Following your logic of nationalistic Americans, the Nintendo Wii wouldn't be dominating both the 360 and PS3 in the US, then, would it? Nor would the PS2 have dominated last generation in the States.
I just think that the reason Microsoft is having better success this generation is because they've done a very good job marketing the XB360 for the US audience.
Actually, it's pretty clear to me that the PS3 has the substantially better games lineup from this point onward. That's including the fact that FFXIII went multiplatform.
They didn't alter their strategies significantly, because they didn't HAVE to. They were both doing just fine as they were. In fact, it's arguably an act of corporate desperation and necessity that Microsoft "significantly altered" their business path and goals. Doesn't appear as though this NYT writer knows much about videogaming.
Whoever says Killzone 2 has been downgraded is a fool.
I'm personally not too interested/hyped for either game, but if I had to choose, I'd prolly take Resistance 2 over Gears. I just loathe the Gears of War series.
I'll take games like Fallout 3 and Far Cry 2 over either, of course.
"[Carmack] assumed the publisher was responsible for destroying small development studios."
And he was completely correct in that assumption.
The only reason Squaresoft turned on Nintendo back in the mid-90's was because Square saw the potential to make much better games with the PSX's disc-based format, while Nintendo stubbornly stuck with the cartridge, limiting the scope that Square have been able to achieve in their games. Their motive was primarily about making BETTER GAMES, at the time.
This move to support Microsoft has nothing to do with making better games or technical limitations.
I'm still pissed. Reason being that Xbox 360 is still on higher ground in terms of priority for Square Enix's support; Star Ocean 4 is _currently_ (may change in the future) still 360 exclusive. And Last Remnant is coming to 360 first.
I don't understand this sudden need for Squaresoft to suddenly go turncoat on the Playstation, especially after years of faithful loyalty and support between the two companies.
What the hell man, I'm gonna get this on PS3. Why do I keep getting the short end of the stick?
Maybe they just mean exclusive DLC, but PS3 owners will be able to get the same content (i.e., Shivering Isles) in Blu-Ray form.
This is about what I expected for the PS3 the month MGS4 arrived. Nothing more, nothing less.
Looks pretty damn good to me. Gushing hands-on impressions from IGN. I've had my eye on this game for a long, long time as potentially being one of my personal GotYs. Hopefully it looks as good in motion as it does in the screens.
Crysis looks good, but polygon mesh detail isn't one of its strong areas, let alone CGI-level poly counts. Then again, neither is CGI-quality texture maps. Some people have analyzed the polygon counts of the in-game character and object meshes of Crysis, and the numbers came out to be pretty pedestrian. Uncharted and Lair beat it in this facet.
Whoa, that looks insane.
I like the idea of open-world shooters.
Far Cry 2 was originally scheduled to come out in March of '08, for PC at least.
I don't dispute that the jaggy-less visuals aren't impossible on a PC if you really crank up the resolution, but taking a look at the remarkably high-polygon count of the TV's mesh, as well as the extremely high resolution of the FMV texture on the TV, I wouldn't hold my breath on any version of the game looking like this.
Dude, this news and article is old as dirt (Feb '08), and has appeared on N4G before.
Do a search of past N4G articles.
Well, going by the complete lack of jaggies, as well as the extraordinarily high polygon count on certain objects, I would venture to guess that it's a pre-rendered video using mostly in-game assets. The character and most of the landscape you see, for instance, is probably real-time assets from the actual game, but this particular video is prerendered for the purpose of enhancing certain aspects of the visuals.
It's a teaser, as anyone could easily tell by taking a quick glance at the title of the video. More specifically, it's a pre-E3 '08 teaser, probably meant to whet your appetite for the REAL trailer, along with a bombardment of bona fide gameplay footage, when E3 finally hits.
This article has the appearance of plausibility at first, but in the end it doesn't make any sense. There's no reason for Sony to not want to sell as many units as possible (hence, win the console war), because that's where the profitability ultimately lies: selling as much software as possible to the biggest console install base they can muster.
To deduce that Sony is "throwing the towel" on trying to reach a high install base based on one passing statement by Sony, is...
Did Soldier of Fortune, or any other FPS in history, have a 50 km, open-ended, explorable African world, dynamic fire propagation, wind, and vegetation systems, custom player weapon loadouts, and sophisticated AI that reacts differently to stealth, assault, sniper, (and incendiary) tactics? I don't think so.
Also, Jack Carver or not, this game will have a MUCH more sophisticated, deep story than any other previous Far Cry game. Same story writer as Bioshock and Gears of War.