-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Seems to early for nextgen consoles...
- Thread starter miyuru
- Start date
and PS2 is showing its age. Oh well back to Halo2 online.All the consoles are showing there age. They starting back in 2002 or earlier.
I'm playing RE4 right now, it's incredible for gamecube and all consoles in general, but is by no means good in visuals. Textures are low res, lots of alaising going on, somewhat low poly, and just grainy.
I'm playing RE4 right now, it's incredible for gamecube and all consoles in general, but is by no means good in visuals. Textures are low res, lots of alaising going on, somewhat low poly, and just grainy.
somewhat low poly? Your average villager is 3000-5000 polys, leon is 7000 (10,000 in cutscenes), bosses are well over 10,000 polys, and you have plenty of characters on screen at once, not to mention the fact that they look fucking awesome, artistically.
Does that comment match an amazon review or something?
It's very true tho. Yes, RE4 is a technical masterpiece for GC, but some of us have moved on already (PC gamers).
Edit:
Yes, it's low poly. Look at the context. We're talking about if we're ready for next generation. If you want to argue that RE4 is pushing a good amount of polys compared to next gen consoles, go ahead.
It's very true tho. Yes, RE4 is a technical masterpiece for GC, but some of us have moved on already (PC gamers).
Edit:
Yes, it's low poly. Look at the context. We're talking about if we're ready for next generation. If you want to argue that RE4 is pushing a good amount of polys compared to next gen consoles, go ahead.
My two cents
$0.01...I consider the Dreamcast part of this generation. Obviously on the low-end, but there nonetheless. It was a much greater step up from the Saturn/Playstation/N64, than the next step up to the PS2/GC/XBOX. It is weaker...but it definitely brought the "next-gen look" to the table...high res, 60-fps, good textures, good effects. I just don't see the difference from DOA/Tekken/RRType4 to DOA2/Soul Calibur/Ferrari355, as those games to say Tekken4/Soul Calibur 2/GT3....yes, they are better(and GT3 especially), but a generation better? I don't see it.
$0.02...why would you want a console lifecycle to be 2-3 years? Good lord these consoles are just nipping at their max now...what's the point of spending all that money for something when it's full potential won't even be realized? What if new consoles came out in 2002/2003...everything that has come out since wouldn't have, or would have been been marginally upgraded...wow. And with dev time growing longer and longer, a shortend console lifecycle would mean most companies would just put out something like one title per generation. Doesn't make sense.
$0.01...I consider the Dreamcast part of this generation. Obviously on the low-end, but there nonetheless. It was a much greater step up from the Saturn/Playstation/N64, than the next step up to the PS2/GC/XBOX. It is weaker...but it definitely brought the "next-gen look" to the table...high res, 60-fps, good textures, good effects. I just don't see the difference from DOA/Tekken/RRType4 to DOA2/Soul Calibur/Ferrari355, as those games to say Tekken4/Soul Calibur 2/GT3....yes, they are better(and GT3 especially), but a generation better? I don't see it.
$0.02...why would you want a console lifecycle to be 2-3 years? Good lord these consoles are just nipping at their max now...what's the point of spending all that money for something when it's full potential won't even be realized? What if new consoles came out in 2002/2003...everything that has come out since wouldn't have, or would have been been marginally upgraded...wow. And with dev time growing longer and longer, a shortend console lifecycle would mean most companies would just put out something like one title per generation. Doesn't make sense.
Ryudo said:
:lol, you've got to be kidding me. The PC and console markets are VERY different. It's worth having consoles out for 4-5 years because the userbase has the same console, whereas for PCs, developers must develop for a variety of configurations. PC games do move forward gradually, forcing the lowest common denominator of systems to upgrade though, whereas for consoles, it's safe to develop for the same one for a longer number of years, because you can specialise more and more, thus getting good looking games out for many years.
Know what I mean?
Did someone say that? Anyway, if Xbox 2 came out this year then Xbox's generation lifecycle is 4 years, PS2 lasted 6 years (2006 release) and GC 5 years (2006 release). Not seeing any 2-3 years. MS is urging the new generation because Xbox isn't a viable business. They want cost effective hardware now. That shows MS is in it for the long term profit, and that they'll try to keep Xbox2 out for 5 years probably.
The full potential of consoles isn't worth it from a technical standpoint. Ratchet and clank basically took PS2 to full strength. At launch Rogue Leader nearly optimized GC (wow, we get like 20% more performance by waiting 3 years for Rogue Squadron 3...a new console would be like 20000% faster this year). Maybe you're not talking about maximizing tech, but maximizing polish, in which case it is going to increase development cycles, and cost. To counteract that, developers need to start developing earlier, and ditch things like CG when it's not needed (like sports games). And I'm sure companies are already doing this. Games like Final Fantasy 13 should be about 50% done if they want to release in 2007.
man, those are some shitty examples.
Something like Ace Combat 5 or MGS3 or even ZOE2 is a much better example of a late-gen PS2 title
And as pretty as Rogue Leader was, It's no F-zero GX or RE4 or MP.
That said, i still haven't seen an Xbox title that's significantly prettier than Panzer Dragoon Orta.
Something like Ace Combat 5 or MGS3 or even ZOE2 is a much better example of a late-gen PS2 title
And as pretty as Rogue Leader was, It's no F-zero GX or RE4 or MP.
That said, i still haven't seen an Xbox title that's significantly prettier than Panzer Dragoon Orta.
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
Microsoft is most certainly rushing things (4 years between 2001 XBOX launch and 2005 XENON launch) Nintendo is right on time (5 years between 2001 GC launch and 2006 Revolution launch) and, if anything, SCEI is slow this time around (the six year gap between the 2000 release of PS2 and 2006 release of PS3 is 1/2 year longer than the PSOne to PS2 gap)
We are due for a new Nintendo and (over)due for a new Sony system in 2006...
We are not due for a new Microsoft system quite yet, but I am getting one anyway
We are due for a new Nintendo and (over)due for a new Sony system in 2006...
We are not due for a new Microsoft system quite yet, but I am getting one anyway
KilledByBill
Member
I don't understand how anyone can use "backlog" as an excuse for not wanting the next generation of consoles. The new machines coming out do nothing to affect your problem unless you're so undisciplined that you have to run out and buy a new machine despite the fact that there are still so many games you want for the console(s) you have. That's not a problem everyone has.
I play games, I don't collect them. So I'm beyond the point where I need to track down every half-way decent game for every system.
The way I see it, all of the top titles released this past holiday (GTA: San Andres, MGS3: Snake Eater, Halo 2, RE 4) could've used the power of next gen machines. Whether it was texture pop-in in Halo 2, frame rate sacrifices/issues in MGS3 and RE4, low levels of detail in San Andres, etc. are problems that could potentially be cured with PS3, Xbox-Next, and Revolution. That's the biggest reason I'm ready to start looking ahead. Also, as was mentioned before, I'd like to see what can be done with sports games next gen, since games like Madden have only seen gradual/marginal improvement since 2001. That teaser render of a next gen Madden by EA is very enticing.
I play games, I don't collect them. So I'm beyond the point where I need to track down every half-way decent game for every system.
The way I see it, all of the top titles released this past holiday (GTA: San Andres, MGS3: Snake Eater, Halo 2, RE 4) could've used the power of next gen machines. Whether it was texture pop-in in Halo 2, frame rate sacrifices/issues in MGS3 and RE4, low levels of detail in San Andres, etc. are problems that could potentially be cured with PS3, Xbox-Next, and Revolution. That's the biggest reason I'm ready to start looking ahead. Also, as was mentioned before, I'd like to see what can be done with sports games next gen, since games like Madden have only seen gradual/marginal improvement since 2001. That teaser render of a next gen Madden by EA is very enticing.
olimario said:
Ahem...you're comparing LATE GEN stuff from other systems, to a system that was killed long before its LATE GEN time. This isn't the PC world, where generations are 6 months or a year or whatever(i'm not a PC gamer). The gap certainly isn't as wide as Halo to N64/PSX titles. If anything, the machines overlap, with the PS2 being in the middle(try thinking of 2 ovals...the left side is the DC, the shaded overlap in the middle is the PS2, and the right side is the GC and XBOX...clearly the XBOX is much more powerful than the DC, but their respective difference from the median, the PS2, is roughly comparible...the XBOX isn't a gen beyond the PS2, and the PS2 isn't a gen beyond the DC). IMO and all that jazz of course.
Warm Machine
Member
More than anything, right now I just want higher resolution, better frame rates, and AA. I'd love to play Halo 2 or RE4 in 1280x720 or higher. The graphics of those 2 games are getting ruined by the 640x480 they are saddled with.
If people were still making DC games or made them until they hit the absolute ceiling of the hardware's capabilities we would have seen some pretty impressive stuff now. Remember, they had Shen Mue running on Saturn at one time and no one though that that would have been possible.
If people were still making DC games or made them until they hit the absolute ceiling of the hardware's capabilities we would have seen some pretty impressive stuff now. Remember, they had Shen Mue running on Saturn at one time and no one though that that would have been possible.
wipeout364
Member
I think the WOW factor is going to be next to nil on the next generation. Dreamcast Wowed me . I was not blown away when PS2 came out after dreamcast, Xbox did not seem like a major upgrade to PS2. Really what I was seeing was improvements but nothing revolutionary.
I think the revolution was the jump from PS1 to this generation (including dreamcast). After playing DOA and soul caliber on the dreamcast the bar had been set those games had polygona; characters that looked great and still do. Games are now improving in an evolutionary way not revoutionary. Take Doom 3, looks great plays mediocre IMO. Sure Xbox 2 will have great graphics, bigger areas, shorter loading, my point is Xbox 1 has great graphics and even PS2 games still look great. The generational gap is over. I don't expect to be blown away, I expect the current generations already good visuals to recieve an upgrade, that is all.
I think the revolution was the jump from PS1 to this generation (including dreamcast). After playing DOA and soul caliber on the dreamcast the bar had been set those games had polygona; characters that looked great and still do. Games are now improving in an evolutionary way not revoutionary. Take Doom 3, looks great plays mediocre IMO. Sure Xbox 2 will have great graphics, bigger areas, shorter loading, my point is Xbox 1 has great graphics and even PS2 games still look great. The generational gap is over. I don't expect to be blown away, I expect the current generations already good visuals to recieve an upgrade, that is all.