Sega unveils Shining series

[Tagrineth]

Jeeze, Almasy, you're a shallow prick.

Go find yourself a copy of Disgaea: Hour of Darkness for PS2.

 

[Almasy]

Any standards that could define what makes a "PS2 game" would be arbitrary. If the game is lazy, SEGA will be the only one to really suffer here - from poor sales.

I don´t feel relativism is needed in this discussion. When looking at the technical capabilities of the PS2, and other titles on the system, even standard titles, you can form an idea of what a PS2 title should look like.

Underexploiting the hardware in such a bad way to me is very lazy on Sega´s part, and seems like all they pursued was access to the userbase with the fundings of a GBA project. I really hope the project tanks, this kind of disrespect to the general consumer should be recieved with very poor sales.

Also, Tagrineth, what you did was uncalled for. I´m presenting my view, and being consistent with it. I´m not being shallow for wanting the machine´s capabilities to be exploited, nor have I said that visuals are all that matters. In any case, I don´t actually need to explain myself to you, I´m just voicing my disgust over such an old looking title that could run on GBA without any mayor compromises.

 

[LogisticX]

To hell with the 3D revolution.... until 3D graphics can look as clean and smooth as that game looks right now, I am completely content with the technology backing Shining Force.

As a matter of fact, I think it looks better than FFXII. Sue me.

 

[Sonic]

I wouldn't call the graphics GBA level or else I would have to call MGS2 Playstation level. I don't see how lazy this is because SEGA is making the game 2d. And this is just one Shining game, a look at the others may tempt you into believing SEGA is not so lazy as it seems. What if the gameplay is better than other games with gorgeous graphics out there in the same genre?

 

[Almasy]

I wouldn't call the graphics GBA level or else I would have to call MGS2 Playstation level. I don't see how lazy this is because SEGA is making the game 2d. And this is just one Shining game, a look at the others may tempt you into believing SEGA is not so lazy as it seems. What if the gameplay is better than other games with gorgeous graphics out there in the same genre?

Have you looked at the screens Sonic? I know you work there, and you have an affection for the company, their games and philosophy, but what exactly is there that couldn´t be reproduced faithfully on GBA? Aside from the screen-sized portraits of the characters during dialogue, and the few effects, I´m confident a GBA version could be very faithfull to the original.

I call the technology behind the game lazy, because that´s what it is. If you´re planning on doing a 2D game, then try to make new things with it. Look at Tales of Rebirth, at least it tries to exploit the graphics capabilities of the PS2. Or the new Atelier Iris game, both are examples of what I expect out of 2D games on PS2.

:sigh:, but why do I even bother? When you have posts like this one:
---------------------------
To hell with the 3D revolution.... until 3D graphics can look as clean and smooth as that game looks right now, I am completely content with the technology backing Shining Force.

As a matter of fact, I think it looks better than FFXII. Sue me.
---------------------------

or this one:
---------------------------
Jeeze, Almasy, you're a shallow prick.

Go find yourself a copy of Disgaea: Hour of Darkness for PS2.
---------------------------

Makes you think that any opinion outside the accepted one that everything Sega and or 2D related are the digital equivalent of the Holy Grail, is hated, and rejected in this place. I just ask, isn´t this a technology driven forum? Then why not allow pov´s that actually demand better technology? I didn´t expect it, but lazy8s was the most rational of all you

 

[Sonic]

I wasn't attacking you, I was asking questions. And you do have a very valid point when bringing up the technical aspects. I am also very biased towards SEGA. I have yet to play this game but have seen the others. I am getting very yped for the Shining series to make a comeback as it is a staple in SEGA's lineup that has long been forgotten. The PS2 can do better than this, and it is in other iterations of the Shining universe.

Honestly, if I had it my way SEGA would only focus on the most powerful hardware out at the time as a lead platform and then port to the rest. The lack of this happening has made SEGA's software lineup crumble into a poor 3rd party solution only slightly better than other dismal 3rd parties, except for rare gems like Panzer Orta, Phantasy Star ?, and others. The software lineup will get much better in the next generation an dI fully expect the quality of the games to go up with it.

I also understand your perception of SEGA as it was once (and still is in some cases) a company that would push the graphics envelope to new heights before any other game maker could. SEGA has done so with the Xbox but still doesn't seem to get the PS2 technology down like others have. The company no longer has its magic and has gone dowhill quite a bit. Times are changing, but things at SEGA are getting better and the magic is coming back. Sammy can be of tribute to that. Of course there are signs of outside help eslewhere also, but the core of SEGA (game making) should go back to the level it was at from the Dreamcast and before.

 

[passerby]

Look at Tales of Rebirth, at least it tries to exploit the graphics capabilities of the PS2. Or the new Atelier Iris game, both are examples of what I expect out of 2D games on PS2.

Autually I think this PS2 Shining game is about around there as well where visual niceness is concerned.

I don't think GBA can do these high-res sprites and 2D. Incidently I don't think PS1 can either. Also limited screen space may make it unsuitable for the game system that Sega designed. Throw in other details such as memory requirements, map sizes, music, etc.

Of course we all want the best of all worlds - visuals and sound and gameplay. However as dev costs continue to spiral, not all dev teams have the resources to deliver on all counts. Sometimes gameplay and sincerity of the title can outweight visual weakness. I've become very tolerant of games with "so-so" graphics after experiences with SummonNight 3 and SuperRobot series.

If it is a bad title, it will not do well. Japanese gamers are quite tolerant of 2D games - but they do care about quality, as evidenced by the lukewarm sales of such titles as "Generation of Chaos", "Growlanser4" and many more that are too numerous to count.

 

[Almasy]

I wasn't attacking you, I was asking questions. And you do have a very valid point when bringing up the technical aspects. I am also very biased towards SEGA. I have yet to play this game but have seen the others. I am getting very yped for the Shining series to make a comeback as it is a staple in SEGA's lineup that has long been forgotten. The PS2 can do better than this, and it is in other iterations of the Shining universe.

Oh, I see. I confess I acted a bit like a drama-queen, though. Still, I don´t really understand Tagrineth´s or LogisticX´s attitude.:?

Honestly, if I had it my way SEGA would only focus on the most powerful hardware out at the time as a lead platform and then port to the rest. The lack of this happening has made SEGA's software lineup crumble into a poor 3rd party solution only slightly better than other dismal 3rd parties, except for rare gems like Panzer Orta, Phantasy Star ?, and others. The software lineup will get much better in the next generation an dI fully expect the quality of the games to go up with it.

Well, don´t misunderstand me, I´m not a "graphics whore", as some people put it in other forums. I was just expecting better looking visuals out of PS2 (since I´ve seen it produce some really good results). There´s just something appealing about well done 3D graphics, and I imagined an ARPG with the kind of art japanese devs regularly use would look pretty good, and frankly, the screens underwhelmed me quite a bit.

I also understand your perception of SEGA as it was once (and still is in some cases) a company that would push the graphics envelope to new heights before any other game maker could. SEGA has done so with the Xbox but still doesn't seem to get the PS2 technology down like others have. The company no longer has its magic and has gone dowhill quite a bit. Times are changing, but things at SEGA are getting better and the magic is coming back. Sammy can be of tribute to that. Of course there are signs of outside help eslewhere also, but the core of SEGA (game making) should go back to the level it was at from the Dreamcast and before.

They did produce games like Shenmue and Sonic Adventure on DC, that´s why I was pretty dissapointed when I saw screens of ST...but now it seems that not even AM2 seems to be able to produce games that look that good on PS2.

 

[JasonLD]

As long as it has great gameplay, I don't think graphical aspect of the game matters(well, as long as it doesn't look downright horrible)..it looks very good for 2D game and also appears to have high production quality. It has been a while since I played Shining Force III sc 1, 2, and 3(last two with unofficial translated walkthough...was pretty painful), and I will be looking forward to this..

 

[Lazy8s]

Almasy:

I don´t feel relativism is needed in this discussion. When looking at the technical capabilities of the PS2, and other titles on the system, even standard titles, you can form an idea of what a PS2 title should look like.

Fine... then present a compelling dictation of the technical requisites a PS2 game must meet such that developers will have a clear set of conditions to follow, if you think it's capable of being done meaningfully. (Make sure your conditions don't inadvertently invalidate some title you may like that uses unique or simplistic graphics.)

It's already Sony's right, based on standards of their own judgement, not to approve games submitted for their platform if inadequate. Beyond that, the title will have to brave the competition of the open market using those graphics, and sales results will be the indicator for whether SEGA went far enough with the visualss.

But you know, you should reserve judgement on Shining Tears until you at least see it in motion...

Underexploiting the hardware in such a bad way to me is very lazy on Sega´s part, and seems like all they pursued was access to the userbase with the fundings of a GBA project. I really hope the project tanks, this kind of disrespect to the general consumer should be recieved with very poor sales.

It's great that your sticking up for your fellow gamer, but shouldn't you be concerned with whether we're getting a good game and not with whether we're getting a game with good graphics? While this is a technology forum, it doesn't mean our priorities have to be out of whack.

Aside from the screen-sized portraits of the characters during dialogue, and the few effects, I´m confident a GBA version could be very faithfull to the original.

Aside from [insert applicable graphical properties], a faithful version of any game could be put on any platform. You can't just overlook properties that don't suit your argument without making the case for which properties are actually significant in bringing a game up to 'PS2 standards'.

Still, I don´t really understand Tagrineth´s or LogisticX´s attitude.

It's not understandable that someone would prefer the high degree of realization that hand-drawn art gives to an artist's vision over the struggle it takes to build that vision out of perspective-faltering 3D elements?

 

[LogisticX]

Didn't mean to sound like I was attacking you directly.

3D is still in its infancy relatively, and as much as I appreciate 3D, just because it exists does not mean that 2D perspective videogames must die. A painting can be more beautiful than the world around you, and there are definitely more 3D characteristics to our perception of the world over a painting.

With an RPG, interactivity isn't really the focus...it's about conveying a storyline. With that said, I just feel that there's no reason to deny that 2D is a matured style that looks absolutely beautiful in the hands of talented artists. You don't have to worry about aliasing issues or lack of texture detail or anything like that. I appreciate that despite the fact that yes, I do post on a new 'technology' supportive website.

 

[Almasy]

Almasy:
Fine... then present a compelling dictation of the technical requisites a PS2 game must meet such that developers will have a clear set of conditions to follow, if you think it's capable of being done meaningfully. (Make sure your conditions don't inadvertently invalidate some title you may like that uses unique or simplistic graphics.)

There´s no need to make such a complicated issue about what makes a PS2 game, it´s quite simple really. If it´s 2D, accomplish things in your engine that are not capable of being reproduced on earlier hardware. If it´s 3D, it´s the same case.

It's great that your sticking up for your fellow gamer, but shouldn't you be concerned with whether we're getting a good game and not with whether we're getting a game with good graphics? While this is a technology forum, it doesn't mean our priorities have to be out of whack.

Graphics are a part of the game, in case you didn´t notice. If the consumer doesn´t get graphics that are no better than a GBA game, what is the point of having more powerfull hardware then?

Aside from [insert applicable graphical properties], a faithful version of any game could be put on any platform. You can't just overlook properties that don't suit your argument without making the case for which properties are actually significant in bringing a game up to 'PS2 standards'.

Nonsense. I was not discounting mayor elements of the game, unlike what you seem to think I did. What I did cannot be equated to "Doom III could be made on PS2 if you removed stencil shadows, light sources, bump-mapping, etc", because that would remove the look of the game. What I said didn´t, it´d still retain its look.

It's not understandable that someone would prefer the high degree of realization that hand-drawn art gives to an artist's vision over the struggle it takes to build that vision out of perspective-faltering 3D elements?

I don´t understand your reasoning, since those small sprites are every bit as bas of a representation of the original art than "perspective-faltering" 3D elements. At least artists don´t have to resort to super deformed characters to avoid losing so much detail when working with 3D.

 

[Almasy]

Didn't mean to sound like I was attacking you directly.

3D is still in its infancy relatively, and as much as I appreciate 3D, just because it exists does not mean that 2D perspective videogames must die. A painting can be more beautiful than the world around you, and there are definitely more 3D characteristics to our perception of the world over a painting.

With an RPG, interactivity isn't really the focus...it's about conveying a storyline. With that said, I just feel that there's no reason to deny that 2D is a matured style that looks absolutely beautiful in the hands of talented artists. You don't have to worry about aliasing issues or lack of texture detail or anything like that. I appreciate that despite the fact that yes, I do post on a new 'technology' supportive website.

I agree on some points, but I do dispute the notion that ST is the best 2D graphics can offer. Also, in an RPG, graphics can help immensely the storyline, and allow for a level of expression far above what the level of 2D present in ST can achieve.

The perspective in my opinion shouldn´t die, but it needs new elements to make it attractive again. For example, I find very interesting what Tales of Rebirth is doing in terms of graphics, the character simulates being in a 3D world when navigating towns while looking entirely 2D at the same time.

 

[Lazy8s]

Almasy:

There´s no need to make such a complicated issue about what makes a PS2 game, it´s quite simple really. If it´s 2D, accomplish things in your engine that are not capable of being reproduced on earlier hardware. If it´s 3D, it´s the same case.

How capable were the Saturn and Dreamcast in 2D, so as to make it clear to developers what's acceptable? And you think those systems couldn't have handled Tales of Rebirth?

By your definition, isn't the PS2 itself invalidated because the Dreamcast, an earlier hardware, is superior in certain areas of texturing, anti-alaising, image quality, and audio?

Graphics are a part of the game, in case you didn´t notice.

Gameplay is foremost (unless you're a "graphics whore"), yet you're already dismissing this title before you even know how well it plays? Shouldn't the real concern be making sure good games don't get outsold by shallower games with flashier graphics?

If the consumer doesn´t get graphics that are no better than a GBA game, what is the point of having more powerfull hardware then?

The point of new hardware is to further enable developers. Some games do get attention for pushing the technological envelope; there's a competitive market for that. However, if a developer wanted to make what is essentially a 16-bit generation game, for example, and enough people want to buy that on this generation's machines (especially considering there is no longer an active SNES market), then more power to them succeeding with their vision... because the game is probably selling on some appeal or on what matters most - gameplay.

Nonsense. I was not discounting mayor elements of the game, unlike what you seem to think I did. What I did cannot be equated to "Doom III could be made on PS2 if you removed stencil shadows, light sources, bump-mapping, etc", because that would remove the look of the game. What I said didn´t, it´d still retain its look.

Some of those effects a GBA couldn't do might be considered crucial to the specific flavor the graphic designer wants for Shining Tears' visual style. Those screen-sized portraits might be important to the sense of charm this game needed in the designer's view.

I don´t understand your reasoning, since those small sprites are every bit as bas of a representation of the original art than "perspective-faltering" 3D elements.

For an artist that conceptualizes a character's personality or expression in hand-drawn work like a picture or a painting, a bitmap transfer captures 2D work much better than trying to reproduce it by building it from 3D elements. On the other hand, 3D graphics would be more ideal for capturing the essense of a sculpture or similar works.

 

[London Geezer]

And again i wonder, what's stopping developers from making a game in 2D that exploits the very powerful hardware of current consoles?

They could make 2D games look absolutely stunning, considering what current hardware is capable of in terms of particles and polygon performance (of course these will be used in a 2D manner, not like they do in 3D games).

Guilty Gear X2 was a stunning game.

If i think of how idle the hardware must be while rendering 2D games, i'm left wondering why developers don't use all the power that's there to push more special effects, more and bigger sprites on screens, more of everything.

Of course they have to keep faithful to their "design", but still... It's no wonder these games are considered "lazy" from a development point of view, when they sit right next to amazing constructs like ZOE2, ZeldaTWW and all the stunning games in this generation.

All i'm saying is that even though it's 2D, with all its limitations, they could do MUCH more.

 

[Almasy]

And again i wonder, what's stopping developers from making a game in 2D that exploits the very powerful hardware of current consoles?

They could make 2D games look absolutely stunning, considering what current hardware is capable of in terms of particles and polygon performance (of course these will be used in a 2D manner, not like they do in 3D games).

Guilty Gear X2 was a stunning game.

If i think of how idle the hardware must be while rendering 2D games, i'm left wondering why developers don't use all the power that's there to push more special effects, more and bigger sprites on screens, more of everything.

Of course they have to keep faithful to their "design", but still... It's no wonder these games are considered "lazy" from a development point of view, when they sit right next to amazing constructs like ZOE2, ZeldaTWW and all the stunning games in this generation.

All i'm saying is that even though it's 2D, with all its limitations, they could do MUCH more.

Excellent post.

 

[Farid]

SEGA has done so with the Xbox but still doesn't seem to get the PS2 technology down like others have.

I'll go OT for a second and say that i was really surprised to see sega unable to adapt itself to the PS2 platform...
The only very good game (technicaly speaking, off course (the game is excellent actually)) from Sega on PS2, i can think of is Super Dimension Fortress Macross* (Macross is known as Robotech in the US/Europe) from Sega-AM2.

*this version has nothing in common with the TDK version (except the license, off course).

BTW, Sonic, do you have news about this game being translated in english?

 

[Lazy8s]

SEGA's apathy to PS2 programming wasn't such a surprise. The design of the hardware didn't inspire their efforts as much as other hardware(s) this generation.

I can't wait to see their new arcade games.

 

[London Geezer]

And again i wonder, what's stopping developers from making a game in 2D that exploits the very powerful hardware of current consoles?

They could make 2D games look absolutely stunning, considering what current hardware is capable of in terms of particles and polygon performance (of course these will be used in a 2D manner, not like they do in 3D games).

Guilty Gear X2 was a stunning game.

If i think of how idle the hardware must be while rendering 2D games, i'm left wondering why developers don't use all the power that's there to push more special effects, more and bigger sprites on screens, more of everything.

Of course they have to keep faithful to their "design", but still... It's no wonder these games are considered "lazy" from a development point of view, when they sit right next to amazing constructs like ZOE2, ZeldaTWW and all the stunning games in this generation.

All i'm saying is that even though it's 2D, with all its limitations, they could do MUCH more.

Excellent post.

Cheers!

 

[Ty]

SEGA's apathy to PS2 programming wasn't such a surprise. The design of the hardware didn't inspire their efforts as much as other hardware(s) this generation.

And yet they didn't have issues with the Saturn?

Maybe it has more to do with getting crushed by the PS2?

I can't wait to see their new arcade games.

Me too!