Ratchet and Clank PS4 vs. PS2 Comparison Shows How Insomniac Made A True Next-Gen Game

ratchet-ps4-4

Ratchet and Clank is finally returning to the PS4 and this time the series is heading into a new direction with an animated movie and game release. The original Ratchet and Clank was released on the PS2 and the latest release is more of a re-imagining of the original with a new graphics engine and story.

It is rather interesting to see how the original version on the PlayStation 2 looks compared to the PS4 version of the game. You can check out this difference in the animated GIFs below (via reddit user mushroomwig).

Ratchet and Clank PS4 is set to release in Spring 2016.

Let us know what you think about this comparison in the comments below.

  • jackboyz

    A 30 fps remake of a PS2 game that was 60 fps, is somehow, someway “true” next gen?

    • bigevilworldwide1 .

      Its not a remake….Its a re-imagining…They are taking things from other games in the series and adding in story elements…Its not the same game from PS2

      • sublimetalmsg

        Don’t bother explaining to him. He is criticizing a frame rate of a none racing game like its going to matter with this title. Because pretty graphix and frame rates are always better then game play……

        • jackboyz

          High frame rates are vital to platformers. Frame rate should always take precedence over graphics and resolution, especially in a platformer. Racers, fighters, shooters, platformers, any game genres such as these that require the player to have quick, twitch-like reactions MUST have high frame rates. Otherwise is purely unacceptable, and frankly, unplayable.

          • sublimetalmsg

            Vital? there where many games on 360 and ps3 that where 30fps. this whole ordeal it needs to be 60 fps is a personal standard. Is 60 fps better then 30 yes I will agree with you I personally like 60 fps more then 30. you know what I like even more then 60 fps? 120 fps but in no way shape or form is it necessary for me to enjoy most games. This game does not need to run 60 fps to still be playable and enjoyable.

      • jackboyz

        Still, 30 fps in a platformer is grotesque.

        • Eh

          You don’t understand how frame rate worked on the PS2 vs current gen frame rate. Back in the PS2 and earlier things were FPS based. Meaning all PS2 games had to run at 60 FPS (well 59.9x to be exact) because you needed 60 FPS to have it run at full speed. Anything below 60 FPS would make the game run slower by around 1.6% slower for each FPS less than 60. Nowadays game FPS is based on time not frames. Basically it means that games can now run at 30 FPS and still be in full speed vs the older games needing to run at 60 FPS. There is nothing wrong with a game running at 30 FPS vs 60 FPS when you compared them to 2 generations back. That is just stupid. They are completely different technologies. If you don’t believe me, do some research yourself and you will see why it doesn’t matter and why it makes sense that the new R&C are running at 30 FPS.

          • jackboyz

            60 fps is an outright REQUIREMENT for any game genre where the player needs to have as less input lag as possible, you know, like a goddamn platformer. There’s absolutely zero excuses as to why R&C is 30 fps.

          • Melvil

            60 fps vs 30 fps makes zero gameplay difference- at a certain point, there is too much information, and any more after that is not useful. Jacking the fps to 60 seconds does absolutely nothing to help the player. I’m sure that you sweare there is a difference, but there isn’t. Sorry!

          • jackboyz

            The higher the frame rate, the lower the input lag. I’d say that makes a difference in the gameplay.

  • BoyBigEyes

    The first Ratchet and Clank was the my favourite! So i just can’t wait to play the reboot! 😀

    • uptownsoul

      Its gonna be sick