Post by: KAGE360 on June 15, 2006, 09:35:00 AM
QUOTE
To see the Graphic Engine that Rockstar plans to use in GTA IV for Xbox 360 and PS3 in action click here. That is right, their recently released Table Tennis game is powered by a new game engine called RAGE (the Rockstar Advanced Game Engine) and according to some Rockstar reps in a recent interview on MTV this is also the game engine that will power future Rockstar games, including the much anticipated GTA IV for Xbox 360 and PS3.
http://www.xboxic.com/news/1080
i kind of expected this to begin with, why would they spend money and time developing the engine just for a table tennis game? looks like a great move, the graphics look very solid and they would understand their engine better then any other, if a budget title looks this good im curious to see what they do with GTA.
Post by: CattyKid on June 15, 2006, 10:20:00 AM
QUOTE(KAGE360 @ Jun 15 2006, 11:42 AM) 
if a budget title looks this good im curious to see what they do with GTA.
Yeah, it'lll eb VERY interesting.
But, IMO GTA has never really been known for it's graphics, I always thought it looked OKAY, but then again there were a lot of things on the screen: buildings, people walking, so that's a plus.
Oh, and GTA didn't choke when you played it on an Xbox like with PS2
Post by: KAGE360 on June 15, 2006, 10:36:00 AM
QUOTE(CattyKid @ Jun 15 2006, 12:27 PM)
Yeah, it'lll eb VERY interesting.
But, IMO GTA has never really been known for it's graphics, I always thought it looked OKAY, but then again there were a lot of things on the screen: buildings, people walking, so that's a plus.
Oh, and GTA didn't choke when you played it on an Xbox like with PS2
okay? i thought it looked like garbage. of all of the GTA style games on the last gen systems, GTA is the worse looking of the bunch. but you are right the series has never been known for its graphics.
im not going to be buying this game (gets old for me) but im curious to see how it looks.
Post by: lostboyz on June 15, 2006, 11:01:00 AM
im also interested to see how it turns out
Post by: ILLusions0fGrander on June 15, 2006, 11:51:00 AM
QUOTE
quote:
That is right, their recently released Table Tennis game is powered by a new game engine called RAGE (the Rockstar Advanced Game Engine) and according to some Rockstar reps in a recent interview on MTV this is also the game engine that will power future Rockstar games, including the much anticipated GTA IV for Xbox 360 and PS3.
Most likely character details will have to be toned down a bit in GTA IV to keep the frame rate smooth but it should still give a good indication of what to expect.
That is right, their recently released Table Tennis game is powered by a new game engine called RAGE (the Rockstar Advanced Game Engine) and according to some Rockstar reps in a recent interview on MTV this is also the game engine that will power future Rockstar games, including the much anticipated GTA IV for Xbox 360 and PS3.
Most likely character details will have to be toned down a bit in GTA IV to keep the frame rate smooth but it should still give a good indication of what to expect.
so dont expect a city full of table tennis quality character models, but im sure they will be significantly better than the previous GTA's with the lego hands
Post by: KAGE360 on June 15, 2006, 11:54:00 AM
QUOTE(ILLusions0fGrander @ Jun 15 2006, 01:58 PM)
also from the quote on maxconsole
so dont expect a city full of table tennis quality character models, but im sure they will be significantly better than the previous GTA's with the lego hands
that should be expected though, between resource management and budget there is no way it can look as good as table tennis. if it looks next gen for its genre though is what most people will care about in regards to graphics.
Post by: ILLusions0fGrander on June 15, 2006, 12:20:00 PM
i still remember waiting for the shipment at bestbuy on GTA: Vice City the day it came out... i always look forward to a new installment, im sure it will be a title ill buy day one.. especially if it has multiplayer... which it better.
Post by: paranoia4422 on June 15, 2006, 01:00:00 PM
And i fully expect GTA to look WORSE then saints row.
Post by: KAGE360 on June 15, 2006, 02:31:00 PM
QUOTE(paranoia4422 @ Jun 15 2006, 03:07 PM)
I personally hate rockstar because the will rehash this engine in every GTA game to come.
And i fully expect GTA to look WORSE then saints row.
that is yet to be seen. with the money that GTA will be making i see it having a bigger budget then saints row which will make a huge difference. also this GTA is being developed from the ground up for next gen system where saints row started as a xbox game. this was found out when they announced that there would be no flying in the game because of the lack of a standarized HD with the systems when a game really doesnt require a HD for flying unless it was initially designed that way.
Post by: lowendfrequency on June 16, 2006, 06:17:00 AM
Post by: krims0n on June 16, 2006, 07:34:00 AM
QUOTE(lostboyz @ Jun 15 2006, 12:08 PM)
its either this or dead rising for my "take a break" or "just kill people" game. real good stress relievers
Well, there is a over a year waiting period between these two games, so you might as well get both
Post by: KAGE360 on June 16, 2006, 07:45:00 AM
QUOTE(lowendfrequency @ Jun 16 2006, 08:24 AM)
Personally I think the GTA concept has sailed, and if Rockstar plans to stay on top with their series, then they will have to make some serious upgrades this time around. If they can keep the character models and lighting on par with table tennis, then they will be doing a fairly good job. I'll buy it, when it's in the used game bin.
your one of the biggest skeptics here, so do you really think this is possible? for a game to have a large city filled with people and cars, i dont see this becoming reality. you know there is a big difference between a static room with 2 characters as apposed to what is in GTA.
as for upgrades, i originally thought you were meaning gameplay wise which is one of the many reasons i dont care for the series.
Post by: lostboyz on June 16, 2006, 08:25:00 AM
QUOTE(krims0n @ Jun 16 2006, 07:41 AM)
Well, there is a over a year waiting period between these two games, so you might as well get both
good point, can I borrow $60?
Post by: hamwbone on June 16, 2006, 09:58:00 AM
Post by: CattyKid on June 16, 2006, 12:17:00 PM
QUOTE(hamwbone @ Jun 16 2006, 12:05 PM)
i honestly have faith in them. you cant expect GOW quality on that large of scale levels, but then again, remember how muddy the game was on ps2, you and i still played the hell out of it. i thought the game play was spot on. as long as its as fun as the past 3 games, ill be buying it - day one.
x2Graphics are good, but when there's no gameplay to back up good graphics, the game sucks. And that, my friends, is why I still log a few hours a week with Tetris. I'd MUCH rather have good gameplay and bad graphics than decent gameplay and decent-good graphics any day.
Post by: lowendfrequency on June 16, 2006, 01:43:00 PM
QUOTE(KAGE360 @ Jun 16 2006, 09:52 AM)
your one of the biggest skeptics here, so do you really think this is possible? for a game to have a large city filled with people and cars, i dont see this becoming reality. you know there is a big difference between a static room with 2 characters as apposed to what is in GTA.
as for upgrades, i originally thought you were meaning gameplay wise which is one of the many reasons i dont care for the series.
I definately think it's possible, but the possibility depends on their optimizationand uitlization of the 360s hardware. In Kameo, there was over 1000 fairly detailed characters on the screen at one time... and I remember reading an article that said it handled multiple times that many without a hiccup during testing, so character-wise I don't think it'd be a problem. The issue comes from having a large environment loaded. If Rockstar tries to load a huge portion of the city all at once, I think they may run into problems with the amount of shit happening. A better approach would be to have sections of the map load as you approach them, but they'd really have to streamline that for it to be effective... I don't think GTA players have the same amount of patience as the Oblivion crowd. So, while I believe it's totally possible, we haven't seen it yet so if they do pull it off it will be impressive. I don't recommend any breath holding however.
Gameplay wise, I think they'll add some new elements but I doubt they will deviate much from the past few games. GTA has secured itself as a sudo-genre... fans are mostly looking for the same experience with a different story.
Post by: KAGE360 on June 16, 2006, 02:22:00 PM
QUOTE(lowendfrequency @ Jun 16 2006, 03:50 PM)
I definately think it's possible, but the possibility depends on their optimizationand uitlization of the 360s hardware. In Kameo, there was over 1000 fairly detailed characters on the screen at one time... and I remember reading an article that said it handled multiple times that many without a hiccup during testing, so character-wise I don't think it'd be a problem. The issue comes from having a large environment loaded. If Rockstar tries to load a huge portion of the city all at once, I think they may run into problems with the amount of shit happening. A better approach would be to have sections of the map load as you approach them, but they'd really have to streamline that for it to be effective... I don't think GTA players have the same amount of patience as the Oblivion crowd. So, while I believe it's totally possible, we haven't seen it yet so if they do pull it off it will be impressive. I don't recommend any breath holding however.
Gameplay wise, I think they'll add some new elements but I doubt they will deviate much from the past few games. GTA has secured itself as a sudo-genre... fans are mostly looking for the same experience with a different story.
very true, i totally forgot about that. they actually had around 4000 characters on screen in the game (3k for the enemies and 1k for the allies) and the testing you are talking about they had over 12k characters in the same scene and still could have had more, very impressive. i see what you mean and i agree, it shouldnt be an issue since the devs are used to developing on limited resources (ps2) so it shouldnt be a problem given the power of current next gen systems.
Post by: Joergen on June 16, 2006, 02:25:00 PM
Oh well, prepare for sub-15fps GTA3 ala PS2 I guess
Post by: KAGE360 on June 16, 2006, 02:32:00 PM
QUOTE(Joergen @ Jun 16 2006, 04:32 PM)
I'm pretty shocked actually. I thought they'd go for a quality engine like UE3 that already has sooo many of the critical elements in place, including physics and netcode for multiplayer.
Oh well, prepare for sub-15fps GTA3 ala PS2 I guess
whos to say that this isnt a quality engine? i think the table tennis looks really good and im sure it being a next gen engine it has all of the same effects as the unreal 3 engine. im not saying they are in the same league but with rockstar being the one's who developed the engine they would benefit more from using their own custom made technology rather then spending even more money purchasing another's.
Post by: Joergen on June 16, 2006, 04:16:00 PM
Though I hope DMA (rockstar north) is getting the proper help from Rockstar so the core team can work on the content while the others slave away to build a proper engine for this golden opportunity. The competition is picking up and getting stronger, either this is a crazy gamble to get an edge on the competition with something incredible in-house innovations or a money-grabbing greedy stunt to save on licensing and suck every last penny out of the retail price of the game.
Either way, its do or die for Rockstar. Thanks for the most next-gen game of last-gen and good luck.
Post by: fastTOE on June 16, 2006, 06:38:00 PM
if they add online multiplayer of ANY sort i think they will be absolutely GOLDEN - imagine 8x8 or 16x16 gang wars online, that would be too much fun.... some racing maybe, why not? some co-op, definately... there's so much they can do with this series to just blow it up (in a really good way) and i think this generation is the perfect time... we're all ready for a slightly more complex gta with better controls and, the obvious, better graphics, .... so bring it rockstar!
like paranoia said, rockstar is golden either way, they have nothing to worry about.... people are going to buy this game no matter what..... i am
Post by: Killa420 on June 16, 2006, 06:53:00 PM
Post by: StigmataDiaboli on June 16, 2006, 06:59:00 PM
Post by: fastTOE on June 16, 2006, 07:02:00 PM
QUOTE(Killa420 @ Jun 17 2006, 02:00 AM)
Gta IV will be on my pre order list. Rockstar knows what they are doing. Every Gta since III has been fun in my book. True its not the greatest graphics but the overall fun factor is there. I still play Gta Sa just to screw around. They will definitly have this game on live and if you ever played Gta SA the multiplayer with a friend. That is fun as hell. I couldnt imagine how great it would be on live. Hopefully they would have it like a server where a bunch of people could join and do whatever they wanted. Im sure the single player will be fun also. I could see the achievment points now. Collecting all those items and crap. Thats gonna take forever.
you didn't like 1 &2?????? man those games were freakin sweet,... playing them made 3 and up soo much better.... i used to dream about a 3d gta then when they finally did it,... it was fruggin nutty sweet awesome (yea)
Post by: lostboyz on June 16, 2006, 08:53:00 PM
QUOTE(paranoia4422 @ Jun 16 2006, 08:05 PM)
GTA wasn't mainstream until it hit consoles, most people never played any before the the 3rd.
Thats BS alllll my friends played GTA2 and quite a few played 1. I remember the awe of seeing it in 3d. I just wanted to kill people all day
Post by: DeadBeets on June 16, 2006, 11:07:00 PM
Really...what movie (or series of) will the next be based on, may or may not change my mind.
I feel, based on the last three...the next should kick all sorts of ass.
Post by: TUUK on June 17, 2006, 04:05:00 AM
SA was a huge game, both geographically and in gameplay terms for me. If the next installment continues the evolution process for GTA and adds a little graphical shine as a bonus, then Rockstar can take my 60 bucks to the bank. (Providing they give me a copy of the game in return that is...)
TUUK
Post by: Killa420 on June 17, 2006, 09:38:00 AM
Post by: lowendfrequency on June 18, 2006, 09:54:00 AM
Post by: fastTOE on June 18, 2006, 12:32:00 PM
paranoia is right, the game isn't going to make someone do something that they wouldn't have done anyways.
Post by: lowendfrequency on June 18, 2006, 06:30:00 PM
QUOTE(fastTOE @ Jun 18 2006, 02:39 PM)
paranoia is right, the game isn't going to make someone do something that they wouldn't have done anyways.
Not true.
http://www.gamespot....ws_6077161.html
Listen, I'm not one of these fanatics that are picketing game companies to stop selling violent games. I don't question Rockstar's right to publish GTA. I just would have hoped that gamemakers would apply a tad bit of morals when it comes to certain subjects and audiences. I'm not trying to start a huge 'voilence in gaming' arguement, I was just giving my reasonings for not being excited about the new GTA. Don't turn this into a political grudge match.
Post by: fastTOE on June 18, 2006, 08:16:00 PM
like that article you posted,... there is obviously something ELSE wrong with those kids, "normal" people KNOW that by shooting a rifle at someone you are going to cause serious harm, and that is BAD.
i LOVE killing people in as many creative ways as possible in gta (and many other violent games for that matter), but i feel bad when i kill spiders.... so what does that mean? you know?
it's a real hard argument because both sides has "proof" of their points, but... suffice it to say, i dont think rockstar should alter their story idea because of stupid kids killing people then trying to get out of it by blaming gta... i loved the SA story, i always loved 'gangsta rap' and all those old gang movies (boyz n tha hood, juice, menace II society etc etc etc).... so i had a blast playing a 'gangsta' in that game, but i'm just a freakin white dude, so i'm not going to go out and tie green bandanas around my head and start running over people for the fun of it, you know? (i wouldnt do that if i wasnt a white dude either though.... just to clarify)
but like i said at the start, i'm not trying to attack your opinions or even start an argument (sorry, if this post is still kinda an argument i guess), but i'm just throwing out my views, i think parents need to take more responsibility of their kids actions (your link was a case and point for that arguement: the kids were 10 and 14 or someting).... so, yea, you have the right to your opinions, and the right to post 'em, and i have the right for mine, so,.... thats that i guess.....
back to the topic maybe then.... or at least a new topic that was brought up,.... which movie do you think they are gonna base off of next?
maybe like 'once upon a time in mexico' or something? we know rockstar is into westerns, and this is not REALLY a western, but it might have enough "city" elements to keep it interesting, and still have a radical change of pace for the game.... i don't know....
Post by: miggidy on June 19, 2006, 08:52:00 AM
And they're going to kill regardless of what entertains them.
I mean what's next?
A bank robber blames Super Mario Brothers for giving him the idea of collecting gold coins?
Come on people, don't let these idiots get the best of you.
Blaming someone else for your shortcomings is the oldest scapegoat in the book....
Post by: m_hael on June 19, 2006, 09:02:00 AM
read some psychology beyond 101, head towards the BAU area of the FBI and tell them that "psychos are psychos"... then look up the term "trigger event".
GTA and many other violent games could easily resonate and become a trigger event in certain people and thus they get attributed with "cause" ... its kinda like the argument for/against guns... if they didn't have the gun they couldn't pull the trigger; if they were not psychos already then a "trigger event" would not throw them over the edge.
we can't remove ALL trigger events... so why not try removing the gun?
Post by: m_hael on June 20, 2006, 06:36:00 AM
a nifty skin shader (to be removed for GTA)
normal mapping
more polys.
more lights.
the end.
Post by: KAGE360 on June 20, 2006, 07:17:00 AM
QUOTE(m_hael @ Jun 20 2006, 08:43 AM)
the engine from what I've seen is the same as before with a couple of extra's.
a nifty skin shader (to be removed for GTA)
normal mapping
more polys.
more lights.
the end.
but the engine that was used before was the renderware engine, i thought that rockstar has built this engine themselves, isnt there copyright laws that would stop them from changing/altering someone elses engine and then calling it their own. i thought that was the main point that they were planning on using this engine in GTA so they didnt have to pay for a 3rd party engine.
Post by: m_hael on June 20, 2006, 08:46:00 AM
and by converted I mean cut & paste.
been there, done that.
Post by: KAGE360 on June 20, 2006, 09:47:00 AM
QUOTE(m_hael @ Jun 20 2006, 10:53 AM)
renderware is/was not rocket science. To get things up and running they would have taken a LOT of its ideas and methods and "converted" it to their own tastes.
and by converted I mean cut & paste.
been there, done that.
i see thanks for the info, i just thought that it was elligal to do such a thing. like if i paid for the doom 3 engine but then rewrote half of it and called it my own engine the next generation of consoles, you would figure someone would be wise to it. maybe the commen use of a lot of technologies (especially renderware) would leave room for arguement though.
personally i never really cared for the renderware engine, even though it was really flexible. the lack of effects and features just seemed outdated from the get-go to me. the fact that it was developed for the ps2 in mind and is used in 1 out of every 4 ps2 games didnt help either. the next gen version of renderware being used in MoA looks impressive though.
Post by: Corrosive Substance on June 20, 2006, 10:57:00 PM
Post by: Keshire on June 21, 2006, 04:09:00 AM
It's a per kid basis. Some wouldn't be impressioned by the violence some would.
Impressionable is the main word here. I know people who were followers until they were in their late 20's. And I also knew people who were firmly grounded in their own personality at age 6.
Myself personally wouldn't play blatently violent games in front of my little boy though. Or people that find it distasteful like my wife.
Post by: James706 on July 07, 2007, 05:11:00 PM
Even from the very first GTA's the driving was fun. Racing games got nothing on GTA.
As long as the game keeps that I'll be happy.
EDIT: About the Violence argument, Violent games are usually rated 18+ in the UK. Average adults should not be denied violent games. As for children, it is on a per kid basis whether or not they can handle it, thats were parents come in. You might say a child will get hold of an 18+ game regardless of its rating, but a child will get hold of alchohol even if its only sold to 18+, and alchohol will do more damage quicker. Furthermore if an adult is broken that a violent game makes him kill someone, well you can bet alchohol came in there somewhere aswell.