Full Spectrum Warrior for the Xbox...

[Sabastian]

This is fairly impressive graphics for a console. heh, don't feel so bad about the xbox after all.

Here are some more here. Looks great.

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/fullspectrumwarrior/screenindex.html [/img]

here is the trailer they demoed at E3 of it.

http://www.xbox.com/en-us/xboxtv/default.htm?t=4237&v=76648&bw=hi

 

[zurich]

Really? Just looks like high res textures slabbed over boxy environments to me :?

 

[randycat99]

Ohhh boy.... [runs for hurricane shelter]

 

[zurich]

Ohhh boy.... [runs for hurricane shelter]

What? It does

 

[Jov]

No, it does look good and pretty clean (as expected for the Xbox), but we'll have to wait and see how it performs in terms of framerate and others.

Jov

 

[randycat99]

Ohhh boy.... [runs for hurricane shelter]

What? It does

I wasn't disagreeing. That's why I ran for cover. I'm sure there will be others who will beg to differ. There are a number of things you could pull apart these pictures on, actually.

 

[Dural]

The game looks fantastic in the videos I've seen, you can get a 14 minute 500MB video of it with the developer explaing the gameplay mechanics here.

 

[cthellis42]

Why would one "feel bad" for the Xbox?

Funny thing is the pictures show some amusing dichotomies--particularly GOOD-looking parts, and some glaring bits the other way. I imagine the video gives a much better look at it overall. (If only sites would stop acting up and let me get it. I'll probably finish downloading next tuesday. 500 megs!)

 

[cthellis42]

<whistles> Ok, that game looks hot as HELL, but I'm coming from a gameplay and AI perspective. Graphics are capable enough (with definite plusses to "damagable" environmentals--not sure how far it goes yet, though), but it's certainly no showcase--it's showcasing OTHER things instead.

 

[DeathKnight]

On the newest OXM disc there are three videos where a dev takes you through different aspects of the game. It looks absolutely insane. This is going to be one hell of an RTS.

 

[cthellis42]

I'm thinking you'll just confuse the heck out of people if you refer to it as an "RTS" though.

 

[AzBat]

On the newest OXM disc there are three videos where a dev takes you through different aspects of the game. It looks absolutely insane. This is going to be one hell of an RTS.

Agreed. I loved the videos. RTS sounds like the best label for it since it's not a FPS and neither can you control individual soldiers. You basically just give them "firing orders". However, I believe you can lob grenades. Can't to wait to a demo of it.

Tommy McClain

 

[cthellis42]

RTS also makes one think in terms of many different units, plenty of them, and a lot of resource control.

I'd go for "strategic, squad-based warfare". Throw "urban" or "sim" in if you want. RTS carries too many of its own connotations, whether or not this fits the base definition. One will have to describe the game ANYway for people to get it, so... <shrugs> Doesn't need an easy-to-remember acronym.

 

[Mr_Wormwood]

On the newest OXM disc there are three videos where a dev takes you through different aspects of the game. It looks absolutely insane. This is going to be one hell of an RTS.

Agreed. I loved the videos. RTS sounds like the best label for it since it's not a FPS and neither can you control individual soldiers. You basically just give them "firing orders". However, I believe you can lob grenades. Can't to wait to a demo of it.

Tommy McClain

I saw the videos for the first time today also and I must say it
was very cool watching someone else who was good at the
game playing it.

As to whether it would be fun to play, I don't know...I lean toward yes.
I was pretty intimidated by the squad/tactical aspect of Ghost Recon until
I got past the learning curve and now I'm not so much intimidated as I just suck.

Anyway, it surely looks promising.

 

[AzBat]

RTS also makes one think in terms of many different units, plenty of them, and a lot of resource control.

I'd go for "strategic, squad-based warfare". Throw "urban" or "sim" in if you want. RTS carries too many of its own connotations, whether or not this fits the base definition. One will have to describe the game ANYway for people to get it, so... <shrugs> Doesn't need an easy-to-remember acronym.

I understand where you're coming from. BTW, if you read the FAQ it does say it will have a "small element of resource management". Considering the developers are Pandemic Studios I already see some similarities between FSW and Battlezone(Pandemic's first title). I loved that game. It was a FPS mixed with RTS. And that's how I see FSW, but instead of a FPS it's a 3rd person view. Also, after I saw the interface for giving fire orders and moving the soldiers I immediately thought of the breakthrough interface Pandemic created for Battlezone. In Pandemic's FAQ they state that the interface and AI skills were some of the biggest reasons why they were chosen by the ICT. Makes sense to me.

Hmm, now I'm starting to get interested in Pandemic's Clone Wars. Might have to pick it up now.

As to whether it would be fun to play, I don't know...I lean toward yes.
I was pretty intimidated by the squad/tactical aspect of Ghost Recon until
I got past the learning curve and now I'm not so much intimidated as I just suck.

I had the same initial problems with Ghost Recon too, but I think I'm getting pretty good at it. I tried the original demo and the Island Thunder demo and finished them pretty easily. I had a harder time with the original game after renting it, but I'm sure if I bought it and spent some more time with it, I would probably eventually finish it. Who knows? I never thought I would have finished Splinter Cell.

Tommy McClain