• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Devil May Cry 4 |OT| of daring to defy your savior

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
belvedere said:
Yes you were. On your setup, and apparently Eurogamer's, COD4 looks softer on PS3.

Everywhere else, it looks just the same.
It has nothing to do with their "setup" as those are direct caps. It's not about looking softer either. You can see right there that various textures are lower in resolution. It doesn't matter how you adjust your TV, those are the actual textures. That's all there is to it.

Do you think I'm just making this up to support some agenda? That's BS and you know it.

In some cases, the differences are minor enough that nobody could really complain about one version or the other. The differences between DMC4 are so incredibly small that the average gamer would never notice or care about them. Those who are anal about such things might, making those points valid, but the average gamer would not.

It's a tad different with CoD4 as the differences are much greater. Again, casual gamers may not care (the one who run their systems in 480i/480p/4:3 mode on an HDTV), but those who at least know something about what they are seeing on screen might actually like to know what differences exist.
 
KGKK said:
Just went to EBgames here in Toronto, Scarborough and they did not have it in yet:( They better get it in before the end of the day, since tomorrow I have no classes and I was kinda hoping to stay in all day playing the hell out of DMC4.
coming in tomorrow apparently :mad:
 

Mamesj

Banned
KTallguy said:
If it wasn't there, you'd be doing the same thing as DMC3. It's a great system that rewards hardcore players, but I imagine newbish players wouldn't have to use it to beat the game.


I don't think it has anything to do with newb/hardcore. Even as a person who will get up to a hardcore level with DMC4, I'm not so happy about the idea of hitting "L" in between every attack. For one thing, there's no punishment if you miss a just rev-- you can keep comboing like normal. I'll have to wait and see how much it's actually worth using in-game, but right now it seems gimmicky.


revving .. I think .. is an answer to Ninja Gaiden's UTs.

it's completely different. If you miss a UT or try too risky of a UT, you'll get punished for it somehow-- either by getting hit, wasting time on the karma meter, or by wasting yellow/blue orbs. Also, UTs are much more powerful and it's necessary to be good at them to be a high level player, since a lot of karma points come from UTs--if not the majority of your score.
 

Kyoufu

Member
Mamesj said:
I don't think it has anything to do with newb/hardcore. Even as a person who will get up to a hardcore level with DMC4, I'm not so happy about the idea of hitting "L" in between every attack. For one thing, there's no punishment if you miss a just rev-- you can keep comboing like normal. I'll have to wait and see how much it's actually worth using in-game, but right now it seems gimmicky.

If you watch the videos where Nero has Perfect-Rev and Exceed LV2/3 unlocked, then you'll see how awesome they are. Your attacks gain more hits therefore increasing your style and damage output.

Also the attack's range is increased, making crowd control a synch. I can't wait to use it.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Pedobear said:
7 by Eurogamer. Same tools who gave DMC3 a 8. They are a joke. A joke with no credibility.
Why do you say that? Again, it's not as if every reviewer is the same...

Still, I think Eurogamer typically presents a more compelling review than most other sites these days. Their nitpicks and complaints are generally quite valid and seem to reflect more on the experience the individual had while playing it.

In this case, they correctly identified many of the best qualities within the game but felt that it was held back by some rather dated design decisions. I can certainly see where they are coming from. The game has some archaic aspects to it. Depending on how much this bugs the player the review score will likely vary accordingly.
 
I was stuck in class and I noticed that it was in stock at a Futureshop near my house...Well it's gone now so unless I stumble into one on the way home, I'll be playing tomorrow when I pick up my pre order...
 

VaLiancY

Member
SnakeXs said:
As usual, Bonus Stage in Queens (last stop N/W trains) has got it, for all you NY Gaffers.

Humbug, I got a GameStop's 30 buck giftcard. Thanks for the info, I'll share the news to my friends.
 

TheCardPlayer

Likes to have "friends" around to "play cards" with
dark10x said:
Why do you say that? Again, it's not as if every reviewer is the same...

Still, I think Eurogamer typically presents a more compelling review than most other sites these days. Their nitpicks and complaints are generally quite valid and seem to reflect more on the experience the individual had while playing it.

In this case, they correctly identified many of the best qualities within the game but felt that it was held back by some rather dated design decisions. I can certainly see where they are coming from. The game has some archaic aspects to it. Depending on how much this bugs the player the review score will likely vary accordingly.
Please. I hate Eurogamer. I think Gamespot is more credible than them. Come on, they gave GRAW a 7 when it released simply because they wanted more hits.

They are just bitter, delusional fools. Just look at the DMC4 review comments to see what kind of people read their site.
 

Naeblish

Member
dark10x said:
Why do you say that? Again, it's not as if every reviewer is the same...

Still, I think Eurogamer typically presents a more compelling review than most other sites these days. Their nitpicks and complaints are generally quite valid and seem to reflect more on the experience the individual had while playing it.

In this case, they correctly identified many of the best qualities within the game but felt that it was held back by some rather dated design decisions. I can certainly see where they are coming from. The game has some archaic aspects to it. Depending on how much this bugs the player the review score will likely vary accordingly.

I agree. When they gave Mass Effect an 8 i went like wtf, but after playing the game i understood why and totally agreed with the 8. Based on the demo i will certainly buy DMC 4, but i expect it to have a few big flaws.

I'm having a hard time insta revving. It's hard enough to get the timing right when your practicing, but in combat i'm way too busy getting my combo's off and raising my style. Respect to those who can do it all the time.
 

Kyoufu

Member
Pedobear said:
Please. I hate Eurogamer. I think Gamespot is more credible than them. Come on, they gave GRAW a 7 when it released simply because they wanted more hits.

They are just bitter, delusional fools. Just look at the DMC4 review comments to see what kind of people read their site.

Lets get one thing straight:

Gamespot is more credible than no-one.
 

Mamesj

Banned
Kyoufu said:
If you watch the videos where Nero has Perfect-Rev and Exceed LV2/3 unlocked, then you'll see how awesome they are. Your attacks gain more hits therefore increasing your style and damage output.

Also the attack's range is increased, making crowd control a synch. I can't wait to use it.


Oh okay, that does make it more appealing. I should mention I'm going by the demo...tee hee whoops :D
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Naeblish said:
I agree. When they gave Mass Effect an 8 i went like wtf, but after playing the game i understood why and totally agreed with the 8. Based on the demo i will certainly buy DMC 4, but i expect it to have a few big flaws.

I'm having a hard time insta revving. It's hard enough to get the timing right when your practicing, but in combat i'm way too busy getting my combo's off and raising my style. Respect to those who can do it all the time.
Yep. That's how I feel. The rush you get when you first play a new game can often make it seem as if they are off base, but when you finish a game, things start to seem somewhat more accurate. Mass Effect was a great example. When I first started, I wanted to scream TEN OUT OF TEN!!11. However, by the end, the little flaws had added up and I must admit that it was more of an 8/10. A great game with issues.

GRAW was the same back in 2006. The experience was pretty incredible, but after a while, the smaller issues started to stand out and it became clear that it wasn't quite AAA. The AI alone prevents that. I'd rate the game slightly higher than a 7, though, but I can see where that came from.

That's not to say every review they write is credible, but I don't think that is the case with ANY site.
 
tribal24 said:
just got the game!! and got a poster with it>.> gonna post a pic of poster and game in a min

Where'd you order?

My EB online shipment still shows as processing and not shipped yet. Free overnight shipping better not fail me now.
 

Yoshichan

And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
tribal24 said:
didnt know about exceed>.> so does it make striking faster? also do i have to hold it down or keep tapping the l2 button?
oemwx.gif


When Nero hits the target, watch for the gold "dot". This means you should tap the L2 button. Your attacks will be faster and stronger.
 

Yoshichan

And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
jvalioli said:
Yeah, how are you guys getting this poster?
Get your ass to Sweden.
 

Yoshichan

And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
CE tomorrow too... can't fucking wait.
 

Sectus

Member
dark10x said:
Why do you say that? Again, it's not as if every reviewer is the same...

Still, I think Eurogamer typically presents a more compelling review than most other sites these days. Their nitpicks and complaints are generally quite valid and seem to reflect more on the experience the individual had while playing it.

In this case, they correctly identified many of the best qualities within the game but felt that it was held back by some rather dated design decisions. I can certainly see where they are coming from. The game has some archaic aspects to it. Depending on how much this bugs the player the review score will likely vary accordingly.
Well, there's one thing they keep repeating in the review which honeslty makes no sense whatsoever. They keep mentioning the game is "old" in game design and that it hasn't changed too much since 2001's DMC 1.

So why the heck did they give Rez HD 10/10? Why did they give Halo 3 10/10? Orange Box? CoD4? All of those games are new but with "old" game mechanics. So I think it's rather hypocritical of them to criticize DMC4 in that way. Especially since the core mechanics work very well, and I personally find it a lot more enjoyable than something like God of War.
 

Feindflug

Member
Pedobear said:
Please. I hate Eurogamer. I think Gamespot is more credible than them. Come on, they gave GRAW a 7 when it released simply because they wanted more hits.

They are just bitter, delusional fools. Just look at the DMC4 review comments to see what kind of people read their site.

From Eurogamer's review:

It's almost three years since the last Devil May Cry, with its self-consciously angsty Emo shapes. Despite its awful music and dialogue, we were happy to dish out 8/10 for what was one of the best hackandslash fighting systems around. It wasn't a big step up, but it didn't need to be. It just needed better balance, and to make us forget about the awful second instalment.

When we finished DMC3, we wondered what Capcom would do with new hardware. The answer is not an awful lot. The visuals are better, the combat's more accessible, the upgrade system's pleasingly flexible, but in practically every other sense Capcom has passed up the opportunity to do something new and exciting. After more than seven years, the Devil May Cry series finds itself in the same kind of safe, reliable trough that Resident Evil was in before Resi 4. DMC4 can still fall back on rock-solid combat mechanics and some standout moments, but it feels as though it's comfortable to slowly refine what was good about previous versions rather than evolve into something spectacular.

Now seriously what kind of evolution and "next-gen" touches they expect from a game like DMC4? Changing the game's already perfect controls? changing the whole style/direction of the game? making it more action (is that even possible?) or making it more adventure?

I guess every game from last-gen needs a free-roaming city filled with QTE's to be considered next-gen...
 
Pedobear said:
7 by Eurogamer. Same tools who gave DMC3 a 8. They are a joke. A joke with no credibility.
One of only a few reviewers left that can be trusted to judge games on anything other than a 7-10 scale.
 

belvedere

Junior Butler
dark10x said:
It has nothing to do with their "setup" as those are direct caps. It's not about looking softer either. You can see right there that various textures are lower in resolution. It doesn't matter how you adjust your TV, those are the actual textures. That's all there is to it.

Do you think I'm just making this up to support some agenda? That's BS and you know it.

In some cases, the differences are minor enough that nobody could really complain about one version or the other. The differences between DMC4 are so incredibly small that the average gamer would never notice or care about them. Those who are anal about such things might, making those points valid, but the average gamer would not.

It's a tad different with CoD4 as the differences are much greater. Again, casual gamers may not care (the one who run their systems in 480i/480p/4:3 mode on an HDTV), but those who at least know something about what they are seeing on screen might actually like to know what differences exist.

I really didn't intend to jump back into this old argument again, and I certainly wasn't bashing you. I was simply pointing out that the most "factual" evidence we have about the texture quality of this game (which actually goes way deeper than just texture res) was numerous comments, rebuttals and data provided by a developer (a senior developer at that) of the actual game in question and dozens of other members of the development community.

In the pics you provided, and dozens more that have been ran over with meticulous effort at b3d, there's been no evidence that proves for a fact, the texture quality is worse in either version. Some posters at b3d seem to think that the PS3 textures are actually higher res, but because of an extra layer of filtering, the effect comes out "soft" as witnessed in many other PS3 titles. The parallel effect to this problem is distant textures and ground textures (AF in general) appear to be sharper, or used more extensively. This could have been one of the "trade offs" mentioned a number of times by IW during the course of COD4's development. Oblivion is a good example of this, though others were mentioned as well. Some believe the 360 version, as you believe, does in fact have sharper textures, but most of the ones who believed that scenario changed position when a batch of the "screenshots" used as "proof" were proven to have been tampered with.

Dark, you're obviously pretty savvy when it comes to these technical details/artifacts, but don't call me crazy when without having proper knowledge of your background, I side with a known member and creator of the subject in question.
 
KGKK said:
Just went to EBgames here in Toronto, Scarborough and they did not have it in yet:( They better get it in before the end of the day, since tomorrow I have no classes and I was kinda hoping to stay in all day playing the hell out of DMC4.

I just got the call from my EB (also in Scarborough) and am going to go pick it up in a bit. I forgot to ask if the artbook showed up though. Well, I guess I'll find out soon enough.
 

TheCardPlayer

Likes to have "friends" around to "play cards" with
Psychotext said:
One of only a few reviewers left that can be trusted to judge games on anything other than a 7-10 scale.
I guess you are right. Gotta buy The Club then. I mean Eurotruth gave it a 8. Who cares about EGM's 5 on the same game.

And the fact that their site is plastered in The Club ads have nothing to do with the good score.
 

Sysgen

Member
shintoki said:
Also, Anyone have a complete list of the achievements? without the secret...secret :lol

Not sure if it's been posted in this huge thread so here you go.

Courtesy http://forums.xbox.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=18247766

1. Clear Mission 11 in Human Mode
2. Clear All missions in Human Mode
3. Clear Mission 11 in Devil Hunter Mode
4. Clear All Missions in Devil Hunter Mode
5. Clear Mission 11 in Son of Sparda Mode
6. Clear All Missions in Son of Sparda Mode
7. Clear Mission 11 in Dante Must Die Mode
8. Clear All Missions in Dante Must Die Mode
9. Clear All Missions in Heaven or *** Mode
10. Clear All Missions in *** and *** Mode
11. Clear all Missions in Human Mode with an S Ranking
12. Clear all Missions in Devil Hunter Mode with an S Ranking
13. Clear all Missions in Son of Sparda Mode with an S Ranking
14. Clear all Missions in Dante Must Die Mode with an S Ranking
15. Clear all Game Modes
16. Clear all Secret Missions
17. Clear stage 10 of Bloody Palace Mode
18. Clear stage 20 of Bloody Palace Mode
19. Clear stage 30 of Bloody Palace Mode
20. Clear stage 40 of Bloody Palace Mode
21. Clear stage 50 of Bloody Palace Mode
22. Clear stage 60 of Bloody Palace Mode
23. Clear stage 70 of Bloody Palace Mode
24. Clear stage 80 of Bloody Palace Mode
25. Clear stage 90 of Bloody Palace Mode
26. Clear All Bloody Palace Mode stages
27. Clear All Bloody Palace staged with an S Ranking
28. Clear the game with Super Nero (Dante)
29. Complete a Stylish Rank S (Smokin'!) combo
30. Complete a Stylish Rank SS (Smokin' Style!!) combo
31. Complete a Stylish Rank SSS (Smokin' Sick Stlye!!!) combo
32. Complete a mission with an S Ranking
33. Extend the Vitality Gauge to maximum capacity
34. Extend the Devil Trigger Gauge to maximum capacity
35. Acquire 10,000 Red Orbs
36. Acquire 100,000 Red Orbs
37. Acquire 1,000,000 Red Orbs
38. Acquire 10,000 Proud Souls
39. Acquire 100,000 Proud Souls
40. Acquire 1,000,000 Proud Souls
41. Defeat a total of 100 enemies
42. Defeat a total of 1,000 enemies
43. Defeat a total of 10,000 enemies
44. Acquire a maximum number of all items
45. Acquire all of Nero's skills
46. Acquire all of Dante's skills
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Dark, you're obviously pretty savvy when it comes to these technical details/artifacts, but don't call me crazy when without having proper knowledge of your background, I side with a known member and creator of the subject in question.
From what I recall, the creator never specifically stated anything about anything. He just continued to say that they were roughly equal and that trade-offs were made on each version without ever suggesting what those were (at least on GAF).

What you see in those shots and what I've seen in person has nothing to do with texture filtering. That wouldn't have an impact on the texture at such a close range. The resolution of the textures is simply lower. That's all there is to it. If you look at the strap on Price's uniform, for instance, you can clearly see detail in the 360 shot that is completely missing on PS3. It isn't simply a matter of blurring, the detail doesn't exist. This is the case with a great number of textures throughout the game. When you look directly at a texture, it doesn't matter if they are only performing bilinear filtering as that won't make a difference. If you were to look at both textures with point sampling (no texture filtering) there would still be a difference.

Distance texturing is entirely different and deals with the use of anisotropic filtering. The PS3 version seems to use VERY slightly AF, but it certainly isn't an optimal amount.

Look at this PS3 shot (the floor)...

939213_20071106_screen015.jpg


That is poor texture filtering. Both versions suffer from it. The PS3 version may be using something like 2X AF, however, but that really doesn't have a huge impact overall.

Look at these comparisons and you can clearly see that even textures right in front of the screen appear lower in resolution.

2004710891165831426_rs.jpg

2004773198037348048_rs.jpg


Notice how there is significant detail lost on the PS3 shot (the bottom)? The distance is the same from the camera, yet there is simply detail that is not present in those textures (his uniform and walkie-talkie).

Again, another close up...

2004759618861242050_rs.jpg

2004770487964697116_rs.jpg


How could you possibly suggest that either of those PS3 shots feature textures of the same resolution as the 360? That simply isn't the case. Fortunately, those differences are minor enough that most won't notice (and a developer TRYING TO SELL his game would not point out). The differences are much greater when dealing with surfaces textures, however. Brick walls, dirt, etc. all tend to be much higher resolution on 360 (though the textures in all versions of the game are weak next to other recent games on all platforms).
 

TheCardPlayer

Likes to have "friends" around to "play cards" with
Psychotext said:
I know it's a radical, perhaps crazy way of looking at things... but it might be that the reviewer just liked the game.
Yes, but the fact is, that according to Eurogamer DMC4 is the same quality as Conan.

And I say that anyone that gave DMC3 a 8 doesn't need to give their opinion of the rest of the series. It will be wrong.
 
Pedobear said:
And I say that anyone that gave DMC3 a 8 doesn't need to give their opinion of the rest of the series. It will be wrong.
I assume you must be one of the people that have already played through and completed the game? What's ironic is that I've seen one of your recent posts complaining that people are dismissing the opinions of others...
 

Synless

Member
Drewsy said:
Hey guyz, any word on which is the definitive version?
I've been comparing the two "demos" all day, and as far as I can tell, the textures are both the same, the framerate is the same, (except the ps3's cutscenes run from 60-30 and the 360's cutscenes only run at 30). The 360 has tearing, but has better AA so I'd say to damn close to say.

Would anyone else say that the colors pop more in the ps3 version, I swear the colors are better. The 360 version seems washed out.
 

~Devil Trigger~

In favor of setting Muslim women on fire
dark10x said:
From what I recall, the creator never specifically stated anything about anything. He just continued to say that they were roughly equal and that trade-offs were made on each version without ever suggesting what those were (at least on GAF).

What you see in those shots and what I've seen in person has nothing to do with texture filtering. That wouldn't have an impact on the texture at such a close range. The resolution of the textures is simply lower. That's all there is to it. If you look at the strap on Price's uniform, for instance, you can clearly see detail in the 360 shot that is completely missing on PS3. It isn't simply a matter of blurring, the detail doesn't exist. This is the case with a great number of textures throughout the game. When you look directly at a texture, it doesn't matter if they are only performing bilinear filtering as that won't make a difference. If you were to look at both textures with point sampling (no texture filtering) there would still be a difference.

Distance texturing is entirely different and deals with the use of anisotropic filtering. The PS3 version seems to use VERY slightly AF, but it certainly isn't an optimal amount.

Look at this PS3 shot (the floor)...

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2007/309/reviews/939213_20071106_screen015.jpg[/img

That is poor texture filtering. Both versions suffer from it. The PS3 version may be using something like 2X AF, however, but that really doesn't have a huge impact overall.

Look at these comparisons and you can clearly see that even textures right in front of the screen appear lower in resolution.

[img]http://aycu28.webshots.com/image/40507/2004710891165831426_rs.jpg[/img
[img]http://aycu38.webshots.com/image/42277/2004773198037348048_rs.jpg[/img

Notice how there is significant detail lost on the PS3 shot (the bottom)? The distance is the same from the camera, yet there is simply detail that is not present in those textures (his uniform and walkie-talkie).

Again, another close up...

[img]http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/41402/2004759618861242050_rs.jpg[/img
[img]http://aycu14.webshots.com/image/43853/2004770487964697116_rs.jpg[/img

How could you possibly suggest that either of those PS3 shots feature textures of the same resolution as the 360? That simply isn't the case. Fortunately, those differences are minor enough that most won't notice (and a developer TRYING TO SELL his game would not point out). The differences are much greater when dealing with surfaces textures, however. Brick walls, dirt, etc. all tend to be much higher resolution on 360 (though the textures in all versions of the game are weak next to other recent games on all platforms).[/QUOTE]

yo Stop that shit, who the fuck cares

and post that crap on CoD4 thread or something...
 

Yoshichan

And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
I'm being serious now, I actually went outside this thread because I thought I was in a CoD4-thread...
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
~Devil Trigger~ said:
yo Stop that shit, who the fuck cares

and post that crap on CoD4 thread or something...
I was "called out", so I had no choice. Don't worry, I'm not going to post anymore shots. It's not as if it has disrupted the thread now is it?
 

the_id

Member
I got an e-mail from Gpstore NZ saying my game has been sent for delivery. The thing is, the official release date for NZ is 8/2 and I should be getting my game sometime today or tomorrow! ZOMG!
 
Top Bottom