First night with the Xbox = what's up with the Cube?

[Saint of Killers]

Originally posted by Gongos
Oh, and one quick edit, if you dont have halo, dont worry, i rented it, got bored and returned it, it is an fps, adn they get really old, really fast, plus the vehical control was unimpressive, i liked the narrative delivery though, it made you feel a little more into the game.

I can say that about any game. "Yeah, those platformers, they get really old, really fast. Nothing but jump, jump, jump. Damn, that's boring." "Those racing games, they suck ass. All you do is drive in circles. Where's the fun in that?" "God, I hate those shmups. All you do is fly a little ship around on a 2D plane and shoot stuff. Whee."

The vehicle control is takes some time to get used to, but once you do, you'll realize how ingenious it really is. I HATED driving the Warthog for the first hour or so, and would actively avoid driving it even when I supposed to be using it. Then it hit me how great the control was. You have to forget everything you've been taught by every other racing/driving game ever made. And goddamn, I love those Banshees.

The other thing about Halo is it really shines in multiplayer. Get 4 Xboxes, TVs, and copies of Halo together with 16 people, and you'll see why those PC guys spend days playing without sleep in those freaky LAN parties. And I think 2 player co-op mode is even better.

[AaronChance]

People have gaming blindspots that prevents them from seeing the fun other people get out of a certain genre. Mine is definitely sports games, and Silent Hill 2.

For a lot of people weened on console games, it's FPS. I, however, still remember the joy of busting through Doom with a friend via modem. I thought nothing would ever top that, but Halo co-op puts it to shame. Played for the first time this weekend (co-op that is) and it's really a brilliant touch to an already great game.

But it's still an FPS game. Those people who don't like that genre should just give up. You'll never get it.

[Clash!]

Originally posted by gamevet

As far as Wreckless goes, Gamecube will soon be getting a port of that game. We'll see just how well Nintendo's little box handles it.

I think the PS2 is getting the port of it, or maybe its both. But yeah I agree, this will really show if the PS2 or the Cube can handle it, and it will show if the Xbox is really that superior. You people NEED to play Wreckless, I have played all the games mentioned in this Thread, and Wreckless truley stands above them in detail, and realism, well except for the characters, but the was meant to be like that. The lighting is better than all of those games, the textures are better than all of those games, the amazing effects are better. My god the heat effects are insane!! Wreckless really is the bench mark, but the lackluster reveiws I think are turning people away, from in my opinion is a great game. I am a crazy taxi game whore though. But if anything play a demo of this game at least and really look at the graphics, just look at them! Seeing your car in windows when you are driving down the street is crazy, or seeing the sun blast on to pavement and give of that odd reflective surface that pavement gives off, its sight to see.

[Tracer]

Originally posted by Saint of Killers

Yeah, the GeForce 4 MX's are pieces of junk.

The Xbox has a really nice GPU, no doubt. It just ain't a Ti4600. Or any GeForce 4 Ti, for that matter. It essentially has a pumped up GeForce 3 Ti200, which is a great card to begin with.

I stoped reading at this.

GeForce3 Ti200 = Bad Ass. I married mine

From all I know - Xbox GPU = "NV2A" a variant of the NV20. I'm not sure what the diffrences are - but I'm told it's better :/ by nearly everyone.

ATI's most recent card is a piece of work I'm told. In an email from John Carmack to the Quake community (about the progress of Doom III) he mentioned being incredibly impressed with the new Radeon - mentioning something that Gamecube fans have been touteing for sometime now - that 8 pass business. I guess ATI has integrated that into their most recent card.

Now clearly Xbox is handicapped. The CPU is trash - but the GPU is a golden piece of work. Everything else about it is as nice as it gets for a console - but a AMD XP 64 Bit CPU would have been appreciated.

The Gamecube = powerfull, but I wouldn't use a game that has pre-rendered backgrounds a showcase of technological superiority. It is just not that. I looks good - presentation is 100% but the technical aspect of it leaves me thinking ANY SYSTEM (PS2 and Xbox) could do that. Not that it matters in terms of the game - it'll be great for RE fans reguardless.

Rallisport is impressive, but with work and time - that could probably be done well enough on GC. Halo, while lacking the IMMEDIATE graphical oohs and ahhs, is something that could only be done on Xbox (not because it is so spectacular, but because it is made just so) and high-end PC's. That to me is the technological definition of the systems. What can it do that others could not adequately (at the same level) do. Halo strikes me as a perfect example of this. Currently - nothing have I seen on PS2 or GC that could only be done exclusively on that system - barring PCs.... expect Time Crisis 2 (because Xbox doesn't yet have a Gun

Rouge Leader looked great, the lighting was what I liked best about it - speaking of incredible lighting... have YOU seen the Doom III video yet?

ºTracer

[Shin Johnpv]

people need to stop putting Resident Evil Down and saying its just pre rendered backgrounds any system can do

have you seen the game in action on a tv if not then please dont comment

ive seen so many people eat their words once they see the game in action

once you see how much is going on with real time lighting and other effects

plus all the texturing going on (theres that 8 textures per pass that other systems cant do )

Look at it this way for the Xbox to do a GC game that is say doing 16 million polys a second and using all 8 textures per pass it has to do 32 million polys a second (2 passes of 4 textures) for the PS2 to do it ( i beleive it can only do 1 or 2 textures per pass) it would have to do either 128 million polys a second (8 texture passes) or 64 million polys a second (4 texture passes)

so while youd be seeing the same amount of polys on screen as the GC one was doing it would have to do alot more work to get the same texturing work

I dont think thats something people are realising

its all about finesse and reifinment over raw power

and i personally think Halo could be done on the GC easily and aybe be done on the PS2 if it was handled by one of the few teams that knows how to harness the PS2's power

[Brotherman]

OK then. Before we can say anything about RE, we need to know what polys the characters models are pushing, amount of textures used, etc. Then we can talk. And the fact that it looks good is only presentation and doesn't prove it's a graphical powerhouse of a game. *waits for stats*

[Cheebs]

From what I've seen of the RE videos, those backgrounds certainly don't look like they are just .bmps sitting there taking up zero processing power. They are lit up like crazy. I'd say the Cube is certainly throwing its muscle around on this one.

[MechDeus]

Originally posted by TracerBullet
Rouge Leader looked great, the lighting was what I liked best about it - speaking of incredible lighting... have YOU seen the Doom III video yet?

Heh, if you put on the commentary for the first level, they talk about how proud they are of the real-time lighting in RL, because they actually upped the movies themselves in that manner during the space battles scenes.

*gasps* Doom III movie?! New one?! Must see!!

[gamevet]

Originally posted by Clash_Master


I think the PS2 is getting the port of it, or maybe its both. But yeah I agree, this will really show if the PS2 or the Cube can handle it, and it will show if the Xbox is really that superior. You people NEED to play Wreckless, I have played all the games mentioned in this Thread, and Wreckless truley stands above them in detail, and realism, well except for the characters, but the was meant to be like that. The lighting is better than all of those games, the textures are better than all of those games, the amazing effects are better. My god the heat effects are insane!! Wreckless really is the bench mark, but the lackluster reveiws I think are turning people away, from in my opinion is a great game. I am a crazy taxi game whore though. But if anything play a demo of this game at least and really look at the graphics, just look at them! Seeing your car in windows when you are driving down the street is crazy, or seeing the sun blast on to pavement and give of that odd reflective surface that pavement gives off, its sight to see.

I still think the car models in Gran Tourismo 3 are more impressive, especially in the replay screens. Also, GT3 moves at a much faster pace. I've played a demo of wreckless, and while it is fairly impressive, it did'nt exactly bowl me over. The game was rather slow and repetetive. Also, the pavement effects in the night time track on GT3, during the rain are the most impressive surface effects I've seen in a racer.

[EightBit]

OK, just got to comment to a few things here... Wreckless is amazing looking, however, I dont think a port to another system will be the end all be all of comparisons. Unless whoever is doing the porting, isnt porting it, and actually making it ground up for each system... aint gonna happen. So unless a fair and non biased developer comes along, and makes the same game, from the ground up for each system, and tries thier best to max out the system with each version of the game... there will be no singular way to directly compare the systems to each other.

Second, Halo can be done on PS2? Hahahaha... yeah. Im not saying it cant be done.. but it cant. I guess if you dont count bump mapping, lots of great textures, and the nice poly counts, then sure... Halo could be done perfectly on PS2. Otherwise, Xbox is simply is a class above PS2 graphicly.

Z-roe