EDGE: Metal Gear Solid: Snake Eater 3D looks better than the HD versio

[granville]

Found another video of the retail game, though there's SPOILERS FOR THE STORY AT ABOUT THE 6:40 MARK!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUbZ_Xf_Wz4

Once again, you can spot major framerate dips. But they don't just happen in cutscenes, it drops even during gameplay.

 

[Deleted_171835]

Found another video of the retail game, though there's SPOILERS FOR THE STORY AT ABOUT THE 6:40 MARK!!!


Once again, you can spot major framerate dips. But they don't just happen in cutscenes, it drops even during gameplay.

I couldn't actually see any framerate dips. And it doesn't make much sense to gauge that with footage of that quality.

 

[granville]

I couldn't actually see any framerate dips. And it doesn't make much sense to gauge that with footage of that quality.

I spotted severe ones. Especially during the parts where Snake is coming in for a landing in the jungle, but also at the other parts. Framerate drops well into the teens and even single digits a couple of times. But the gameplay runs about 20-25 in general and drops from there.

If we were judging the core graphical assets, i'd agree with you about using low quality videos not being a good indicator. But we already know what the game looks like visually, offscreen footage is perfect for judging framerate when you're not sure how accurate direct feed videos are. Reason being that sometimes direct feed videos can exhibit framerate issues not present in the real game, due to lag present in the encoding process (Kingdom Hearts 3D is a good example, the trailers show framerate issues that aren't nearly as bad as the real game). But here you can see just how much the game lags due to the surrounding area where the video was taken. In this case, you can see that the surrounding room where the video was recording isn't choppy looking at all. The game is choppier than the environment it's filmed in, so you can see it's the game that lags. Assuming you can spot the choppiness (which is quite obvious to me, and pretty darn bad).

Honestly though, just go ahead and watch the videos IGN uploaded a couple of weeks ago if you insist on good quality. They're of the final game (not the demo) and are indicative of the framerate in the final game-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJh0i61Dn0M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9-x9JGE-uc

You should be able to see how choppy the videos are. It's very noticeable and i'd say quite bad for the most part.

 

[The Milkman]

I gotta admit even though this is the first 3D metal gear I played the mechanics are fucking awesome! And the 3D is great its so deep its like the first 3DS game I got that I actually had to turn the 3D down on. Who cares which looks better anyway? Arent true gamers supposed to look at gameplay first then HD and graphx?

 

[Hadrian]

I played the demo the other day out of curiosity (I only like the MSX/GBC games) and meh lookswise, nothing bad at all its clean and all but definitely not as good as when it was The Naked Sample. 3DS could do a lot better. Also its the only 3DS game that could not bare to have on full 3D, could not focus right on it and it made my brain ache.

Controls nicely though, probably better than the PSP games but still it needs to be on a big screen. In my eyes, only make dedicated MGS games for handhelds, not ports. Loading is still as poor as the PS2 game, walk a bit...then it loads...walk some more...loads some more. You'd think they would have fixed that in this day and age.

 

[granville]

I gotta admit even though this is the first 3D metal gear I played the mechanics are fucking awesome! And the 3D is great its so deep its like the first 3DS game I got that I actually had to turn the 3D down on. Who cares which looks better anyway? Arent true gamers supposed to look at gameplay first then HD and graphx?

I liked the 3D effects and the game is still fun, but i'm still highly critical of the framerate. Visually, the game is relatively unoffensive, pretty much the same as the PS2 version just with slight downgrades. The problem is that it looks worse than a game on far weaker hardware. And the framerate is a visual aspect that interferes with action and makes me dizzy and disoriented.

 

[DiscostewSM]

Found another video of the retail game, though there's SPOILERS FOR THE STORY AT ABOUT THE 6:40 MARK!!!
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=lUbZ_Xf_Wz4

Once again, you can spot major framerate dips. But they don't just happen in cutscenes, it drops even during gameplay.

To be fair, recording the game from a camera tends to make the framerate look worse than it currently is, since the refresh rates aren't in sync with each other.

 

[The Milkman]

I gotta admit even though this is the first 3D metal gear I played the mechanics are fucking awesome! And the 3D is great its so deep its like the first 3DS game I got that I actually had to turn the 3D down on. Who cares which looks better anyway? Arent true gamers supposed to look at gameplay first then HD and graphx?

I liked the 3D effects and the game is still fun, but i'm still highly critical of the framerate. Visually, the game is relatively unoffensive, pretty much the same as the PS2 version just with slight downgrades. The problem is that it looks worse than a game on far weaker hardware. And the framerate is a visual aspect that interferes with action and makes me dizzy and disoriented.

Are you overexaderating? I never understood what people ment about the graphics making them dizzy or sick, the worse I've ever seen have only hurt my eyes a little and made me squint while playing and the framerate does nothing more then annoy me a bit and since its only in cutscenes it doesnt bother me much.

 

[granville]

Are you overexaderating? I never understood what people ment about the graphics making them dizzy or sick, the worse I've ever seen have only hurt my eyes a little and made me squint while playing and the framerate does nothing more then annoy me a bit and since its only in cutscenes it doesnt bother me much.

No, i'm being serious. I can sometimes forgive graphical downgrades (even if they're still unacceptable). But a choppy framerate that dips well below 20fps or so can really ruin a game for me if it's somewhat action heavy or requires quick reflexes or close examination of the environment. It makes me dizzy and disoriented to see a game run horribly. For something slow paced like an RPG it's at least not as bad, but it still annoys me and makes me somewhat ill.

Good example is Rayman DS. The framerate on that is so incredibly horrible that i cannot believe i managed to beat it. I used to own a shitty laptop back several years ago and trying to play modern-ish games (for the time) or intensive emulators on it was very miserable when the framerate would chug like mad. I don't mean it makes me sick as in i'm disgusted by it, i mean literally nausea and dizziness, even giving me a headache. Not something i can help. It pisses me off. At least poor textures and low polygon models don't make me physically ill. I'm not really picking on the game for that so much. An unsmooth and unstable framerate can literally make me sick however. I fully understand that this doesn't affect everyone, or even most people. But it's also a reason i can spot a poor framerate so easily.

I'm glad this only happens during the cutscenes, but it still made me somewhat dizzy and a bit sickly in my stomach to see it even in cinematics.

 

[The Milkman]

I snippie the post

Ahhh ok, I just hear alot of people on the forums always saying a game makes them sick or something and I dont really understand why, Im still getting this game just because of the gameplay (I told ya first 3D metal gear ) I dont mind the dips as long as its only in cutscenes (I got a crap PC too Im used to cut scenes looking like crap but I hate lag in actual gameplay) thanks for the clarification.