Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction

["Nerve-Damage"]

WOOooooooooow

So the actual game they played (http://www.gamevideos.com/video/id/10039) actually looks better than the screenshots AND the trailer. This is definitely one title to keep an eye on.

Before the trailer (pics)…

After seeing the trailer …

The animation and the massive amount of stuff that’s going on is f-ing unbelievable!!

 

[Eagle-Vision]

But highly detailed textures wouldn't look right. Even if it's a technical limit, given an infinitely powerful console you wouldn't throw super-detailed textures into this game. It has a soft look, like hand-painted textures as used in a CG rendering, and it needs that. The textures that are there aren't obviously pixelated or showing filtered texels in these pics. There's no texture shimmer/aliasing that I noticed in the footage, and it doesn't appear to be in want of AF either. So apart from not being highly detailed, which I put down to being an art choice though you might disagree, technologically speaking it seems to me as strong in the texturing as elsewhere.

Not all of that it's excusable because of the art direction. Look at the grass and the leaves sprites, those look like ass, and not because of the art direction.

Also, geometry wise, the models don't appear to be that detailed, lots of polygon edges in them.

 

[DJ12]

And having this confirmed as realtime in the 1UP movie is pretty . Also the humour is wicked!

What stuck out for me is he said the actual game looks even better than the video and screenshots.

I am also pleased the game is going back to it's roots, I liked deadlocked, but not as much as the others.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Not all of that it's excusable because of the art direction. Look at the grass and the leaves sprites, those look like ass, and not because of the art direction.

The grass textures I can agree with. The leaves...I'm seeing nothing bad about the foliage. Poly-counts aren't the highest per character, but there's a lot going on too. How many games have large scope of no visible polygon edges?

 

[TheChosenOne]

You guys should also keep in mind that the game is targeted to run at 60fps which, in turn, probably calls for a few tradeoffs here and there.

Overall, I think the game looks impressive --> large environments, lots of action on screen, nice animation, and again, 60fps (which is kind of rare for next-generation games). The art direction isn't bad either.

 

[archangelmorph]

Art style or not, all textures lack detail. More than the art style, I believe it's the trade-off for such high quality AA + motion blur.

Your being consistent negative about the visuals of a game that clearly has some very strong artistic qualities...

It's perfectly clear that the game is persuing such a strong art direction... Granted the textures DO stick out like a sore thumb and somewhat distract you from the overall picture, but they don't take away from the overall slick style the game is going for..

At least give the game credit where it is due.. Rather that rat on it so much when you know full well nobody here is going to agree with you...

 

[Eagle-Vision]

The grass textures I can agree with. The leaves...I'm seeing nothing bad about the foliage. Poly-counts aren't the highest per character, but there's a lot going on too. How many games have large scope of no visible polygon edges?

To be fair, there's not really much going (other than in the city area) . A few ships flying by and a couple of explosions here and there. Most of the geometry in the environment is blocky and flat. I don't see why couldn't they use a few extra polygons in the junctures of the models.

 

[Nesh]

Art style or not, all textures lack detail. More than the art style, I believe it's the trade-off for such high quality AA + motion blur.

I think you have to change your way of percieving visual quality. If you isolate each visual aspect to see if a game looks good then you are missing the real deal.

You simply cant use the same credentials, stereotypes or "guides" for every game to judge its visuals and thats what you are doing now.

There are even CGI out there that look better than this but lack even more textures. If the AA and motion blur make up for the lack in texture then why bother?

You have to take notice that the series has been known as one of the most beautiful platform games despite that there were games like Sonic Adventure and SA2 with more detailed textures.

Rachet and Clank always featured HUGE draw distances, varied enviroments, crazy amounts of particle effects, beautiful lighting, countless of animated objects on screen at once and superb animation, almost if not better as good as Pixar's CGI movies (in animation I mean) all that at a 90% constant 60fps.

These screens show all these only MUCH better. The textures are also the way they have to be and still although they arent "Gears of War" quality they dont need to be like that because they are beautiful and fit perfectly to the game's visual style. You expect unnecessary textural detail to be impressed.

 

[SOcean2forever]

There's quite a difference in comparing Lair with Ratchet and Clank.

First and foremost, Lair is an original IP and with that E3 2005 trailer with superb texture and animation people cannot help but judge current screens according to THOSE expectations.

Ratchet and Clank is an established franchise and people do not expect it to look as technically impressive as Killzone of E3 2005. Like the Jak series it excels in animation, huge draw distances and numerous enemies on screen.

 

[archangelmorph]

There's quite a difference in comparing Lair with Ratchet and Clank.

First and foremost, Lair is an original IP and with that E3 2005 trailer with superb texture and animation people cannot help but judge current screens according to THOSE expectations.

Ratchet and Clank is an established franchise and people do not expect it to look as technically impressive as Killzone of E3 2005. Like the Jak series it excels in animation, huge draw distances and numerous enemies on screen.

agreed..

Very game has a visual focus and its obvious that R&C's is not in the area of "super awesome HDR high texture poly visuals with SSS, bloom, AA, spherical harmonics and all that jazz.."

Considering R&C is part of a long running series you should already know this and therefore fairly judge the visual according to how they've matured coming onto the new platform and not how they compare to other games for it which clearly have a completely different focus..

Your saying the game "looks bad" because it has bad texture res, however i'm pretty sure you wouldn't have said the same thing when the previous R&C games were first revealed on the PS2 so many years ago..

THATs why i have a problem with your posts Eagle..

 

[Nesh]

And the flamefest continues. Woohoo!!

The level of hypocrisy in these boards has gone through the roof these last months. I can't enter in this thread and point out a rather small flaw in the game because all the fans start to flame to no end because apprarently I'm not considering the big picture. On the other hand, I can go into the Lair thread and say that no matter what the scale is or whatever, a few textures or effects are bad and therefore the game looks like total ass, and surprisingly, everyone would agree!

What the hell..

R&C looks bad to you because of small and minor details while on the other hand Lair doesnt have problems in small details but has visual problems in the "big picture" as well.

 

[StefanS]

I think everyone in here, needs to cool down. No need to get all fired-up and personal (and that includes both sides of the argument).

 

[-tkf-]

I´m late i guess.. saw the trailer.. thought yeah cool 2 secs of gameplay, then saw the 1up show were they discussed the trailer and EGM article.., ohhh yes it´s all realtime!

 

[Mr. Domino]

It will probably be a real stunner when it comes out. Insomniac is really one of the most capable developers on PS3 when you look at Resistance and R&C. I'm already very curious to see how Resistance 2 will look on an even improved engine next year.

 

[Rolf N]

There are some more scenes embedded into the 1up show proper, really amazing stuff (a boss fight).
I have high confidence for Insomniac's ability to make the game not just good-looking, but also fun to play (as opposed to Naughty Dog ...). Ratchet & Clank 3 is just awesome, and if they can keep it just at that level of gameplay, with those kinds of graphics, I'm very interested.

 

[Npl]

There are some more scenes embedded into the 1up show proper, really amazing stuff (a boss fight).
I have high confidence for Insomniac's ability to make the game not just good-looking, but also fun to play (as opposed to Naughty Dog ...). Ratchet & Clank 3 is just awesome, and if they can keep it just at that level of gameplay, with those kinds of graphics, I'm very interested.

Well... thats your opinion, not a fact

 

[Rolf N]

Well... thats your opinion, not a fact

Exactly. Based purely on Jak 3 I need to add, which is without a doubt a technological marvel, but also a disappointing, confused game.
Which isn't saying that Naughty Dog can't make anything interesting, but that wasn't what I was trying to say. It's just that I have more confidence in Insomniac, as what they have delivered was already very good, of course according to my refined and valued opinion