I've already read some impressions on this board by some people who apparantly haven't played both versions. So I did. First off, if you're an XBox fanboy who can't take a little criticism of your system, then you should probably leave. I'm not pulling any punches just to make you guys happy, so keep your flames to yourself please.
Anyhow, I think both versions look pretty good. I saw the XBox version first and was pleased with it. In some ways(dino models) it looks as good or better than Halo, but in other ways(no reflective mapping or bump-mapping), it doesn't look as good. It had the same smooth look to the textures in the distance that Halo and about every game on the Box has. It wasn't until I did side to side comparisons to the Cube version that I realized that this isn't an intentional effect. Apparantly the XBox's graphics chip isn't capable of drawing textures at full detail at any distance beyond the immediate. Anyone can see this for themselves. Go right up next to a rock in this game or in Halo, there you will see the texture in full detail. As you inch away, even just a little, you'll see the texture fade into a blur. The further back you go, the worse it gets. I went through my whole catalog of games and it's inherent in every game. MotoGP, Halo, Max Payne, Dave Mirra, Test Drive, RalliSport Challenge, they all do it. You can check it on the ground textures too, only whats right under your feet will be in full detail. I may not have ever noticed this if it wasn't for Turok though. The GCN shows full detail at great distances in this game. The textures are a lot sharper and colorful in the Cube version as well. I'm not prone to believe a lot of hype, but I did believe that if there was one area where the XBox would equal or surpass the GCN's abilities, it would be in the graphics chip. Now, I'm not even sure it can equal the GCN in that respect.
Now to another area of interest. I've known since before the systems came out that a 450mhz Power PC RISC based cpu(GCN) would be better suited for 3D apps than a 733mhz CISC based cpu(XBox). There have been a few games in the past(Cell Damage, Dark Summit) that have demonstrated it but none as well as Turok. All three versions were developed by three different teams, at the same time, so that each version could get the customization it needed to perform its best. What they ended up with was 30fps(with a little slowdown, especially in the first two levels)for the XBox, and 60fps(with a little slowdown in the first two levels)for the GCN. After the first two levels, the GCN's 60fps is almost completely rock solid, it moves, looks, and plays very nice as a result. The flying sequences in the GCN version never slowdown or stutter, even with the huge draw distance and complex graphics showcasing tons of objects on screen. This is another area where you can see the full detail of the GCN's textures whereas the XBox's textures in the distance become almost just an orange silhouette. Also, LOD management is more apparent on the Box. Objects fade out of sight at a closer distance on the XBox.
I did notice a few creatures that were in the XBox version that weren't in the GCN version. Maybe all three versions have their own uniqueties. I read a review that said the XBox had more lighting, but I couldn't find it. Both versions have light sourcing, both versions have lighting effects when weapons are fired. Wait till you see the flame-thrower and its distorting effect. Very nice. The black mass effect is awesome too, especially at 60fps.
There are a lot of other differences between the two but I don't feel like pointing out every last detail. Just know this, the GCN version is FAR Superior to the XBox rev in every conceivable way. I can't see how anyone who has seen both versions could possibly tout the XBox version above the GCN version. There really is THAT much difference in the graphics and playability(due to the framerate).
I said a long time ago that the GCN will prove itself as the more capable system as time goes on and no one could mistake the differences in this game. Not even Dave Halverson. Speaking of him, I can't wait to see what kind of spin he puts on this next month.
As for the game itself, it started out kinda slow, but at this point I like it a lot. It's pretty much a straight-up fps and thats fine by me. Some of the locals and geometry in the later levels are very impressive and beautiful. It plays about as well as a fps on a console can. Some of the death throws are very amusing. The music is very well done as well, although I like to turn it down low so that I can be more immersed in the game world. I suggest everyone at least rent it. I would even suggest buying it if you like fps'. I'm happy with it.
