seismologist
Banned
Also the DS has more to offer than just graphics.
Like dual screen Animal Crossing with a touch pad. *drool*
Like dual screen Animal Crossing with a touch pad. *drool*
-
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.
First PSP screens: Need for Speed Underground Rivals
- Thread starter Wario64
- Start date
Chittagong
Gold Member
Has anyone got direct-feed, not resized videos of this?
EA's own site has a blurry-as-hell video, looks like it would have been captured analog and resized three times. Makes you wonder the competence of their PR people. I want crisp, pixel-per-pixel accurate footage. It isn't hard to produce if you are not stupid.
EA's own site has a blurry-as-hell video, looks like it would have been captured analog and resized three times. Makes you wonder the competence of their PR people. I want crisp, pixel-per-pixel accurate footage. It isn't hard to produce if you are not stupid.
Doom_Bringer
Banned
Milhouse31 said:Here is some pics of the PS2 version (a little too AA but you get the point)
VS
what you don't see in those psp pics is the wet road effect! Watch the video and its present in them.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Those pictures Millhouse posted actually work against his case, IMO. The PS2 version looks rather meh, and quite simillar to PSP version, especially if you see that in video, they do have the wet road effect in place. Apparently, it's the wealth of visual glitches in the PSP version that make it look poor at this point, though. In any case, RR creams all over it at this point, but I'd assume EA has gotten actual hardware devkits a lot later than Namco and other Japanese developers.
I have never said any of those games match their PS counterpart feature-for-feature. They do say at IGN that HSG has worse character models, very simillar terrain, but better image quality (no texture shimmering), than the PS2 version btw.
deadhorse32
Bad Art
I saw the video, the game looks even worse. How can you say the PSP version looks better than the PS2 version with a straight face ? Whoa
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Whoa, how can you not read what I'm saying? It's a very average looking game on the PS2, and PSP version looks slighly worse.
Seriosly, what IS it about the PS2 version that makes you think it looks significantly better, or good to begin with (but that's another bag of chips). The both have comparably shitty textures, comparably poor framerate, similalr shine effects, simillar blocky cars.
Doom_Bringer
Banned
looks good to me
deadhorse32
Bad Art
The PS2 version is not an average looking game. It has good lighting, lots of special effect (motion blur + light tray) and the car looks good. The frame rate is pretty crappy at time i'll give you that.
NFSU-PS2
http://media.gameboy.ign.com/downlo...ot/ps2/nfsu_101503_03_free.wmv?position=front
NFSU-PSP
http://files.ea.com/downloads/eagames/misc/nfsur_psp_hi.mov
Technically the two are identical as far as I can tell. Main difference is the track for PSP is very average. It lacks NFSU's trademark neon signs and flair.
http://media.gameboy.ign.com/downlo...ot/ps2/nfsu_101503_03_free.wmv?position=front
NFSU-PSP
http://files.ea.com/downloads/eagames/misc/nfsur_psp_hi.mov
Technically the two are identical as far as I can tell. Main difference is the track for PSP is very average. It lacks NFSU's trademark neon signs and flair.
I think this is great! People are now debating Handheld graphics vs Console graphics! Rock on!
No, I'm not being sarcastic actually. This goes to show you how far handheld graphics have gone now that they're being compared with active 'living' consoles on a game-to-game basis, but not just any active console, the #1 console.
On this game: It blows my socks away as a handheld title, although if I played it on an active console other than Dreamcast or PS1 I would not be impressed. It looks GREAT for a handheld game.
I've seen nothing on DS or GBA that comes close to this.
Imagine just walking into the vicinity of someone else with NFSU loaded in thier PSP, and doing wireless matches, not even knowing where they are (In the mall or Airplane terminal or Train stations or school).
People picking on the PSP because it barely matches PS2 performance or is just under PS2 visually really goes to show how hard people are grasping at straws to find flaw with the PSP.
No, I'm not being sarcastic actually. This goes to show you how far handheld graphics have gone now that they're being compared with active 'living' consoles on a game-to-game basis, but not just any active console, the #1 console.
On this game: It blows my socks away as a handheld title, although if I played it on an active console other than Dreamcast or PS1 I would not be impressed. It looks GREAT for a handheld game.
I've seen nothing on DS or GBA that comes close to this.
Imagine just walking into the vicinity of someone else with NFSU loaded in thier PSP, and doing wireless matches, not even knowing where they are (In the mall or Airplane terminal or Train stations or school).
People picking on the PSP because it barely matches PS2 performance or is just under PS2 visually really goes to show how hard people are grasping at straws to find flaw with the PSP.
---------------
People picking on the PSP because it barely matches PS2 performance or is just under PS2 visually really goes to show how hard people are grasping at straws to find flaw with the PSP.
---------------
When the cost is rumored to be the same as next-gen consoles, there is no need to grasp at straws to find flaws. I agree with cyba in that expectations are through the roof for PSP considering the sacrifice we might have to make to get it on release - loss of hooker money for the high cost, and being forced to carry around a man-purse to carry an AC cord because of crappy battery life (if true).
I'm not that worried, though, cuz my hooker budget is secure, and I know these screens are blown up much larger then will ever be seen on that tiny PSP screen. Plus I don't give a shit about NFSU anyway.
People picking on the PSP because it barely matches PS2 performance or is just under PS2 visually really goes to show how hard people are grasping at straws to find flaw with the PSP.
---------------
When the cost is rumored to be the same as next-gen consoles, there is no need to grasp at straws to find flaws. I agree with cyba in that expectations are through the roof for PSP considering the sacrifice we might have to make to get it on release - loss of hooker money for the high cost, and being forced to carry around a man-purse to carry an AC cord because of crappy battery life (if true).
I'm not that worried, though, cuz my hooker budget is secure, and I know these screens are blown up much larger then will ever be seen on that tiny PSP screen. Plus I don't give a shit about NFSU anyway.
deadhorse32
Bad Art
I'm not that worried, though, cuz my hooker budget is secure, and I know these screens are blown up much larger then will ever be seen on that tiny PSP screen. Plus I don't give a shit about NFSU anyway.
Those screens are 480 x 272 pixel. That's the natural PSP resolution. That's how it's gonna look in real life.
And the fun of getting a "Sorry, opponent our of range" message a few meters from the finish lineVagabond said:
Straws, eh? Like its been said like a thousand times already in this thread, the DS or GBA were never touted by everyone from system whores to devs as being "equal or more powerful than PS2". Its certainly a valid argument to question thos claims now that we've seen screens, with most disappointing in that regard, especially for a system that in all likelyhood will cost $250+.
*Queue in post repeating exactly what Vagabond just said, again.*
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
Sorry about the JPEG artifacts, I did these via Paint:
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
One more:
Game settings = Everything on + highest visuals. AA is not active.
Game settings = Everything on + highest visuals. AA is not active.
Some of what you said is valid, but we're still going on speculation about price (Because it 'looks expensive') and the battery life is questionable with nothing really confirmed. However, it does not negate from the fact that the unit itself is sleek, feature-proof and sexy as all hell and that this game looks VERY good for a handheld game. It's very comparable to the PS2 version, although slightly inferior in still shots. I don't get the negative comments posted in this thread...
The PSP might be 300 bucks, sure, but it'd be worth it if it offers up this level of gaming and functionality on the go. People have no qualms paying for a more expensive, less powerful laptop rather than a less expensive, more powerful Desktop system because of it's portability. It's a balanced compromise. Why would the gaming realm be any different?
And your quip about 'Opponent out of range': That's the beauty of WiFi, You don't have to worry about that. If that is indeed a problem, it's software-side.
The PSP might be 300 bucks, sure, but it'd be worth it if it offers up this level of gaming and functionality on the go. People have no qualms paying for a more expensive, less powerful laptop rather than a less expensive, more powerful Desktop system because of it's portability. It's a balanced compromise. Why would the gaming realm be any different?
And your quip about 'Opponent out of range': That's the beauty of WiFi, You don't have to worry about that. If that is indeed a problem, it's software-side.
The laptop comparison doesn't work because even though you do pay more money for less, it's still valid competition for a desktop unit. Functionality is exactly the same, the same software can be used, and you don't sacrifice much at all besides ability to upgrade and a little more dough out of your wallet.
Handheld games systems are at an immediate disadvantage because they can never provide the same experience as consoles. Tiny screens, fewer buttons, weaker sounds, slightly stripped down conversions of console games...even the PSP is going to suffer these disadvantages as powerful as it is. You buy handhelds only if you MUST game on the go. And it better be worth it.
I remember when the Game Gear was released. Had a better screen, was more powerful than the gameboy, and was backilit. When I first saw it I was amazed. Looked amazing "for a handheld," and absolutely destroyed anything I had seen on the game boy. But it wasn't worth it. It wasn't worth the bulky brick design, the hefty price tag, and the lame ass battery life.
I'm not comparing the PSP to the Game Gear, because the circumstances are clearly not the same, but I gotta say when I first saw these screens the first thing I wondered was if this really is going to be worth it. Worth the rumored potential price tag and portability hurting battery life. Especially when there will be a competing handheld that doesn't try to mimic the power of todays consoles, but will possibly have bettery battery life, a more reasonable price, and games that will still be impressive on some level. Because after all, "for a handheld", the stuff we've seen still looks damn good
Again, not so worried. This game doesn't represent everything that will be released. But I definately want to be impressed at some point if it's going to get my money
Handheld games systems are at an immediate disadvantage because they can never provide the same experience as consoles. Tiny screens, fewer buttons, weaker sounds, slightly stripped down conversions of console games...even the PSP is going to suffer these disadvantages as powerful as it is. You buy handhelds only if you MUST game on the go. And it better be worth it.
I remember when the Game Gear was released. Had a better screen, was more powerful than the gameboy, and was backilit. When I first saw it I was amazed. Looked amazing "for a handheld," and absolutely destroyed anything I had seen on the game boy. But it wasn't worth it. It wasn't worth the bulky brick design, the hefty price tag, and the lame ass battery life.
I'm not comparing the PSP to the Game Gear, because the circumstances are clearly not the same, but I gotta say when I first saw these screens the first thing I wondered was if this really is going to be worth it. Worth the rumored potential price tag and portability hurting battery life. Especially when there will be a competing handheld that doesn't try to mimic the power of todays consoles, but will possibly have bettery battery life, a more reasonable price, and games that will still be impressive on some level. Because after all, "for a handheld", the stuff we've seen still looks damn good
Again, not so worried. This game doesn't represent everything that will be released. But I definately want to be impressed at some point if it's going to get my money
In my experience with Wi-Fi: it'll go through most wood well, it hates many types of metal, it works better if you're still and not moving (even if it's within range), it varies with concrete and cement. I can REALISTICALLY get a signal up to about 150 feet most of the time. I suppose it'll theoretically go farther than that, but that's my more realistic estimate for most environments.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Firest0rm said:
As was noted, the touch screen really is just a glorified analog stick. It can certainly serve as the basis for some rather unique ideas, but I'd bet that most games will not be employing the touch screen for anything that an analog stick couldn't handle.
What can you do with the touch screen that will REALLY benefit most types of games? It is awesome for unique games like Wario Ware...but how much use will other games really get out of it? We can't be sure until the machine has been around for a while, but I just can't see it being used for too much...
I can see the touch screen being applied in such applications as a virtual keyboard, or those keypad-based puzzles. Also, in a puzzle game where you're directly moving the blocks.
But some of the other applications I've read about seem pretty awkward, such as shooting in an FPS, or even drawing your combos in a fighting game (WTF?). Again, time will tell whether it ends up as simply a gimmick or whether it changes the way people interact with games.
But some of the other applications I've read about seem pretty awkward, such as shooting in an FPS, or even drawing your combos in a fighting game (WTF?). Again, time will tell whether it ends up as simply a gimmick or whether it changes the way people interact with games.
Just because they can be used doesn't make it right to use them. Most 8bit home computers used the joystick for paint programs yet I'm damn pleased the Mac, Amiga and ST came with a mouse as standard.dark10x said:
An RTS using a stick is just clumsy. On the flipside some input devices are too good for a genre, a mouse in a lightgun game for example.
Personally believe too many people are thinking inside the box, thinking of current games and how they can be played with a touchscreen. Hope and expect Nintendo to look at it the other way round, how the touchscreen can change gaming. We'll see soon enough.
lol, sorry. NFS:UR; just like every PSP game shown so far has some really nice effects but with the poly pushing ability of a crippled Dreamcast. I think that's a good thing, on a small screen I want whizz bang effects and nice image quality not a zillion polygons that can't be seen.FoneBone said:
Baron Aloha
A Shining Example
Wow. So this PSP game (and a few others) don't look as good as the current crop of PS2 games. So what? I mean really...did anyone really expect them to look that good right out of the gate? Its going to take a while before we see anything thats looks as good as some of the newer PS2 games. Think back to how plain/boring (and outright bad) some of the 1st year PS2 games looked. Go ahead and play a few of them and take a look at these screens and I think you'll agree that NFSUR stacks up pretty well. Heck it outright looks better than a lot of them. PSP may be as powerful as the PS2 but if it is its going to take a while for the games to catch up because there is still a learning curve involved. The graphics for this game are phenomenal for a handheld. Nintendo should be worried IMO.
Brofist
Member
At the present this is the 3rd best looking racer on the system (GT4, RR) maybe the 4th (new Shotoku battle game might even look better?). And probably of those 4 the game I'd least likely to buy.
And who expects EA on short time to have matched the visuals of the J racers (on any time for that matter).
And who expects EA on short time to have matched the visuals of the J racers (on any time for that matter).
ArcadeStickMonk
Member
Hey, maybe this thread was closing up, but after seeing that plain-ass blue Skyline posted above I just had to display my fly whips.
Goldbrick
Blue Night
Clean Z
Spiderman
Dragon
Shredded Red
Deep Purple - The Game Beater
That's how the game is supposed to look.
Sorry I didn't think of turning of the HUD until halfway through.
Goldbrick
Blue Night
Clean Z
Spiderman
Dragon
Shredded Red
Deep Purple - The Game Beater
That's how the game is supposed to look.
Sorry I didn't think of turning of the HUD until halfway through.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
I think part of the problem here is that to a large degree 2D is 2D and whether it looks hot or not depends largely on stuff like artistic quality. 3D however, as we have all learned over the last seven years or so, shows of flaws and limitations in how graphics are rendered extremely well. Yoshi's Island still looks awesome today. PS1 games generally do not. We're now used to stuff like Burnout and Ninja Gaiden as quality 3D - so seeing even Dreamcast level stuff or worse will appear lacking, at least in still shots. (Motion accounts for a hell of a lot with 3D.)
This is the mindshare problem a 3D portable system faces - GBA can be technically less powerful than say, PS2 for doing 2D graphics (Guilty Gear X2 / PS2 vs Guilty Gear Advance / GBA) but still look generally good. A 3D portable can be slightly worse than current leading 3D consoles and PC hardware, and look generally bad to eyes acclimated to the current standard.
Personally, the main thing I am concerned about is that most PSP stuff I've seen so far looks poly-starved - as in PSOne level poly counts in a lot of cases, with better textures, lighting, and effects.
This is the mindshare problem a 3D portable system faces - GBA can be technically less powerful than say, PS2 for doing 2D graphics (Guilty Gear X2 / PS2 vs Guilty Gear Advance / GBA) but still look generally good. A 3D portable can be slightly worse than current leading 3D consoles and PC hardware, and look generally bad to eyes acclimated to the current standard.
Personally, the main thing I am concerned about is that most PSP stuff I've seen so far looks poly-starved - as in PSOne level poly counts in a lot of cases, with better textures, lighting, and effects.
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
Those tails on the Skyline are the WORST mod in the entire game. God that's one ugly rear. Otherwise, the rest of your car looks hot. And yeah, I know that my Skyline is plain as day. I sort of prefer it that way, but also; I just fired up NFSU, threw on a bunch of random mods and took pics.
I think Sony has set unrealistically high expectations for PSP performance, if not out right lied about its capabilities.
I sure as hell was expecting NFSUR to look much better than this. Judging by the quality of these graphics, as well as other games being shown at TGS, the PSP looks to be somewhere between PSone and DC, IMHO.
For a handheld, this IS amazing, but all this shit about PSP>>>PS2!! has set many of these games up for unfair scrutiny.
I sure as hell was expecting NFSUR to look much better than this. Judging by the quality of these graphics, as well as other games being shown at TGS, the PSP looks to be somewhere between PSone and DC, IMHO.
For a handheld, this IS amazing, but all this shit about PSP>>>PS2!! has set many of these games up for unfair scrutiny.
That's being incredibly generous Marc.Marc said:
On the show, this was pretty much the worst looking&running racing game shown for PSP. And I'd rate it amongst the worst looking PSP demos overall as well.
The worst part about it though - the demo ran in low 20ies, while pretty much every other demo on the show was 60. It kinda made for a rather embarassing showing from EA.
Not really. There are were a couple of games that look at least as good if not better then PS2 counterparts, and given how rushed most of the development has been so far, that already exceeded some of my expectations.Datawhore said:
What most people don't realize is that average PSP game budgets at this moment are around 4x(or more) lower then what you get for desktop consoles. No matter how nice the hardware, it won't make up for that kind of massive disparity.
If anything, current stuff should be a testament to how much faster(and cheaper) PSP gives results.
Shogmaster
Member
Phoenix said:
You would be wrong.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
cja said:
This kind of reasoning could be made for any accessory/feature of a system then. It is us thinking inside the box and not seeing how gaming should be revolutionized.
Personally I like the touch screen as it allows for much more complex GUIs in DS games and allows for easier to play RTSs on the system, but I do not find it a huge revolution in gaming and I did not think gaming needed a revolution.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Fafalada said:
WORD
.