It is no secret that Sony has used the Cell processor as a marketing tool. It is also no secret that the game development community has spoken negatively about the Cell. If the Cell is garbage for gaming applications, what is it good at? Also, why did Toshiba partner with Sony and IBM to engineer the Cell?

http://www.hpcwire.com/hpc/1379479.html

That's right, video imaging. For oh say, the blu-ray player in the PS3. Anyone starting to catch on? The Cell is not the answer for great gaming, it's a cost effective way for Sony to trojan horse blu-ray with the PS3.

http://www.videsignline.com/encyclopedia/defineterm.jhtml?term=Cellchip

You see there is a reason game developers are having trouble with the Cell. It's because to develope a game they have to do double the work just to make a game mediocre to acceptable. Why? Because the Cell wasn't built with gaming as the reason for it's existence. There is no hidden "powah", there is only longer dev time working with something that wasn't built for game development in the first place.

http://www.advancedimagingpro.com/print/Advanced-Imaging-Magazine/The-IBM-Cell-Processor/1$2630

The Cell processor should no longer be a bragging point for Sony loyalists.

bluebrad1974

Oh noes! I've been trojan-horsed by a blu-ray player that also plays very good games for 3/4 of the price of a standalone blu-ray player!

Talk about a rip-off!

Good job at almost making a damn good deal sound like a bad thing.

And there is hidden power. Have you seen last E3? Sony told us to wait in 2006. Now, just when every lemming was going ''Lol, why wait?'', Sony comes around and delivers. KZ2's graphics, physics and animation pwns even Halo 3. GT5 is almost photorealistic. And it's only the beginning.

None of the Above. I'd chose Duke Nukem...food4me

He'd take forever to get there...

im almost postitive Gears of War will come to the pc ( betting)

Polaris_choice

It's been announced at the MS press conference....

Where's the Official Lair Hype thread?

It's written in the title: (Currently: AA) or something.

And even if that nowhere magazine gave lair 3,75, another gave it 9/10.

And even with that, nobody cares, only GS scores count here. I'm pretty sure this was written somewhere in a sticky.

[QUOTE="Unforgiven2870"][QUOTE="fran_906"]

I have a Xbox 360 and a Pc with Core 2 duo, 2 GB ram, 160 GB hard drive and a Geforce 7300 GT and i thinking to buy a XFX GeForce 8800 Ultra for Crysis(and for another games)or Playstation 3 for Metal Gear 4 (and for another games). What do you think? Sorry for my inglish because i'm from Argentina.

trix5817

:lol: How would a bigger HDD improve his game performance?

His PC is more than fine.

I agree that anywhere around 100 gb is okay. However, a Bigger HDD means more data per square inch which means more bandwidth at the same speed, like CD vs DVD Vs Blu-ray. A CD at 2x sucks, a Blu-ray spinning at 2x pwns.

The main concern is drive speed though, get a high RPM hdd. Sata II, obviously. Partition it and install windoze on one partition.

500 gb is cool though, most games coming out take like 5 gb. If you're into evil internet pirating 100 gb is over very soon.

Since we have a new crop of fanboys once again claiming the 360is holding back GTA4, let's forget the fact the 360 currently has 2 sandbox games available for it right now that all fit on 1 DVD and look at some other facts.

Let's start by listing the contents of a game disc. We put it in order on how much space they take up from most to least:

1) FMV (Full Motion Video aka CG cut scenes - especially the HD ones)
2) Audio (Background music, spoken dialogue, sound effects)
3) Textures/Shaders (especially high resolution)
4) Geometry (the polygons you see on screen)
5) Game code (programming stuff)

With that done, anybody the knows anything about any GTA made beginning with GTA3 knows no FMV has ever been used in them. Cutscenes are made using the game engine. So that eliminates the biggest space hog on a game disc right there. So let's start with:

2) Audio - As we know every GTA games is filled to the brim with licensed music. Between that, the spoken dialogue and sound effect, audio files take up at lest 70% of a GTA game disc.

But guess what? Audio can be done in compressed formats and still keep its quality.

I introduce to you the OGG VORBIS format:

"In the commercial sector, Vorbis support is on the rise. Many mainstream video game titles such as Unreal Tournament and Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas store in-game audio as Vorbis. Popular software players support Ogg Vorbis playback either natively or through an external plugin."

What that statement doesn't mention is that ogg was used in the Xbox and PC versions of GTA: SA and not the PS2 version. Which is why the PS2 version took up a whole DVD while the Xbox/PC versions took up less than half of one.

Now that we've taken care of Audio, let's discuss #3 and #4, Textures and Geometry.

We'll start with Geometry first since it's the easiest:

4) Geometry - Anybody that has played a 3D GTA knows that it has never been a high polygon game. The main characters at best 3500 polygons, while the "people on the streets" were around 1500. Building and structures were simple boxes made to look more detailed by clever texturing.

"But but GTA4 will have a world far bigger than San Andreas"

This pic is from a 3ds max scene. This is 400 boxes with each box consisting of 20,000 polygons each. Altogether, this scene consists of 8,000,000 polygons. The world of San Andreas consisted of half this polycount.

And how much space does this file take up you ask? ****drum roll****

A whopping 172 mb!

In other words, a GTA five times the size of San Andreas will need a heaping 253 mb worth of extra geometry.

Yellow_Rose

Lol... 8 000 000 polys is extremely small for a complete next-gen game world. You said it: San Andreas. Some houses had about 50 polys. Both the PS3 and 360 are supposed to be able to render about 500 000 polys in a FRAME.

I believe it's not the storage space that will hold GTA back, it's the lack of a Cell Processor. The Cell pwns the 360 at parallel processing, ai and physics, which sucks since the game will most likely use the same physics engine on both.

no...it isnt good for crysis..in fact all the current dx10 cards are terrible at running DX10 games..i would wait until the next set comes out....you should check out some of the current dx10 roundups that show the performance of even the top of the line cards ..honestly its quite terrible..schu

Err... no.

What do you thin kthey demo Crysis on right now? An unreleased card? The devs have stated that an 8800 maxes it out, res and all.

A 8600 should almost max it out. Maybe tone down the AA and AF to 4x-6x instead of 16x :P

Pics or it didn't happen.

I don't think an official Xbox Mag would be newb enough to say lies (except on game reviews), but this is not a mag saying something here, it's a random dude on an internet forum.

As head of Nintendo, I decree that:

-There shall be a Star Wars game with space, ground and Lightsaber combat with support for the Wii Fit pad (Lean to move your character instead of using the nunchuck)

-There shall be a good, non cartoony FPS.

-There shall be a good RTS on the Wii, original or a port (SC 2 :P)

-The R&D department shall start working on the Wii 2, which will have photorealistic graphics(like the PS4 and Xbox 1080) and which will include an upgraded Wii Fit pad, an upgraded Wiimote and nunchuck and an Eyetoy-type camera standard in the box. That will ensure that the full Wii experience to everybody. By 2011, Devs will probably have figured out how to make good, non port-with-gimmicky-wii-controls games.

I'll be getting it not at all. I hate flight sims, all of them.

Following another human controlled airplane is just damn boring cause he's also doing his best to get behind you and everybody ends up going in circles for hours.

FPS for the win. Shoot, die, respawn.