QUOTE
If he doesn't like Turn Based rpgs, then that's why he wouldn't like the game. He doesn't have to play a game to say he doesn't or won't like it.
If I hate first Person Shooters, then why should I give half Life 2 a try? I don't like the game since it's a shooter.
Maybe you should read the entire thread before making a comment like that. His not liking of the genre has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.
QUOTE
Thats not the HALO 2 Demo , thats the HALO 2 Teaser Trailer , it was made to show a posibility on how it would look like. if you want to compare , compare it to the E3 Playable DEMO.
"But that's not the FFX demo, thats the ballroom Teaser Trailer, it was made to show a possibility on how it would look like..."
You don't get it, do you? Let me remind of the rest of the thread you should have read: Miggidy posted a small image of the ballroom demo followed by a craptastic screenshot of FFX. If you say that his two pictures prove that FFX looks 'nothing' like the ballroom demo then you must also agree with me that the two images I posted prove that the Halo 2 trailer looks 'nothing' like Halo 2. Otherwise you are a total hypocrite.
Just for completeness, let's compare to the E3 demo:

QUOTE
You my friend, are an exposed PS2 fanby
Define fanby.
QUOTE
Give up already, you're only making it worse for yourself.
For once I agree with you, I am making it worse for myself since more and more zombies keep coming at me. They keep blabbering "sony zombiessssss" while having no real arguments besides posting crappy pictures or writing off-topic comments that fail to take into consideration what we're talking about.
QUOTE
My, a magician aren't you?
You keep pulling things out of your ass.
You cannot argue against what I have shown and so you resort to swearing. But I guess there is little alternative when you are losing an argument this badly.
QUOTE
The cutscenes in the retail of version of Halo 2 look every bit as good, if not better than that E3 trailer.
"The cutscenes in the retail version of FFX look every bit as good, if not better than the E3 trailer"
QUOTE
Have you checked out the cutscenes for yourself? They are running at a higher resolution than the ingame action.
... I still can't believe you're still writing this. Can't you realize that everything you are saying about Halo 2 can be applied to FFX?
QUOTE
Now if you've answered yes to both questions, my last question would be, what kind of television did you play the game on?
50" Samsung widescreen DLP. Aside from the low resolution, it looked very nice indeed. Unfortunately, the game itself was nowhere near as good as Halo 1 (for its day) but I digress. I also recently replayed a few parts of FFX on it and it looked very good as well.
In case you still haven't caught on, I don't think Halo 2 looks bad at all. The only reason I posted those screens was to mock your silly comparison of FFX vs the ballroom scene.
QUOTE
comparing the E3 teaser to an ingame shot?
compare it to an actual Halo 2 cutscene and they will look alike.
I apologize to the brothers for not seeing this sooner and speaking up.
And now we are supposed to try every game on the planet b4 we say "I dont or I wouldnt like that game"?
fuck that
Ive always hated turn based rpgs and always will. I dont need to fuggin try a new one to know I dislike it. I dont know what I despise more, FF games or Tekken(biggest pile on this planet) [hope that starts a new debate!] fuggers beerchug.gif
Im not going back and seeing what this is all about, I have a yard to clean up after those storms rolled thru yesterday/lastnight. Anyone in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and PA knows what Im talking about sad.gif
I think this place needs more pop.gif
it brings harmony to an otherwise volatile community
I wont comment, I broke a rib from laughing in disbelief someone actually said that.
Im also in conversation with a funny man via AIM, discussing possible goodies in DOA 4
The dude said Sony delivered with one of their target demos (the FF ballroom dance scene, he says FFX delivered in terms of graphics) shown at E3 prior to the PS2 launch. He was actually talking to Twisted but I just had to address his post.
Anyways, I feel for you bro.
Yard work is a bitch! Good luck with that.
if they are true zombies, it cannot be done. Hopefully they arent totally blinded.
Im a MS fanboy, yet atleast I acknowledge the fact that the ps3 will be a monster of a machine.
A Sony Zombie will argue with you till hes blue in the face and tell you that the ps1 is more powerful than the 360, let alone a ps3 to 360 comparison.
fuggin zombie wastes of skin
All I keep seeing in these posts are the words "sony zombies" yet not a single real argument.
I can understand how someone can be anti-sony, but what I can't understand is how these same folks can turn around and kiss MS's ass when MS is obviously just as guilty of the same lies that they accuse Sony of.
But hey, at least now we know who all those annoying 13 year-olds on Live are!
QUOTE(Deftech @ Jul 28 2005, 04:19 PM)
did someone from MS, robbie, J or Peter, ever say that the xbox games would have no jaggies? and this generation would be the one to eliminate that problem? if so, Please post. I dont recall anyone saying such a thing, but that was a while ago and lord knows me memory isnt what it used to be. Its filled with sony hating thoughts which cloud my mind
theres no way in hell one of them said "every single xbox game will feature anti aliasing"
maybe they said "the xbox is capable of anti aliasing every game" ??
thats not a lie, and leaving it up to developers will always yield different results. I pray we are past those days.
Bro, why did you respond as if I said M$ told us no jaggies on the xbox? All I did was watch the tech demos and think to myself, "I see no jaggies but have yet to see an xbox game like that." That would be why I made my comment on jaggies.
My whole post was to stop the childish fanboy crap. Both companies exaggerated. M$ is not innocent like some think. I want to make that very apparent. There is also two sides to every story. M$ fanboys do nothing but talk and post pics of the $ony tech demos and call $ony liars. Yet, they never seem to post xbox tech demo pics. You guys know, the ones that make M$ liars also. Strange isnt it?
QUOTE(Deftech)
I think xbox could do the raven demo(if thats all that was on screen), just with a gazillion jaggies is all.
Very true, MechAssualt 2 proved just that. It looked every bit as good during the cutscenes, with as you put it, "a gazillion jaggies".
On a side note: God of War is one of the best looking games I have ever seen on my HDTV, and it only ran in 480p. The only thing that comes close IMO is Splinter Cell Chaos Theory on xbox, it was about equal.
QUOTE(Andy51 @ Jul 28 2005, 08:33 PM)
FUCK IT PEOPLE! LETS ALL SAY THAT NOT ONE SINGLE CONSOLE HAS GRAPHICS LIKE THE TECH DEMOS BEFORE THE RELEASE THE THE CONSOLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
QUOTE(Deftech)
please refresh my memory. I had to wipe my harddrive a few weeks back and lost 5 gigs of E3 shit I had saved
Thats why you always should have more than one HDD.
QUOTE(deftonesmx17 @ Jul 28 2005, 08:57 PM)
I believe the ATI/Ruby demo was their only tech demo for the 360.
QUOTE(MightyZim @ Jul 28 2005, 10:46 PM)
I don't remember either Sony or MS 'promising' anything with their tech demos (and if they did, it still doesn't matter). A tech demo is just that --- a tech demo. In the case of the ballroom scene tech demo, FFX was able to achieve a similar result. If you want to be picky, then I'll say that other games like God of War have certainly surpassed it.
QUOTE(Deftech @ Jul 29 2005, 12:55 AM)
step away kids, hes losing it!
QUOTE
I have the video clip sitting on my pc.
Do a quick search on Sharebear and you will find it.
FFX didn't even come close, the facial expressions are about the only thing that came close. Although the video clip graphics lack detailed textures, it's pretty obvious that it wasn't running on real time PS2 hardware, let alone specs.
As for God of war surpassing the tech demo?
No, I'll admit that the game has great graphics (one of this year's favorite games for me) but it still doesn't come off as good as the ballroom scene.
Again, you need to download a clean clip to see it for yourself, I've yet to see anything on the Xbox even achieve it's level. Not even Team Ninja's games.
I'm happy for you that you seem to have some sort of incredible video that the rest of the world does not know about. I have already posted screenshots as well as a link to the actual ballroom demo which plainly show that, for the most part, the ballroom demo graphics were inferior to those of FFX. But if you don't think so, that's your problem.
QUOTE
Check out what TeamXbox has to say about Sony's broken promises:
You posting a link to an article about the PS2 that is on an Xbox site is no different then if I were to post a link to an article on a PS2 site that claims it lived up to all its tech demos and that the xbox lived up to none. An Xbox site bashing the PS2 has about as much credibility as a PS2 site bashing the Xbox. In other words - none.
So no, I have no intention whatsoever of reading the teamxbox article.
QUOTE
Depends and on your definition of close. All I see is the textures coming close to that of the demo.
You're also the same one who claims to 'see' that FFX does not come close to the ballroom demo.
QUOTE
Here's the PC version of Silent Hill 3.
What exactly does the PC version have to do with all this? And if that was a screenshot of the game running on my PC, I would be embarrassed to show it...
QUOTE
See the huge difference?
Just what exactly are you talking??? A 'huge' difference between the PC version and PS2 versions??? What does that have to do with this discussion? We aren't talking PC vs PS2 here, you know!
More shots from the PS2 version:


Resolution/textures aside, I don't see any "huge" difference unless your definition of "huge" is different from everyone else's. Certainly even in the worst case it is not any greater than, for example, the difference between a middle-range PC vs the Xbox version of Doom3 (and thats really pushing it). Regardless, what the PC version has to do with this is beyond me...
QUOTE
Video game companies always enhance their pictures.
It used to be done through RGB back in the 16 bit days and now it's done with AA.
The Halo 2 screen shot you put up is of the same quality of what you see in Halo 2, minus the AA of coarse.
No one's denying this, and no one's denying that MS miss the mark with their Robot tech demo.
Actually the reason I came into this thread is because someone was.
QUOTE
The thing that seperates M$'s Xbox division and Sony's SCEA/J division is Sony's intent to fool the public.
Ooooh so now we're down to conspiracy theories. The Xbox division is pure and angelic and sony is the evil deceiver that turns people into sony zombies.
Grow up. The world is not black and white.
Both sides have tried to and have successfully 'deceived' the public. I don't know about you, but I certainly remember talking to one of my friends after he had seen that incredible first halo 2 trailer. His words were "OMG, did you see the graphics?!?! I'm gonna pre-order it, it's gonna be f----- sweet." (and like the millions of others, he did).
QUOTE
Those tech demos were never proven to be running on actual PS2 hardware so there's no way of knowing whether they can run in an optomized fashion on the PS2.
Now rewrite that sentence but replace every instance of 'PS2' with 'XBOX'.
QUOTE
I've yet to see any current console surpass those tech demos
So I don't know where your comment came from.
What tech demos? Are you actually trying to say that NONE of the xbox or ps2 tech demos have been surpassed this generation?!
QUOTE
As for me having faith in tech demos? Tell that to the folks over at G4TV.
???
QUOTE(miggidy @ Jul 29 2005, 04:57 AM)
Check out what TeamXbox has to say about Sony's broken promises:
anyone that sees a supposed real time pspoo screenshot and thinks its REAL, when its not filled with jaggies, is so far gone its just effing sad.
those pics can have PS2 stamped all the fug over them, but unless they are riddled with jaggies, then the pic is for show, and not taken from an actual ps2 running the game.
it cannot remove jaggies from a real time scene, whether its ingame play or a real time cut scene. The pics that keep getting posted of Silent Hill 3 are the best example possible. Those supposed ps2 pics lack jaggies, need I say more?
the damn xbox versions of SH 2 and 4 are riddled with them for shits sake!!
LMAO!! Look at the 2 recent pics Mighty whatever posted! Look at the guy int he BG! Smooth as shit! yeah go watch that fuggin scene on a ps2 and tell me it has no jaggies.
Look at the pic with just the girl, look how smooth the BG is! the walls...hahahaha
If you have eyes that see that exact scene, frame for frame, jaggy free, play out on your retail ps2, then youre a freak and should insure your eyes for 5 million $$. who needs HDTV when you have those freaky things.
I wish I had those kinds of eyes.
QUOTE(MightyZim @ Jul 30 2005, 12:07 AM)
I'm happy for you that you seem to have some sort of incredible video that the rest of the world does not know about. I have already posted screenshots as well as a link to the actual ballroom demo which plainly show that, for the most part, the ballroom demo graphics were inferior to those of FFX. But if you don't think so, that's your problem.
well I hated all older RE's except for Veronica. I heard 4 was good, so they had better not change too much.
A couple points i would like to make:
1) Most the ps2 game shots you view on your computer monitor are at a higher resolutions; both textures and overall picture. Just take a look at any gt4 screen shots, if they looked nearly that good on the ps2, i wouldn't even worry about next gen games. Also, just by simply viewing them on a computer monitor you are already upscaling the res to whatever you have your monitor set at; i.e., no scan lines like there is in 480p. This goes for xbox screen shots as well.
2) Halo 2's first announced trailer looks much better then what halo 2 really looks like. In the trailer there was amazing shadows; shelf shading, lighting; bloom effect and reflective light mapping, better animation, and real-time environment reflection in MC's visor. None of which was in the final build of halo 2. I'll be stoked if halo 3's graphics are that good.
3) E3's halo 2 playable demo was pretty much exactly what we got graphical with halo 2, minus a few negligible things; the shading/shadows still were not quite as good.
4) God of War is the best looking ps2 game i have ever seen/played. I love this game; so damn fun. That being said, the overall graphics are no where near as good as a handful of xbox games. Namely:
- Ninja Gaiden
- Halo 1
- Halo 2
- Riddick
- Thief
- Chaos theory
Ninja Gaiden is the most like GoW in terms of genre, skills, and both are damn hard; as long as you play GoW on the hard difficulty setting. NG blows GoW away in environment and character detail. The higher res textures in environment and characters make a huge difference.
The biggest problems i have with GoW is:
1) Low texture quality
2) Environments are unimpressive; all the systems horse power is going into the characters and the environments a pretty bland.
5) I too agree the ball room dance demo looks better then ffx. The characters in ffx look great, but the texture detail and facial animations is horrible; looks like puppets when talking. The other thing that bothers me with ffx's characters faces is how fake/perfect they are. There is no shading or depth in their faces like there is in a game like chaos theory, where bump/normal mapping is used. I'm referring to the in-game graphics and not the cgi/fmw.
Can the ps2 even do bump/normal mapping? I'm just curious, because i have not played/seen one yet.
6) I've never liked RE much either, because of the clunky, tank-like controls.
EDIT: I play my consoles on a PC monitor via a true vga transcoder. I get a better picture with my sony 19" flat screen crt then i do with my 36" sony HDTV. Just to let you know i'm not baising my opinions on a pos TV.
even PGR 2 is sexy.
QUOTE(Mojiba @ Jul 30 2005, 05:31 PM)
Dude, maybe people are a little pissed up because you're basing most of your argumentation on something that you believe it's an uncorrupted fact, in this case this bunch of beauty pictures, but these pictures are not true to what we see in the ps2, this is the problem. They do not represent what the console can do, they have attributes that is not even possible to happen in the ps2, I think that if you really want to continue to support what you believe based on screenshots, you have to take your own screens or find a place that have them, wich is something very, very hard to find since most screens came from developers (like the ones you're using) or the ones that not are strangely blurry.
OMG this game is going to be frickin sweet!
MightyZim-While I agree with you, just let it go. You are not going to persuade an xbox fan otherwise.
Miggidy-You also need to let it go as you will not persuade a $ony fan otherwise.
Deftech-You don't count.
We know you are an xbox fanboy because you admit it and well, maybe thats why you and I get along so well.
QUOTE(deftonesmx17 @ Jul 31 2005, 01:52 AM)
MightyZim-While I agree with you, just let it go. You are not going to persuade an xbox fan otherwise.
QUOTE(Foe-hammer @ Jul 30 2005, 10:18 PM)
i'll be surprised even if the next gen consoles can surpass pc games. Here's to hopen otherwise.
QUOTE(Foe-hammer @ Jul 30 2005, 08:18 PM)
You seem to be a level headed guy, deftones, but do you seriously believe that ffx overall graphics were as good as the ball room demo? I've stated reasons why i believe they are not above, and i couldn't give a rats ass which system it was on. Whether this was a ms or sony game, my judgment would still stand the same.
Well the truth about any console is the size of the screen you are playing on. On a 13 inch TV the 640x480 resolution is crisp and you will see minimal jaggies. Now, if you take it to a big screen, like us with widescreen HDTV's, we see jaggies galore. I would say us FFX fans might be biased based on the fact that we loved the game and it looked beautiful to us none the less.
QUOTE(Deftech)
I wont be surprised. PC's wont see the R520 core till after the 360 is launched, and even then, they arent getting the edram set up till mid 2006 supposedly. So until then, pc games will still take some sort of performance hit when running FSAA and other features. Just my opinion though, wtf do I know
Well, if you are running at 1280x1024 or especially 1600x1200 on a 19 inch or below monitor AA is not needed. And Deftech, you know I was just fuckin with ya about the fanboyism.
this argument will go on forever and ive tried to stay out of it but what the hell.....
mightyzim your right. your right that the xbox tech demos werent running on actual xbox hardware. they were running off of one of the first gforce 3 cards that was about to be out at the time, a card slower then whats actually in the xbox. the same cant be said about the ps2 however.
you are mistaken about what people are saying about the way MS and sony start their hype. you dont seem to understand that it is one thing to show pre-rendered footage (ps2 and ps3) and dodge the question of it being real time but MS was open to their demos being real time. in fact the raven demo ran with only 800,000 polys per second, im trying to find an old article to prove it because i know how you like people to back up their claims.
as for the first halo2 trailer, your friend should be too stupid to be playing games if he actually believed that the entire game would look that good. that was not a demo of the game at all but instead a technology demo of the different effects and technology that they were planning on using in the game. a controlled scene with no AI, enemies, physics, etc. will always look better then the actual game anyone who has been playing games and has a brain would know that. all those effect could still be in the game just dumbed down, that doesnt make them liers.
as for the screens of SH3, your a fool to believe that they are from the ps2 version of the game. most ways of advertisement use any other source other then the ps2 unless specifically noted. do you think that the screens and commercials of games are running off of a ps2??? no they are running on a xbox or pc because they look better. the same method has been used for years and years from even the last generation. i learned quick when i picked up a copy of tomb raider for saturn. i loved the game to death and thought it was beautiful
(for a saturn game), but look at the back of the box and you would see screens from the pc version. its wise advertisement from a business perspective to not use the ugliest version of the game to show the public.
call me a fanboy, zombie, or whatever you want. i have stated facts that you would know if you have been playing games for a while now. i do like MS, i like their more honest aproach to the next gen and i like it how my expectations are braught up to a real level. i do however read about the competition and take all the facts into account, something a fanboy would not do.
and deftech, i think that if applied right the gamecube could do normal mapping. as far as i know it is capable of doing bump-mapping and normal mapping is a form of bump mapping so it seems possible. i could be wrong however, maybe the gpu/cpu isnt powerful enough to support such an effect like the xbox. we'll never know as the gamecube is usually held back because of the ps2 when it comes to ports.
fact is that sony showed unreal and dodged any questions while microsft showed SOME unimpressive footage (anyone that says gears of war isnt next gen should be smacked) but admitted it was running on weak hardware. better to be suprised then dissapointed i always say.
QUOTE(Deftech @ Jul 31 2005, 03:57 AM)
I wont be surprised. PC's wont see the R520 core till after the 360 is launched, and even then, they arent getting the edram set up till mid 2006 supposedly. So until then, pc games will still take some sort of performance hit when running FSAA and other features. Just my opinion though, wtf do I know
QUOTE(portarock @ Jul 31 2005, 10:14 AM)
One thing I must correct though is that the ps2 can do normal mapping or more accurately will (if they live up to what they say).
QUOTE(portarock @ Jul 31 2005, 06:14 AM)
I just read this whole thread and I have come to the conclusion that Mighty is a blind zombie. I agree with both the Defs.
so yeah...
Resident Evil 5 looks pretty sweet...
I actually picked up a GC and RE4 on Thursday... RE4 is awesome and I'm getting psyched for RE5 now...
I didn't realize Capcom re-released all the RE games in the series on the GC. RE0, RE, RE2, RE:CV, and RE4. It will certainly be interesting if the Revolution is the only next gen console without an RE title considering they pretty much got the whole catalog this generation.
RE4 uses a completely different control/perspective setup than the previous RE titles... it makes me wonder that since they're bringing back the "old team" for RE5 if they're going to go back to the old control/perspective style or continue on with what they started in RE4.
For those of you who haven't played 4 the camera is like a cross between a 3rd person spy game and an FPS... in that it's external to the character but follows directly behind his right shoulder. For the most part it plays more naturally than past REs in that you have essentially the same POV as you would if you were really there (unlike past REs where you had a "God" view over the entire room). At times moving the camera around to look around can be kind of clumsy, and there's no strafing which is frustrating because you have to blind yourself in close quarter battles when turning to move sideways. Overall it's much better than the past REs though.
The news of this game made my day...and the entire next generation. Resident Evil 4 was (next to the Halos) my favorite game of this generation. Yeah I have always been a fan the original made me and my friend collectively shit ourselves...and swear off guide books forever...
Not that we ever used them but we got stuck at the part with the plant...the book told us to just wait it out during the fight and the girl would run in with the flamethrower and take care of the plant...35 min and all of our health later was there a girl? No...just 35min of use getting slapped around like little bitches...
Anyway I hope that RE5 brings back the Mercenaries mode...it kicks ass if you have not unlocked it yet. Also I hope that RE5 has hundreds of zombies on screen at one time...
The only game I would get more excited about would be a new Street Fighter...I can dream...
QUOTE(portarock @ Aug 1 2005, 02:23 AM)
Hey twisted I thought you were gonna wait for the Revolution? lol
twisted- get yourself the RE remake and MGS1: the twin snakes (remake)
I plan on picking up a lot of games for it... before I do that I've got to call nintendo and trade in my new GC for an older one though
Apparently they removed the "Digital AV Port" on the newer versions of the GC. Without that port I can't get component out and without component out I can't get 480p. To me this is unacceptable
Luckily Nintendo will trade your console for a refurbished unit with the necessary port... I hate to give up my shinny new toy right after I got it though
It's a good thing I haven't cracked the case open yet to look at modding it
Sort of back on topic:
It seems that this gen a few companies chose a particular platform to re-release all the games in a particular series.
For instance
Square-Enix re-released all (most of?) the old FF games on PS1, meaning that the whole collection can be played on a PS2.
Capcom re-released all the RE games for GC
Tecmo re-released the old DOAs on Xbox
With the next gen consoles all being BC it means the legacy will carry over. But it begs the question as to whether or not these companies plan on sticking with their chosen console brand to support their entire legacy on a single platform. Such as Square-Enix starting to make games for the 360 and Capcom bringing RE5 to PS3 and 360 with no mention of the Revolution. Will they stick with Sony and Nintendo respectively just to continue to have all of their games playable on a single console?
Just something to think about.

That sux that you need to get a refurbished one. I remember when I got mine. I had to buy the component cable straight from Nintendo because I quote QUOTE
we found that less than one percent of all Nintendo GameCube players used this feature.
I guess this makes sense as most GC owners are kids, but some of us A/V buffs find this unacceptable.
QUOTE(deftonesmx17 @ Aug 1 2005, 09:52 AM)
Eh, the Gamecube isnt really worth modding, unless you are a complete pirate.
QUOTE(twistedsymphony @ Aug 1 2005, 01:08 PM)
BTW looking at the MGS and RE remakes on GC...

Those will definitly be my next two game purchaces...
Both of those remakes are top quality. RE Remake really does induce fear with the wicked GFX. MGS:TTS is the way MGS1 should have been 
QUOTE
The RE remake looks amazing

(is it just me or are the GC's particle effects far and wide the best this generation. I've never seen more realistic flames or fog on a console)
You know, I think you are right. ATI has always had the image quality lead over other GPU's, at least in the PC market. Heres to hoping the R520 continues that trend.
QUOTE(twistedsymphony @ Aug 1 2005, 04:04 AM)
QUOTE(Shinamano @ Aug 1 2005, 05:23 AM)
The only game I would get more excited about would be a new Street Fighter...I can dream...
QUOTE(miggidy @ Aug 1 2005, 07:47 PM)
Which one would you rather see, a 3D Street Fighter 4 or a 2D Street Fighter 4?
If the rumors hold any substance we should see SF4 on the new consoles.
I heard that Capcom will also be bringing out a new beat'em up game for the Xbox 360.
Dead Rising looks promising, and now RE5.
It's a good time to be a Capcom fan