You need to give it a rest.dark10x said:That's absolutely untrue. The GC version had a very rough look and some rather bothersome flaws found throughout. Easily among the worst games on the GC in regards to image quality...
Just run for it.
You need to give it a rest.dark10x said:That's absolutely untrue. The GC version had a very rough look and some rather bothersome flaws found throughout. Easily among the worst games on the GC in regards to image quality...
Mr Gump said:You need to give it a rest.
Just run for it.
But at the end of the day, gamers are likely to be hard-pressed to tell the differences between the two versions if they are not forewarned.
Mr Gump said:You need to give it a rest.
Just run for it.
D-X said:I don't see any reason why the Nbots shouldn't have a field day with this. They spend all their time defending their 'inferior' console and handheld. Now they have the upper hand let them shout about it all they want. After E3 they might not have much to shout about anymore.
Silkworm said:I'm sorry if I'm retreading a previous post in this thread, but after watching G4TechTV's pre-E3 show last night showing running footage of PS2 version of RE4, there really isn't a noticeable difference in appearance of the game versus the GC version. It looked a lot better than the screen shots that showed up in the first page of this thread. So maybe you can nitpick things if you take screenshots but in motion I really don't see a noticeable difference. So if you only own a PS2, don't pass on RE4 thinking it's somehow inferior to the GC version. Have fun with RE4, whether you play it on the PS2 or GC.![]()
Azih said:Loading times will be the determining factor between the port and the original methinks.