this in my opinion better describes what Bluepoint is trying to do
this in my opinion better describes what Bluepoint is trying to do
ok we can't really compare a vader screaming NOOOOO as loud as he can in a previously silent scene to extremely slight eyebrow movements added to a previously static scene.
The thing is, it's pretty well known those Mona Lisa spinoffs are being shipped as parodies.
Nowhere in the marketing has this remaster made the claim it was a parody. It's trying to bill itself as the genuine thing. That's deceitful and attempts to betray the hearts the original game won over.
the altered color scheme is still the critique that puzzle me the most, when you go from a ps2 engine to a modern physically based one, with the entire post process pipeline, gometry, textures etc completely redone from the ground up, matching the exact color scheme in every scene is borderline impossible, even the most praised remake of all time, deemed by most the definitive version of the game, the Resident Evil remake, had pretty drastic color scheme and atmosphere changes(among other things):Well that's somewhat accurate since BP greatly altered the color scheme of the game. :P
This might be one of the most hyperbolic and entitled things I've ever read on era. Jeez.
Everything about Wander's body language in that scene indicate a somber mood. He moves slowly, he slightly hesistates to remove the cloak, him staring at the body and his face also reflecting his mood makes sense. Like someone else said, the original relied more on textures than animation to convey what he's feeling. This is prevalent is ALL of Ueda's work, his work has always been about characters conveying genuine emotion. That's always been his mo. Wander's animation was never about him being a stoic alpha male badass who displays no emotion.That's fine, but it's not the Wander we experienced in the original game.
Pay close attention to the shoulders, the posture, the "standing tall" nature of Wander on the left. Everything matches the face completely. Wander is standing strong.
On the right-hand side, Wander is slouching forward, staring at the floor, the body is slightly limp. Everything matches the face and nothing speaks Strong about that.
It doesn't take an ophthalmologist to catch that 2 seperate characters are being depicted here. The question remains: is it OK for a remaster to change central defining aspects of the main character? It's OK to criticize BluePoint in this scenario, they need to realize that their ideas of "remastering" have the ability to accidently or intentionally change defining aspects of the game, and there are reasons those aspects were in place. BluePoint needs to start taking that into consideration with their "ideas".
Yeah, the entitlement here is getting out of hand. Wowzers.This might be one of the most hyperbolic and entitled things I've ever read on era. Jeez.
This might be one of the most hyperbolic and entitled things I've ever read on era. Jeez.
The thing is, it's pretty well known those Mona Lisa spinoffs are being shipped as parodies.
Nowhere in the marketing has this remaster made the claim it was a parody. It's trying to bill itself as the genuine thing. That's deceitful and attempts to betray the hearts the original game won over.
The thing is, it's pretty well known those Mona Lisa spinoffs are being shipped as parodies.
Nowhere in the marketing has this remaster made the claim it was a parody. It's trying to bill itself as the genuine thing. That's deceitful and attempts to betray the hearts the original game won over.
Rose tinted glasses taken to the natural extreme.You...genuinely think that Bluepoint is trying to be deceitful, in an attempt to betray the hearts of fans?
...really?
The thing is, it's pretty well known those Mona Lisa spinoffs are being shipped as parodies.
Nowhere in the marketing has this remaster made the claim it was a parody. It's trying to bill itself as the genuine thing. That's deceitful and attempts to betray the hearts the original game won over.
You...genuinely think that Bluepoint is trying to be deceitful, in an attempt to betray the hearts of fans?
...really?
Hahahahahahahahahaha, okay. To each their own.
I think they just remade a game they loved, and did their best, but whatever conspiracy you want to cook up is fine, too.
I didn't say they are trying to. I'm saying they are. Unintentional or not, they changed the context of the original game and deserve whiplash for doing that.
At the moment, people are buying this game right now on their PS4 who genuinely believe its the same game as the original. It's not. It's bluepoint headcanon, and i've argued that from the start.
How am I wrong? Saying im shitposting. Try actually responding. You even clearly ignore the rest of my post where I say it's definitely not a deal breaker but there's nothing wrong with pointing out flaws.Is there a @ResetERAshitpost twitter account yet?
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-shadow-of-the-colossus-tech-analysis
Haha made me laugh out loud. Yeah, it's jumped the shark for sure.
The thing is, it's pretty well known those Mona Lisa spinoffs are being shipped as parodies.
Nowhere in the marketing has this remaster made the claim it was a parody. It's trying to bill itself as the genuine thing. That's deceitful and attempts to betray the hearts the original game won over.
I disagree. It's a pretty valid comparison. In the original scene, you couldn't tell what Darth Vader was thinking but you could analyze the context and think about what was said 5 minutes prior, and pretty much get a very good guess at what was going on in Vader's mind. The new version throws that away and makes it clear "this is what vader is thinking about".
In SotC, Wander's expression on the left is pretty devoid of emotion. He's thinking something, but you're not sure what. You might guess. The remake turns him into a borderline wuss that makes it clear "J-just look at me! You know what im thinking!".
I agree with an above poster that attaching an actual remaster of SOTC to this game would have been the ideal course of action to address these complaints, instead of just asking those people to shut up and go away
I have no idea how you came to that conclusion, Playstation and bluepoint have been absolutely clear from the very start that this is a remake from a different developer, going as far as to publish multiple behind the scenes videos talking about how they approached the project and how it differs from the original, nobody is trying to hide anything.I didn't say they are trying to. I'm saying they are. Unintentional or not, they changed the context of the original game and deserve whiplash for doing that.
At the moment, people are buying this game right now on their PS4 who genuinely believe its the same game as the original. It's not. It's bluepoint headcanon, and i've argued that from the start.
Fair. It's a good result, this is a pretty good remaster all things considered, but on principle, i'm going to argue against third party companies doing "revisions" of a game like this, and shipping it as the genuine thing. I simply won't accept that. This is fairly uncharted territory in videogames, but it happens all the time in movies.
the improved framerate ironically created issues with the gripping mechanic that caused some colossi to be more difficult than beforeWait what exactly was wrong with the PS3 version?
I played the PS2 and PS3 versions years apart so didn't compare directly, but seemed fine.
Ah thanks.the improved framerate ironically created issues with the gripping mechanic that caused some colossi to be more difficult than before
well I would argue that such things weren't in fact possible on that hardware, the game run at single digit fps sometimes lol.Ah thanks.
It was always one of those games that was much more impressive on the original hardware anyway, given how it squeezed so much out of the relatively weak PS2. No way things of such scale should have been possible on that box.
Agreed. All criticisms are valid, however at some point constant repetition starts to feel petty. Developers sacrifice so much for us, giving us an incredible remake in this instance, and then we get pages and pages of people over-analyzing subjective matters like these. It must be so stressful and demoralizing being a developer.
Yea, I don't get it but whatevs..True that, won't make a difference for sales. I enjoyed reading the criticisms here, just feel people are taking it to the extreme with constant repetition. Face is bad, okay great, play the original then. Next.
I think there is a very distinct difference between having an issue with something in the game and claiming the devs behind it are being deceitful. There is a way to speak on complaints without being absurd about it.fucking god, why are people complaining about those who have a problem with the remake? this is a thread about a criticism of the game, coming here and complaining about those who find something wrong with the game, calling them entitled or whatever is so fucking weird. if you think the remake is perfect and god's gift to humanity good for you but why not go to the OT and celebrate the dev's achievements instead of coming here and belittling people who find something wrong with it? honestly it makes zero sense
that's completely your opinion and i respect it, but what if people are being absurd about it? they're just voicing their opinion too. to me it seems like the dramatic side of the argument is the one who's constantly trying to shut down a (in my opinion, valid) criticism of a remake, that most of you guys haven't played yet by the way, but have just decided that it's a masterpiece above criticism, as if you're losing sleep if someone is finding a flaw with it. it's all contained in this thread any way. again, it's SUPER BIZZARE what some of you guys are doing, specially those who call people names simply because they find something wrong with the game.I think there is a very distinct difference between having an issue with something in the game and claiming the devs behind it are being deceitful. There is a way to speak on complaints without being absurd about it.
I would appreciate if you didn't lump me into this with "you guys". I don't think portraying it as a one-sided thing (which is what you're doing) is any better.that's completely your opinion and i respect it, but what if people are being absurd about it? they're just voicing their opinion too. to me it seems like the dramatic side of the argument is the one who's constantly trying to shut down a (in my opinion, valid) criticism of a remake, that most of you guys haven't played yet by the way, but have just decided that it's a masterpiece above criticism, as if you're losing sleep if someone is finding a flaw with it. it's all contained in this thread any way. again, it's SUPER BIZZARE what some of you guys are doing, specially those who call people names simply because they find something wrong with the game.
i'm sorry, my reply wasn't specifically towards you, but more towards those who are making it seem like people who don't like an aspect of this remake are crazy or something.I would appreciate if you didn't lump me into this with "you guys". I don't think portraying it as a one-sided thing (which is what you're doing) is any better.
I'll let this be my last response on the matter.
People are thrusting their own preconceived notions and "headcanon" at the original, claiming Wander clearly feels this way, or that way, etc.At the moment, people are buying this game right now on their PS4 who genuinely believe its the same game as the original. It's not. It's bluepoint headcanon, and i've argued that from the start.
Agreed. I made this thread because I felt that Wander's actual facial model and facial animation were distractingly bad in the remake. This tangent about his emotional state in one three-second cutscene has taken the thread in a weird direction, and I say that as someone who has poured over every minute detail in the original game.People are thrusting their own preconceived notions and "headcanon" at the original, claiming Wander clearly feels this way, or that way, etc.
He's an inexperienced guy who stole a sword and harbors a deep sorrow for the fact that Mono is dead. That's most all we know. Wander looks strange in this new iteration only because of things like facial structure, skin tone, features, etc. The emotion he's conveying in his face seems fairly accurate to me, and those claiming otherwise are probably projecting their own stuff onto what was largely a blank slate due to hardware limitations.
Imo it's only busted during running animations, I have no problem with its new artistic depiction especially during cutscenes, it's a different face and different body proportions but it's not objectively worse in my opinion, after looking at it for quite a while the new design grew on me, kinda of like Sully's new design from uncharted 1/2/3 to uncharted 4.Agreed. I made this thread because I felt that Wander's actual facial model and facial animation were distractingly bad in the remake. This tangent about his emotional state in one three-second cutscene has taken the thread in a weird direction, and I say that as someone who has poured over every minute detail in the original game.
Wander's face is busted from a technical and artistic standpoint. Can't most of us at least agree on that?
The thing is, it's pretty well known those Mona Lisa spinoffs are being shipped as parodies.
some people would even argue that the ps3 version looks worse than the ps2 version because the ps2 assets weren't designed for hd resolutions, there is simply no perfect way to capture 100% of the feel of any original piece of art, the best you can do is do something similar that has its own strengths and that is able to evoke strong, slightly different yes, but still appropriate emotions.It's funny you say that, the version of the Mona Lisa on the right is actually a copy of the original, and is said to better reflect what the original had looked like in its early days color wise. Aside from a very slight difference in perspective, it's definitely not a parody (it's just been preserved better) and is actually what the original was intended to look like.
Nonetheless, I'm on the side who agrees that the remake doesn't exactly carry the same feeling that the original game did. Call it limitations or whatever you want, but Wander's expression in the original looks a lot more grim, and the excessive bloom and low draw distance gave the game a very majestic, celestial look. Bluepoint did very fine work, but I would definitely agree that some things were lost in the translation. I say this as someone who thought the Zelda 3DS remakes lost a lot of their atmosphere in the more shadowy dungeons though, so take that as you will.
Who in the world would say that the PS3 remaster looks worse than the PS2 original? That's lunacy. It's exactly the same but with way better image quality and performance.some people would even argue that the ps3 version looks worse than the ps2 version because the ps2 assets weren't designed for hd resolutions, there is simply no perfect way to capture 100% of the feel of any original piece of art, the best you can do is do something similar that has its own strengths and that are able to evoke slightly different but still appropriate emotions.
I've seen people argue that the added visual clarity made flaws in things like textures and geometry look too apparent and distracting, things like the very angular nature of the low poly models for example, and to a degree they're not wrong, assets build for low resolutions can look rather rough and fake at higher resolutions.Who in the world would say that the PS3 remaster looks worse than the PS2 original? That's lunacy. It's exactly the same but with way better image quality and performance.
How about we stop claiming that people who see authorial intent in the original cutscene are "projecting?"People are thrusting their own preconceived notions and "headcanon" at the original, claiming Wander clearly feels this way, or that way, etc.
He's an inexperienced guy who stole a sword and harbors a deep sorrow for the fact that Mono is dead. That's most all we know. Wander looks strange in this new iteration only because of things like facial structure, skin tone, features, etc. The emotion he's conveying in his face seems fairly accurate to me, and those claiming otherwise are probably projecting their own stuff onto what was largely a blank slate due to hardware limitations.
I've seen people argue that the added visual clarity made flaws in things like textures and geometry look too apparent and distracting, things like the very angular nature of the low poly models for example, and to a degree they're not wrong, assets build for low resolutions can look rather rough and fake at higher resolutions.
eh, I would say it's debatable, what team Ico animators were really good at was expressing emotion through body language, if you watch carefully every cutscene and ingame facial animation of wander you will notice that his face doesn't really change all that much at all, those running animation for example so obviously express exhaustion not because he has his mouth slightly open or because of complex facial animations but because his body is bouncing around, his arm are flailing all over the place etc, one important part of this whole equation is also wander's resting face:How about we stop claiming that people who see authorial intent in the original cutscene are "projecting?"
Hardware limitations didn't prevent the original creators from making Wander's face express pain, fear, exhaustion or anger.
Team Ico portrayed Wander as gentle and caring when they felt it was appropriate for the character. His introduction and most notable close-up didn't animate itself by accident.