Supposedly there are over 30 million individual Xbox360 users.
Supposedly they average over 11 hours per week (so many play a lot more).
Supposedly nearly all of them pay for Live.
Even accounting for time-zones, if all the above is true, does it make sense that this has happened only once?
If there is any they'll do it.
A $129 Arcade might even outsell the Wii for a few months.
Some of the best games ever made are still compelling and fun despite outdated visuals.
Having said that, the video of Alan Wake looks very good.
The visual style reminds me of an old PS2 game called Ghosthunter. Ghosthunter is basically roaming around with a flash-light killing ghosts. From a technical standpoint it was one of the top games last gen. Bump-mapping, dynamic light sources with real-time shadows, etc...
MGS4 looks a lot smoother than 30fps because of the way they handle smoothing between frames.
Given how well Ratchet:ACIT does it I have no doubt that Insomniac will do a bang-up job with it.
Gears, on the other hand, doesnt feel look smooth but that fits right into the gameplay, which is meant to be jerky and jarring. Something like Ninja Gaiden, which is about elegance and smoothness will be difficult to adapt to 30fps even with good interframe smoothing.
from a technical standpoint. Polygons, textures, etc...
Digital Foundry said that Insomniac deserves a lot more credit than they get. Here's the link.
http://www.n4g.com/NewsPend...
I disagree with Digital Foundry on GT5. Polyphony Digital does not put out bull-shots, they put out shots from photo-mode. It's just that their photomode can handle much higher detail.
Easily the most under-rated developer on the planet. As Digital Foundry says, this game has so much going on at once it's amazing that it runs at 60fps. Not only that, some people like to claim that the PS3 cant handle alpha-blending well but this game has far more alpha blending than any game I've seen on any platform at any frame-rate.
What's more it's real alpha blending, not the low quality, alpha to coverage (dithering) used by many other 60fps games like Forza 3.
Other than being too light, it's about the same as the original only at a much higher resolution. In porting to the PS3 they've retained the bump-mapping from the original, which is good. The way the PS2 did bump-mapping was completely different (used programmable vector units and EDRAM rather than the GPU) so they would have had to reengineer that aspect of it.
It's amazing how good even the PS2 version looks. The lighting was so sophisticated for it's time.
This time, even in America.
Global sales over the last 10 weeks:
PS3: 2.89 Million
360: 1.46 Milllion
______
@BuckySlingo
You're either living in a fantasy world or you don't know how to read a chart. 360 is down in every single chart. When the line is angling down that means bad.
Uncharted 2 is a huge leap over Uncharted 1 but even Uncharted 1 is far better, from a purely visual/technical standpoint, than any game on the 360.
Killzone 2 is a too much to ask.
Enormous amount of polygons.
Smoke reacts realistically to wind and rotor blades of aircraft!
When things explode, glowing (light casting) hot embers bounce around realistically.
Massive alpha effects filling the screen.
Huge amounts of physics driven volumetric sm...
is that if Obama has his way and passes strict net neutrality regulation, Comcast and others will not be able to artificially limit bandwidth to sites like Netflix as well as PSP bandwidth.
This means that Netflix might eventually increase the bit-rate to acceptable levels.
The 360's problem is that it's CPU is not fast enough to decode true high-bit rate video and decoding HD-DVD was done through a combination of CPU and GPU. Since Netflix uses a different encodin...
I can't even use google from it.
Over 70% of modern console owners have access to a much richer online experience than what the 360 provides.
I wish the 360 had more content. If it at least had a web-browser (even the Wii had it) it would make a good cheap ($199) living room PC if nothing else.
The problem is that Microsoft is intentionally limiting it because they want to control and profit from everything you do on your 360. I wouldnt be surprise...
just being able to hop onto google in my living room is just awesome. The 360's whole concept of Microsoft controlling what online content you get is decidedly outdated.
People make a huge fuss about the 360 getting facebook and twitter. Gee. Wow.
PS3 and Wii owners have had that since 2006!
When will Live ever catch up with the PS3's online features?
because 360 owners are typically fans of shooters like Halo and COD, which are pretty much defined by their multiplayer.
It's the demographic that bought into the original Xbox.
The problem for the 360 is that it hasn't broadened it's appeal.
to remain 360 exclusive and keep coming up with new excuses as to why they didn't make a PS3 version.
Microsoft has bribed lot's of developers. With the PS3 consistently outselling the 360 it's going to become more expensive to bribe developers. It's all about opportunity cost.
It's actually possible to mathematically estimate the cost of a bribe with publicaly available information.
via a patch or even the next version. It's unknown if they will follow through on it since Microsoft is known to constantly change it's strategy and might go back on the deal.
By crippling the PC version and requiring it to have the same features and shortcomings (like the limited FOV) as the Xbox version, it makes future integration easier.
hits = ad revenue
That's how websites like gamingbolt, N4G, IGN, Gamespot, etc. make a profit.
Your obviously outgunned dude.
mnichols is famous on N4G for his tech knowledge. I also know for a fact that people have even copied his comments from N4G on other websites. Fanboys on both sides hate him for telling the truth about PS3 and 360.
If i have one complaint about him is that he writes too much and also gets too technical. He should try to make shorter comments. Hear that mnichols??? Short and sweet!!!