Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11
    Jyuu's Avatar
    Jyuu is offline Super Moderator Community Builder
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    6,689

    Default

    You've been saying that gameplay is being neglected.
    Show me.

    PS2 games, right?
    Well Black certainly is fun. Guitar Hero is unbelievable, God of War is great, Resident Evil 4 is awesome, Okami looks great and MGS 3 is really good.

    PSP?
    Syphon Filter, Lumines, Loco Roco, Tekken, Hot Shots Golf, etc <-- All have great gameplay.

    Xbox 360:
    Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, Table Tennis (unbelievable graphics AND awesome realistic and FUN gameplay), Gears of War, Oblivion, PGR3, etc



    All these games have great gameplay.
    I REALLY can't see why you say that gameplay is being neglected in favour of graphics.

  2. #12
    Elcura is offline Senior Member Always Around
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,404

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jyuu
    You've been saying that gameplay is being neglected.
    Show me.

    PS2 games, right?
    Well Black certainly is fun. Guitar Hero is unbelievable, God of War is great, Resident Evil 4 is awesome, Okami looks great and MGS 3 is really good.

    PSP?
    Syphon Filter, Lumines, Loco Roco, Tekken, Hot Shots Golf, etc <-- All have great gameplay.

    Xbox 360:
    Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, Table Tennis (unbelievable graphics AND awesome realistic and FUN gameplay), Gears of War, Oblivion, PGR3, etc



    All these games have great gameplay.
    I REALLY can't see why you say that gameplay is being neglected in favour of graphics.
    PS2: Black is good? Nope, what a yawn of a game, good to look at but not interesting at all... MGS3 - Graphics haven't changed since 2, but the story and characters are different, making it fun and involving. Gameplay is great with minor tweaks and changes to keep it interesting. The rest I'll give you as they are great games with interesting gameplay and lots of care taken to make it enjoyable (which include story).

    The bad (general): Any game modelled from a movie, there are plenty of bad games to choose from. Yet all of these have good graphics.

    PS2: Kao the Kangaroo Round 2, The Hustle: Detroit Streets, Winback 2: Project Poseidon, Arc the Lad: End of Darkness, Armoured Core games after AC2, Astro Boy, Alter Echo, Castlevania: Curse of Darkness, ChoroQ, Colosseum: Road to Freedom, Crash Bandicoot games, Crazy Taxi, Dead to Rights, Death by Degrees, Devil May Cry 2, Destroy All Humans!, Dragon Ball Z games (bar Budokai 3). Driven, Driver 3, Dynasty Warrior games after 3, EA Sports games, GoDai, GTA games after 3, Grandia, Any and all wrestling games, NFL NHL NCAA NBA games, Power Ranger and Powerpuff games, Dukes of Hazard, The Getaway, The Godfather, The Matrix (oops, those 2 belong in the catagory above), Time Crises, Tom and Jerry, Tribes, Trigger Man, Transformers, True Crime, Turok, Van Helsing, V-Rally, Yu Yu hakusho, Yu-Gi-Oh.

    God let it stop! Thats not even half the games I could've listed, I could list more if I wanted too, I even left out MOST movie turn games (there's a lot). Most shooting games are just graphical rehashes of the last game that was out, only difference is how good they can get the game to look. Apparently FPS are just about graphics, who cares about story anyway? .hack series - don't get me started.

    I would even go so far as to say KH2. Why? Graphics are great, the controls work and it's fast and furious - BUT, what's lacking? A coherant story that makes sense, too many plotholes and gray areas, dialogue is weak and uninteresting, cliche's all over (group laughs and saying shit at the same time), exploration is missing, levels are bland and for the most part boring and flat, way too easy and gameplay broken up by a ton of cutscenes (fight > CS > fight > CS > CS > fight > CS > boss). Not exactly gameplay being put backburner but I would say a lot else was neglected. KH1 was so good in comparison), but in anycase, I still enjoyed KH2.

    That's JUST for PS2, don't GET me started on PSP, Xbob and GC, cause I garuntee there are alot. Pretty much ALL of those games look good for their time. But where's the gameplay and good control schemes (ok, AC2 had a terrible control scheme, but was still pretty good).

    Ok, PSP (I won't list) but there are games for PSP now? That aren't just ports of older games that were good? About time? Good games you say, yes there WERE, but it's been done. The biggest dissapointment about the PSP is the lack of original games, the most fun games I've played on PSP I would've loved to play on PS2 or PC, or would've played the same. Lack of originality = fail. You happen to list 3/4 games that are PS2 ports as well.

    I'm still not convinced that gameplay isn't being neglected, the amount of games that come out is much higher then the amount of games that come out and are worth buying and playing.

    Don't get me wrong, I don't hate games, I hate bad, boring games.

  3. #13
    Rocklee87 is offline Senior Member Long Time Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    853

    Default

    honestly really i mean REALLY bad gameplay and bad graphics go together most of the time and if people spend alot of money and time on the graphics, i think that gameplay will be pretty important to them aswell

    they may not innovate with new gameplay mechanics, but whatever they set out to do will probably be done nicely

  4. #14
    Elcura is offline Senior Member Always Around
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,404

    Default

    Yes, bad graphics and gameplay often go hand in hand, yet good graphics and bad gameplay do just as much as well, maybe even less now because it isn't hard to bring the PS2 to it's graphical limit anymore, most big time companies do it easily and still bring out bad games.

  5. #15
    nedeti is offline Member Frequent Poster
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    66

    Default

    keep an eye on upcoming Nvidia cards
    The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world.

  6. #16
    AKofC is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,680

    Default

    Well, I'm not building my vista rig up until a year or so after its release. Should be enough time for certain issues to get worked out.

  7. #17
    Jyuu's Avatar
    Jyuu is offline Super Moderator Community Builder
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    6,689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nedeti
    keep an eye on upcoming Nvidia cards
    The G80 will most likely fail when compared to the R600. Why? The R600 uses a unified shader architecture and the G80 doesn't.

  8. #18
    Cold-NiTe's Avatar
    Cold-NiTe is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Dallas, Tx, US
    Posts
    3,872

    Default

    I better start saving up money to buy last year's "new technology" when this stuff becomes an option economically speaking.

    Or I could just buy my brother's computer for $500 and let him stay current.

    But it'll be nice to see some of this in action on his when he decides to upgrade.
    Dear cousin choppitychop89, you were a good relative, though I hardly knew ye.

  9. #19
    OrangePulp is offline Senior Member Frequent Poster
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jyuu
    The Ageia PhysX Physics Processing Unit is, at the moment, a real waste of money.
    Why? It's $299 and works only in a handful of games (Callfactor, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, City of Villains, some tech demos and several Unreal 3-powered games like Unreal Tournament 2007). The problem is that the PPU can only be used if the physics engine in the game is the Novodex Physics Engine developed by Ageia. Moreover, the way the developers are implementing its use is ridiculously retarded: The addition of physics effects, not actual physics calculations of existing in-game bodies. In English, this means that the PPU is used to enhance the visual quality of explosions, collisions, particles and fluids. One example is that instead of having 100 particles flying around during an explosion, the PPU will calculate the physics of 500 particles and show them on the screen. The HUGE disadvantage of this is that to render all these extra objects, the graphics processing unit, commonly known as "video card" is given extra work and thus the game will run more slowly.
    There are, in my opinion, far better ways of calculating physics and this is done through the central processing unit itself. The Havok Physics Engine (Half Life 2, The Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion, Halo 2, Max Payne, etc) does this wonderfully well and Havok are working in collaboration with ATI and NVIDIA to offload the physics calculations to a graphics processing unit with shader model 3.0 capabilities or simply to a second video card. Another solution, the best one in my opinion, is to make use of Hyperthreading technology and the secondary core(s) of the central processing unit itself.
    If ever you look at Cellfactor, you WILL be amazed at how complex the physics engine is, but it really is nothing that a modern day central processing unit cannot achieve easily. Proof? I made a video a long time ago of Cellfactor running without a PhysX card and here's how it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3CiwhbLc_Y
    It looks weird since I was playing it through the level editor, but there are no slowdowns at all from the explosions and every supposedly intensive physics calculations.
    My computer at that time was:
    Pentium D 940 at 4.0GHz
    2GB DDR2-667 RAM
    Two Geforce 7800GTX 512MB in SLI

    Physics processors will certainly not revolutionize gaming until better implementations are done.
    I find it amusing you talk about how the PhysX card is a waste of money (it is) in the same post that you outline your rig, and say "at the time", which to me implies you now have something even more expensive.

    I've always thought using a physics card just to do graphical physics is completly retarded, but using it to accomplish cool gameplay physics (at a much more reasonable cost) I think would be very cool. When I think about gameplay physics, I think of a game sometime in the future that has such a good physics engine, you won't need to program anything in to fire a gun. Just put in all the specs of the gun into the engine, and just tell it that a mouse click means depressing the trigger. It would handle all the rest.
    I told him once or twice; to stop playin' cards, and shootin' dice.... he's in the jailhouse now

  10. #20
    Jyuu's Avatar
    Jyuu is offline Super Moderator Community Builder
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    6,689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangePulp
    I find it amusing you talk about how the PhysX card is a waste of money (it is) in the same post that you outline your rig, and say "at the time", which to me implies you now have something even more expensive.
    XD

    Well I just got this new job at a computer shop and uhh I get awesome prices.

    I can buy a PPU now for only $240 instead of the RRP of $300 >.>
    But I still won't get one.
    I'm looking at the Canon 1Ds Mark II.

 

 
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
vBulletin Skin by: ForumThemes.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79