So.. What will Nvidia Bring to Counter the R520?

digitalwanderer said:
I think there will be a "catching up" so to speak of games soon, in about a year. :)

Have we seen any hard evidence yet that newer developer tools are having an impact in shortening development time for high-quality stuff?

Or is it still a lowest-common-gpu-features-denominator issue holding this back?
 
geo said:
Or is it still a lowest-common-gpu-features-denominator issue holding this back?
It would be amusing if the best looking PC games for a while were ports of next-gen console titles that originally didn't have to worry about DX7 video cards.
 
Oh, and the best-looking PC games being console ports just doesn't make much sense. Console ports typically just don't have the level of work put into them to make use of the best tech that the PC has to offer.
 
Chalnoth said:
Um, there are already some games that just flat out won't run on pre-DX8 cards.
True, but Riddick is about the only game I can think of that really graphically challenges either the X800 or 6800 right now...and I still ain't sure if that isn't just a matter of some weird coding or not.
 
If Riddick challenges top end cards, I'd say that's because it's a lazy port rather than anything else. There are plenty of Xbox-derived games that run slower in PC trim than they have any right to (even bloody Halo, which started out as a pure PC title).

But I generally agree that the bulk of graphically intensive (or whatever you want to call it) games over the next couple of years will likely be Xbox2 ports. For sure there will always be one or two pure PC Doom3 or HL2 type titles that lead the way in terms of leveraging the power on offer from whatever is the prevailing high end PC tech. But the PC gaming market is just too small and too compromised by piracy (I hate Steam with a passion, but I dont blame Valve for doing it) and as ever a lot of for-PC titles will pretty low in order to enable the largest possible market etc. The cost of developing games is getting pretty crazy as the graphical quality explodes and the time taken to generate assets and whatnot similarly expands. I don't see many pure-PC titles pushing the boundaries in the short to medium term. I doubt there will be more than two or three D3 / HL2 standard (in terms of pushing the boundaries of visual quality, and let's be honest, the Source engine is nothing special, it's more the quality of the art work and assets that makes HL2 what it is graphically) PC titles in the next 2-3 years.
 
Well, we're supposed to see the first UE3 engine titles in about a year, and same with Oblivion. I'd call that medium-term.
 
Agreed, the Unreal engine looks pretty good (I had a demo from Mr Sweeney himself about 4 or 5 months ago). Duno anything about Oblivion. So that's one definite and one possible. I don't know of any others...if id do something hard core again you'd have to think it was years away - but there's something about the Doom 3 engine that fails to satisfy - it feels like a bit of a technical dead end - sort of the ultimate dx8 level engine (yes I know its OpenGL, but you know what I mean) in a time when we're all getting excited about total programmability.
 
caboosemoose said:
but there's something about the Doom 3 engine that fails to satisfy - it feels like a bit of a technical dead end - sort of the ultimate dx8 level engine (yes I know its OpenGL, but you know what I mean) in a time when we're all getting excited about total programmability.
All that you really need to add to the Doom 3 engine to make it great for PS 2.0 and higher graphics cards is to implement a configurable materials system that has a robust shader library (so that artists don't need to be programmers, similar to what UE3 purports to have).

Beyond that it may be good to start adding in different techniques for implementing the shadowing aspect.

But, when you think about it, there already is a materials system (it just needs a easier to use front-end), and JC has already experimented with alternative shadowing techniques, so the engine really is far from a technical dead end.
 
oblivon is a console game , being co developed at the same time acording to game informer .


I don't see why cnsoles wont have a small leap for a bit . It allways happens the year the new systems come out then they slowly loose it .

a xenon with a 3.5 ghz cpu with 6 cores and a r500 should be able to put a image on the screen better than a athlon 64 dual core cpu and a r520 .

Esp considering that not title will take advantage of those features that the new card brings to the table .
 
But it's not a console port, jvd. That's the point. The PC version is being primarily-developed for the PC. It's not a console game first, PC port second. That said, I'm not expecting wonderful performance for the features in this game.
 
Well, it being a trailer shouldn't affect the number of polygons in the scene, which looked rather low.
 
jvd said:
oblivon is a console game , being co developed at the same time acording to game informer .
1. It's a multiplatform game, not console game. Max Payne 2 was a great example of multiplatform game.
2. It's developing for next generation of consoles (Xenon being the most possible development target).
 
Chalnoth said:
Fodder said:
Dark Sector looks pretty slick as well.
I'm just not seeing it. Those models look really low-poly and flat-shaded. Looks to me more like a game for the PSP than anything for next-gen technology.

Agreed. has a nice enough "look" and the lighting is moody and all, but the texturing and poly count is pretty old school.
 
Back
Top