OrangeSoul Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Alpha Kit: Beta Kit: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circaflex Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 doesnt look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fahmi_r Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 doesnt look good. 586198920[/snapback] so true. 100 percent true :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSoul Posted July 12, 2005 Author Share Posted July 12, 2005 doesnt look good. 586198920[/snapback] The Following picture is House of Dead 3 on Xbox, see the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTerminator Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 What doesnt look good about it? Better graphics than anything else on market right now... and killing zombies is always fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecaveman Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 oh please people don't you see the difference beetween the BETA and Alpha kit? Notice those wonderful PS on the water and tell it looks bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolslacker Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 I know that the graphics is better than Xbox, but I also agree with Circaflex that it can be better, much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathray Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 I know that the graphics is better than Xbox, but I also agree with Circaflex that it can be better, much better. 586198956[/snapback] Question... how do you know it can be much much better? Im sorry, but everyone who keeps saying this is very poor, what are you comparing it to, the image in your mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostShell Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 (edited) I think the graphics look ok but could be better. They are definitely an improvement from the original xbox. Edited July 12, 2005 by GhostShell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theyarecomingforyou Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 I'm not a fan of the graphics. :no: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing-Man Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Question... how do you know it can be much much better? Im sorry, but everyone who keeps saying this is very poor, what are you comparing it to, the image in your mind? 586198963[/snapback] Screenshot from Xbox360: Screenshot from PS2: The reason I picked the SH:4 picture is that the characters from both games look similar. What I am really trying to show is that the PS2 character has more facial detail then the HofD character on the Xbox360. I have noticed, with screenshots from nextgen games on both the Xbox360 and PS3, is that the artists just are not putting enough detail into their characters. I don't know if the artists are lazy or not, but the skin textures on their characters are way too smooth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iconboy Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 i hope these are early screenshots and they gunna put more work in cause this game just looks plain BLAND! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecaveman Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 jmole you really have to learn about how 3D works dude... If you see the PS2 version then the face is pretty flat and it has no bump mapping like you see on the x360 version, that really makes difference when you see light sources running around. Sure it could look aLOT better but it's just another brain-dead zombie game, they are not supposed to spend to much on creating them even if id belives in that crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolslacker Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Question... how do you know it can be much much better? Im sorry, but everyone who keeps saying this is very poor, what are you comparing it to, the image in your mind? 586198963[/snapback] I didn't say that the graphics is poor, I said it could be better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iconboy Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 jmole you really have to learn about how 3D works dude... If you see the PS2 version then the face is pretty flat and it has no bump mapping like you see on the x360 version, that really makes difference when you see light sources running around. Sure it could look aLOT better but it's just another brain-dead zombie game, they are not supposed to spend to much on creating them even if id belives in that crap. 586199019[/snapback] dude, time crisis looks better than this game, in this age there is no excuse for crappy graphics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iconboy Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Question... how do you know it can be much much better? Im sorry, but everyone who keeps saying this is very poor, what are you comparing it to, the image in your mind? 586198963[/snapback] umm well im comparing it to earlier games and guess what? its losing (in my mind). I think you would have to be clinically retarded to be "impressed" by these graphics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecaveman Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 dude, time crisis looks better than this game, in this age there is no excuse for crappy graphics. 586199028[/snapback] Dude you even know what you are talking about? You are so silly you have to see never games in action to see what they are all about, screenshots don't justify anymore since the light sources are constantly changing, unlike the PS2 era and you see lot of the facial features reflect that and shade correctly considering where the light source comes from. It has FAR higher polygon count and is far more detailed than a simple texture added to a very low polygon model, you know how ugly the PS2 models look at different angles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notuptome2004 Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 i love the image with the water in it that does seem to be fairly detiald and how the light sources work off of it. anyways remeber these are from crappy arcade hardware that is barly up to a GeForce FX specs graphcis from what i understand it is weak for graphics so that being siad right now they have just got beta hardware witch has Finale chipset for X360 they have everything and what you are seing now is a port of the game untill they start and make it look better. iam sure we may see movie quality zombies and enviroments. Somewhat same topic but offtopic ( anyone read about the Zombie game on PSP Infected <<< just curious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
black.ops Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 oh please people don't you see the difference beetween the BETA and Alpha kit? Notice those wonderful PS on the water and tell it looks bad 586198952[/snapback] Notice that they look the exact same? You just don't see water on the first few. And fyi, if this game was developed on the Alpha kit it will NOT look better on the final one, just run smoother. Future games on the other hand, MAY look better, but it's not a given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iconboy Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Dude you even know what you are talking about? You are so silly you have to see never games in action to see what they are all about, screenshots don't justify anymore since the light sources are constantly changing, unlike the PS2 era and you see lot of the facial features reflect that and shade correctly considering where the light source comes from. It has FAR higher polygon count and is far more detailed than a simple texture added to a very low polygon model, you know how ugly the PS2 models look at different angles? 586199045[/snapback] true, i guess ill have to see this game in action. but honestly, i wasnt comparing time crisis' models to these because on a technical level it blows time crisis away, but i do think the overall look at feel of time crisis it a lot more together than the above screenshots,. they just look.... BLAND... im sorry i cant get super excited about these shots, they just look bad. BAD. BAD. BAD! but like i said before lets hope they put some more work into it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecaveman Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 BTW iconboy here is an easy read for you... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_mapping Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.M.K Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 The image of the dude and chick looking down the tunnle looks good, the others aren't anything special. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing-Man Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 jmole you really have to learn about how 3D works dude... If you see the PS2 version then the face is pretty flat and it has no bump mapping like you see on the x360 version, that really makes difference when you see light sources running around. Sure it could look aLOT better but it's just another brain-dead zombie game, they are not supposed to spend to much on creating them even if id belives in that crap. 586199019[/snapback] I have all the Silent Hill games on the PS2. I don't get your flat face remark because none of their faces look flat at all. Silent Hill games probably have the best looking character renders.With these screenshots, the texturing looks crappy. It's like everything is plasticized and smoothed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNay Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 looks horrible :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Professional Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 not bad, but the 360 can do better. But then again this is a early version... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts