Wowza! Looks really good! Can't wait for this to arrive! Hopefully it runs at 60fps.
seriously? ps vita?! OMG this looks awasome!
These screenshots are rendered at a much higher resolution than the Vita screen. I hate when developers do that, as it's extremely misleading. Other games that did this were Assassin's Creed Liberation and Uncharted, and guess what? They looked extremely pixelated when you actually play them because you saw the very high resolution screenshots first.
nope they're rendered at Vita's native resolution: 960x544 pixels
Whaaaat?.... I call bull crap... the Vita can't do THAT much yet... they haven't figured out its sweet spot yet... this has to be on a PS3... r-right?
Yes the actual resolution of these screenshots is correct, but they were *rendered* at a much higher resolution, the cubically downscaled. I.E. in the actual game you will be seeing lots of jaggy edges that you don't see here. It's very misleading and makes it look much better than it actually will.You can see this practice in action if you look at the Assassin's Creed Liberation screenshots compared to the actual game. The screenshots look perfect console quality, but even though they're 960x544, the exact resolution of the Vita screen, SOMEHOW when you actually play it on the Vita there are jagged edges everywhere and it looks like crap.
Here is an example:http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/39/2331980-acl_hd_persona_avelineservant_screenshot.jpgThey will create an extremely high resolution render like this (2,880 × 1,632) then cubically downscale it to the Vita's resolution (960 x 544). This makes it look so much more detailed than it actually is. You have been fooled.
Well I might have agreed were those screenies produced by any other studio (cf. your excellent examples) but in the case of TN I'm confident they're genuine. Remember DOA:D on 3DS. That was one fine looking game running at 60 fps. Vita's raw processing power mops the floor with 3DS.
Ummm...Is it just me or does the Vita version look much cleaner than the console versions?(By cleaner i mean sharper, clearer and yes just over all better)From what i can tell from the screenshots here, the Vita version looks less "smoothed out" than the console versions, yes the backgrounds look simplified but that is BETTER compared to the busy backgrounds of the console countetparts.I might just buy it now because it looks amazingly amazing. Best graphics since Uncharted!
No, actually these are 960x544, download the image and check the properties context.Secondly, i never heard of developers doing that unless its a PC game.Lastly, you can tell its native resolution of the Vita by the outline of the characters :)
Like I've stated below, these screenshots are rendered at an HD resolution, then downscaled to the Vita's resolution, making it look much better than it actually is.It's a common trick publishers make developers do in order to make the game more marketable.
It will not look this clean on the Vita's screen. These images are high resolution downscaled to the Vita's screen. You are literally seeing more detail than you would on the Vita's screen because it is hinted in the blended pixels of these screenshots. On the Vita you will only see jagged edges.
I'm sure it won't look bad, and it most probably will run in 60fps which will blur some of the pixelation issues, but it definitely can't look as good as these "screenshots".
Well that explains it then....Duh. Of course they would have to render an image captured at 60fps and 960x544 ar higher resolutions. Why? Developers must do this in order to catch the actual image without moving in motion. Make sense? in other words, the Vita's screen is so sharp that to capture it in essence could show flaws and deteriation of polygons. Your eyes cant see it because it moves so fast but if you stop it frame by frame, yeah....point is this game WILL actually look this good when its released. It will look exactly the same as these shots either way
Dont forget that 960x544 is just the native resolution. Games can be played in higher resolutions at 60fps, this is proved to me by the 2.00 update which enable the Vita to play 1080p, at least that is my theory. I mean the Vita is powerful enough with the right programming right? :p
i think that's just renders, not actual screenshots
That is a nice theory, but doesn't work in practice. There is certainly more consistent motion in a fighting game so the pixelation will be masked to an extent, but it still will not look nearly as good as these screenshots. Just saying.
Someone else who actually understands...
? a higher fps means more frames to render, so less detail you can display in each frame. In order to achieve a higher frame rate you must sacrifice render details (like lower polygon count, texture size, etc.) or sacrifice the resolution. Uncharted chose to sacrifice the resolution AND the fps in order to have high render details (higher polygon count, shadows, etc.)1080p applies to video files. There are no calculations there, it literally just tells the Vita what to display in each frame (and it's compressed to a large extent, video compression technology is amazing).
Well, the ACIII:L shots were obvious bullshots, way to clean and no aliasing issues, knew that from the beginning. The latest batch of NGS2+, however, looks way more genuine. Please take a look at this couple, looks genuine to me.http://i.imgur.com/JXGqe.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/oHOSv.jpg
If the vita's screen was really dense, jagginess and pixelation would be solved without the use of AA.
I guess we'll see...i dont know why it's so hard to believe that those images can represent the actual graphics for the final product. Plus the Vita's lower resolution makes it easier to make these graphics possible, its just a matter of the developers love and care towards the product. If they can make Uncharted look great with all the storyline, npcs running arounds, ai then i dont see why it would be so hard to make these graphics possible in the time they have. Thats just reality.
"Video compression technology is amazing"Hmmmm.... So i guess Vita would only be able to play 1080p videos and not 1080p games at 60fps? Intereting, since my 3D phone can play 1080p games at 60fps and it has a lower native resolution.I am not saying you are a liar, i am just saying i think it is truely up to the developers, i believe that the Vita is powerful enough to run a game at 1080p and wouldnt need a patch/update to do so (although my phone needed a HUGE update)
i believe its from pre render footage - cutscene clips basically :)
You are dumb......
Ha. Assassins Creed does NOT look like crap, maybe you need glasses. Of course there is going to be jaggies if you look at the screen TOO close, the game isnt running in 1080p (obviosly) if it was than it wouldn't be a problem. Any HD screen will have some kind of artifacts if you are way to close to the screen. My advice would be to look at the game a few inches away and you will see the jaggies dissapear. Lol
Either you are a troll or you don't know anything about technology. Please tell me that you are trolling. No one can be this dumb.
No the update is only for 1080p videos.
Compare this to Mortal Kombat Vita... This has even superb visuals than mk. ps3. They could have DEFINATELy done better with the mortal kombat vita. Lazy devs.
yes, the second one looks exacly genuine, the first looks cleaned up.
Unfortunately that technology is still too expensive to be reasonably marketed, also it requires a higher resolution. Many games on Vita are even runnung at 720x408 instead of the native 960x544.
if im going to buy dead or alive 5 im going to buy the PS3 version so i can play it on my big screen, and also Ps3 controller feels better in my hands than a vita
Maybe but even so they still have plenty of time to make something comparable. It wont look AWFUL like SOME people are suggesting. That would be if DOA5 3DS lol
aaaaaaa stands for aaaaaaaaaasshole lolsounds like someone got mad at MarcusGOW for making a point haha
your a troll. get a life Matt
sony says update is for 1080p movies & gamesssss sucka!
^truth :3step back & clearaity shines thru. vitaz amazing yo!
source? bet u make up as u go along:p
changing ur name from aaaaaaa to smh?still a troll fag lol
fag alert! aaaaaaa changes name to smh & vice versa. wat a troll lmfao
So who really gives a flying fuck if they're renders or not? Fucktards, you have DOA5 on Vita!!
im gonna have to agree with marcusgow on this one chief, if the device can output 1080p video, then it can do it just as well with games and as far as vid compression goes that is a false statement on both ends. you guys, you cant keep compressing the higher you go up in resolution. there is no reason too. actually, its just the opposite, since films are recorded in 1080p and downscaled to 480i-720p, they need to be compressed to downsize everything alond with sound. Guys if you're gonna make shit up do it better
I didn't make anything up. What the heck do you want me to source? I've stated several things:1. Dense 5" screen technology (enough so you can't see individual pixels) is too expensive to be reasonably marketed on the Vita.1920x1080 would be a ridiculously expensive jump. Say we went from 960x544 to 1280x720 (pixels still recognizable), well... look at this listing for a 4.8" (not 5") AMOLED display:http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/614649156/For_samsung_galaxy_S3_display.htmlYeah, $154-200. And it's not high enough density to make the pixels unrecognizable, but pretty close.Also, producing higher density screens means more of them get fucked up in the manufacturing process. So even if Sony somehow made them cost the exact same as the current screen (impossible) they'd have to throw more of them out than they currently are.2. Vita requires a higher resolution for such a screen.This is common sense, if you really think a 5" screen that has more pixels doesn't mean the Vita is pushing a higher resolution, you're an idiot.3. Many games on Vita are running lower than its current native resolution (960x544), at 720x408 instead.Uncharted: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-analysis-uncharted-golden-abyssMod Racers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ModNation_Racers:_Road_TripI'm not going to list them all here. Look it up for yourself.
duuuude you're an idiot. plenty of 3d phones are on the market. i can name 6 that play 3ds games in hd. do some research, you look like a dumbass bro
These screens are downscaled. I'm aware they're 960x544. They were rendered at a higher resolution, then scaled down to the Vita's screen size. This makes the image look much better than it normally would being played real-time on the Vita, as pixels that would otherwise have solid contrast (jagged edges) are interpolated which gives the illusion of higher detail.
What is your problem? If you have nothing to add to the conversation then just remain silent. I'm only fixing misconceptions that the publishers of these games intentionally throw at us.
It's because I can see as well as I can, that I am very sensitive to lower PPI screens. If it doesn't bother you, that's great, but it looks like a bloody mess to me. They should have really thrown in some antialiasing at the least.If you want to see a game that looks nearly perfect on the Vita's screen, play Wipeout 2048. That is a damn good looking game, it runs at native resolution (instead of this lower 720x408 uncharted bullshit), and has 2x antialiasing. My experience with 2x in other games is that it's pretty low, but in Wipeout 2048 it looks great.
My beef is with the publisher and the bullshots. I think the Vita is a great device.If you are being a fanboy enough to draw the misconception that I am insulting the Vita in any way here, you need to chill your head.
It is impossible to tell the difference with any resolution higher than 960x544 on the Vita's screen. Ps Vita games will never run at a resolution higher than 960x544.It is illogical to do otherwise, and Sony is not as stupid as you are trying to make them out to be with that comment.
I am confused, honestly I do not think anyone is really wrong here. I think we are all confused and we are misunderstanding each other. It seems like people are getting on each other's nerves? :(It is almost like we are just going in circles making the same points yes?But hey...we all have Vitas! :D
It's not "hard to believe", it's just impossible. I'm sure the game will look great, but not this great. We're never going to see the Vita run a game at 60fps with FSAA.
No one in this entire comment section has suggested that the game will look awful. You're assuming many things, and the fact that you're bashing on the 3DS which has nothing to do with this shows me you're simply biased towards the Vita and think it's perfect. All hardware has limitations. The Vita is a wonderful device, but that doesn't mean you should assume it is perfect. I'm tired of dealing with fanboys.
You don't seem to understand video compression. Compression is not downscaling the resolution. It's finding a better way to display a stream of pre-determined pixels than just straight up recording each pixel.For example, H.264 works by only recording the differences between the previous and next frame. This sort of compression can't be done in a videogame, as it is an expensive algorithm that is done by post-processing. But as a result, you get a file that can display a video stream very efficiently. In other words, video compression techniques don't work in videogames because the frames are dynamically created.I'm certain the Vita can display games in natural 1080p if you connected it to an external monitor somehow, as the iPad 3 has the same GPU and is handling a 1080p screen. However, these games would have simple graphics with low polygon counts and fps. Remember, some games such as Uncharted for Vita run at a lower resolution than (720x408) the Vita's native in order to achieve the visual effects they wanted at a decent framerate. We're not going to see any 1080p games on the Vita, especially since its screen is 544p. It just makes no sense. It's pointless.
You're fine, dude, just a bit optimistic about what the Vita can handle. I work in Digital Production Arts, and know my 3d rendering techniques better than I know my own family. I hate to be like this, but basically when I say something about 3d graphics I know what I'm saying. It just doesn't help when fanboys reply and disagree just because they're... well... fanboys. The Vita has to be absolutely perfect to them. I'm not trying to insult the Vita's capabilities, just being realistic here.
I highly believe that the game will look like as it would, in cutscenes and in game.
if the final product looks like this, then i am getting, i dont even like DOA , or fighting games but that sort of effort would need to be acknowledged.
Sorry if i sounded like a jerk earlier. I admitt i can be a bit of a fanboy sometimes.And for some reason I seem to prefer my Vita over my PS3 and my high-end PC, why? Who knows? But also, the Vita is the first console I have been super impressed with, although i have to say i have never had a tablet type product or anything similar ti the Vita experience. Thank you for your info though. I just hope we get newer and better games for Vita this coming year.
but he/she is right, it will look better than a 3ds version (if there was one)
Anti aliasing takes up a lot of power and fps, so adding it onto a game may just put it below the 25 frames per second rate at which our eyes see smooth video. Unchartered and resistance burning skies i believe needed AA but they probably chose to have smoother gameplay, maybe an option to have it turned off and on would be nice, Source: i am a rookie games developer
the cutscenes in the game will look this good, but this isn't gameplay
FINALLY DOA ON VITA!!! DEMENSIONS WAS TOO EASY.
DOA is 1 of the greatest fighting games I just hope it doesnt go downhill with Itigacki out of the company cuz DOA Dimensions was way too easy and Ninja Gaiden3 for 360 and PS3 was really easy and lost what it was suppose to be but I gotta play Razors Edge b4 saying they didnt correct mistakes
OMG dudes this is awsome:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-Y3xHDTTe8
Maybe you can help me explain to these people that we're not going to see these "screenshots" of the game running at 60fps. If in the very rare case that the Vita actually does render them, it would be using somewhere around 16x MSAA to make it look like this.You use OpenGL or Direct X?
What he said is that the 3ds version would look awful, not just worse. That's pretty much a fanboy comment.
if you saw tekken on psp and how close that game was to the console versions, the vita should have no problem with running this game or tekken tag.
I read through some of your other comments... And I actually knew a lot of that lol. On one hand I was just being goofy I guess. I know these are done with rendering tricks to make them more amazing. But really, more of what I'm talking about isn't the visual creaminess :P. I'm actually talking about the elements in the scene. It's clear that these are rendered with actual game assets, because you can see blurry background textures and angular elbows and knees. But like you've said, they were rendered at a higher resolution and scaled down, meaning the final game will not be quite so smooth as it's displayed frame-by-frame.I get that. What leaves ME dumbfounded and calling bull crap is that the textures and models, no matter how clearly game assets and not cut-scene assets, look way to beautiful to be running on a Vita... even if they run lower than the native resolution and upscale to 960x544. I could see how a PS3 could reliably run textures and models of this high of a spec, because they've had almost 7 years to tune their game engines for the various consoles. However, the Vita is the new kid on the block, and sure he's got some nice things to look at and pretty clever new doohickeys to poke at, but his repertoire still lacks the over all spit-shine that the present console games can get.Thus, I call bull crap that these high fidelity game assets are actually running smoothly in a vita game (yet*), regardless of the resolution. There is nothing else out there for Vita that looks this clean. Even the flagship Uncharted, no matter how beautiful it is, still has more jaggedness than this. * Of course, if they have some how performed the black magic necessary to push the Vita this hard already, then by god color me impressed!
its say doa 5 not doa 5 vita :P
I always wondered wy my phone have such a stupid ass high res and vita with the same screen size have way lower res...that pretty much explains it.Even more, making a 1280x720 game would be much more expensive, require alot more from the gpu and so on....on traditional consoles I canot stand bad graphics and thats wy I play pc, but in a handheld its ok to have not so great graphics as long as its a great exprience and so far the only thing lacking, for me, is a multiplayer title that I enjoy (ragnarok odyssey is kinda pointless and black ops is fps, I dont like fps that much).
Didn't really sound like a fanboy comment to me, the 3ds has already shown us that it's limited to cartoony graphics. Metal gear simply looked awful and the fps wasnt great either compared to the vita version, but the 3ds shines when you play games like Mario 3dsland
Yes, just like MK. but I hope it's better.
Some pics looks the same as it was on ps3 and xbox... Like the Helena and Lisa, and Kasumi and Ayane one... Can't really tell the differences
And when I'm trying to compare those pictures, I see that it was all the same picture as it was on ps3 and xbox screenshots -____-