19th March 2006, 7:18 PM
I agree for the most part, but Link's model, some of the boss models, graphical effects and overall scope of everything in the screens released thus far are definitely comparable and even superior to first gen 360 games in many ways.
Oblivion does look very nice, but i cant stand those types of games. I call them conversation simulators. The best gameplay you can find in them is a cheap first person point and click attack scheme and everything else is about becoming more god-like until you get bored with the game. Blah. However, i watched some videos of it in action and i have to say that it looks as good as Zelda and better in many ways, but not much better. I know, imma fanboy, etc, but in my opinion, like the knight on the horse for example looks very Zelda TP to me. A side from the game just looking much darker and more gritty.
As far as Ghost recon, I watched it in action as well and looked at screen shots and again, i have to say that while the poly counts are higher, higher res, etc, Zelda looks better. the human faces in Ghost recon look like puppets and the clothes have weird shading where folds are supposed to be so when they move it looks unreal, and then the props and buildings look like cardboard cutouts. Like ABF said, it's technically superior but it still falls short of being as pretty as TP is. It's just my opinion and i'm honestly not trying to put Zelda on a cross, TP just looks as good or sometimes better than those games.
of course, like in Oblivion for sure, there are neat bump map effects, multiple light sources, real time shadows capable of distortion around objects, all kinds of neat things; It's a graphically superior game on a technical level, but so is Ghost recon (compared to TP) and as with all developers some are better equiped to make a game shine than others. while i believe oblivion is either better or as good as Zelda graphically, ghost recon and PDZ and other games actually dont look as good as TP. this probably has to do with TP getting more TLC in its development, and each texture and poly being scrutinized by entire teams at a time and it definitely shows. I think with the first gen 360 games, that TLC was put on a back burner to get the games out quickly in time for launch.
paco specifically will want to brand this post as fandom, but Shadow of the Collosus is also a better looking game in many respects. The actual 'Collosus' creature's models look better than anything i've seen on 360 so far in their first gen line up. So again, I think it has more to do with care and attention rather than a debate about technical specs, which the 360 wins hands down. That just doesn't guarantee a better looking game. in Shadow, those beautiful monsters are running around an expansive open desert. ie: they're the only thing on screen other than your character and the horse. but zelda manages to get tons of shit happening at once with extremely detailed environments and characters, the things that suffer is things like the textures used for the ground, where it's one giant low resolution texture used over and over to create the look of the ground whether it be a grassy field or a packed down dirt path. because of that sacrifice, the developers are able to pump the location up with NPC's, props, etc. It's really nice looking and i bet every trick in Nintendo's hat is being displayed in that game. With first gen 360 titles, the lack of experience with working for that hardware and the rush to get the game's out on time resulted in high poly count, High definition subpar graphics that really, should not represent the power of the system at all, neither should Oblivion which is made by a notorious company for being very 'buggy' and sloppy in their coding. Gears of War will be the 360's claim to fame and once that game is released, pretty much everything will strive for that graphical level becase they know, they'll be compared to Gears of War immeadiatey.
so, my two cents and i'm sticking to em.
Oblivion does look very nice, but i cant stand those types of games. I call them conversation simulators. The best gameplay you can find in them is a cheap first person point and click attack scheme and everything else is about becoming more god-like until you get bored with the game. Blah. However, i watched some videos of it in action and i have to say that it looks as good as Zelda and better in many ways, but not much better. I know, imma fanboy, etc, but in my opinion, like the knight on the horse for example looks very Zelda TP to me. A side from the game just looking much darker and more gritty.
As far as Ghost recon, I watched it in action as well and looked at screen shots and again, i have to say that while the poly counts are higher, higher res, etc, Zelda looks better. the human faces in Ghost recon look like puppets and the clothes have weird shading where folds are supposed to be so when they move it looks unreal, and then the props and buildings look like cardboard cutouts. Like ABF said, it's technically superior but it still falls short of being as pretty as TP is. It's just my opinion and i'm honestly not trying to put Zelda on a cross, TP just looks as good or sometimes better than those games.
of course, like in Oblivion for sure, there are neat bump map effects, multiple light sources, real time shadows capable of distortion around objects, all kinds of neat things; It's a graphically superior game on a technical level, but so is Ghost recon (compared to TP) and as with all developers some are better equiped to make a game shine than others. while i believe oblivion is either better or as good as Zelda graphically, ghost recon and PDZ and other games actually dont look as good as TP. this probably has to do with TP getting more TLC in its development, and each texture and poly being scrutinized by entire teams at a time and it definitely shows. I think with the first gen 360 games, that TLC was put on a back burner to get the games out quickly in time for launch.
paco specifically will want to brand this post as fandom, but Shadow of the Collosus is also a better looking game in many respects. The actual 'Collosus' creature's models look better than anything i've seen on 360 so far in their first gen line up. So again, I think it has more to do with care and attention rather than a debate about technical specs, which the 360 wins hands down. That just doesn't guarantee a better looking game. in Shadow, those beautiful monsters are running around an expansive open desert. ie: they're the only thing on screen other than your character and the horse. but zelda manages to get tons of shit happening at once with extremely detailed environments and characters, the things that suffer is things like the textures used for the ground, where it's one giant low resolution texture used over and over to create the look of the ground whether it be a grassy field or a packed down dirt path. because of that sacrifice, the developers are able to pump the location up with NPC's, props, etc. It's really nice looking and i bet every trick in Nintendo's hat is being displayed in that game. With first gen 360 titles, the lack of experience with working for that hardware and the rush to get the game's out on time resulted in high poly count, High definition subpar graphics that really, should not represent the power of the system at all, neither should Oblivion which is made by a notorious company for being very 'buggy' and sloppy in their coding. Gears of War will be the 360's claim to fame and once that game is released, pretty much everything will strive for that graphical level becase they know, they'll be compared to Gears of War immeadiatey.
so, my two cents and i'm sticking to em.