onetimeposter
Banned
Titanio said:
the Octacon is a cutscene part, thats definitely NOT ingame, it looks way better than the other shots.
First MGS4 screens are on the web (!)
- Thread starter Titanio
- Start date
- Status
the Octacon is a cutscene part, thats definitely NOT ingame, it looks way better than the other shots.
therealskywolf
Regular
Phil said:blakjedi: (damn I wish the quote wouldn't stall my i.explorer)
You are right the animation in GoW is NOT up to par and that may taint your view of the graphics but they are separate things truthfully. The GoW pic is fairly more detailed than the MGs pic however. It doesnt make it it better but the detail is greater and obvious.
I'd have to disagree, unless you want to define "more detailled". The only thing I see in that screen is a high usage of shine and glossy look to the characters - and you're comparing it with a very close close-up of snake which obviously has quite a different artistic approach to it (in fact, just about every MGS game always went for that special colourless look). I'd say the grab of Otacon also shows how much detail is already going into those characters as a whole. I'm also basing this off the other screens of the battlesceen which seems to show a lot of action going on. I'm not hoping for 60fps in MGS4's case (would be wishful thinking IMO and sadly), but I'm willing to take this as fact that whatever Kojima releases will be at least as rock-solid 30 fps as MGS3 on PS2 - with top-notch animation. It's not evidence, yeah, but not one without substance if you have come to respect Kojima's work across all his efforts. I'm sure you can as well, biased or not biased.
Of course, if the TGS trailer reveales everything to the exact contrary to what I just stated, then I will stand corrected, but until then, I have no reason to believe otherwise. GOW on the other hand and the way it looks in motion is something that I have seen and it's challenging to imagine it without the flaws. Screen grabs only tell one part of the story..
I'd also disagree that animation and visuals are two seperate things. Animation is an integral part to framerate (and art) and those two again go and in hand with the visuals. Visuals demand performance but so do fluid and smooth animation as well. And everyhing that adds to AI and gameplay mechanics again competes for the very same resources - which is why it makes comparing games in general so difficult to compare (I'd actually go as far to say quite impossible because it always boils down to art and personal preference in the end which are by all means subjective).
In the end though, I'm sure both will be great in their own way and that's what counts. MGS4 with better graphics won't make GOW look or play any worse as a game and vice-versa...
I'd say we at least wait until we see the MGS4 trailer and how / if GOW's framerate/animation is improved... and then draw all the guns.
EDIT:
Ask your collegues again, but show them Otacon this time.On the other hand, there are many games on various platform that long surpassed MGS3, yet I still think it's one of the most realistic things I've seen and puts many next generation efforts to shame. Art direction ( animation / smooth framerate goes a long way when trying achieve realism... (--> or why GT4 still looks better than most even with less)
Look mate, Mgs4 is supposed to have this quasy anime feel to it alright? Now to your eyes it's art direction may look better, to the next to you it may not. Detail wise IMO they are pretty close, and we are comparing 2 games that surelly have lots of resources put into them. The Otacon Face looks awesome, but it doesn't look more detailed per say, it just looks different, it certainlly shows as we have seen in the past that Kojima Team Modellers are very tallented, however again it doesn't look technically better, it's just the design that is more appealing.
I've read some pretty laughable stuff in other foruns, fortunatelly not here, and i agree with you that Animation in GOW isn't exactly the best BUT if you ever worked on the development of a game you would know that Animations are constantly getting tweaked and better with time. Now i'm sure MGS4 will have awesome animation, no reason to say otherwise, it's prequels had it.....
Conclusion, yes sure, MGs 4 looks amazing, but why wouldnt it? IT's probably Konami's biggest project in the works, and they are working on a very powerfull machine, and if the past holds any hints, then i would say that few games will look better than MGs4 on the PS3.
And that also tells us that Xbox 360 isn't the pussy that many make it, because GOW is launching next year and it looks just as good as MGs4, wich imo only serves to say that these 2 systems aren't perfomance wise far between eachother like Xbox and Ps2 were this gen. So to the PS3 ******s, suck it in, because finally what you guys said in the past can put to test "Gameplay is what matters most, and it's the games that make a system".
If you are comparing which looks more realistic then I think GOW is the one, but I think that is what the developers were trying to achieve with that game. I don't think that is the intention of Kojima with MGS. They both have different artistic styles and at that point it becomes a matter of taste. I think both look great and the look of these 2 games really makes me excited for the potential of the next gen systems.
onetimeposter said:
Definitely nothing. We don't know, you assume (or hope, which would be rather twisted). I could easily say it's not and it's in-game.
We do know it's realtime whatever about anything else.
And not as part of this argument, but simply as a side point, a look at how far we've come (courtesy of Nightbringer on GAF):
Surprisingly, the jump from 2 to 4 looks bigger to me than 1 to 2.
Another side note: despite how great this looks in static shots, please remember that they don't tell half the story when it comes to MGS games. We can't really say we know how this "looks" until we've seen it in motion - I'd be confident the trailer will say far more than these shots ever could, as was the case with MGS2 (Unlike MGS4, I remember a relatively muted response to the first shots of MGS2, but once people saw the trailer..).
Last edited by a moderator:
Theres the comparison of Gears of War dude with Otacon.
onetimeposter
Banned
one said:
This is ingame Alpha kits:
therealskywolf
Regular
one said:
Same models used in game. Lightning will obviouslly depend on the Situation. No? Just go watch the Videos and check the G4 ones. I repeat....it's the same models, those pics were taken from the game. Don't believe it? Can't do anything for you then buddy. Obviouslly you don't want to believe.
onetimeposter
Banned
serenity said:
LOL resident evil 5 looks miles better than both MGS or GOW.
therealskywolf
Regular
onetimeposter said:
I wouldn't say miles.....don't be rediculous, but i did liked Res5 Style better.
To me it looks not at all likeonetimeposter said:This is ingame Alpha kits:
http://www.cheatcc.com/xbox360/media/gearsofwar_screen10.html
and
http://www.cheatcc.com/xbox360/media/gearsofwar_screen5.html
I've seen the video of GoW, but nothing like this blur. What are you talking about?therealskywolf said:
http://www.cheatcc.com/xbox360/media/gearsofwar_screen9.html
mckmas8808
Legend
BlueTsunami said:
Theres the comparison of Gears of War dude with Otacon.
I'm sorry, but I like the more natural lighting in the MGS4 game already than the bright and shiny GOW game. Just look at the blinds in the background. It's just wow! Don't get it wrong GOW looks great, but I just rather have a more natural lighting kind of game that bright whiteness IMO.
Last edited by a moderator:
therealskywolf
Regular
one said:
The blur thing happens when the camera is moved really fast. It says in the Previews:
Not only has the framerate been increased, but some new effects have been added, such as a motion blur that occurs when you rotate the camera quickly. This creates the same effect as when you turn your head too fast – everything goes slightly out of focus. It’s a minor addition, but does manage to increase the realism of the look even further. The main character, Marcus Fenix, also has a new crouching run that has been implemented since the E3 version, which helps the character stay low when moving from cover point to cover point. Unlike most action games, you won’t be able to run and gun your way through Gears of War. Taking cover is key to survival. I found that out today, when I actually go the chance to play Gears of War on the Xbox 360.
http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200509/N05.0914.1151.18570.htm
onetimeposter
Banned
onetimeposter said:
did you see the heatwave effect when the camera pans down below the legs and the birds fly? that was the most realistic game scene i have ever scene
I don't think it's really fair to compare an action shoot em up game like GoW toa cinamatic sneak around game like MGS:4 I would expect MGS:4 to look better especially on superior hardware.
Thats like saying Splinter Cell has better graphics then Halo2, wll of course it does there's fewer char on screen and it's slower paced.
Thats like saying Splinter Cell has better graphics then Halo2, wll of course it does there's fewer char on screen and it's slower paced.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
