This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="OldParr"]well after gears i dont see why is necessary and creating stuff like that will indicate more money and tons of time.maybe bioshock will change ur mind
anshuk20002
i guess blu ray is for the super epic games that are long. gears single player is short.
like gundam:crossfire?
[QUOTE="thirstychainsaw"][QUOTE="mattyomo99"][QUOTE="wavebrid"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="mattyomo99"][QUOTE="wavebrid"]:roll: blu-ray is not needed
period
wavebrid
you must own a 360 then
period
What is with all this nonsense today? If Blu Ray is not needed you can play whatever you damn well please, from Wii to PS3 to PSP to DS to PC to 360. You don't HAVE to own a flipping 360.
But the problem with that statement is deeper than that. According to Insomniac, Naughty Dog, and Factor Five, Blu Ray is needed. So I'm siding with them, seeing as their games are so GD impressive.
So beacuse some other developers say blu-ray needed you listen to them ? :roll: alright whatever floats your boat.
how can you sit at ur computer and say that a disk that holds 50gb makes equal games to a disk that holds 10gb
PC games still are using CDs...:|
dont bother there too manny cows on this fourm supporting blu-ray they make the most non- snese crap up
i will put 1000 bucks the next gta will be released exclusivly on ps3 just because of the blue-ray disk
[QUOTE="mattyomo99"][QUOTE="wavebrid"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="mattyomo99"][QUOTE="wavebrid"]:roll: blu-ray is not needed
period
thirstychainsaw
you must own a 360 then
period
What is with all this nonsense today? If Blu Ray is not needed you can play whatever you damn well please, from Wii to PS3 to PSP to DS to PC to 360. You don't HAVE to own a flipping 360.
But the problem with that statement is deeper than that. According to Insomniac, Naughty Dog, and Factor Five, Blu Ray is needed. So I'm siding with them, seeing as their games are so GD impressive.
So beacuse some other developers say blu-ray needed you listen to them ? :roll: alright whatever floats your boat.
how can you sit at ur computer and say that a disk that holds 50gb makes equal games to a disk that holds 10gb
PC games still are using CDs...:|
Actually, they made the jump to DVDs a year ago, and even a year ago, games like Medievil TW II were coming on multiple DVDs.[QUOTE="wavebrid"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="mattyomo99"][QUOTE="wavebrid"]:roll: blu-ray is not needed
period
mattyomo99
you must own a 360 then
period
What is with all this nonsense today? If Blu Ray is not needed you can play whatever you damn well please, from Wii to PS3 to PSP to DS to PC to 360. You don't HAVE to own a flipping 360.
But the problem with that statement is deeper than that. According to Insomniac, Naughty Dog, and Factor Five, Blu Ray is needed. So I'm siding with them, seeing as their games are so GD impressive.
So beacuse some other developers say blu-ray needed you listen to them ? :roll: alright whatever floats your boat.
how can you sit at ur computer and say that a disk that holds 50gb makes equal games to a disk that holds 10gb
and how do you listen to some developer.... and sit there and tell me its needed. when bul-ray hasnt even proven itself yet.
and Naguthy dog is part of sony of course there going to support it! :| same with factor five. so they people you been talking about are PART OF SONY!
no wonder why they said its NEEDED.... hmm why havent ubisoft,sega,ea,2k, etc... said anything ???
[QUOTE="wavebrid"][QUOTE="thirstychainsaw"][QUOTE="mattyomo99"][QUOTE="wavebrid"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="mattyomo99"][QUOTE="wavebrid"]:roll: blu-ray is not needed
period
mattyomo99
you must own a 360 then
period
What is with all this nonsense today? If Blu Ray is not needed you can play whatever you damn well please, from Wii to PS3 to PSP to DS to PC to 360. You don't HAVE to own a flipping 360.
But the problem with that statement is deeper than that. According to Insomniac, Naughty Dog, and Factor Five, Blu Ray is needed. So I'm siding with them, seeing as their games are so GD impressive.
So beacuse some other developers say blu-ray needed you listen to them ? :roll: alright whatever floats your boat.
how can you sit at ur computer and say that a disk that holds 50gb makes equal games to a disk that holds 10gb
PC games still are using CDs...:|
dont bother there too manny cows on this fourm supporting blu-ray they make the most non- snese crap up
i will put 1000 bucks the next gta will be released exclusivly on ps3 just because of the blue-ray disk
like you even have 1000 bucks :| not going to happen
[QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"]I just don't get it... if oblivion can fit on ONE dvd disk then why do we need blu ray YET?Redfingers
Oblivion repeats a number of small, often low quality tilesets. It will in no way compare to the detail found in the megatexture applied to the games John Carmack is currently speaking of. Do not despair: this game will be available to your platforms as well, but rest assured that it will look INFINITELY BETTER than Oblivion.
I'll belive it when I see it. I'm a Sony fan but so far this gen has been all talk and no walk
EDIT (ma gramma sux)
He's John Carmack for Christ's sake. What is he, lying or something? Oblivion has already been destroyed by a number of titles, from Crysis to Haze to Heavenly Sword to Mass Effect. Stop dreaming. I swear, people in this foum and their Gears of War and flipping Oblivion. My brother says Oblivion is UGLY. He said, verbatim "it looks like butthole" when he saw it for the first time. It's not impressive. It won't require a big leap to surpass. There are already games out that stomp this game, and I gaurantee you, the mega-texture is a way to surpass the wimpy tiles and pea-soup distance textures of Oblivion.
As I said, show me something the ps3 can do graphically that the box360 can't. And no, I'm not talking about developerspeculation or tech demos
Instead of showing you something the 360 can't do, I'll simply ask you to show me examples of the 360 playing something the PS3 CAN do. Show me a game with 30 levels, 40 player multiplayer, and massive draw distances. Show me a game with 4 gigabyte levels, 32x32 km maps, 25,000 soldiers, hundreds of dragons, fluid dynamics, and progressive mesh. Show me a 360 game that has no loading screens (NONE) because the data is constantly streaming from both HDD and the Blu Ray (DVD perhaps, in 360's case?) sources. Show me a game with thousands of animations, deferred lighting and MSAA anti-aliasing. Please. Show me these games.
Ughhhhhhhhh. Propaganda at its best. I want to belive the ps3 can do all that, I really do, and heck, maybe it can.BUT I only believe what I see, right now I'm seing the ps3 graphicallyloosingbattlesto thebig ol box on multiplatform games.
Letme ask you that same question. What ps3 gamesreleased even come close to any of those things you mentioned?
[QUOTE="mattyomo99"][QUOTE="wavebrid"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="mattyomo99"][QUOTE="wavebrid"]:roll: blu-ray is not needed
period
wavebrid
you must own a 360 then
period
What is with all this nonsense today? If Blu Ray is not needed you can play whatever you damn well please, from Wii to PS3 to PSP to DS to PC to 360. You don't HAVE to own a flipping 360.
But the problem with that statement is deeper than that. According to Insomniac, Naughty Dog, and Factor Five, Blu Ray is needed. So I'm siding with them, seeing as their games are so GD impressive.
So beacuse some other developers say blu-ray needed you listen to them ? :roll: alright whatever floats your boat.
how can you sit at ur computer and say that a disk that holds 50gb makes equal games to a disk that holds 10gb
and how do you listen to some developer.... and sit there and tell me its needed. when bul-ray hasnt even proven itself yet.
and Naguthy dog is part of sony of course there going to support it! :| same with factor five. so they people you been talking about are PART OF SONY!
no wonder why they said its NEEDED.... hmm why havent ubisoft,sega,ea,2k, etc... said anything ???
Lair is the first game that Factor 5 has ever developed for a non-Nintendo platform since 1997. ;)[QUOTE="mattyomo99"][QUOTE="wavebrid"][QUOTE="thirstychainsaw"][QUOTE="mattyomo99"][QUOTE="wavebrid"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="mattyomo99"][QUOTE="wavebrid"]:roll: blu-ray is not needed
period
wavebrid
you must own a 360 then
period
What is with all this nonsense today? If Blu Ray is not needed you can play whatever you damn well please, from Wii to PS3 to PSP to DS to PC to 360. You don't HAVE to own a flipping 360.
But the problem with that statement is deeper than that. According to Insomniac, Naughty Dog, and Factor Five, Blu Ray is needed. So I'm siding with them, seeing as their games are so GD impressive.
So beacuse some other developers say blu-ray needed you listen to them ? :roll: alright whatever floats your boat.
how can you sit at ur computer and say that a disk that holds 50gb makes equal games to a disk that holds 10gb
PC games still are using CDs...:|
dont bother there too manny cows on this fourm supporting blu-ray they make the most non- snese crap up
i will put 1000 bucks the next gta will be released exclusivly on ps3 just because of the blue-ray disk
like you even have 1000 bucks :| not going to happen
Yeah...not going to happen. How stupid would theat be?[QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"]I just don't get it... if oblivion can fit on ONE dvd disk then why do we need blu ray YET?qead
Oblivion repeats a number of small, often low quality tilesets. It will in no way compare to the detail found in the megatexture applied to the games John Carmack is currently speaking of. Do not despair: this game will be available to your platforms as well, but rest assured that it will look INFINITELY BETTER than Oblivion.
I'll belive it when I see it. I'm a Sony fan but so far this gen has been all talk and no walk
EDIT (ma gramma sux)
He's John Carmack for Christ's sake. What is he, lying or something? Oblivion has already been destroyed by a number of titles, from Crysis to Haze to Heavenly Sword to Mass Effect. Stop dreaming. I swear, people in this foum and their Gears of War and flipping Oblivion. My brother says Oblivion is UGLY. He said, verbatim "it looks like butthole" when he saw it for the first time. It's not impressive. It won't require a big leap to surpass. There are already games out that stomp this game, and I gaurantee you, the mega-texture is a way to surpass the wimpy tiles and pea-soup distance textures of Oblivion.
As I said, show me something the ps3 can do graphically that the box360 can't. And no, I'm not talking about developerspeculation or tech demos
Instead of showing you something the 360 can't do, I'll simply ask you to show me examples of the 360 playing something the PS3 CAN do. Show me a game with 30 levels, 40 player multiplayer, and massive draw distances. Show me a game with 4 gigabyte levels, 32x32 km maps, 25,000 soldiers, hundreds of dragons, fluid dynamics, and progressive mesh. Show me a 360 game that has no loading screens (NONE) because the data is constantly streaming from both HDD and the Blu Ray (DVD perhaps, in 360's case?) sources. Show me a game with thousands of animations, deferred lighting and MSAA anti-aliasing. Please. Show me these games.
Ughhhhhhhhh. Propaganda at its best. I want to belive the ps3 can do all that, I really do, and heck, maybe it can.BUT I only believe what I see, right now I'm seing the ps3 graphicallyloosingbattlesto thebig ol box on multiplatform games.
Letme ask you that same question. What ps3 gamesreleased even come close to any of those things you mentioned?
Well, for the game with "30 levels, 40 player multiplayer, and massive draw distances" you've got Resistance.For a game with "4 gigabyte levels, 32x32 km maps, 25,000 soldiers, hundreds of dragons, fluid dynamics, and progressive mesh" you have Lair (though maybe not HUNDRES of dragons).
For a game with "no loading screens (NONE) because the data is constantly streaming from both HDD and the Blu Ray (DVD perhaps, in 360's case?) sources" you have Uncharted.
And for a game with "thousands of animations, deferred lighting and MSAA anti-aliasing" you have Killzone 2 (though the animations part i don't know about yet, but Uncharted has 3000 just for the main character).
All this has been confirmed by the devs of each game.
I have been called a "cow" before, and yet here I am refuting each and every imbecilic claim about how this shows that Blu Ray is necessary. I'm also providing appropriate arguments in favor of Blu Ray technology that are actually TRUE, like the 4 gigabyte, 32x32km, 25,000 soldier, hundreds of dragons figure for one single level in Lair.RedfingersThat's great and all, but more doesn't equal better. Gears is generally regarded as being a better game than Resistance, despite Resistance being bigger.
[QUOTE="Redfingers"]
The developers make the games. And when they make a factual assumption, I must side with them, unless I'm being arrogant and assuming I know more than them.Instead of showing you something the 360 can't do, I'll simply ask you to show me examples of the 360 playing something the PS3 CAN do. Show me a game with 30 levels, 40 player multiplayer, and massive draw distances. Show me a game with 4 gigabyte levels, 32x32 km maps, 25,000 soldiers, hundreds of dragons, fluid dynamics, and progressive mesh. Show me a 360 game that has no loading screens (NONE) because the data is constantly streaming from both HDD and the Blu Ray (DVD perhaps, in 360's case?) sources. Show me a game with thousands of animations, deferred lighting and MSAA anti-aliasing. Please. Show me these games.
qead
Ughhhhhhhhh. Propaganda at its best. I want to belive the ps3 can do all that, I really do, and heck, maybe it can.BUT I only believe what I see, right now I'm seing the ps3 graphicallyloosingbattlesto thebig ol box on multiplatform games.
Letme ask you that same question. What ps3 gamesreleased even come close to any of those things you mentioned?
Let me make this very clear to you. Each and every one of those things is in a Playstation 3, whether immediately available at retail or upcoming. Now I'll list them out for you, since you seem to be so damn persistent about it .
Resistance: Fall of Man has 40 player multiplayer and 30 gigantic levels with particularly massive draw distances, among some other things. Lair has 4 gigabyte levels, with 25,000 soldiers and hundreds of dragons, measuring 32x32km in size. Julian Eggebrecht confirmed this. He also confirmed that it will have fluid dynamics and progressive mesh. He said that this is impossible on any other platform. This is somewhat speculative...however, if you have an example that refutes this claim, please, bring it up here and put Julian and I to rest. Uncharted: Drake's Fortune is constantly streaming audio, textures, level data, animations, everything from the Blu Ray disc and the HDD so that there are NO LOADING SCREENS in the entire game. It also has some huge figure (multiple thousands) of animations. Killzone will be utilizing deferred lighting. Their technique includes MSAA simultaneously with deferred lighting. No other game utilizes this technique, and very few utilize deferred lighting. Again, refute my claim. Go ahead. Show me an instance on the Xbox 360 or otherwise where these figures occur. Show me the game.
Yes, I trust developers. Because they make the games. They know the specs of their own games.
QFT!Yes, I trust developers. Because they make the games. They know the specs of their own games.
Redfingers
That's great and all, but more doesn't equal better. Gears is generally regarded as being a better game than Resistance, despite Resistance being bigger.[QUOTE="Redfingers"]I have been called a "cow" before, and yet here I am refuting each and every imbecilic claim about how this shows that Blu Ray is necessary. I'm also providing appropriate arguments in favor of Blu Ray technology that are actually TRUE, like the 4 gigabyte, 32x32km, 25,000 soldier, hundreds of dragons figure for one single level in Lair.Sooshy
[QUOTE="OldParr"]well after gears i dont see why is necessary and creating stuff like that will indicate more money and tons of time.maybe bioshock will change ur mind
Unstoppable_1
Gears of War was waay too short. High detail graphics on HD DVD format equals less game length. Also Epic did not have enough time. Believe it or not they were pressured by Bill Gates to release for Fall. Hence the November 7 release date. Now that they have proven themselves, having blu-ray would not hurt them, rather help them. However the 360 is HD DVD. Having multiple HD DVD is not a bad thing. As for the price, I don't see why there would be an increase above 60$.
sorry for using gears as an example but i was trying to say is that it will take a lot of money and time for that to happen.the reason i said gears and im saying this again was because it wasnt necessary all that storage to make a game epic
[QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"]I just don't get it... if oblivion can fit on ONE dvd disk then why do we need blu ray YET?makingmusic476
Oblivion repeats a number of small, often low quality tilesets. It will in no way compare to the detail found in the megatexture applied to the games John Carmack is currently speaking of. Do not despair: this game will be available to your platforms as well, but rest assured that it will look INFINITELY BETTER than Oblivion.
I'll belive it when I see it. I'm a Sony fan but so far this gen has been all talk and no walk
EDIT (ma gramma sux)
He's John Carmack for Christ's sake. What is he, lying or something? Oblivion has already been destroyed by a number of titles, from Crysis to Haze to Heavenly Sword to Mass Effect. Stop dreaming. I swear, people in this foum and their Gears of War and flipping Oblivion. My brother says Oblivion is UGLY. He said, verbatim "it looks like butthole" when he saw it for the first time. It's not impressive. It won't require a big leap to surpass. There are already games out that stomp this game, and I gaurantee you, the mega-texture is a way to surpass the wimpy tiles and pea-soup distance textures of Oblivion.
As I said, show me something the ps3 can do graphically that the box360 can't. And no, I'm not talking about developerspeculation or tech demos
Instead of showing you something the 360 can't do, I'll simply ask you to show me examples of the 360 playing something the PS3 CAN do. Show me a game with 30 levels, 40 player multiplayer, and massive draw distances. Show me a game with 4 gigabyte levels, 32x32 km maps, 25,000 soldiers, hundreds of dragons, fluid dynamics, and progressive mesh. Show me a 360 game that has no loading screens (NONE) because the data is constantly streaming from both HDD and the Blu Ray (DVD perhaps, in 360's case?) sources. Show me a game with thousands of animations, deferred lighting and MSAA anti-aliasing. Please. Show me these games.
Ughhhhhhhhh. Propaganda at its best. I want to belive the ps3 can do all that, I really do, and heck, maybe it can.BUT I only believe what I see, right now I'm seing the ps3 graphicallyloosingbattlesto thebig ol box on multiplatform games.
Letme ask you that same question. What ps3 gamesreleased even come close to any of those things you mentioned?
Well, for the game with "30 levels, 40 player multiplayer, and massive draw distances" you've got Resistance.For a game with "4 gigabyte levels, 32x32 km maps, 25,000 soldiers, hundreds of dragons, fluid dynamics, and progressive mesh" you have Lair (though maybe not HUNDRES of dragons).
For a game with "no loading screens (NONE) because the data is constantly streaming from both HDD and the Blu Ray (DVD perhaps, in 360's case?) sources" you have Uncharted.
And for a game with "thousands of animations, deferred lighting and MSAA anti-aliasing" you have Killzone 2 (though the animations part i don't know about yet, but Uncharted has 3000 just for the main character).
All this has been confirmed by the devs of each game.
[QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"]I just don't get it... if oblivion can fit on ONE dvd disk then why do we need blu ray YET?makingmusic476
Oblivion repeats a number of small, often low quality tilesets. It will in no way compare to the detail found in the megatexture applied to the games John Carmack is currently speaking of. Do not despair: this game will be available to your platforms as well, but rest assured that it will look INFINITELY BETTER than Oblivion.
I'll belive it when I see it. I'm a Sony fan but so far this gen has been all talk and no walk
EDIT (ma gramma sux)
He's John Carmack for Christ's sake. What is he, lying or something? Oblivion has already been destroyed by a number of titles, from Crysis to Haze to Heavenly Sword to Mass Effect. Stop dreaming. I swear, people in this foum and their Gears of War and flipping Oblivion. My brother says Oblivion is UGLY. He said, verbatim "it looks like butthole" when he saw it for the first time. It's not impressive. It won't require a big leap to surpass. There are already games out that stomp this game, and I gaurantee you, the mega-texture is a way to surpass the wimpy tiles and pea-soup distance textures of Oblivion.
As I said, show me something the ps3 can do graphically that the box360 can't. And no, I'm not talking about developerspeculation or tech demos
Instead of showing you something the 360 can't do, I'll simply ask you to show me examples of the 360 playing something the PS3 CAN do. Show me a game with 30 levels, 40 player multiplayer, and massive draw distances. Show me a game with 4 gigabyte levels, 32x32 km maps, 25,000 soldiers, hundreds of dragons, fluid dynamics, and progressive mesh. Show me a 360 game that has no loading screens (NONE) because the data is constantly streaming from both HDD and the Blu Ray (DVD perhaps, in 360's case?) sources. Show me a game with thousands of animations, deferred lighting and MSAA anti-aliasing. Please. Show me these games.
Ughhhhhhhhh. Propaganda at its best. I want to belive the ps3 can do all that, I really do, and heck, maybe it can.BUT I only believe what I see, right now I'm seing the ps3 graphicallyloosingbattlesto thebig ol box on multiplatform games.
Letme ask you that same question. What ps3 gamesreleased even come close to any of those things you mentioned?
Well, for the game with "30 levels, 40 player multiplayer, and massive draw distances" you've got Resistance.For a game with "4 gigabyte levels, 32x32 km maps, 25,000 soldiers, hundreds of dragons, fluid dynamics, and progressive mesh" you have Lair (though maybe not HUNDRES of dragons).
For a game with "no loading screens (NONE) because the data is constantly streaming from both HDD and the Blu Ray (DVD perhaps, in 360's case?) sources" you have Uncharted.
And for a game with "thousands of animations, deferred lighting and MSAA anti-aliasing" you have Killzone 2 (though the animations part i don't know about yet, but Uncharted has 3000 just for the main character).
All this has been confirmed by the devs of each game.
Only one of those games is actually playable on a home ps3. I honestly don't care about how much devs choose to hype thier games. I hope when these game are released I'll be proven wrong. But untill then the ps3 has failed to deliver
[QUOTE="Sooshy"]That's great and all, but more doesn't equal better. Gears is generally regarded as being a better game than Resistance, despite Resistance being bigger.[QUOTE="Redfingers"]I have been called a "cow" before, and yet here I am refuting each and every imbecilic claim about how this shows that Blu Ray is necessary. I'm also providing appropriate arguments in favor of Blu Ray technology that are actually TRUE, like the 4 gigabyte, 32x32km, 25,000 soldier, hundreds of dragons figure for one single level in Lair.Redfingers
Technically, Resistance has more going on in a lot of situations, but Gears looks better most of the time. You could dumb down the graphics in Gears to that of Resistance--not that Resistance looks bad--and put more enemies on screen and have larger levels, but then it wouldn't be the same game. It might not have been as good.
Like I said--more doesn't equal better.
[QUOTE="makingmusic476"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"]I just don't get it... if oblivion can fit on ONE dvd disk then why do we need blu ray YET?Redfingers
Oblivion repeats a number of small, often low quality tilesets. It will in no way compare to the detail found in the megatexture applied to the games John Carmack is currently speaking of. Do not despair: this game will be available to your platforms as well, but rest assured that it will look INFINITELY BETTER than Oblivion.
I'll belive it when I see it. I'm a Sony fan but so far this gen has been all talk and no walk
EDIT (ma gramma sux)
He's John Carmack for Christ's sake. What is he, lying or something? Oblivion has already been destroyed by a number of titles, from Crysis to Haze to Heavenly Sword to Mass Effect. Stop dreaming. I swear, people in this foum and their Gears of War and flipping Oblivion. My brother says Oblivion is UGLY. He said, verbatim "it looks like butthole" when he saw it for the first time. It's not impressive. It won't require a big leap to surpass. There are already games out that stomp this game, and I gaurantee you, the mega-texture is a way to surpass the wimpy tiles and pea-soup distance textures of Oblivion.
As I said, show me something the ps3 can do graphically that the box360 can't. And no, I'm not talking about developerspeculation or tech demos
Instead of showing you something the 360 can't do, I'll simply ask you to show me examples of the 360 playing something the PS3 CAN do. Show me a game with 30 levels, 40 player multiplayer, and massive draw distances. Show me a game with 4 gigabyte levels, 32x32 km maps, 25,000 soldiers, hundreds of dragons, fluid dynamics, and progressive mesh. Show me a 360 game that has no loading screens (NONE) because the data is constantly streaming from both HDD and the Blu Ray (DVD perhaps, in 360's case?) sources. Show me a game with thousands of animations, deferred lighting and MSAA anti-aliasing. Please. Show me these games.
Ughhhhhhhhh. Propaganda at its best. I want to belive the ps3 can do all that, I really do, and heck, maybe it can.BUT I only believe what I see, right now I'm seing the ps3 graphicallyloosingbattlesto thebig ol box on multiplatform games.
Letme ask you that same question. What ps3 gamesreleased even come close to any of those things you mentioned?
Well, for the game with "30 levels, 40 player multiplayer, and massive draw distances" you've got Resistance.For a game with "4 gigabyte levels, 32x32 km maps, 25,000 soldiers, hundreds of dragons, fluid dynamics, and progressive mesh" you have Lair (though maybe not HUNDRES of dragons).
For a game with "no loading screens (NONE) because the data is constantly streaming from both HDD and the Blu Ray (DVD perhaps, in 360's case?) sources" you have Uncharted.
And for a game with "thousands of animations, deferred lighting and MSAA anti-aliasing" you have Killzone 2 (though the animations part i don't know about yet, but Uncharted has 3000 just for the main character).
All this has been confirmed by the devs of each game.
dude all that is cool and stuff but what if the game sucks.im not saying that it will but for real all that tech implemented to a thing that u thought it was gonna be something potential and end up sucking
[QUOTE="GarchomPro"]People who say blu-ray is not needed isnt preparing for the futur properly. Even now blu-ray is very usefull to developers. Theyve stated it
wavebrid
when you dont need something in the future :| why bother having it now
and guess what they HAVENT USE IT!
people who think you need blu-ray really needs to rethink
What the hell are you talking about, that makes no sense?
And they have already used more then DVD9 can handle with R:FOM, that game had like 19 gig on it's disk.
If everyone thought the way you think then we as a people would never advance.
And each of them will be playable before the end of the year. Point?Redfingers
My point is if the ps3 was capable of these things then why havn't we seen it in more cases? Why does it run multiplatform games worse then onthe big ol box? I'll be looking forward to the release of these games, if they live up to the hype ill gladly withdraw my comments... heck ill BUY a ps3
denial:roll: blu-ray is not needed
period
wavebrid
Two words, Lossless compression. Blu-Ray is not needed currently, sorry.
[QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="Sooshy"]That's great and all, but more doesn't equal better. Gears is generally regarded as being a better game than Resistance, despite Resistance being bigger.[QUOTE="Redfingers"]I have been called a "cow" before, and yet here I am refuting each and every imbecilic claim about how this shows that Blu Ray is necessary. I'm also providing appropriate arguments in favor of Blu Ray technology that are actually TRUE, like the 4 gigabyte, 32x32km, 25,000 soldier, hundreds of dragons figure for one single level in Lair.Sooshy
Technically, Resistance has more going on in a lot of situations, but Gears looks better most of the time. You could dumb down the graphics in Gears to that of Resistance--not that Resistance looks bad--and put more enemies on screen and have larger levels, but then it wouldn't be the same game. It might not have been as good.
Like I said--more doesn't equal better.
If you don't think that my opinions aren't justified in and of themselves, are you sure that you're not the fanboy? Because that could be the case. I made my own observations (which I believe I'm allowed to do) and came to the conclusion that not only is there more going on on screen at any given frame in Resistance, there is a better draw distance. It's also cute and fun to note that it has 30 levels as compared to Gears' 8 and 40 player online as compared to Gears' 4.
Now, I think it's also cute to note that none of these figures were noted in any review I've ever seen of the two, even Game Informer, which rated each of them at a 9.5 and thought they were great.
I don't even think that Gears of War is a good game. But that's just me. I don't think that Resistance is the greatest thing since sliced bread, mind you, but I believe that it is technically a hell of a lot more impressive.
And one thing that you need to know is that according to Brian Hastings of Insomniac (developers of Resistance: Fall of Man) the reason that Resistance does not look as good as Gears is because it does not have streaming textures. So there you go. With streaming textures, perhaps Resistance, in addition to everything else that I've noted above, would technically destroy Gears.
Gears took up the greater portion of the DVD-9. It almost filled it. With 8 levels, 4 player multiplayer, and relatively small map sizes (again, only relatively, they were pretty good size in my opinion). You could "dumb down" the graphics on Gears of War, but that does not mean that it is going to have 30 levels, 40 players online, and the sheer amount of physics and characters on screen as Resistance (try throwing a backfire grenade and using the alt-fire for the Hailstorm gun in a crowded room)....
To say that it would is sheer speculation. So let's leave it at that. Let's cut the speculation and say this: Gears may have better textures overall, maybe even better shading. It might be more fun, and all of that, I won't dog on the opinion of the industry, or my fellow forumite and gameplayer. However, I will say that Resistance has everything that I stated above not relegated to any of those things in spades over Gears of War, and that's why I say that it is technically more impressive.
Additionally, imagine, if you will, a Resistance Rise of Man, with the same ups as the former except with streaming textures. You do not need to go far for a better picture of this, simply look at Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction. Brilliant imagery. Gears is summarily stomped.
More doesn't equal better but it certainly prolongs the experience and provides a sense of wonder, in addition to simply being more technically demanding and impressive.
I also disagree that Gears looks better most of the time, due to the draw distances.
Two words, Lossless compression. Blu-Ray is not needed currently, sorry.
coolviper2003
Yet, on one hand, in Lair, we have 4 gigabyte compressed levels. On the other, we have Uncharted, with data streaming from the Blu Ray disc in order to eliminate load screens and give, quote "maximum efficient use of memory." According to Naughty Dog, the demo will not fit on a DVD.
[QUOTE="wavebrid"][QUOTE="GarchomPro"]People who say blu-ray is not needed isnt preparing for the futur properly. Even now blu-ray is very usefull to developers. Theyve stated it
marvelfan
when you dont need something in the future :| why bother having it now
and guess what they HAVENT USE IT!
people who think you need blu-ray really needs to rethink
What the hell are you talking about, that makes no sense?
And they have already used more then DVD9 can handle with R:FOM, that game had like 19 gig on it's disk.
If everyone thought the way you think then we as a people would never advance.
they already used :? alright yea ok thats there own fault and i doubt its true...
please stop making crap up
[QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="wavebrid"]:roll: blu-ray is not needed
period
wavebrid
Depends on what you're talking about, man. Like Naughty Dog said, they're using it, along with the HDD, to stream nearly everything. They said that the Uncharted DEMO would not fit on a single DVD. Isn't that convincing enough? Isn't it also convincing to know that a single level in Lair takes up 4 gigabytes?
Resistance has 30 levels, while Gears has 8. Do the math.
no since i can say pizza cant fit into a car either. Just beacuse they said it DOSENT MAKE IT TRUE.
did we need dvd, cd for games no we didnt. but we have them now dont we...
omg......you again lmao your so lame come up with some decent facts dude..... you always say the same thing or something similar to this i can say pizza cant fit into a car either. Just beacuse they said it DOSENT MAKE IT TRUE.[QUOTE="Armored_cell"][QUOTE="wavebrid"]denial:roll: blu-ray is not needed
period
wavebrid
like i need to go buy a 600 console to use half bak blu-ray disk no thanks ill stick to dvd games...
Yeah and my one dream is to go and buy a $400 console, only to discover that I need a rechargeable battery platform, and need to pay $50 a year to play my games online. On top of that, I'm doing it to play the same format that is currently available in my PC and PS2 (DVD-9). I think I'll cough up the $600 for the idea of more space and some intriguing new features.
[QUOTE="coolviper2003"]Two words, Lossless compression. Blu-Ray is not needed currently, sorry.
Redfingers
Yet, on one hand, in Lair, we have 4 gigabyte compressed levels. On the other, we have Uncharted, with data streaming from the Blu Ray disc in order to eliminate load screens and give, quote "maximum efficient use of memory." According to Naughty Dog, the demo will not fit on a DVD.
Yet it's amazing how almost , and I do mean almost every computer game still fits on a single DVD. Hmmmmm, makes you think.Just because a developer CAN choose to fill up a blu-ray disc does that mean he HAS to? No. Does filling it up, using all that space, create a better game in and of itself? No.
what makes a game good has very LITTLE to do with how much space it takes up on a disc; it has to do with design, the games logic, player interaction and dynamics.
How is having 20gb of textures going to make for a better game? In and of itself it does not because it has nothing to do with delivering a better gameplay experience to the player.
Blu Ray is NOT needed right now.
$600
[QUOTE="marvelfan"][QUOTE="wavebrid"][QUOTE="GarchomPro"]People who say blu-ray is not needed isnt preparing for the futur properly. Even now blu-ray is very usefull to developers. Theyve stated it
wavebrid
when you dont need something in the future :| why bother having it now
and guess what they HAVENT USE IT!
people who think you need blu-ray really needs to rethink
What the hell are you talking about, that makes no sense?
And they have already used more then DVD9 can handle with R:FOM, that game had like 19 gig on it's disk.
If everyone thought the way you think then we as a people would never advance.
they already used :? alright yea ok thats there own fault and i doubt its true...
please stop making crap up
First off, Dude resistance has 16 gb on the disk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistance:_Fall_of_Man#Storage and this is very early in PS3 life which means when they figure out ps3 artitechture they will be able to use blu-ray more wisely and devs will be able to make games that are pure amazement... http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-9584-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=28116&messageID=527543&start=-9971 anyways there are more facts i will post them up soon...[QUOTE="Redfingers"]And each of them will be playable before the end of the year. Point?qead
My point is if the ps3 was capable of these things then why havn't we seen it in more cases? Why does it run multiplatform games worse then onthe big ol box? I'll be looking forward to the release of these games, if they live up to the hype ill gladly withdraw my comments... heck ill BUY a ps3
Julian Eggebrecht from Factor Five said that the reason that multiplatform games run worse on the PS3 when ported from the XBox 360 is because the code is designed around specific features that the Xbox 360 has that the PS3 does not. Julian went on to say that he considers them both advantages and disadvantages. He says that when you try to port them directly over, you are in for a bad surprise. The features: unified memory, unified shaders, eDRAM.
The PS3 does not have these things, along with being completely different hardware in general, leading to difficulties. Basically, the code is unoptimized for the Playstation 3.
We've also discovered that the Playstation 3's Cell requires precise coding to take advantage of the entire mechanism. Basically, multi-plats would look fine on the PS3 if the PS3 was the leading platform and the code was designed around it. That's why Julian advises that all multiplats use PS3 as the leading platform (or, they could also develop individual versions coded around each console, such as Mercenaries 2 developers are doing).
These games do not have to live up to their hype for you to have to withdraw your comments. They simply have to exist as they are described by the developers. Seeing as they do, I kindly ask that you withdraw your comments. The game being "in development" or "possibly a flop" doesn't make any of the technological features that I or the developers themselves cited any less a part of the game unless they are expressly removed from the final version of the game (and even if they are, fully functional demos ran on PS3's that contained those features, making it a null point if the full copies have them or not).
Just because a developer CAN choose to fill up a blu-ray disc does that mean he HAS to? No. Does filling it up, using all that space, create a better game in and of itself? No.
what makes a game good has very LITTLE to do with how much space it takes up on a disc; it has to do with design, the games logic, player interaction and dynamics.
How is having 20gb of textures going to make for a better game? In and of itself it does not because it has nothing to do with delivering a better gameplay experience to the player.
Blu Ray is NOT needed right now.
$600
MaTT2011
The 20 gigabyte textures, called the Megatexture, which are applied to the entire terrain of the map, according to Wikipedia, are streamed as needed in segments from the hard disc, where they are stored. So, now the question no longer has to do with the Blu Ray disc, but the hard disc, which the 360 is also lacking (core XBox 360, no standard hard disc).
However, Carmack also stated that a game using this technology would come out for both PS3 and Xbox 360, leading me to assume that he's found some way around this. Are core gamers finally going to be excluded from Id's latest opus? We have no idea. 360 gamers will, however, partake in the game with the so-called megatexture.
Let's face it: loading 20 gb textures before every level would be pretty ridiculous anyway. Not only that, it'd only have a few levels tops even on a dual-layer Blu Ray disc, since there are different megatextures for each and every level.
However, I choose to rebut your claim that the Blu Ray disc's extra storage cannot provide an environment that can be used to create a better game. More content, more surface area, more of the good stuff. Assuming we're talking about a developer that can get it right in the first place, like Kojima for example, we're just getting more brilliance, more beauty, more fun. Sure, we can fill a Blu Ray disc with a 7 hour expose on Harry Truman's lost lover Harriet or Dr. Phil's entire lifetime of Oprah Winfrey appearances, and that certainly would be pretty crappy. However, nobody said we're doing anything of the sort.
More space: more goodness, assuming there's goodness in the first place.
[QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="qead"]I just don't get it... if oblivion can fit on ONE dvd disk then why do we need blu ray YET?Redfingers
Oblivion repeats a number of small, often low quality tilesets. It will in no way compare to the detail found in the megatexture applied to the games John Carmack is currently speaking of. Do not despair: this game will be available to your platforms as well, but rest assured that it will look INFINITELY BETTER than Oblivion.
I'll belive it when I see it. I'm a Sony fan but so far this gen has been all talk and no walk
EDIT (ma gramma sux)
He's John Carmack for Christ's sake. What is he, lying or something? Oblivion has already been destroyed by a number of titles, from Crysis to Haze to Heavenly Sword to Mass Effect. Stop dreaming. I swear, people in this foum and their Gears of War and flipping Oblivion. My brother says Oblivion is UGLY. He said, verbatim "it looks like butthole" when he saw it for the first time. It's not impressive. It won't require a big leap to surpass. There are already games out that stomp this game, and I gaurantee you, the mega-texture is a way to surpass the wimpy tiles and pea-soup distance textures of Oblivion.
As I said, show me something the ps3 can do graphically that the box360 can't. And no, I'm not talking about developerspeculation or tech demos
Instead of showing you something the 360 can't do, I'll simply ask you to show me examples of the 360 playing something the PS3 CAN do. Show me a game with 30 levels, 40 player multiplayer, and massive draw distances. Show me a game with 4 gigabyte levels, 32x32 km maps, 25,000 soldiers, hundreds of dragons, fluid dynamics, and progressive mesh. Show me a 360 game that has no loading screens (NONE) because the data is constantly streaming from both HDD and the Blu Ray (DVD perhaps, in 360's case?) sources. Show me a game with thousands of animations, deferred lighting and MSAA anti-aliasing. Please. Show me these games.
ouch! Hot! Hot! now THAT was a burn! 8)
Redfingers:
It's not that I don't think your opinion is justified, but like it or not, your individual opinion doesn't matter as much as EGM's, GameSpot's, and all the people that bought Gears and not Resistance. It sold better, and it was critically received as being a better made game.
I'm not going to argue with you about what you think is going to stomp Gears or whatever in the future, because it's pointless. You don't know what's going to be better anymore than I do.
My argument is that more doesn't equal better. Gears of War proved this last holiday season.
[QUOTE="wavebrid"][QUOTE="marvelfan"][QUOTE="wavebrid"][QUOTE="GarchomPro"]People who say blu-ray is not needed isnt preparing for the futur properly. Even now blu-ray is very usefull to developers. Theyve stated it
Blanco98
when you dont need something in the future :| why bother having it now
and guess what they HAVENT USE IT!
people who think you need blu-ray really needs to rethink
What the hell are you talking about, that makes no sense?
And they have already used more then DVD9 can handle with R:FOM, that game had like 19 gig on it's disk.
If everyone thought the way you think then we as a people would never advance.
they already used :? alright yea ok thats there own fault and i doubt its true...
please stop making crap up
First off, Dude resistance has 16 gb on the disk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistance:_Fall_of_Man#Storage and this is very early in PS3 life which means when they figure out ps3 artitechture they will be able to use blu-ray more wisely and devs will be able to make games that are pure amazement... http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-9584-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=28116&messageID=527543&start=-9971 anyways there are more facts i will post them up soon...LOL WIKIPEDIA!!!!!!
Redfingers:
It's not that I don't think your opinion is justified, but like it or not, your individual opinion doesn't matter as much as EGM's, GameSpot's, and all the people that bought Gears and not Resistance. It sold better, and it was critically received as being a better made game.
I'm not going to argue with you about what you think is going to stomp Gears or whatever in the future, because it's pointless. You don't know what's going to be better anymore than I do.
My argument is that more doesn't equal better. Gears of War proved this last holiday season.
Sooshy
Resistance has sold over 1 mil., Gears, over 3 mil. There are 3x the number of 360's in people's homes as there are ps3s, so Gears sold 3x as much as Resistance. Shocker!
[QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="wavebrid"]:roll: blu-ray is not needed
period
wavebrid
Depends on what you're talking about, man. Like Naughty Dog said, they're using it, along with the HDD, to stream nearly everything. They said that the Uncharted DEMO would not fit on a single DVD. Isn't that convincing enough? Isn't it also convincing to know that a single level in Lair takes up 4 gigabytes?
Resistance has 30 levels, while Gears has 8. Do the math.
no since i can say pizza cant fit into a car either. Just beacuse they said it DOSENT MAKE IT TRUE.
did we need dvd, cd for games no we didnt. but we have them now dont we...
[QUOTE="wavebrid"]:roll: blu-ray is not needed
period
Redfingers
Depends on what you're talking about, man. Like Naughty Dog said, they're using it, along with the HDD, to stream nearly everything. They said that the Uncharted DEMO would not fit on a single DVD. Isn't that convincing enough? Isn't it also convincing to know that a single level in Lair takes up 4 gigabytes?
Resistance has 30 levels, while Gears has 8. Do the math.
resistance got a 8.6 and gears got 9.6 do the math. also you failed to mention that lair and uncharted are only 12 hrs long bu bu blueray. what about motorstorm 8 courses and 2 modes bu bu blueray fanboys never cease to amaze me
I just don't get it... if oblivion can fit on ONE dvd disk then why do we need blu ray YET?qead
oblivion reuses many of its textures, if u want many different looking areas (like resistance ps3) u need more space
Redfingers:
It's not that I don't think your opinion is justified, but like it or not, your individual opinion doesn't matter as much as EGM's, GameSpot's, and all the people that bought Gears and not Resistance. It sold better, and it was critically received as being a better made game.
I'm not going to argue with you about what you think is going to stomp Gears or whatever in the future, because it's pointless. You don't know what's going to be better anymore than I do.
My argument is that more doesn't equal better. Gears of War proved this last holiday season.
Sooshy
But does the fact that it was received as being a better game somehow make the claim "less equals more" justified? Does that support that claim at all? I don't see the correlation at all.
I often see complaints that Gears of War was too short, often from people who own the game and played it on their Xbox 360s. Would you then argue with me that the shortness of the game is a weak point, or would you continue to say that it is a strong point? I think that instead of the shortness of the game and its other inadequacies (which I've pointed out, and which are true, whether a publication chooses to expound upon it or not) supporting your premise, they in fact refute it.
I'm not saying that it is a bad game (even though I do, in fact, think that it is a not very good game...I understand this is contrary to general opinion and am willing to concede this point), but I do believe that it has a number of shortcomings, one of which being shortness, lack of content, and a relatively restrained number of particle effects, character models onscreen, and individual physics and AI calculations, along with somewhat limited draw distances. If these issues could be resolved, I do believe that would be the ultimate game. I do believe that that would supercede Gears in the memory of those who play games forever, in review scores, general reception, and sales (assuming a large installed base, good marketing, etcetera).
[QUOTE="Sooshy"]Redfingers:
It's not that I don't think your opinion is justified, but like it or not, your individual opinion doesn't matter as much as EGM's, GameSpot's, and all the people that bought Gears and not Resistance. It sold better, and it was critically received as being a better made game.
I'm not going to argue with you about what you think is going to stomp Gears or whatever in the future, because it's pointless. You don't know what's going to be better anymore than I do.
My argument is that more doesn't equal better. Gears of War proved this last holiday season.
makingmusic476
Resistance has sold over 1 mil., Gears, over 3 mil. There are 3x the number of 360's in people's homes as there are ps3s, so Gears sold 3x as much as Resistance. Shocker!
So you think Resistance would have sold as much as Gears if PS3 had the same installed base as 360?[QUOTE="MaTT2011"]Just because a developer CAN choose to fill up a blu-ray disc does that mean he HAS to? No. Does filling it up, using all that space, create a better game in and of itself? No.
what makes a game good has very LITTLE to do with how much space it takes up on a disc; it has to do with design, the games logic, player interaction and dynamics.
How is having 20gb of textures going to make for a better game? In and of itself it does not because it has nothing to do with delivering a better gameplay experience to the player.
Blu Ray is NOT needed right now.
$600
Redfingers
The 20 gigabyte textures, called the Megatexture, which are applied to the entire terrain of the map, according to Wikipedia, are streamed as needed in segments from the hard disc, where they are stored. So, now the question no longer has to do with the Blu Ray disc, but the hard disc, which the 360 is also lacking (core XBox 360, no standard hard disc).
However, Carmack also stated that a game using this technology would come out for both PS3 and Xbox 360, leading me to assume that he's found some way around this. Are core gamers finally going to be excluded from Id's latest opus? We have no idea. 360 gamers will, however, partake in the game with the so-called megatexture.
Let's face it: loading 20 gb textures before every level would be pretty ridiculous anyway. Not only that, it'd only have a few levels tops even on a dual-layer Blu Ray disc, since there are different megatextures for each and every level.
However, I choose to rebut your claim that the Blu Ray disc's extra storage cannot provide an environment that can be used to create a better game. More content, more surface area, more of the good stuff. Assuming we're talking about a developer that can get it right in the first place, like Kojima for example, we're just getting more brilliance, more beauty, more fun. Sure, we can fill a Blu Ray disc with a 7 hour expose on Harry Truman's lost lover Harriet or Dr. Phil's entire lifetime of Oprah Winfrey appearances, and that certainly would be pretty crappy. However, nobody said we're doing anything of the sort.
More space: more goodness, assuming there's goodness in the first place.
But what your considering to be "goodness" seems to have more to do with graphics and less with gaming. More content, like levels, maps etc...., are GREAT and appreciated but there can be a TON of content without ever needing to use blu ray; but because of this current, and quickly dissapearing, unreasonable focus on graphics we constantly need more and more space to accomadate what we THINK is good visuals when in reality GREAT grapihcs can be achieved with a DVD. Better graphics dont garuntee a better gaming experience; they just garuntee that the gaming experience (good or bad) is going to be very purty to look on when you eventually pause the game to actually notice those graphics.
The "Goodness" , i would argue, comes from the gameplay.....and gameplay doesnt take up much space let alone enough to require a blu ray drive. Since gameplay is the interaction between the player and the environment provided by the developer what deterimines its quality is the concept, design and implementation of those in game dynamics and how the player accesses it (controls).
When it comes to providing GREAT gameplay experiences, content (levels, means of implementing and interacting with the gameplay dynamics and not just simply the virtual SPACE the game provides you), and interaction the Blu-Ray technology, at this point in time, is simply not NEEDED to provide those things.........the only thing having a blu-ray player does is INCREASE THE PRICE of the gaming machine its installed into.
If the PS3 didnt have that drive i think it wouldnt be in the terrible position it is now because of its RIDICULOUS price tag. Gamers know that more space does not equal better games.......it just garuntees that more stuff can be crammed into the disc.
But more specifically about the streaming content thing; the blu ray player in the ps3 is actually SLOWER when it comes to attaining information from the disc than a standard dvd player. So how is it supposed to effectively stream such high res textures fast enough so that the player wouldnt see the actual textures loading? Perhaps if sony waited to implement blu ray in the NEXT gen, not this one, its read speed would be better and might preemptively avoid this question. Now, of course, it could be that its just fast enough to do what Carmack is describing...i dont know. But the point is that the technology could have been better implemented (mainly because in the future there would actually be a NEED to have it as opposed to now) if it were introduced at a time where it would actually be both neccessary and cheap enough to implement such that the gamer wouldnt have to pay an extra $200-$300 for it.
There are also examples, on the Playstation 3, of games that both contain the strengths of Gears of War technically and resolve its weaknesses. With the same amount of fun and good execution along with a little polish, wouldn't you say that this is a worthy successor to Gears of War? I would, I absolutely would.
Again, that does not mean that Gears of War was a bad game, or anything like that. It simply means that it is not God's Gift to Man as you seem to think. Review scores don't make games bulletproof.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment