Author Topic: Resident Evil 4 heading to Playstation 2 (Read 37378 times)

vudu · « **Reply #75 on:** August 29, 2005, 10:17:19 AM »

Wait ... Ashley in a suit of armor Is that a joke? Also, why does it look like Leon is wearing an eye patch and a Jughead hat?

KDR_11k · « **Reply #76 on:** August 29, 2005, 10:32:11 AM »

Yes, it is a joke. A joke you can unlock by playing through the game. Many unlockables in many games are jokes.

attackslug · « **Reply #77 on:** October 11, 2005, 06:17:09 AM »

Apparently many of the cutscenes are now pre-rendered on the PS2 version. Not really an issue as far as gameplay is concerned, other than a lack of continuity when using alternate costumes and bragging rights about system power.

vudu · « **Reply #78 on:** October 11, 2005, 09:01:29 AM »

Where did you hear this from? It's the first I've heard of it.

As far as continuity, the game had that same problem on GameCube, although not with costumes. I remember triggering the bridge cut scene and even though I was holding a shotgun while approaching the bridge, it switched to a pistol for the cutscene.

attackslug · « **Reply #79 on:** October 11, 2005, 01:56:29 PM »

http://forum.capcom-europe.com/viewtopic.php?p=120990#120990

The "confirmation" is made by a Capcom employee, or at the very least the official admin for the message board. Also, owners of the PS2 demo disc have found a bunch of cutscenes included on the disc and have determined them to be DVD9 files.

I'd assume that since some of the cutscenes make heavy use of bumpmapping, higher-poly models, lots of depth of field blurring, distortion effects, and large numbers of characters onscreen, the PS2 simply couldn't handle them without showing an obvious decline in quality or a dodgy framerate. Since the quality of graphics during gameplay have been noticably cut (no bump/specular mapping on items or character models, downgrading of enemy models when they become numerous, downgraded lighting model, etc), I don't see how the PS2 could suddenly match the quality of the GC version when the special effects and filters are much more detailed and prominent in the cutscenes. Little cutscenes, however, like pulling the radio out for a transmission, rappeling down cliffs, letting the dog out of the beartrap, and so on will be done in real time.

FYI, the cutscenes in the GC version didn't switch weapons because it would require new animations to keep larger weapons like the bazooka or rifle from looking akward and clipping through models and other geometry.

http://www.thehorrorisalive.com/forums/showthread.php?t=194
Here's the thread where all of this came to light.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #80 on:** October 11, 2005, 02:51:37 PM »

THIS IS VERY INTERESTING

On a related note, the scene in Metroid Prime 2 where the Ing ambush the GF Troopers and their craft was pre-rendered @ 60fps, to make it believable. And that's all. The rest of the game was real-time luvin'.

And in RE4 (GC), in the event where Leon rotates the castle bridge from within the bridge tower, the actual footage of the bridge moving was pre-rendered. The presence of video artifacts in the footage supports this, and it's not realistic for RE4 to load 2 different areas so quickly for consecutive scenes (inside tower + outside tower). The rest was real-time luvin'.

But this has me thinking, what will become of Ashley's "ballistics" cutscene on PS2? Separate FMV for just that?

LOL PWNED =D =O D= *o*

kirby_killer_dedede · « **Reply #81 on:** October 11, 2005, 03:10:40 PM »

I never got around to buying MP2...does anyone have a video of the pre-rendered scene Prof. is talking about?

KnowsNothing · « **Reply #82 on:** October 11, 2005, 03:14:16 PM »

If you didn't buy the game, you don't deserve the cutscene.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #83 on:** October 11, 2005, 03:23:41 PM »

Of course I have the cutscene uploaded somewhere. But,

[see msg above]

attackslug · « **Reply #84 on:** October 11, 2005, 05:50:30 PM »

There's lots of artifacting and dithering present in actual gameplay as well, especially in areas with darker lighting and volumetric fog and dust clouds. It's hard to tell though... it's seems odd that they'd pre render a scene that isn't very graphically intense.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #85 on:** October 11, 2005, 06:44:37 PM »

Probably has to do with the fact that, originally, the cutscene models for characters took longer to load on PS2. But by using FMV, the game can just load up the video stream without having to jump/load between high-detail-cutscene mode and game-play mode.

Mario · « **Reply #86 on:** October 11, 2005, 06:46:23 PM »

Interesting comparison pics

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #87 on:** October 11, 2005, 11:05:11 PM »

Soooo depressing!

BlackNMild2k1 · « **Reply #88 on:** October 12, 2005, 12:25:18 AM »

All but 2 of the PS2 pics look barren and washed out in comparison.

Less lighting, detail and environmental addage, but I'm sure you won't notice while playing the game.

KnowsNothing · « **Reply #89 on:** October 12, 2005, 02:15:58 AM »

Yeah, thsoe were some interesting comparison pics, but I'm still impressed by the final product, at least graphically. I think it'll be noticeable during the gameplay, but it won't have any major impact on it. Apparently the controls aren't too good,, that's what everyone should be worried about

vudu · « **Reply #90 on:** October 12, 2005, 09:27:06 AM »

Since I can't read squares (Japanese text isn't installed on my computer) I'm having a hard time discerning if the PS2 screens are much darker than the GC ones because of the way the screenshots were taken or because they PS2 version is just that much darker than the GC one. Anyone know the answer?

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #91 on:** October 12, 2005, 09:31:49 AM »

It's because the PS2 can't handle the GC version's lighting...

ruby_onix · « **Reply #92 on:** October 12, 2005, 03:08:23 PM »

Here's a couple that I thought showed the biggest differences.

GameCube original.
Less polygons (trees) in the PS2 version.

GameCube original.
No lighting in the PS2 version.

BTW, the GameCube version is supposedly running in 16-bit color, but the PS2 version doesn't have that limitation (which is a small improvement). But the FMV in the PS2 version is 16-bit color, which means that it's the PS2 running FMV footage of the GameCube rendering something in realtime.

Also, supposedly these comparison pics were both taken from a standard-definition TV set. The PS2 version can be set up to handle widescreen. So if you zoom the GameCube version up to a widescreen TV it looks crappy, but if you play the PS2 version you get a clearer view of it's inherent crappiness.

Artimus · « **Reply #93 on:** October 12, 2005, 03:13:37 PM »

Those second shots are like night and day!

My main problem with all this is that if it wins Game of the Year amywhere they'll credit the inferior PS2 version too.

stevey · « **Reply #94 on:** October 12, 2005, 03:38:17 PM »

That really bad. It looks like the difference of tp & mm graphic.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #95 on:** October 12, 2005, 05:22:55 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: ruby_onix
Also, supposedly these comparison pics were both taken from a standard-definition TV set. The PS2 version can be set up to handle widescreen. So if you zoom the GameCube version up to a widescreen TV it looks crappy, but if you play the PS2 version you get a clearer view of it's inherent crappiness.

You don't take screens from a TV set. TV sets don't capture screenshots or video and save them on your harddrive. The proper practice is to take screens using the same video capture device & connectors, using the same capture resolution, same brightness/color/etc, and run each game with their default 4:3 letterboxed format. Basically, use the same controlled conditions to eliminate biases towards the samples. I believe Ruliweb did a good job of this, making a valid comparison (unlike the media war some developers fuel with their high-rez dev-kit-made non-retail-version screens and trailers).

And there are ways of routing video to a PC, letting the PC zoom/resize the video with decent quality, and routing the processed video to a WS TV, so RE4(GC) wouldn't look as crappy.

Artimus · « **Reply #96 on:** October 21, 2005, 03:33:32 PM »

IGN gave it a 9.5. Good score. I have to laugh though, at the end of the review he says any difference in GCN/PS2 scoring is just due to the different reviews, larger PS2 game library...and a few inferior elements. Hahaha. It's worded to sounds as if anything BUT the few elements are to blame. Seriously, who cares? It's a 9.5! If the graphics aren't as good, fine. Don't say otherwise. A 9.5 is good regardless of why it isn't a 10. You hardly need to soften the blow...

Anyway. Sales should be interesting. Did it come out in Japan yet, btw?

WuTangTurtle · « **Reply #97 on:** October 23, 2005, 07:17:46 PM »

I'll have to give capcom some credit though, i was one of those guys saying "OMG PS2 version will look like @$$". The graphics are obviously missing a lot, such as the atmospheric fogging and lighting stuff, and the textures are a bit lower res, and some models seem to be scaled back, but for anyone who hasn't played the GC version they will still think it is beautiful.

I appreciate the fogging and lighting stuff so much more now that i've seen the PS2 version but honestly guy's saying it is night and day is a bit too overboard don't u think?

Matter of opinion i guess, however if RE4 gets game of the year they should be represented as GCN as it is the original and IMO the superior version.

Artimus · « **Reply #98 on:** October 23, 2005, 07:32:42 PM »

It is night and day. That doesn't mean the PS2 version isn't pretty.

couchmonkey · « **Reply #99 on:** October 25, 2005, 07:25:17 AM »

I don't think the difference is that huge. I agree the GameCube version looks superior, and it's nice to have a game that shows the GameCube has more power, once and for all, but the PS2 version looks just fine. Graphics don't matter that much anyway.

News:

Author Topic: Resident Evil 4 heading to Playstation 2 (Read 37378 times)