View Full Version : XBox 360: So Close
bapenguin
10-02-2005, 01:44 PM
IGN (http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/655/655273p1.html) takes a look at the XBox 360's life since E3 this year. It started pretty rough, and there's been quite a few bumps in the road for developers. According to IGN though, it's all going to change this week with the X05 event.
Despite this painful, transparent struggle, there is hope in sight. That expensive progressive scan HD TV you bought this summer will not have been purchased in vain. We've recently played 360 games -- from Tony Hawk's American Wasteland to Call of Duty 2 to Peter Jackson's King Kong - and seen others, Tiger Woods 06, Need for Speed Most Wanted, Madden, NBA Live, and FIFA. While many games look like high-res versions of current titles, others look and play phenomenally. To date, Infinity Ward's Call of Duty 2 is the best looking and playing Xbox 360 game I've played so far. And while that's nothing to sniff at, because that's a true next-generation title, I expect others to up the ante. PGR3 looks incredible. Perfect Dark Zero, we've learned, is coming along well, and Kameo - surprisingly - has many game journalists in awe. Even King Kong, which has that whole movie stigma attached, looks and plays surprisingly well.
Soon we'll get to see how Next-Gen, next-gen really is. X05 starts October 4th.
Nath5000
10-02-2005, 01:59 PM
I think its funny that he thinks COD2 is truly a next gen title that shows off the 360, especially considering its a multiplatform game. I personally think that COD2 looks awesome, but doesnt look as half as next gen in its presentation as the newly released gamespot and IGN media of NBA 2k6. COD2 looks good, but from what I've seen I wouldnt give it the "showcase title" title just yet. To be fair, he did say it was the best of only what he had played so far.
Liquidize105
10-02-2005, 02:20 PM
I never bought any HDTV, and even if I had, it wouldn't be in vain.
I love me some King Kong like anybody else (and maybe NBA 2k6 too, but that's all), seriously it doesn't take much to awe these "journalists."
Abash Alarmist
10-02-2005, 02:23 PM
I want Oblivion and Gears of War....
I don't understand why people get their panties in a twist over next gen. OH MAN DO YOU SEE THOSE GRAPHICS IT'S NOT REALLY NEXT GEN LIKE NEXT GEN LOOKS LIKE NEXT GEN NEXT GEN!
Just sit back and enjoy the new consoles. I'm looking forward to the XBOX 360 just for the new XBL.
MGS4 is the only game I can truly say looks next-gen.
MGS4 is the only game I can truly say looks next-gen.
wut r u talking about MGS4 looks like fukken n64 grafifix lol
We've been looking at "next gen" for the past year or so... it's called a PC! Even though the games will have better presentation and interface, the PC's have already shown what "next gen" consoles are goin to look like.
Bloom, HDR, normals, specular, higher resolution, depth cue, physics, more polygons, per-pixel lighting / shadowing.
Those are the things you'll see primarily in the first wave of games. No one's had time with the machines to innovate jack-chit.
While many games look like high-res versions of current titles
This is what worries me. I've been saying this from the very beginning.
Everything looks like it's running on Xbox 1.5.
Hewie
10-02-2005, 02:38 PM
wut r u talking about MGS4 looks like fukken n64 grafifix lol
That made me laugh, not sure why though.
Kelegacy
10-02-2005, 02:39 PM
wut r u talking about MGS4 looks like fukken n64 grafifix lol
Do you have Multiple Personality Disorder? Sometimes you post coherent stuff, sometimes it's actually intelligent, sometimes you turn into a 12 year old with a flimsy grasp of l33t sp33k, and other times you're like a retarded cowboy on his first trip to a big city gay bar.
You need to see a professional. Really.
bapenguin
10-02-2005, 02:41 PM
This is what worries me. I've been saying this from the very beginning.
Everything looks like it's running on Xbox 1.5.
I don't know...that's pretty much how it always is with a select few. Look at Madden when it hit the PS2 compared to the PS1 game. Higher rez models, a slightly better animations, but that was about it. First generation in a new console is always underwhelming with a few standout titles.
and other times you're like a retarded cowboy on his first trip to a big city gay bar.
That's the best.
Draft
10-02-2005, 02:42 PM
This is what worries me. I've been saying this from the very beginning.
Everything looks like it's running on Xbox 1.5.This is because a lot of developers took Xbox games, upped the textures and resolution, and voila, Xbox 360 game. MS is probably allowing this because they want as many launch titles as possible.
This is what worries me. I've been saying this from the very beginning.
Everything looks like it's running on Xbox 1.5.
Does everything have to look like XBOX 2.0? I think people need to realize that next gen doesn't mean KILLER GRAFFIX.
What does it mean then. Other than graphics what does next gen get you? Excluding the revolution of course.
Does everything have to look like XBOX 2.0? I think people need to realize that next gen doesn't mean KILLER GRAFFIX.
For the sake of the industry, it better. Developers need to realize that most people are happy with their Xbox. Considering the state of the economy right, and the fact that analysts are predicting a record-low spending season, most people simply aren't willing to fork out the cash. You have to look at the real world situation.
Lets also consider that the 360 is going to be $400 and $60 for gamers (I assure you that most won't go for the 'Core' system). So if anything, most consumers will buy the 360 with one or two games. If someone buys the system and two games, that's over 500 bucks.
The need to impress is especially high right now. If the average consumer doesn't think the games are much of a jump, they're simply going to stick to playing Halo 2 this Christmas.
Everywhere I go, I hear the casual gamer (for lack of a better word) saying the same things:
"Man, doez games don't look no better than da Xbox!"
"$400 bucks?!"
"No harddrivez????"
and of course,
"Where dem Halo 3 at?"
Schnoogs
10-02-2005, 04:16 PM
What does it mean then. Other than graphics what does next gen get you? Excluding the revolution of course.
Are you really that clueless as to the advantages of the XBox 360??
Let's start with a few that aren't graphical...
A.I.
Physics
Multithreading
Yes I am actually. Totally 100%. I know this may be a shocker to some on this site, but I don't really follow consoles. At all.
In any case:
1: AI, yeah. Good luck on that. I wouldn't get my hopes up
2: Sounds good
3: Allows for the above 2, kind of redundant
Draft
10-02-2005, 04:57 PM
Yeah, not like more powerful hardware would allow for more robust AI. I mean, that doesn't make any sense at all.
thecrazyd
10-02-2005, 04:59 PM
Just cause it can, doesn't mean it will. We will get shinier graphics, if we are lucky.
No it makes full sense. But AI is one of those things thats always hyped and never delivered. Processing power has increased how much over the past 10 years? Over this time period how many times have we heard about better AI and how often have we gotten it?
Is the bottle neck really processing power or is it not spending the time or not having the ability to code it. Especially now with the push for more and better graphics, that's where the time and money is going to be spent. Easier to accomplish and easier to sell.
Or maybe I'm just cynical.
No it makes full sense. But AI is one of those things thats always hyped and never delivered. Processing power has increased how much over the past 10 years? Over this time period how many times have we heard about better AI and how often have we gotten it?
Is the bottle neck really processing power or is it not spending the time or not having the ability to code it. Especially now with the push for more and better graphics, that's where the time and money is going to be spent. Easier to accomplish and easier to sell.
Or maybe I'm just cynical.
You're just being stupid. It really does take a bit of processing power to get good AI plus whatever else you want done. If you look at the AI from the current generation and then look at the last generation, you'll notice a huge jump. Don't believe me? Play Metal Gear Solid, and then play 3. Notice the difference in AI?
Maybe if a company specializing in AI created an AI engine that could be plugged in like these physics engines we'd have something. Wonder if that's possible or if AI is to game specific.
Maybe if a company specializing in AI created an AI engine that could be plugged in like these physics engines we'd have something. Wonder if that's possible or if AI is to game specific.
It would be too game specific. Imagine Quake 3 bots in Battlefield 2. It would be hilariously bad.
You're just being stupid. It really does take a bit of processing power to get good AI plus whatever else you want done. If you look at the AI from the current generation and then look at the last generation, you'll notice a huge jump. Don't believe me? Play Metal Gear Solid, and then play 3. Notice the difference in AI?
Let's say I am being stupid, at least I'm the literate one. Where did I say processing power was not needed for AI? That's all that's needed for it, from a power standpoint.
It would be too game specific. Imagine Quake 3 bots in Battlefield 2. It would be hilariously bad.
I believe Quake3 ran on checkpoints though. Didn't learn terrain and strategy on it's own. You'd think if someone created a pure ai that learned the terrain on it's own, it could be customized for different types of games.
Let's say I am being stupid, at least I'm the literate one. Where did I say processing power was not needed for AI? That's all that's needed for it, from a power standpoint.
I don't know what you're talking about.
Let me quote you correcting me
It really does take a bit of processing power to get good AI plus whatever else you want done.
Now let me correct that quote by saying if you were a literate individual you never would have said that.
I KNOW that technically next gen hardware can power better AI. I question whether anyone will write AI that will take advantage of it. Scripting for an environment does not equal a good adaptive artificial intelligence to me.
Abash Alarmist
10-02-2005, 05:16 PM
You're just being stupid. It really does take a bit of processing power to get good AI plus whatever else you want done. If you look at the AI from the current generation and then look at the last generation, you'll notice a huge jump. Don't believe me? Play Metal Gear Solid, and then play 3. Notice the difference in AI?
Not exactly...Like he said, graphics are much easier to code and sell in a game than AI. AI, arguably, is the most advanced piece of any game. There are far too many "ifs" to handle if there is only a moderately dedicated amount of people working on it. I think the idea of having a single company licensing out the AI would be a great thing. Giving the developers different sets of AI for different situations/games. Having the most basic for deathmatch, a la Quake 3, and having the more advanced for stealth/tactic games, a single set for games like Battlefield 2 and a different one for Splinter Cell-esque games.
Wouldn't be too hard to market either...Would a company rather spend $150,000 for AI that wouldn't do jack shit, or spend $25-100k(depending on the package) for competent AI?
Is the bottle neck really processing power or is it not spending the time or not having the ability to code it.
Yes, there is a bottle neck.
Does that make you feel better?
You don't get it buddy. Apparently you never will.
You don't get it buddy. Apparently you never will.
r u for serious
Let's say artists right now only put in the time and effort to churn out a game that looks like a 1999 game, but runs on a 360. Is the bottleneck the graphics card or is it the time and effort put in by the art team?
r u for serious
Wow, I hope that was typed tounge in cheek.
Let's say artists right now only put in the time and effort to churn out a game that looks like a 1999 game, but runs on a 360. Is the bottleneck the graphics card or is it the time and effort put in by the art team?
The time and effort?
What exactly are you trying to get at here
Draft
10-02-2005, 05:23 PM
OK. Ninja Gaiden, and especially Ninja Gaiden Black, has AI that could not have been done on a PSX or Saturn or a Dreamcast. It is one of the game's defining strengths.
Wow. Is it me guys?
Yes.
(character limit)
dojoteef
10-02-2005, 05:26 PM
Well video games just don't push the state of the art in AI like they do with graphics. That is a cold hard fact. Often the problem with using "advanced" AI techniques in games is the unpredictability. Game designers want to know that the game is fun to play, is beatable, etc. This is hard to do with sufficiently complex AI systems. For that reason 95% of games use a simple state machine architecture for the AI.
There have been attempts to use more sophisticated state machines, such as hierarchical state machines. In fact, that is likely what Bethesda's Radiant AI does. It has a high-level state machine that determines what the overall goal is: get food, sleep, attack, etc. It then has a lower level state machine to cover the actions required to complete the higher level tasks such as find food, movement to and from a location, picking up items, fire a bow, etc. This also lends itself well to a LOD system for the AI because when the player isn't close the AI does not have to go through all the motions, it can just use the higher level AI to determine what to do and forget about processing the menial aspects of performing the action.
Even games that use AI algorithms such as neural networks, genetic algorithms, etc only use those algorithms to control very small highly confined sections of the AI. They still use state machines for the overall AI of the game though.
Next-gen consoles can promise better AI, but AI has recieved enough processing power in the past few years that it could flourish if more development time was spent on that aspect, namely creating more intricate state machines. As it stands, the development time tends to be skewed towards the graphics more and that's why AI does not progress nearly as quickly as graphics.
Next-gen consoles can promise better AI, but AI has recieved enough processing power in the past few years that it could flourish if more development time was spent on that aspect, namely creating more intricate state machines.
This is kind of what I had in mind. And the fact that it hasn't flourished, even though it could, has me a bit cynical.
*snip*
It's not just how smart they are though, its how many semi-smart NPCs you can have at one time. In most FPS games the limit is around 14 (I remember reading something about the Helghast in Killzone, so I could very well be wrong). It's one of the reasons why mobs in MMORPGs are so stupid. You couldn't possibly make them any smarter because there are just too many of them and there isn't enough power to do it.
dojoteef
10-02-2005, 05:42 PM
It's not just how smart they are though, its how many semi-smart NPCs you can have at one time. In most FPS games the limit is around 14 (I remember reading something about the Helghast in Killzone, so I could very well be wrong). It's one of the reasons why mobs in MMORPGs are so stupid. You couldn't possibly make them any smarter because there are just too many of them and there isn't enough power to do it.
Generally from what I understand of gamers discussing AI, they aren't usually complaining about the number of NPCs on the screen. Rather they seem to discuss the relative intelligence that the NPCs they interact with exhibit. That's what I'm refering to.
And besides, do you really want to be fighting more than 14 intelligent enemies at once in an FPS? Heck I had a challenge playing through the F.E.A.R. single player demo while only fighting 3-4 guys at once.
gojira
10-02-2005, 06:10 PM
This is kind of what I had in mind. And the fact that it hasn't flourished, even though it could, has me a bit cynical.
I disagree with you somewhat. While the power has been there for a while, it isn't willpower or resources on the development side that are lacking either.
It's the preception by the developer that shiny sells games, so they put all of their resources into making particle effects, loading textures faster, and triple super-dooper sampling on everything. By the time you notice that the AI is kinda subpar, you're already halfway through the game and you've already recomended it to 3 of your friends.
It ain't resources at any level, it's the mindset of the people who make the games. AI budget is prioritized dead last because it doesn't sell games.
Librum
10-03-2005, 09:07 AM
Not to mention that, these days, at least these days, all the hardware and software companies are pushing for multiplayer, multiplayer and more multiplayer. Couple that with the previously noted lackluster AI up until now and I really don't see it becoming a big priority. It's almost like single player content is in jeopardy, much less fantastic AI.
ChypeFlux
10-03-2005, 09:07 AM
We've been looking at "next gen" for the past year or so... it's called a PC! Even though the games will have better presentation and interface, the PC's have already shown what "next gen" consoles are goin to look like.
Bloom, HDR, normals, specular, higher resolution, depth cue, physics, more polygons, per-pixel lighting / shadowing.
Ayep. Except I wouldn't necessarily say that they'll provide a better presentation or interface.
Anyway, this generation of consoles won't be any different than what's always happened. The consoles may be marginally more powerful that higher-end PC's when they launch, but the lead won't last long.
That's not actually a problem, because I'd rather play console titles any day of the week, but I think certain people may be disappointed, if they already aren't.
Lot of hype out there these days.. ;)
Abdiel
10-03-2005, 09:08 AM
Give me a game that consists of interacting with a single, surprising (in an intelligent way) character in a well-realized environment, even a small one, and I will be impressed.
Warren Spector's vision, in other words.
Although I would honestly be more excited if you put the name Doug Church on it. And maybe seasoned with a sprinkle of Chris Crawford.
Stormwatcher
10-03-2005, 09:24 AM
I really wish I had a Xbox 360 to play CoD2. Wait, I can play it on my PC! YAY!
The demo, of course,and BTW, it looks really good. And surprisingly light. I hope the final game is really good. and I can play it with Mouse and Keyboard!!!!
Heretic Machine
10-03-2005, 01:41 PM
Launch titles =/= Accurate representation of a system's power.
Stormwatcher
10-03-2005, 01:46 PM
Launch titles =/= Accurate representation of a system's power.
That's just my opinion too. I was argueing that with som imbecile on another forum.
Murmillo
10-03-2005, 05:06 PM
you know. there is a big difference between the next gen of consols and the next gen of PC. PC's get better and better as every day goes along, consoles only get better every 4-5 years. So what has happened over the 5 years with PC's happens all at once with consoles. PC's slowly crawl along to then *bang* a console(s) comes and jumps those 5 years with one hop. So while you can expect your PC to get better next month and then the month after that.. the month after that.. oh.. and the month after that.. if you have the money to stay with all the updates. But at least with consoles we get that nice 5 present in one lump sum.
Magnanimous Gnome
10-03-2005, 05:43 PM
Wow. Is it me guys?
No, he's clearly a douche.
mister_slim
10-03-2005, 06:00 PM
Give me a game that consists of interacting with a single, surprising (in an intelligent way) character in a well-realized environment, even a small one, and I will be impressed.
Warren Spector's vision, in other words.
Although I would honestly be more excited if you put the name Doug Church on it. And maybe seasoned with a sprinkle of Chris Crawford.
Like Facade?
I like how the Sims A.I. is rather non-deterministic, but consists mostly of hacks.
Major Dan
10-03-2005, 07:05 PM
:D The power of next Gen is really starting to become evident! The screens and movies coming out for the 360 are looking good. Oblivion seems to be trying its hand at better AI and who knows I think things will be pretty good with the next Gen. There probably hasn't been such a big leap for consoles since Genesis--->Saturn/Playstation. I preferred the Saturn and Tomb Raider was the break out 3D game of the day.
Saturn-->Dreamcast/PS2/XBox nice but.....
XBox-->XBox 360/PS3 is a big leap me thinks!
WOOT!
Magnanimous Gnome
10-03-2005, 08:07 PM
:D The power of next Gen is really starting to become evident! The screens and movies coming out for the 360 are looking good. Oblivion seems to be trying its hand at better AI and who knows I think things will be pretty good with the next Gen. There probably hasn't been such a big leap for consoles since Genesis--->Saturn/Playstation. I preferred the Saturn and Tomb Raider was the break out 3D game of the day.
Saturn-->Dreamcast/PS2/XBox nice but.....
XBox-->XBox 360/PS3 is a big leap me thinks!
WOOT!
You honestly think the next gen "leap" will be as big as the HUGE jump from the SNES to the 64??
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.