Present-gen games that will stand the visual test of time.
- Thread starter tedtropy
- Start date
Considering the push towards HD next gen, how can any of these games stand a visual test of time? Seeing many of these games on a progressive HD display is almost like going from late PS1 to early PS2. Of the games i've played here, i can say that F-Zero GX looks best, though it doesn't hurt that you seldom have time to see any deficiencies (even in replays). Also, i've gotta plug Super Smash Bros. Melee. The game is practically visually flawless.
Cel-shaded games look like crap to me on an HD display. The extremly sharp anti-aliased lines juxtapose frequent blurry textures kills me. i'd much rather play them on S-video, which tends to soften the image a bit.
Cel-shaded games look like crap to me on an HD display. The extremly sharp anti-aliased lines juxtapose frequent blurry textures kills me. i'd much rather play them on S-video, which tends to soften the image a bit.
Warm Machine
Member
Rallisport 2 will hold up not only for its graphics but also for its almost perfect 16:9 mode and 480p support as well as its 60fps.
ICO is too repetitive and too low resolution.
ICO is too repetitive and too low resolution.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
ToxicAdam said:At one time I thought 'Defender of the Crown' would never be topped.
So the moral is: Graphics will always be topped and end up looking dated. Even the cel-shaded games like Windwaker.
Dated is one thing, but still nice to look at, even after the tech has moved on is another. I think that's what this thread is about. And I think Defender of the Crown *is* still nice to look at, though unspectacular.
I still think Joust looks fantastic, for that matter. The prettiest, best-graphically-designed game of the 80s, maybe.
While I agree that most N64 and PSX games have aged poorly, you also have to bare in mind that 3D console gaming was still very much in its infancy during that time. Present generation consoles have come a long way in improving the technology. And while I'm sure the upcoming generation of consoles will be impressive, I suspect it will be more of a moderate evolution in graphics then the significant leap we saw from going to the N64 and PSX to the Gamecube, PS2, and XBox. I'm a little uncertain as to where to shove the Dreamcast in that list, it was sort of a middle-gen console, but graphically was a significant leap over the N64. I think that the better present 3D games we have now will age better then those of last gen, but I may certainly be proven wrong in that respect. What I'm expecting out of the upcoming consoles is better HDTV support, some good FSAA, higher-res textures, and obviously a bump up in the amount of polys being pushed on screen - still, I don't see it being a significant leap in graphical improvement. I hope I'm wrong. I think 3D gaming graphics is reaching the plateau that 2D did in the 16-bit generation, that is, the technology behind the graphics has evolved enough to make the direction of the artists apparent. While there will certainly be more technically apt titles with time, those original games will still look good, whereas with the last-gen games, their technological lackings marred the deeper art design intent. Anyways, that's alot of run-on sentences that probably doesn't mean much, but it's my opinion, take it as you will.
tahrikmili
Member
many games will withstand the test of time from a gaming point of view but none of them will stand up to the next generation. It's inevitable. No game from 6 years ago looks like what's around these days.
tahrikmili said:
Yeah, but we're operating on the assumption that consoles advance at some consistent rate. Who's to say the next generation of consoles will be as big a leap as these were? I mean, Moore's Law has been a little off for awhile now, has it not?
The most polished games will stand up very well...
Metal Gear Solid 2, Metroid Prime, Soul Calibur, Wind Waker, F-Zero GX, Team Ninja's work and other similar games will all stand that test of time very well.
Whoever said "Sonic Adventure" has totally missed that. SA is one of the least polished games released this generation. It's an absolute technical mess and has aged very badly as a result...
Metal Gear Solid 2, Metroid Prime, Soul Calibur, Wind Waker, F-Zero GX, Team Ninja's work and other similar games will all stand that test of time very well.
Whoever said "Sonic Adventure" has totally missed that. SA is one of the least polished games released this generation. It's an absolute technical mess and has aged very badly as a result...
olimario said:
Klonoa 2 isn't really amazing looking, but it still holds up decently. It's very clean and colorful and has an attractive visual style. The high framerate and intentionally simple look (plus the large sense of scale) should prevent it from aging badly. Klonoa 1 on PSX, for example, has aged beautifully.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
GTA:SA doesn't look all that great today.
It's nice to know that not every game sells on grpahics. Some sell on violence!
(j/k. GTA:SA is my vote for GOTY)
It's nice to know that not every game sells on grpahics. Some sell on violence!
(j/k. GTA:SA is my vote for GOTY)
tahrikmili
Member
tedtropy said:
Current consoles are DX7/DX8 level hardwares. Next generation is DX9/DXNext level hardwares. Even between DX8 and DX9 PC saw a huge leap in IQ. It's a reasonable assumption that this and next gen games will look exceptionally different. The amount of RAM and bandwidth overhead combined with extra processing power will make it possible to make extensive use of displacement mapping, HDR lighting, depth of field effects and pixel/vertex shading operations this generation can't even hope to handle.
The question is, will it be as huge a leap as PS1 and N64 made? Probably not. But it will make current generation look as bad as this generation made the last one look. Especially with higher resolutions that HDTVs offer.
Ignatz Mouse said:
Yeah, graphically GTA: SA isn't all that impressive, but it can be forgiven for the sheep scope of its world and the gameplay therein. But the game is obviously stressing the PS2, doesn't exactly look amazing now, and will look horrible in a few years.
wobedraggled
Banned
re4 is a benchmark for what we can come to expect, I think it will hold up for some time to come
F-zero is another example
The team ninja games all look to shiny, like someone dipped them in baby oil or something, they need to work on that
Edit: as for orta, it's great looking, but it's also "tunneled" not enough open areas
F-zero is another example
The team ninja games all look to shiny, like someone dipped them in baby oil or something, they need to work on that
Edit: as for orta, it's great looking, but it's also "tunneled" not enough open areas
I think we can use the example from the SNES generation.
Many SNES games (like just about everything Nintendo published except for Starfox and Mario Kart) look fine today.
I think this generation has that quality. We'll notice the lack of graphical bells and whistles that will no doubt define the next 5 years, but I really don't think anyone will look at Resident Evil 4 and say "That's just ugly. It's unplayable."
Many SNES games (like just about everything Nintendo published except for Starfox and Mario Kart) look fine today.
I think this generation has that quality. We'll notice the lack of graphical bells and whistles that will no doubt define the next 5 years, but I really don't think anyone will look at Resident Evil 4 and say "That's just ugly. It's unplayable."
tahrikmili
Member
Speevy said:
I disagree.. I already think most PS2 games look too ugly to be played by current standards. RE4 is the exception and not the rule. This generation has been around for a long time and already the games from the first few years are starting to show their age. I mean, look at Halo 1, it looks pretty awful compared to the latest XBOX games, I won't even compare with PC.. Resident Evil 4 looks good "for the current consoles", but it still does not compare to Doom 3 graphically.
I don't think Resident Evil 1-3 look that bad now, so I'd say RE4 will look pretty decent (if not a bit retro) in 6-7 years. It'll just be lacking in detail. Same goes for Metal Gear Solid 3.
They will both look really "old" but I don't think unplayable like certain PSOne games now... (ie FF7 looks like complete shit now
)
Others:
Wind Waker
Super Mario Sunshine (hell Mario 64 still looks good)
Paper Mario
Metroid Prime 1, 2
Ones that wont:
GTA series
Halo 2 (that pop-in cinema scene crap will be laughed at)
They will both look really "old" but I don't think unplayable like certain PSOne games now... (ie FF7 looks like complete shit now
)Others:
Wind Waker
Super Mario Sunshine (hell Mario 64 still looks good)
Paper Mario
Metroid Prime 1, 2
Ones that wont:
GTA series
Halo 2 (that pop-in cinema scene crap will be laughed at)
tahrikmili said:
Halo 1 looks awful? Um, what? Compared to most titles on the XBox, the game still looks good to this day. What about it stands out as 'awful' exactly? And while Doom 3's engine is no doubt more capable technically that RE4's, RE4 is certainly the better looking of the two to me. Fighting greasy Imps in dark hallways, or fighting pseudo-zombies in amazing looking outdoor and indoor environments? Hmm...
Doom_Bringer
Banned
Doom III PC
Far Cry PC
Half Life 2 PC
Burnout 3 XBOX
Ninja Gaiden XBOX
Hitman Contracts PC
All good looking PS2 games have unstable frame rates so no PS2 games on the list. Don't have GC therefore no GC games on the list.
Far Cry PC
Half Life 2 PC
Burnout 3 XBOX
Ninja Gaiden XBOX
Hitman Contracts PC
All good looking PS2 games have unstable frame rates so no PS2 games on the list. Don't have GC therefore no GC games on the list.
tahrikmili
Member
tedtropy said:Halo 1 looks awful? Um, what? Compared to most titles on the XBox, the game still looks good to this day. What about it stands out as 'awful' exactly? And while Doom 3's engine is no doubt more capable technically that RE4's, RE4 is certainly the better looking of the two to me. Fighting greasy Imps in dark hallways, or fighting pseudo-zombies in amazing looking outdoor and indoor environments? Hmm...
What stands out awful in Halo 1 today is the really low poly models covered with really low detail flat textures. This is exactly what makes PS2 look awful to me - blocky models with flat, blurred, boring textures. Later XBOX games managed to use better texture compression and bump mapping to fix this somewhat, but compared to what the PCs can do in Doom 3, Far Cry and the like most of this generations games look really bland.. In Halo, for example, in most levels, the character and environment textures lacked so much detail that they looked like they were covered with just base color and some lighting. Compare the elites/grunts in Halo 1 to those in Halo 2 and you'll see what I mean, or the environment textures in covenant ships or the library to those in Halo 2. Anyway, most PS2 games still look like Halo 1, and while Resident Evil looks good today its models/textures/lighting etc. will look pretty outdated as well in a few years. Compare the face/hair in RE4 to what Half Life 2 can do, for example. And that's just a taste of what the next generation will have to offer..
It might be that I'm nitpicking because I'm a spoiled graphics whore, but I think this is what will happen
SolidSnakex
Member
tahrikmili said:
RE4 has really nice art direction which is going to help it out alot. ICO models and textures aren't really all the technically impressive, but whats going to make it stand up next gen is the art direction. I think that can carry a game alot further than how technically impressive it is.
Doom_Bringer
Banned
The End said:
Those aren't the best looking PS2 games...
Doom_Bringer
Banned
The End said:
Not in my opinion.
No PS2 games belong in this list IMO
Err, Halo 1 was one of the first FPS titles to make EXTENSIVE use of bumpmaps. There is perpixel lighting everywhere in that game. Halo 1 uses better bumpmaps than Halo 2 on the environment, even...
Go back and look again...
Which games are? I mean, stuff like MGS2 and GT4 look amazing and run at a smooth 60 fps. What are you thinking of? Heck, Burnout 3 looks better on PS2 in a number of ways (more robust effects -- more than just sparks, for example) and has no framerate troubles.
Doom_Bringer
Banned
dark10x said:
MGS2 has plently of slowdowns and it doesn't look all that amazing.
I haven't played GT4.
Burnout 3 on PS2 has jaggies and slowdown.
ZOE2 looks amazing but it also has plently of slowdown. So does: Sly 2, Jak III and other high profiled PS2 games. Ace Combat V looks really good in widescreen mode but it also has slowdowns and the ground textures & the explosions in the game are really weak.
Doom_Bringer
Banned
The End said:
again, Gradius V is one of the best-looking games out there, period. even the screenshots don't really do it justice.
Yager PC looks better than that
and its 3d too!Kutaragi Hirai
Banned
Mmmm.. Gran Turismo 4, I got the japanese version, it is really amazing and thats only in 480p mode.
Doom_Bringer
Banned
Unison said:Gradius V is inconsistent though. For example:
Like many games listed in this thread, it won't look horrible next-gen, but it will certainly look quaint.
looks like its running on a bad television with really low contrast