MGS3: Pachislot vs Delta
- Thread starter YCoCg
- Start date
Heimdall_Xtreme
Hermen Hulst Fanclub's #1 Member
We're mentally connected... 2 hours ago, I looked up that same comparison. 
March Climber
Gold Member
Looks like the Pachislot version has better wind effects/physics/hair and has a more filmic look to it. Delta has better detail in the character models and environments.
Lighting goes back and forth though. Sometimes the pachislot version edges delta out, sometimes vice versa. The Fury boss looks insane on the Pachislot version for example, but that's because the fire also looks extremely better than Delta's.
Edit: The most surprising thing here for me is just how much content they provided for the pachislot version. I thought it was just a few cutscenes but it's way more.
Lighting goes back and forth though. Sometimes the pachislot version edges delta out, sometimes vice versa. The Fury boss looks insane on the Pachislot version for example, but that's because the fire also looks extremely better than Delta's.
Edit: The most surprising thing here for me is just how much content they provided for the pachislot version. I thought it was just a few cutscenes but it's way more.
Last edited:
roosnam1980
Member
i like the look of the pachislot version , esp the characters.
Judge Magister
Gold Member
We're mentally connected... 2 hours ago, I looked up that same comparison.
Last edited:
Ellis
Member
It's still rendered within Fox Engine. Even with top of the range hardware back then, it wouldn't equal what machines some users here are playing Delta on today.
It's a fair enough comparison, in my opinion, as it can still best Delta in many instances whilst also being ten years older. FE does a lot of things better than UE5. For one, baked lighting (when done by people that know what they're doing) shits all over luman and GI bollocks every day of the week.
Like the epilogue segment in Uncharted 4. To me, that still looks better than even the best examples of path tracing. CP 2077.
Last edited:
Not at all, it is a offline render like any CGI movies. If I have to guess, they use FOX engine for its UI and menu then play back these cut scenes in a video format. Like MCC uses UE4 for its menu and got lost in translation.
Denton
Member
Baking IS path tracing, just offline rendered and static. Pathtracing's whole point is to bring that level of quality into realtime domain, thus allowing dynamic ToD and lighting.
Saying baking shits on raytracing is nonsensical, because they are the same thing, except lumen (or C77's PT) does it in realtime.
Ellis
Member
It does when you look at the requirements needed for pretty much the same quality as baked by hand. A scene like that UC4 picture would need a vastly faster GPU to achieve the same with PT.
Gameplay Gods Bless
Member
I don't think they tried very hard to make Eva look good in the remake. She's much prettier in the PS2 game and you know kojima knows how to design pretty video game ladies so I'ma blame this on virtuous.
Bojji
Gold Member
It's still rendered within Fox Engine. Even with top of the range hardware back then, it wouldn't equal what machines some users here are playing Delta on today.
It's a fair enough comparison, in my opinion, as it can still best Delta in many instances whilst also being ten years older. FE does a lot of things better than UE5. For one, baked lighting (when done by people that know what they're doing) shits all over luman and GI bollocks every day of the week.
Like the epilogue segment in Uncharted 4. To me, that still looks better than even the best examples of path tracing. CP 2077.
How about IJ DLC?:
By
zeroluck
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Real time graphics being (favorably) compared to offline CGI is a victory in itself.
Denton
Member
Of course, that is obvious. Progress (realtime PT versus static PT) requires new tech and more power. So what? It is still progress. You cannot have Uncharted 4-like graphics in an open world simulated world with time flowing without realtime PT.
ValiantInstance
Member
My eyes were gravitating towards Delta throughout the video. It is a staggeringly good looking game.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
It really is.
Doesn't perform flawlessly but man it looks good as fuck. Probably some of the best character models in the market right now, they don't go for hyper-realism and use a fair bit of artistic liberty in features but the output is fantastic while being faithful to the original look, especially if you use the Legacy filter.
Heimdall_Xtreme
Hermen Hulst Fanclub's #1 Member
It's like comparing Final Fantasy Advent Children with Final Fantasy VII Remake. I'm going with Delta.
Heimdall_Xtreme
Hermen Hulst Fanclub's #1 Member
The power of Fox Engine
Gameplay Gods Bless
Member
Baked lighting sucks, the only reason we put up with it is because we didn't have the hardware for real time lighting. Precalculated lighting is a dead end that comes with compromises that affect gameplay (everything has to be static or the lighting breaks), real time lighting is going to make games more dynamic and interactive as opposed to this smoke and mirrors everything is a movie set with static props BS.It's still rendered within Fox Engine. Even with top of the range hardware back then, it wouldn't equal what machines some users here are playing Delta on today.
It's a fair enough comparison, in my opinion, as it can still best Delta in many instances whilst also being ten years older. FE does a lot of things better than UE5. For one, baked lighting (when done by people that know what they're doing) shits all over luman and GI bollocks every day of the week.
Like the epilogue segment in Uncharted 4. To me, that still looks better than even the best examples of path tracing. CP 2077.
Grildon Tundy
Member
I wish I didn't know which was which. I think I prefer the look of pachinko's lighting and characters. The style seems more grounded and Delta more cartoony.
Last edited:
Luipadre
Member
Jesus when i saw the first pic i thought its real... I need to play this again since i got my new GPU. I can play now with PT on
Chuck Berry
Gold Member
We're mentally connected... 2 hours ago, I looked up that same comparison.
I sure fucking hope not for
YCoCg
's sake after this monstrosity of a thread filled with nothing but embarrassment chills and red flags.
Heimdall_Xtreme
Hermen Hulst Fanclub's #1 Member
Que tiene??!!I sure fucking hope not for
Its nothing bad
Killer8
Member
What's interesting about the comparison to the pachislot version is if you go back and read the old threads when it originally got revealed. Look past all of the Kojima and #FuckKonami sperging at the time and you notice that people really, really wanted to play that pachislot version with those graphics. People were begging Konami to make it and now Delta is as close as you can possibly get to actually realizing that dream.
Xaeroxcore666
Member
Word: we should open a thread of real time graphics vs CGI, across history and nowadays! I mean, i recall since PS2 and DC that comparisons started to make sense.
And BTW it´s confirmed the Pachislot uses Fox Engine? I don´t think so...
CamHostage
Member
Fire is one of those things which can look great if you totally fake it, looks ok if you can hide enough fakery tricks of flat or simple solutions, and can be a disaster for even the most rich and powerful film/game studios if you have to sim it for real.
Take for example this replacement Fire effect shown off in an NVIDIA demo recently. The original on the left is obviously old-school and simple. The one on the right is more of a sim, with particle effects and depth and dimension... And it looks awful. The color dispersion is bad, the smoke looks foggy and indistinct, and it just doesn't look hot.
An artist could do better than the tech nerds at NVIDIA, but the point is that even movie studios have trouble even with fire in non-realtime cg. Corridor Crew rails on Marvel and other FX fire/explosion work looking too billowy and slow. For Oppenheimer, they went with making a crazy real fire rather than cg a nuke. (Partly that's Nolan going crazy, but when you ask how do you film a nuke, usually the answer is that you don't.) Fire is very hard to recreate, especially if it has to have dimension and range and intense contrast and liquid movement. The better the tech and the more complex the simulation, the more chances you have to fuck it up.
(*In both cases, these are cutscenes, so the effect is the effect, but Delta I'm sure uses the same fire in play as in non-interactive, so it has to work from all angles and not be too contrasty that you can't see what your playing.)
(**All that said, the Pachislo flamethrower is indeed rad.)
Last edited: