33 replies to this topic

[AndyG]

There are a ton of nitty gritties i'm still yet to understand but i think it could be done, but not without some sort of setback. That draw distance alone would melt the PS3, some of the character models i feel could be a little higher in the polygon count but it is otherwise a beautiful game. One thing i do worry is about the model swap (when a lower quality model is swapped with a higher quality when you get close by, this was only evident to me once during the E3 trailer in which a small chunk in the beams above was swapped with a larger one. It wasn't noticeable to me at first but if this thing happens quite often it can be a tad annoying, it happened all the time in the AC3 port and really started to drag me out of the game. I could upload a photo in case you need proof but i will have to do so later as my internet is playing up.

[Socalmuscle]

X has too many polygons on screen at once for the old gen systems.

The last of us looks great in cut scenes and some other times, but the budget is in favor of the faces, which aren't extreme. Then there are the backgrounds that aren't very geometrical at all when a high detail character is present.

Plus... Easier to make a game like that look good than an open world game.

Consider that ps3 almost didn't get later sky rim dlc due to said software crippling the system. It had to be dialed bac... Optimized. And x destroys even the pc version of skyrim. And this is in alpha form.

The thing about x is that we are seeing it from alpha onward. And it still looks great. The latest a build we saw at e3 looked light years ahead of the first reveal. And it will still improve. A lot.

Lets revisit this topic when x is out. A lot of haters are going to be very sad.

[BrandedSwordsman]

Do you guys think we'll see X at Tokyo Gameshow, maybe even the official name reveal? 

 

(I think it's considered one of the bigger Japanese titles as Monolith Soft said they thought the Japanese gaming industry has lost its touch and they'd like to change that) 

Edited by RogueStatus28, 23 August 2013 - 01:12 AM.

[AdmiralClassy]

Do you guys think we'll see X at Tokyo Gameshow, maybe even the official name reveal? 

 

(I think it's considered one of the bigger Japanese titles as Monolith Soft said they thought the Japanese gaming industry has lost its touch and they'd like to change that) 

 

I would love to see it at the tokyo gameshow for some reason I feel it's gonna be a no show though

[3Dude]

Bro, the last of us and beyond two souls obliterates x and anything else the Weak U currently has and will have.

Beyond 2 souls is a horrible looking joke that stretched itself way beyond the limits of its engine and suffered horribly.

The last of us has amazing art direction, but fails to match the strength of the wii u in several ways.

First and foremost, its not an open world game. 99% of what you see is just background, you cant actually go to it. Its set up similarly to metroid, you have 'large' set peices (though compared to x or even xenoblade, even these are microscopic, typically only the size of colony 9 or smaller, and just the city area) seperated by enclosed often tunnel like areas used to hide the streaming of the next outside area. Areas typically larger than this, like the exciting intro, are of a far, faaaaaaaar lesser quality, with extremely poor textures and assets naughty dog hopes you dont have time to notice because you are riding by in a car.

You cant see a point, and just fly straight to it like in x, in tlou, it doesnt really exist, often, its just a 2d backdrop, or psx level asset. It would also crash the system, as without culling all those unseen polygons, it would be far more than the system could handle.

Then theres the fact that X actually renders individual rocks and pebbles, while those details are simply drawn onto the textures of the last of us.

Then theres the small amount of characters allowed at once. While X shows herds upon herds of wildlife along with giant mechs and other players. TLOU never exceeds its dozen character cap. Less when large enemies like the bloater are around.

And on the subject of large, tlou's largest enemy gets stepped on by x's average mob size.

Then there is the fact x is a online multiplayer game. How does tlou multiplayer holdup to its single player? Ew, yeah....

And.... TLOU was a 500 man team with 4 years put into it.

X is a beta stage game that has just over a year.

[nbond3040]

oh you chose a really bad picture for GTA 5 let me choose a better one and also don't tell me my opinion is wrong on which game looks better because they both look great 

oh look I can chose a bad looking image for a game too 

look those texture look like crap and you can see the lines on the water the point is that there are bad looking images for both games but they both look amazing 

Edited by nbond3040, 25 August 2013 - 04:30 AM.

[TheUltimateWaddleDee]

oh you chose a really bad picture for GTA 5 let me choose a better one and also don't tell me my opinion is wrong on which game looks better because they both look great


oh look I can chose a bad looking image for a game too
look those texture look like crap and you can see the lines on the water the point is that there are bad looking images for both games but they both look amazing

Far out shots always look better than up close ones because you don't have to worry about the level of detail as much. That level of detail doesn't hold ip when you get closer. Not to mention you used an alpha shot of X and compared it to a pic that was shown much later in GTA5's development.

Also, opinion only works when refering to art style, not how the game is on a technical level. You stated that while X had a better art style, GTA5 was better looking, creating a clear distinction between the two. GTA 5 does look good, but X blows it out of the water.

[LaserSWE]

Yeah, problably could. But wont.

Edited by LaserSWE, 25 August 2013 - 07:05 AM.

[tboss]

GTA 5 is all I have to say the game world is huge the graphics are better than X (although I like the art style of X better) you really overestimate the WiiU's power and severely underestimate what last gen systems can do 

 

edit: also MGS5 that game looks incredible 

 

GTA 5 is huge(i actualy expect both games to be ruffly the same size maps), GTA i expect more things happeneing but all be simpler(quanity of quality), low draw distance, low poly everything, but alot of it. same with ai, all are crap, but alot of ai, vs X which will probly have insainly good ai, simply because wiiU CPU is made very well for AI, but less of it becuasae there is less stuff to have AI. id expect 360 to push X with worse graphics andn AI. plain and simply, but the limit for 360 is only ram/disk size, that is the only real limit to being able to play games now, everything can scale back far enough now.

[3Dude]

oh you chose a really bad picture for GTA 5 let me choose a better one and also don't tell me my opinion is wrong on which game looks better because they both look great 


oh look I can chose a bad looking image for a game too 
look those texture look like crap and you can see the lines on the water the point is that there are bad looking images for both games but they both look amazing

You dont have the luxury of hiding behind a poorly formed opinion here. You attempted to enter a debate about facts, pretending your opinion was fact.

Your 'champion' picture further demonstrates the gulf between x and gtav.

The lod is incredibly aggressive to stat within the smaller ram and processor constraints of the ps3.

The geometry is very low quality at this lod, all details like even large rocks are simply painted on.The textures are low res and heavily, heavily, HEAVILY repeated, the trees are all instanced because the ps3 cant afford more than 3 unique models. Theres absolutely nothing in the area shown whatsoever except the player, and a train and bridge at an lod level that would put it at ps2 level assets if seen up close.

Even the 'bad' alpha screen of X taken from low quality streaming video is beyond what your screen of gta5 shows the ps3 is capable of.

Your opinion formed by being enamoured with gta5's art direction while ignoring its technical limitations has no place in this thread.

In fact its the exact opposite of the specifically stated topic of this thread.

[Desert Punk]

This is too early to make a comparison of this type. We really don't know the full scope of the 'X' engine. Just watching a video is not enough. We don't know how it handles physics, AI, weather etc. It could be like the wii game xenoblade with a graphic update or it could be using a much more ambitious engine. Lego undercover had some nice graphical touches in places but looked pretty weak in other areas compared to 360/PS3.

 

It was pretty incredible what Monolith achieved with the wii. Xenoblade was a game that really pushed the wii to the limit. 'X' may end up a game that visually ends up slightly above 360/PS3 but using an engine that is more basic than the best engines on 360 and PS3. I.e. there is less interaction with the environment and less happening in the environment with 'X' despite the visuals being superior to 360/PS3. I would suggest this as a strong possibility/outcome.

[3Dude]

This is too early to make a comparison of this type. We really don't know the full scope of the 'X' engine. Just watching a video is not enough. We don't know how it handles physics, AI, weather etc. It could be like the wii game xenoblade with a graphic update or it could be using a much more ambitious engine. Lego undercover had some nice graphical touches in places but looked pretty weak in other areas compared to 360/PS3.

It was pretty incredible what Monolith achieved with the wii. Xenoblade was a game that really pushed the wii to the limit. 'X' may end up a game that visually ends up slightly above 360/PS3 but using an engine that is more basic than the best engines on 360 and PS3. I.e. there is less interaction with the environment and less happening in the environment with 'X' despite the visuals being superior to 360/PS3. I would suggest this as a strong possibility/outcome.

 
Actually, we do.

 
It uses havok vision for physics (just like killzone shadowfall), features real time day/night cycles real time weather changes, and ai encompassing differing sight/sound/group/aggression dynamics.

Monolith soft offers a lot of information on their site, such as the hiring of physics/compute shader experts (high experience demanded in red type for all these) ai experts, net code experts, and more.

Your argument is disingenious at best, and purposefully decietful at its most likely. Not a SINGLE ONE of the engines you were referring to is an open game world engine, nor could it be scaled to open world while mantaining the level of interaction you were boasting. Its called the cost of overhead, ps360 cant afford it, because they suck dog balls at branch code.

[Desert Punk]

We will have to agree to differ. I'm certainly not going to form an opinion without seeing the evidence of the engine running preferably actually playing it myself. Xenoblade looked great in scope but was actually very limited in how you interacted with the environment. Incredibly basic compared to some of the engines on 360 and PS3 like Skyrim with mountain clouds, running water, birds, multiple characters, weather, physics and AI. At this point I don't know if 'X' will be somewhere between the 2 or exceed them. I've seen nothing so far on wii u that gets even close to skyrim in game engine complexity.

[3Dude]

Desert Punk, on 25 Aug 2013 - 3:32 PM, said:
We will have to agree to differ. I'm certainly not going to form an opinion without seeing the evidence of the engine running preferably actually playing it myself. Xenoblade looked great in scope but was actually very limited in how you interacted with the environment. Incredibly basic compared to some of the engines on 360 and PS3 like Skyrim with mountain clouds, running water, birds, multiple characters, weather, physics and AI. At this point I don't know if 'X' will be somewhere between the 2 or exceed them. I've seen nothing so far on wii u that gets even close to skyrim in game engine complexity.

ha ha, THATS what you think is interaction? At least you mentioned physics.

You never played xenoblade. Dont even try to lie about it.

Xenoblade, had a party of 3. So right off the bat there are multiple characters. There are so many characters in the world, that it is nearly impossible to find a spot with just the party.

The 'monsters' in xenoblade, were the local wild life, many often traveled in herds or packs, and featured that in their ai. There were packs of horses, flocks of bird monsters, roaming rhino/triceratops herds, complete with alpha males, sentient humanoid tribes wandering about.

NPC's littered throughout the open world, and thats not counting the flocks of normal sized non combatant birds, bees and butterflies. Xenoblade was not lacking in this regaurd because it was on wii.

NPC'S have their own lives, and undergo routines every day, from waking up, getting out of the house, walking to work, eating, hanging out with freinds, shopping, to spying on local celebrities, and walking back to their house at bedtime (unless they work the night shift).

All the flora fauna in xenoblade blew in the wind when it was blowing, and moved when the player or mob touched them.

There is tons of liquid substances all over the world of xenoblade, including quite possibly the largest waterfall in videogames, which you could swim up to if you didnt mind taking a half hour to get there. I say liquid substances because not all of it is water or water like. Such as the glowing liquid ether and its gravity defying variant, and geysers could be used to propel the player party to higher places, and the player could use pools of water kilometers beneath them to carefully plunge into and discover secret areas to explore. Much, MUCH more water to swim in than skyrim, oblivion, and morrowind combined.

The realtime weather cycles in xenoblade are some of the best on any system. Anything with just sun/cloud/rain/snow is a joke in comparison.

Xenoblade had very specific weather changes even among 'normal' weather categories. There was rain, rain with the sun shining, rain with and without thunderstorms. Different creatures, unique bosses, ai behaviors, and events happened with combinations of specific weather AND the specific time of day/night.

And then each area had several unique weather effects only available to them. Such as fog, ether fog, ether showers, blizzards, meteor showers, and other combos of real/fantasy effects. X has a weather icon, to indicate changes in weather so the player can more aptly keep track of what monsters/events/behaviors will emerge. This is how we already know X has realtime weather.

Xenoblade also made heavy use of physics. However, the wii was not capable of using such complex rigid body physics like those that skyrim used for cosmetic effect.

They used them for gameplay purposes instead. Different materials yielded different effects on traversal. Alittle slower, a little faster, you can climb more steeply on rough surfaces than slick ones. Mostly cosmetic. Except ice. Ice could greatly accelerate the players speed, enabling them to make massive leaps, to reach secret areas to explore. Definately not the rigid body physics and rag dolls from skyrim, but, X is currently hiring experts in using havok and its shaders (havok vision giveaway). So we know its coming in X.


People who have played xenoblade have a hard time taking you seriously, because all the things you are insinuating are too much for wii u and X were done in xenoblade.... On wii.