GOW 1+2 VS REMASTERS ! HUGE difference !

[MaxwellGT2000]

Reasonable said:

MaxwellGT2000 said:

Reasonable said:

MaxwellGT2000 said:

Reasonable said:

MaxwellGT2000 said:
There is no difference other then the color of both sets are different, looks like they touched up the life/magic bar, but that's about it. Textures are the same, lighting is the same, models are the same, shadows are still a bit blocky.... yeah its the same.

I really don't know why people try to "compare" things by changing colors and resolutions, you know in science there is such a thing as a control, dear lord its a basic principal, you can't compare two sets unless there is a controlled variable, changing the color and then saying ZOMG LOOK HOW BIG THE DIFFERENCE IS, it's just unreliable data.

Actually, the PS3 version is clearly sharper and higher resolution.  That's the point I think most are missing - the games been given a resolution hike, better AA, etc. so it will look smooth on an HD TV rather than jaggy, with sharper textures.  But looking at an image that size you're not going to see that well represented.  Zoom in on the images to get the real picture - oh, someone's already done that.

See?  This is about making the game HD in terms of resolution, AA, etc. not re-doing the core engine, etc. so the models and so forth are going to look mainly the same - but sharper.

I'm guessing you also missed the point I made that said changing resolutions and color is the worst way to "compare" screenshots, if you're wanting to say it's the exact same thing except higher resolution, then say that.  Higher resolution and looking better are two totally different things, and saying there's a "huge difference" is simply absurd.  Higher resolution and higher AA can be done in an emulator and already has.

Nothing has changed at all except for the obvious changes to resolution, if you want to prove something seriously changed play the PS2 version in 1080p or play the PS3 version in 480p, in fact if I remember right the PS2 Gow was one of the few games on the PS2 to support higher "HD resolutions" by upscaling.

And to be clear, I'm talking about looking better on an HD TV - a higher resolution will make it look better than PS2 version upscaled - which is what the upgrade is all about.  Resolution respective to the display device absolutely makes a game look better - unless you think the exact same visual image with clear jaggy edges and a slight blurriness is better or equal to a sharp image with clean lines.

Also, I made it clear there ISN'T a huge difference because the focus is on HD resolution and making it look clean on an HD display, not upgrading the game wholesale - i.e. in my first post I pointed out the difference isn't huge and people don't seem to be looking at what the upgrades about.  I feel you didn't properly read my post.

 

And I feel the same so that makes us even.

Funny, because re-checking the thread I see the following:

1 - the expected 'It's HUGE' comments from the believers

2 - you and other going 'it's not huge' (correctly) then citing same textures, etc. and no real difference (incorrectly, rather to my amazement)

3 - I and others explain, quite calmly, that the difference is there but it's in resolution and improving the texture assets to be sharper and smoother, vastly improved AA (are you really saying you can't see the different between the huge jaggies in some of those shots and the straight lines in others?) and smoother frame rate which is all about having a far better image on an HD TV - the analogy would be watching a film on VHS on an SD TV then BR on an HD TV: same film, clear difference in image quality, however it is still the same film

4 - you quote me and correct me the difference isn't huge, which is odd because I never said it was huge, in fact I clearly said the opposite, while clarify what the differences really are, which clearly shows you didn't read my post properly

 

So you'll forgive me for knowing that I absolutely did read your post properly, and indeed everyone elses, however you clearly misunderstood mine, as you mis-quote me in black and white whereas I replied (not directly) to your and other comments with technical facts regarding the difference between the PS3 HD versions and the originals.

But hey, don't face facts.  Anyway, as usual I'm not getting into extended back and forth on a forum, it's a waste of time IMHO so this will be my final response on this.

Heh works for me, since my main point that you didn't address was the fact that, if you're going to compare screenshots claim there is a huge difference (not aimed at you the thread itself mind you) then there must be a control.  Especially if you claim HUGE differences, again you didn't, but that's the only point I was making and I guess you missed and is the only point I feel like arguing.  There is a difference in resolution, being clearer is debatable when you're trying to compare shitty screen caps like the ones in the OP, the PS2 screens had the brightness turned down (again I must state there needs to be a control here for comparison)

In the end I'm mostly saying the comparisons are stupid when they're so poorly done, I never even denied how the framerate is better, AA better, or a few clearer textures.  But I did state those weren't huge since they have already been done with the original game and an emulator by a few guys working on programs in their spare time. 

So yes I do think you missed my points as well, and since I didn't start the back and forth quotes, I leave that up to you to figure out why you started it :P