Tendo City

I can't wait to see some Revolution games.

Go look at an Xbox game. ;)

:p

We'll both be crying when it turns out to be true. :(

Yeah a central CPU and GPU 3 times as powerful as GC with twice the ram will barely have enough power to run Kameo.

Oh except for the fact that Kameo looked exactly as it did on GC as the Xbox 1 version and the morphing actually looked better on the GC version than the 360 version and the GC to 360 comparison shots happen to look almost identicle except for the fact that one has HD textures and the other doesn't.

But yeah, there's no way the Revolution will be able to display graphics better than XBox. I mean even the Gamecube had better looking games than the XBox and just because you up the power and abilities and possibly offer a new type of development tool to create real time pre-rendered graphics for Revolution doesn't mean it's going to be a more powerful system with more abilities and possibly a new type of development tool to create real time pre-rendered graphics.

What are you thinking Nintendo?? GOSH, you NEED 3 cores running at 1000 Ghz each and a video card made by NASA just to have marginally better graphics, the 360 proved that! You think just because you decided not to run the system in HD that you're going to save resources and be able to create a cheaper system with the same graphical prowess?? yeah, like THAT's ever happened before.

*on a mountain somewhere*

Cajolery, God of Sarcasm: *David Spade voice* Oh no, too much sarcasm! haha, not. Ever read Greek mythology? All me buddy. I even wrote 5 books in the bible but they took out my version of how the world ended where everyone was attacked by their own fat.

lazyfatbum Wrote:Yeah a central CPU and GPU 3 times as powerful as GC with twice the ram will barely have enough power to run Kameo.

Oh except for the fact that Kameo looked exactly as it did on GC as the Xbox 1 version and the morphing actually looked better on the GC version than the 360 version and the GC to 360 comparison shots happen to look almost identicle except for the fact that one has HD textures and the other doesn't.

We really don't know if the Revolution could handle Kameo or not. Seeing as how the 360 made the HD output possible I'd say no, the Revolution is not capable of handling Kameo as it is right now.

Dellusional much? I think you're omitting the higher polygon counts, seemingly endless draw distance, thousands of characters on screen at once, smoother animations, and better lighting.

Quote:But yeah, there's no way the Revolution will be able to display graphics better than XBox. I mean even the Gamecube had better looking games than the XBox and just because you up the power and abilities and possibly offer a new type of development tool to create real time pre-rendered graphics for Revolution doesn't mean it's going to be a more powerful system with more abilities and possibly a new type of development tool to create real time pre-rendered graphics.

Which Gamecube game looked better than some of the best looking Xbox games? I'd say they are mostly on par, but better?

I couldn't name a game I've played on Xbox that looks better than Resident Evil 4.

Paco/ You have no idea what you're talking about. Sit down. No hardware on Earth is capable of 'better draw distance' or 'smoother animations' those have always been dictated by the developers and real time lighting isn't processor intensive, just time consuming in development. Watch the trailer for Kameo when it was running on GC, it looks exactly like the XBox version. You'll notice that in the GC trailer, the 'sea of orcs' scene is also there.

Quote:We really don't know if the Revolution could handle Kameo or not. Seeing as how the 360 made the HD output possible I'd say no, the Revolution is not capable of handling Kameo as it is right now.

Do you even understand what HD is? If OB1 were here he would call you an idiot. Kameo on Revolution would look exactly the same in 480p as it would on 360 except the 360 would have higher resolutions on an HD television. If you removed the HD components of 360 you would need half or less than the system resources to run a 360 game. Half the system resources of 360 = Revolution. But most of all, it all comes down to how much a developer is willing to spend on the game in time and money. Thus the difference between something that looks like shit (everything on 360 right now except the Rare games and Donkey Kong World) and something that doesn't (The Rare games and Donkey Kong World). Madden 06 looks good, well, it looks okay. But it plays like ass, even the developer said "sorry, we spent all our time on graphics" and it shows. Good developers make the game pretty, not the system, the system is just a pile of resources and those resources (save for HD) are basically 2 to 3 times the power of XBox... which is a Revolution ("Basically 2 to 3 times more powerful than GC" which, in your own words, are 'on par' with XBox and in some cases even better).

Quote:Which Gamecube game looked better than some of the best looking Xbox games? I'd say they are mostly on par, but better?

Yeah Zelda TP and RE4 are no match for Halo. Fuck even Pikmin 2 looks better than most XBox games. Do you even play video games? Or do you just go around forums making wild statements to see a reaction? Reminds me of DJ telling people he's a girl. You even said in a different thread that RE4 is the most impressive game graphically (you sure as shit aint talkin about the PS2 version) and now you act as if it doesn't exist, or the Prime series, or WW and TP or REmake and RE0. TP I bet would look very similar on XBox if there were any programers that dev for it worth their salt (which there are not save Capcom and Rare who dont measure up to Nintendo's devs) to crank it out but it's well known that the XBox cant do the level of cel shading done in WW.

All systems have their strong points and weaknesses and it's up to developers to wrok around them. You cannot tell me that 360 games look vastly superior to the current gen XBox games because they dont, save for a handful of nice effects here and there. The reason they look like that is because it takes a system about 3 times more powerful than XBox to display current gen XBox games in full HD.

*tears open your ass and wears you like a suit* LOOK AT ME I'M PACO I BLINDLY DEFEND THE CONSOLE OF A FACELESS CORPORATION BECAUSE THEY MAKE MY DICK FEEL LONGER *YINYAP YINYAP YINYAP*

I just love the way that lazy can be the most knowledgable, well-informed, and (at times) most well-spoken of us all for the first half of his posts, and then throw in a completely random piece of...erm...well, pure lazyfatbum at the end.

I salute thee!

Quote:I just love the way that lazy can be the most knowledgable, well-informed, and (at times) most well-spoken of us all for the first half of his posts, and then throw in a completely random piece of...erm...well, pure lazyfatbum at the end.

I salute thee!

He certainly goes above and beyond the call of duty for Nintendo fandom... I don't know if he's right, though. He's ... more than a bit ... biased. More than even most Nintendo fans are, I think... but he makes a lot of good points there, and people are definitely under-rating the Revolution's graphics possibilities... once they accept that it won't be high res (really, that's the main flaw with the argument 'Rev is powerful enough'... it is now, but in a few years, when it's trying to compete with just 480p, the HDTV issue WILL matter with more than the tiny few that it does now.) Nintendo's task is making Revolution good enough that the lack doesn't matter... but I certainly think that they can do that. But will the public listen...

I agree. Nintendo's going to have a huge problem on their hands when HD starts to explode. But the need for HD for most people wont come from TV or video games, it's going to come from 1080p DVD players that play HD-DVD and/or BR-DVD. Once people see the difference in that they'll be wanting it hardcore and when that happens, Rev's lack of 720p to 1080p is going to show in a very big way. I can imagine the message boards across the internet "Why does my 360 have sharper textures than my Rev?". You gotta remember, most people have no idea what HD is or how/why they need it. Give them a clear reason to need it and the market will explode.

And of course i'm biased but atleast for a logical reason. Nintendo internally develops my most favorite games and this only half opinion. The entire industry looks up to Nintendo's first party games - each one they release is a new benchmark for that particular genre. Nintendo is Disney back when Walt was still alive, all they care about is making the best content possible which has very little to do with realistic graphics and everything to do with gameplay and specialized techniques.

Why anyone would want to defend the value of a Playstation or XBox is beyond me. These companies do *nothing* except manufacture hardware and use out-sourced companies to give them content. Even when it says 'Developed by SCEA' on the box the reality is that an out-sourced company made it and Sony of America purchased it. But somewhere in Kyoto Japan there is a building where Shigeru Miyamoto is making ants float on leaves and saying things like "the rounded leaves are more complicated, let's make them round and try the grasshopper this time" becase he's in the middle of development on Pikmin 3 and the entire building is busy getting the Rev hardware finalized and checking the status of its launch games where massive amounts of people are brought in to test them over and over and over to get everything as tight and flawless as possible because they know the better they make the game, the more it will sell.

Unless you're someone who buys games just for the visual experience, but then those people are getting fed to those giant 'inverted asshole creatures' from King Kong (in my head anyway). God those things creeped me out.

lazyfatbum Wrote:Paco/ You have no idea what you're talking about. Sit down. No hardware on Earth is capable of 'better draw distance' or 'smoother animations' those have always been dictated by the developers and real time lighting isn't processor intensive, just time consuming in development. Watch the trailer for Kameo when it was running on GC, it looks exactly like the XBox version. You'll notice that in the GC trailer, the 'sea of orcs' scene is also there.

Confused? I wasn't comparing the Xbox and GC versions. I thought you were suggesting that the GC version looked as good as the 360 version.

Quote:Do you even understand what HD is? If OB1 were here he would call you an idiot. Kameo on Revolution would look exactly the same in 480p as it would on 360 except the 360 would have higher resolutions on an HD television. If you removed the HD components of 360 you would need half or less than the system resources to run a 360 game. Half the system resources of 360 = Revolution. But most of all, it all comes down to how much a developer is willing to spend on the game in time and money. Thus the difference between something that looks like shit (everything on 360 right now except the Rare games and Donkey Kong World) and something that doesn't (The Rare games and Donkey Kong World). Madden 06 looks good, well, it looks okay. But it plays like ass, even the developer said "sorry, we spent all our time on graphics" and it shows. Good developers make the game pretty, not the system, the system is just a pile of resources and those resources (save for HD) are basically 2 to 3 times the power of XBox... which is a Revolution ("Basically 2 to 3 times more powerful than GC" which, in your own words, are 'on par' with XBox and in some cases even better).

OB1 is not here, and I always thought he was an idiot.

I understand that the Revolution would not be capable of outputting over 480p, and the Xbox 360 is and does for Kameo. As Kameo is right now, made for the console with 512MB of RAM, the textures to take advantage of it, and a multicore CPU, I still say the Revolution could not outright run Kameo. It just makes sense there would have to be some degree of downgrading somewhere.

You don't know for fact that Kameo could be done on the Revolution, you just don't so I'm going to ignore what you said there. I'm not saying it can't for fact (though it seems very likely), but how can you say it could? You don't even have any Revolution games to compare. All you have to go off of is a quote from a Nintendo representative saying that the graphics will be on par with Xbox 360 and PS3. How is that any different than a Microsoft rep saying that Xbox 360 will be graphically on par with PS3?

Quote:Yeah Zelda TP and RE4 are no match for Halo. Fuck even Pikmin 2 looks better than most XBox games. Do you even play video games? Or do you just go around forums making wild statements to see a reaction? Reminds me of DJ telling people he's a girl. You even said in a different thread that RE4 is the most impressive game graphically (you sure as shit aint talkin about the PS2 version) and now you act as if it doesn't exist, or the Prime series, or WW and TP or REmake and RE0. TP I bet would look very similar on XBox if there were any programers that dev for it worth their salt (which there are not save Capcom and Rare who dont measure up to Nintendo's devs) to crank it out but it's well known that the XBox cant do the level of cel shading done in WW.

LOL, you're ranting about something I didn't say. Read my post again, and carefully. I said they are mostly on par, meaning they are about equal. As for the Resident Evil 4 comment, I said that it is no less impressive than, for example, Ninja Gaiden. Feel free to check it for yourself, and please don't misquote me or put words in my mouth. OB1 did it and it was very annoying.

I play lots of games. When I made my comment I thought back to all the play time I've put on: Halo, Halo 2, Metroid Prime, Metroid Prime 2, Fable, Ninja Gaiden, Dead or Alive 3, Dead or Alive Ultimate, Conker: Live and Reloaded, Panzer Dragoon Orta, F-Zero GX, Resident Evil Remake, Resident Evil Zero, Resident Evil 4, Project Gotham Racing, Project Gotham Racing 2, Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay...

Yes, I have played many games on both systems and that is how I came to my conclusion that they are mostly on par. So comeback from leftfield and let's continue this...

Quote:All systems have their strong points and weaknesses and it's up to developers to wrok around them. You cannot tell me that 360 games look vastly superior to the current gen XBox games because they dont, save for a handful of nice effects here and there. The reason they look like that is because it takes a system about 3 times more powerful than XBox to display current gen XBox games in full HD.

It takes a stronger system to bring all those effects together.

I think we've been down this road before and we came to a stand still as far as our impressions go for next-generation games. I think Kameo, Perfect Dark Zero, and Project Gotham Racing 3 look next-gen, and not possible on current generation systems as they are. The Xbox or GC would not be capable of bringing everything that the 360 does together; the phenomenal lighting, the noticeably higher polygon count, the HD resolution, the rich textures, the particle effects, etc. It's only going to get better.

That being said, the Xbox 360 simply has more resources for developers to work with. I simply don't understand how you can make the bold face claim that Revolution games will for fact look as good 360 games, even on a standard TV. You have nothing to support your arguement other than a comment made someone from Nintendo. On the other hand you have the stark contrast in their hardware specs to indicate that they systems are for fact not on par.

Quote:*tears open your ass and wears you like a suit* LOOK AT ME I'M PACO I BLINDLY DEFEND THE CONSOLE OF A FACELESS CORPORATION BECAUSE THEY MAKE MY DICK FEEL LONGER *YINYAP YINYAP YINYAP*

If I didn't picture you as a full grown man adorned in Nintendo apparel huddled in the middle of all his Nintendo consoles then I might take you seriously and be a little hurt. It's very obvious that you're just hopeful, because you really don't have a leg to stand on as far as a comparison goes. If you'd like to drag this back up once the first Revolution games are shown and make wild speculations as to what effects are being done then do it, I'll jump in and we can keep going round and round like this.

I'm not defending Microsoft, I'm just looking at what's been shown thus far. I hate repeating myself but I'm going to just to drive the point home...

Single CPU < 3 Core CPU
About 100 MB of RAM < 512MB of RAM

There's an obvious difference in numbers there. Your conclusion that that difference only lends itself to HD output sounds more hopeful than it does as a technical analysis. I think you need to chill out. As far as I know Nintendo doesn't hand out a "Rabid and Blind Defender of the Big N" award.

Quote:I understand that the Revolution would not be capable of outputting over 480p, and the Xbox 360 is and does for Kameo. As Kameo is right now, made for the console with 512MB of RAM, the textures to take advantage of it, and a multicore CPU, I still say the Revolution could not outright run Kameo. It just makes sense there would have to be some degree of downgrading somewhere.

You don't know for fact that Kameo could be done on the Revolution, you just don't so I'm going to ignore what you said there. I'm not saying it can't for fact (though it seems very likely), but how can you say it could? You don't even have any Revolution games to compare. All you have to go off of is a quote from a Nintendo representative saying that the graphics will be on par with Xbox 360 and PS3. How is that any different than a Microsoft rep saying that Xbox 360 will be graphically on par with PS3?

It could almost certainly run 480p Kameo... which is all you can ask for from it...

Quote:I think we've been down this road before and we came to a stand still as far as our impressions go for next-generation games. I think Kameo, Perfect Dark Zero, and Project Gotham Racing 3 look next-gen, and not possible on current generation systems as they are. The Xbox or GC would not be capable of bringing everything that the 360 does together; the phenomenal lighting, the noticeably higher polygon count, the HD resolution, the rich textures, the particle effects, etc. It's only going to get better.

This is absolutely true. Those games could not be done on current-gen consoles... really, I think people were expecting too much from this console generation. The physical upgrade is as big as ever, but as the stats get higher the noticable difference is less... and this time, they compensate by focusing on higher resolutions, which require HDTVs that most people don't have... so people who only have normal TVs are complaining that X360 doesn't look nearly as good as they expect. Of course it doesn't, the games are designed for high res and just made to work on normal TVs...

Quote:That being said, the Xbox 360 simply has more resources for developers to work with. I simply don't understand how you can make the bold face claim that Revolution games will for fact look as good 360 games, even on a standard TV. You have nothing to support your arguement other than a comment made someone from Nintendo. On the other hand you have the stark contrast in their hardware specs to indicate that they systems are for fact not on par.

Why not? Nintendo will be focusing on just normal res, so they'll be putting a lot more effort into making it look good at normal resolution. In addition, it is true that a lot of the additional system power of the X360 and PS3 is used for high resolutions... for instance, that RAM. Given how screens are displayed, you do need like 3 times more RAM to display the same image at 720p instead of 480p... so that 108 or whatever megs of RAM in the Revolution isn't as bad as it seems. Similarly, the normal DVD size media is just fine for most all games, since the main advantage of bigger discs is for high-res textures... of course, the lower res means the games won't look as good in screenshots and on HDTVs, but I see no reason why Nintendo can't make them look comparable on normal TVs. The Revolution, after all, is much more powerful than the GC or Xbox.

As for the CPU itsself, maybe it doesn't require 3x more power just to display 720p instead of 480p, but it definitely uses more. Revolution, I expect, will be closer looking than people expect when viewed at 640x480 or less (given that normal TVs can only do up to 480i, I believe...).

Quote:I agree. Nintendo's going to have a huge problem on their hands when HD starts to explode. But the need for HD for most people wont come from TV or video games, it's going to come from 1080p DVD players that play HD-DVD and/or BR-DVD. Once people see the difference in that they'll be wanting it hardcore and when that happens, Rev's lack of 720p to 1080p is going to show in a very big way. I can imagine the message boards across the internet "Why does my 360 have sharper textures than my Rev?". You gotta remember, most people have no idea what HD is or how/why they need it. Give them a clear reason to need it and the market will explode.

I hope Nintendo can overcome it.

Quote:And of course i'm biased but atleast for a logical reason. Nintendo internally develops my most favorite games and this only half opinion. The entire industry looks up to Nintendo's first party games - each one they release is a new benchmark for that particular genre. Nintendo is Disney back when Walt was still alive, all they care about is making the best content possible which has very little to do with realistic graphics and everything to do with gameplay and specialized techniques.

Why anyone would want to defend the value of a Playstation or XBox is beyond me. These companies do *nothing* except manufacture hardware and use out-sourced companies to give them content. Even when it says 'Developed by SCEA' on the box the reality is that an out-sourced company made it and Sony of America purchased it. But somewhere in Kyoto Japan there is a building where Shigeru Miyamoto is making ants float on leaves and saying things like "the rounded leaves are more complicated, let's make them round and try the grasshopper this time" becase he's in the middle of development on Pikmin 3 and the entire building is busy getting the Rev hardware finalized and checking the status of its launch games where massive amounts of people are brought in to test them over and over and over to get everything as tight and flawless as possible because they know the better they make the game, the more it will sell.

First paragraph: Definitely true. Second one: fanboyism. :) I mean, you exaggerate somewhat... Sony and MS do have internal teams. Rare probably should be counted as one, so the X360 had two internally developed titles at launch... the other first-party title (Project Gotham Racing 3) was developed by an external developer I believe. And definitely Sony and MS have much smaller first-party game numbers. But even so you exagerate some... and ignore the fact that both consoles have lots of third-party exclusives too -- and those, to the gamer, are just the next step down from a first party title, since the game only is coming out on their system...

Anyway, Nintendo is a great developer, and I like Nintendo a lot, but I do like other things too. Such as PC games. :)

A Black Falcon Wrote:Why not? Nintendo will be focusing on just normal res, so they'll be putting a lot more effort into making it look good at normal resolution. In addition, it is true that a lot of the additional system power of the X360 and PS3 is used for high resolutions... for instance, that RAM. Given how screens are displayed, you do need like 3 times more RAM to display the same image at 720p instead of 480p... so that 108 or whatever megs of RAM in the Revolution isn't as bad as it seems. Similarly, the normal DVD size media is just fine for most all games, since the main advantage of bigger discs is for high-res textures... of course, the lower res means the games won't look as good in screenshots and on HDTVs, but I see no reason why Nintendo can't make them look comparable on normal TVs. The Revolution, after all, is much more powerful than the GC or Xbox.

You're making the assumption that the textures are the only thing to benefit from the extra horsepower and RAM. I can't imagine that being anything close to an accurate statement.

I never said that the Revolution was "bad" in anyway. I just think it's absolutely silly to say that it's on par with either of the other two consoles from a technical perspective.

Quote:As for the CPU itsself, maybe it doesn't require 3x more power just to display 720p instead of 480p, but it definitely uses more. Revolution, I expect, will be closer looking than people expect when viewed at 640x480 or less (given that normal TVs can only do up to 480i, I believe...).

No doubt that a hi-res display takes that extra power but any developer should be able to do more with more resources. There's no question that the 360 has more to work with than the Revolution is there? (with the rumored specs anyway)

Quote:I understand that the Revolution would not be capable of outputting over 480p, and the Xbox 360 is and does for Kameo. As Kameo is right now, made for the console with 512MB of RAM, the textures to take advantage of it, and a multicore CPU, I still say the Revolution could not outright run Kameo. It just makes sense there would have to be some degree of downgrading somewhere.

You don't know for fact that Kameo could be done on the Revolution, you just don't so I'm going to ignore what you said there. I'm not saying it can't for fact (though it seems very likely), but how can you say it could? You don't even have any Revolution games to compare. All you have to go off of is a quote from a Nintendo representative saying that the graphics will be on par with Xbox 360 and PS3. How is that any different than a Microsoft rep saying that Xbox 360 will be graphically on par with PS3?

If you could make a game on 360 with normal resolutions you would have tons of resources to pull from, but the system is not designed to do this. 3 central CPUs are there to increase worlk load, the extra RAM is there to hold the giant texture files - it's an HD machine. It requires more work on 360 dev kits to make a game run smoothly on normal resolutions because it's not what the system was designed for but if a developer chose to do so, they would have a much more impressive game as far as polys and effects, number of textures and models and A.I. and physics off the charts. But at the cost of HD content.

For example HD television signal needs huge amounts of info which is why you can only get it through satelite, microwaves, super high density DVD (HD-DVD) or optical networks. Even though the data streams are huge, it can only hold a few channels (except for microwaves which can be pulled in directly from the air through an HD reciever antenae). You could pump in a *huge* amount of normal resolution TV channels but once you start talking about native wide 1080i you just took a huge chunk of data off your stream. This is why when you order HD packages from cable companies who have optical networks you can only get about 20 of them at max as compared to the 500+ at normal resolutions, they just cant fit it all in without upgrading their networks.

Looking at the screenshots of Kameo from the GC version and comparing them to the 360 you can clearly see that it's the same game. There are some props and areas around the level using more polygons and this is expected as the 360 can display more polys than the GC. The downside is, once you try to display 150 million polys or more (in widescreen 1080i signal) you just lost more than half your resources, You can even find the same problem with HD-tivo - gone are the days of recording 2 days of shows and playing them back, we're back down to a few hours at best.

You can get any game to run on any system. You can get PDZ to run on an SNES, it would boot the rom but it wouldn't even be able to display the title screen and probably crash or run at 1 frame an hour. But if the systems you're transfering to have atleast a similar architecture, a bus of equal size or buffers, etc the game will run fine with only minor tweaks needed. When Rare left Nintendo the first on their list of projects was get to know the XBox hardware, so they ported Starfox Adventures to Xbox. After some minor tweaks, the game ran fine. They did the same for PDZ and Kameo and it was able to run fine. Then MS said scrap the XBox plans, we're moving to 360. So Rare, again, ported their games to a new hardware type and with a few tweaks it ran fine. They then based the builds they have of the games (in their near complete stage) and starting adding on with 1080i textures and display which quickly ate up all the system resources even though we're talking about converted GC games. So if you were to take Kameo and slap it a Revolution it would NOT run fine UNTIL they did some tweaks. Swap out the textures files for the same textures at normal res and tell the game how and why it should communicate with the new processors and whoosh, Kameo on Revolution.

You need to keep in mind that Kameo was basically at the 60% mark on GC, it reached around 90% completion on XBox and was finished up during 360 development. That means 90% of the game was based on XBox/GC hardware and would be extremely easy to port to Revolution as long as you swap out those texture files. Animations, models, levels, sound files, etc etc would all be the same. You may find frame rate hiccups but those are easily curbed.

It's extremely confusing to look at something with much higher numbers and be told that the benefits are only for resolutions. Believe me I know, ever price an editing station versus an HD editing station? You can have a workstation that's ungodly in the amount of power and storage it has yet it's just barely above what a normal editing station can do because everything in that station is going to handeling the HD content smoothly which means multiple core CPU's (or networked CPU's, I saw one using over 20) and massive amounts of RAM *JUST* to edit HD video.

So now that I explained that, to the quote tags.

Quote:Confused? I wasn't comparing the Xbox and GC versions. I thought you were suggesting that the GC version looked as good as the 360 version.

I was, but not that it looks as good. That's why I mentioned that the 'sea of orcs' was also in the GC version (you were talking about how the 360 can do 'better animations and better draw distance which is not true). It was a little trick they wanted to show off even back in the GC dev days. As I said, the GC version, when compared to the 360 version, is the same game with a different texture pallette and less glitz and props and overall lower polys (and of course normal resolutions) but the game is still comparable.

Quote:LOL, you're ranting about something I didn't say. Read my post again, and carefully. I said they are mostly on par, meaning they are about equal. As for the Resident Evil 4 comment, I said that it is no less impressive than, for example, Ninja Gaiden. Feel free to check it for yourself, and please don't misquote me or put words in my mouth. OB1 did it and it was very annoying.

I play lots of games. When I made my comment I thought back to all the play time I've put on: Halo, Halo 2, Metroid Prime, Metroid Prime 2, Fable, Ninja Gaiden, Dead or Alive 3, Dead or Alive Ultimate, Conker: Live and Reloaded, Panzer Dragoon Orta, F-Zero GX, Resident Evil Remake, Resident Evil Zero, Resident Evil 4, Project Gotham Racing, Project Gotham Racing 2, Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay...

Yes, I have played many games on both systems and that is how I came to my conclusion that they are mostly on par. So comeback from leftfield and let's continue this...

How am I in left field? You said that "there are no GC games that look better than XBox games, they look equal". Ninja Gaiden does not look anywhere near as good as RE4, you cant possibly think that. You say that no GC game looks better and I say that the Prime series, Resident Evil remake, zero and 4, WW and TP look better than anything available on the XBox. Prove me wrong.

Quote:It takes a stronger system to bring all those effects together.

I think we've been down this road before and we came to a stand still as far as our impressions go for next-generation games. I think Kameo, Perfect Dark Zero, and Project Gotham Racing 3 look next-gen, and not possible on current generation systems as they are. The Xbox or GC would not be capable of bringing everything that the 360 does together; the phenomenal lighting, the noticeably higher polygon count, the HD resolution, the rich textures, the particle effects, etc. It's only going to get better.

That being said, the Xbox 360 simply has more resources for developers to work with. I simply don't understand how you can make the bold face claim that Revolution games will for fact look as good 360 games, even on a standard TV. You have nothing to support your arguement other than a comment made someone from Nintendo. On the other hand you have the stark contrast in their hardware specs to indicate that they systems are for fact not on par.

I explained most of this already so you have an idea of what HD content does to hardware, but you are completely wrong that it takes a stronger system to achieve particular effects. Real time lighting is something you can do on N64 it doesn't 'get better', how it interacts with shadows or reflects off of texture maps has nothing to do with the power of the system and everything to do with the time the developer is willing to take on the game. You mentioned HD textures and richer textures like they're two different things as well. The fact is that every piece of hardware that has ever been has something special about it. SNES could do hardware scaling and rotation, Genny could not. The N64 could display fully anti-aliased graphics in high resolution, the Saturn/PSX/PS2 could not. These are not things that require more power but difference in design. It's that difference that makes the hardware unique and sets it apart from competition. But dont think for a second that there weren't any Genny games that had scaling and rotation or Saturn and PS2 games with anti-aliased textures. Effects are something that simply make the hardware have a visual difference. For XBox 360 the 3 main ones that come to mind are HD (nur), really awesome smoke effects and really awesome bluring effects. PS3 may go a route that says our system will have really awesome fire and explosions or be built with the idea of awesome wind dynamics, the companies choose what effects to pump up based on what they think the consumer is going to go for. It has nothing, not a single thing, to do with being a more powerful system or not. The 3 games you mentioned were developed on the XBox, yes, they can be played on an XBox if you convert the texture files and tweak the games - certain effects may be disabled, there may be a need to cut down the number of polys on screen in certain locations, but the game's would look so similar that you would need to do side by side comparison shots to spot the different versions.

Quote:If I didn't picture you as a full grown man adorned in Nintendo apparel huddled in the middle of all his Nintendo consoles then I might take you seriously and be a little hurt.

I am a full grown man (wearing a Zelda shirt) and my Nintendo consoles are in the living room (but the 64 is in the bedroom so wife and I can play DKR inbetween our rabid sex acts) But I was not trying to 'hurt' you, I was making a simple point - what are you defending? You're certainly not defending a game's studio or particular game series, you're just telling people they should like what you like, a large corporate structure that funded the development of a hardware console to attract third party development. I have about 25 years of history, characters, game series, libraries, consoles, directors, producers, writers, composers, artists etc etc from one company that i'm defending against people like you whenever your type pops up to preach the benefits of your opinions. You have nothing to defend except your own pride in the hopes that people will like what you like and agree with your opinions which is definitely not going to happen when you construct such sentences that exclaim your ignorance of how video games are made and is definitely not going to happen on a Nintendo message board. All Nintendo fans have had to deal with your type, a few decades ago you were telling me how much better Sega is, then you told me that I need a 3DO or Neo Geo and ditch that Nintendo. Then you told me how absolutely fantastic the PSX is and how lame the N64 is and now you've attached yourself to the newest latest and greatest contender in the video gaming arena which had mild success in Europe, pretty good success in America and is totally lost on the Japanese, enter round 2 with second gen hardware and now it's even more important for you to spread the word and get people interested in the newest machine that (aside from Rare's games) holds absolutely no interest for me. When Microsoft decides to get out of the home console market you will invisibly absorb a new product from a new console manufacturer and you will make sure it's not affiliated with Nintendo because it might compromise your stance on gaming that people should like what you do. I could have my ears surgically altered to resemble Hyrulian features with a Virtual Boy strapped to my face with duct tape while blowing the entire Jontoh Pokemon League and I still would not be as sad as you.

Quote:Your conclusion that that difference only lends itself to HD output sounds more hopeful than it does as a technical analysis. I think you need to chill out. As far as I know Nintendo doesn't hand out a "Rabid and Blind Defender of the Big N" award.

1.) You need to do homework on HD technology.

2.) i have won that award every year for 15 years straight. They tried to hold a similar award ceramony for XBox fans but most of the nominees didn't show because of 'FCAT's' and the ones that did show could only produce cognitive word strings such as "I'm drunk", "I'm sorry I puked in your refridgerator" and "Halo Party at Dan's!" - after the cancellation it was reformed in to the "Semi-Annual Microsoft Fanboy Finals" in late 2005 but was cut short after Microsoft noticed a trend in current demographics of no one giving a rat's ass.

lazyfatbum Wrote:You can get any game to run on any system. You can get PDZ to run on an SNES, it would boot the rom but it wouldn't even be able to display the title screen and probably crash or run at 1 frame an hour.

Then it can't really run the game can it? I mean, you couldn't play it in that state (or at least you wouldn't want to). I'll say it again, the Xbox or GC could not run Kameo as it is right now, that is, the game would not be in a playable state if the GC or Xbox were trying to display everything the 360 can and does. This is why I think that there would be some degree of downgrade, even if miniscule, if Kameo were going from 360 to Revolution.

Quote:But if the systems you're transfering to have atleast a similar architecture, a bus of equal size or buffers, etc the game will run fine with only minor tweaks needed. When Rare left Nintendo the first on their list of projects was get to know the XBox hardware, so they ported Starfox Adventures to Xbox. After some minor tweaks, the game ran fine. They did the same for PDZ and Kameo and it was able to run fine. Then MS said scrap the XBox plans, we're moving to 360. So Rare, again, ported their games to a new hardware type and with a few tweaks it ran fine. They then based the builds they have of the games (in their near complete stage) and starting adding on with 1080i textures and display which quickly ate up all the system resources even though we're talking about converted GC games. So if you were to take Kameo and slap it a Revolution it would NOT run fine UNTIL they did some tweaks. Swap out the textures files for the same textures at normal res and tell the game how and why it should communicate with the new processors and whoosh, Kameo on Revolution.

You need to keep in mind that Kameo was basically at the 60% mark on GC, it reached around 90% completion on XBox and was finished up during 360 development. That means 90% of the game was based on XBox/GC hardware and would be extremely easy to port to Revolution as long as you swap out those texture files. Animations, models, levels, sound files, etc etc would all be the same. You may find frame rate hiccups but those are easily curbed.

It's extremely confusing to look at something with much higher numbers and be told that the benefits are only for resolutions. Believe me I know, ever price an editing station versus an HD editing station? You can have a workstation that's ungodly in the amount of power and storage it has yet it's just barely above what a normal editing station can do because everything in that station is going to handeling the HD content smoothly which means multiple core CPU's (or networked CPU's, I saw one using over 20) and massive amounts of RAM *JUST* to edit HD video.

So now that I explained that, to the quote tags.

That's fine and all but the proof is in the pudding, so to speak. You can sit here all day and break it down brick by brick but I won't come to a conclusion until I can compare second and third generation games from the respective consoles.

Quote:I was, but not that it looks as good. That's why I mentioned that the 'sea of orcs' was also in the GC version (you were talking about how the 360 can do 'better animations and better draw distance which is not true). It was a little trick they wanted to show off even back in the GC dev days. As I said, the GC version, when compared to the 360 version, is the same game with a different texture pallette and less glitz and props and overall lower polys (and of course normal resolutions) but the game is still comparable.

...and the game could not run on a GC as it does on the 360. I don't think I said the the 360 can do better animations, I was suggesting that Kameo benefits from better animation and draw distance due to the extra power. I remember seeing the haze and fog draw distance on the GC and Xbox version, and I remember Rare saying that they were struggling to get around 30 character models on screen at once with the Xbox. Kameo has its roots in this generation, but it looks next gen because Rare was able to get more from the 360. I'm not going to move from this standpoint no matter how hard you push me.

Quote:How am I in left field? You said that "there are no GC games that look better than XBox games, they look equal". Ninja Gaiden does not look anywhere near as good as RE4, you cant possibly think that. You say that no GC game looks better and I say that the Prime series, Resident Evil remake, zero and 4, WW and TP look better than anything available on the XBox. Prove me wrong.

I've played all those games you just mentioned. I think Ninja Gaiden is the best looking and most techinically impressive game on the Xbox (Conker would take it but there are frame rate issues). I think RE4 is the best looking and most technically impressive GC game. I'm not going to say one is better than the other because I don't believe that.

I don't have to prove anything, eye of the beholder and such.

If you want to start talking about artistic value then we would need to include the Playstation 2 library that, imo, takes down both GC and Xbox. But we're not going to do that because we don't need to.

Quote:I explained most of this already so you have an idea of what HD content does to hardware, but you are completely wrong that it takes a stronger system to achieve particular effects. Real time lighting is something you can do on N64 it doesn't 'get better', how it interacts with shadows or reflects off of texture maps has nothing to do with the power of the system and everything to do with the time the developer is willing to take on the game. You mentioned HD textures and richer textures like they're two different things as well. The fact is that every piece of hardware that has ever been has something special about it. SNES could do hardware scaling and rotation, Genny could not. The N64 could display fully anti-aliased graphics in high resolution, the Saturn/PSX/PS2 could not. These are not things that require more power but difference in design. It's that difference that makes the hardware unique and sets it apart from competition. But dont think for a second that there weren't any Genny games that had scaling and rotation or Saturn and PS2 games with anti-aliased textures. Effects are something that simply make the hardware have a visual difference. For XBox 360 the 3 main ones that come to mind are HD (nur), really awesome smoke effects and really awesome bluring effects. PS3 may go a route that says our system will have really awesome fire and explosions or be built with the idea of awesome wind dynamics, the companies choose what effects to pump up based on what they think the consumer is going to go for. It has nothing, not a single thing, to do with being a more powerful system or not.

No, not to achieve; to utilize in a playable game. And don't go down the "well, you could play a game at one frame rate per hour that occasionally crashes", just don't, it's pathetic even if technically correct. I'm talking about a game that you or I would deem acceptable as playable games.

Then wouldn't it make sense that perhaps Rare did something with Kameo that Xbox 360 excels at where the other consoles would not do so well if at all? (I know how ridiculous that sounds for a game that was basically completed on this generation of consoles and is a launch game for the next generation, but just go with it.) Perhaps the Revolution could not handle the hundreds of dragons flying around Thorn's castle, or the crazy particle effects. What I'm getting at is even if those are slight cosmetic changes then it is not the same game. That's superficial but true none the less.

Quote:...The 3 games you mentioned were developed on the XBox, yes, they can be played on an XBox if you convert the texture files and tweak the games - certain effects may be disabled, there may be a need to cut down the number of polys on screen in certain locations, but the game's would look so similar that you would need to do side by side comparison shots to spot the different versions.

Do you remember the Rubber Ducky demo from the PS2 demonstration? A single rubber ducky floating in a sink with some impressive water effects, meant to demonstrate what the PS2 was capable of. Fast forward to today and we had a similar demonstration, except the power of the PS3 allowed hundreds of rubber ducks. The demos are basically the same, except the PS3 can do so much more.

Why is it so far off base to assume that because the PS3 has more power that the developers can and most likely will achieve more than on 360 or Revolution? Why is it hard to believe that because 360 is technically more capable that developers can and will achieve more than on Revolution?

Quote:I am a full grown man (wearing a Zelda shirt) and my Nintendo consoles are in the living room (but the 64 is in the bedroom so wife and I can play DKR inbetween our rabid sex acts) But I was not trying to 'hurt' you, I was making a simple point - what are you defending? You're certainly not defending a game's studio or particular game series, you're just telling people they should like what you like, a large corporate structure that funded the development of a hardware console to attract third party development. I have about 25 years of history, characters, game series, libraries, consoles, directors, producers, writers, composers, artists etc etc from one company that i'm defending against people like you whenever your type pops up to preach the benefits of your opinions. You have nothing to defend except your own pride in the hopes that people will like what you like and agree with your opinions which is definitely not going to happen when you construct such sentences that exclaim your ignorance of how video games are made and is definitely not going to happen on a Nintendo message board. All Nintendo fans have had to deal with your type, a few decades ago you were telling me how much better Sega is, then you told me that I need a 3DO or Neo Geo and ditch that Nintendo. Then you told me how absolutely fantastic the PSX is and how lame the N64 is and now you've attached yourself to the newest latest and greatest contender in the video gaming arena which had mild success in Europe, pretty good success in America and is totally lost on the Japanese, enter round 2 with second gen hardware and now it's even more important for you to spread the word and get people interested in the newest machine that (aside from Rare's games) holds absolutely no interest for me. When Microsoft decides to get out of the home console market you will invisibly absorb a new product from a new console manufacturer and you will make sure it's not affiliated with Nintendo because it might compromise your stance on gaming that people should like what you do. I could have my ears surgically altered to resemble Hyrulian features with a Virtual Boy strapped to my face with duct tape while blowing the entire Jontoh Pokemon League and I still would not be as sad as you.

I'm not defending Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo. I have no vested interest in them. I haven't told you to buy an Xbox 360 and I haven't even claimed it as a better console or such nonsense (other than tech specs). I don't even have one yet and it's likely to stay that way until Halo 3 comes out, whenever that is. I'm simply defending the numbers, and on paper the Revolution is the lesser of the two consoles from a technical perspective just as Xbox 360 is lesser than the Playstation 3.

You don't have to defend Nintendo from me, I love them. I've been playing Nintendo consoles since my mom would let me and I've owned every Nintendo console and handheld (save for the DS, soon though) and I've loved every minute of it. Perhaps it would even interest you to know that I'm already putting money aside for a Revolution. Is that of any significance? Yes, considering I'm damn near broke all the time from rent and tuition. I'm scraping up every spare dollar I find so that I get Nintendo's new console when it drops, and so I can hop online and download some old favorites and have them all in one place. I'm almost going on faith alone that the Revolution is the console I want to buy at launch, not knowing what games will be released day one or what it even feels like to play it. I'm taking it for granted that I will enjoy it more than a 360 or PS3 due to my time with Nintendo consoles in the past.

I didn't own a Sega console; I wanted one but could not afford to have two consoles. Want to know which one I ended up sinking my hard earned allowance money into? Do I really need to tell you? Do I need to tell you that I ended up buying over 20 games for my SNES? I didn't even own a Playstation when it came out, I still don't own one to this very day (unless you want to count PS2). I bought a Saturn for one game alone, NiGHTS into Dreams, because it looked really good. I did it to hold me over until the 64 came out which I bought and now have most of every major Nitnendo release there was for it. Do I need to tell you that I didn't plan on buying a Playstation 2 or Xbox, ever? I had pre-paid a Gamecube and couldn't wait to get it. What happened is that Rare delayed Starfox Adventures and I found out there was no Mario game at launch. I got pissed off and put all my money to an Xbox. It was an impulse decision because I was mad at Nintendo. I felt horrible after I did it, and even worse when I came home one day to find a hefty box on my porch (Xbox). Looking back on my impulsive decision to buy an Xbox it turned out to be a good thing. It's taken me from a point of view that Nintendo is the best option when it comes to video games. It's one of three options, that are all good depending on your taste in video games. I ended up buying a GC the day Starfox Adventures released. I now have the PS2, GC, Xbox, and DC. I don't prefer one over the other. I hate the idea that back in the day I was so loyal as to snub Sega and Sony, to degrade anyone who didn't outright favor Nintendo as some sort of second rate gamer, and act like a jerk as you are right now. You're the one who is sad, buddy. I'm actually enjoying many more video games than you are.

If you can point out one instance where I made a suggestion as to like what I like then I will throw up a white flag and you can call me your bitch anytime you want. I'll even put it as my title, "lazy's bitch."

Your rant is based on some unfounded idea of me. I don't hate Nintendo, it's quite the opposite actually. However, I'm not so much in love with them as to not criticize them or see a fault or two, or just the plain facts. I can't imagine what the arguement would be like with you about Nintendo's decisions to go cartridge with the 64 that, in hind sight, was not the best choice, or their strict quality over quantity policy that drove some third party developers away, or that their game releases are few and far between. Nintendo is not perfect, and please don't take that as some kind of Nintendo death chant. It's just the truth.

It's obvious that you enjoy Nintendo, but you should...no, need to realize there are other consoles that can be enjoyed just as much. I realize that you may not be able to comprehend that but know it anyway so that when someone else comes in here and tries to look at things objectively that they are doing just that, and not praying for the demise of Nintendo.

Bottom line: You had me pegged all wrong. I'd accept an apology from you but I very much doubt you're even considering it. You've come across someone who isn't blindly loyal to any one console and you don't know how to handle it. It's okay, it happens on TXB too.

Quote:1.) You need to do homework on HD technology.

2.) i have won that award every year for 15 years straight. They tried to hold a similar award ceramony for XBox fans but most of the nominees didn't show because of 'FCAT's' and the ones that did show could only produce cognitive word strings such as "I'm drunk", "I'm sorry I puked in your refridgerator" and "Halo Party at Dan's!" - after the cancellation it was reformed in to the "Semi-Annual Microsoft Fanboy Finals" in late 2005 but was cut short after Microsoft noticed a trend in current demographics of no one giving a rat's ass.

I don't need to do any homework on HD technology. I'll let the games speak for themselves when they come out. In the mean time I'm going on the numbers alone and you've done nothing to convince me that I should change my point of view.

You've just confirmed for me that you are an ass, and that your "Nintendo is teh elite" point of view is seriously hampering your ability to have a simple discussion. Perhaps in the future I'll spend a sarcastic or even mildly insulting comment but I'm not sure you're worth it.