| RAZurrection said: selnor said: Like I said Carmack knows what he's talking about. Rage looks better than anything else on console by some way. Look at this brand new screenshot. Maybe people should listen to him about PS3 power.
Carmacks saying that apparently.
Rage looks and runs better than both, especially Uncharted 2 which looks identical to Uncharted 1.
Why does the 360 version need help? It's running at a solid 60fps like it's high-end PC counterpart...a year before release as Carmack and God intended, this is why no-one is making excuses like "if only Carmack got help from MS 1st and second party developers blah, blah, blah"" because... its a reality.
And you can keep hoping that it will, in the interim we PC & Xbox hardcorites will revel in TRURAGISM knowing that ours with certainty, does, if the PS3 ever makes it, we'll make space.
You're the one suggesting that a team that's built an engine far beyond any of Sonys exclusive offerings needs to do things differently, just because the PS3 isn't keeping up for these 5th/6th generation engines (it's been coming for a while now though). All i'm saying is that they really don't, because from the 1st party stuff as has been shown so far (released and unreleased) there's nothing that remotely comes close, let alone with 60fps, open world split-screen caveats.
Uncharted was a short game anyway, to be longer than it is not exactly pushing the envelope. What?! it took close to two years to develop the oringals singleplayer, and to increase that while keeping gameplay and bettering graphics is a great achievement.
LAZY! A not lazy developer would have the full campaign as co-op, rather then a multi-player mode that can be played co-operatively. Surely its more hassle to create new missions (and there are many) from scratch than putting co-op in the main game. Besides its not them being lazy, the story would not have worked if there were always 3 people playing(same with modern warfare 2. are you going to say their game will be badd???)
Looks just like Uncharted 1 with motion-blur really, Edge magazine agrees too. THIS IS almost peurile. Uncharted 2 has had a MASSIVE overhaul and besides edge got their original build play in november 08, they have DEFINIETLY increased the fidelity since then. Go onto a technology site like digital foundry and search uncharted 2, they say its an amazing improvement.
Fair enough.
LAZY! A multi-player mode should have been in the original in the first place, this is just an example ND not being as lazy as when they made Drakes Fortune . Hell even Dark Sector has a multi-player mode FFS, it's a standard really. It least in non-Sony games.
No way. So youre now saying theyre not lazy? Just because they wanted to concentrate on the singleplayer and did not multiplayer doesnt mean theyre lazy. Its not really like an fps, where most games have it. TPS are much rarer if they have multiplayer
Uh, i'm sure I was familiar with all of those features back then, it's very bare minimum stuff, very lazy. YOU WERE NOT AWARE OF THEM THREE MONTHS AGO BECAUSE HTE IN GAME RECORDING FEATURE, AND MULTIP[LAYER WERE NOT ANNOUNCED TILL LATE MAY!
Here's what they need to do to not be lazy - *Implement full Campaign co-op play with split-screen support (including system link and Online) *Implement split-screen support for the already existing multi-player modes (including system link and Online) Pretty straight forward no? Gears 1 & 2 did it, Resident Evil 5 does it, no reason for Uncharted 2 not to do it...unless the PS3 is maxed out ...or Naughty Dog are just lazier then Epic and Capcom. i HOPE YOU NOW REALISE THEYRE NOT LAZY! |
