Newbcast Gaming Contributor Locclo take a look back at Final Fantasy X. Is it a great addition to the franchise?
I want the HD remake so bad, wtf is taking so long?!
I've never played it so it will be nice to place through first time in HD. What systems is it being released for ?
PS3 and PS Vita.
you can get it in higher resolution and better performance than the ps3 or vita will be able to produce for free if you own the original disc (or buy it for $6-$10 on amazon or gamestop and download pcsx2 for free http://www.youtube.com/watc... http://www.youtube.com/watc... http://www.youtube.com/watc... (watch in 1080p) it looks 10x better than even youtube is capable of showing, it and 99.5% of all ps2 games work flawlessly and blow ANY ps2 remake on ps3 out of the water you will need a decent pc, and least 4gb ram, a fast dual core and an 8800 gts or better gpu (cheap modern ones like a 650 will max everything out again, pcsx2.... its free and it makes the ps3 hd remakes look last gen
I second this. Pcsx2 is awesome. Just a little bit of tweaking per game is required. I don't know but is SE recreating FFX or just adding HD visuals.
That really depends on how much they upgrade it to HD. If they actually retexture everything to be hd standards and update lighting a little and have 1080p cgi cut scenes it will be alot better than the emulator. If they half fast it like some hd remakes then yes it probly will look better on your computer.
Honestly, some ps2 games on pcsx2 look better than ps3 games, full retail games, like the pc is capable of making a 9 year old game look better than 90% of the ps3's library, its crazy... ffx is no exception, in 1080p @60frames, it destroys anything that will ever be done with it on ps3, most likely they will make a crappy, upscaled to 720p at 30 frames with jaggies still all over the place like all the other "hd" remakes the have made that are barely hd if you still consider 1280x720 hd, well....i feel bad for you....yes technically its "hd", but...i don't even think anywhere but walmart sells crappy 720p tv's anymore, you'd be better off playing ps3 and 360 games on a tube tv, its closer to the res of most games, ...lol...get an "ED" tv pcsx2 is amazing and crushes anything ps3 has done with ps2 library Obviously this has to do with them being rendered at WAY high resolutions than ps3 is capable of in a real 3d game, at 6x the resolution of ps2, with fxaa and dx10 rendering applied games like this; http://www.youtube.com/watc... actually look better than 90% of ps3 and 360 games! we need some new consoles out now -2 years ago really no need for rose tinted, or any other glasses, just fire up pcsx2 and play the your favorite ps2 games far beyond anything ps3 will ever give you, FOR FREE!!!
I disagree. It looks better than before but I can still tell the textures are from ps2. Its blured out a little because no matter what you you try to inlarge a small picture to be 1080p its still going to look not that great. Only way around that is if they retextured everything. And someone has to be blind if they really do think pcsx2 graphics are better than 90% of games coming out. all pcsx2 is adding anti-aliasing and upscaling it. I always laugh inside when I hear someone say this graphics look horrible. They look like ps2 graphics. They really need to play ps2 games over again because no where near a ps2 game. And yes I played ff10 on my computer and it does make it look better but nothing compared to ps3 games. Artistically yes its better than most but graphically not close.
Typical N4G dogma, some games do look better on PCSX2 then PS3 games well at least early games. An don't give my that tried texture argument because as anyone with more then two brain cells knows textures aren't as important in cell shaded games plenty of which featured on the PS2. I mean honestly you even try an argue that second image the PS3 game looks better I dare you! 1) http://i.picpar.com/1825096... 2) http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4...
Graphically yes I do think its better. I can tell the tech they use with global illumination and better lighting makes it graphically better. But artistically not even close. If you took that same scene from that cell shaded game and put it into Leisure Suit Larry game it would look a lot nicer. And there is no cell shading happening in that game. Its a illusion from the texture. Cell Shading is an added shader to mimic cell shading without adding textures to it yet. Something like Naruto Ninja Storm is a good example. And I can still tell the textures are blury. To make that even nicer than can redo the textures or just make the image larger and do some touch up. One thing also for me being a 3d modeler I can tell by how low poly it is from that image. There is no lighting at all. No shadows. I saw this immediatly when I saw this. Now does it look ugly? No. Graphics is all to do with the tech side from the game. If they had some great modelers added some objects into the lesure suit larry game engine it would look pretty nice. And there is no way a ps2 game should be better graphically. It depends on the developer who made it or not. Like leisure suit larry box office bust was developed by horrible developers. That image is like what you see from amateurs tring to develop something there first time. It looks horrible but graphically its better than the other but artistically it looks horrible.
@N4GDgAPc I love the way your trying to change the argument now it's proven your full of rubbish. First of all the argument was about what "looks" better and that's clearly the PCSX2 game. The argument wasn't about what was technically graphically superior, technically speaking of course a PS3 game has an advantage considering it made for much more powerful hardware. However the PCSX2 game still looks miles f-ing better even you admit it. How about you stop changing the rules of the argument an admit your wrong?
Bit late to asking that question, isn't it? Though of course with S/E messing up as badly as they have recently, thinking about the old games, its a pity that it was victim of chauvinism with Tidus stealing the main character spot from Yana.
I liked FFX, but neither Tidus nor Yuna were good characters anyway. Half of the main cast sucked.
I thought Yuna was a great character and should have been the protagonist, imo. I was more invested in her pilgrimage and growth as a summoner than Tidus' tag-along and issues with Jecht. :O
I think it was a much more invested storyline than most games these days. Although I don't agree with needing an HD rehash, the characters were unique and relatable, not to mention its heartbreaking storyline.
A good addition to a franchise can forever be debated. Retro reviews tend to look at previous titles to decide such questions.
Except it was a flawed game. FF6 especially showed that Square could make a title with multiple characters, and Yuna and Tidus both should have been the "main" character since it was her story but he was a chief element in her personal development. Instead Yuna was regulated to being a kidnap victim.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.