NeonSyN said: I agree, the character models are pretty ugly
The faces need work, I guess you're right about that. They almost look like they're just not meant to be seen up close. But I am confident that they will be just fine in the end. I don't play SF to see close-up shots anyway.
[quote=NeonSyN]I agree, the character models are pretty ugly[/quote]
The faces need work, I guess you're right about that. They almost look like they're just not meant to be seen up close. But I am confident that they will be just fine in the end. I don't play SF to see close-up shots anyway.
overlordmaster said: street fighter should not be in 3D it should be in 2D just like street fighter was! It was good back then.
I agree. And SF4 looks like it is keeping with that tradition. The gameplay is in 2D while the presentation is 3D.
Imagine if Capcom gave us a choice in the options menu concerning presentation:
3D (as seen here) - Along w/ multiple sub-options for how dramatic the camera angles go
OR
2D with perspective (AKA 2.5D - just like this video but with camera only moving side to side as if on a linear rail with no camera turning)
OR
2D with no perspective (AKA Scalar - view is not a cone but a rectangular prism like that for a blueprint thereby eliminating depth perceived by camera displacement)
AND
separately a choice for cell-shaded or non-cell-shaded.
This way, to choose 2D w/ no perspective and w/ cell-shading takes the game back to the 90's!! Yeah!
[quote=overlordmaster]street fighter should not be in 3D it should be in 2D just like street fighter was! It was good back then.[/quote]
I agree. And SF4 looks like it is keeping with that tradition. The gameplay is in 2D while the presentation is 3D.
Imagine if Capcom gave us a choice in the options menu concerning presentation:
3D (as seen here) - Along w/ multiple sub-options for how dramatic the camera angles go
OR
2D with perspective (AKA 2.5D - just like this video but with camera only moving side to side as if on a linear rail with no camera turning)
OR
2D with no perspective (AKA Scalar - view is not a cone but a rectangular prism like that for a blueprint thereby eliminating depth perceived by camera displacement)
AND
separately a choice for cell-shaded or non-cell-shaded.
This way, to choose 2D w/ no perspective and w/ cell-shading takes the game back to the 90's!! Yeah!
This game looks like it should of been released 7 years ago. The character models look U-G-L-Y, also looks like they are made out of clay when they are in motion!!!
This game looks like it should of been released 7 years ago. The character models look U-G-L-Y, also looks like they are made out of clay when they are in motion!!!
I hope that that work a bit more of the faces of the character models. They don't quite look like Ryu and Ken; atleast compared to how they looked in the trailer.
I hope that that work a bit more of the faces of the character models. They don't quite look like Ryu and Ken; atleast compared to how they looked in the trailer.
The faces need work, I guess you're right about that. They almost look like they're just not meant to be seen up close. But I am confident that they will be just fine in the end. I don't play SF to see close-up shots anyway.
I agree. And SF4 looks like it is keeping with that tradition. The gameplay is in 2D while the presentation is 3D.
Imagine if Capcom gave us a choice in the options menu concerning presentation:
3D (as seen here) - Along w/ multiple sub-options for how dramatic the camera angles go
OR
2D with perspective (AKA 2.5D - just like this video but with camera only moving side to side as if on a linear rail with no camera turning)
OR
2D with no perspective (AKA Scalar - view is not a cone but a rectangular prism like that for a blueprint thereby eliminating depth perceived by camera displacement)
AND
separately a choice for cell-shaded or non-cell-shaded.
This way, to choose 2D w/ no perspective and w/ cell-shading takes the game back to the 90's!! Yeah!