Metal Gear Solid 4 - Stunning first pics inside :o

Deadwing

That mustache is sh!t.
Hope its better than mgs 3, which i thought was cack.

Rhyme

SnIpErX wrote:

Ok so if both Snake and Otacon are so much older than they were in Metal Gear Solid 2 then i'm guessing my favourite character is dead! Revolver Ocelot would be well over 100!!! That mean's Liquid (or rather his arm) is buried with him!

For every MGS game they do a sort of a line-up of characters in that style that they use... the line-up included Snake (obviously), Revolver Ocelot, (what looked like) Meryl, a sort of zombie-esque Big-Boss, a vamp-ish character, Otacon etc...

KdjaCL

No way in hell thats ingame footage, its rendered to bits. The amount of polys in those shots are cut scene material. But suppose the kill zone trailer was in game footage too :rolleyes:


kdjac

projectmayhem

MobileInfantry wrote:

Visually looks great, snake looks like crap.....

Also, as mentioned, notice how the screenshots look slightly retouched, even if they are real-time. Then look at the screenshot of Snake close up. It looks no better then a new PC game....

you're looking at shots of a game that's got at least another 5 months of development to go

Retr0gamer

KdjaC wrote:

No way in hell thats ingame footage, its rendered to bits. The amount of polys in those shots are cut scene material. But suppose the kill zone trailer was in game footage too :rolleyes:

Funnily enough thats what everybody said about the first MGS2 footage shown at E3.

Vokes

Is it actually Snake in the pics though? Cos he also looks very Ocelot-ish

steviec

You'd think, considering it happens with every generation, people would start to realise that the technology leaps usually mean in game footage on a new console look as good as pre-rendered footage from the era before it. If MGS4 was a PS2 game then I'd be saying no way their real shots.

Besides, am I the only one that thinks those shots don't look much better than current PC games? Especially the close-ups of snake. FEAR looks every bit as good. Also, I hope players get the ability to shave in the game, that moustache is annoying.

LookingFor

steviec wrote:

Besides, am I the only one that thinks those shots don't look much better than current PC games? Especially the close-ups of snake. FEAR looks every bit as good.

I think the closeup is distracting because of the facial expression.

This is on a different level to anything currently on PCs IMO:

BloodBath

Hmm well if that is in game footage then it's very imprssive. Hideo is going for an anime style with this one. To those saying it looks no better than anything on pc your wrong. I've never seen a game that looked like an anime. That's not to say it couldn't e done on a good high end pc ut not many people have those.

Something was said about this ones them being "nowhere to hide" or similar. I hope they change the game play a bit from MGS3. I know all the games are fundamentally the same but I finally got around to playing MSG3 last week and I was really disappointed. It seemed like you took two steps/crawls forward, then go into first person view to check the way ahead and repeat.

The healing aspect too added realism but took away from the enjoyment. I know this thread is about the graphics, which look great, but I just hope they inject a bit more fun into the game to match.

The games are about stealth, that's what people love. If your looking for a blast fest go play quake 3.

flogen

I don't think it's in-game footage in the way we'd like it to be, it looks more like cutscene shots to me (unless the camera angles are superbizarre).
It looks well, but if it is just cutscenes, then it means nothing. I look forward to seeing an actual in game video running from the ps3 hardware, this is about as meaningful as the killzone 2 video

Pretor

I wouldnt really jump to any conclusions about it being pre-rendered footage, i mean noone really knows what the ps3 is graphically capable of.

Like most new console releases the first few games only scratch the surface of the consoles power, Mgs4 probably just gives us a glimpse of the ps3's power...

Giblet

They are removing the old "!" above peoples heads so you have to look at their faces to see if they're suspicious.

I think it's funny how some people don't believe it's realtime and some people think it looks worse than a new PC game. From all the graphical techniques apparent in those screenshots and if they are running at a good frame rate, it will beat the ass off anything on a PC for a 1-2 years (which is usually about correct for a new console). I don't imagine it being too difficult to render in real time on specific hardware like a PS3. This is the next level of graphic rendering and everything looks pretty accurate, I don't see much changing in those shots besides the obvious touching up to make them look grainy/hand drawn.

dent

BLITZ_Molloy wrote:

I hate how publishers have stopped releasing proper screenshots; even if they are supposedly real time, they're from cut scene style angles, not representational of what the game will look like when your playing it.

Yeah I agree, seems like consoles do this a lot. I'm not interested in cut sceens,
and if they are shots of actual play they are at odd angles :rolleyes:

steviec

The graininess could easily be done in-game too, Silent Hill does it pretty well.

The shots obviously aren't during gameplay, but from past experience 50% of your time playing MGS games are cut scenes from these angles anyway, and they still use exactly the same graphics so I don't see how it's not indicative of the actual game.

dent

Giblet wrote:

I think it's funny how some people don't believe it's realtime

Well I think they should provide screen shots orientated to the actual gaming experience. I hope it really is going to look that good but more often then not these things are misleading. Lets just hope they don't forget the game play amongst these amazing graphics

aidan_walsh

The more I look at the eye patch on Snake, the more I become convinced that this could be another prequel to the original Metal Gear. The full warzone setting could be the rise of Zanzibar...

GrumPy

Someone mentioned about it being a stealth game and go play quake (to lazy to find post) but never has a metal gear game been about stealth, you want stealth go play an actual game like splinter cell3, dont get me wrong, i love metal gear to bits, but it aint stealth, it's action adventure, with added cut-scene, if your seen in mgs, you just run into nearest door, hide under a box for 40 seconds, and your good to go, in splinter cell, if your seen, your dead (sorry for the rant) as for it being actual graphics i dont see why not looks like Hideo has changed the game completly, which could be a good thing, as the series was getting dull.

LookingFor

flogen wrote:

I don't think it's in-game footage in the way we'd like it to be, it looks more like cutscene shots to me (unless the camera angles are superbizarre).

Correct, the camera angles in these shots at least aren't gameplay camera angles. Likely not in the trailer either.

flogen wrote:

It looks well, but if it is just cutscenes, then it means nothing. I look forward to seeing an actual in game video running from the ps3 hardware, this is about as meaningful as the killzone 2 video

Incorrect. This is realtime on PS3. Killzone was prerendered CG. Kojima's cutscenes only ever use the in-game engine, just without gameplay camera angles, obviously. The game will look this good and better if you believe Kojima - and there's no reason not to believe that, the game is likely at least 12 months away, and they're still running on underpowered, non-final PS3 devkits.

BTW, the first airing of the trailer at TGS is at 3pm Japanese time tomorrow. That's 7am tomorrow our time. Rumour has it, the trailer will go up on Konami's website just shortly after the first TGS airing.

cosgrove80

BloodBath wrote:

The games are about stealth, that's what people love. If your looking for a blast fest go play quake 3.

Don't get me wrong, I loved MGS1 (probably in my all time top 5) and really liked the second one. It's just I found the third one annoying and a little repetitive.

I know full well whether or not I want to play a MGS game and what, generally, to expect from them.

Can't wait for the trailer.

Vokes

Id be looking for a MUCH improved camera-angle for MGS4. Something i have control over.

Unlike Snake Eater which suffered for it, imo.

LookingFor

SofaKing wrote:

Id be looking for a MUCH improved camera-angle for MGS4. Something i have control over.

Unlike Snake Eater which suffered for it, imo.

They confirmed at E3 that it'll be a 3D camera. They're using a version of it in MGS3:Subsistence - you'll be able to switch between the 3D camera and "traditional" camera as you please. They were working on it for MGS4 but decided to put it in MGS3:S to get feedback on it and improve it for 4.

Similarly, they're experimenting with online in MGS:3 with an eye on 4.

flogen

LookingFor wrote:

Incorrect. This is realtime on PS3. Killzone was prerendered CG. Kojima's cutscenes only ever use the in-game engine, just without gameplay camera angles, obviously. The game will look this good and better if you believe Kojima - and there's no reason not to believe that, the game is likely at least 12 months away, and they're still running on underpowered, non-final PS3 devkits.

My point isn't that these screenshots are the same as the killzone 2 demo, but more that they're about as meaningful. What I mean by that is that until we see actual in-game footage (video) and gameplay, there's no point in deciding what looks good, bad or great.
Now, if these are the level of graphics in game then that would be great, but I'm not believing anything until I see it, games companies are all too happy to lie to you about game quality, even if they have a history of being honest.

LookingFor

flogen wrote:

My point isn't that these screenshots are the same as the killzone 2 demo, but more that they're about as meaningful. What I mean by that is that until we see actual in-game footage (video) and gameplay, there's no point in deciding what looks good, bad or great.
Now, if these are the level of graphics in game then that would be great, but I'm not believing anything until I see it, games companies are all too happy to lie to you about game quality, even if they have a history of being honest.

Fair enough, you're entitled to be sceptical. I think you will be pleasantly surprised though. Kojima certainly does not have a history of passing off CG as game engine graphics - but he does have a history of introducing games to which many respond "CG CG CG", only to later find out differently (it happened a lot with MGS2) Personally I'm very happy to accept his word on this, he has been very clear and very explicit on the issue.