According to an interview with Epic Games' senior producer Rod Fergusson, developers for the Xbox 360 may be reaching the outer edges of what is graphically possible with the console. In an interview with Gamasutra, the
Gears of War / Gears of War 2 head says that recent advances and refinements are pushing the system further than expected, though he still believes there's some room to grow. In Fergusson's words: "I think we're certainly approaching the upper end of it, as far as what developers are able to do with it, but just looking at all the demos we saw today -- ours and others -- it's clear that all the games just keep improving, and keep pushing that bar." Of course, there's a long gap between pushing a system to its limits and starting to look around for its replacement, though since we all know another iteration of the Xbox is inevitable, none of this news should come as any surprise. They have a name for things like this... progress.
[Via
GameDaily]
posted September 4th 2008 9:27AM
zuess is an ass. halo 3 is an indisputably good game. IMO best game ever because of the multiplayer. you are entitled to your own opinion (you can say you don't like it) but you can't just say the game was bad.
also (correct me if im wrong) but halo 3 is the first game with full playback ability. where you can move anywhere in the map and watch everything happen again. so if i remember right thats why the developers had to tone down the res so they could add that in. and IMHO that has made it one of the koolest things in the game to be able to share clips and pictures of funny ass things that happen in halo. also i think its pretty innovative to include that, sense (again correct me if im wrong) its the only game out there (at lest on consoles) that has full playback ability.
dude... if he thinks that GoW2 is pushing the limit, then clearly he hasn't seen a video of far cry 2 on consoles. blows everything away
Didnt he also say it would be 3 or 4 years until it reaches the max for the system. Games take some time to release. I bet in 3 or 4 years there will be a new xbox anyway.... Or at least there better be one on the horizion.
Far Cry 2 is a very good looking game, but the Cryengine 2 and Unreal Engine 3 have two very distinct different styles. While CE2 goes for realism, UE3 goes for full out, overblown detail, which, in my opinion looks great. I love realism and all, but I like creativity better.
This was a reply to Cesium.
While I agree with your opinion, Far Cry 2 doesn't use the CryEngine 2, it uses a special engine called Dunia. Crytek have only just recently gotten alpha tests of the CryEngine running on the consoles.
this is a reply to your comment about gta on ps3.
although running at a slightly lower resolution the ps3 version of gta achieves less pop-in, smoother framerate, better texture and lighting. it was widely reported in the gaming media blog sphere that the ps3 version had an advantage in the graphics department.
stop skewing the facts,
you fail
No, it was pretty widely reported that they look about the same. I don't know what you were reading, but there's really no difference between GTA4 on the various consoles besides resolution.
Thank you for the correction, Rooshma. I didn't realize they were using a different engine, as I haven't really been keeping up on the news for that game... I just assumed, considering the original Far Cry used CryEngine 1.
Unboring, you obviously don't realize the reason what you're talking about. For starters, the reason there is less pop in on the PS3 is not because of the lower resolution, but because of the mandatory install- the game can be loaded faster from the hard drive than the slow Blu-Ray drive. Furthermore, the lighting is only opinion based, considering both consoles have areas where one will out do the other in terms of lighting depending on who you ask, but what is factual is that the 360 has richer colors and the framerates are VERY close to eachother, only slowing down when things get very crowded on the screen. But, you can kiss that advantage good bye, along with the framerate advantage when the new console update comes around allowing for optional installs on the 360's hard drive.
The only one skewing facts here is you. :)
Have a nice day.
Thank you for the correction, Rooshma. I didn't realize they were using a different engine, as I haven't really been keeping up on the news for that game... I just assumed, considering the original Far Cry used CryEngine 1.
Unboring, you obviously don't realize the reason what you're talking about. For starters, the reason there is less pop in on the PS3 is not because of the lower resolution, but because of the mandatory install- the game can be loaded faster from the hard drive than the slow Blu-Ray drive. Furthermore, the lighting is only opinion based, considering both consoles have areas where one will out do the other in terms of lighting depending on who you ask, but what is factual is that the 360 has richer colors and the framerates are VERY close to eachother, only slowing down when things get very crowded on the screen. But, you can kiss that advantage good bye, along with the framerate advantage when the new console update comes around allowing for optional installs on the 360's hard drive.
The only one skewing facts here is you. :)
Have a nice day.
This is a good thing! The 360 is a relatively easy system to develop for, so it makes sense developers will be able to make use of the system's full capability sooner.
The PS2 was, in theory, more powerful than the original XBox (comparing Sony's raw GIGAFLOPS specs), but few developers ever came close to the theoretical "upper end" of the PS2's capability, and XBox games generally looked better than PS2 games. So, you see, being able to reach the console's full capabilities is more important than having theoretical capabilities that are never achieved in a game.
as i remember it PS2's specs were actually lower than both gamecube and xbox
It wasn't a question of theoretical upper limits, it was just Sony's completely unrealistic number manipulation.
In reality, the Xbox 1 was considerably more powerful than the PS2, in large part due to the fact that its parts were culled from a later batch of hardware releases.
Is that E.T. from the 2600 hiding at the bottom of that pit?
No...that is a Scorpion.
obviously, kspraydad doesn't get the reference...
"I think we're certainly approaching the upper end of it, as far as what developers are able to do with it, but just looking at all the demos we saw today -- ours and others -- it's clear that all the games just keep improving, and keep pushing that bar."
Ahh public relations: always well versed in not saying anything definitive, but complimenting their competitors.
I personally don't care about the latest batch of $60 games anyway. I'd much rather play a less graphically intense (but no less awesome) game like Braid. I also thought bringing out a new version of Bionic Commando was great and long overdue. Bring on the downloadable game revolution! (SMB4 on Wii, perhaps?)
You know, I should goddamn hope that devs are getting all they can out of the system by now, it's been out for nearly 3 years. I don't understand why people take this to be a bad thing, it means that the games we've been getting are as close to as perfect as they can be with the current hardware. Would you like to hear that your favorite game could have been made better?
They could have upped the visuals on fahrenheit...(Xbox/PS2)
Agreed. They better be giving me the good stuff when they can. Don't sandbag just so you can put out a better game later.
Yeah, that $800 rig that looks so "cool" next to your Kuro...
On the bright side, they have lots of room to improve on the reliability of the console.
Marvel Ultimate Alliance had a Pitfall level. It was in the “evil carnival” area. You used your Marvel character (updated graphics) to traverse Pitfall (old school graphics). Kinda cool.
It is kinda sad, but this should turn out being really good for the console. At least for single-platform games anyway. Think about it, when developers can pump out amazing graphics at the upper limits of the console, the only thing left to focus on is gameplay...
Marvel Ultimate Alliance had a Pitfall level. It was in the “evil carnival” area. You used your Marvel character (updated graphics) to traverse Pitfall (old school graphics). Kinda cool.
didn't they say the same thing with the 1st Gears of War?
360 is coming up on 3 year mark. Original lasted 5 years before the 360 came out right? Couple of factors though - HDTV saturation is still not that high, which should extend the life of the current gen some more the presumed 5 year cutoff- at least I hope it does. Plus, there's so many iterations of games that are just coming out with their next gen versions now (Soulcalibur, Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Midnight Club . . .), they've got to get a sequel to these out on the same system. Hopefully that gives us another couple years on these machines.
I went with a PS3, because I wanted GOW and Ratchet and Clank, two of my all-time favs along with Soulcalibur which is on both, and I wanted a blu-ray/upscaler. I love the thing so far. The upscaling in particular is excellent. And I like being able to stream content from my mac. What I DON'T like is online FPS, or Madden, which seems to be a dig draw for the 360.
I don't really understand much of the techno babble about the framerates and graphics and stuff. From what I understand the 360 is the better dedicated gaming machine hands down. Though, for me, it's always been about the gameplay versus the graphics . . . to each his/her own I guess.
Didn't devs say the same thing year after year with the PS2? and GoW proved them wrong
And GOW2 came 8 years in....hopefully PS3 will also get quality games much much later in life.
I have yet to see anything that looks better than Gears of War 2 with the exception of MGS4 but that's a whole different art style and has been about 4 years in the making. Sure, other titles look good i.e, DMC4, Call of Duty 4, Bioshock and a host of others. Upcoming titles will continue to look better for both consoles as developers get the knack of things. I think that because MS provides good tools for its developers its easy for them not to come up with tricks on their own, they'll pretty much settle for generic stuff as it is cost effective. People start to see games that look pretty much the same across the board, in other words they just have that same "look" especially when you use a licensed engine. I remember the Sega Genesis days when some developers used clever dithering and raster effects to give the appearance of more on screen colors than what was actually capable towards the end of its life cycle. Nowadays the consoles themselves with the exception of the Wii don't really have too many limitations like they did then, ask Hideo Kojima. The 360 is nowhere near the end of its life cycle, I'm sure there is plenty of power and tricks left, the same for PS3, this is up to the game makers and their artists to do new things and really push the hardware. Remember, Sony always promises the max potential in the beginning through immense hype only to let people down when a system finally comes out. Hell, it took almost 10 years into the PS2's life cycle for God of War 2 to look the way it did, PS1 titles also tried to employ new tricks to look decent. The original XBOX still had a lot of juice left believe it or not and so did Dreamcast. Another thing to look at is the difference between Japanese,European & American developers and the techniques they use. CryEngine 2 has yet to be ported to either console and what ever happened to Project Offset?
Wow I love these new Xbox 360 graphics, watch out for those logs!
hahah quit your whining epic. its time that developers break free from this pattern of using a single engine for each generation. if you compare this to the film business, it would be like using the same exact room for every interrogation sequence in a movie and then making minor changes in its details for every movie. the videogame industry is HUGE now! its time that they spend a LOT more money and making the production of a game a LOT bigger with a LOT more people involved. if you pushed yourself to the limit everytime and built new engines from the ground up everytime you made a new game, comments like this wouldnt happen. yea it sounds daunting, but its totally doable and it involves a complete rethinking of how the industry works. using the same engine over and over, OF COURSE YOUR MAXING OUT THE 360! you have nothing to do but push the *engine* to its limits. how about bring in some truly gifted people and lots of them. there is enough money to do this, its time for a fvcking change already. stop complaining when you are the source of your own problem! your engine is outdated! admit and move on and make a new one.