dukmahsik said:this thread is so stupid
mckmas8808 said:Yeah it kinda is isn't?
So why do you reply for?groper said:And yes this thread is stupid.
Thats because by the time MGS3 was released PS2 was obsoleteEleazar said:I go for actually playing the game, what I played of MGS3 was underwhelming. I was much more impressed with MGS1 and MGS2. I feel the reviews for that game are rather inflated. Many reviewers went as far as to give it 100%, which MGS3 was by no means a flawless game, nor worthy of a 100%. It is really just my opinion. I think everyone knows MGS3 was rated well, but was it actually the game everyone was expecting and hoping for. For me it wasn't and I don't see how it got the extremely high reviews it got. Although I would say 90% is acceptable if you are a hardcore fan of the series.
Eleazar said:I go for actually playing the game, what I played of MGS3 was underwhelming. I was much more impressed with MGS1 and MGS2. I feel the reviews for that game are rather inflated. Many reviewers went as far as to give it 100%, which MGS3 was by no means a flawless game, nor worthy of a 100%. It is really just my opinion. I think everyone knows MGS3 was rated well, but was it actually the game everyone was expecting and hoping for. For me it wasn't and I don't see how it got the extremely high reviews it got. Although I would say 90% is acceptable if you are a hardcore fan of the series.
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/668/668449p1.htmlMGS4 Gets XXXX System
New system makes game more next generationy.
Kojima also makes reference to Metal Gear Solid 4 in his latest entry. He states that's a new system, which he refers to under the code name of "XXXX," has been implemented in the game's development environment. Apparently, upon seeing this new system, the Kojima Production staffers exclaimed "Aah, now this is next generation!". This new system, if implemented correctly, will give the game a different flavor from Metal Gear Solid, and will "likely be an industry first," Kojima adds.
Above is, we think, an image of the MGS4 development environment. With this image and someone good with Japanese/Chinese characters (it's presumed that each of the X's in the game system's name stands for a kanji character or a Japanese alphabetic character) you may be able to figure out the name of this new system and earn world fame.
Read this at IGN.But I dont know whats in that picture anyone can understand.The only think visible is the back of Solid SnakeStillmatic said:I actually thought it was the best in the series. The story and gameplay were great, the only gripe i had with the game was the camera, and it looks like Kojima is addressing that issue with MGS3:S and MGS4.
Anyway, anyone read this from IGN.
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/668/668449p1.html
So anyone got any thoughts into what this 'XXXX' system could be? I was thinking Endorphin but what do i know
fulcizombie said:So the first next gen game in some people's minds(diehard sony fans) won't come out until the end of 2007(when MGS4 will probably be released)??
Wow i really feel sorry for people who are thinking like that but ....have fun waiting i guess.
Jov said:When I think of next-gen games, it will at least include such factors as things that definitely can NOT be done on existing consoles and/or todays PCs.
london-boy said:Seen how the GPUs are heavily based on their PC sisters, and seen how the sisters will keep getting better every 6 months, why are you expecting that?
If there is anything these consoles can do that a PC can't, it would have to come from their CPUs, and by the time those are fully exploited, PCs will have more powerful CPUs at their disposal.
Gamers don't buy console games because they have "features that can't be done on PCs". They buy console games because console gaming is easier to set up, run exactly the same from console to console, usually seen as more fun, or because they don't have a PC that's pwerful enough to run the latest games at full detail.
It's a commodity and taste thing, not a power trip.
Cell might give us some very impressive physics simulations, and Xenon will too probably, but give PCs not even that long and they'll do the same. And display at a higher resolution.
Myself said:It's a commodity and taste thing, not a power trip.
london-boy said:Seen how the GPUs are heavily based on their PC sisters, and seen how the sisters will keep getting better every 6 months, why are you expecting that?
If there is anything these consoles can do that a PC can't, it would have to come from their CPUs, and by the time those are fully exploited, PCs will have more powerful CPUs at their disposal.
Gamers don't buy console games because they have "features that can't be done on PCs". They buy console games because console gaming is easier to set up, run exactly the same from console to console, usually seen as more fun, or because they don't have a PC that's pwerful enough to run the latest games at full detail.
It's a commodity and taste thing, not a power trip.
Cell might give us some very impressive physics simulations, and Xenon will too probably, but give PCs not even that long and they'll do the same. And display at a higher resolution.
Actually, though this is going off topic, that isn't necessarily true. A PC CPU has to run a clunky OS and a wide variety of applications. It needs legacy support and a very developer-friendly design that'll run all the apps coming from a widely varying pool of programming talent. A console CPU is only going to run optimized code that's passed by the hardware companies and so the can forgo the niceties and legacy support and go for outright targetted parformance. As long as a PC CPU has to run old and flakey code (the sort I write!) hardware is going to be constricted from super-turbo performance.london-boy said:Cell might give us some very impressive physics simulations, and Xenon will too probably, but give PCs not even that long and they'll do the same. And display at a higher resolution.
Shifty Geezer said:Actually, though this is going off topic, that isn't necessarily true. A PC CPU has to run a clunky OS and a wide variety of applications. It needs legacy support and a very developer-friendly design that'll run all the apps coming from a widely varying pool of programming talent. A console CPU is only going to run optimized code that's passed by the hardware companies and so the can forgo the niceties and legacy support and go for outright targetted parformance. As long as a PC CPU has to run old and flakey code (the sort I write!) hardware is going to be constricted from super-turbo performance.
As a comparison, how long did it take for PCs to catch up with NES 2D capabilities? And how's about SNES 2D abilities? AFAIK generally the consoles were better at games because the hardware was targetted at games. There's no reason for this to change. The only real difference with modern PC's versus consoles is PC's by their nature spearheaded 3D graphics, and a large industry of 3D accelerators has cropped up. But consoles can still aim to be custom gaming-monsters in the CPU department whereas PC CPU's will always have the ball-and-chain of legacy support holding back their key performance. If the high vector-streaming capabilities of XeCPU and Cell really do make a big difference, a standard PC isn't going to have a similar CPU functionality for a long time. Unless a standard in vector-processor addons can be developed, there's certainly potential for the consoles to remain ahead in the processing department.
fouad said:The main reason why people prefer Console games, is that
CONSOLE GAMES ARE FAR BETTER AND MORE INTERESTING, ENTERTAINING, INNOVATIVE THAN PC GAMES. PERIOD
london-boy said:And here i thought that the first game on a next gen machine was already a next gen game...