WiiGeePeeYou (Hollywood) what IS it ?
- Thread starter Megadrive1988
- Start date
- Status
There are a handful of new Red Steel screens at IGN. The lighting definitely looks better than what came out of E3, but still not at the trailer quality, which is disappointing.
Megadrive1988
Veteran
remind me, what exactly was the Red Steel trailer?
*a prerendered render target
or
*realtime on a higher-end GPU with more performance than Wii / Hollywood
I just watched the wmv version of the trailer on gametrailers.com - the lighting is very nice plus there seems to be a significant amount of anti-aliasing.
*a prerendered render target
or
*realtime on a higher-end GPU with more performance than Wii / Hollywood
I just watched the wmv version of the trailer on gametrailers.com - the lighting is very nice plus there seems to be a significant amount of anti-aliasing.
sfried said:
No I'm speaking about Red Steel. And I still can't tell how you guy's can see differences in lighting. The only time I really notice differences in lighting is when I see the game in motion playing in front of me.
What is it you guy's see from one sreenshot to the next from the same game that looks different?
Red Steel:
Now
New
Then (pre-baked PR bullshots)
Old
Somehow, I got to believe that they just receive a devkits one month before E3 and they just cooked something that looked impressive enough. Otherwise, the graphics wouldn't have taken such a downturn. The new shots aren't even close to the first ones.
Now
New
Then (pre-baked PR bullshots)
Old
Somehow, I got to believe that they just receive a devkits one month before E3 and they just cooked something that looked impressive enough. Otherwise, the graphics wouldn't have taken such a downturn. The new shots aren't even close to the first ones.
Megadrive1988
Veteran
well.... looking at the screenshots of the older, nicer-looking Red Steel, it does not look pre-rendered, it just looks like it's done real-time on a mid-range PC GPU such as X1600 or something like that.
hupfinsgack said:
Geeze, do people ever read it from the horse's mouth or not?
Red Steel Dev Blog said:
Megadrive1988
Veteran
hupfinsgack said:
I agree with that -- unfortunately :/
if the actual game is to reach the level of the trailer - a.) Hollywood will have to be strong enough, and b.) the development team will need a number of months into 2007 to get it all done, including perfecting the control system.
I see nothing bull about that whatsoever, apart from the added antialiasing, which is commonplace in PR shots. The scene looks very similar to the new shot you linked to, it's just the lighting that differs (bright vs. dark room). That's all I could see without breaking out the ol' f-boy over-analyzing magnifying glass...hupfinsgack said:
I've no idea what you're talking about man. The graphics look just the same to me, down to the same type of vertex-lit gouraud-shaded highlights on character models and the player's weapon.
If you prefer compare to this one.
http://media.wii.ign.com/media/821/821973/img_3784412.html
Compare for example the light in the hands, does it seems the same thing?
See others from trailer.
http://media.wii.ign.com/media/821/821973/img_3556228.html
http://media.wii.ign.com/media/821/821973/img_3556236.html
http://media.wii.ign.com/media/821/821973/img_3784412.html
Compare for example the light in the hands, does it seems the same thing?
See others from trailer.
http://media.wii.ign.com/media/821/821973/img_3556228.html
http://media.wii.ign.com/media/821/821973/img_3556236.html
pc999 said:
We should restrict ourselves to comparing screenshots of same resolution. Moreover, the second ones are screen grabs (from a video filmed off a video wall?) which doesn't improve quality.
EDIT:
Video Wall? Take a look at the bottom
Last edited by a moderator:
Haven't seen any post-E3 shots with lighting like on the hand here:
http://revolutionmedia.ign.com/revo...40/e3-red-steel-screens-20060501034053043.jpg
I also don't think that hand looks Gouraud-shaded, but I could be wrong.
You do see some of that glowy outline on the characters in the newer shots, but it doesn't look as vivid or smooth. The lighting just looks flatter in the new stuff. Skin especially seems to look lifeless compared to the original shots.
I wonder why Nintendo has gone with such a low-powered console. It really does not sound like it has modern shaders. In the recent Ubi interview, the guy says shaders aren't Wii's strength and stuff has to be done in texutres--much like Gamecube. And if Wii had DX9ish shaders, I'd think anything X360 or PS3 could do could be downscaled. So the question is why. After all, they've been putting X series ATI chips in laptops for a while now. My guess is some combination of the following:
1. The wireless stuff is expensive enough and Nintendo is dead set enough on not losing billions on a risky venture that cutting GPU transistor count to an absurdly low level and not burning a lot on R&D is saving them significant $$$. Unlikely.
2. It's a political statement. Nintendo wants to prove you don't need lots of horsepower to be successful in the home console market. Likely.
3. They want to reign in development costs and more or less force developers to keep budgets and development times under control on Wii. Likely.
4. Backward compatibility with Gamecube ended up being more complex than they thought with a truly modern GPU, and they have been dead set on using Twilight Princess to leverage Wii sales for some time now. Moderately likely.
http://revolutionmedia.ign.com/revo...40/e3-red-steel-screens-20060501034053043.jpg
I also don't think that hand looks Gouraud-shaded, but I could be wrong.
You do see some of that glowy outline on the characters in the newer shots, but it doesn't look as vivid or smooth. The lighting just looks flatter in the new stuff. Skin especially seems to look lifeless compared to the original shots.
I wonder why Nintendo has gone with such a low-powered console. It really does not sound like it has modern shaders. In the recent Ubi interview, the guy says shaders aren't Wii's strength and stuff has to be done in texutres--much like Gamecube. And if Wii had DX9ish shaders, I'd think anything X360 or PS3 could do could be downscaled. So the question is why. After all, they've been putting X series ATI chips in laptops for a while now. My guess is some combination of the following:
1. The wireless stuff is expensive enough and Nintendo is dead set enough on not losing billions on a risky venture that cutting GPU transistor count to an absurdly low level and not burning a lot on R&D is saving them significant $$$. Unlikely.
2. It's a political statement. Nintendo wants to prove you don't need lots of horsepower to be successful in the home console market. Likely.
3. They want to reign in development costs and more or less force developers to keep budgets and development times under control on Wii. Likely.
4. Backward compatibility with Gamecube ended up being more complex than they thought with a truly modern GPU, and they have been dead set on using Twilight Princess to leverage Wii sales for some time now. Moderately likely.
hupfinsgack said:
It is? Didn't look like, anyway it looks just like the movie/ss they have on the official site so you can look at those if you prefer, which BTW would make them lier's.
fearsomepirate said:
Agree, plus from their own comments they would only need 1/4 of the power/memory to run the same game, should be hard losing that much money that way.
They could do those with a X1400 level card and a low end 970FX (with very low prices for HW and dev cost (no HD, no to many polys, just "basic shading"....) too) so I doubt.
I wonder if would be that hard to create something better and keep BC (see PS2/3 even being really different architectures) plus a few minor upgrades to LoZ would incentive people to buy it.
Personally I find strange this game look so bad, because at least 1)several others looked much better (eg including M:G/MP3) +2) ATI said it is just the tip of the iceberg 3) Ubi keeps telling us that Wii is more powerfull than XB but every exclusive XB game (even Halo) look better. Maybe it is not the HW.
I still have doubts if it will be really that underpowered to not be even able to run some ports from UE3/next gen UBI games (info and some "rumors" from the past (even recent like Gearbox support) still haunting me
).Anyway IMO I am very disappointed with wii, most games cant really bring something new to the table, most just some partial innovation or fail like RS, besides Wii Sports like (I guess that it is needed time to it) they didn't show anything new yet. The specs (so it seems) will not open any doors too, on the top of that it is too pricier for what offers.
- Status
