I will treasure my PS4 copy. And it’s actually one of the few games where 30 fps isn’t a big deal due to fixed camera angles in the original.
I feel like we’re only a year or two away from announcing a game and it’s remaster at the same time.
That PS5 version looks like shit. I own the original and it’s a lot of fun. What the fuck up with the lighting?
Original is awesome. I feel like the remaster basically just turned it yellow and deleted the fog and called it a day.
I believe, we call those “live service games”…
I know the fan mod project for FF8 is jokingly named Demaster in protest of the official remaster, but I never thought a large company would release an honest to god demake of a game - and charge you for it!
I liked the FF8 remaster. The field models are just field models. It’s not like they look like the FMV cutscene character models on the original either. They’re just so distorted that you have to imagine the FMV characters.
Editing out Siren’s bush was a sin though.
They say it runs better but isn’t that because it hovers around 35 fps on PS4 and is locked to 30 on PS5 (as it should have been on PS4)? Some of comparisons are in the yikes territory though.
I haven’t played it, but the trailers I’ve seen were night and day better than the original.
I played a few hours on PC yesterday and if somebody is saying it looks worse than the PS4 version I’m questioning their sanity.
On the other hand, raytracing, HDR and frame generation are all completely broken and it is a disgrace to charge 70 bucks for a remake of a 9 year old game and not even do basic QA on their PC port. You also need a PSN account to play your singleplayer game.
ahhh I see what you did there, you sly devil you.
What did I do? Whatever it was, wasn’t intentional. I was commenting in earnest. The trailers looked incredible, big uplift in graphics from just watching those. I am very interested to know why people don’t think the same.
I mean, trailers are going to pick the best-looking scenes. The comparison video linked in the article seems like it’s trying to be neutral and lots of scenes just look worse in it. I haven’t seen the actual game either, though…
Skimmed the comparison video in the article now, I don’t know if I just have different tastes or something but the remaster ps5 version looks so, so, so much better. Like it’s not even close.
hahaha it’s gotten called “already dawn” or “after dawn” a lot because they shifted it from cool lighting (that looks like the middle of the night lit by moonlight) to warm lighting (that looks like evening or morning light) so I thought “night and day” was a nod to that. the graphical fidelity is a lot better, but it wasn’t even bad in the original and the mood shift caused by the lighting change seems very unbefitting of the story and it also seems like they’ve cut idle animations? which is an insane choice the characters seem so dull and lifeless without them
Huh. Well I checked out more comparisons and just side-by-side I stand by what I first said, that the remaster looks much better. As for feeling or atmosphere, I’ll of course reserve that until I play/watch through the whole game. Love the original and intend to do so on the remaster eventually!
Man, you almost feel bad for them, because clearly some effort went into this. It’s not like they just slapped high-res textures on and called it a day.
You can tell, because that would’ve looked better.But I don’t actually feel bad, because no one forced them to remake such a recent title. You don’t run that risk, if you remake something that actually looks bad in the first place.
How tf did they think a PS3 era piss-filter would improve things?
There is so much you could absolutely tear into, what the hell do they think they are doing?
Just want to show of ray tracing. In return, it runs 30 fps (while the original runs 60 on PS5), with worse music and camera.
Absolutely pointless cash grab, they should have just created a graphics upgrade to polish out some texture details, add haptic feedback, and sell it as an add on for 10.
