The more I see of this emulator the more impressive it becomes.
Has any progress been made on MGS4?
This is great to see. Last time there were some nasty bugs and glitches with loading and audio that renders the game nearly unplayable.
Tbh this is like the ultimate game to try and run, since its so big
[QUOTE=J!NX;52500868]Tbh this is like the ultimate game to try and run, since its so big[/QUOTE]
this and Red dead.
[QUOTE=Man in the Moon;52500969]this and Red dead.[/QUOTE]
GTA5 as well, due to it having an actual PC port to compare with performance and quality wise. It was also the biggest game as far as I can remember that was put on last gen. Being an 'end of the life cycle' game it would pretty much be the absolute peak of accomplishment.
if you can port it to at least run half as good as GTA5 currently does on PC you've already done pretty good.
If you can run a game that quite literally could not use the hardware better than GTA5 did, you can emulate [B]anything[/B]
[QUOTE=J!NX;52500982]GTA5 as well, due to it having an actual PC port to compare with performance and quality wise. It was also the biggest game as far as I can remember that was put on last gen. Being an 'end of the life cycle' game it would pretty much be the absolute peak of accomplishment.
if you can port it to at least run half as good as GTA5 currently does on PC you've already done pretty good.
If you can run a game that quite literally could not use the hardware better than GTA5 did, you can emulate [B]anything[/B][/QUOTE]
i dunno, the hackier games out there could prove to be an obstacle. take Rogue Squadron for Gamecube, which was a bitch to emulate for the longest time until Dolphin finally honed them down since the devs used a shitton of abnormal hacks and workarounds for it
[QUOTE=J!NX;52500982]GTA5 as well, due to it having an actual PC port to compare with performance and quality wise. It was also the biggest game as far as I can remember that was put on last gen. Being an 'end of the life cycle' game it would pretty much be the absolute peak of accomplishment.
if you can port it to at least run half as good as GTA5 currently does on PC you've already done pretty good.
If you can run a game that quite literally could not use the hardware better than GTA5 did, you can emulate [B]anything[/B][/QUOTE]
It makes me laugh that sometimes it's actually possible to run a game better in an emulator than the PC port, due to the port being so shit.
[QUOTE=J!NX;52500982]GTA5 as well, due to it having an actual PC port to compare with performance and quality wise. It was also the biggest game as far as I can remember that was put on last gen. Being an 'end of the life cycle' game it would pretty much be the absolute peak of accomplishment.
if you can port it to at least run half as good as GTA5 currently does on PC you've already done pretty good.
If you can run a game that quite literally could not use the hardware better than GTA5 did, you can emulate [B]anything[/B][/QUOTE]
I dunno, wouldn't a dedicated PS3 game be a better example of using the hardware to its peak than a cross-platform game? The fact that GTAV runs at all on PS3/360 is incredible, nevermind at a reasonably solid 30fps, but I'd be willing to bet that Uncharted/Last of Us/Ratchet & Clank/Beyond Two Souls likely did more with the hardware since they were exclusively PS3 at the time.
MGS4 would be mad if you could get it to run I think. It's a very very big game, it has to reinstall between chapters because its so large.
Also the graphics were very good for it's time plus its a PS3 exclusive, imo it would be a very big step if they could run it.
[QUOTE=Xron;52502428]MGS4 would be mad if you could get it to run I think. It's a very very big game, it has to reinstall between chapters because its so large.
Also the graphics were very good for it's time plus its a PS3 exclusive, imo it would be a very big step if they could run it.[/QUOTE]
The game did a lot of things with the PS3 that not many other games from around it's time tried. But the reinstalling between chapters has been long since resolved. It used to only install the relevant 5GB or so for a chapter because a lot of PS3s still had piddly little hard drives at the time. Sony stopped being stingy when they shipped the slim consoles so it stopped being a problem.
25GB install size is nothing compared to the average PS4 game though. Even CoD: IW is around 80GB today thanks to the required updates with DLC content.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;52502442]The game did a lot of things with the PS3 that not many other games from around it's time tried. But the reinstalling between chapters has been long since resolved. It used to only install the relevant 5GB or so for a chapter because a lot of PS3s still had piddly little hard drives at the time. Sony stopped being stingy when they shipped the slim consoles so it stopped being a problem.
25GB install size is nothing compared to the average PS4 game though. Even CoD: IW is around 80GB today thanks to the required updates with DLC content.[/QUOTE]
To be fair CoD: IW is at the upper end, due to pointless pre-rendered cutscenes IIRC
[QUOTE=djjkxbox;52502486]To be fair CoD: IW is at the upper end, due to pointless pre-rendered cutscenes IIRC[/QUOTE]
Yeah..."hey you landed on the Ret, better move to a pre-rendered shitshow!"
[QUOTE=djjkxbox;52502486]To be fair CoD: IW is at the upper end, due to pointless pre-rendered cutscenes IIRC[/QUOTE]
why are prerendered cutscenes still a thing in 2017
like okay i can understand xbox 360 and ps3 memory limitations but there's no good fucking excuse why they are still being used so much today beyond habit or lazyness
No idea, the majority of PS4 games don't use them though, which makes sense given that a lot of people download games now
[QUOTE=9millmeeter;52502663]why are prerendered cutscenes still a thing in 2017
like okay i can understand xbox 360 and ps3 memory limitations but there's no good fucking excuse why they are still being used so much today beyond habit or lazyness[/QUOTE]
Consistent performance at a higher visual quality than could be output by the engine otherwise
Not worth it for the loss in storage
[QUOTE=Pw0nageXD;52502761]Consistent performance at a higher visual quality than could be output by the engine otherwise[/QUOTE]
Except most of the time they use in game assets at 30fps, so for anyone with a decent machine it looks worse than standard gameplay and takes up a stupid amount of space.
Plus, the idea that you would want to allocate 40+ gigs on cutscenes is fucking ridiculous. If your machine is good you'll want it rendered in game and if it isn't good you probably don't have the spare space for multiple 50GB+ games, or the constant reminder that your game looks like shit compared to what it could be.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;52502887]Except most of the time they use in game assets at 30fps, so for anyone with a decent machine it looks worse than standard gameplay and takes up a stupid amount of space.
Plus, the idea that you would want to allocate 40+ gigs on cutscenes is fucking ridiculous. If your machine is good you'll want it rendered in game and if it isn't good you probably don't have the spare space for multiple 50GB+ games, or the constant reminder that your game looks like shit compared to what it could be.[/QUOTE]
The more recent CoDs have at least had some effort put into their prerendered cutscenes, which has been nice.
[t]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/3DRKpF9JaDM/maxresdefault.jpg[/t]
[t]https://s3.amazonaws.com/opshead/assets/article/2016/08/04/infinite-warfare-long-live-the-captain-trailer_feature.jpg[/t]
Still arguably unnecessary, but at least it'll age much better than using in-engine assets at a lower FPS than the game itself. RAGE is probably the most egregious example of that I can think of; the intro cinematic had unbelievably bad compression, running at 720p and 30fps.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;52502887]Except most of the time they use in game assets at 30fps, so for anyone with a decent machine it looks worse than standard gameplay and takes up a stupid amount of space.
Plus, the idea that you would want to allocate 40+ gigs on cutscenes is fucking ridiculous. If your machine is good you'll want it rendered in game and if it isn't good you probably don't have the spare space for multiple 50GB+ games, or the constant reminder that your game looks like shit compared to what it could be.[/QUOTE]
Luckily with the latest generation the practice is somewhat dying off as the engines are more capable of doing high quality cutscenes in real time. Some games do still use it but as digital downloads become the norm more and more, it's been happening less and less.
A good example of a game where it came down to performance would be Breath of the Wild. All those cutscenes were rendered in-engine but some of them just wouldn't have been able to stay stable in real time. The game itself has issues holding a stable framerate let along with all the additional particles and effects and the such.
BOTW spoilers (although the game has been out for almost five months)
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrmyJWCabx8[/media]
Nintendo did a great job of compressing the cutscenes and they aren't so numerous that they take up ridiculous amounts of space.
Also as mentioned above, some games just want to do ultra-cinematic cutscenes which otherwise just wouldn't be possible in the engine in the first place. I think 40GB+ of pre-rendered cutscenes is ridiculous but I don't think pre-rendered cutscenes are the worst thing in the world. They have their place.
[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;52503690]The more recent CoDs have at least had some effort put into their prerendered cutscenes, which has been nice.
[t]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/3DRKpF9JaDM/maxresdefault.jpg[/t]
[t]https://s3.amazonaws.com/opshead/assets/article/2016/08/04/infinite-warfare-long-live-the-captain-trailer_feature.jpg[/t]
[/QUOTE]
imo that's actually worse. The most common immersion breaker for me these days is a game that uses pre-rendered cutscenes that look way better than the game itself. Like on one hand I'm a huge fan of a game that has good cutscenes and if I was just watching those on Youtube, that'd be great. But when I'm actually playing the game, it just sucks me right out of the moment when the cutscene ends and I go back to the normal realtime visuals.
Storage is pretty cheap nowadays if we're talking desktop computers. 4 tb drives are quite literally just about a hundred bucks. Bandwidth is really the problem, since a lot of people are stuck on 15-60 mbps internet which is shit for those huge games.
Though I do think companies often could do things much better, because sometimes large sizes are for hilariously retarded reasons. Titanfall, for example, was like 60 GB because they packed EVERY GODDAMN SUPPORTED LANGUAGE in uncompressed wav audio. Instead of having them be downloaded as needed.
Likewise with cutscenes I really can't see why they can't work it out so that when you download the game, you can choose to have highly compressed cutscenes (720p,) or the standard ones.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52505268]Storage is pretty cheap nowadays if we're talking desktop computers. 4 tb drives are quite literally just about a hundred bucks. Bandwidth is really the problem, since a lot of people are stuck on 15-60 mbps internet which is shit for those huge games.
Though I do think companies often could do things much better, because sometimes large sizes are for hilariously retarded reasons. Titanfall, for example, was like 60 GB because they packed EVERY GODDAMN SUPPORTED LANGUAGE in uncompressed wav audio. Instead of having them be downloaded as needed.
Likewise with cutscenes I really can't see why they can't work it out so that when you download the game, you can choose to have highly compressed cutscenes (720p,) or the standard ones.[/QUOTE]
As much as storage is cheaper, it's still $100, on top of the price of the game. I can't remember how much space I have on my PS4, but when I'm done with games I uninstall them. I like to keep a certain amount installed so I have some choice as to what to play. I actually avoided CoD: IW because of the ridiculous size, it would've meant I'd be uninstalling probably 2 or 3 games, and I don't have the money right now to upgrade the storage.
Companies should do their best to reduce storage where possible, pre-rendered cutscenes shouldn't exist anymore. Game developers always have the choice of reducing the framerate to provide higher graphics for a cutscene, not to mention fixed camera angles also provide ways to increase framerate since things out of screen can be completed unloaded.
Game developers did a lot more work back in the PS1 era to fit incredible amounts of content on a limited sized disk, nowadays they take the piss a bit because they know they have an undefined amount of space to work with
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
