Metal Gear Solid 3: E3 2K4 Video

There wasn't as much in the way of texturing to worry about in Jak 2 (or any of the other five games of its spawn) compared to modern games. Texturing usage in the game is incredibly low-key. Often, it's low resolution, too, like with ground textures which fill the screen most predominantly that look like nothing more than green and brown blotches of indistinguishable detail... meant to convey an earthy look.

 

Hmmm, you can actually control the camera at all times, and you also have the first person view, plus you get to see much of the scenery from all the different heights and angles. I doubt they are fudging anything there just for a speciffic camera view, as there's barely a scene in the game where you can't change the view drastically.

Even if that was true (which it isn't) what is the point of what you said (other than to downplay PS2 graphics, of course)?

 

Huh? 5 games?

^ ^ Just an attempt to turn even this thread into a [put name of dead console here] thread.

 

marconelly!:

The relevancy was along the exact same line that london-boy's response was, if you read back:

"So why aren't they doing it? Konami coders = teh dumbasses? Don't think so..."

"I think because there's a tradeoff. Is Jak2 texture heavy?"

"I guess it all depends..."

The issue being considered was whether Jak2's texture load and their lower level of prominency within the game’s look required as much work and attention to fight texture alaising as MGS3's jungles would need.

And here's the commonplace texturing I was talking about with that engine:





About you insinuation: I don’t think valid criticism of PS2 IQ and texturing is being unfair.

 

Instad of engaging in some meaningless screenshot war, I'll just tell you to go an play J&D1 in the village, or Jak 2 in the forest, look at the textures at the ground and elsewhere, even upclose - and then come back and tell me that they look blotchy or that they are lower resolution than those textures used in MGS3. Sure, MGS3 does look whole lot better than either of those two games, but that is not because of the resolution of it's textures.

Perhaps not in every thread imaginable?

 

Did anybody see that last movie? LMAO! The last part on it was freaking halarious. Check it out or die wishing you did....

 

marconelly!:

Neither game has good textures, but the difference is that MGS3's play a more noticeable role in the overall appearance and have high contrast detail - making the visuals quite prone to harsh texture alaising.

My point was that the two titles may be distinct with regard to the kind of filtering and methods that could've been applied to control texture alaising. I'm sure Konami's games would've had proper filtering had they the extra power to spare in those games.

 

And you wanted to bring that point by pointing out that Jak 2 could do better texture filtering because it has low res textures, vs MGS3... for which you just now said - has low res textures. I must say I'm a bit lost in that line of thought :\

 

No, I don't think they're comparable; resolution isn't everything. MGS3 has a lot more texture detail between its contrast and variety. Jak II's surfaces often look like one big repeating grid. There's good reason that trilinear plus corrected mip-mapping has seen limited use (not to mention that the dev would have to fight the hardware).

 

I finally saw E3 trailer, its simply amazing. Team MGS has again done wonders. MGS3 looks more varied than MGS2 (which is a good thing IMO). So is it really snake (in 1964)?? Or is it Big Boss?

 

Definetly Big Boss. The eyepatch on the right gives it away.

 

I hope Kojima's promise of 'being able to get lost in the jungle' will come true.

 

Yeah, that REALLY sounds like the kind of game I wanna play; aimlessly wandering around in a festering jungle with no clue of where to go!

 

If it enhances the feel of survival... why not?
It would be nice to be able to climb a mountain and to view the entire landscape.

 

Now that's better. If one gets lost, he can climb a tree or something to see where to go...
But aimlessly wondering around with nothing to do and no clue on where to go is not the way to go. It never worked in games, why should it work now? Anyone remembers the FF7 "desert" part, where u need to cluelessly find someone in the desert, with tens of "desert" rooms (being pre-rendered, u had to exit one part and enter an identical desert-looking part)... Urgh...

 

I sort of remember the desert part, and I also remember the ice world part where as I recall, it was pretty impossible to rest as well and the enemies were fairly dangerous.

 

YEAH! That one too... I mean aren't there supposed to be "Game Designers" there????

 

That is CLASSIC game design, man! Wander around in a maze of rooms that look either the same or almost the same. Well, actually, the ice world rooms did look different I believe, but they were haphazardly connected so leaving through the wrong exit lead back to a previous location... Argh. Highly annoying, especially when you're running low on phoenix downs, healing pots and mana.

 

Actually, the game doesn't force you to go through the desert (you are refering to the jail under the golden saucer) - in other words, speaking to characters tell not to go into the desert as you probably wouldn't find your way out. If you still go into the desert, then you are of course punished. Heh, it's a jail afterall.