Microsoft fires the first shot in the "NEXT" generation.... - Page 102 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #3031 of 7006 Old 05-12-2012, 08:32 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,661
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 345 Post(s)
Liked: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1 View Post

It's going to be impossible for MS or Sony to change their minds and get a new console out this Xmas. That simply is not happening. Regardless of whether they would have liked to have done it or not. The only way one of the consoles come out this year, is if it was secretly planned all along, and was the best kept secret this industry has ever seen in it's history. Knowing MS and Sony, and how they keep secrets, that's about as likely as me winning a 500 million powerball, so I really wouldn't bank on it.

Having said all of that... if the horrible sales at retail continues (42 percent drop year over year in April), then I can guarantee that both Sony and Microsoft will start to fast track their systems for a Spring 2013 launch if it's at all possible..

Agreed. Spring 2013 is definitely a fast track, but I just don't see how we make it past 2013 without at least one new entry.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #3032 of 7006 Old 05-12-2012, 08:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mboojigga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Little Rock AFB, Arkansas
Posts: 7,997
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post


When you consider that the Wii is basically an overclocked Gamecube, it isn't that surprising that they didn't do more.

Exactly why it was possible to do that. It wasn't expensive to provide that option. Trying to convince people to decide on the type of versions Anthony described would have been a bonehead move.

The 5.0 is here
mboojigga is offline  
post #3033 of 7006 Old 05-12-2012, 09:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PENDRAG0ON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,477
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga View Post


Exactly why it was possible to do that. It wasn't expensive to provide that option. Trying to convince people to decide on the type of versions Anthony described would have been a bonehead move.

Just make it scale to the new hardware. In a 360 it runs at 720p 30fps, in the nextbox it runs at 1080p 60fps. Same disc it just scales to the hardware.

PSN - Pendragoongp
NNID - Pendragoon
Include your AVS username in the friend request.
PENDRAG0ON is offline  
post #3034 of 7006 Old 05-12-2012, 09:45 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,661
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 345 Post(s)
Liked: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post


Just make it scale to the new hardware. In a 360 it runs at 720p 30fps, in the nextbox it runs at 1080p 60fps. Same disc it just scales to the hardware.

I doubt it'll be the same disc, but we're gonna see a lot of that when it eventually comes. The one thing they have to nail is keeping the initial run of games cross compatible multiplayer.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #3035 of 7006 Old 05-12-2012, 10:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
onlysublime's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Orange County
Posts: 4,797
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

I doubt it'll be the same disc, but we're gonna see a lot of that when it eventually comes. The one thing they have to nail is keeping the initial run of games cross compatible multiplayer.


gameplay @ 3:20

different console games on the same disc. We had that with the Burger King games! Had both Xbox1 and Xbox360 titles on the same disc and autodetected which console the disc was in. And the titles were distinctly different (it's not just the Xbox1 version being emulated on the 360).

That was a unique situation. They'd never do that with the 360/Next Xbox.

If they did have crossplatform multiplayer, that would cement the Xbox ecosystem. That's far preferable than backward compatibility.
onlysublime is online now  
post #3036 of 7006 Old 05-12-2012, 12:03 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,661
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 345 Post(s)
Liked: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlysublime View Post



gameplay @ 3:20

different console games on the same disc. We had that with the Burger King games! Had both Xbox1 and Xbox360 titles on the same disc and autodetected which console the disc was in. And the titles were distinctly different (it's not just the Xbox1 version being emulated on the 360).

That was a unique situation. They'd never do that with the 360/Next Xbox.

If they did have crossplatform multiplayer, that would cement the Xbox ecosystem. That's far preferable than backward compatibility.

Ya, I'm sure they can do it, but they def want to incentivize you to buy into the nextbox, not buy nextbox capable titles and have you buy the system later.

When the nextbox comes out next year, and I have to choose between playing next gen COD by myself, or last gen COD with friends, it's a much tougher sell. Bring it all together and I'm in all the way. I think BC is still important, and it's hardly an either/or, but cross platform is a HUGE deal. I have a good feeling they'll get it right, they know what's at stake.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #3037 of 7006 Old 05-12-2012, 01:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
number1laing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,993
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

It very well could. Maybe not 20 years, but if they make the right leaps to next gen it could work. But with how Activision treats the IP there's a good likelihood of burnout.

A lot of time when a game jumps a generation they lose their feel, which is the #1 thing that will turn people off. Often because they jump to new engines, that while reaching the same ends, do things differently code wise and you can feel it.

Anyways, it's not a creed against COD. Just proving the point that there's plenty of money to be made if a developer can tap into the pulse of what the consumer wants, and keep them happy. COD never relied on next gen power, unless you think 60fps @ 600P is what people really thought "next gen" was going to give them. COD engine, as far as I know, IDtech3 with years of revisions. That's the same base engine that ran Q3A years ago. And it works, cause people overlook the tech, and even praise it, because of the whole package.

1024x600 is nothing special, but 60fps is. And you know what? This game has 16 player multi, full stat tracking, voice, party system, easy to find games, lots of modes, etc.

Was some of that stuff around last gen? Sure, but how many people had Xbox Live or PS2 network? Only a fraction of what is out there now.

Point is, most people were playing single player games like GTA3 on their PS2s. Modern Warfare is indeed a huge leap ahead of what they were playing last gen.
number1laing is offline  
post #3038 of 7006 Old 05-12-2012, 02:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PENDRAG0ON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,477
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 558
CoD4 was very impressive, coming out just a few months after Halo 3, it was a show stopper. Fantastic Single player, insanely deep multiplayer, great graphics and a solid 60fps framerate. The problem is the yearly releases have killed the appriciation for what Infinity Ward had accomplished all those years ago.

(it was also the start of the PS3 not getting shafted with crappy ports)

PSN - Pendragoongp
NNID - Pendragoon
Include your AVS username in the friend request.
PENDRAG0ON is offline  
post #3039 of 7006 Old 05-12-2012, 02:54 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,661
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 345 Post(s)
Liked: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

The problem is the yearly releases have killed the appriciation for what Infinity Ward had accomplished all those years ago.

Sales seem to indicate otherwise. People aren't stupid, they wouldn't continue to buy it year after year if they didn't like what they were getting.

Series annualization is something people need to just get used to. It's not a bad thing for non story driven games.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #3040 of 7006 Old 05-12-2012, 03:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PENDRAG0ON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,477
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post


Sales seem to indicate otherwise. People aren't stupid, they wouldn't continue to buy it year after year if they didn't like what they were getting.

Series annualization is something people need to just get used to. It's not a bad thing for non story driven games.

Not what I meant, I meant that people no longer realize just how impressive the Modern Warfare engine was for it's time. People are so used to it now that they can't see anything special in it.

PSN - Pendragoongp
NNID - Pendragoon
Include your AVS username in the friend request.
PENDRAG0ON is offline  
post #3041 of 7006 Old 05-12-2012, 03:16 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,661
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 345 Post(s)
Liked: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post


Not what I meant, I meant that people no longer realize just how impressive the Modern Warfare engine was for it's time. People are so used to it now that they can't see anything special in it.

Ah, gotcha.

The crazy thing is, even though people don't see it as special anymore....no one else in the industry is following their lead. They're just pumping out poor copies like homefront and medal of honor, instead of applying the qualities that make cod successful to their own franchises. It's absolutely baffling to me.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #3042 of 7006 Old 05-13-2012, 08:44 AM
 
TyrantII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 10,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 832
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

Not what I meant, I meant that people no longer realize just how impressive the Modern Warfare engine was for it's time. People are so used to it now that they can't see anything special in it.

It was never impressive. It was and is a modified ID Tech 3 engine.

It was impressive back when Quake 3 arena was the thing, but thats about it...

Now getting everything from gameplay to level design to click and figuring out what gamers wanted, sure, that was impressive. I was never arguing that. The fact that it's IDT3 netcode is probably the single reason it's still one of the best MP games out there in terms of playability and not having latency/connection issues. But the engine was not impressive from a technical standpoint. IW passed up IDT4 and Unreal 3, both much more impressive engines.

IW didn't want it to be impressive (ie graphically and physics demanding), They wanted it to be cheap to license and proven to fit their needs.

Which kind of goes back to the point earlier in this thread. A game that was based of the Q3A engine went on to be a 3 billion dollar franchise with yearly releases. It really didn't use what this gen had to offer, besides using the consoles power to scale to 60fps. It's actually quite muted as far as next gen games go in what you'd think would be the focus of a new console hardware, and relies more on ingenuitive graphical tricks and good level design to deal with it's limitations.

Just proves the point that it's not really about the hardware. New hardware might wipe the slate clean and provide some shoulder room, but it's no guarantee of success even for a developer pushing the envelope. Along comes another IW, with a cheap, outdated engine, but a game people want and you're back to second place with your expensive Rages and Enslaveds and Twisted Metals.
TyrantII is offline  
post #3043 of 7006 Old 05-13-2012, 10:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PENDRAG0ON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,477
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 558
A heavily modified id tech 3 engine. Quake 3 Arena never looked that good. Call of Duty 1 was more or less that engine with mild tweaks.

Something tells me that Black Ops 2 might be using an even further enhanced engine to start preping for next gen.

PSN - Pendragoongp
NNID - Pendragoon
Include your AVS username in the friend request.
PENDRAG0ON is offline  
post #3044 of 7006 Old 05-13-2012, 11:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,661
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 345 Post(s)
Liked: 1430
Id either just stopped licensing it or the industry as a whole thumbed their nose at it. Look at a list of idtech 4 games - they're all id or related properties. I know Carmack said they just stopped wanting to license it out so they could focus in house, but that might just be saving face after their failure to garner interest for their tech.

idtech was going in a direction that wasn't going to work for cod. They were going for big sprawling maps in quake wars: enemy territory with their megatextures, which is completely unusable for random spawning MP games in cod. Even in idtech 5, textures need to reload even if you do so much as turn around. Rage also has horrendous animation, and really poor environmental effects. It's just a terrible fit for cod, and it's no coincidence Rage didn't have your standard deathmatch MP.

Unreal engine has never focused on speed, just features and frame quality over rate, so that was never going to be a good fit either.

So their only real choice was to develop the engine on their own, in the direction they needed it to go. They may have licensed Idtech 3 almost 10 years ago, but it's hardly the same engine it was then. Its like saying gears of war 3 is based on the same tech that powered unreal tournament. Its a pet peeve of mine that people swallow this "brand new engine" marketing nonsense. Its such a bum rap to label cod as old tech, ignoring the fact that every modern engine is a derivative of its predecessor. Some modern engines might be capable of things beyond current consoles, and can produce some epic bullshots and trailers, but that's irrelevant as soon as you put the disc in the drive.

People seriously need to be reminded what quake 3 looked like.
LL
LL

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #3045 of 7006 Old 05-13-2012, 12:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mboojigga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Little Rock AFB, Arkansas
Posts: 7,997
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

Id either just stopped licensing it or the industry as a whole thumbed their nose at it. Look at a list of idtech 4 games - they're all id or related properties. I know Carmack said they just stopped wanting to license it out so they could focus in house, but that might just be saving face after their failure to garner interest for their tech.

idtech was going in a direction that wasn't going to work for cod. They were going for big sprawling maps in quake wars: enemy territory with their megatextures, which is completely unusable for random spawning MP games in cod. Even in idtech 5, textures need to reload even if you do so much as turn around. Rage also has horrendous animation, and really poor environmental effects. It's just a terrible fit for cod, and it's no coincidence Rage didn't have your standard deathmatch MP.

Unreal engine has never focused on speed, just features and frame quality over rate, so that was never going to be a good fit either.

So their only real choice was to develop the engine on their own, in the direction they needed it to go. They may have licensed Idtech 3 almost 10 years ago, but it's hardly the same engine it was then. Its like saying gears of war 3 is based on the same tech that powered unreal tournament. Its a pet peeve of mine that people swallow this "brand new engine" marketing nonsense. Its such a bum rap to label cod as old tech, ignoring the fact that every modern engine is a derivative of its predecessor. Some modern engines might be capable of things beyond current consoles, and can produce some epic bullshots and trailers, but that's irrelevant as soon as you put the disc in the drive.

People seriously need to be reminded what quake 3 looked like.

I have to say well said and on Tyrants comment about hardware I agree with.

The 5.0 is here
mboojigga is offline  
post #3046 of 7006 Old 05-13-2012, 12:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PENDRAG0ON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,477
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 558
Let's also consider how much Square Enix spent making the FF13 engine. Now compare screenshots of 13 vs HD renders of 10, the difference is actually rather small.

An expensive high tech engine isn't always the best choice.

PSN - Pendragoongp
NNID - Pendragoon
Include your AVS username in the friend request.
PENDRAG0ON is offline  
post #3047 of 7006 Old 05-13-2012, 02:45 PM
 
TyrantII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 10,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 832
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

Id either just stopped licensing it or the industry as a whole thumbed their nose at it. Look at a list of idtech 4 games - they're all id or related properties. I know Carmack said they just stopped wanting to license it out so they could focus in house, but that might just be saving face after their failure to garner interest for their tech.

idtech was going in a direction that wasn't going to work for cod. They were going for big sprawling maps in quake wars: enemy territory with their megatextures, which is completely unusable for random spawning MP games in cod. Even in idtech 5, textures need to reload even if you do so much as turn around. Rage also has horrendous animation, and really poor environmental effects. It's just a terrible fit for cod, and it's no coincidence Rage didn't have your standard deathmatch MP.

Unreal engine has never focused on speed, just features and frame quality over rate, so that was never going to be a good fit either.

So their only real choice was to develop the engine on their own, in the direction they needed it to go. They may have licensed Idtech 3 almost 10 years ago, but it's hardly the same engine it was then. Its like saying gears of war 3 is based on the same tech that powered unreal tournament. Its a pet peeve of mine that people swallow this "brand new engine" marketing nonsense. Its such a bum rap to label cod as old tech, ignoring the fact that every modern engine is a derivative of its predecessor. Some modern engines might be capable of things beyond current consoles, and can produce some epic bullshots and trailers, but that's irrelevant as soon as you put the disc in the drive.

People seriously need to be reminded what quake 3 looked like.

Well, it's wrong to label it new tech too. The core engine is still there, even if modified. It's not a knock at all, just a fact that the engine was so versatile that it's been going forever. Even when COD launched, we were seeing other games that were more technically impressive. But they didn't do 60FPS. They didn't have the feel of COD. Didn't get the level design right. Or the gameplay, ect.

I just have a problem with people trying to rewrite history on what made COD the industry leader it is. It was never the tech. The people that propelled it's sales just don't know and don't care about that stuff. People and even reviews will claim it's the best looking game out there. They might not play many games, and they don't care. To them it is, because it's what they know.

And it's worth pointing out when us GFX geeks get all riled up about pushing technology, or publishers lament system limitations.

In the end, a modified Q3A engine ran a 3 billion dollar franchise, and still is. MW3 is actually the first game where it appears they started hitting barriers in their level design and animations systems where it's not going to cut it anymore, and even those instances were few and far between.

As for ID, they're in trouble with their engines as far as I know. Unreal has been the defacto console engine this gen for just about everything. Mostly because it can scale properly, unlike ID's processor intensive tech shows. They went with something more open environment with Rage, but it still is very power hungry and isn't going to scale well based on needs, as you've pointed out. Unreal on the other hand is just insane how many different genres and types of games it has serviced, everything from hallway shooters to open world games to freaking side scrollers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

Let's also consider how much Square Enix spent making the FF13 engine. Now compare screenshots of 13 vs HD renders of 10, the difference is actually rather small.

An expensive high tech engine isn't always the best choice.

Which goes to my point. New systems and new expensive engines to take advantage of those systems ain't going to fix bad games, and the woes of publishers. I love new tech and toys too, but to think it's going to save the industry from the slump they are in is not realistic. It's just going to sprinkle some sugar on a **** cake.
TyrantII is offline  
post #3048 of 7006 Old 05-13-2012, 04:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,661
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 345 Post(s)
Liked: 1430
The tech deserves more credit than it gets. I don't think it'd be able to maintain its appeal if it didn't continue to improve over the years. People dont need to be sheltered to believe its one of the best looking games - 60FPS is not a minor thing to pull off without looking like garbage, and the end result is impressive. Hardly anyone else in the shooter genre is even attempting it. The game simply wouldn't be as popular as it is, if it wasn't pushing quality every iteration without compromising frame rate. It's not the only reason but it's a big factor.

Tech alone can't make a bad game good, but it can definitely make a good game even better. It's why we need new consoles - theyve essentially been pushed to their limits, and we need more raw power to take it to the next level. That doesnt just mean higher resolution of the same ol stuff, it means faces we can actually empathize with, physics that can properly model hair, cloth and liquids, sound that can properly model an environment - removing more and more barriers between our experience in the real world and the virtual worlds.

Still, I hope the industry takes a long hard look at how important frame rate is for the next gen. It's time we got back to the 60fps standard we enjoyed in the 8 and 16 bit eras.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #3049 of 7006 Old 05-13-2012, 05:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
onlysublime's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Orange County
Posts: 4,797
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

It's time we got back to the 60fps standard we enjoyed in the 8 and 16 bit eras.

If we're talking 8-bit (Atari, Commodore, NES, Apple, SMS, etc.) and 16-bit (Genesis, SNES, Amiga, Atari ST, Mac, etc.), games were usually 10-30 fps, with many games around 15-24 fps. Not 60 fps. 60 fps was basically only arcade machines.
onlysublime is online now  
post #3050 of 7006 Old 05-13-2012, 05:27 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,661
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 345 Post(s)
Liked: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlysublime View Post


If we're talking 8-bit (Atari, Commodore, NES, Apple, SMS, etc.) and 16-bit (Genesis, SNES, Amiga, Atari ST, Mac, etc.), games were usually 10-30 fps, with many games around 15-24 fps. Not 60 fps. 60 fps was basically only arcade machines.

They were only 30fps in the sense that they ran on interlaced NTSC/PAL which technically only transmits 30 full frames a second. They updated 60 times a second, at half resolution, so it essentially worked out to 60fps. It actually modified the TV signal to shift the interlacing in such a way that it came out as a very low resolution progressive scan with blank scanlines between each line. I can really only speak for the SNES, NES and Genesis, probably SMS. I wouldn't be surprised if the western stuff ran at a lower frame rate.

There were a few oddities, typically western games like joe and mac on the SNES and a lot of EA genesis games like B.O.B. or road rash that ran at 30fps. The vast majority ran at 60fps, really only translating into butter smooth scrolling. But games that weren't 60fps felt cheap and low quality, just like they do today.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #3051 of 7006 Old 05-13-2012, 06:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
onlysublime's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Orange County
Posts: 4,797
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

They were only 30fps in the sense that they ran on interlaced NTSC/PAL which technically only transmits 30 full frames a second. They updated 60 times a second, at half resolution, so it essentially worked out to 60fps. It actually modified the TV signal to shift the interlacing in such a way that it came out as a very low resolution progressive scan with blank scanlines between each line. I can really only speak for the SNES, NES and Genesis, probably SMS. I wouldn't be surprised if the western stuff ran at a lower frame rate.

There were a few oddities, typically western games like joe and mac on the SNES and a lot of EA genesis games like B.O.B. or road rash that ran at 30fps. The vast majority ran at 60fps, really only translating into butter smooth scrolling. But games that weren't 60fps felt cheap and low quality, just like they do today.

that's not correct either. if you're talking about interlacing, we're talking fields, not frames.

when we're talking about games and the frames per second generated, we're talking about inside the machine itself rather than the output.

None of the SNES or Genesis games ran (or generated graphics) at 60 fps (at least the commercially known ones). Tell me one. Street Fighter 2 on the SNES ran around 20-25 fps. They did some shortcuts to make it look faster but not at true 60 fps arcade speeds.

I think you're confusing the fps you're seeing in emulators. That's not the true fps of the actual consoles. Emulators actually run the game "better" in terms of speed of graphics than the actual consoles.
onlysublime is online now  
post #3052 of 7006 Old 05-13-2012, 08:01 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,661
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 345 Post(s)
Liked: 1430
I have no idea where you're getting that from. I just fired up sf2 and super mario world on my SNES. The base frame rate looks 60fps for scrolling and movement of sprites. Obviously the frame animation runs slower than that, but the overall effect is butter smooth.

Regardless, this isn't the last gen thread, it's the next gen one. 60fps is still a laudable goal.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #3053 of 7006 Old 05-14-2012, 06:24 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Daekwan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 10,262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 335
60fps should be the absolute minimum for next generation. They've waited this long.. why not wait some more to get it right.

Xbox Live & PSN gamertag- Daekwan
www.facebook.com/Daekwan
Daekwan is offline  
post #3054 of 7006 Old 05-14-2012, 10:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
onlysublime's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Orange County
Posts: 4,797
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daekwan View Post

60fps should be the absolute minimum for next generation. They've waited this long.. why not wait some more to get it right.

at least Minecraft is running at 60 fps...
onlysublime is online now  
post #3055 of 7006 Old 05-14-2012, 10:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PENDRAG0ON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,477
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlysublime View Post


at least Minecraft is running at 60 fps...

Well, most of the time. In the extreme circumstances during co-op it can drop to 30fps locked.

PSN - Pendragoongp
NNID - Pendragoon
Include your AVS username in the friend request.
PENDRAG0ON is offline  
post #3056 of 7006 Old 05-15-2012, 06:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
number1laing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,993
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

So their only real choice was to develop the engine on their own, in the direction they needed it to go. They may have licensed Idtech 3 almost 10 years ago, but it's hardly the same engine it was then. Its like saying gears of war 3 is based on the same tech that powered unreal tournament. Its a pet peeve of mine that people swallow this "brand new engine" marketing nonsense. Its such a bum rap to label cod as old tech, ignoring the fact that every modern engine is a derivative of its predecessor. Some modern engines might be capable of things beyond current consoles, and can produce some epic bullshots and trailers, but that's irrelevant as soon as you put the disc in the drive.

People seriously need to be reminded what quake 3 looked like.

This is so true. The whole "rewritten engine" thing is just a bunch of marketing speak. I saw a lot of posts on other forums where people complained about Portal 2 and how Valve didn't write a new engine yet and Source came out in 2004. It's really silly.

Anyone who has ever programmed before (even casually) knows that throwing out a bunch of code that works and has been tested is pretty much the stupidest waste of time ever. Especially if you are going to replace it with some other code that does the exact same thing.

COD4 was not possible on Xbox hardware, or on a PC from 1999. When the new hardware came they upgraded the technology for the hardware. That's really the smart way to do it. They'll do it again when the new hardware comes out.
number1laing is offline  
post #3057 of 7006 Old 05-15-2012, 06:48 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,661
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 345 Post(s)
Liked: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by number1laing View Post


This is so true. The whole "rewritten engine" thing is just a bunch of marketing speak. I saw a lot of posts on other forums where people complained about Portal 2 and how Valve didn't write a new engine yet and Source came out in 2004. It's really silly.

Anyone who has ever programmed before (even casually) knows that throwing out a bunch of code that works and has been tested is pretty much the stupidest waste of time ever. Especially if you are going to replace it with some other code that does the exact same thing.

COD4 was not possible on Xbox hardware, or on a PC from 1999. When the new hardware came they upgraded the technology for the hardware. That's really the smart way to do it. They'll do it again when the new hardware comes out.

Yep. All engines have always been a work in progress, but the major work happens alongside hardware upgrades. After that it's just squeezing efficiencies out and creating some new effects/procedures. A lot of work has been done on that engine since cod 4 - for instance, you won't find a breakable pane of glass before mw2 - but cod4 was the really big upgrade. Unreal engine hit its stride on the consoles with gears 2, hasn't really changed much since.

Same thing will happen next gen - first round of games will be a huge upgrade but nowhere near the limits of the console. Two years in, games will really start to take advantage. After that, it's just a steady march of minor visual upgrades with ever diminishing returns. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #3058 of 7006 Old 05-15-2012, 08:46 AM
 
TyrantII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 10,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 832
Just more fuel to my point about the Publisher crisis:

http://www.gametrailers.com/side-mis...million-units/

Quote:
Some quick math: Over a million units sold at $20 a pop = more than $20 million in revenue generated by Minecraft: Xbox 360 Edition… in under a week.

More Minecraft metrics from Microsoft's Major Nelson:

Total Online Hours: 5.2M

Multiplayer sessions: 4M

Total Multiplayer gaming hours: 2.4M

The game became the fastest-selling XBLA game ever mere hours following its March 9 release

A old game, that isn't very graphically intensive, just pulled in $20 million in a few days. A new, expensive console would have done nothing but eat into it's profits, and given little if any real additional return.

It's the games stupid, and if the console manufactures are so soon to dump these platforms for GFX whores and a industry of mega publishers in mega trouble, well... it's rather short sighted.

I'm pretty sure they are not, and we'll be seeing ane consoles in 2014 and possibly even 2015.

On another note I'm playing Alice: Madness Returns right now, and I'm blown away it got poor reviews. Good story, some of the best GFX this gen, and awesome platforming. A tad long, but that's a plus IMO. Games like this still show you that good developers can squeeze some very nice visuals out of the platforms for their games. And while the GFX they came up with are nice, it's the story, art direct and platforming that really shine. I'd say it's one of the best platforms out there this gen, but unfortunately that kind of game has fallen out of style and seems to be panned in reviews, after being given to reviewers who hate that genre. Too bad, I recommend it if you like platformers.
TyrantII is offline  
post #3059 of 7006 Old 05-15-2012, 08:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PENDRAG0ON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,477
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 558
I'm getting over my fixation with graphics, after what might be the most impressive game this generation (technical aspects wise) being a Wii game (Xenoblade) I've gone back to the old white brick and just started playing games, GCN and Wii releases. Just finished Metroid Prime 1 again and it just astounds me how well it held up over time. Debating my next game now...

PSN - Pendragoongp
NNID - Pendragoon
Include your AVS username in the friend request.
PENDRAG0ON is offline  
post #3060 of 7006 Old 05-15-2012, 08:55 AM
 
TyrantII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 10,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 832
Quote:
Originally Posted by number1laing View Post


COD4 was not possible on Xbox hardware, or on a PC from 1999. When the new hardware came they upgraded the technology for the hardware. That's really the smart way to do it. They'll do it again when the new hardware comes out.

No it wasn't, and it's true. You upgrade the software and patch it to get more out of it. But, it also means you deal with major engine limitations. There's a reason most COD maps are less open and more maze like. They use a form of radiant, which ends up causing level design that is more indoor hallways with a sky box to make it appear as open. Or you have the horrible, horrible pre-canned animation and death systems. Or AI that really isn't any changed or any better than Q3A. Or the netcode, something you'd never want to change since the engine did it so well. Personally, I think the movement and bullet code coming from Q3A is probably the reason for COD success, and why people don't like it in newer engines. Even to me, something about how a legacy ID Tech engine handles and feels has not been recreated since. Even ID's newer tech engines feel stiff and unnatural comparatively.

anyways, Start ripping those out and rebuilding them from scratch and you alter the things that allow you do do the things you want (say 60fps).

But, that's not my argument. As said, there's nothing wrong with the engine, and as you said calls for new engines are overblown. Just as calls that new hardware is needed to satiate GFX and tech geeks, or publishers who desperately want to kill market giants like COD and try to figure out the next giant, are overblown.

The problem publishers think a new console will fix are not going to be fixed by a new console. Especially when dev costs will most likely go up.
TyrantII is offline  
Closed Thread Xbox Area

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off