GT3 Rain Effects
teemoney
fact that there are only two cars in this particular demo (the Viper and
a Castrol Supra GT) might have something to do with that. It's not clear
whether Polyphony can actually implement this mode in a full six-car
race, or if it will only be a head-to-head arcade mode option.
...
One other slight drawback is that you can see the reflection effects
being drawn in, as it were. As it is with the sharper textures that
appear at a close distance when mip-mapping routines are implemented,
there's an invisible horizon at which the lights begin appearing in the
wet road, and it's not quite out as far as your view horizon in most
cases, which results in a slightly disconcerting pop-up effect when you
pay close attention to what's going on."
this is not good. not good at all. misleading demos and technical
problems. oh well.
Anthony
teemoney <moch...@zdnetmail.com> wrote in message
news:3A723926...@zdnetmail.com...
Thats why the game is still in development.
~Anthony
>
>
John Kitchar
Anthony wrote in message ...
>Thats why the game is still in development.
>
And this is why I call the PS2 weak and flawed.
JMK
CoolColJ
--------------------------------------------------------
This is actually realistic didn't you know
You expect the light to bounce off the water into your eyes from long
distance?
think again...
Have a look at a wet road...at night
ccj
jes.da.bes
consoles weak and flawed.
"John Kitchar" <jkit...@netpci.com> wrote in message
news:94tp5...@enews3.newsguy.com...
sang...@my-deja.com
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
CoolColJ
teemoney <moch...@zdnetmail.com> wrote in message
news:3A723926...@zdnetmail.com...
also happens to be a replay on the demo... ie meansing its an old build
ccj
sergio
simply do so becuase, in the real world, they cant.
Thanks
"teemoney" <moch...@zdnetmail.com> wrote in message
news:3A723926...@zdnetmail.com...
Mark Borton
> >Thats why the game is still in development.
> >
>
> And this is why I call the PS2 weak and flawed.
>
Weak and flawed systems are the DC, its being pulled from production, que
third parties to drop any and all developemtn like a hot potato
and
X-Box, a PC in a set top box thats going to suffer from same old, same old,
PC ports
> JMK
>
>
Anthony
<sang...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:94tsk6$ali$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> DO NOT FEED THE TROLL!!!
So I can read the other boring posts in this ng?
Trolls = flame wars which are always a laff.
~Anthony
TheLydecker
You call a game system flawed because it's still in development? I should like
to see your face when the X-Box becomes the system of broken promises. Its chip
has already been downgraded twice, and everyone who isn't brain-damaged knows
it won't make it out until 2002.
Your ridiculous decision to bypass the PS2 (and thus justify your
Dreamcast-XBox choice by trashing the PS2 at every juncture, even if said
juncture reeks of irrationality, illogic, and in the case above, flamebait) is
continuing to make you look foolish.
John Kitchar
TheLydecker wrote in message
<20010128012142...@ng-md1.aol.com>...
>John Kitchar wrote:
>
>>Anthony wrote in message ...
>>>Thats why the game is still in development.
>>>
>>
>>And this is why I call the PS2 weak and flawed.
>
>You call a game system flawed because it's still in development?
No no no. Sorry if I gave that impression. It's the sum total of dozens of
things that point me to the PS2 being weak and flawed. Like lack of
availability, higher price, no modem, no harddrive, only 2 controller ports,
Unreal running at less than 30 fps, EA NASCAR dropping to PSX resolution
with a mirror on, Munch Team jumping ship, SSX slowing down with only one
player on the screen, and GT3 having only 5 AI cars to race against. The
list is nearly endless.
And the comment by Unreal2's developers about Unreal2 being *impossible to
run* on a PS2 is really sad, yet expected. The PS2 is like the
DC---similarly weak but over a year late, no modem and a higher price. Much
higher price when you consider all the good $19.99 DC software deals out
NOW. Hence I call the PS2 weak and flawed beyond belief.
JMK
Phat Tran
> >Thats why the game is still in development.
>
> And this is why I call the PS2 weak and flawed.
Because it can do impressive rain effects not yet seen in any other game?
Smart as ever, John.
Phat.
Phat Tran
Can you be any more predictable? When I was reading that preview on PS2
IGN, I told myself to expect a teemoney take on the exact paragraphs you
quoted.
You'd be happier if they took out the rain effects altogether, just as you
would prefer a 1L glass that is full over a 3L glass that's only half-full.
Phat.
Phat Tran
>
> No no no. Sorry if I gave that impression. It's the sum total of dozens of
> things that point me to the PS2 being weak and flawed. Like lack of
> availability, higher price, no modem, no harddrive, only 2 controller
ports,
Non-points. The DC launched at a similar price, came with an outdated modem
that I had no use for (but still cost me $40 in the purchase price), had no
hard drive, and could only accept at most 4 controllers (instead of 8 as
allowed by the PS2's multitaps).
> Unreal running at less than 30 fps, EA NASCAR dropping to PSX resolution
> with a mirror on, Munch Team jumping ship, SSX slowing down with only one
> player on the screen,
I suppose you haven't a clue about weak software vs weak hardware.
> and GT3 having only 5 AI cars to race against.
And some of videogame's best physics fully modeled on each car, as well as
enough special effects to make George Lucas proud.
If you want 20+ AI vehicles to race against on the PS2, may I suggest
MotoGP? Graphics are still stunning (although they do fall short of GT3's),
and the framerate is a constant 60fps.
And if you want even more AI entities, Dynasty Warriors 2 has about 30
characters onscreen at once, while Kessen 2 will have roughly 500.
So, how weak and flawed is the PS2 again?
> And the comment by Unreal2's developers about Unreal2 being *impossible to
> run* on a PS2 is really sad, yet expected.
Your continued dribble is really sad, yet expected, as well.
> The PS2 is like the
> DC---similarly weak but over a year late, no modem and a higher price.
Much
> higher price when you consider all the good $19.99 DC software deals out
> NOW. Hence I call the PS2 weak and flawed beyond belief.
Even more weak and flawed than the DC, right John?
Sorry for being so derisive, but your logic deserves nothing more and
nothing less.
Phat.
jes.da.bes
will be out and that will just have me addicted playing 24/7. ZOE, Metal
Gear 2, Gran Tourismo 3 (I bet Dreamcast can't even handle 1 car with
60FPS), Star Wars: Star Fighter, Tony Hawk 3, Getaway, Suikoden 3, WinBack,
and more. I just listed some of the ones I'm interested in.
Honestly man, can you actually say that a racing game on the Dreamcast looks
and plays better then Gran Tourismo 3? Sega GT, generic looking cars with no
shine or any realistic effects. MSR, generic looking cars with no shine or
any realistic effects.
Have you seen how out dated Munch game looks now? I can name many games that
look way better then Munches Odyssey, starting with SSX, Madden 2K1, ZOE,
and much more. I don't want to embarrass Munches developers, but The Bouncer
puts that game to shame in the graphics department.
Dreamcast flaws, no RPGes on release date, controller makes your hand sore,
it uses a GD-drive, slow downs in Crazy Taxi, Phantasy Star Online doesn't
support broadband, NFL2K1 doesn't support broadband, NBA2K1 doesn't support
broadband, EA doesn't support Dreamcast, slow downs in Shenmue, slow downs
in Jet Grind Radio, lag in Phantasy Star Online, slow downs in Phantasy Star
Online, lowered particles and poly count in Virtua Fighter 3TB, slow downs
in Ready 2 Rumble, and I can list some more if you like.
"John Kitchar" <jkit...@netpci.com> wrote in message
news:950nk...@enews3.newsguy.com...
>
Mark Borton
> <20010128012142...@ng-md1.aol.com>...
> >John Kitchar wrote:
> >
> >>Anthony wrote in message ...
> >>>Thats why the game is still in development.
> >>>
> >>
> >>And this is why I call the PS2 weak and flawed.
> >
> >You call a game system flawed because it's still in development?
>
> No no no. Sorry if I gave that impression. It's the sum total of dozens of
> things that point me to the PS2 being weak and flawed. Like lack of
> availability, higher price, no modem, no harddrive, only 2 controller
ports,
> Unreal running at less than 30 fps, EA NASCAR dropping to PSX resolution
> with a mirror on, Munch Team jumping ship, SSX slowing down with only one
> player on the screen, and GT3 having only 5 AI cars to race against. The
> list is nearly endless.
MUNCH TEAM DIDN`T "JUMP SHIP"
MS waved there magic checkbook and made them dissapear, no great loss, i
always though oddworld games were sad platformers on the PSx, rather like
ANotherworld.the new one doesn`t interest me, it looks like a piss poor copy
of giants
only reason oddworld sold, the main character could fart, period
havent seen any slowdown on SSX, GT3 only has 5 ai, thats enough for me,
Colin Mcrae only has you racing (unless you use arcade mode when i goes to
5ai+you), i don`t need 100s of simnplistic AI, just 5 really good,
intelligent AIs, makes for more of a challenge
As for the 2 contorler ports, theres these things called MULTITAPS, oh, and
we can have 8 standerd pads then for 8 player games, and theres the USB
ports, which can also take controlers in the very near future
>
> And the comment by Unreal2's developers about Unreal2 being *impossible to
> run* on a PS2 is really sad, yet expected. The PS2 is like the
> DC---similarly weak but over a year late, no modem and a higher price.
Much
> higher price when you consider all the good $19.99 DC software deals out
> NOW. Hence I call the PS2 weak and flawed beyond belief.
>
DC software is so cheap becuase stores are trying to get shut of it, i doubt
after recent announcments that DC software will be easy to get hold of
shortly, the format is effectivly dead, retailers wont back a console thats
been given the heave ho by its parent company
PS2 isn`t weak and flawed, the system is is as good as the DC or Gamecube,
so far the games have, like the PSx before it, Mearly been little tests of
the system, the real games are due in a month or so, then youll be
scrabbling to buy a PS2 to play GT3, MGS2, Getaway, Dropship, Onmishu,
BOuncer and others
whats the X-Box going to have that no other system will have? Munchs game,
thats it, everything else will have already been released on the PC and PS2,
and will continue to be released on the PS2 and PC
> JMK
>
>
Swam Mollen
> And the comment by Unreal2's developers about Unreal2 being *impossible to
> run* on a PS2 is really sad, yet expected.
I wouldn't take that as said - dont forget, Epic have NEVER programmed a
console game in their lives before Unreal hit the PS2, and at that, they
only spent 8 months or so developing for it. The end result was poor, and
that's just down to their lack of experience rather than lack of raw power.
When a developer states somthing like "It'd be impossible to run", they're
either talking up their graphics engine, or showing their lack of
experience.
I remember developers stating that QUake II would be impossible to bring to
the PS1! It did it in the end!
The only limitations are the ammount of texture detail and the geometry.
Both can be got around, and both are limitations that ANY console will have.
a PC has the luxury of huge quantities of RAM, and even the X-box has less
than half what a typical PC running Unreal 2 will have. Even with the OS, a
PC with 128mb Ram has more th work in than a X-box with 64mb as the PC also
has a huge graphics card (32-64mb and possibly 128mb soon), with all the gee
whiz special effects turned on.
Nope, it's just developers who have very little experience developing
ANYTHING on the PS2 talking baloney.
> JMK
>
>
teemoney
Don't forget that all of the ballyhooed March games have either been panned
(Oni, Bouncer), delayed (GT3) or are just tired rertreads of other games
(Onimusha is RE is feudal Japan).
The PS2 had a lot of promise. It didn't deliver on any of it.
>
>
> JMK
teemoney
Do you mean those rain effects that are suspected to be in the arcade mode
with only 2 cars racing? Ever wonder why they only showed the effect in a
screenshot? There are tons of movies available but for some reason that
only gets a screenshot. What might be the most impressive effect only gets
a screenshot.
You people may still be controlled by Sony hype. The rest of us aren't.
>
>
> Phat.
teemoney
Can you be any more predictable? When I noticed you replying to my post, I
told myself to expect a Phattie take on the quoted paragraphs, ignoring them
and attacking me personally.
I can only thank sites like IGN for telling the truth. You PS2 fanboys prefer
walking around in a Sony induced daze. The fact remains that the rain effect
is shown in a demo and may only be available in the arcade, head -to- head
mode. And it's done very poorly in the demo!
Keep eating the dog food, Phattie. You're an obedient fanboy.
>
>
> Phat.
teemoney
> "John Kitchar" <jkit...@netpci.com> wrote in message
> news:950nk...@enews3.newsguy.com...
> >
> > No no no. Sorry if I gave that impression. It's the sum total of dozens of
> > things that point me to the PS2 being weak and flawed. Like lack of
> > availability, higher price, no modem, no harddrive, only 2 controller
> ports,
>
> Non-points. The DC launched at a similar price,
similar as in $100 cheaper, right?
> came with an outdated modem
> that I had no use for (but still cost me $40 in the purchase price),
the PS2 came with outdated dvd playback which Ihad no use for (but still cost
me $100 in the purchase price)
> had no
> hard drive,
the PS2 had no hard drive
> and could only accept at most 4 controllers (instead of 8 as
> allowed by the PS2's multitaps).
The PS2 forced me to buy a multi-tap for4 player games, and possibly 2 for 8
player games.
>
>
> > Unreal running at less than 30 fps, EA NASCAR dropping to PSX resolution
> > with a mirror on, Munch Team jumping ship, SSX slowing down with only one
> > player on the screen,
>
> I suppose you haven't a clue about weak software vs weak hardware.
It's always the software, right? Even from world renowned developers. That's
very convenient.
>
>
> > and GT3 having only 5 AI cars to race against.
>
> And some of videogame's best physics fully modeled on each car, as well as
> enough special effects to make George Lucas proud.
It should with only 5 cars to draw.
>
>
> If you want 20+ AI vehicles to race against on the PS2, may I suggest
> MotoGP? Graphics are still stunning (although they do fall short of GT3's),
> and the framerate is a constant 60fps.
Please don't make me laugh.
>
>
> And if you want even more AI entities, Dynasty Warriors 2 has about 30
> characters onscreen at once, while Kessen 2 will have roughly 500.
>
> So, how weak and flawed is the PS2 again?
Very.
>
>
> > And the comment by Unreal2's developers about Unreal2 being *impossible to
> > run* on a PS2 is really sad, yet expected.
>
> Your continued dribble is really sad, yet expected, as well.
Your continued PS2 fanboyism has me very worried about you as well.
TheLydecker
>Do you mean those rain effects that are suspected to be in the arcade mode
>with only 2 cars racing?
Wow, all things sound unimpressive when you pull them out of your ass. Good
job.
TheLydecker
>Don't forget that all of the ballyhooed March games have either been panned
>(Oni, Bouncer)
Poor, poor teemoney. Does it really hurt that much that Bouncer looks better
than any DC game / X-Box game released / showed so far? I know you're far too
stupid to realize how awesome a 3D Streets of Rage is with a story / survival /
multiplayer mode so I suspect you should be happy that this will be vacant from
Microsoft's ubersystem.
>are just tired rertreads of other games
>(Onimusha is RE is feudal Japan).
Scared of the score it received in Famitsu?
TheLydecker
>> Non-points. The DC launched at a similar price,
>
>similar as in $100 cheaper, right
Amazing that the DC was able to launch at $200 with DVD playback. Remarkable.
>the PS2 came with outdated dvd playback which Ihad no use for (but still cost
>me $100 in the purchase price)
You haven't bought it. The PS2 cost you nothing.
>It should with only 5 cars to draw.
Again, GT3 will show up any DC / X-Box racer released until GT4, both
graphically and gameplay-wise. Deal.
DarienAllen.com
<moch...@zdnetmail.com> we were graced with this statement:
>Don't forget that all of the ballyhooed March games have either been panned
>(Oni, Bouncer), delayed (GT3) or are just tired rertreads of other games
>(Onimusha is RE is feudal Japan).
and Z.O.E.? Considering you haven't even PLAYED Onimusha you really
shouldn't talk about something you don't know about...then again when
has that stopped you in the past?
------------------------
Darien Allen
ICQ-2927081/AOL-Dezign369
All of MD is behind you..GO RAVENS!!!
TheLydecker
>>You call a game system flawed because it's still in development?
>
>No no no. Sorry if I gave that impression.
Yeah right. Flamebait can always be justified in retrospect.
>It's the sum total of dozens of
>things that point me to the PS2 being weak and flawed.
Again, picked and selected not by rationale but in an overwhelming need to
justify your console purchasing behavior.
>Like lack of
>availability
No longer a problem.
>higher price
DVD player, backwards-compatibility. And the X-Box will be $400+ when it's
released.
>no modem,
Excuse Sony from wanting to avoid the lag-filled Seganet crap. I don't call a
dedicated network that costs gamers $22/month just to be able to overclock a
56k modem a sound business decision.
>no harddrive
And what point would a harddrive be at this point, eh?
>only 2 controller ports,
Easily rectified with a multitap.
>Unreal running at less than 30 fps,
Unreal runs at 30FPS at all times. Now justify Q3A's framerate for me.
>EA NASCAR dropping to PSX resolution
>with a mirror on
PSX resolution? Are you drunk?
>Munch Team jumping ship
A bunch of inferior idiots bought out by Microsoft? You're using this? Poor,
poor John.
>SSX slowing down with only one
>player on the screen
Proof you haven't played it.
>and GT3 having only 5 AI cars to race against
A non-issue that proves you're insanely jealous of the unbelievable graphics
that GT3 presents.
>The
>list is nearly endless.
>
Not really. Your reasons suck. Every one of them.
>And the comment by Unreal2's developers about Unreal2 being *impossible to
>run* on a PS2 is really sad, yet expected.
Not only have they not said this but I doubt a bunch of PC developers are
equipped to comment on what a PS2 can run, given their vastly different
development environments. You'll have to do better.
>The PS2 is like the
>DC---similarly weak but over a year late, no modem and a higher price.
Please. SSX, Madden, NHL, Fifa, Onimusha, Bouncer, and GT3 prove how much
better a system the PS2 is than the DC. Although I guess you do have a point,
in that Sony recently announced that they're stopping production of their PS2's
and bringing their software to the DC and X-Box. Sega hasn't done anything like
that.
>Much
>higher price when you consider all the good $19.99 DC software deals out
>NOW
And which will soon be available on the PS2.
>Hence I call the PS2 weak and flawed beyond belief.
You'll have to do better. Your reasons aren't reasons at all, but laughable
"conclusions" based on specious reasoning at best.
DarienAllen.com
(TheLydecker) we were graced with this statement:
>Poor, poor teemoney. Does it really hurt that much that Bouncer looks better
>than any DC game / X-Box game released / showed so far? I know you're far too
>stupid to realize how awesome a 3D Streets of Rage is with a story / survival /
>multiplayer mode so I suspect you should be happy that this will be vacant from
>Microsoft's ubersystem.
Graphics aside I ppl should hold off on The Bouncer bandwagon just a
bit.
Anthony
You be sure to keep sucking Gates' dick, you're an obedient man-whore.
~Anthony
>
> >
> >
> > Phat.
>
teemoney
> teemoney wrote:
>
> >Don't forget that all of the ballyhooed March games have either been panned
> >(Oni, Bouncer)
>
> Poor, poor teemoney. Does it really hurt that much that Bouncer looks better
> than any DC game / X-Box game released / showed so far?
have fun with the 1 hour of gameplay.
> I know you're far too
> stupid to realize how awesome a 3D Streets of Rage is with a story / survival /
> multiplayer mode so I suspect you should be happy that this will be vacant from
> Microsoft's ubersystem.
Virtua Fighter on the Xbox will blow that piece of schmegma away.
teemoney
> Now at the time of Sun, 28 Jan 2001 16:41:46 GMT, teemoney
> <moch...@zdnetmail.com> we were graced with this statement:
>
> >Don't forget that all of the ballyhooed March games have either been panned
> >(Oni, Bouncer), delayed (GT3) or are just tired rertreads of other games
> >(Onimusha is RE is feudal Japan).
>
> and Z.O.E.?
sorry, i don't get into gay ass mech games.
> Considering you haven't even PLAYED Onimusha you really
> shouldn't talk about something you don't know about...then again when
> has that stopped you in the past?
Onimusha uses the same engine as RE. It has the same tired ass gameplay, even
utilizing the 180 degree turnaround that Capcom developed rather than
developing true 3D navigation. Capcom couldn't make a 3D game to save their
asses.
DarienAllen.com
<moch...@zdnetmail.com> we were graced with this statement:
>> and Z.O.E.?
>
>sorry, i don't get into gay ass mech games.
Gay ass mech games? Thanks for remind me while I had you in my KF in
the first place. I thought you'd drop that infantile
shit...apparently not.
teemoney
> Now at the time of Sun, 28 Jan 2001 19:29:36 GMT, teemoney
> <moch...@zdnetmail.com> we were graced with this statement:
>
> >> and Z.O.E.?
> >
> >sorry, i don't get into gay ass mech games.
>
> Gay ass mech games? Thanks for remind me while I had you in my KF in
> the first place. I thought you'd drop that infantile
> shit...apparently not.
Oh, I don't like mech games and you resort to namecalling. What a
hypocrite. Not surprising.
Jake Zelnick
> have fun with the 1 hour of gameplay.
Jesus christ dude. I've been reading this NG for a while, what is your
major malfunction?
Do you own stock in SEGA, Micro$oft, and Nintendo or something? I mean,
every post out of your hands is bitching about something or other
re: SONY.
I mean, I'm all for a good bitch and cunt session once in a while, but
man, you take it to a new level. Is it the living in Brooklyn? ;)
Jake Zelnick
> "DarienAllen.com" wrote:
>> Now at the time of Sun, 28 Jan 2001 19:29:36 GMT, teemoney
>> <moch...@zdnetmail.com> we were graced with this statement:
>>
>> >> and Z.O.E.?
>> >
>> >sorry, i don't get into gay ass mech games.
>>
>> Gay ass mech games? Thanks for remind me while I had you in my KF in
>> the first place. I thought you'd drop that infantile
>> shit...apparently not.
> Oh, I don't like mech games and you resort to namecalling. What a
> hypocrite. Not surprising.
Actually "T-money", you started with the name calling by claiming mech
games are "gay".
What the hell is homosexual about robots? You're typing on a piece of
electronics right now, you fool ;) LOL. At least you're funny. Keep up
the flames.
John Kitchar
Phat Tran wrote in message <3JSc6.13698$fe1.1...@news20.bellglobal.com>...
>> Unreal running at less than 30 fps, EA NASCAR dropping to PSX resolution
>> with a mirror on, Munch Team jumping ship, SSX slowing down with only one
>> player on the screen,
>
>I suppose you haven't a clue about weak software vs weak hardware.
>
It's always your excuse---the software. Or Maybe the thing is, ever heard of
this Phat...hard to program for?
>> and GT3 having only 5 AI cars to race against.
>
>And some of videogame's best physics fully modeled on each car, as well as
>enough special effects to make George Lucas proud.
>
With only 5 AI in a flagship GT racer, no one should be proud. Looney Tunes
possibly, but not GT3.
>And if you want even more AI entities, Dynasty Warriors 2 has about 30
>characters onscreen at once, while Kessen 2 will have roughly 500.
>
But damn, what's with that huge white wall of fog in Dynasty Warriors 2?
Maybe they should have dropped the AI count down to 5 like in GT3, so the
game could have a little background detail. And speaking of detail, the
textures on the hills are blurry low res. Not enough VRAM=flaw.
>So, how weak and flawed is the PS2 again?
>
You want me to go over this *again*?
>> And the comment by Unreal2's developers about Unreal2 being *impossible
to
>> run* on a PS2 is really sad, yet expected.
>
>Your continued dribble is really sad, yet expected, as well.
>
I can tell this one hurt. Yep, get used to it, the PS2 can't handle
near-future games. Unreal2? Nope. Return to Castle Wolf? Nope. X-Box? Yep
and yep. The PS2 has no purpose---or what, to re-hash old DC games? RECV
and F355 again on the PS2?
>> The PS2 is like the
>> DC---similarly weak but over a year late, no modem and a higher price.
>Much
>> higher price when you consider all the good $19.99 DC software deals out
>> NOW. Hence I call the PS2 weak and flawed beyond belief.
>
>Even more weak and flawed than the DC, right John?
>
Yes.
The DC is over-performing with titles like Lemans pushing well over 3M
polys. The PS2 isn't revolutionary; most everyone is underwhelmed. The PS2
isn't delivering what was promised; the DC obviously is.
JMK
TheLydecker
>Graphics aside I ppl should hold off on The Bouncer bandwagon just a
>bit.
What?
TheLydecker
>It's always your excuse---the software. Or Maybe the thing is, ever heard of
>this Phat...hard to program for?
I think the problem people have with you is that you always site software for
the Dreamcast's many problems (and we can imagine, the X-Box's). So which is
it? Can't have it both ways.
>With only 5 AI in a flagship GT racer, no one should be proud.
Again, you can parrot this over and over but everyone else here knows this is
an empty complaint. Sorry.
>But damn, what's with that huge white wall of fog in Dynasty Warriors 2?
There is none. I know you haven't played this game. Why comment on it then?
>And speaking of detail, the
>textures on the hills are blurry low res. Not enough VRAM=flaw.
You really don't understand the PS2's architecture. Or do you need someone else
to go over with you again, how the PS2's VRAM is not normal functioning VRAM?
You'd think you'd find something else to harp on about after being proven wrong
on this count time and again.
>You want me to go over this *again*?
Yes, except use actual PS2 problems rather than desperate fanboy attempts at
argumentation.
>
>I can tell this one hurt. Yep, get used to it, the PS2 can't handle
>near-future games. Unreal2? Nope.
Yes.
>Return to Castle Wolf? Nope.
Yes. Care to be proven wrong again? Hopefully Red Faction will shut you up.
>The PS2 has no purpose---or what, to re-hash old DC games?
The ones worth playing, yes. Well that and to have far superior-looking and
playing games *first* before the DC and the X-Box. Will you have fun playing a
dumping ground of PC ports on the X-Box? How long will it take you to eat crow?
>The DC is over-performing with titles like Lemans pushing well over 3M
>polys.
Please. Lemans doesn't come close to this figure, one that the PS2 achieved
with its first launch titles.
>The PS2 isn't revolutionary; most everyone is underwhelmed.
That must be why sales charts are unprecedented. The PS2's are being bought up
as soon as they hit store shelves. Deal.
>The PS2
>isn't delivering what was promised;
Yes it is. And more.
Mark Borton
"DarienAllen.com" <darie...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:gps87tcge96c0pe4f...@4ax.com...
> Now at the time of Sun, 28 Jan 2001 19:29:36 GMT, teemoney
> <moch...@zdnetmail.com> we were graced with this statement:
>
> >> and Z.O.E.?
> >
> >sorry, i don't get into gay ass mech games.
>
> Gay ass mech games? Thanks for remind me while I had you in my KF in
> the first place. I thought you'd drop that infantile
> shit...apparently not.
You just entered my kill file, Mech games rule, and if you don`t like them
,don`t get an X-Box, with MS holding the Mechwarrior license Big Mech games
are likely to be the only other "EXLUSIVE" title the X-Box is going to have
other than Munches sack of shite
009
Mark Borton <MarkB...@DEEPSPACENINE.COM> wrote in message
news:980684537.18530.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
Phat H Tran
wrote:
>Phat Tran wrote:
>
>> Can you be any more predictable? When I was reading that preview on PS2
>> IGN, I told myself to expect a teemoney take on the exact paragraphs you
>> quoted.
>>
>> You'd be happier if they took out the rain effects altogether, just as you
>> would prefer a 1L glass that is full over a 3L glass that's only half-full.
>
>Can you be any more predictable? When I noticed you replying to my post, I
>told myself to expect a Phattie take on the quoted paragraphs, ignoring them
>and attacking me personally.
Attacking you personally? For a guy whose primary modus operandi is
the personal insult, your skin is uncharacteristically thin.
And I actually addressed your points by drawing an analogy, but I'm
not surprised it flew right over your head.
>I can only thank sites like IGN for telling the truth. You PS2 fanboys prefer
>walking around in a Sony induced daze. The fact remains that the rain effect
>is shown in a demo and may only be available in the arcade, head -to- head
>mode.
Let me spell things out for you. The rain effects are highly
impressive, and I wouldn't be surprised if they're very taxing on the
system, any system. No other game and no other system has done
anything like them before. They are an additional icing on an already
very rich cake. So what if, up to now, Polyphony has only added the
effects to special racing modes, or if the effects aren't overlaid on
the street all the way to the same horizon as the rest of the
graphics? The fact that they're there at all is a significant
technical feat.
>And it's done very poorly in the demo!
All the people who have seen it have said that the rain effects are
"highly impressive", as evidenced by the screenshots. You are being
intentionally blind and illiterate.
Phat.
---
To e-mail, remove obvious clutter from address.
Phat H Tran
<jkit...@netpci.com> wrote:
>
>Phat Tran wrote in message <3JSc6.13698$fe1.1...@news20.bellglobal.com>...
>>> Unreal running at less than 30 fps, EA NASCAR dropping to PSX resolution
>>> with a mirror on, Munch Team jumping ship, SSX slowing down with only one
>>> player on the screen,
>>
>>I suppose you haven't a clue about weak software vs weak hardware.
>
>It's always your excuse---the software. Or Maybe the thing is, ever heard of
>this Phat...hard to program for?
And how does "hard to program for" == "weak"? And since you are aware
that the PS2 is a difficult-to-program console, you should recognize
the disparity between what can be achieved when the hardware is
programmed well and when it is programmed poorly, and not use the poor
performing examples as upper limits on the achievable performance of
the machine like you've been doing since it launched.
>>> and GT3 having only 5 AI cars to race against.
>>
>>And some of videogame's best physics fully modeled on each car, as well as
>>enough special effects to make George Lucas proud.
>
>With only 5 AI in a flagship GT racer, no one should be proud. Looney Tunes
>possibly, but not GT3.
I see you snipped out my reference to MotoGP, which has over 20 AI
bikes racing on the track, at 60fps, and impressive visuals. But I
wouldn't say that it's a more impressive game than GT3. The number of
computer cars is only a big deal to you because that's the only thing
you can knock GT3 for at this point.
>>And if you want even more AI entities, Dynasty Warriors 2 has about 30
>>characters onscreen at once, while Kessen 2 will have roughly 500.
>
>But damn, what's with that huge white wall of fog in Dynasty Warriors 2?
The fogging in DW2 doesn't prevent the game from drawing more
background than in, say, Soul Calibre, on the DC, and yet still be
able to draw 30+ characters, each as detailed as a character from SC.
And yet, to you, PS2 is still weaker than DC.
>Maybe they should have dropped the AI count down to 5 like in GT3, so the
>game could have a little background detail. And speaking of detail, the
>textures on the hills are blurry low res. Not enough VRAM=flaw.
What about the textures on the tunnel in GT3?
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/screenshot.cfm?sid=2079&picno=4
High res, and the game is doing much more than DW2. So, do you still
argue that it's the hardware and not the software?
>>So, how weak and flawed is the PS2 again?
>
>You want me to go over this *again*?
You haven't even stated a good case even _once_.
>>> And the comment by Unreal2's developers about Unreal2 being *impossible
>to
>>> run* on a PS2 is really sad, yet expected.
>>
>>Your continued dribble is really sad, yet expected, as well.
>>
>
>I can tell this one hurt.
I can assure you that it hurt me not one iota, and certainly not as
much as Sega's early retirement of the DC was to you.
>Yep, get used to it, the PS2 can't handle
>near-future games. Unreal2? Nope. Return to Castle Wolf? Nope. X-Box? Yep
>and yep. The PS2 has no purpose---or what, to re-hash old DC games? RECV
>and F355 again on the PS2?
True, the PS2 can't handle games designed for PCs with 128MB of main
memory, 32MB of graphics memory, and 30GB of hard disk space. We're
talking about physical resources the console doesn't have. But, if
you're going gaga over PC games, why not get a PC to play them on?
>>Even more weak and flawed than the DC, right John?
>
>Yes.
Okay, now you've said everything.
teemoney
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 16:46:54 GMT, teemoney <moch...@zdnetmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Phat Tran wrote:
> >
> >> Can you be any more predictable? When I was reading that preview on PS2
> >> IGN, I told myself to expect a teemoney take on the exact paragraphs you
> >> quoted.
> >>
> >> You'd be happier if they took out the rain effects altogether, just as you
> >> would prefer a 1L glass that is full over a 3L glass that's only half-full.
> >
> >Can you be any more predictable? When I noticed you replying to my post, I
> >told myself to expect a Phattie take on the quoted paragraphs, ignoring them
> >and attacking me personally.
>
> Attacking you personally? For a guy whose primary modus operandi is
> the personal insult, your skin is uncharacteristically thin.
I wasn't upset that you were attacking me personally. I was just pointing it out.
>
>
> And I actually addressed your points by drawing an analogy, but I'm
> not surprised it flew right over your head.
don't flatter yourself.
>
>
> >I can only thank sites like IGN for telling the truth. You PS2 fanboys prefer
> >walking around in a Sony induced daze. The fact remains that the rain effect
> >is shown in a demo and may only be available in the arcade, head -to- head
> >mode.
>
> Let me spell things out for you. The rain effects are highly
> impressive, and I wouldn't be surprised if they're very taxing on the
> system, any system. No other game and no other system has done
> anything like them before. They are an additional icing on an already
> very rich cake. So what if, up to now, Polyphony has only added the
> effects to special racing modes, or if the effects aren't overlaid on
> the street all the way to the same horizon as the rest of the
> graphics? The fact that they're there at all is a significant
> technical feat.
We'll have to wait until we play the game to evaluate how significant a feat it
is. The review indicated that it wasn't done that well, referring to the visible
draw in.
>
>
> >And it's done very poorly in the demo!
>
> All the people who have seen it have said that the rain effects are
> "highly impressive", as evidenced by the screenshots. You are being
> intentionally blind and illiterate.
The guys from IGN said it was done poorly. You're being intentionally protective
of Sony and the PS2.
And where the heck did you get the gall to call me illiterate? You base whether
someone is well read on how he interprets comments from a game review? You have a
very limited view of the world. You should get out more and interact with people.
Phat Tran
> Phat H Tran wrote:
>
> > Let me spell things out for you. The rain effects are highly
> > impressive, and I wouldn't be surprised if they're very taxing on the
> > system, any system. No other game and no other system has done
> > anything like them before. They are an additional icing on an already
> > very rich cake. So what if, up to now, Polyphony has only added the
> > effects to special racing modes, or if the effects aren't overlaid on
> > the street all the way to the same horizon as the rest of the
> > graphics? The fact that they're there at all is a significant
> > technical feat.
>
> We'll have to wait until we play the game to evaluate how significant a
feat it
> is. The review indicated that it wasn't done that well, referring to the
visible
> draw in.
There is no draw-in as commonly implied by the term. Read the article
again:
"One other slight drawback is that you can see the reflection effects being
drawn in, as it were. As it is with the sharper textures that appear at a
close distance when mip-mapping routines are implemented, there's an
invisible horizon at which the lights begin appearing in the wet road, and
it's not quite out as far as your view horizon in most cases, which results
in a slightly disconcerting pop-up effect when you pay close attention to
what's going on."
The writer was referring to some detail pop-in in the reflections that's
only noticeable if "you pay close attention", not draw-in of the track or
scenery.
> > All the people who have seen it have said that the rain effects are
> > "highly impressive", as evidenced by the screenshots. You are being
> > intentionally blind and illiterate.
>
> The guys from IGN said it was done poorly. You're being intentionally
protective
> of Sony and the PS2.
The IGN article did not exactly describe the effect as "poor". Here are
some quotes:
"The as-yet-unfinished reflection, fog, and particle effects used to add to
the experience of driving through Special Stage R5 after a heavy rain are
yet another display of the PS2's intense special effects capability."
"The added sensation of realism is exceptionally striking."
"The wet-weather mode is a very impressive piece of visual artistry."
> And where the heck did you get the gall to call me illiterate? You base
whether
> someone is well read on how he interprets comments from a game review?
You have a
> very limited view of the world. You should get out more and interact with
people.
Um... I wasn't the one who got so excited about the prospect of having sex
with a girl that I had to interrupt the occasion to log onto the internet
and tell Usenet about it.
Phat.
John Kitchar
Phat H Tran wrote in message <3a78f4ba....@news.rim.net>...
>On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 06:52:11 +1000, "John Kitchar"
><jkit...@netpci.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Phat Tran wrote in message
<3JSc6.13698$fe1.1...@news20.bellglobal.com>...
>>>> Unreal running at less than 30 fps, EA NASCAR dropping to PSX
resolution
>>>> with a mirror on, Munch Team jumping ship, SSX slowing down with only
one
>>>> player on the screen,
>>>
>>>I suppose you haven't a clue about weak software vs weak hardware.
>>
>>It's always your excuse---the software. Or Maybe the thing is, ever heard
of
>>this Phat...hard to program for?
>
>And how does "hard to program for" == "weak"? And since you are aware
>that the PS2 is a difficult-to-program console, you should recognize
>the disparity between what can be achieved when the hardware is
>programmed well and when it is programmed poorly, and not use the poor
>performing examples as upper limits on the achievable performance of
>the machine like you've been doing since it launched.
>
The "PS2 hard to program for" issue is a HUGE weakness IMO. You see Phat,
just because a *few titles* from the *very best* developers end up looking
good does not imply system "strength". I call it a weakness when lesser
known developers have difficulty developing unique and quite often very
interesting titles. I like quirky smaller budget games---Psychic Force 2012
on the Dreamcast is a fine example of just such a game.
This whole issue of PC port difficulty concerns me even more. Lots of great
games are made for the PC. Before you jump on me to game on the PC, shut-up
and consider that an easy to PC port console could only be viewed
objectively as a PLUS---wouldn't the PS2 be a better console if Unreal T
ported over easily at 60 fps? Now imagine how easy Sega could port over
Shenmue 2 to the X-Box over a port to the PS2. I consider the difficulty to
develop for and difficulty to port PC games very significant PS2 weaknesses.
So much so in fact, I predict that in the long run, the PS2 could fail.
Bring on the PS3 I say.
>>>> and GT3 having only 5 AI cars to race against.
>>>
>>>And some of videogame's best physics fully modeled on each car, as well
as
>>>enough special effects to make George Lucas proud.
>>
>>With only 5 AI in a flagship GT racer, no one should be proud. Looney
Tunes
>>possibly, but not GT3.
>
>I see you snipped out my reference to MotoGP, which has over 20 AI
>bikes racing on the track, at 60fps, and impressive visuals. But I
>wouldn't say that it's a more impressive game than GT3. The number of
>computer cars is only a big deal to you because that's the only thing
>you can knock GT3 for at this point.
>
I'm sure that GT3 will be a good game. If I had a PS2 I would buy it. But
I'm being dead honest when I say that 5 AI doesn't impress me---good game
possibly, but certainly not a killer app for me. You just can't model sim
racing with only 5 AI. Actually, my mistake, you could. But given the mass
market appeal of GT3, I'm betting on arcade rubber band AI all the way, just
like GT2. How fun would GT3 be for "Joe Casual Gamer" with no catch up logic
and only 5 AI? I'm playing a 5 rubberband AI DC racer at the moment, and it
has 250 tracks. It's MSR of course and it wasn't for the 250 real-world
tracks, this racer would be only average due to the 5 AI. GT3 has nicer
looking cars and reflections yes---but only 5 AI and 15 tracks. Can you tell
if I'm excited as hell about GT3? Good game yes. Great game no way.
>>>And if you want even more AI entities, Dynasty Warriors 2 has about 30
>>>characters onscreen at once, while Kessen 2 will have roughly 500.
>>
>>But damn, what's with that huge white wall of fog in Dynasty Warriors 2?
>
>The fogging in DW2 doesn't prevent the game from drawing more
>background than in, say, Soul Calibre, on the DC, and yet still be
>able to draw 30+ characters, each as detailed as a character from SC.
>And yet, to you, PS2 is still weaker than DC.
>
Well then, I just didn't see this. From what I observed watching people play
at Gamestop, I saw no backgrounds more impressive than SC. I did see a whole
lot of white fog. I saw nice looking characters poping in and out of that
fog. I saw blurry textures drawing-in *and* a solid curtain of white fog. I
also observed slowdown with that horse on the screen. BTW, I see quite a lot
of slowdown in SSX even when only one player is on the screen---which is
most often the case.
>>Maybe they should have dropped the AI count down to 5 like in GT3, so the
>>game could have a little background detail. And speaking of detail, the
>>textures on the hills are blurry low res. Not enough VRAM=flaw.
>
>What about the textures on the tunnel in GT3?
>http://www.computerandvideogames.com/screenshot.cfm?sid=2079&picno=4
>
I was talking about DW2. GT3 isn't out yet, so I won't comment much (we do
know about the sad 5 AI) about a game I cannot see. You should hold the
phone also---you just never know about the actual game and gameplay until
after release. It may be another "Bouncer" for all we know. And BTW, it
looks like it's going to be quite a while before we see GT3 anyway with all
the delays.
>High res, and the game is doing much more than DW2. So, do you still
>argue that it's the hardware and not the software?
>
>>>So, how weak and flawed is the PS2 again?
>>
>>You want me to go over this *again*?
>
>You haven't even stated a good case even _once_.
>
Your opinion. Thanks!
>>>> And the comment by Unreal2's developers about Unreal2 being *impossible
>>to
>>>> run* on a PS2 is really sad, yet expected.
>>>
>>>Your continued dribble is really sad, yet expected, as well.
>>>
>>
>>I can tell this one hurt.
>
>I can assure you that it hurt me not one iota, and certainly not as
>much as Sega's early retirement of the DC was to you.
>
I could really give a flying F even if Sega cans the DC tomorrow. My DC
"paid for itself" the day I purchased my Japanese version of Powerstone long
ago, *months* before USA DC launch. Really Phat, if you are a console gamer,
what console games have you purchased and played since 9/9/99?
>>Yep, get used to it, the PS2 can't handle
>>near-future games. Unreal2? Nope. Return to Castle Wolf? Nope. X-Box? Yep
>>and yep. The PS2 has no purpose---or what, to re-hash old DC games? RECV
>>and F355 again on the PS2?
>
>True, the PS2 can't handle games designed for PCs with 128MB of main
>memory, 32MB of graphics memory, and 30GB of hard disk space. We're
>talking about physical resources the console doesn't have. But, if
>you're going gaga over PC games, why not get a PC to play them on?
>
It should, given that the published specs state, what, 60M pps?
Revolutionary and "Toy Story" graphics was the hype and lies around USA DC
launch Phat, remember? Instead we get a console struggling to hold its own
against the Dreamcast---with many games actually looking inferior
considering no VGA support. Like DC DOA2 in VGA blowing away PS2 DOA2 in
NTSC. If it wasn't for Sony hype marketing muscle (and with brainwashing PSX
fan mags like PSM) and playing dirty pool with retailers, the PS2 would be
DOA. So the PS2 could be popular *only* due to marketing; great. This IMO,
has nothing to do with real system performance.
>>>Even more weak and flawed than the DC, right John?
>>
>>Yes.
>
>Okay, now you've said everything.
>
The PS2 is weak and flawed because it failed to deliver next-gen graphics
over the DC. The DC was successful in delivering next-gen graphics over the
PSX and N64---no one argues that. You have to consider time Phat---an
abstract concept I know. The PS2 fails for being over a year late---it's too
similar in performance to the DC to be considered a next-gen console. I've
already played F355 and RECV. Get it?
The X-Box will deliver the future of videogames IMO, not the weak PS2 *and*
DC of course.
JMK
teemoney
The truth be known, I was more excited about the Japanese dinner we had. She
wasn't all that in the sack.
That still wouldn't explain how I'm illiterate. Another one of your unfounded
attacks I guess...
>
>
> Phat.
DarienAllen.com
<jkit...@netpci.com> we were graced with this statement:
>The "PS2 hard to program for" issue is a HUGE weakness IMO. You see Phat,
>just because a *few titles* from the *very best* developers end up looking
>good does not imply system "strength". I call it a weakness when lesser
>known developers have difficulty developing unique and quite often very
>interesting titles. I like quirky smaller budget games---Psychic Force 2012
>on the Dreamcast is a fine example of just such a game.
Uh I don't know that I consider the studio's that did Midnight and
Smuggler's Run large....LucasArts certainly is not one of the "best"
console developers and yet Starfighter looks to be a very polished
product.
>Well then, I just didn't see this. From what I observed watching people play
>at Gamestop, I saw no backgrounds more impressive than SC. I did see a whole
>lot of white fog. I saw nice looking characters poping in and out of that
>fog. I saw blurry textures drawing-in *and* a solid curtain of white fog. I
>also observed slowdown with that horse on the screen. BTW, I see quite a lot
>of slowdown in SSX even when only one player is on the screen---which is
>most often the case.
Did you also see all the AI work going on in the background of DW2? I
bet.
------------------------
Darien Allen
ICQ-2927081/AOL-Dezign369
RAVENS WIN!!! RAVENS WIN!!!
John Kitchar
DarienAllen.com wrote in message ...
>Now at the time of Tue, 30 Jan 2001 19:32:37 +1000, "John Kitchar"
><jkit...@netpci.com> we were graced with this statement:
>
>>The "PS2 hard to program for" issue is a HUGE weakness IMO. You see Phat,
>>just because a *few titles* from the *very best* developers end up looking
>>good does not imply system "strength". I call it a weakness when lesser
>>known developers have difficulty developing unique and quite often very
>>interesting titles. I like quirky smaller budget games---Psychic Force
2012
>>on the Dreamcast is a fine example of just such a game.
>
>Uh I don't know that I consider the studio's that did Midnight and
>Smuggler's Run large....LucasArts certainly is not one of the "best"
>console developers and yet Starfighter looks to be a very polished
>product.
>
So I read that you work for a PSX mag. I question your ability to be
objective if true Darien. Are you going to deny that development costs are
higher for PS2 games? Why would it be higher? Labor costs due to more time
in development possibly---the consequence of a difficult to program for PS2?
>>Well then, I just didn't see this. From what I observed watching people
play
>>at Gamestop, I saw no backgrounds more impressive than SC. I did see a
whole
>>lot of white fog. I saw nice looking characters poping in and out of that
>>fog. I saw blurry textures drawing-in *and* a solid curtain of white fog.
I
>>also observed slowdown with that horse on the screen. BTW, I see quite a
lot
>>of slowdown in SSX even when only one player is on the screen---which is
>>most often the case.
>
>Did you also see all the AI work going on in the background of DW2? I
>bet.
>
You lost me here. Yeah I saw all the similarly textured AI running around.
But IMO, they should have lowered the AI count to cut the fog---DW2 is
clearly pushing the PS2 too far.
JMK
DarienAllen.com
<jkit...@netpci.com> we were graced with this statement:
>So I read that you work for a PSX mag. I question your ability to be
>objective if true Darien. Are you going to deny that development costs are
>higher for PS2 games? Why would it be higher? Labor costs due to more time
>in development possibly---the consequence of a difficult to program for PS2?
John thanks for proving again what a complete fucking idiot you are.
I've written for a variety of multi-console game websites over the
last 5 years wrote for a N64 magazine and now write for a PS magazine,
not only that but most of the games that are in my currently playing
list in the PS magazine are DC games.
You sir are a complete moron.
John Kitchar
DarienAllen.com wrote in message ...
><jkit...@netpci.com> we were graced with this statement:
>
>>So I read that you work for a PSX mag. I question your ability to be
>>objective if true Darien. Are you going to deny that development costs are
>>higher for PS2 games? Why would it be higher? Labor costs due to more time
>>in development possibly---the consequence of a difficult to program for
PS2?
>
>John thanks for proving again what a complete fucking idiot you are.
>I've written for a variety of multi-console game websites over the
>last 5 years wrote for a N64 magazine and now write for a PS magazine,
>not only that but most of the games that are in my currently playing
>list in the PS magazine are DC games.
>
>You sir are a complete moron.
>
You consistently side with what's popular---not to mention being a *total
asshole*. Common knowledge= high PS2 development costs. What a dick.
I don't insult here much, but I'll make this exception. Do me a favor and
never reply to my posts---better yet, please add me to your *growing*
killfile list. I'm sure it's getting pretty large by now.
JMK
Kjetil Torgrim Homme
> This whole issue of PC port difficulty concerns me even more. Lots
> of great games are made for the PC. Before you jump on me to game
> on the PC, shut-up and consider that an easy to PC port console
> could only be viewed objectively as a PLUS---wouldn't the PS2 be a
> better console if Unreal T ported over easily at 60 fps? Now
> imagine how easy Sega could port over Shenmue 2 to the X-Box over
> a port to the PS2. I consider the difficulty to develop for and
> difficulty to port PC games very significant PS2 weaknesses. So
> much so in fact, I predict that in the long run, the PS2 could
> fail. Bring on the PS3 I say.
The PS3 will be sporting an Emotion Engine 3 and Graphics Synthesizer
3, so it won't be a lot easier to port to. The basic architecture is
fixed, but we will be seeing massively larger VRAM (at least 32 MB
confirmed) and higher clock rates (assumption). I'm at a loss what
new features the EE/GS architecture really needs, texture compression
is a red herring at that point, but applying more than one texture at
once may be useful (saves writes). It'll be interesting to see what
the 4x increase in transistors (on the EE) will buy.
Kjetil T.
DarienAllen.com
<jkit...@netpci.com> we were graced with this statement:
>You consistently side with what's popular---not to mention being a *total
>asshole*. Common knowledge= high PS2 development costs. What a dick.
>
>I don't insult here much, but I'll make this exception. Do me a favor and
>never reply to my posts---better yet, please add me to your *growing*
>killfile list. I'm sure it's getting pretty large by now.
Spare me the high and might bit...it's about as old as your tired weak
and flawed argument.
Phat H Tran
<jkit...@netpci.com> wrote:
>
>Phat H Tran wrote in message <3a78f4ba....@news.rim.net>...
>>On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 06:52:11 +1000, "John Kitchar"
>><jkit...@netpci.com> wrote:
>>
>>And how does "hard to program for" == "weak"? And since you are aware
>>that the PS2 is a difficult-to-program console, you should recognize
>>the disparity between what can be achieved when the hardware is
>>programmed well and when it is programmed poorly, and not use the poor
>>performing examples as upper limits on the achievable performance of
>>the machine like you've been doing since it launched.
>
>The "PS2 hard to program for" issue is a HUGE weakness IMO.
Your original claim of the PS2 being "weak and flawed" pertained to
the hardware's inherent capabilities, not programming difficulties.
The language you used consisted of "PS2 can't do this" or "PS2
couldn't do that".
Now, it looks like you want to redefine what you meant when you said
that the PS2 is "weak and flawed". If you want to say that being hard
to program for is a weakness, then you are talking of a strategic
weakness in Sony's plans, hindering the adoption of the PS2 as the
successor platform to the PS1, not an inherent weakness of the
hardware. An alternate strategy for Sony would have been to delay the
launch of the PS2 until the middleware and libraries were up to par,
but then they'd be trading one set of risks for another.
>>The fogging in DW2 doesn't prevent the game from drawing more
>>background than in, say, Soul Calibre, on the DC, and yet still be
>>able to draw 30+ characters, each as detailed as a character from SC.
>>And yet, to you, PS2 is still weaker than DC.
>>
>
>Well then, I just didn't see this. From what I observed watching people play
>at Gamestop, I saw no backgrounds more impressive than SC.
"Impressive" is subjective. An objective measure would be the number
of polygons in the backgrounds of DW2 and SC. SC's backgrounds
consist primarily of a nice bitmapped infinity plane and a small
number of very simple polygonal details for the near background.
DW2's backgrounds, OTOH, consist of trees, tents, mountains, and other
landscape details that would have required many times the number of
polygons that are in SC's backgrounds.
>>What about the textures on the tunnel in GT3?
>>http://www.computerandvideogames.com/screenshot.cfm?sid=2079&picno=4
>>
>
>I was talking about DW2.
In other words, you want to ignore games that contradict your claims
that the PS2 is "weak and flawed". In this case, "can't handle high
res textures".
>>I can assure you that it hurt me not one iota, and certainly not as
>>much as Sega's early retirement of the DC was to you.
>
>I could really give a flying F even if Sega cans the DC tomorrow. My DC
>"paid for itself" the day I purchased my Japanese version of Powerstone long
>ago, *months* before USA DC launch. Really Phat, if you are a console gamer,
>what console games have you purchased and played since 9/9/99?
You mean for my DC? Let's see... Crazy Taxi, Soul Calibur, Shenmue,
F355, Berserk, Sega GT, Virtua Fighter 3, Virtua Tennis, Tokyo Extreme
Racer, and some others that slip my mind.
>>True, the PS2 can't handle games designed for PCs with 128MB of main
>>memory, 32MB of graphics memory, and 30GB of hard disk space. We're
>>talking about physical resources the console doesn't have. But, if
>>you're going gaga over PC games, why not get a PC to play them on?
>
>It should, given that the published specs state, what, 60M pps?
Yes, but the specs also only said 32MB of main memory, and no virtual
memory. Unreal2 would have to be redesigned around a system that is
much more memory constrained than the PC to run on the PS2.
>The PS2 is weak and flawed because it failed to deliver next-gen graphics
>over the DC. The DC was successful in delivering next-gen graphics over the
>PSX and N64---no one argues that. You have to consider time Phat---an
>abstract concept I know. The PS2 fails for being over a year late---it's too
>similar in performance to the DC to be considered a next-gen console. I've
>already played F355 and RECV. Get it?
The PS2's games have largely failed to live up to the hype. But in
terms of hardware, the specs of the shipping product matched the specs
of the announced product, unlike MS' lowering of the X-Box's specs as
the days pass. And in terms of capabilities, even the mostly mediocre
games so far have demonstrated large leaps in graphics rendering such
as extremely high-poly models, sophisticated skinning, environment
mapping, light refraction, filtering effects like depth of field and
heat haze, and other feats that your beloved DC has no hope of doing
at any interactive framerate.
>The X-Box will deliver the future of videogames IMO, not the weak PS2 *and*
>DC of course.
Enjoy the wait, if you think that the X-Box will launch with
"revolutionary" games this year.
DarienAllen.com
<jkit...@netpci.com> we were graced with this statement:
>You consistently side with what's popular---not to mention being a *total
>asshole*. Common knowledge= high PS2 development costs. What a dick.
What's wrong your feelings hurt because you went somewhere you
shouldn't have and got spanked for it? Bias has nothing to do with
current or past writing assignments Johny-boy you should know that. I
always side with what's popular...when ppl slammed the TXR's....I
liked them...when everyone loved VP, I didn't....when ppl raved about
Sonic, Jet Grind Radio and Samba...I didn't....
Yeah John you're making perfect sense...as usual.
>I don't insult here much, but I'll make this exception. Do me a favor and
>never reply to my posts---better yet, please add me to your *growing*
>killfile list. I'm sure it's getting pretty large by now.
I clear it out regularly Johnny so that I see all your brilliant
artistry.