Resistance: Fall of Man update! BIG READ , come inside!

[Arwin]

how to use resources is a choice Arwin, that 1080p means less space for textures and models and less bandwitdh is a fact (and less fillrate, but this change from game to game)

Of course it is, but are you comparing the largest levels in Resistance to, say, a tenniscourt? A football stadium? A basketball court? How many different textures do characters in a sports game require? Both teams have the same uniforms after all. Two tennis players are maybe going to be four in a doubles game, but after that you'll have to stretch using ball-bays to take it much further, or maybe other fringe stuff like audience. It's not like the ball is taking up a lot of resources right there beyond maybe physics calculations ... and those aren't going to be very complex either. How many models do you need in these games? Sure, individual players will take up some space, but it's not really exhausting resources compared to huge buildings with infinite view-distances in something like resistance, with all sorts of aliens, weapons, smoke effects and so on and so forth.

How hard is it to recognise that different games have different resource requirements, and that for some of them 1080p isn't going to be much of a sacrifice?

 

[MasterDisaster]

Of course it is, but are you comparing the largest levels in Resistance to, say, a tenniscourt? A football stadium? A basketball court? How many different textures do characters in a sports game require? Both teams have the same uniforms after all. Two tennis players are maybe going to be four in a doubles game, but after that you'll have to stretch using ball-bays to take it much further, or maybe other fringe stuff like audience. It's not like the ball is taking up a lot of resources right there beyond maybe physics calculations ... and those aren't going to be very complex either. How many models do you need in these games? Sure, individual players will take up some space, but it's not really exhausting resources compared to huge buildings with infinite view-distances in something like resistance, with all sorts of aliens, weapons, smoke effects and so on and so forth.

a) resistance is far to be a game with 'infinite view-distance'
b) you can develope a tennis game, a FPS, a racing game, but if you leave so MUCH MORE (exacts words from the developer of resistance) of VRAM, bandwitdh, fillrate unused, in my opinion you are not a good developer, learn how to use the resource to make the game look better

How hard is it to recognise that different games have different resource requirements, and that for some of them 1080p isn't going to be much of a sacrifice?

I't less hardware to recognise than this PR 1080p is not free and use much more (much more) resources than 720 stealing from other things of the game (and don't came here to say that a tennis game don't need bandwitdh or texture because there're only two important models and only a lot of secondary)

 

[Shifty Geezer]

how to use resources is a choice Arwin, that 1080p means less space for textures and models and less bandwitdh is a fact (and less fillrate, but this change from game to game)

And that's the point Arwin was getting at. It's not a waste to use 1080p, because you're still using the resources. They're just used differently. It's no more a waste to use 1080p then it is to use 2048x2048 textures. You could use 1024x1024 textures and get more of them, but at lower fidelity.

 

[MasterDisaster]

And that's the point Arwin was getting at. It's not a waste to use 1080p, because you're still using the resources. They're just used differently. It's no more a waste to use 1080p then it is to use 2048x2048 textures. You could use 1024x1024 textures and get more of them, but at lower fidelity.

I see a good use of the 1080i/1080p native, only for games as XBLA or BC titles (simple games not rich of textures and so on)

if you ask me, do you want 720p with that quality, or 1080 with much less textures, less models, less detail on envirorments, less effect bandwitdh-related (ex. aa) in a MODERN game
I will say no, in my opinion I will never, never trade quality and details to go from 720p to 1080p (little difference at 5m from the tv, only a minority uses 1080p tvs and so on)

the developer of this game, agreed with me.

 

[one]

Wow, compensation theory again? If you remember this is the thread for Resistance, you sure must remember it's one of the key launch titles which can't miss the schedule.

 

[LunchBox]

Isn't it 12 gigs of raw game data (40 "levels", 300mb a piece)?

AFAIK they've already compressed it a lot.

 

[aselto]

Of course it is, but are you comparing the largest levels in Resistance to, say, a tenniscourt? A football stadium? A basketball court? How many different textures do characters in a sports game require? Both teams have the same uniforms after all. Two tennis players are maybe going to be four in a doubles game, but after that you'll have to stretch using ball-bays to take it much further, or maybe other fringe stuff like audience. It's not like the ball is taking up a lot of resources right there beyond maybe physics calculations ... and those aren't going to be very complex either. How many models do you need in these games? Sure, individual players will take up some space, but it's not really exhausting resources

Well, graphics in (for example) VT3 could be much improved and you could put much more resources into players and stadiums. The difference between game and real world is still huge:
http://www.sopot.pl/intgm_inc/pics/tenis.jpg
http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/824/824785/img_4008677.html
Of course, Sega didn't improve graphics because they didn't want arcade version look inferior, but still they could improve tons of aspects.

 

[valioso]

Why add fluff content in the first place to take it beyond the DVD-9 capacity? Sony's just trying to justify the use of higher-capacity media and the Sony devs are following suit.

they also have 1 universal disc, meaning all different localized languages are in every version.

 

[xmu]

An additional bonus about using a higher capacity disc is that you sort of have one thing less to worry about. Now I'm not saying everything couldn't be fit on a DVD9, but as a developer I'll personally embrace anything that gives me more time to focus on creating the actual game.

 

[Asher]

If you didn't worry about asset size, you've got bigger problems than your storage space: RAM space and then loading times/streaming times.

 

[acaeus]

^^ right, but the length of the game can be increased, more levels for example. As developer you don't have to worry about length, about whether you last level will fit or not.

And more importanty you can add side content a la GTA or Oblivion.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

^^ right, but the length of the game can be increased, more levels for example. As developer you don't have to worry about length, about whether you last level will fit or not.

Generally speaking, I think length is more determined by cost than storage capacity. There's plenty of shorter games that fit onto single sided DVD where the devs didn't spend the extra to make the game longer or add more variety.

 

[expletive]

Even if they use H.264 or VC-1, 720p video, you need atleast 12mbps for a decent HD encode, and in practice judging by bitrates on released HD-DVD titles, you need about 15-18mbps given immaturity of codecs. 1 hr @ 12mbps = 5.4gb, or 6.7gb @ 15mbps avg. That means even 15 mins of HD FMV is going to eat up about 1.3-1.6gigs. Most titles probably won't have that much FMV, but Final Fantasy will have a shit load, and Lost Odyssey appears to have tons as well. .

FWIW, they've got VC1 at 9-10 mbit now for high quality masters, which all CGI would be.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=718689

Does anyone know how many different languages/localizations they put on the disc?

 

[weaksauce]

Man I can't stop thinking over that it's worse now than i 2005.

http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/748/748483/vids_6.html

I mean, artistically, I think it was way darker, more serious and more solid.
Technically I think this had better animations, like when the player gets a melee attack from an enemy, and the spider thing too. Also when the explosions come and blow the car and truck, great physics. And all the soldiers, which had a way cooler style then, where are they now?

Is it just me?

And why the fuck did they rename the already perfect name "I-8" to some B-movie style title "Resistance: Fall of Man", it's like so serious that it gets rediculous.

[/rant]

 

[Bad_Boy]

Man I can't stop thinking over that it's worse now than i 2005.

http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/748/748483/vids_6.html

I mean, artistically, I think it was way darker, more serious and more solid.
Technically I think this had better animations, like when the player gets a melee attack from an enemy, and the spider thing too. Also when the explosions come and blow the car and truck, great physics. And all the soldiers, which had a way cooler style then, where are they now?

Is it just me?

Maybe, theres tons of stuff we havent seen, but for the stuff we seen and know about, theres plenty of physics and things that are effected by explosions, blown up cars get moved around, glass breaking dynamically, tires being shot up, etc. that all matches or surpass the orginal trailer imo. Enemies still do funky melee attacks, the screaming animation is still there, just I dont think we have seen much of it yet. Even then I think the graphics have improved, the draw distance is a shit load better, and there seems to be more debree and architecture on screen at one time. I dont see a huge difference in how the spider animates. The only huge difference I can tell is the amount of soldiers on screen at once, but again that could still be in the game, we just may have not seen it yet.

And why the fuck did they rename the already perfect name "I-8" to some B-movie style title "Resistance: Fall of Man", it's like so serious that it gets rediculous.
[/rant]

I-8 was the code name, and was never meant to be the final game name. "Insomniac's 8th game" = "I-8"

 

[weaksauce]

Maybe, theres tons of stuff we havent seen, but for the stuff we seen and know about, theres plenty of physics and things that are effected by explosions, blown up cars get moved around, glass breaking dynamically, tires being shot up, etc. that all matches or surpass the orginal trailer imo. Enemies still do funky melee attacks, the screaming animation is still there, just I dont think we have seen much of it yet. Even then I think the graphics have improved, the draw distance is a shit load better, and there seems to be more debree and architecture on screen at one time. I dont see a huge difference in how the spider animates. The only huge difference I can tell is the amount of soldiers on screen at once, but again that could still be in the game, we just may have not seen it yet.

Yeah sure much is there, and some some environments and such are more detailed now, but I don't see it as solid as it was, like the melee attacker moved way better, the ragdoll and explosion of cars seemed to work better in the old video.

I-8 was the code name, and was never meant to be the final game name. "Insomniac's 8th game" = "I-8"

Oh, I thought it was a name for a project in the game, suited well for the style of it.

 

[Bad_Boy]

Yeah sure much is there, and some some environments and such are more detailed now, but I don't see it as solid as it was, like the melee attacker moved way better, the ragdoll and explosion of cars seemed to work better in the old video.

I think it will be easier to judge those things when we get the final game a month from now.

Oh, I thought it was a name for a project in the game, suited well for the style of it.

I-8 was a cool name no doubt.
It's funny most concept names are usually as cool or even cooler than the final names (I still like revolution over Wii ).

 

[Ben-Nice]

Some videos from gamers day. Good videos. Bad music. :smile:

http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=14327&type=mov

http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=14331&type=mov

http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=14329&type=mov

 

[Arwin]

Very impressive videos, and indeed, lousy music.

 

[pipo]

It looks very smooth, but I'm not sure what to think of the visual style. Some stuff looks a bit cartoony while other stuff looks realistic.

Could be the video quality too by the way...