I would prefer someone to buy an off the shelf x86 CPU and a high end GPU design by licensing rather than pouring billions into an experiment that may or may not work like CELL was.
The problem with this is that it would be immensely difficult to emulate CELL. Actually it would still be hard even if Sony tried to continue with a CELL type design. You would still have to build a massive suite of software 'fixes' for individual games, that means a full team of people ...
Pc looks fine to me although its not had too much attention on it. The usual higher resolutions, speedy framerates and vsync make a big difference.
As for consoles what did you expect? Much like Fallout 3 and New Vegas the game was built on 360 and ported to PS3. So again just like those games you can see it has meant the PS3 version is compromised with textures, memory management and AA solutions.
PS3 looks like it has slightly lower res assets and most ...
Performance actually in game is very very variable, i guess you might imagine this considering the huge variances in areas and load. Anyone who ran fallout New vegas, fallout 3 etc will be well familiar with that.
Typically indoors can be half as demanding as outdoors. The most demanding i have seen so far often happens when you enter a new town or village area. I suspect this may be because the streaming and memory swapping is at its most intense.
To mak...
Meh. 360 does win but its not massive massive you would notice unless you ran them tightly side by side. Not the kind of gap you would notice, like having a halfway decent PC would be obvious. Same res, level of AA, same framerate like 95 percent of the time. Teeny rendering differences made less noticeable by the fact the whole image is upscaled just to reach 720p anyway!
Sometimes i think the differences are overblown between the consoles. I don't get it, as someone w...
Well if he is the janitor he can start by cleaning up all his bullshit.
PC at high resolution looks clean but pretty unremarkable. All the effects in place to allow the game to run on console at 60FPS, stuff like low polygon counts and flat textures, lo res alpha textures.....none of them have had any effort put into them on the PC platform.
The upside is that you don't need a great PC to run the game maxed.
The downside is if you have a great PC then sit back and see all that power going to waste. Watch as your 2600k and...
GTA4 virtually maximised xbox 360's disc capacity when it came out in 2008. 6.8Gb was used. Part of the reason is GTA always has a lot of audio, voices, music, hours and hours of radio. Also the amount of individual different textures and models from characters to vehicles. There is still very much a tight limit on compressing audio down before the quality suffers. Skyrim is a different comparison.
I fully expect GTA5 to be on multiple discs in light of the size of GTA4...
'I thought the PS3 was designed to have 2 Cell's working in parallel? It was simply due to the manufacturing cost that they had to make final adjustments which then resulted in the RSX you see today.'
Not precisely accurate. RSX is the most expensive single processing component to build a PS3 today now that CELL manufacturing has been refined so the yields are good. The yields were poor that made it expensive initially, but they were always going to improve. RSX...
The problem with liberty city in GTA4 for me was it was too small. After the freedoms of San andreas it felt like a step back. Part of the joy of San Andreas was exploring every square inch and being astounded by the scale presented. Bigger IS better, as long as Rockstar's traditional quality is maintained.....
See, i don't want it to be bigger at the cost of quality- i want it to be bigger and the same quality at least. As this GTA game will have been in developmen...
I wouldn't care so much as long as they improved the scale of the game beyond GTA4, improved the immersion and continuity of the world. For all i care the engine could include no major improvements on GTA4 visually as long as the scale is upped hugely- which it appears is happening anyway.
Any other visual improvements are a bonus. Frankly i would also just take a performance improvement over GTA4, it was fairly good, but could get a little wonky at times when a lot hap...
Well we won't see leaps. We haven't for a few years now. We can see incremental improvements, but if you have played Gears 3 and Uncharted 3, you have seen about as good as it is gonna get and shouldn't expect some other game coming out to blow them away on this generation of consoles.
I mean it shouldn't really matter now, the consoles are so dated developers should be focused on maximising the stability of the platforms with top top games.
A game requiring precise timing and skill. I could not think of many worse games to have Onlive's control lag
150 milliseconds is a little high but not exactly excessive....when playing games whose framerates dip below 25FPS and are inconsistent then i could see it being a problem, the lag would be well over 150ms and it might be hard to adjust to that. Assuming UC3 is consistent, i believe this lag 'problem' is rather overstated...
Its not so much lag, its the directional on the stick some people might have issues with. Maybe they will patch it, but personally i didn't...
I believe the open world game you are all grasping for is Just Cause 2 which is highly impressive on console and stunning on PC. Alright the foliage are sprites but it isn't hugely noticeable that it ruins the look of the game. Very good looking massive world title.
Still i am sure that Rockstar are squeezing these platforms as hard as they can, as long as they don't settle for poor performance then i would be happy. Happier if they do a Pc version day one mind.... ...
Some say people don't know how to spell his name...and...they are right.
They could do a lazy port to Wii U assuming it has quite a lot more performance than current consoles, and just turn up the resolution and filters.
However i think that if the game ended up on Wii U rockstar would try and do the hardware justice. Personally i doubt it will make it to wii U unless nintendo have specifically chased rockstar down and made a deal for it.
My reasoning being more that Wii u's userbase will still only be very small and limited ...
Great developer really changed the landscape of pc gaming. Shame he looks like a middle aged Harry Potter who ate all the pies :-/
BF3 isn't quite as mad demanding as maybe some people imagined it to be. Yes you need a GTX570/6970 to max it really @ 1080p, but these cards aren't the top top end even now. This isn't Crysis, where you could barely max the thing in 1080p and AA with a pair of 8800 Ultras- the fastest cards of the time. Two GTX580 gobble up BF3 maxed 60FPS+ without breaking sweat.
Plus in about 4 months said high end cards will be midrange at best, because we have a brand new 28n...
No AA :( ouch. The battlefield games need AA, they have a lot of square flat edges. 2 X AA would clear up the very worst so it wasn't quite so eye stabbing. I believe in the beta an 8800GT was enough to squeeze on a little AA on low
Depends how much performance the manufacturers go for. If one of them chooses to do a wii then there will be no leap.
If one or more of them goes for a new technology machine then there will be a significant leap. GTX580 is nearly 10 times faster than present consoles. It will be replaced by a part much faster within 4 months.
Unless you make a major hash of building a game from scratch for said hardware then you will get a leap.
At the...