Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots

[Solid Lifters]

Thing is solid, there are zero situations in that trailer where there would be zero light, thus, there would be absolutely not spot for absolute black.

Ha, ha, ha; you're cute.

If you want crappy dynamic range for colors, blacks, contrast, and shadow detail, then that's your thing, I'll take the significantly improved new trailer over that garbage anyday.

I guess you missed the part where I said I don't want those things. It's odd how you came to this conclusion. I also said I don't want the game to be as washed out as it appears in the crappy videos. But, like I said, I'm going to wait until we get the "REAL" videos to make my opinions.

And people are raving about the trailer because it's frame rate doesn't chug during the scene's they used to, and it's technically superior, which means that the engine is coming along nicely and that the game has a lot more to offer. Not because there's a few extra rocks flying around when the wall breaks.

The improved frame rate is nice to see. I said I liked that about these videos. But I don't much care, if the videos are going to look like as horrible as they do. People can rave all they want; I'm not going to. I'll 'rave' when I get to see some decent video quality videos.

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

Wow, for a Metal Gear Solid fan, you sure are extremely nit picky and uhh....never mind. I'm not going to get into a verbal fling fest. You think the video looks washed out, I know it's technically superior. You like an inferior image, I like the cleaner, better image. So we'll agree to disagree.

 

[Solid Lifters]

Wow, for a Metal Gear Solid fan, you sure are extremely nit picky and uhh....never mind. I'm not going to get into a verbal fling fest. You think the video looks washed out, I know it's technically superior. You like an inferior image, I like the cleaner, better image. So we'll agree to disagree.

No, not 'nit picky,' more like fed up. If I had something to be nitpicky about, it would be about seeing the same clip again. Seeing the same clip was done for reason, and I'm not complaining about that.

I think it's ridiculous that the best looking MGS4 trailer so far has been a 480i trailer demo released on a OPM game demo disc released over a year-and-a-half ago.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

I think it's ridiculous that the best looking MGS4 trailer so far has been a 480i trailer demo released on a OPM game demo disc released over a year-and-a-half ago.

100% agreed...

There are so many different variables along the video chain that unless we are made aware of exactly how these images were created and captured and the equipment used to do it, it would be nearly impossible to know how much of the difference is actually programmed into the game, and how much is really just the difference from one video capture system to another.

As far as "black looking black":

You might like your blacks to look like charcoal gray, which they look like now in the 'recut' videos, but that's only your opinion. Blacks looking like blacks is obviously mine. I want blacks to look like blacks, so that's why I don't like the current videos.

As someone with a long history in film & cinema, and with over 3,000 film titles in my library, I can promise you very little on film is ever true black. One excellent example of a film that actually has several scenes with an abundant amount of true black is "Pitch Black"... but this is very much a rare exception in film and especially video!

Obviously space scenes often have a lot of true black, but even this can be diminished depending on the brightness of the stars shown in the scene. Clothing, and painted items can sometimes come close to being true black, although they to usually have subtle shades of deep gray.

However, only scenes shot entirely in the dark are meant to be true black. Most everything else is simply shades of gray that can come close to "true black"... often referred to as "video black" and even "blacker than black".

The better the camera and display, the more shades can be captured and displayed... and this above all else effects the quality of the image being shown... not having black look black. This is often a point of contention with die-hard CRT owners, who are all too quick to sacrifice shadow detail, for "true black", which is a real shame, as shadow detail not only determines how much fine detail you can see, but also gives images a more three dimensional look. Having better "true black" offers absolutely no detail, and if it sacrifices shadow detail, it will make images look more flat than they should.



As for the rest of your comments, I agree completely.

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

I think it's ridiculous that the best looking MGS4 trailer so far has been a 480i trailer demo released on a OPM game demo disc released over a year-and-a-half ago.

I don't agree on that either. The Documentary disc that came with Pre-orders for Subsistance was substantially better than the OPM video. It was higher bit rate and 480p (I cannot confirm if the OPM vid was 480i).

Either way, no matter how you cut it as far as preference, that can be your opinion, however, technically, the video has improved it's lighting. You may have liked the shallow range of lighting and shadows previously seen in the E3 2K6 video, but that doesn't change the fact that the remastered video is technically superior.

 

[Solid Lifters]

I don't agree on that either. The Documentary disc that came with Pre-orders for Subsistance was substantially better than the OPM video. It was higher bit rate and 480p (I cannot confirm if the OPM vid was 480i).

Either way, no matter how you cut it as far as preference, that can be your opinion, however, technically, the video has improved it's lighting. You may have liked the shallow range of lighting and shadows previously seen in the E3 2K6 video, but that doesn't change the fact that the remastered video is technically superior.

Oh no, no, no. The OPM demo disc had FAR better clarity and image detail than the very bad Saga disc. I know, I have both. Even my kids noticed the difference.

Again, your opinion. But, I know of not a single person, other than yourself, who prefers the Saga TGS 2005 MGS4 trailer over the OPM demo disc.

As far as the black levels in movies, my Star Wars movies in HD have 'outer space' that looks like real black space and not like a 'charcoal gray area' that's trying to pass off as space like in my VHS movies. Huge difference.

I like the black levels to be as black as possible and the contrast as high as possible without washing out the picture. It's just the way I am.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

I like the black levels to be as black as possible and the contrast as high as possible without washing out the picture. It's just the way I am.

Which is no different than what I said.

The problem becomes when the black levels are artificially increased and sacrifice shadow detail... often referred to as "black crush". The same thing happens on the opposite side of the spectrum when the contrast setting is boosted too high it crushes all detail in bright images.... often referred to as "white crush".

One of the problems shown in some of the X360 versions of games is that there is a lot of "black crush", where a great deal of actual detail is completely "blacked out"... this is definitely NOT a good thing!

Gametrailers.com has some decent X360 vs PS3 videos showing how the same games compare on both systems, with several side by side comparisons. In most of them you'll find that the X360 versions have a bad case of black crush, and in fact in one scene from Armored Core 4, where you go down a utility shaft. In the video of the X360 version, the shaft is entirely in black, where as the PS3 version shows the detail of the inner walls of the shaft... which if they were not intended to be shown, the graphic designers would not have created it.

These are all great examples showing that you can have too much black, where black was never intended to be scene... only dark shades of near black.

 

[Solid Lifters]

Speaking of side-by-side comparisons... http://www.gametrailers.com/umwatcher.php?id=71543

The color and blacks have been washed out too much. Is that what you want? Reds look more red in the 2006 trailer. Blacks look more like black. Greens look more like greens. I say the contrast level is now too high in the 2007 trailer 'remake.' They need to back it down.

But, again, is the fault of Konami or the people who made the video comparison?

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

But, again, is the fault of Konami or the people who made the video comparison?

Exactly...

There are so many different variables along the video chain that unless we are made aware of exactly how these images were created and captured and the equipment used to do it, it would be nearly impossible to know how much of the difference is actually programmed into the game, and how much is really just the difference from one video capture system to another.

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

I like the black levels to be as black as possible and the contrast as high as possible without washing out the picture. It's just the way I am.

The color and blacks have been washed out too much. Is that what you want? Reds look more red in the 2006 trailer. Blacks look more like black. Greens look more like greens. I say the contrast level is now too high in the 2007 trailer 'remake.' They need to back it down.

💡

 

[Solid Lifters]

💡

Yeah, and the 2007 contrast is too high, which is why I don't like it; all the colors look like crap.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

JR, While it is understandable why it may look like he is contradicting himself, he is not. He is talking about two different things.

A display's "Contrast Ratio" and the "Contrast Level" (which is actually gamma level, but unfortunately the display industry decided long ago to call it "Contrast Level") of a display in the video adjustment settings menu.

While these two are some what related, they are in fact different.


Just as Solid-L mentioned, ideally you would want a display with the highest possible contrast ratio, but the last thing you want to do is to set the contrast (gamma) level too high or too low, because when you do that you will crush detail on both sides of the luminance spectrum (loss of shadow & bright detail). This is also why it is critical to properly calibrate a display for EACH video input and source, as the gamma levels will be different for each... and to add to the problem, nearly all displays are sent out with the contrast (gamma) level set too high.

In addition, having the gamma levels set improperly will also negatively impact the color accuracy of the images displayed.


The following is an example of how too low and too high a gamma level will negatively impact the quality of an image:

​

The proper setting would be the one resulting in the image shown in the upper right-hand side.

 

[Omnis]

I think the 2007 trailer more accurately shows the dusty daylight of the environment. 06 was too dark and had some black crush for what is supposed to be a hot, dusty day.

 

[Solid Fro]

I noticed the textures are more detailed than before and there is no longer frame rate drops in the scene where Solid Snake is at The Boss's grave.

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

*snip*

Dude, I'm a photographer, a graphic design major, and I extensively deal with HDR photo's and images, and a magnatude of different monitors and display setups in order to idealy develop digital photography and visual designs. The last thing I need is an explanation on gamma, contrast, and display settings.

Point blank, it seems he really doesn't know what he wants. Last year it was "Oh yuck, the yellow filter looks like puke" and now it's "oh, the blacks aren't black enough".

Quite frankly, there is no way on the face of the planet anyone could say last years trailer is technically superior. There are thousands of reasons why, as we've mentioned, the most important being shadow detail. Quite frankly, as good as the trailer "may" have looked, I want to SEE where I'm going when I walk into a room, not suffer from the horrible results of black crush, simply so some AV guy can say his "blacks are black".

Also, he was speaking specifically about the game. He likes his "blacks black" and his "contrast as high as possible" both in reference to the game, not to any displays. He is talking ONLY about how he wants the game to have those features.

Then, later on, he talks about how he wants the contrast turned DOWN. That is a contradiction to what HE said. Higher contrast leads to a higher range of color and light, blacks and whites, etc etc. Having a lower contrast would only further degrade the image quality.

As for your photo example, I, and many photographers for that matter, would beg to differ. The "proper" image would be the one in the top left, not the top right. The one in the top right suffers greatly from over exposed waves and crushed shadows in the rocks. The only true exposure in that entire thing is the top left, in which the shadows are shadows, not empty black spaces, and the waves have detail, not a huge white mass.

 

[Solid Lifters]

You're absolutely ridiculous. You'll go to any length to try to appear you were correct the whole while. You are actually trying to tell people I don't know what I like or prefer.

Go do something better with your life, boy. Like, pick your nose and eat the contents. Play with a kitty. Watch Barney and Friends.

Sheesh.

 

[Dave A]

Dude, I'm a photographer, a graphic design major, and I extensively deal with HDR photo's and images, and a magnatude of different monitors and display setups in order to idealy develop digital photography and visual designs. The last thing I need is an explanation on gamma, contrast, and display settings.

And people that don't know you off this site are all going to magically know that.

Point blank, it seems he really doesn't know what he wants. Last year it was "Oh yuck, the yellow filter looks like puke" and now it's "oh, the blacks aren't black enough".

Whether Solid liked the first one or not, it doesn't mean he should like this one. If he doesn't like either, then he doesn't like either. Personally, to me neither have the colours and lighting right yet for my preference but both viseo's impress me on a technical levle. The second imo looks better but my opinion should not and will not be projected onto anyone else, including Solid. Personally I can't remember Solid making that many complaints about last years trailer, but regradless of what he thought of it he's entitled to think what he wants of this new one.

Quite frankly, there is no way on the face of the planet anyone could say last years trailer is technically superior. There are thousands of reasons why, as we've mentioned, the most important being shadow detail. Quite frankly, as good as the trailer "may" have looked, I want to SEE where I'm going when I walk into a room, not suffer from the horrible results of black crush, simply so some AV guy can say his "blacks are black".

You may be right on a technical level, but on the basis of opinion you may not.

Also, he was speaking specifically about the game. He likes his "blacks black" and his "contrast as high as possible" both in reference to the game, not to any displays. He is talking ONLY about how he wants the game to have those features.

So, that's how he wants it, so what. Hundereds of people post about how they want the next GT game to be, so what, that's thier opinions , they're simply sharing what they like.

Then, later on, he talks about how he wants the contrast turned DOWN. That is a contradiction to what HE said. Higher contrast leads to a higher range of color and light, blacks and whites, etc etc. Having a lower contrast would only further degrade the image quality.

Maybe he did, maybe it wasn't exactley what he meant, maybe you should a: either be able to jump to that conclusion yourself, or b: ask him for clarification like an adult.

I don't mean to sound like an arse here but why get so worked up over something so simple and unimportant when most missunderstanding like this simply require a "I'm not sure what you mean by that, it sounds like you contradicted yourself?" Which is a far mor respectable way to get over the problem.

 

[godzilla_GTR]

great post Dave A, +Rep for that effort:tup:

 

[Solid Lifters]

+ rep, there.

But, don't bother. It's not going to solve anything. He's just going to continue on with this.

Drop it, and let's get back to MGS4!

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

And people that don't know you off this site are all going to magically know that.

Whether Solid liked the first one or not, it doesn't mean he should like this one. If he doesn't like either, then he doesn't like either. Personally, to me neither have the colours and lighting right yet for my preference but both viseo's impress me on a technical levle. The second imo looks better but my opinion should not and will not be projected onto anyone else, including Solid. Personally I can't remember Solid making that many complaints about last years trailer, but regradless of what he thought of it he's entitled to think what he wants of this new one.

You may be right on a technical level, but on the basis of opinion you may not.

So, that's how he wants it, so what. Hundereds of people post about how they want the next GT game to be, so what, that's thier opinions , they're simply sharing what they like.

Maybe he did, maybe it wasn't exactley what he meant, maybe you should a: either be able to jump to that conclusion yourself, or b: ask him for clarification like an adult.

I don't mean to sound like an arse here but why get so worked up over something so simple and unimportant when most missunderstanding like this simply require a "I'm not sure what you mean by that, it sounds like you contradicted yourself?" Which is a far mor respectable way to get over the problem.

Because he's insulting, thus I respond with the tone I do.

There's no dancing around the fact that he frequently contradicts his self, and then if he does get caught up in something like that, here simply insults you, in the most ridiculous of ways at that.

As to people "magically" knowing things about me. I post frequently enough about photography, graphic design, and home theater in a magnitude of threads (one's in which Solid and D-N have both participated in) that they should know that I don't need a basic breakdown about something as simple as contrast.

My point was, he spoke only about contrast in reference to said video, and indirectly the game. He never makes a mention of a TV set. And since that was the stance he took on said subject, he contradicted himself. There isn't any arguing that.

Then when I suggested that the video was technically superior, and that having crushed blacks does nothing but hide detail and remove the 3D 'pop' rendered objects have, he responded as though I was an idiot.

I've reported his post. If I'm subject to the AUP, so is he, and he's broken it with many members on this site, time and time again.

 

[godzilla_GTR]

^Not everyone is an "expert" on this sort of stuff man, and quite a few people would find that post from D-N very helpfull for trying to setup there HD-TV's etc(ive printed it off for my grandad to use on his as his is shocking atm) and only the first 2 lines looked as though they were directed at you, while the rest seemed to be toward's whoever took interest. Just my take...

We need jordan or a mod in here lol.

*-.ANYWAY.-* Back on topic....MGS:4 GOTP

So, whos looking forward to this game

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

Dude, I'm a photographer, a graphic design major, and I extensively deal with HDR photo's and images, and a magnatude of different monitors and display setups in order to idealy develop digital photography and visual designs. The last thing I need is an explanation on gamma, contrast, and display settings.

First of all, my name isn't "Dude".

Second of all, I'm glad to hear you do not need an explanation on gamma, contrast, and display settings... however, if that is the case then your response in post #610 makes little sense.

It is perfectly sensible and inteligent to desire maximum contrast (ratio), and avoid excessive contrast levels... as explained in the post you so graciously *snipped*.

Furthermore, whether you did understand these issues or not isn't entirely the point. Other's may indeed not, and may understandably be confused by how the term "contrast" can mean different things, and unlike you might appreciate a little clarification.

Finally Dave said it best...

And people that don't know you off this site are all going to magically know that.

Whether Solid liked the first one or not, it doesn't mean he should like this one. If he doesn't like either, then he doesn't like either. Personally, to me neither have the colours and lighting right yet for my preference but both viseo's impress me on a technical levle. The second imo looks better but my opinion should not and will not be projected onto anyone else, including Solid. Personally I can't remember Solid making that many complaints about last years trailer, but regradless of what he thought of it he's entitled to think what he wants of this new one.

You may be right on a technical level, but on the basis of opinion you may not.

So, that's how he wants it, so what. Hundereds of people post about how they want the next GT game to be, so what, that's thier opinions , they're simply sharing what they like.

Maybe he did, maybe it wasn't exactley what he meant, maybe you should a: either be able to jump to that conclusion yourself, or b: ask him for clarification like an adult.

I don't mean to sound like an arse here but why get so worked up over something so simple and unimportant when most missunderstanding like this simply require a "I'm not sure what you mean by that, it sounds like you contradicted yourself?" Which is a far mor respectable way to get over the problem.

+REP from me as well. 👍

^Not everyone is an "expert" on this sort of stuff man, and quite a few people would find that post from D-N very helpfull for trying to setup there HD-TV's etc(ive printed it off for my grandad to use on his as his is shocking atm) and only the first 2 lines looked as though they were directed at you, while the rest seemed to be toward's whoever took interest. Just my take...

You took correctly.

 

[Solid Lifters]

You see Dave A and Digital-Nitrate? What did I tell you? (Check your reps) It's pointless to even try. Just ignore him when he's like this and move on. I have. 👍

 

[Famine]

I've reported his post. If I'm subject to the AUP, so is he, and he's broken it with many members on this site, time and time again.

Everyone is subject to the AUP. Solid Lifters has received staff action under the Infraction System twice, whereas your current persona has not. So if either of you have cause to complain about the AUP's application, it isn't you.


This seems to be a misunderstanding based on ambiguous wording, which DN has tried to explain. Move on.

 

[Sprite]

Now my personal opinion on the new MGS trailer, I liked the look of the new one, as it had less contrast and looked more washed-out. Im not a big fan of the colour pallet used.

Opinion over.

 

[Solid Fro]

Destructoid's podcast clarifies MGS4's exclusivity to PS3 and potential ports of Metal Gear to other consoles.

http://www.podtoid.com/podtoid-24-international-edition/

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

Destructoid's podcast clarifies MGS4's exclusivity to PS3 and potential ports of Metal Gear to other consoles.

http://www.podtoid.com/podtoid-24-international-edition/

That link took me to the following:

This week’s Podtoid took on a bit of worldly flavor with the addition of Cheapy D (coming at ya’ from the dank, post-apocalyptic streets of Neo-Tokyo Japan), and a sleep-addled cameo from the reigning queen of the DToid community atheistium. Keep in mind people, she’s English, so while her title may be official, in reality, she’s merely a figurehead symbolically lording archaic traditions over a commonwealth yearning to join its trans-Atlantic offspring in a democratic society inspired by the works of long-dead Greek chaps with beards that could choke post-motorcycle-fixation Ewan McGregor.

Along with all the dirty foreigners (We kid! Foreigners are generally hard-working, industrious people! They’re like sexy, hard to understand bees!), we had Wombat, Cheapy’s he’s-just-my-ward-there’s-nothing-sexual-about-it sidekick on the CAGcast, myself, Ron Workman, and brief flashes of respectability provided by Aaron Linde and Niero “Niero” McI’mfromcuba.

As per usual, you can pick up the Podtoid by clicking below, or, if you’re annoyed at how often I’m using hyphens in this post, you can have Steve Jobs send the Podtoid to you via your very own copy of iTunes.

?

 

[Solid Fro]

Yeah, click on the Audio MP3 button just below it. This podcast is for mature audiences only.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

Yeah, click on the Audio MP3 button just below it. This podcast is for mature audiences only.

As you have already listened to it, could you quote the relevant parts of the podcast, or at least identify where (time marker) in the podcast this revealing information on MGS4 is discussed.

I started to play it, but when I realized it looked to be over an hour of mostly "dude chatter" I simply had to turn it off. I would be interested in listening or reading what they have to say specifically on MGS4, so if you can share with us that, or be more specific as to where in the podcast they discuss this info, that would be very helpful. Thanks!

 

[Solid Lifters]

As you have already listened to it, could you quote the relevant parts of the podcast, or at least identify where (time marker) in the podcast this revealing information on MGS4 is discussed.

I started to play it, but when I realized it looked to be over an hour of mostly "dude chatter" I simply had to turn it off. I would be interested in listening or reading what they have to say specifically on MGS4, so if you can share with us that, or be more specific as to where in the podcast they discuss this info, that would be very helpful. Thanks!

They finally stop talking out of the a-holes aroung the 21 minute mark, but contine for another 8 or 9 minutes as they talk about MGS4. It's not really worth it, I think. LOL

But, it was interesting news to hear.