Probably accidental. An author would be asking for trouble to leave out such a big thing on purpose, when it was only shown on 360 at E3.
Then again, the writer DID say, "Rage blew me with its rich, vibrant settings powered by id's new graphics engine". I thought you needed a peripheral to be blown by a video game, but maybe the visuals are simply orgasmic...
I'm imagining the end of the next demo to run something like this:
Soon, dozens of zombie-like, rabid, and very fast mutants emerge...
After defeating many of them, an enormous humanoid mutant boss about 15 feet tall wielding a huge grenade launcher emerged...
After dispatching the boss...A gargantuan, humanoid mutant at least 50 feet tall emerges from behind a building and howls with rage...
After dispatching the gargant...
No monsters in this game, only mutants! #;^)
Ju, is a "top tear contender" someone who cries a lot, or causes others to cry? #;^)
If we've only seen a trailer of inFamous2, how do we know how many particles actually make it into game-play? And does the largest number of particles define the best looking games? In that case, every game mentioned on this topic sucks compared to Geometry Wars...
It may be obvious from my choice of words that I prefer the smooth, hand-crafted (but perhaps less "exciting") corner of the space. Graphically, I find I enjoy some of the 2D download-able games, such as those from Pixeljunk, which run at 1080p at 60 fps, over some of the 3D games (which I might enjoy more for their gameplay) that might only run at 540 @ 30 fps and hurt my eyes compared to the others (I'm looking at you, GTA IV PS3).
If Rage actually renders at ...
Of course, "better" or "best" is a matter of preference to a large degree. Some people prefer dark, monochrome, repetitive textures with lots of particle and post-processing excitement thrown in to cover it up. While others prefer well-lit, interesting, hand-crafted textures that don't require a cover up. Some prefer a lot of stuff going on at once on screen, at the expense of smooth frame-rate and tearing, while others look for the opposite.
I totally agree with Biggest about reserving judgment until we can actually see the games running. Having said that, the people reporting from E3 HAVE apparently seen the games running live on the respective platforms (and I'm assuming they are smart enough to check that the cables actually connect to the consoles these days...) and if they say it looks better, there's a good chance it looks at least about as good...at 60 fps.
Even if they looked the same, for a shooter, I'd prefer the one that ran at 60 FPS without slow-downs, tearing, or running at sub 720p resolution.
KZ2 did not run at 60 FPS. What's KZ3 supposed to run at, 30 (or less) again?
Of course, high FPS is not going to make a game look better in screen shots, but it will look and feel better (than the same game at lower FPS) when played.
Go to http://e3.g4tv.com/videos/4... and check out all three videos (they play one after the other)
In network games, player movement is predicted, in order to hide lag. If this system has a lot of lag, they could be doing the same. So what you are seeing could simply be the inaccuracy of the prediction.
I have yet to see someone suggest that it might be the law-firm, itself, that posted this "hack". Sure, it sounds ridiculous, but it could be seen to establish an upper bounds for the settlement. Everybody starts talking about a 50% settlement and how silly it is, the suit gains additional publicity, and when people hear that the requested settlement is "only" 10%, it sounds much more reasonable than 50% (despite the fact that it might still be quite unreasonable).
You are right. The times I've been notified that I was a member of a class-action lawsuit, the law firm got about half the payout, and the payout per member (at least for the share I had) was so small it was not even worth pursuing.
Agreed. It sounded like it was written by some teen who's never played anything but CoD/MW games, peppering the article with some references and names he found through Google...
Something to keep in mind is that the model and animations used for this video are not NECESSARILY the same as what you will actually be fighting against in game. Many games will use a higher-resolution model and animations for in-engine cinematics, which play in a tightly -controlled setting (such as this with just two characters), so they can afford to use higher rendering and animation costs.
Of course, one problem with statements such as "It's tapped out" is defining "tapped" in relation to what? 100% absolute compute usage is easy, but doesn't translate to what you see on screen, necessarily. 100% compute usage in generating visuals according to standard techniques is probably what was meant for G0W2 for PS2. But the pinnacle would be 100% compute usage for undiscovered techniques that push graphics beyond the capabilities of even current techniques. ...
One thing to keep in mind is that guys like Pachter usually get to see things way before anyone else has heard a peep about them, and it is their job to predict based off that information. So they make predictions based on grossly unfinished products, balanced against information about competing products that may be even more unfinished. So, for example, he may have been asked to predict the success of the 360 vs a PS3 that may have simply been in paper design at the time.
S...
The blurriness of GTA4 on PS3 (rendered at the same resolution) and the fact that it was such an eyestrain is going to prompt me to buy this on 360.What good is the extra content if I can't stand to play the game long enough to even finish it?
I actually DID care about the sub HD resolution on GTA4. I loved the game, but could only play the game for a couple hours before the blurriness caused enough strain on my eyes to put it away for the night. The negative effect depended on the post-processing effects playing at any particular time. During daylight scenes with little to no weather, it was pretty playable. Darker scenes, especially with heavy weather effects, were the worst (IIRC - I barely got to the second island - mostly beca...
If this were true, then game developers and publishers would have no issue with what is defined as piracy. Since they complain and attempt to put in measures to discourage it, it is obviously not the foundation they are seeking for their business...
If the developer WANTS you to try out their game, they will release a demo or a shareware version. If they do not, regardless of whether it is a smart business plan, they are lazy, or they are stupid, that is entirely up to them a...