looks great. It is accurate to compare this game to Halo, since IMO neither game has absolutely stunning graphics. I was let down by Halo's visuals, as I am sure many others were. But these early screen shots almost match Halo.

So I am sure the visuals will surpass Halo easily once complete. (that does not mean they will be the best graphics ever though) leave that to Killzone

I was watching Mission Impossible 2 last night and the virus that was created in that movie was also called Chimera.
I thought that was interesting. Am I unaware of a neutral meaning for the word Chimera, or is it just a coincidence?

makingmusic476 said: krik said: ChronotriggerJM said: Yah I'm sorry, every scan I"ve seen of this game looks much better than Halo 3 xD I think people confuse Halo 3's lighting being good because none of their other FPS's really have much light ._.;; That and did anyone see the "people models" in Halo 3? Oh man they were horrible LOL, but master chief in armor looked awesome :P Maybe bungies just really good at creating armor xD On a side note, if this is running off the Ratchet and Clank engine, does that mean this game will be running at 60FPS? @making music, this game better NOT be 1080p, I don't think the developer world could take that kind of preasure to make PS3 games xD I don't expect them to do 1080p or 60 FPS. It will probably be 720p/30FPS, the number, size and details of the enemies is too high. Anyway if it comes out looking like that at 720p/30FPS will be awesome.  Well, the screenshots are 1080p, and developers usually don't release screens larger then the actual game renders...

 Let's wish for the best then :)

ultraslick said: looks great. It is accurate to compare this game to Halo, since IMO neither game has absolutely stunning graphics. I was let down by Halo's visuals, as I am sure many others were. But these early screen shots almost match Halo. So I am sure the visuals will surpass Halo easily once complete. (that does not mean they will be the best graphics ever though) leave that to Killzone I was watching Mission Impossible 2 last night and the virus that was created in that movie was also called Chimera. I thought that was interesting. Am I unaware of a neutral meaning for the word Chimera, or is it just a coincidence?

Chimera is an actual term, used for many things.

Here are some of the meanings:

Greek Mythology A fire-breathing she-monster usually represented as a composite of a lion, goat, and serpent.
An imaginary monster made up of grotesquely disparate parts.
A horrible or unreal creature of the imagination.
An organism, organ, or part consisting of two or more tissues of different genetic composition, produced as a result of organ transplant, grafting, or genetic engineering.
A substance, such as an antibody, created from the proteins or genes or two different species.

Figuratively, a 'chimera' is a creation of the imagination, especially a wild creation.

As you mentioned it was used as a term for a virus in MI2. The term 'Chimeran virus' does exist:

A chimera virus is defined by the United States Department of Agriculture Center for Veterinary Biologics as a "new hybrid microorganism created by joining nucleic acid fragments from two or more different microorganisms in which each of at least two of the fragments contain essential genes necessary for replication".

Mars said: Wojtas said: I don't know, most of you people expect from the PS3 greater technical wonders that can't be achieved currently on PC's with better gfc cards and greater amount of RAM. If the Cell was so powerful to sweep the board with gfx on par with crysis or better (as some seem to actually believe) we would already have crysis on the PS3 and any other game a lot earlier out than now. Above all that the PS3 would cost more like 1600$, not 600$ at launch :P LMAO It took 5 years for devs to use PS2s full capability, and PS3 is no esier to code for then PS2 was. You expect them to max out the Cell/RSX potential in its first year, are you high ? Crisis like games will be on PS3, just not right now.

First off all developers have at least a year before the console comes out to get to know the architecture. Even if it is difficult to programm for, if the HW allows it they should be able to show thes uber super graphics during the second year already. Epic pulled off UT on the PS3 with some problems as i remember but the game isn't anywhere on par with crysis in terms of graphics and physics.

Besides that your point is not too good of a one. If say they manage to put crysis on the Ps3, let's say in 2 years, who the hell will give a damn by then? By that time we will have two new generations of gfx cards for the pc plus new types of cpu's with games that should probably be close to crysis levels on a normal basis and with even better looking games as future gfx benchmarks for the gaming industry. And if it so happens that in three years time running crysis on normal pc settings will be the max the ps3 can handle it will be even more of a yawn. And that's the sad truth. If they can't pull it off now, then there's no point as it won't matter anymore in the future.

 

Insomniac needs to swipe Naughty Dog's Uncharted lighting engine.
Also, WTH with all the fanboys saying the PS3 isn't capable of rendering 1080p 60fps? When you've got the single most advanced chip ever manufactured as a CPU.... well, that just doesn't seem to be much of a problem... (and don't start about the PS3's RAM. 256MB XDR @ 3.2GHz + 256MB GDDR3 @ 700MHz > 512MB GDDR3 @ 700MHz)

MikeB said: Wojtas said: If the Cell was so powerful to sweep the board with gfx on par with crysis or better (as some seem to actually believe) we would already have crysis on the PS3 and any other game with such visuals a lot earlier out than now. Above all that the PS3 would cost more like 1600$, not 600$ at launch :P I think you are underestimating the amount of time and effort required to port legacy game engines over to the Cell's SPEs. Ever since I digged into the Cell's architecture years before the PS3 was released I understood this. Back in 2005 I publically stated it would take some time to fully adapt legacy engines and Insomniac accomplished this faster than I expected. Just because Insomniac was so quick to realize this milestone, for others it may prove to be a much more difficult task. A 600 dollar PC doesn't even run Windows Vista well enough, Windows drains a lot of system resources which could be used for games. The Cell cannot be easily compared to the cost of PC CPUs, x86 CPU have to take a lot of legacy bagage with them when advancing. The Cell is a radically different approach, that's why the Cell outperforms much more expensive PC desktop CPUs at medical research, university projects as well as with regard to mature game engine related functionality.

You know MikeB, that may very well be the case that the PS3 is powerfull and all (still doubt that powerful enough to handle crysis, but still), but saying that it's the architecture of the console and not the HW itself that's at fault isn't really much of an excuse. If only a few dev will break the barrier of the ps3 architecture leaving the rest "in the deep forest", so to say, then what's the point? You know the facts just as well as i do, if Sony will leave the PS3 for ten years on the market just to let the devs take full advantage of it's power, sometime along the way MS and Nintendo will give out a new console that will be more powerful(gaming-wise )and at the same price if not cheaper (due to low tech costs in the future). Add to that the fact that devs will have it easier  to develope games on those other systems (a possibility mind you, not a certainty) and we'll have results very fast in favour of the new consoles. 

 

Wojtas said:

I don't think that will be the case, it will only take others more time. Every little step forward, is a step forward for all future games based on the same game engine.

MikeB said: Wojtas said: If only a few dev will break the barrier of the ps3 architecture leaving the rest "in the deep forest", so to say, then what's the point? I don't think that will be the case, it will only take others more time. Every little step forward, is a step forward for all future games based on the same game engine.

 Yes, that's true, no doubt there. It's just a crying shame that Sony would develope an awesome piece of hardware without thinking about the simplicity of use first. Still it's not that much of a problem for me, as my primary console is still the Wii (love those games i tell ya).

Looks great to me....Can't wait.

And anyone who is deprived of games to play on their ps3 has way too much time on their hands...I own a 360 & a ps3...and I honestly spend more time on my ps3. In fact, I can't keep up with the games....haven't even had a chance to play Ratchet & Clank or Uncharted yet (playing UT3 & Rock Band on ps3, and Blue Dragon on 360 right now). But anyhow, doesn't bother me, 90% of the time the people making those comments are naive fools that don't even have a ps3 to know--they blab off hearsay--which I find funny.*prepares for the flaming that will make me sit back and laugh hysterically for the rest of the night*

DragonLord said: Looks great to me....Can't wait. And anyone who is deprived of games to play on their ps3 has way too much time on their hands...I own a 360 & a ps3...and I honestly spend more time on my ps3. In fact, I can't keep up with the games....haven't even had a chance to play Ratchet & Clank or Uncharted yet (playing UT3 & Rock Band on ps3, and Blue Dragon on 360 right now). But anyhow, doesn't bother me, 90% of the time the people making those comments are naive fools that don't even have a ps3 to know--they blab off hearsay--which I find funny.*prepares for the flaming that will make me sit back and laugh hysterically for the rest of the night*

So your gaming tastes apply to everyone then i take it? Whatever.