images aren't good enough to point out texture quality issues, but Birth by Sleep used the textures from the renders in screens, and I'm sure 3D does too. And then there's the much better AA and texture filtering, which all adds up to a very different image overall.
But you probably think they're basically the same thing, given that you didn't know what I was talking about. =P
Ah, no, I can see the differences you're pointing out there. Very interesting, I didn't know they did that. Though honestly, it doesn't change a whole heck of a lot (yes, obvious polygon change, but I probably wouldn't have noticed it otherwise, and it doesn't really change my opinion with how the game looks), though I can see why they'd want to do it. Sneaky buggers.
Lol it is all about marketing~
Also, I find it ironic that the gif looks better to me than the actual steroid-pumped screenshot. The low-poly textures seem to have a nicer, more natural feel to it. Maybe it is because the HQ screenshot has been cleaned up that you can see how artificial it is
Also, I find it ironic that the gif looks better to me than the actual steroid-pumped screenshot. The low-poly textures seem to have a nicer, more natural feel to it. Maybe it is because the HQ screenshot has been cleaned up that you can see how artificial it is
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 901
It looks like they changed the shading quite a bit.
I don't think I would like the HQ even if it were moving. Sora's eyes and mouth are so odd to me.
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2007
- Messages
- 1,517
You can't have low-poly textures. =P You can have low resolution textures, but that gif is far too small to notice and the HQ image is a bad scan.
I probably should have made sure to get direct-feed images, to be honest; the HQ image is a scan, and the gif had a reddish filter put on it by the gif maker. (Here's a better quality image for the HQ one) They're also not the exact same moment; Sora's big cheesy grin from the HQ image isn't shown in the gif. There does seem to be something artificial about the HQ images, to be fair, but that's generally less distracting than jagged edges in motion if PCSX2 screens/videos are anything to go by.
- Status