Epiphany

Appears as though he, and the rest of Microsoft view it as a mistake. Not sure about the "rush games" part, as a few titles have slipped from launch day to the launch window release.

That's why consoles have different compression methods than PC games, and the console game also does not require the various textures that many games have, because there is no "low, medium, high" setting on a console game. A harddrive is good for cache streaming on a console, but using it a storage medium simply isn't the answer. There are so many variables that add extra space to a PC game that simply don't apply to console versions.

Completely irrelevant, as games are cross platform from console to PC all the time. It's supposed to be even more frequent next gen as well.

Have you checked out the games yet? NO WAY!

Nope. When Nintendo forced SK to make MGS instead of continuing their work on Too Human, the project was put on hold. It was then rumored that Nintendo and Denis had a big fallout, and SK wanted to push high production value games with an "epic feel" to them, and Nintendo wanted the opposite, so they signed with MS. It's alive and kicking, and due out late '06.

When will you ever understand the point of this debate.. It's like trying to explain Shakespeare to a rock. Noone has said DVD's are obsolete now (except for you putting words in everyone elses mouths). But the fact is that one DVD is not enough space for some games even when the Xbox360 launches. Unless Microsoft is planning on releasing a new Xbox every year, the DVD player in the Xbox360 is going to become completely obsolete within a year or two after release. A console is supposed to have at least a 5 year life cycle. We'll see in a couple of years how clever it was to stick with DVD.. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Did you even bother to read the post I was responding to, or do you like just making things up? He said it was obsolete - running out of room before it hit the streets. Sorry, but that's about as "right now" as it gets. But, I guess as with every PS3 fanboy, they instantly forget that disc mediums can be swapped during gameplay. So, on the rare occasions that a game uses so much FMV that it fills up a full DVD-9, then the game will simply ship on two discs. But, that goes into a debate that you simply don't understand, or haven't cared to comment on, which is FMV vs in-game cutscenes, and their drastic effect on storage. Project Offset?

Then you must be the only one, cause the UE3 tech demo clearly shows how there is no difference between the two, when proper maps are applied to the model. I guess that's why everyone is blind, and you aren't. Not large scale? HUH? N3 (formerly Ninety Nine Nights) Kameo Heavenly Sword How do games get any "larger" in scale than these?

That wasn't really the direction I was trying to head. I was simply commenting that with larger production values of next gen games, the games engine will be equally as powerful. Since middleware licenses such as the UE3 will be extremely popular, these production values will go to the costs related in getting the engine, and then tweaking it. The engine itself is so powerful (among many other next gen engines) along with the two front running consoles for next gen being as strong as they are, you can simply do everything in real time that you would previously have needed FMV for. Sure, they can up the bar on FMV, but what purpose does it serve? Many of the "big name" games this generation had FMV sequences that were mere pixels away from looking completely realistic. It's just not practicle to use an abundance of FMV in next gen titles, unless you don't have the technical motivation to have a powerhouse engine running the game. If it comes down to that, I honestly believe those companies won't survive as well, and those games won't be as popular, since the big budget titles will get the publicity. The Gears of War models have very low poly counts, and yet have incredible detail. If you watch the tech demonstration of the UE3, you'll see how they take a normal 100k (can't remember the exact number, but it was high) and then compare it to a 5k model. They're identical in appearance, because of the texture work. Pushing polygons is not some magnificant feat like it used to be. Now it's just pushing textures and shaders, which the PS3 and X360 can do at an extreme level. That's just an elitest response that serves absolutely no part in this conversation. Texture work is just as, if not more important than having high polygon models.

What movie has come out in the last two years that surpases the stunning effects used in the LotR movies though? There is only a certain level of realism that one can achieve, and that has already happened in film - with the right budget of course. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Give it a while, new films do have a tendency to come out now and again. " <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah, and it's been two years, Sherlock.

What movie has come out in the last two years that surpases the stunning effects used in the LotR movies though? There is only a certain level of realism that one can achieve, and that has already happened in film - with the right budget of course.

I'm saying with the visual quality of next-generation graphics, and the fact that production values on almost all next gen games are so high, and the engines are so phenomenal, FMV is not important, and no longer serves a purpose. Story telling can be done just as well in game now, since the models and physics are such that hair can be individually done on characters. The reason it was done was because of hardware limitations and the inability to show things on such a massive scale. Say, for instance, the Onimusha 3 intro. With games like N3, having 20,000 characters on screen at once, simply put that limitation to shame. Again, they can do IN GAME what previously required FMV sequences. When using middleware like the UE3, polygons aren't an issue, since you can take 5,000 polygon models and make them look like they were rendered with 500,000 polys. Just take a peak at the interview with Factor 5 over Lair. It's not a matter of mapping textures to models to achieve the realistic look that FMV's have. It's possible, in game, on screen, in real time. When you have unified architectures (Xenos) or brute poly pushing force (RSX), you no longer have to worry about these previously worrisome details. Visually, many of the "top tier" next gen games that have been shown (and remember these are FIRST GEN GAMES) - nearly match what is shown in $300,000,000 budget motion pictures. When you see PGR3, and the racing sequences, and then watch the CG footage shown in Bad Boys 2, or Matrix Reloaded, then you can see 40,000k models, with the proper mapping applied, match up to these titles. But to answer your question specifically, yes, PROJECT OFFSET looks identical to the LotR movie CGI sequences. It's possible, as it's already been shown, in real time. I don't blame anything on them, because budgets, engines, and general technology simply wasn't as high as they are now.

DVD-9 is not obsolete, that's the basis of your pathetic stance on this argument. Full backwards compatibility is also not entirely accurate, as there are a few games in the PS1 library that do not work on the PS2. That aside, BC is only important during the begining stages of a new console lifecycle, as there is a void of quality games for a few months. Regardless, the X360 is fully compatible with all Xbox games minus the few dual layer games that aren't "popular" - by whatever standard Microsoft is judging popular. So, you, as usual, make this slight flaw in the BC library and blow it out of proportion, when you yourself don't even acknowledge that there are a small handfull of PS1 games that don't work on the PS2. Try again, for the 2000th time. Says the guy that can't carry on a single debate on the subject of next gen consoles. All you did was go "YEAH! LOLZ! HAHA HE TOLD YOU!" on conversations that went entirely over your head. The entire debate on the cell's practicle functionality in gaming was correct, and is not "inaccurate". But the fanboys here, that can't post in positive threads because they don't understand everything regarding the console believe otherwise. Anything detrimental to the PS3 in their minds is instantly "wrong" or "inaccurate". Enjoy typing your reply, I'm finished with you now, your ignorance no longer my co-workers and I, so I'm going to add you to my ignore list to filter out the silliness in threads.

link Pretty cool interview, not a whole lot was answered, but he does explain the switch from PS1 to GCN to X360.

^ Another example

I didn't "fall back" on Killzone, I merely used it as yet ANOTHER example of next generation graphics, and how no FMV sequence has been created to surpass the visuals in that game, and the rest of list I gave in my previous post. Hell, you clowns just love to dance around, if I mention all X360 game, you scream fanboy, and ignorantly try to discredit everything that's said. If I mention games from both consoles, you claim I'm "falling back" on the PS3, and use that as your crutch to discredit what was said. If I make a post slamming the PS3, you are all ready to pounce like children. If I make posts showing off cool aspects/demos of the PS3/cell, nobody responds. Makes me even more confident that you don't know what you're talking about, since, if you were the diehard PS3 fans that you display in all your PS3 defense, you'd post stuff in the "positive" threads. Sounds like you need to get some of your own opinions, and leave the G4TV tech analysis at home, as it's no good here. Responding with "YOU ARE WRONG PS3 OWNS! IT IS BETTER!" isn't going to prove you know what you're talking about, especially when you can't carry on a conversation about your beloved console when the same person you love to whine and cry about posts something positive about it. You either know what you're talking about, and can talk about the good/bad of everything, or you don't know what you're talking about and you just need to stay quiet. Make your choice.

I've been trying to ignore your stupidity, but oh well. I own a PS2, so defending Sony isn't that big of a deal when it comes to current generation tech. The best example of next gen graphics are in Oblivion, Gears of War, Alan Wake, N3, Killzone, MGS4, Lair, Too Human, PGR3, and so on. Carry on with your personal ignorance though, it's becoming amusing.

Sony never claimed the PS2 would do Toy Story graphics. I don't even like Sony that much and even I knew that... The media and MS made those claims, not Sony.

Yet the Killzone video, which was done in engine (all-be-it @ 5fps) looks better than the FF 12 trailer. [face_plain]

The FF12 trailer??? lol k I figured people would at least try, by picking next gen FMV to try and prove their point, rather than current gen games. I can tell that you're... special, so I'll just leave you be.

Same difference, but whatever floats your boat. The FMV sequences in WC3, or any Blizzard game for that matter, are matched and in some cases surpased by next gen games.

WC3 intro easily beat/matched by many next gen games. Never seen Dawn of War. You don't win, next.

Show me FMV that looks graphically better than those games.

Eastern developers don't really have the technical motivation to build ground breaking engines. That's why most of their games rely heavily on FMV sequences to advance the story. Doing so, requires a massive amount of disc space, and the volume it occupies simply goes up once it's rendered in HD. It confuses me as to why they're still pushing pre-rendered cutscenes, since there is no visual difference between the two anymore. Anyone that's looked at the Final Fantasy 7 tech demo for the PS3, Oblivion, Gears of War, or MGS4 can see that next gen graphics have evolved to a state that FMV is no longer required, or more so, it no longer serves a purpose. I was sure you couldn't get any worse regarding your knowledge of Oblivion, but amazing enough, you continue prove me wrong.

I'm fully aware of the real disc limitations. Enchant Arms was the first game to max out disc space, and they're simply using multiple discs. The X360 can emulate every Xbox game with little to no problems except the few dual layer games (I believe, last number was around 15-16). Of those games, a few are "top sellers" of which, MS has promised will be BC. Emulation brings all faults of the previous game over - much like the Metroid emulation on Metroid Prime still has the framerate issues of the old NES classic. It was their only viable option, and with the new HDWMV compression, even more data can be stored on a disc. It'll work just fine, few games, if any, will have limitations to such a degree that the storage medium will impact it being published/developed. I think they're doing what they should do. Stick with a proven medium, advance the compression techniques, and push the games. Going with Blu-Ray would be silly, since there is a chance Blu-Ray will fail.

MS has done nothing but back peddel on release two SKU's in the US. The rest of the world got one SKU - they obviously screwed up, but BC is still there. That proves what? Or perhaps because they didn't want HD-DVD in their console due to being scared that Blu-Ray, by some fluke, might actually succeed? Remember, you can swap discs, running out of space was a thing of the past when CD drives came out. It only has a future if hollywood accepts it as the standard medium. Now China is throwing in a third HD drive into the mix, to make things even more insane. Blu-Ray will not cost $199 at launch, nor around the time of the PS3 launch. You've lost your mind. The PS3 falls short in several other areas, but you've been unable to understand those fundamental concepts, so we won't go over all that again. Your sources? It appears as though a LOT of Japanese developers are supporting the system in a great way, and despite your G4TV analysis of the consoles popularity in Japan, it will succeed to a far greater level than the Xbox ever did. Hell, just look at the exclusive titles the console has from Japanese developers... Don't be so ignorant as to claim the console is not popular to some degree before launch.