[QUOTE="jvonrader"][QUOTE="2beers_in_hand"][QUOTE="jvonrader"]

The difference in regards to 100 characters onscreen is that the enemy AI in Gears is so much better than that of Heavenly Sword. (In fact, just about everything in Gears was better than Heavenly Sword, but that's another discussion).

It's about context. Dynasty Warriors throws dozens and dozens of enemies onscreen at once, but they're dumb as dirt, so who cares? "Enemies onscreen" is not a known quantity. Which is to say that not all enemies are created equal, thus it's about more than just who has more enemies onscreen.

In fact, in the larger sequences in Heavenly Sword, it really worked a lot like the Dynasty Warriors games...the few enemies close to you would attack, and those farther away would just sort of "wait their turn."

In the original Gears, each battle was smaller - your squad against 4 or 5 Locust at any given moment aside from a few sequences, namely the end of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th acts. For people who've played that game to then imagine the dynamics of having exponentially more Locust onscreen at any given time... it's basically Epic upgrading the system and letting gamers know they can do so much more and provide hundreds of intelligent enemies onscreen at once.

Is it likely gamers will actually face 100 Locust at once in Gears 2? No. But the battles are promised to be of a larger scale.

And this principle holds true for all other games using UE3. The engine's been upgraded to allow for more power for their games as well, not just Gears.

2beers_in_hand

I've got the feeling that you didn't actually read what I wrote.

If you did, you'd have seen me make the point that gamers aren't going to actually face off against 100 Locust at a single time. It's a tech demo to show what the engine CAN do.

And frankly, yes. You saw it on the screen for yourself. 100 independent enemies onscreen at once. Do you really think Epic would upgrade the Unreal Engine to a point that wouldn't be possible on a 360?

Apparently, you didn't read that first comment - because, for a second time, you've tried to make a point I already addressed. "Sony's edge tool kit did it last year" - you don't get it.

Enemies are not a known quantity. Because a Gears of War enemy, for example, requires far more processing power than one used in a Dynasty Warriors game.

The reason for what I said above about HS - in which characters farther back would just "sit there" is precisely that - they could BE THERE, but they couldn't think for themselves. This is why it's such crap for developers to make blanket statements about X number of enemies onscreen at once.

Again, the point of this demo was to show that they have upgraded the system. The 100 Locusts on-screen is something they can do now using UE3.5 that they couldn't do on UE3. Gamers aren't going to face a 100 at once, but they should be privvy to larger battles than in the last game.

[QUOTE="dragon_master11"][QUOTE="Taalon"][QUOTE="dragon_master11"][QUOTE="Taalon"][QUOTE="dragon_master11"]

[QUOTE="Taalon"]What's the big deal about "chainsaw battles"? WOW YOU CAN PRESS A BUTTON RAPIDLY TO KILL THE ENEMY!Taalon

You obviously have not seen it. Go back to hyping killzone 2.

Whatever you say fanboy.

Your both fanboys. Go marry each other and have a night of passionate sex.

You came to the wrooooong place, pal.

[QUOTE="jvonrader"]

The difference in regards to 100 characters onscreen is that the enemy AI in Gears is so much better than that of Heavenly Sword. (In fact, just about everything in Gears was better than Heavenly Sword, but that's another discussion).

It's about context. Dynasty Warriors throws dozens and dozens of enemies onscreen at once, but they're dumb as dirt, so who cares? "Enemies onscreen" is not a known quantity. Which is to say that not all enemies are created equal, thus it's about more than just who has more enemies onscreen.

In fact, in the larger sequences in Heavenly Sword, it really worked a lot like the Dynasty Warriors games...the few enemies close to you would attack, and those farther away would just sort of "wait their turn."

In the original Gears, each battle was smaller - your squad against 4 or 5 Locust at any given moment aside from a few sequences, namely the end of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th acts. For people who've played that game to then imagine the dynamics of having exponentially more Locust onscreen at any given time... it's basically Epic upgrading the system and letting gamers know they can do so much more and provide hundreds of intelligent enemies onscreen at once.

Is it likely gamers will actually face 100 Locust at once in Gears 2? No. But the battles are promised to be of a larger scale.

And this principle holds true for all other games using UE3. The engine's been upgraded to allow for more power for their games as well, not just Gears.

2beers_in_hand

I've got the feeling that you didn't actually read what I wrote.

If you did, you'd have seen me make the point that gamers aren't going to actually face off against 100 Locust at a single time. It's a tech demo to show what the engine CAN do.

And frankly, yes. You saw it on the screen for yourself. 100 independent enemies onscreen at once. Do you really think Epic would upgrade the Unreal Engine to a point that wouldn't be possible on a 360?

It's got a shot at the award, I think.

I love the Sony fanboy that said "joke thread?" Apparently, he missed when the original took GOTY here in '06.

Between this and Fallout 3, it's gonna be tough. I'd even go out on a limb and say that Gearbox's Borderlands might be on this year's shortlist.

The difference in regards to 100 characters onscreen is that the enemy AI in Gears is so much better than that of Heavenly Sword. (In fact, just about everything in Gears was better than Heavenly Sword, but that's another discussion).

It's about context. Dynasty Warriors throws dozens and dozens of enemies onscreen at once, but they're dumb as dirt, so who cares? "Enemies onscreen" is not a known quantity. Which is to say that not all enemies are created equal, thus it's about more than just who has more enemies onscreen.

In fact, in the larger sequences in Heavenly Sword, it really worked a lot like the Dynasty Warriors games...the few enemies close to you would attack, and those farther away would just sort of "wait their turn."

In the original Gears, each battle was smaller - your squad against 4 or 5 Locust at any given moment aside from a few sequences, namely the end of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th acts. For people who've played that game to then imagine the dynamics of having exponentially more Locust onscreen at any given time... it's basically Epic upgrading the system and letting gamers know they can do so much more and provide hundreds of intelligent enemies onscreen at once.

Is it likely gamers will actually face 100 Locust at once in Gears 2? No. But the battles are promised to be of a larger scale.

And this principle holds true for all other games using UE3. The engine's been upgraded to allow for more power for their games as well, not just Gears.

I'm sorry, there's a very, very big difference between hyping Fable 2 and hyping Killzone 2.

See, Fable was a good game.

Killzone was an abysmal mess.

This post was edited to avoid fascist moderation. :lol:

The only game that's really made me frustrated enough to make a note of this generation was DoA4.

Except for this one CoD4 match a few weeks ago...f***ing spawn-sniping SOB. 8)