By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - More Star Ocean 4 Info and Screenshots from Famitsu

Slimebeast on 29 December 2008
Riachu said:
Slimebeast said:
Riachu said:
Slimebeast said:
mrstickball said:
Slimebeast said:
FrostyTop said:
Well yes to a degree. WRPGs are more sandbox in the technical sense than JRPGs in that they are character driven, there's more opportunity for supper dooper eye candy moments in JRPGs but you've still got your basic areas you can go back to.

Where there is a lot of eye candy frame rates tend to suffer because the engine isn't specifically designed for those eye candy moments in real time.

JRPGs have nothing to do with sandbox (not that you claimed them to be, but since that term was brought up). JRPGs are the most linear games you can find. So it's not a technical issue at all if they look inferior (and they do), just a tradition of simplistic (or flat out bad) developing.

Ah, but we're talking technical. and not gameplay :)

There is a very staunch difference in *some* JRPGs and *some* WRPGs, since linearity changes design choice.

When there is more linearity, it means there are FAR more set pieces, and varied terrains/scenarios that are given. Since you aren't back-tracking on the same area often (unlike Sandbox RPGs), they are forced to make more areas that are different.

A few great games to explore for design choices:

  • Mass Effect
  • Oblivion
  • Fallout 3
  • King's Bounty: The Legend
  • The Last Remnant
  • Blue Dragon
  • Two Worlds
  • Eternal Sonata
  • Tales of Vesperia

..Of the recent ones, it's very interesting to view how the game play areas are defined. Some games restrict movement in favor of far more grandoise setpieces (such as Eternal Sonata and Tales of Vesperia), while other games have no boundaries, but are far more generic (Oblivion and Fallout 3). It's a very certain tradeoff: You have to sacrifice somewhere. Either the game will have some sort of pre-rendered, you-can't-go-there background, but have tons of them that are gorgeous, or aren't as gorgeous, but you can go anywhere, and do anything.

I think playing Mass Effect and The Last Remnant bring out the contrast in design choices the most, IMO. Both are UE3 games, but follow the varied East/West philosophies of dungeon and area design. ME has more sandbox-y areas, but aren't as varied as The Last Remnant, which restricts your ability to move in favor of gorgeous level design (which is certainly varied compared to ME...Which is also varied, but not nearly as much).

 

Yeah, those are good points. But I prefer the sandbox trade-off in variety. I adore sandbox.
And I'd actually say that sandbox in essence is gorgeous level design - while linear is inferior level design. But most people disagree.

 

I think linear level designs are best in story driven games while sandbox designs work best in mission driven games. That's my opinion though, not anyone elses'.

 

Yes, currently it is like that because it's obviously a lot easier to to integrate a story in a linear game than to an open-world - and that's why most developers still choose the linear path. But the ultimate challenge is to be able to weave in a great story into a totally free sandbox game - that's the dream I have.

 

It might be too late because some would argue that GTAIV did a pretty good job of that.   Others might think otherwise though.

 

GTA4 certainly did a pretty good job at that, but I has to remind you that huge areas of the city were restricted to entrance for a large part of the game.

 



Around the Network
jesus kung fu magic on 29 December 2008

Best looking JRPG until ff13 comes out.



N64 is the ONLY console of the fifth generation!!!

Stats87 on 29 December 2008

Is it just me, or does the quality of the graphics fluctuate from image to image?

Even if you take out all the CGI shots, some of those graphics are noticeably worse then they are in others. The pattern seems to be that the images I have seen before look better, while the newer ones seem worse. Possibly the former were touched up? It also seems to be that the images that have a lot of light/sun look better.



KichiVerde on 29 December 2008
Stats87 said:
Is it just me, or does the quality of the graphics fluctuate from image to image?

Even if you take out all the CGI shots, some of those graphics are noticeably worse then they are in others. The pattern seems to be that the images I have seen before look better, while the newer ones seem worse. Possibly the former were touched up? It also seems to be that the images that have a lot of light/sun look better.

 

 

That would be my fault. I took the images from Famitsu and threw them together at random in the title post.  Some of those screenshots are from 4 months ago while others were posted only yesterday. It probably has to do with the games development progress.





Stats87 on 29 December 2008

The Character models are easily the best part of the graphics and the detail is a step up from SO3 in a big way. The outdoor environments look nice, while the indoor environments look a little more bland. Lots of color and great use of lighting. The monsters (much like in SO3) look average and/or okay, while bosses (or what I am assuming are bosses) look better.



Around the Network
Riachu on 29 December 2008
Stats87 said:
The Character models are easily the best part of the graphics and the detail is a step up from SO3 in a big way. The outdoor environments look nice, while the indoor environments look a little more bland. Lots of color and great use of lighting. The monsters (much like in SO3) look average and/or okay, while bosses (or what I am assuming are bosses) look better.

Damn, Lost Odyssey's excellent monster designs just had to spoil me.

 



 

http://www.youtube.com/user/InvaderZimGuy1?feature=mhum

mrstickball on 29 December 2008
Riachu said:
Stats87 said:
The Character models are easily the best part of the graphics and the detail is a step up from SO3 in a big way. The outdoor environments look nice, while the indoor environments look a little more bland. Lots of color and great use of lighting. The monsters (much like in SO3) look average and/or okay, while bosses (or what I am assuming are bosses) look better.

Damn, Lost Odyssey's excellent monster designs just had to spoil me.

 

After playing The Last Remnant for 25+ hours...I have to say that TLR's depth of monster design is pretty great. Evil Eyes have to be one of the most unique designs for a monster ever....First battle with one (and he was very high leveled with 30,000HP) was ungodly scary. Very unique designs from bugs to dragons.

 



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

KichiVerde on 29 December 2008

When it comes to monsters Dragon Quest has the best ones. They are highly unique. However, what I like best is that they keep the same monsters throughout the series. It gives the player a sense of familiarity each time they pick up the latest title in the series.