Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 03:46:33 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Final Fantasy XIII [split topic]

Started by jutl, March 05, 2010, 11:40:49 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

jutl

(Western) Final Fantasy XIII reviews are beginning to come out, making it sound all a bit disappointing:

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps3/finalfantasy13

Also, the 360 port is supposed to be a bit lazy and shit:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-final-fantasy-xiii-face-off

Still Not George

"84% Generally Favourable" on metacritic is disappointing now?

edit. Finished reading the second article. "Lower resolution with decent upscaling, looks about the same with very occasional issues that don't really matter" means "lazy and shit" now?

falafel

That's what they've meant in PS3land for quite a while now, SNG...

Still Not George

That's just it, though, neither link really seems to support jutl's introductory sentence for it. Seemed a bit weird is all.

Saw the bit describing FFXIII as linear. I take it these people never played FFX...

jutl

Quote from: Still Not George on March 05, 2010, 12:45:59 PM
That's just it, though, neither link really seems to support jutl's introductory sentence for it. Seemed a bit weird is all.

For a game with that level of budget and expectation, the reviews are disappointing, yes. The DF article cites many examples of areas where the 360 conversion seems to have cut corners, so yes - lazy. Shit is subjective, but again, given the investment, I think it's fair.

Still Not George

Quote from: jutl on March 05, 2010, 12:58:33 PM
For a game with that level of budget and expectation, the reviews are disappointing, yes.
I think our understanding of "disappointing" is different.

QuoteThe DF article cites many examples of areas where the 360 conversion seems to have cut corners, so yes - lazy. Shit is subjective, but again, given the investment, I think it's fair.
Um, it cites one. At length. And explored the ramifications of it.

jutl

Quote from: Still Not George on March 05, 2010, 01:06:52 PM
Um, it cites one. At length. And explored the ramifications of it.

Erm... have you read it all? He talks about lack of tiling, failure to leverage better alpha channel support on the 360, failure to use all the available space on the storage media and poor video compression.

Still Not George

Eek, good point, there is indeed more pages of it. The tiling is the same problem he talks about on the first page, and he's stretching with the "failing to use all available space" thing, that's probably blaming Square ENIX more than is reasonable.

And the alpha testing? Not always the best idea; it can cause serious sorting problems at times which might not be that good an idea in a hair shader depending on how much the hair flies around (I don't have the game so I don't know if it Bayonettas or Crofts, if you see what I mean).

Certainly the encoding issues are a problem; I admit to not knowing much on that particular topic (video codecs are not at all my thing).

jutl

#8
Quote from: Still Not George on March 05, 2010, 01:17:00 PMCertainly the encoding issues are a problem; I admit to not knowing much on that particular topic (video codecs are not at all my thing).

...and they are something that the DF guy obsesses about as he is trying to flog their very fast full-frame capture technology to games studios but has generally to show off its output using lossy compression over the internet. It's clearly something he does a lot and knows a lot about. It is a bit cheeky of Square Enix to just chuck the PS3 video through a compressor with no manual improvements and cash Microsoft's cheque. It's just a reversed example of the procession of low-effort ports that flow from the 360 to the PS3. On the positive side though, it will probably cheer up many gloomy PS3 fanboys.

Still Not George

Quote from: jutl on March 05, 2010, 01:26:45 PMOn the positive side though, it will probably cheer up many gloomy PS3 fanboys.
And more to the point, FINALLY demonstrate that lazy ports are in fact just lazy ports and not admissable as "evidence that the <insert platform here> is shit lol".

falafel

Bit of a tangent, but what's wrong with the occasional aside: we all know the Wii is basically a bit shit (don't we?) but they managed to do a great job with Resi 4. Even if the platform is shitty there's no real excuse not to try to wring something decent out of it.

PS3 and 360 have not been demonstrably different to me in any significant way yet. Apart from - and I was criticising this before I played it - some of the crowd scenes in heavy rain maybe, and the bits in Uncharted 2 where loads of stuff falls over and things start collapsing in an apparently unscripted sort of fashion, plus the post=processing stuff. Though I really have no idea how the whole PPE parallel hoojah thing works there so I could be miles off.

I think the Wii's problem is mainly - something SNG has touched on several times before - that only a very limited number of developers are given the 'keys to the kingdom', as it were. When you play something like Metroid Prime Trilogy, there are enough graphical and stylistic flourishes, as well as just knockout art design, that you could almost almost buy that it was a next-gen game. On top of that, you've got a control system that is simply more instinctive than any other available on any platform for that type of game. I'm genuinely baffled whenever I hear someone complain about the tightness of those controls. The thing is, it's basically an in-house development, and as a consequence, it's about 100% more technically-accomplished than what almost any third-party developer can come up with because Nintendo are so stingy with their insider assistance. I'm still not quite sure why this is but it certainly protects and promotes the outstanding quality of their leading titles.

Another major difference for me is that I could probably play and enjoy anything from the Top 20 current 360/PS3 games. If you look at the Wii charts, it's literally shit for cunts, with NSMB thrown in. Same with the DS. I go to computer city in China and browse through all the games, Euro/American and Jap. It's 99% utter turd, cash-in, license bullshit. Yet despite these differences, I'm very rarely wowed or delighted by any game on 360/PS3. There are loads of very playable, polished titles - and I played literally hundreds in China - but almost nothing that I'd rate alongside SMG or Metroid Prime or even Twilight Princess, which wasn't a great Zelda game, to be frank. I'd even put the likes of Spirit Tracks/Phoenix Wright on the DS above almost anything else. I could go into the number of cracking titles which I feel were totally underappreciated by the press and public (Excite Truck, for one - as mentioned before) but I think my point stands as it is. The core titles - as repetitive and simplistic as they may be in theme/character/scenario/plot - stand head and shoulders above virtually any other franchise I could name. In terms of pacing, level design, difficult curve, that intangible 'feel', in-game variety, Nintendo are still at the forefront of gaming and that's precisely why I'll support their software, even if the system is relatively shit. I've got mates who've been converted but still say to me 'if only the Wii had better graphics, etc.' I agree, if only...Do I expect it to happen with the next model? I don't think they'll ever chase the 'hardcore' gamer crowd again.

The Wii could be flooded with AAA-grade non-shovelware titles and I still would not like its waving-the-controllers-around control scheme.

The first time it was leaked I thought it would be arse while everyone else thought viva la revolucion. I still think the controller waggling is ballsack a few years on. I much prefer the traditional Xbox/PS controller sans movement. I want to be comfortably sat down, with only my fingers pressing the directions and fire buttons.

.

Maybe standing up and shaking a plastic wand will come into its own in the Wii 2 / PS4 / Xbox720 (or the soon-to-be released periphs for ps3/x360), but as it is now, I dislike it a lot.

Yeah, but that generalisation stems more from advertisements than reality! To take Metroid as an example: although you're pointing at the screen with the remote, your movements require as much physical movement as if you were using a mouse, there's just a greater sense of involvement. You're not 'waggling' or 'shaking' anything and you're certainly not standing up! I can count on one hand the games which require or even encourage you to do the latter. Even in SMG, which does require a barely perceptible flick of the wrist, no human being - besides my nan, probably - would actively shake the controller as it's neither necessary nor beneficial. You are basically using joypad movements with very minor physical elements.

I'm not suggesting you've not come to a first-hand conclusion on this but it's precisely what all my mates said before they'd actually played on it.

jutl

Quote from: The Boston Crab on March 05, 2010, 03:26:57 PMYou are basically using joypad movements with very minor physical elements.

...it's also moot when games like Heavy Rain have you chucking the controller around in non-optional motion controls in any case.

jutl

As a further aside, this is hilarious:

http://uk.gamespot.com/news/6252956.html

Quote"Activision has adopted the corporate strategy of forcing Messrs. West and Zampella to sue for their pay--in the hopes of either getting away with not having to pay them anything, or maximizing its leverage to reduce that pay," the suit alleges. "Such actions are not surprising, given that Activision is run by a CEO who has been publicly quoted as believing the best way to run a videogame studio is to engender a culture of 'skepticism, pessimism, and fear,' and who prefers to pay his lawyers instead of his employees."

Quote from: The Boston Crab on March 05, 2010, 03:26:57 PM
Yeah, but that generalisation stems more from advertisements than reality! <snip>
I'm not suggesting you've not come to a first-hand conclusion on this but it's precisely what all my mates said before they'd actually played on it.

First-hand conclusion. When I said waving/waggling I didn't mean to suggest some exaggerated balletics as displayed by various TV happy families in Nintendo Wii commercials. Boiling it down to wrist flicks and subtle twists of the nunchuk still doesn't sit well with me as a control scheme. The joypad is still king when it comes to console gaming.

Fair enough and despite the relative ease of use, I can definitely understand that its deliberate inclusivity could also make it divisive.

jutl

Quote from: Garfield And Friends on March 05, 2010, 03:55:19 PM
The joypad is still king when it comes to console gaming*

* excluding Guitar Hero, Samba De Amigo, Wii Fit, Donkey Konga, House of the Dead, Missile Command, World of Goo, Resident Evil 4, Wii Sports, Professor Layton, Lost Winds, Elite Beat Agents, Flower etc etc

falafel

The controls in Metroid Prime were excellent but I really didn't get on with it. In fact, I've never enjoyed Nintendo exclusive gaming. Yeah, that's right. Fuck you. I've always hated Mario, every single Mario game I have played has just left me frustrated and frankly really fucking bored. Zelda is shit; tedious fucking shit. Likewise Metroid, as mentioned. That Kirby thing on the DS was alright though, I guess.

I don't get Nintendo! I really, really don't.

Oh wait, I did really really love Mario Kart Double Dash, that was awesome. But the Wii version... nah.

Jemble Fred

I'm hoping that Natal spells the end of this kind of dispute. No silly lumps of plastic to waggle.

VegaLA

Quote from: Garfield And Friends on March 05, 2010, 03:07:51 PM
The Wii could be flooded with AAA-grade non-shovelware titles and I still would not like its waving-the-controllers-around control scheme.

The first time it was leaked I thought it would be arse while everyone else thought viva la revolucion. I still think the controller waggling is ballsack a few years on. I much prefer the traditional Xbox/PS controller sans movement. I want to be comfortably sat down, with only my fingers pressing the directions and fire buttons.

.

Maybe standing up and shaking a plastic wand will come into its own in the Wii 2 / PS4 / Xbox720 (or the soon-to-be released periphs for ps3/x360), but as it is now, I dislike it a lot.

Agreed, but I won't be getting ANY of the next gens if they adopt that controller scheme and force the player to use it.
Slouched in the sofa with a joypad is the only way for me laddies and ladies!

falafel

I'm intrigued how this will pan out when you look at the average consumer. I don't know if Natal will look that much different to the PS Eye to most people, despite probably being a lot more powerful. Sony could easily market the PS Eye on its own as one of the minor things they have, and the Arc as an awesome new revolutionary control system, thus making Mr and Mrs Average go "they've got a thing like Natal, PLUS a big plasticky wavy wand with a glowy thing that looks a bit like the wotsit from Labyrinth"!

Nik Drou

Anyone play the Just Cause 2 demo yet?  It's fun floating about the place and theres a great sense of scale to it, especially when large structures collapse, and there's an impressive amount of destructibility to the environment.  It's also nice to have a game where a grapple hook is not only a central feature but can be used to such a variable effect. 

When it comes down to earth, though, it's pretty clunky.  No decent cover system, so gunfights seem to consist of standing in an open plain or rooftop, as far away as possible from any enemies and slowly pick them off, all the while hoping that their energy runs out before yours.  The AI is pretty poor and more intricate movements, such as getting inside a building through a window, feel much more clumsy than they should.  In spite of that, I reckon there's a lot to like.

I think the Wii has a lot going for it, though it remains to be seen how much after the other parties get their motion controllers in gear.  The idea that it involves a 'waving-around-controllers' control-scheme feels like a gross exaggeration/recieved wisdom based upon the admittedly plentiful array of mediocre party games on the system.  The last three games I've gotten for the Wii (Boy and His Blob, Tatsunoko Vs Capcom and Muramasa.  All very enjoyable.)  don't use any motion sensitivity at all.  Games that do involve the odd shaking of the wand (Madworld, No More Heroes) work in a perfectly intuitive, not to mention cathartic, way. 

Before I got my PS3, the graphical capability of the Wii wasn't much of an issue.  Mario Galaxy and Smash Bros Melee looked fantastic and visually far more interesting than the likes of Gears of War or something.  Since playing and thoroughly enjoying Uncharted 2, LittleBigPlanet, InFamous and such, my Wii has waned (fnarr) in comparison.  It's a shame, as I think the Wiimote design and application is a thing of beauty and I'm always up for its defence.  Even if Wii had an HD capability it'd make the difference.  It doesn't really need to play blu-rays, DVDs or be an extension of people's hi-fi/entertainment set ups a la Sony.  There pretty much needs to be a Wii 2 announced within about two years.

Anyway, I asked this earlier, but is it worth me getting a 360 as well?  Aside from Trials HD and maybe one of the Halos, there isn't a huge amount of exclusive software I'd be after.  Still, it appears to run a bit better than the PS3 and have the majority of superior ports.  I've yet to be sold on Natal, though.  Any system that isn't interacting with a piece of hardware in your hands is going to be less reliable.  I'm sure it'll work for party games and for a bit of extra interactivity here and there, but it won't be the Minority Reportish future world that the adverts claim.

HappyTree

I just watched the official promo for Natal and wow, what a lovely, smiley, well-behaved family they are! The sheer ecstatic joy on their faces as they played together and stayed together was a wonder to behold.

Unfortunately, my family isn't like that, plus I wonder how the Natal captor will cope with real-life party-time extra gestures of picking up bottles and passing joints.

It's interesting in that this and the Wii are making you move your body to get more absorbed in the experience. This is in contrast to the traditional controller which is geared towards the precise opposite: the least possible movement of the body to get more absorbed in the experience.

I personally prefer the former for throwaway, sporty games. Most fun I've had on a computer sports game was the Wii bowling. There, the mental activity stayed in the real world and the console was merely a plaything providing feedback on our physical actions.

But I much prefer the latter method for absorption into any other type of game. Games that are story-based and provide a world for you to inhabit other than the real world do not suit real-life body movement controller types, in my opinion. Here, the game needs to be treated not as a plaything accessory to your mental life out in the real world, but as a mental world to inhabit for a while. So the less movement you have to make in the physical world the more engrossed your mind will be in the game world. When little finger movements on a controller become second nature you can almost forget you are moving them at all and so your movements in the game and the manipulation of its environment become far more convincing. It's like you have mentally transported your awareness into the character that represents you on the screen, or into the screen itself if it's a first-person perspective.

So I think there will be room in the future for both types of controller, the body movement Wii/Natal type and the non body movement 360/PS3 in-hand type. Where both these controller types converge is in virtual reality type helmets that are to come. They will combine the strengths of the 2 opposing types of controller today and you'll have mental and physical engrossment in a game world. But not yet!

Still Not George

Quote from: The Boston Crab on March 05, 2010, 02:38:10 PM
I think the Wii's problem is mainly - something SNG has touched on several times before - that only a very limited number of developers are given the 'keys to the kingdom', as it were. When you play something like Metroid Prime Trilogy, there are enough graphical and stylistic flourishes, as well as just knockout art design, that you could almost almost buy that it was a next-gen game.
Only if - and I'm speaking as someone who's now spent a lot of time playing next-gen games - only if you didn't really play games very much on the other consoles. Metroid Prime is pretty (if a little boring and gimmicky) but Gears of War 2 in 720p it ain't.

The "Keys to the Kingdom" problem (and that's a damn good term, thank you) isn't so much one of how to make it competitive with other consoles; doing so is pretty much impossible. The problem is that Ninty have massive advantages over other developers in their tools: they have the source to Nintendoware, for example, something no-one else has access to; they have an in-house motion sensing library they started work upon during the early stages of the Revolution Project, everyone else is stuck using the utterly shit 3rd party libraries or writing their own. So basically we're only now, years into the Wii's lifetime, seeing people with access to techniques Nintendo have had from the get-go.

Thing is, I do see a lot of Wii owners saying things like "there's nothing much on the other consoles that appeals". And that actually makes a degree of sense. There's a certain kind of gamer that is essentially ready-made for Nintendo's specific approach to game creation, and that kind of gamer has become the Wii evangelist of the modern era. It's just a shame so many people (me included) fell for the Revolution hype and the following bullshit storm; the Wii really isn't bringing us a New Way Of Playing Games. It's just saved Nintendo's ass, that's all.

mobias

Quote from: Nik Drou on March 05, 2010, 04:55:47 PM





Still, it appears to run a bit better than the PS3 and have the majority of superior ports. 


That's fairly debatable. The 360 has a few superior ports thus far but the PS3 is starting to have a growing number of superior ports and there are mutterings amongst some games developers that in the long run the PS3 will be the lead platform for cross platform games (up until fairly recently the 360 has always been the lead platform) From what I've heard I think the tide will turn in favour of the PS3 now that its clear a lot of games developers have finally worked out how to program it it properly.

There are games such as Gears of War and Halo (as well as others) it is clearly worth owning a 360 for so I would say if you can afford it then go for it, the lower spec 360 is pretty good value for money if you're an avid gamer.


falafel

Not sure how you mean "run a bit better"... it's historically less reliable, but that's probably sorted out.

I think as a rule if you are alright with the DualShock then the playing experience from port-to-port will generally be so similar as for any wee little differences to be immaterial. Only worth getting the 360 for Live and for the exclusives, if you've already got the PS3, as far as I can see. So if you've got the money, I'm with mobias; get the cheapo 360 and be done with it, you've already got your primary gaming machine.

jutl

Quote from: mobias on March 05, 2010, 06:38:09 PM

That's fairly debatable. The 360 has a few superior ports thus far but the PS3 is starting to have a growing number of superior ports

The PS3 has some (generally first party) superior exclusives (in the sense that they do things that have not been done well on the 360 thus far). There really are not many multi-platform games that are better on the PS3, unfortunately. Eurogamer's Face Off articles show the history pretty well, with PS3 versions of multi-platform games getting closer and closer to parity but only very rarely beating 360 counterparts. I'm not biased towards either side here, and own both consoles. Developers seem to choose the 360 as a lead platform because it has a larger installed base. Looking at the cumulative sales of the consoles, it doesn't look like the PS3 is going to catch the 360 during either console's lifetime (despite being ahead in Japan and looking likely to squeeze past the 360 in Europe soonish).

Quoteand there are mutterings amongst some games developers that in the long run the PS3 will be the lead platform for cross platform games

I'd be interested in links to these, because from the data it would seem like an odd choice.

mobias

Quote from: jutl on March 05, 2010, 07:29:18 PM
. Developers seem to choose the 360 as a lead platform because it has a larger installed base.



Well that's certainly one reason, Sony were apparently very late getting PS3 development kits to games developers at the start of this generation. The other reason is that the 360 is way more easy to program for, it is after all just a PC in a flashy box more or less. The PS3 is known to be a real bugger to program for (as was the PS2) but what that also means is that developers have to think outside the box when programming for it which in turn should lead to more innovation, or so they say.
There was a article in I think Edge magazine fairly recently that said that some games developers are starting to think that there may be more milage in the PS3 as its now starting to become clear that the fact that the 360 is stuck with 9GB of max game size is limiting for that console and since the PS3 and 360 are going to be the current generation of consoles for far longer than the PS2 and Xbox were it is possible that more investment will be made into developing for the PS3 over the 360.

On a similar-ish subject I read quite a good article recently about the age old 360 versus PS3 debate and whether or not 360 games have reached their peak, in terms of graphics and game physics where as the PS3 has in the last six months seen a spate of games that clearly show that games are continuing to improve for that console.
Not sure what my opinion is on that as I don't have a 360. There's certainly been some graphically incredible games like Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 for the PS3 in the last little while.