KILLZONE, BAD?

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:57 pm

Of course I'm using the most extreme examples of each of my points that I can find. It would not make any sense to use the next-gen game with the most impressive looking lighting effects to argue about how difficult advanced lighting is to pull off, now would it?

...and I am well aware of the fact that no new hardware is ever fully unlocked and utilised to it's full potential in the first round of games. I thought I had made that clear in stating that I felt that the current gen hardware is still capable of feats more impressive looking than what developers are dabbling with with the games that will be released in "the first year", of the next gen consoles. The power of the X-box, PS2 and Gamecube have not been fully maxed out yet, and likely never will be. ...while the new systems are new and mysterious to the game developers.

However, I still think you are expecting more from this new technology than it will actually be able to deliver. ...just a little... It may have been designed to do that kind of stuff, with all the dedicated processors and such, but that does not mean that it can Easily do everything that you've heard is theoretically possible.

Talking the talk and walking the walk are different things. It is one thing to say that a stunt plane is manuverable enough to fly through the streets of New York, turning 90-degree (or sharper) corners in mid air without crashing into any buildings...and another entirely to ask a pilot to take that machine and do it.

And of course the new hardware will be fully "capable" of outdoing what has previously been done. Where did I say otherwise?

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:00 am

Well, Airtight and Eye of the Storm look like the best and most recent demo video's to me. They're still running a little slow, but I'm hoping that's either intentional or software issues.

Niether really showcases "particle," effects too heavily though, beyond the useual clouds of smoke and dust. Instead they focus on realistic damage physics and high ridged body counts.

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:09 am

Sorry, misread your comment about Full Auto and the XBox.

Though I should note that as far as I know, the games engine was made on a beta-kit which had a substantially weaker CPU. Plus, as I mentioned earlier, a lot of the spit and shine is added in the final months of development. So some of the demo's released for the E3 will not look as good as the final results.

:Edit:

*After rewatching the air-tight demo I'm sure they're slowing things down in many cases in order for the game developers to sit and awe over all the flying pieces of debree flying in so many different directions over and over.

In many cases things will move along at a nice speedy pace and then slow down where it would be most dramatic.*

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:30 am

WolvenOne wrote:Well, Airtight and Eye of the Storm look like the best and most recent demo video's to me. They're still running a little slow, but I'm hoping that's either intentional or software issues.

Niether really showcases "particle," effects too heavily though, beyond the useual clouds of smoke and dust. Instead they focus on realistic damage physics and high ridged body counts.

I just watched part of the "AirTight" demo. I did not see any of the "Advanced" particle effects that I thought you were talking about before. (which you allready mentioned were not in that demo).

I actually wasn't very impressed by the technical aspects of that demo. It looks good, and definately requires a powerful machine to run stuff like that smoothly, but it is not a huge leap ahead of what I've allready seen.

Basically, I think I may have been the one who has been thinking too unrealisticly. I thought you were taling about WAY more advanced stuff than that.

Oh yeah...360 and PS3 will totally have as much of that as you could possibly want. They both (and surely the Revolution too) will be able to have destructable stuff like that easily, and do it all in stride. That's basic stuff. You don't need cell processors and multiple graphics processors to do that*. (*The stuff in the "Airtight" demo).

I'll have to look at some of the other demos to see if there is any of the more "high end" stuff in there.

...just watched "eye of the storm". and "game fluids 1"

Ditto. I think you were right. The demos are only running slow to emphisise the effects more. I think my PC could run most of that, (though at a slow,choppy framrate, but I'm pretty sure it could.)

I saw nothing in either of those two demos that could not easily be in a first round Next-gen game.

What I see here is "childsplay" compared to what I thought you were talking about.

...heh...I feel silly now.

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:35 am

Well indeed, I think the things in these demo's were pretty basic, so I'm pretty sure that all consoles will be able to do things a step or so above these without much trouble.

Course, Agaia's claiming that they're gonna be capable of doing 30 thousand ridged bodies when thier final hardwares finished and I saw nothing like that here. *The big scenes with the airplane crashing seemed to only utilize a couple hundred at the very most.*

In short, I'm still waiting for Agaia to really wow me, but, I suppose that if you threw effects like these into a much more expensive title like HL2 it might be a bit more impresive.

:Edit:

Oh and the video's seem to become less impresive as you move down the list I'm afraid.

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 2:29 am

If you think you have a fairly powerful PC, and you would like to see some really nice stuff, you could download the latest 3D Mark graphics benchmark program (a HUGE download) and try to run it.

...my (Edit: "my Brothers") PC nearly grinds to a halt if I even try to run some of the graphics tests, (while others wont run at all, becasue my card isn't advanced enough), but what I can see looks sweet.

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 2:38 am

Oh, my PC isn't powerful at all. Pentium 3, 850mhz, 256MB's RAM, 64MB card. I need to replace it since it's falling apart but new machines arn't cheap.

Though, I suppose I could always run it on my brothers machine. He essentially gave me about 700 dollars to put a machine together for him last January, it's pretty nice.

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 8:47 am

WolvenOne wrote:Oh, my PC isn't powerful at all. Pentium 3, 850mhz, 256MB's RAM, 64MB card. I need to replace it since it's falling apart but new machines arn't cheap.

Though, I suppose I could always run it on my brothers machine. He essentially gave me about 700 dollars to put a machine together for him last January, it's pretty nice.

Heh...I guess mine isn't powerful enough either. I can run the '03' edition just fine, and I had seen my brother run the '05' one on his PC (which is about equal in power to mine) so I assumed I could run it too. However, my grahics card does not support Direct X 9, so I can't even run it at all.

...oh well. ...and it took all night for me to download it too...

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:12 pm

Yet another reason I like consoles. There's rarely incompatability issues, they've seem to keep up with PC's for increasingly long periods of time, and above all these, they're comparativly cheap. ;)

Cause of all these, I really wouldn't pick up a serious gaming PC. They're just, not cost effective enough.

Shadow Wulf · Post by **Shadow Wulf** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 5:00 pm

WolvenOne wrote:Yet another reason I like consoles. There's rarely incompatability issues, they've seem to keep up with PC's for increasingly long periods of time, and above all these, they're comparativly cheap. ;)

Cause of all these, I really wouldn't pick up a serious gaming PC. They're just, not cost effective enough.

actually wolven you can build a serouse gaming pc for the same amount of a new console. like say $370

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 7:33 pm

"Serious gaming PC," can mean many many different things to different people. In my case, I've done the math and after getting a computer that has everything I need for my graphic design hobbies, it'd cost an additional few hundred dollars on top of that to get half decent gaming capabilities as well.

Something in the range of 800-900 dollars tottal. Where-as a graphic design PC I can put together for 700 total. Don't ask me why graphic design applications are expensive to build a PC around, they just are.

Anyhow, throw in the fact that PC's mostly cator to fans of RTS games and First Person shooters, and that lowers the value it has as a gaming platform to me. I enjoy the occasional First Person shooter or RTS, but I'm primarilly a console RPG fan, and that sort of genre is nearly non-existent on PC's.

Also keep in mine, that after 1.5 years or so the price of a console typically drops 100 dollars.

Shadow Wulf · Post by **Shadow Wulf** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 7:52 pm

you see thats where your wrong wolvenone, for $500 to 600 tops I can build a computer thats has the power and speed of the most expensive alienware computer you can think of.

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 1:00 am

Shadow Wulf wrote:you see thats where your wrong wolvenone, for $500 to 600 tops I can build a computer thats has the power and speed of the most expensive alienware computer you can think of.

That would be quite a trick, considering that the best Graphics cards on the market right now cost $300 themselves.

My PC is a decent performer for PC games, and I built it with my brothers expert guidance for under $700...but that was with a donated monitor, DVD drive, CD-burner and speakers. If you add things like that to the cost of the machine, plus a nice case, power-supply, etc. the cost goes up considerably.

And when bying the cheaper motherboards, processors, etc. with supposedly high end capacity, what you will und up with is a disaster. My first motherboard was dirt cheap, but was "supposedly" compatable with just about anything. ...but My PC crashed all the time.

Today, (if you knew what you were doing and what parts to buy) you could make a very, very impressive Gaming PC for less than half the cost of an Alienware machine (like about $800). However...the best stuff out there (Ram, Graphics cards, sound cards, processors, etc.) are very expensive...often hundreds of dollars on their own. Toss a good Grpahics card, a good sound card, a good processor and a good motherboard into the same machine and you allready have spent $900...and you don't even have a case to put it in yet...or a CD drive...or a power supply...or Ram...not to mention a keyboard and mouse.

It can be done...but it's not easy. However, making a box as powerful as the highest end Pre-made Gaming PC(like the ALX) for only $600 is not realistic. (Unless you have , "connections" like my sisters boyfreind.)

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 1:27 am

Keep in mind, that if you're a media/graphic design hound, what you're going to want the most is a TON of FAST ram, and an immense HDD that's very fast. Both items even out to costing nearly 100 dollars each, throw in XP pro for an additional 150 dollars, and you're upto 350 dollars before buying the case, the motherboard, the CPU or the GPU.

Also I'm a bit of a sound enthusiest so I would likely by an seperate sound card.

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 1:39 am

WolvenOne wrote:Keep in mind, that if you're a media/graphic design hound, what you're going to want the most is a TON of FAST ram, and an immense HDD that's very fast. Both items even out to costing nearly 100 dollars each, throw in XP pro for an addiction 150 dollars, and you're upto 350 dollars before buying the case, the motherboard, the CPU or the GPU.

Also I'm a bit of a sound enthusiest so I would likely by an seperate sound card.

You betcha...if it is your intention to build a machine for the purposes of Audio/ Video Media (3D or otherwise) creation/editing, you are talking a whole different league.

Outragious amounts of ram and HD space...audio/video cards (seperate ones of course...and "on-board" stuff is definately out), with wide varieties of both Input AND Output options...even more hard drive space...

There is no such thing as a bargain Media creation workstation.

Shadow Wulf · Post by **Shadow Wulf** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 3:37 pm

WolvenOne wrote:Keep in mind, that if you're a media/graphic design hound, what you're going to want the most is a TON of FAST ram, and an immense HDD that's very fast. Both items even out to costing nearly 100 dollars each, throw in XP pro for an additional 150 dollars, and you're upto 350 dollars before buying the case, the motherboard, the CPU or the GPU.

Also I'm a bit of a sound enthusiest so I would likely by an seperate sound card.

sigh. wolvenone, dearest of all my friends. your going by bestbuy sells or something cause I can get parts alot cheaper.
Windows xp: get a friend to burn the software or burn it yourself or borrow it from a friend.
Powersupply: You can get a 550 watt for $50.
Video cards: You dont need that top of the line one that sells at $400, you dont need that much power to run any game right now or even in a while from now. just get one of $90 to a $150 one thats worth $200 to $250 and it can run even doom 3 and half life 2 just fine.
The case itself cost $30. but I dont know why you want a new case if you already have one.
Moniter, speakers, and keyboard: You already have one, you dont need another and if you are going to buy it then you should only spend about $120 at the most, I can get a good set cheaper.
Sound cards: You can get a real good one for $50 or $60.
Motherboard: Agien you dont need a $200 motherboard, there just ripping you off, you can get a real good one for half the price with pretty much the same quality and you can get one with a processor combo the same price, or you can spend a little more for it if you want to.
Hard Drive: you can get a 100 gigabyte for $50.
RAM: you can get a 512mb of ram for $50 aswell.

Total:So you should spend between $500 to $600 on building a computer thats pretty much the equivilant to a $1,500 alienware computer.

What you guys are asking for is a computer that can run a state of the art game 7 years from now. With this you can play all or most of the high quality games that will be out there within a couple of years
and plus $400 of an alienware computer is just the case, moniter and speakers, which is pointless.

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 5:30 pm

Oh if you're cutting out the cost of the OS it's easy to get a computer for a darn good price.

BUT

Burning a copy off the internet is illegal. So I can't do that.

and no I'm not going off of Best Buy prices, I'm going by NewEgg and Price Watch prices.

Oh, and btw, 100gigs does not constitute an immense HDD, and I'd need twice as much RAM at the very least. I should also note that I'm looking at serial-ATA 2 based HDD's and DVD burners because thier file system works better for media creation then PATA133.

Actually your power supply looks a little on the pricy side, but it's moot point since I'm getting a whole new case. My current case is litterally falling apart due to the abuse it took during my last cross-country move.

I've looked at motherboards and I know the features I need. Unfortunetly I'll end up spending nearly 100 dollars for it if not more.

As for the video-card. Well if I was getting a videocard designed for Content Creation I'd likely go with an ATI-All in Wonder Card as I've heard great things about them. Unfortunetly they're not cheap and they only make passable gaming cards.

Oh you can get a sound card for fifty bucks, and I'll probably do that since I mainly just listen to music. However if I really wanted to get a sound card for content creation I would need to spend nearly 100 dollars.

Like I've said, I've shopped around, and I know what I need. A computer that'll fit my needs completly right now is a bit on the expensive side to begin with. I might be able to grab parts good enough to play Half Life 2 on lower settings, but a true gaming rig that'd play new games for the next two years would cost me a lot more.

Shadow Wulf · Post by **Shadow Wulf** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:00 pm

What are you trying to build a computer for. as far as I know gaming computers are the most expensive, and if you want to get a good video card for a cheap price, I suggest the radeon 9600xt. My friend has a radeon 9550 and Half life 2 plays great. And as for windows XP, would you rather have to pay $100 for it, and besides bill gate is a thief for stealing the windows idea in the first place so your basicaly doing the world a favor. I only own a windows 98, I dont have XP yet but I have had several offers to have windows xp burned. How can you go wrong with a 100 gig hard drive, unless you download a whole bunch of junk from the internet and softwares, as for ram.. why dont you get 2 512 mb but why do you want more than that?

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:17 pm

I'm not gonna just pirate a copy of windows okay. I don't care how you justify it yourself, for me it's just not worth the risk.

Actually gaming PC's are not the most expensive kind of PC out there. Servers and Rendering-PC's are as far as I can tell. However throwing gaming capabilities ontop of these purposes adds some extra cost.

As I said earlier, I'm building a computer for graphic design and media creation. For the record, Photoshop alone can use over a gig of RAM if you let it, and files made in Photoshop can get HUGE.

Shadow Wulf · Post by **Shadow Wulf** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:18 pm

hmm I see what you mean.

Set · Post by **Set** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 5:04 pm

WolvenOne wrote:I'm not gonna just pirate a copy of windows okay. I don't care how you justify it yourself, for me it's just not worth the risk.

I'm just curious as to how many people have been caught and fined for piracy, I've never actually heard about anyone getting caught. And from what I hear you can only get into trouble for UPLOADING stuff, not downloading it. If they really wanted to stop people from doing that then CD burners would have to be made illegal. [s]Arr.[/s]

Gaming PCs...yeesh, is it really worth all the effort? I have an old computer with windows 95 on it and my games work just fine.

Lupin · Post by **Lupin** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 5:19 pm

WolvenOne wrote:Actually gaming PC's are not the most expensive kind of PC out there. Servers and Rendering-PC's are as far as I can tell. However throwing gaming capabilities ontop of these purposes adds some extra cost.

But that's not because you're buying bleeding-edge hardware for a server. Usually you buy slightly older, more reliable components that have proven track records to minimize downtime. Usually it comes from the fact that you stick like 4GB of ram, and 2TB of disk in it.