Ghost Recon 3: PC and Xbox 360 versions

Nooo...

The media has not called out Ubi because Ubi did not tell the press over and over again, "This is what you will be playing... this is in the game... this is gameplay" etc when asked "Is this the real graphics of the game in realtime on the Xbox 360".

That is the distinction. Ubi, to my knowledge, never said, "This is realtime ingame footage rendered by the engine". They never set the bar and said, "This video is what the FINAL product will look like".

I am not judging it.

I am honestly inquiring into the differences. Obviously ALL the shots are "ingame" of some time (cut scenes or whatever). The problem is games usually look BETTER over time, not worse.

So the question I have is why did the game go from AAA+ quality to "Meh!" ??? Did they show a render target? Are they having problems porting? Is this PC stuff mixed in? What?

Obviously Ubi released the ORIGINAL E3 trailer to HYPE the game.

My question is: Was that a render target with the goal end product, a "hype" advertisement to get interest, or an artists impression somewhere inbetween using ingame assets, or was it actually in the engine.

We know very LITTLE about the game. But the media is the main stuff we know, so determining WHAT that media may say, and does not say, about the product we will play is important.

Am I gonna be playing the E3 trailer OR am I going to be playing the recent video. While not a graphics snob in general, I must admit that on games I may not generall play if they look AWESOME I will give them a try. GR3 and GOW are examples. Neither game by themselves interests me... but if they look as HOT as they do, well, I may have to give them a try!

It is like an action/effects movie. They may be brainless, but the really good looking ones with a lot of eye candy are fun Same with games... I may not like GOW play style, but the eye candy may be so over the top it may not matter!

 

1. There are 2 versions of GR3--PC and Xbox 360--and there are differences. We do not know how much though.

2. There is some confusion about what the game will look like. This confusion has been directly fed by Ubi's press imagesd at E3 and since then. Basically they are very different--same art assets, but completely different quality. The root of this confusion may be

a. PC and 360 shots being intermingled, with one looking a LOT better than the other
b. If the E3 footage was a render target to HYPE the game and/or give an impression of their goals
c.The differences are due to Alpha Dev kit footage, early builds, etc. where features have been turned off to bug test and optimize
d. E3 footage was a "compiled" video from the game engine and they are only now getting the engine up to real-time speed
e. A mixture of the above
f. None of the above

3. The read is a general discussion of the issue and looking for answers:

a. What will GR3 on the Xbox 360 look like.
b. And why is there a discrepancy in the photos?

4. And a poll to give your opinion based on what we know

Obviously there is a lot going on with this game. The E3 footage was just awesome. Ubi has been pretty closed lip on this title and has not offered much info... exciting titles generate interest.

As I am personally interested in this game I want to know more about it. If it looks like the E3 trailer sign me up (if it plays well)... if it looks like the new screen shots, meh.

I am just curious if this is going to be the title that makes me break down and buy a 360 before I see any PS3 software.

That is the jist