How so ? I recall the game having slightly crisper character models.
I would say X-2 was a downgrade in terms of effort put into constructing any new environments they made, even if they made some base technological improvements.
How so ? I recall the game having slightly crisper character models.
Someone posted this earlier, it's a bigger improvement than it may seem at a first glance.
The graphical changes are significant, particularly to the character models. This is certainly somewhere between a remaster and a remake, I would just consider it closer to the former than the latter. For all we know, some (definitely not all) of the improvements could have been lifted from X-2.
Maybe I'm remembering it wrong, but X-2 didn't seem as polished.
Source: http://ps2.gamespy.com/playstation-2/final-fantasy-x-2/6368p2.htmlGameSpy said:Ever wonder what's down those back stairs where Yunalesca was hanging out in FFX? Apparently it's a nearly featureless hallway -- a stark contrast from the stunning ruins of Zanarkand you'll have to make your way through again to get to that point. You can expect something this dull just about anywhere FFX-2 calls on you to go somewhere that you didn't read with Tidus and co. in FFX.
They rounded off some rough edges, its still at PS2 levels of quality in everything but resolution. Its an incredibly simplistic upgrade. If you didn't have the two versions of the game right next to each other you wouldn't even realise there was a differenceLook at this and tell me all they did was up the res
Haha get real. This is nowhere near a remake. Not even close.It's near remake level of improvement.
It's near remake level of improvement.
Someone upload the 2-second footage on youtube !
no way where?
They rounded off some rough edges, its still at PS2 levels of quality in everything but resolution. Its an incredibly simplistic upgrade. If you didn't have the two versions of the game right next to each other you wouldn't even realise there was a difference
But are those screens real or bullshots? It looks too clean and with too much anti-aliasing to be real screenshots.
That just indicates that (some of) the new assets are weak, not that they screwed up the assets from the previous game.No, you're right. It was even reflected in reviews at the time:
Source: http://ps2.gamespy.com/playstation-2/final-fantasy-x-2/6368p2.html
They rounded off some rough edges, its still at PS2 levels of quality in everything but resolution. Its an incredibly simplistic upgrade. If you didn't have the two versions of the game right next to each other you wouldn't even realise there was a difference
Haha get real. This is nowhere near a remake. Not even close.
anyone have the seymour comparison?
Er... X-2 was a graphical downgrade...
They rounded off some rough edges, its still at PS2 levels of quality in everything but resolution. Its an incredibly simplistic upgrade. If you didn't have the two versions of the game right next to each other you wouldn't even realise there was a difference
No it's not... look at the textures in the PS3 screen.
I wonder how much I'll enjoy X-2 because I skipped that. Musically, I already know that game doesn't touch X.
Also, a Final Fantasy XII remaster would be incredible
Look more closely. Auron's hair looks completely different, for one. The added textures on Lulu's clothing also make the fur coat look like an almost entirely new model.They rounded off some rough edges, its still at PS2 levels of quality in everything but resolution. Its an incredibly simplistic upgrade. If you didn't have the two versions of the game right next to each other you wouldn't even realise there was a difference
They now look like a 2005 PS2 game in HD rather than a 2001 PS2 game in HDNo it's not... look at the textures in the PS3 screen.
I wonder how much I'll enjoy X-2 because I skipped that. Musically, I already know that game doesn't touch X.
Also, a Final Fantasy XII remaster would be incredible
Okay if we define downgrade in the most literal sense yes, it was not one.That just indicates that (some of) the new assets are weak, not that they screwed up the assets from the previous game.
I don't think it was a graphical downgrade.Maybe I'm remembering it wrong, but X-2 didn't seem as polished.
Particularly Lulu's dress and button necklace, as well as the wall that's to the lower left of Auron.
I'm not saying it looks amazing, but it's above PS2 level. And you have to remember the two screens in that comparison are between the PS3 version, and the PCSX2 running at 720p. In comparison to the actual PS2 version, it would be even more notable
Looks like the HD remake is a lot more advanced than I thought it was. Now i'm torn. I really want this on both PS3 and Vita now but don't want to pay twice.
Okay if we define downgrade in the most literal sense yes, it was not one.
This is the best I could do though (top-PS2, bottom-HD):
His hair is lighter colored now.
90% of the new dungeons looked boring and were repetitive looking (especially the).Thunder Plains hidden cave which was one of the longest and worst dungeons I've ever been through
They now look like a 2005 PS2 game in HD rather than a 2001 PS2 game in HD
it just seems very limited the changes they have made, especially considering how long its been in development. To call it a remake at the very least you'd want a superior lighting system, but to me it looks worse. It looks flatter. Is it wrong to have expected improvements like HDR, a superior shadowing and self shadowing system etc. Things that are native to current gen.
They are definitely going to put EXTRA effort into Lulu's upper body since they know full well that's where everyone's looking.
They are definitely going to put EXTRA effort into Lulu's upper body since they know full well that's where everyone's looking.
The improvement does seem to be grossly exaggerated by many people in this thread. It looks similar besides the fact it now has razor sharp IQ and textures which are redone so they don't look glaringly terrible. In other words the bare minimum from what I expect of a decent HD remake.
Wakka is thinner. Everyone is but it's more noticeable on him.Someone posted this earlier, it's a bigger improvement than it may seem at a first glance.
I don't have X available to verify the quality of the PCSX2 screens in here, but a lot of the visual improvements here feel like they're from X-2.Maybe I'm remembering it wrong, but X-2 didn't seem as polished.
Seymour's hair looks kinda...bad to me. It just looks really flat.
I think adding more detail and seeing it with more clarity just further reveals how dumb the design is in the first place.Seymour's hair looks kinda...bad to me. It just looks really flat.
Seymour's hair looks kinda...bad to me. It just looks really flat.
The improvement does seem to be grossly exaggerated by many people in this thread. It looks similar besides the fact it now has razor sharp IQ and textures which are redone so they don't look glaringly terrible. In other words the bare minimum from what I expect of a decent HD remake.
MGS3I'd like to see a PS2 game with that high of polygon count.