X05 Stuff

[Sky]

Ok. Now I'm interested :)

Except that using thumbsticks to shoot makes baby jesus cry and whatnot :(

Can we steal the NDA-style smiley?

[Shockeye]

Can we steal the NDA-style smiley?

Request granted.

[Signe]

I think something that real looking might really kill me.

[Xilren's Twin]

Okay, here's about as definitive as you're likely to get:

Great!

Now, make with the Dragons Age info please. My hope in mmorpgs is rapidly fading...

Xilren

[CassandraR]

I am becoming greatly annoyed with games where you play humans. Haven't there been enough of those already? People just need to forget about humans for a while. ;)

[Nija]

I am becoming greatly annoyed with games where you play humans. Haven't there been enough of those already? People just need to forget about humans for a while. ;)

[Margalis]

Ha ha awesome. I used to be pretty good at that.

[CassandraR]

That game was pretty fun for abit. I don't like fighting games much though, much prefer rpgs.

[schild]

That's a definitive answer, and a good one. That's the first real in-game stuff I've seen that makes me want a 360.

I hate to be a spoil sport, but Ninety Nine Nights looks just as good. And lets not forget Gears of War. Only difference is Bioware MIGHT bring something new to the table.

[Signe]

I love fighting games.  After rpgs, they're my favourite.  I even like bad ones.  Mostly.

[Pococurante]

I am becoming greatly annoyed with games where you play humans. Haven't there been enough of those already? People just need to forget about humans for a while. ;)

I like this one.  Please stay.

For now. ;)

[stray]

I love fighting games.  After rpgs, they're my favourite.  I even like bad ones.  Mostly.

I thought it was racing games?

[Jain Zar]

All I have seen so far on the 360 is pretty graphics.  Big whoop.  When friggin G4 asks devs about the games and the ONLY thing mentioned is graphics, one sort of gets an idea its all style, no substance.

I suppose if you like pretty graphics recoating the games I don't buy this generation anyhow it might be ok.

[Margalis]

Gamespy had an interview with some EA guy a while back about the 360. They were asking him about innovative gameplay features, and his response was HD. I'm 100% serious. That was his innovative gameplay - higher resolution! I'm thrilled...

[schild]

Every generation has had developers that have made gameplay innovation on their own time. To think it wouldn't happen with this generation is just silly. Also, higher-res graphics opens up an entire can of possibilities in game. Draw distances, objects on screen, particles, shadows - these will all make huge difference in the genres that need them the most. It's time to pony up and just cope with the fact this next year is a console release year. Happens every 4-7 years. That's how this industry works. I, for one, am glad that two of the next three consoles coming out will do high def as I just got an HDTV.

Quite simply, natural progression. Same as it ever was.

[Margalis]

Every generation has had developers that have made gameplay innovation on their own time. To think it wouldn't happen with this generation is just silly. Also, higher-res graphics opens up an entire can of possibilities in game. Draw distances, objects on screen, particles, shadows - these will all make huge difference in the genres that need them the most. It's time to pony up and just cope with the fact this next year is a console release year. Happens every 4-7 years. That's how this industry works. I, for one, am glad that two of the next three consoles coming out will do high def as I just got an HDTV.

Quite simply, natural progression. Same as it ever was.

Um...wow just about every word in this post is wrong.

Higher res graphics means lower draw distance, lower framerates and fewer objects on screen. (Vs the same hardware at lower resolutions) CPU cycles spent filling more pixels means less cycles for other stuff.

As far as a "huge difference for genres that need them the most" what genres are those exactly?

As far as "natural progression" being the same as it ever was, this is NOT the same as it ever was, which is why people are complaining. Each previous generation of consoles presented an extremely obvious and immediate improvement. I will submit that there hasn't been a generation of consoles since the NES that was just the same as the previous generation but with marginally better graphics. That's what we are seeing now - marginal improvements. The law of diminishing returns is kicking in.

When consoles started seeing diminishing returns on 2D graphics 3D was popularized. The 2D games of today barely look different than the 2D games of 5 years or more ago. Now we are seeing the same effect with 3D graphics. You can increase texture memory and add shaders and bump up the resolution but you aren't going to see the same jump you saw from PS1 to XBox. So this generation's new thing is - nothing. It's just keeping up with more expensive games to boot.

And given how the XBox360 games are mostly rehashes or were actually developed for other systems originally, the price increase seems very dubious. Is making Genero Racer: 4 really that expensive when it's just Genero Racer: 3 with shaders added? What changed on Kameo to make it a $60 game for the 360 when it was going to be $50 for the GC or XBox? It just magically got $10 more expensive to make per unit?

If someone develops a high-end game from scratch with great graphics I can see paying $60 for it. Paying $60 for these warmed-over messes is a joke. Most of the XBox 360 games should be $40. I'm supposed to believe creating a new Madden is monumentally expensive?

[schild]

Higher res graphics means lower draw distance, lower framerates and fewer objects on screen. (Vs the same hardware at lower resolutions) CPU cycles spent filling more pixels means less cycles for other stuff.

Used effectively the Xbox 360 is quite capable of having more objects on screen, longer draw distances, and 30fps+ on any given scene. There's a reason you optimize for a platform. Yes, at base your logic is correct. But I'm not looking at it from a "what's the shittiest developer going to make" but rather "the best." I don't have time to spend on shitty games. And I won't.

As far as "natural progression" being the same as it ever was, this is NOT the same as it ever was, which is why people are complaining. Each previous generation of consoles presented an extremely obvious and immediate improvement. I will submit that there hasn't been a generation of consoles since the NES that was just the same as the previous generation but with marginally better graphics. That's what we are seeing now - marginal improvements. The law of diminishing returns is kicking in.

This is exactly why I see (at the very least the PS3) this generation lasting 6-10 years instead of 4-6. I don't think we'll see what the PS3 or the 360 can do for a good 3-4 years. Just like we didn't see how kickass the SNES was with color until Final Fantasy VI. Hell, for this generation we JUST peaked with God of War (PS2), Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory (Xbox), and RE4 (GC) in terms of what a machine could do in terms of graphics. In terms of draw distance and objects on screen, Kingdom Under Fire and Katamari Damacy 2 challenged what I personally thought the xbox and PS2 were capable of achieving.

When consoles started seeing diminishing returns on 2D graphics 3D was popularized. The 2D games of today barely look different than the 2D games of 5 years or more ago. Now we are seeing the same effect with 3D graphics. You can increase texture memory and add shaders and bump up the resolution but you aren't going to see the same jump you saw from PS1 to XBox. So this generation's new thing is - nothing. It's just keeping up with more expensive games to boot.

Just like with this generation and the last generation (not during the SNES and NES years though...), you'll see some incredibly innovative or retro titles at budget prices because their budgets will be low. They'll look great. They'll be cheap. They might be the next robot Jesus. Whatever. You can't really compare the PS1 to the Xbox anyway. The jump from the PS1 to the PS2 was minimal compared to any systems jump to the Xbox. The Xbox 360 will probably be middle of the line if programmers figure out how to optimize for the PS3, but even then I'd be surprised. Even Carmack has been complaining about the PS3 development suite. This jump is easily in order with any other console change we've had. We went from Final Fantasy IX and whatnot to Fantavision. Great. Woopty do. Arguably the biggest jump was Saturn to the Dreamcast. My poor, poor lovable Dreamcast.

And given how the XBox360 games are mostly rehashes or were actually developed for other systems originally, the price increase seems very dubious. Is making Genero Racer: 4 really that expensive when it's just Genero Racer: 3 with shaders added? What changed on Kameo to make it a $60 game for the 360 when it was going to be $50 for the GC or XBox? It just magically got $10 more expensive to make per unit?

Kameo is $49.99, bro. It's a first party game. Third party games - in other words EA games - are $50.

If someone develops a high-end game from scratch with great graphics I can see paying $60 for it. Paying $60 for these warmed-over messes is a joke. Most of the XBox 360 games should be $40. I'm supposed to believe creating a new Madden is monumentally expensive?

Most of the Xbox 360 games I'm interested in are $50. But then, I've done my research.... and will gladly pay the cost of $60 for a 360 Soul Calibur III, Resident Evil 5, etc.

[Yegolev]

Mildly related to the X360 topic, J Allard makes retarded-sounding comments on the Rev controller.  Maybe he has a point but it's always better to not sound like an idjit when making said point.  Plus his point relies on EA.