Ghost Recon 3: PC and Xbox 360 versions

What will the Xbox 360 version look like?


  • Total voters
    46
That new video looks like crap to be perfectly honest. Garbage.

This game just got scratched from my launch list until further notice.
 
Acert93 said:
The question is was that video a fair representation of the end product. OBVIOUSLY it is a quality representation of the gameplay (oh those fearful words!) but if the game looks like the recent pics we can surely say that the E3 trailer was not representative of the end products graphics -- not by a long shot IMO. That last 10% between realtime and CGI is the most important.

I understand your point, but it is kind of unfair to judge the end product of any launch game months before the console is released. Over the next two months they will be banging out the beta kit, so who knows what the end product will look like. All I'm saying is some people put to much into what the graphics and frame rate of games before they even get to beta kits.
 
Acert93 said:
The light is not passing through the leaves like the E3 video:

CGI (?) from E3 & New Shots
gr3sux5mb.jpg




The reports at the time (none official though) was that the gameplay video from E3 was a CGI. It had HDR and some other effects that were not possible on the Alpha Kits, so either it was CGI or it was on a 6800U SLI setup like GOW.

If the current sreenshots are from the 360 then it appears that the E3 video was a render target using ingame assets. There is a world of difference from what was shown at E3 and the new pics/movies.
So you agree with me then about what has been shown for GR3?

More importantly, why hasn't the media called Ubisoft out on this?
 
man you don't even have a clue where that screenshot came from.

if you watch the new video, crappy as it may be, the lighting is like the E3 video NOT like that screenshot, the sun passes through the leaves.

media hasn't called em out cause A) these are PC shots and B) the game has not been released
 
scooby_dooby said:
media hasn't called em out cause A) these are PC shots and B) the game has not been released

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".

Mac said:
I understand your point, but it is kind of unfair to judge the end product of any launch game months before the console is released. Over the next two months they will be banging out the beta kit, so who knows what the end product will look like. All I'm saying is some people put to much into what the graphics and frame rate of games before they even get to beta kits.

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 :D Same with games... I may not like GOW play style, but the eye candy may be so over the top it may not matter!
 
Inane_Dork said:
All I know is I'm confused on the topic and Acert is feeding my confusion Miracle Grow.

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 :D

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 :D
 
The reality is UBI kicked ass on LIVE with Xbox.

With Xbox 360 and Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter UBI better be here to kick ass and chew bubble gum, and be all out of bubble gum.
 
I'm a little confused as to why the wall is missing a texture. :LOL: Surely the Xbox 360 has the power to have that on there? :LOL:
 
Alstrong said:
I'm a little confused as to why the wall is missing a texture. :LOL: Surely the Xbox 360 has the power to have that on there? :LOL:

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The game is not done yet. They probably threw the extra texture and other stuff in the E3 video to show what the final product will look like. Guys remember they are still making the game.
 
Ah... so they've moved it over then? Acert's pictures just make it seem like the second one pic was nothing more than test-screengrab than anything that is final.

mckmas: my comment was meant to imply heavily that the screenshot was not anything near final. ;)
 
qwerty2000 said:
This thread is really confusing me.
your not the only one


I think the point is that there are crappy screen shots going around and the demos we've seen have shown a pretty good picture all around just not as good s the render target picture
 
BTOA said:
Two different textures on the right wall. ;)

The question is does the render target version have those other textures ?

Did they just change one texture to another ?
 
jvd said:
The question is does the render target version have those other textures ?

Did they just change one texture to another ?

They probably changed it. The wall texture is not the only thing that they have changed in the pic. Look at the soldier. Some things are changed. Didn't you guys notice that?
 
Back
Top