PDA

View Full Version : Not really HD?


SiKiTtOyA
09-16-2011, 09:14 AM
I dunno but from what i just saw @Kotaku the game doesnt look much differ at all then the original xbox version. I thought it was gonna get a total HD conversion like RE4?

If thats the case then imma pass on this. What a shame. I want full crisp detail and what not. Not the same game stretched out just to fit the screen. Dont get me wrong, I love MGS but in this day in age I want FULL 1080 HD. Its almost 2012. Come on! RE4 HD FTW!

Heres what Luke Plunkett had to say:

And then there's Metal Gear Solid 2, which takes the approach that if it was good enough for the 1990s, it's good enough for now, and changes almost nothing.
In some ways, this sucks, as the muddy character textures and low polygon counts look awful on a big HDTV (the level art, being blocky by design and better lit, doesn't look too bad). In others, though, it's awesome, as you see things like hairy armpits (pictured in clip above) in greater detail than ever before.

You can see review here:http://kotaku.com/5840892/metal-gear-solid-2-in-hd-is-all-talk-hairy-armpits/gallery/1

BosmaniaK
09-22-2011, 10:52 PM
what you want is a total remake... that they all look like MGS4, right?
That's simply not possible. something like that takes loads of work and is totally not cost effective, because most people won't buy a remake or game that they've played before for $60 per game.

and LMAO at "RE4 ftw". have you played it? it's exactly what MGS HD will be like (graphical) no, probably better because it's Konami/Kojima and they actually care about their games

SiKiTtOyA
09-23-2011, 09:32 AM
what you want is a total remake... that they all look like MGS4, right?
That's simply not possible. something like that takes loads of work and is totally not cost effective, because most people won't buy a remake or game that they've played before for $60 per game.

and LMAO at "RE4 ftw". have you played it? it's exactly what MGS HD will be like (graphical) no, probably better because it's Konami/Kojima and they actually care about their games

did u even read the review on MGS2HD before u posted?

yes, i played RE4 on the gamecube, ps2 and now on the 360. it looks absolutlely amazing in HD. Yes it was a full remake. which capcom did with flying colors. konami should of done the same.

RE4 HD only costs $20 over xbox live, so i dont know where u got $60 from? i think a company as big as konami should have no problem doing a total remake like capcom did for re4.

and no. its not what MGS will be like. read the review before u post. they actually saw the game in person at TGS 2011. they said it has muddy character textures and low polygon counts look awful on a big HDTV.

please read before you post as i shouldnt of even bothered replying to u cause apparently you dont bother reading.

BosmaniaK
09-23-2011, 10:16 AM
did u even read the review on MGS2HD before u posted?

yes, i played RE4 on the gamecube, ps2 and now on the 360. it looks absolutlely amazing in HD. Yes it was a full remake. which capcom did with flying colors. konami should of done the same.

RE4 HD only costs $20 over xbox live, so i dont know where u got $60 from? i think a company as big as konami should have no problem doing a total remake like capcom did for re4.

and no. its not what MGS will be like. read the review before u post. they actually saw the game in person at TGS 2011. they said it has muddy character textures and low polygon counts look awful on a big HDTV.

please read before you post as i shouldnt of even bothered replying to u cause apparently you dont bother reading.

I feel like we misunderstand eachother.
RE4 is not a full remake, have you heard the sound effects of the breaking pots? sounds exactly like in the PS2, 64 kb/sec. They simply updated the visuals a bit and slap on the HD-label.

and yes I have read your whole post. I just think people should get their expectations straight.

and be honest: does RE4 look like the graphics can compete with todays games?

SiKiTtOyA
09-24-2011, 05:04 AM
I feel like we misunderstand eachother.
RE4 is not a full remake, have you heard the sound effects of the breaking pots? sounds exactly like in the PS2, 64 kb/sec. They simply updated the visuals a bit and slap on the HD-label.

and yes I have read your whole post. I just think people should get their expectations straight.

and be honest: does RE4 look like the graphics can compete with todays games?

Updated the visuals just a bit? Are you even playing on an HDTV? It looks awsome! The HD label is there because it is HD.

it sounds just fine on my BOSE acoustimass 10 series IV speakers!

RE4 looks amazing. Its better then havin jagged edges and low polygon counts that MGS will have.

I dont have my expectations straight? If a company says they gonna release a game in HD. It better be in HD. If they say its HD when the image is still low quality with jagged edges. Its a rip off and very misleading. HD remake should not have any of those faults.

Just because something is 16:9 does not make it HD.

I will no longer comment on the subject as I hope it will look better then described by Kotaku. MGS2 was awsome n i played the crap out if it on the xbox!

BosmaniaK
10-09-2011, 03:52 PM
quote from Gameshard http://www.gameshard.net/metal-gear-solid-2-3-hd.html

"If MGS2 still looked brilliant, though, I have to say MGS3 looks absolutely unbelievable. MGS3 was always a highly detailed game, and the always ambitious Kojima decided to set the game in a jungle, which was always going to push the PS2 with it's visuals. This resulted in the game having to put up with a lower (30 fps) framerate, which wasn't much of an issue but was definately noticable next to the silk-smoothness of MGS2. Thanks to the upscale to HD, the game can now fulfil its potential years later and look without a doubt better than it ever has before. The smoothness and fluidity help you appreciate how improved the animation was, also how much better the movement and more refined controls worked. It's simply an absolute treat to behold. Even the textures, which are arguably nothing to todays photo-realistic standards, look incredible. It's quite a thing to say, but MGS3 looks better than some current gen games today, the extra polish has helped the game's potential finally be realised and I think some will be suprised just how much detail has been crammed in here. Astonishing."

Zerokesra
10-11-2011, 09:38 PM
Having just finished RE4:HD I can say its only a minor upscale in terms of graphics compaired to the PS2 version. And yes I've been playing on a full HDTV.

From what I've seen of the comparison shots between PS2/HD versions of Metal Gear you can actually notice how on edges of objects they look more smooth than before. As Bosmania said, Its a Kojima game and they'll actually put the effort into touching it up properly.

Kaiyo
11-10-2011, 01:17 AM
If you want a true remake then go get Halo CE: Anniversary. Now that bad boy is a remake.

KloudStrife
11-20-2011, 12:46 PM
Somewhat, Halo CE: Anniversary uses both the original Halo engine and the Reach engine for visuals.

This be DMK
11-20-2011, 01:41 PM
I noticed the upscale problems throughout MGS2, but it was only when cutscenes were fairly close and honestly it was only the walls and some pieces of the guns that looked bad. Outside of that looked fantastic. MGS3 as described above looks above and beyond what I was expecting after playing MGS2 first.

bennifer3000
11-21-2011, 12:19 PM
That word... I don't think it means what you think it means...

linus614
11-24-2011, 11:28 PM
I remember when HD in video game terms ment Hand Drawn. But I digress. And for the op's comments personally it is stupid to pass on a game simply because of graphics. I can understand wanting to to play something that fully push a consels limitaions, but when you are talking about an "upscaled" game or even a "remake" you have to give it some limitations. If you where expecting MGS4 type of graphics you sir are a moron. Personally I have been waiting years to play these games on the 360 and I can give 2 shits less about the graphics. Have fun with Leon.

samsaBEAR
11-29-2011, 12:33 PM
I must admit I was a bit disappointed when I started seeing gameplay videos of MGS2HD and they weren't 'proper' HD, but then nostalgia took over and I forgot all of my woes and worries.

shavron
12-09-2011, 12:15 PM
Metal Gear Solid 2 was released in 2001. Resident Evil 4 was released in 2005. RE4 had better graphics to begin with so it damn well better look better than a game released four year prior.

MAC METAL FACE
12-10-2011, 01:40 AM
Still looks good to me ^_^ and it is all about that Ultra Nostalgia!

idave1010
01-18-2012, 09:37 PM
Mgs2 is in total HD. It's not completely remade with better textures and higher polygon count but it looks great. Hell even the original XBOX version looked great at the time and this is bringing me back.

TVthePunisher
01-19-2012, 09:56 AM
I think it looks great, both of the games. Compared to what they look like through an AV cable out of a PS2 and then looking at them now...these are gorgeous. Sure the graphics themselves are from last generation but they still look pretty good! Maybe not as impressive as what everyone is used to these days but shit...quality games. Today's gamers are spoiled on Gears of War graphics and Metal Gear Solid 4 graphics...looking back at last gen games makes them think they are terrible ;>_>

Burnout x360a
01-19-2012, 10:17 AM
HD in the case of updated retro games is usually 'High Detail', at least that's how I see it.

tehapoc
01-20-2012, 02:44 PM
What a laugh, Konami actually put time into this "HD" remake? Go look at Halo CE and how you can switch back from what the game used to look like and the remade graphics, then take a look at the still piss-poor low res textures on MGS HD. There's no excuse, and where is MGS 1? What a joke. Lazy, money grubbing bastards.

Really? I thought Halo looked like shit. And I wouldn't call Konami a bunch of money grubbing bastards. Bungie decided to make Halo 3 their final and last game and then you put out the shit that was Halo: ODST and Halo: Reach. And now, Microsoft handed over the rights to 343 to make a yet another shitty trilogy.

RDrules
01-24-2012, 02:15 PM
Its just a matter of people not understanding what HD is, it doesn't mean a game with top end graphics that looks fantastic it just means they have made the game work in a higher resolution that is all.

it has nothing to do with increasing the polygon count or updating the graphics or anything like that

BrySkye
02-09-2012, 07:42 PM
HD in the case of updated retro games is usually 'High Detail', at least that's how I see it.

Nope, HD is still High Definition.

High Definition in the strictest sense is simply a matter of the rendering resolution, that's all.

Originally MGS2 on the PS2 and Xbox were 640x480 @ 60fps (The Xbox version had some enhanced anti-aliasing, but the port was far from perfect and suffered from slow down in certain areas compared to the PS2 version.

MGS3 on the PS2 was rendered at 640x480 @ 30fps. The drop in framerate was the price for the vastly increased amount of detail.

The MGS HD Collection renders all 3 games at 1080p, ie, 1920x1080, and all 3 games, including MGS3, now run at 60fps.

Now changing the resolution alone can't work miracles. It doesn't increase the amount of polygons making up a model and low resolution textures will still be low resolution textures.

What it does help with is making the rendered 3D objects appear sharper and smoother. You won't see many jagged lines on the actual models in the HD collection.
Konami have in fact also redrawn some of the games textures at higher resolutions as well, but not all of them.
One example would be the writing on Snake's oxygen mask at the start of Snake Eater. The writing which reads "Metal Gear Solid 3 Snake Eater" is very clearly legible compared to the original.

MPC
02-10-2012, 04:31 AM
This guy must be on crack and sort sighted i have a 47 inch full hd tv and this looks better then resi 4 yes resi 4 does look nice but u can see in places where it still looks like ps2 graphics

Tekuno Tiger
02-16-2012, 05:34 PM
I thought the same, OP.

FiReStOrM^
02-22-2012, 10:47 PM
I haven't played MGS3 HD yet, been busy with MGS2 HD, but 2 looks awesome IMO. There is absolutely no aliasing (jaggies) at all that I can see (on my 37" at least) so there is clearly good anti-aliasing going on.

I absolutely cannot remember how the older versions looked. Did they have any kind of anti-aliasing?

d0ct0rscarecr0w
03-07-2012, 07:33 AM
Did you know that better graphics make a better game, tru fax.

I didn't bother reading every post but here is the break down either OP:
a) has played the games before and is willing to buy them again in better graphics
Conclusion: Either OP is a sucker willing to buy the same game over and over or he has lost access to the old copies.
Solution: Either way if the graphic changes matter obviously OP doesn't really want the games, so as it was said before he's a sucker.
Note: Of course this option only really matters if OP has played MOST 5 games which is highly unlikely.

b) OP hasn't played any or most of the games and only wants to play them if they are in 'new' graphics.
Conclusion: OP is a causal and isn't worth the time, obviously the only game he is suited to play is Modern Warfare 3.
Solution: tell him that the games are no good and he should NEVER play them. It would be a shame to get the games dirty.

c) OP thinks this is a remake.
Solution: tell OP isn't not a remake but a port and send him on his merry way.

PLEYOR
03-08-2012, 06:30 PM
Somewhat, Halo CE: Anniversary uses both the original Halo engine and the Reach engine for visuals.

It only used Halo's original engine, it only used Reach's engine for the multiplayer.


Resident Evil 4 didn't look that great in HD.

Kivlov
03-17-2012, 09:19 PM
If they were going the way of twin snakes, they may as well just create a whole new game.

Besides, for a game that was made in 2001/2002, and 2004/2005, the graphics are way ahead of their time, and dont seem dated in the slightest bit.

All this game really offers is being able to play 2 awesome games you used to love on your 360, as most people including me probably switched to xbox after the PS2 went outdated. So finaly we can play it on our current consoles. And most of all, with an actually DECENT controller, and not that kiddy piece of shit PS3 controller which hasnt changed since PS1.

LoversandBrothers
03-20-2012, 11:55 PM
HD doesn't mean remake. The Resident Evil for GameCube or Halo CE Anniversary for Xbox 360 are remakes. The Resident Evil 4 and Code Veronica HD, or this metal gear solid collection are not. HD stands for High Definition.

bapae
04-10-2012, 04:43 AM
Personally i think it looks way better then the ps2 version.. AA is better, New texture filtering that added effects, way higher resolution textures, smoother frame rate... So i don't know what you're complaining about honestly the RE4:HD isn't that much better.

Da-LES-Project
04-10-2012, 05:14 AM
Yeah the visuals in MGS:HD Collection do give you that ill feeling, but they have just been revamped somewhat to look good on the current consoles comared to what was available back then. Peace Walker being a PSP game was stunning on the handheld, but to the 360 and all the big open view compared to a small screen does make a difference even if the game was limited in some aspects.

Fluid Mantis
04-10-2012, 01:41 PM
It is HD because it is running at 1280x720 or 1920x1080. Or standard definition obviously if you're using a normal television. Whilst I don't think most of the textures were given an upgrade, I do think the character models were given a texture and polygon improvement. For instance, I took a photograph of Snake in the tunnel near the end, and viewed it in the photo viewer. I was amazed. Whilst not exactly the quality of modern games, it would certainly pass for being an early 360 game.

But like I said, whilst character models do seem to have been improved, I think most of the environmental textures remain the same. Although I did look at the computer monitors in the computer lab and they seem to have been made HD. :) Obviously, FMVs couldn't be made HD. Or the videos that were recorded with real cameras, because they were probably DV cameras. One other important factor is that improving the resolution of everything would probably prevent MGS2/3 fitting onto one DVD.

For the record, I own Substance for the Xbox, but I bought the HD Collection since I haven't played MGS3 or Peace Walker, and the added achievements and the price make it a steal! Metal Gear and Metal Gear 2 are included as well, making it even better value for money. No, they weren't given a HD upgrade. ;) And if you won't play MG1/2 because of "bad grafics" then go die in a fire.

Zapher
05-08-2014, 03:17 PM
its not a new game, its just in 1080p now so yes it IS in HD