Actually I think most game companies work with models with many more polygons than the final systems will support, and also higher resolution textures that they then spend a lot of time compressing. After all, as long as you are paying an artist you may was well get the highest possible capture quality of the work they produce. And the artists costs are only upfront.Disc swapping is an answer but it increases production costs substantially so I think most companies would cut costs in that area in order to not incur that per-unit expense which drains revenue as long as you publish the game.I still think pressure from developers will be too great for Microsoft to keep a moratorium on HD-DVD games, and we'll see that medium get used on the 360 eventually.
I played the PS3 today at E3. Honestly, I don't see a reason to get one over the 360 I already own. All the games for it look EXACTLY the same as the ones on the 360, the ones that are dual platform I mean. I guess Blu-Ray is a reason to get one, but then you still run the risk of it being the losing format. I really think blu-ray will win out, but still, lot of money to spend if it loses.
1080i is sufficient output for movies, given that movie and television framerates are 24 and 30fps. A decent 1080p tv can take the interlaced signal and recreate the original progressive frame.
You could argue for or against the great features of the ps3 all day long, but the point is its 600 dollars, and I'm not buying a game console for 600 dollars. And I dont think most people will.Also- playstation needs to get back to the GAMES. Look at the PSP (I own one). It can play movies, go on the internet, play mp3s, show pictures.... but is there a game worth playing on the whole thing? Not really.
True, but there is a rather specific timeframe of about five years here for development of these systems. Most console games are not developed to take as long to play as a game like Oblivion. My point is, on average, a PC game's scope is much greater than that of one for a console. With no need for FMV anymore, it will be quite a while before we see a game that's bigger than the 9 GB dual-layer DVD limit.
From what I have seen from E3... we dont have any clue what games are going to at launch, MGS4 i dont think they have mentioned a date... FFXIII was debuted ( AMERICA HASNT GOTTEN XII YET, WHY SHOULD I CARE ABOUT XIII WHEN I WONT BE ABLE TO PLAY IT FOR ANOTHER FOUR YEARS). Besides the PS2 is still putting out some really cool games (God of War 2, FFXII just to name a few), so a PS3 is a long way away from being marketable.
superkendallMay 12, 2006
Actually I think most game companies work with models with many more polygons than the final systems will support, and also higher resolution textures that they then spend a lot of time compressing. After all, as long as you are paying an artist you may was well get the highest possible capture quality of the work they produce. And the artists costs are only upfront.Disc swapping is an answer but it increases production costs substantially so I think most companies would cut costs in that area in order to not incur that per-unit expense which drains revenue as long as you publish the game.I still think pressure from developers will be too great for Microsoft to keep a moratorium on HD-DVD games, and we'll see that medium get used on the 360 eventually.
mcg2k1May 12, 2006
I played the PS3 today at E3. Honestly, I don't see a reason to get one over the 360 I already own. All the games for it look EXACTLY the same as the ones on the 360, the ones that are dual platform I mean. I guess Blu-Ray is a reason to get one, but then you still run the risk of it being the losing format. I really think blu-ray will win out, but still, lot of money to spend if it loses.
mprobinsMay 13, 2006
1080i is sufficient output for movies, given that movie and television framerates are 24 and 30fps. A decent 1080p tv can take the interlaced signal and recreate the original progressive frame.
grodiusMay 13, 2006
You could argue for or against the great features of the ps3 all day long, but the point is its 600 dollars, and I'm not buying a game console for 600 dollars. And I dont think most people will.Also- playstation needs to get back to the GAMES. Look at the PSP (I own one). It can play movies, go on the internet, play mp3s, show pictures.... but is there a game worth playing on the whole thing? Not really.
mgleason007May 14, 2006
True, but there is a rather specific timeframe of about five years here for development of these systems. Most console games are not developed to take as long to play as a game like Oblivion. My point is, on average, a PC game's scope is much greater than that of one for a console. With no need for FMV anymore, it will be quite a while before we see a game that's bigger than the 9 GB dual-layer DVD limit.
seren1tyMay 19, 2006
From what I have seen from E3... we dont have any clue what games are going to at launch, MGS4 i dont think they have mentioned a date... FFXIII was debuted ( AMERICA HASNT GOTTEN XII YET, WHY SHOULD I CARE ABOUT XIII WHEN I WONT BE ABLE TO PLAY IT FOR ANOTHER FOUR YEARS). Besides the PS2 is still putting out some really cool games (God of War 2, FFXII just to name a few), so a PS3 is a long way away from being marketable.
paulryan21May 23, 2006
Is Grand Tourismo only a PS3 game - if so - I don't care how much it costs. I'll get one.
blanskiMay 24, 2006
Found it:<a class="user" href="http://www.defunctgames.com/media047.htm">http://www.defunctgames.com/media047.htm</a>