Strangelove Posted March 18, 2014 Report Share Posted March 18, 2014 FFX on Vita looks pretty sweet. Its not native resolution, but it still looks great. Also has fast as hell loading and so far no hiccups of any kind. Anyways, I got a question that I hope someone can finally answer since it's bugged me since FFX originally came out in 2001 or whenever: Whats the point of this? Having the different faces/character models? They use the shitty ones when the camera is far away and they use the nice faces/models for close up cutscenes. The shitty face doesnt animate, all it does is blink and the mouth kind of moves. Cant they just do that with the better looking faces? It'll look out of sync either way. Is it some sort of processing power thing or something? Like it needs to be downgraded for most of the game? It doesnt bug me so much because its a thing, but because I dont see the point of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 18, 2014 Report Share Posted March 18, 2014 More polygons on screen means more work for the graphics hardware, more memory required, etc. By having things get crappier when they're farther away you can increase the amount of stuff you can have without a significant impact to image quality. The term is "level of detail". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted March 18, 2014 Report Share Posted March 18, 2014 They don't use one for further way and one for near to the screen. In FFX (and pretty much every 3D FF actually) they have battle models, field models and cutscene models. My understanding with the HD remake is the cut scene model is now also the field and battle model too. It's pretty much a processing thing, with battles you tend to have a lot of flashy effects: processor intensive, and in field you tend to have a bunch of other NPCs. But with a cut scene you can set up performance exactly how you want it (and with FMVs you can obviously pre-render it too). Though I should note with FFVII this is the other way around: Field model: Battle model: Though it's their first 3D FF so priorities might have been different. Ethan is right for how it's done with other games though. Here's a write up I did about LoD and TF2 for PXOD some years back: http://pressxordie.com/2011/01/24/team-fortress-2-is-too-detailed/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strangelove Posted March 19, 2014 Report Share Posted March 19, 2014 That actually makes sense. I guess I just dont play games that do it so blatantly. Anyways, Im running through FFX as fast as I can just to get into FFX-2. Hate to say it, but it's the better game. Stupid story, but awesome gameplay. Im going to try to get the plat for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted March 19, 2014 Report Share Posted March 19, 2014 Getting back into DXHRDC cos I want to restore my faith in Eidos Montreal. Cos man ...Thief. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 19, 2014 Report Share Posted March 19, 2014 (edited) Man shut up Thief is great! good! *Edit* - To be honest, I think I enjoyed Thief more than Deus Ex, which just felt cheap and small to me. I mean Thief had kind of a similar feeling, but it not being an RPG I didn't have as high of expectations in that department. I did enjoy DXHR, but don't think it's just amazing or anything. Edited March 19, 2014 by TheMightyEthan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Heart Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 Dean! You know what to do. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staySICK Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 I'm starting to worry about Ethan, guys. I think we should start considering setting up an intervention about his terrible tastes in games. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 It's not me, it's EVERYONE ELSE who has terrible taste! In all seriousness though, whatever, if I have low standards that let me enjoy more games than other people I'm okay with that. I've long since come to terms with that "problem" with movies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 It's not the games that you like that are the problem, it's the games that you don't like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 Outside of JRPGs, when was the last time I said I didn't like a game? I said I liked DXHR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 You didn't like it enough. Also you think Resident Evil 4 is bad. And I vaguely recall something about you not playing/caring about Metal Gear? That's enough to see a pattern. A pattern of failing to recognize undeniable quality. To sum it up in a single video: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 You're right about RE4, I forgot about that one. You're also right that I've never played Metal Gear, but that's more of a function of it seeming really daunting to a new player. I feel like if I jump in now I'll be lost, but at the same time I'm fairly confident that if I try to go back and play the old ones I won't be able to get through them because they'll be too dated in terms of gameplay. I am interested in it, and want to get into it, but it just seems so overwhelming. Like trying to jump in at Mass Effect 3 or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) Well, I certainly wouldn't advise jumping in with Ground Zeroes or anything like that. But you were able to go back to the original Splinter Cell trilogy, so I think you'd be able to handle Metal Gear Solid just fine. I wouldn't say the gameplay is dated, it's mostly the controls and camera in MGS 1 and 2 that are weird. But they always felt kinda weird to me and aren't that hard to get used to. MGS3 lets you switch between classic and third-person camera on the fly. Just grab the HD collection and go from there (or the Legacy Collection if you feel confident you'll want to play up to MGS4). I'm not sure if HD Collection includes a voucher for MGS1 but I think Legacy does. I would suggest playing MGS 1 on your Vita but unfortunately I heard there's some kind of sound glitch affecting it right now so you'd have to play it on PS3. If you don't mind blocky PSOne graphics, then getting MGS1 off PSN is your cheapest means of giving it a shot. It's worth it for the story alone, imho. If you get into the story, then you'll probably end up just blasting right through the rest of the series. I wouldn't recommend skipping MGS1, but the series is so heavy on exposition that you'd probably be fine if you did. Edited March 20, 2014 by FLD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCP Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 Just dive into MGS3 first, Ethan. Do it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. GOH! Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) Just an update: still playing Dark Souls, although I think I'm overleveled at level 70 for the Lord Souls quests. I just straight blazed through the Catacombs and the Tomb of Giants like no other. Nito himself only took two tries. Only invaders can touch me when I'm rocking full Havel's Armor and the Black Knight Halberd +3. Now I just need to figure out where to go next; I don't think I've found any of the other entrances to other Lords Souls dungeon areas. Ethan: if you're gonna play any MGS game, play MGS3 Snake Eater. It's not as crazy dated and it's the first chronologically, so there's not much backstory. It's also the only MGS game worth playing for folks who aren't already MGS fans. Seriously, the other games are convoluted messes. MGS 3 is great fun. Edited March 20, 2014 by Mr. GOH! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) Just dive into MGS3 first, Ethan. Do it! No, Cowboy! Bad Cowboy! edit: Goddamnit, you guys. No. It's the first chronologically but the series is meant to be played in release order. There's a lot of self references and the continuity is built to be best understood in that order. Edited March 20, 2014 by FLD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) Splinter Cell had the advantage of nostalgia, because I'd already played and loved them when they first came out. *Edit* - I'd also point out that MGS1 is a full generation older than Splinter Cell. Maybe I'll get MGS1 when Sony releases their upscaling emulator for PS4 I'll get it then. Edited March 20, 2014 by TheMightyEthan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 You're overthinking it! Just get MGS1 off PSN now and go play it. You make lawyer money and it's like ten bucks. Don't even think about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 $10 is $7 above my "fuck it, I'm curious" price. I also made the mistake of looking up the HD collection, which is like $30, and makes me less interested in getting started in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 What part of "Don't even think about!" do you not understand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. GOH! Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 I didn't play much of MGS 1 and 2 and I really enjoyed MGS3. Trust me, Ethan, just play MGS3 and be done with the series. It's truly the only one worth playing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted March 20, 2014 Report Share Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) I didn't play much of MGS 1 and 2 and I really enjoyed MGS3. Trust me, Ethan, just play MGS3 and be done with the series. It's truly the only one worth playing. Lol. No, it really isn't... If it's the only one you've played then you're just talking out of your ass. I'll concede that, other than MGS1, it's probably the only one that could be enjoyed as a stand-alone experience. But if your intention is to get into the series as a whole then it's an absolutely terrible entry point. You'd understand the plot enough to enjoy the game but so much would be completely lost on a newcomer to the series. MGS3 assumes that you're familiar with the events of MGS2. Edited March 20, 2014 by FLD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. GOH! Posted March 21, 2014 Report Share Posted March 21, 2014 I played about half of MGS1 and MGS2 and watched let's play videos of the rest of 2 and all of 4. I mean, watching a let's play of 4 is not much different than 'playing' it. Never played Metal Gear Rising or the Vita game, of course. Trust me, Ethan; MGS3 is the only one you'd really like. Get it on Vita. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.