Wow. Well, he does say he is reviewing it by modern standards as unsurprisingly the graphics get a panning, which I can sorta agree with as they haven’t aged well, especially when compared to Zwei and Saga.
I always felt PD1 was the weakest of the series overall, but it WAS the earliest.
[quote=“Shadow”]Wow. Well, he does say he is reviewing it by modern standards as unsurprisingly the graphics get a panning, which I can sorta agree with as they haven’t aged well, especially when compared to Zwei and Saga.
I always felt PD1 was the weakest of the series overall, but it WAS the earliest.[/quote]
Completely agree with you.
It’s also important to note that Team Andromeda had a lot of trouble developing PD1. The Saturn prototype took a long time to arrive, so they had to develop the game on an OpenGL renderer. When they got their hands on the hardware, the 3D code proved to be very difficult to port.
Don’t see why anyone would choose to review this “with modern standards”.
The question is, bad graphics compared to what? Did many other 3D games have better graphics than Panzer Dragoon in 1995?
Compared to today’s standards. He clearly states that the graphics haven’t aged well, though the artistic direction and animations are excellent.
EDIT: There has been a lot of buzz on Twitter about Panzer Dragoon after this review. Even Sega itself expressed interest.