While I agree to some extent, you never have too much frame-rate (except in films). Battlefield 3's single-player has a documentary style and I think 60 FPS would've gave it more "liveness" as most of the TV reports now are filmed with very smooth digital camera.
you're right. If you only bought 60 FPS games on console you'd be only playing Call of Duty...
It's even one of its key-selling points for which they sacrifice the visual quality. Can't blame them for that even though I think they could have let go to 30 FPS at least for the single-player campaign where it's all about immersion and not competition (I also think 30 FPS gives more dramatic effect than the "too-fast" 60 FPS).
Sorry for that. I'll manually submit better translations.
This is Call of Duty 4 in its pre-alpha form:
http://www.gametrailers.com...
The final version looked quite better...
PC will obviously always be superior in many ways to consoles, but consoles has (technically) one critical advantage.
It's funny because THE caracteristic of PC gaming rigs and consoles that differentiates them is both their strenght and weakness.
PC doesn't have a static configuration while all the consoles are the same (for each platform). What does this mean? Well, PC can always evolve as each new component can make it stronger (most of the time th...
Considering what they've achieved with Bad Company 2 on consoles, I think we can blindly trust them...
http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...
yeah it could have been worse like "fuck u" or "kiss my ass" but he didn't directly offend him and instead labeled his statement as bullshit which is... well, true.
They did pretty well with Bad Company 2. There's this footage analyzed by digital foundry in which they play in a rich jungle environment and the frame-rate hardly drops under 30.
http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...
Call of Duty's running at 60 FPS but its native resolution is sub-HD (1024*600). It was even worse for Black Ops on PS3 (960x544).
http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...
Other games running at 60 FPS or/and with a native 1080 rez are either downloadable games or sports/racing game which do not demand huge ressources.
God of War 3 tends to run at ...
With the 6850 Toxic I plan to buy, I would be in the very good category.
Even with my 4GB DDR3 and only a Quad Core Q8200, monitoring with Everest while playing my games made me realise that only my 9800GTX+ wasn't following (furthermore, it tends to overheat lately which causes huge framerate drops).
I think it's pretty obvious without explanation...
The dev never used the word output. I'll quote exactly what was said:
Julian791 asked: "Will Battlefield 3 be in 720p, or 1080p/1080i for consoles?"
Johan Andersson replied: "720p"
no more, no less
However in the article, it's interpreted as "consoles will only support 720 output".
I think you got your fool...
Any major console game today supports 1080 output, and any majo...
it's rather the author of the article who got that wrong. He thought the dev was talking about output resolution while he was obviously talking about the native rez.
As I already said several times before, and as a (mainly) PC gamer, I really hope BF3 will look good on consoles, even to the point of matching with their exclusives. That would mean graphically cutting edge games can be developed on PC while being correctly ported to current-gen consoles, so other multiplat devs would follow in DICE's footsteps which would be better for everyone (we would all have the best graphics possible for our platforms).
But to be honest, this demo...
The game looks obviously gorgeous but damn I hate this HUD color. I don't have problem with "true" blue but this cyan color is just too passive for a war game HUD. Might play HUDless just for this...
It might not be as accurate, but controller is more confortable (in my case at least, and you can play on the couch) and immersive (between clicking on a mouse and pulling the trigger, the latter is obviously closer to the action you do in the game) so at least for Single Payer where it's more about immersion than competition, the controller is better. And it's not like FPS with controllers are unplayable. Sometimes, when I'm tired, I play Black Ops multiplayer on PC with a contro...
Gotta admit this. I researched similar image with this shot of MW3:
http://www.gameinvaders.fr/...
And that's what I get:
5358d ago 2 agree0 disagreeView comment
"Most beautiful game at E3 2011"... Frostbite 2? Battlefield 3 anyone?
I agree the game looked really nice though, with an interesting story/atmosphere and way more dynamic than Far Cry 2 (well, it wasn't really possible to do a more boring game). A big surprise which made me excited.
Yep, they're not gonna make up a new franchise name everytime they just change the settings (GTA I, II, III and IV have different settings and yet they are all called GTA for example). Overall it seems to play like Bioshock (FPS + injected super-powers) so calling it by this name makes sense. Can't wait!
Well it's more annoying to have swinging frame-rate than a "slow" 30 FPS. And that's the problem with PC gaming whereas console games when correctly developped have a stabilized frame-rate (capped to 30 by the devs).
With entry-quality PCs like mine, while you can get an average 30 FPS for ressource hungry games, it can drop to 20 or fly to 40-60 which is more annoying than having constant 30 frames. For example in Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, I have a...