Prey (2006)

Ok, I forgot about that one. All the other ones were crap though.

 

anyway good read on IGN, glad to hear that game runs smooth even on early stage of dvelopment. Litlle sad that they decided to stay at 30 fps, 60 will be something nice .

 

Awesome graphics

 

So I guess Prey is doing global illumination. That's pretty awesome for a FPS game! Nice shadows and lightning. Any estimates on the poly count? Nice textures too btw.

 

CoD2 is a great game but the painful live interface alone makes it a shitty port. Beyond that there is the crappy texture filtering, the rough framerate in HDTV modes and the recently patched glitch that was hosing peoples saves. If you think those issues should be ignored, I say your standards are too low. I sure hope Prey doesn't get released with such problems.

 

I haven't played it on Live, since I bought it for the single player campaign but I understand that they did a poor job of creating the Xbox Live experience. The "rough framerates" I find dubious; I know it's not locked at 60, but we aren't talking SotC framerates here either. And I don't consider a bug to be worthy of calling something a shitty port.

Seriously, the market and reviewers all disagree with you. I understand your nitpicking on the game--you've pointed them out before and I agree they are worthy of critique. But I do believe that calling Call of Duty a bad port is actually just wrong.

 

Must be the only 'shitty port' in history to average 90.3% on gamerankings.com.

Lets take a look at how the other 'shitty ports' compared:
Q4 - 75.2
TonyHawk - 76.3
Gun - 75.3

There's no question that COD2 was far and away a more quality game than any of activision's ports.

Your standards are too high. The entire video game industry, everyone from reviewers to consumers disagrees with you and have been loving the game.

 

I'm not comparing it to the other Activision ports, I'm comparing it to the PC version that I also own and in that comparison the issues I mentioned make it a crappy port. The only plus I can give the 360 version is that it can be played with a controller against other people with a controller which is a big plus for me as someone who likes to game from the couch, but other than that the 360 version is a letdown compared to what I have on my PC.

 

I hope they do a little more work on being able to make the skin tones etc. look better because although I think the Doom3 engine is impressive, the plastic look of the skin has always bothered me. I dont need photo realistic skin (yet ) but the skin just really stands out to me from what is otherwise great looking engine.

 

source Gamespot:

but IGN says X360 looks better and has silky framerate who's right??????

 

IGN might consider 30fps silky smooth.

Optimizing could just mean making the framerate much more stable.

 

c'mon so it's silky 30fps or

 

To me it looks very unimpressive. Like a doom3 with different gameplay.

 

Looks okay to me too. I mean 2 years ago I would have pissed on myself seeing this game, but today no. For instance seeing a game like Gears of War and then looking at this doesn't get me excited.

 

Personally I am not going "OMG, OMG, OMG!", but yes it is coming along very well. Unfortunatly Doom 3 engine didn't really hold up to well against more advanced tech demo/games AKA Half Life 2 but I suppose the D3 enigne has had a much better life time so far, and far better games. Doom 3, Quake 4 and now Prey, even if it wasn't the greatest engine/visuals around it is really producing the better resaults in the long run, that said, I'll be getting this day 1.

 

I thought Doom3 got pretty okay to bad ratings though. It seemed to me that a lot of people thought the game was kinda boring and lame.