I have serious trouble seeing enemies against the backgrounds.
Could be the levels. Varrigan City may be a bit disorienting, but hopefully you get used to it. The next hub is easier on the eyes IMO.
Thanks for the pix Pro.
Now, in MY eyes, the first picture is the sharpest, the second one the least sharpest, and the third the 2nd sharpest. I focused on the outline of Jack's head for reference. In this case, sharpness is what matters, since the color palette is minimal to say the least... Though you gotta wonder who was running QA for Platinum/Sega...
Oh well. I'll save hard mode for a rainy day. Or a gaming drought!
The first pic is in native resolution, pixel for pixel. You're not going to see that in real life without a native SD display.
Once you move on to HDTVs and scaling is introduced, "sharpness" is OBLITERATED.
The point of the pics aren't to point out image quality, it's to illustrate PROPORTIONS.
1st pic is the source. It's not realistic, you probably won't see it in reality without an EDTV w/ dual full/wide modes.
2nd/3rd pic should be treated as if they're on the same HDTV, i.e. scaling has fudged or destroyed pixels.
3rd pic is just the first pic squished. With more unused/empty space in the source, the less effective real estate you end up with after squishing. It only looks sharper in your web browser because the picture is smaller. It's natural for images to look sharper when they're shrunk, and softer when enlarged.
The 2nd pic looks soft for the reason above, reflective of HDTV rape. Had the image been displayed on a native EDTV with a proper widescreen mode, the image would not be scaled and the pixels would not be fudged: the pixels are changed to look fat/wide instead of true squares, resulting in an image that would be just as sharp as the 1st pic, as the image would be accurately presented, pixel for pixel.
On HDTVs, 2nd and 3rd "scenarios" are equally blurry messes, with the 3rd pic having the misfortune of being unfairly bordered and squished.