Love_In_Rio
Veteran
Xenos´ tech demo
- Thread starter Love_In_Rio
- Start date
Probably because it's not "new" and may come off as a half-assed effort on their part, since ATi's already had that sitting on their website ever since the X800 launched. It's fine to show it off on the floor and let people just ooh and aah over it, but when you premiere a new device you pretty much want to present new methods of showing-offness.Gollum said:Not trying to whine, but why didn't MS show this at their conference damnit? It's pretty impressive!
cthellis42 said:Probably because it's not "new" and may come off as a half-assed effort on their part, since ATi's already had that sitting on their website ever since the X800 launched. It's fine to show it off on the floor and let people just ooh and aah over it, but when you premiere a new device you pretty much want to present new methods of showing-offness.Gollum said:Not trying to whine, but why didn't MS show this at their conference damnit? It's pretty impressive!
It's a new ruby demo for the upcoming r520 launch not the one already available
Is this even running on the R500/Xenos :?
It looks good, and realtime in the 3rd video... but what is it exactly? X800 Ruby? If so that would not be impressive. Thd dev kits have X800s and they chug. R520? If so who knows if the Xenos can even be mentioned in the same breath as the R520? Is this on a dual R520 setup with AMR?
The demo could be better imo... very nice AA, hair, high poly, shadows, nice lighting, etc... but also kind of bland in the building in detail and geometry. But it could be be the design (ATI/NV demos always look lifeless to me) but not knowing WHAT it is running on makes me go "meh".
Not trying to be negative... but nothing to get excited about until we know more.
It looks good, and realtime in the 3rd video... but what is it exactly? X800 Ruby? If so that would not be impressive. Thd dev kits have X800s and they chug. R520? If so who knows if the Xenos can even be mentioned in the same breath as the R520? Is this on a dual R520 setup with AMR?
The demo could be better imo... very nice AA, hair, high poly, shadows, nice lighting, etc... but also kind of bland in the building in detail and geometry. But it could be be the design (ATI/NV demos always look lifeless to me) but not knowing WHAT it is running on makes me go "meh".
Not trying to be negative... but nothing to get excited about until we know more.
This is not the old Ruby demo but one that ws supposed to be for the R520 launch; the XBox 360 launch usurped it. According to ATI this and a few other demo's was ported in under a week via XNA. Because this was a very las minute quick port, unfortunatly they didn't have AA enabled.
The first day of the show this was just running video loop because the XBox had the wrong BIOS version, but the second day they had it sorted out and was running the demo (and was being switched to interactive mode).
At the moment it looks like ATI were the only ones running actual XBox hardware on the show floor.
The first day of the show this was just running video loop because the XBox had the wrong BIOS version, but the second day they had it sorted out and was running the demo (and was being switched to interactive mode).
At the moment it looks like ATI were the only ones running actual XBox hardware on the show floor.
My bad. I only saw the thing in stills, and from what I remembered of the Ruby demo, it looked the same. (Needed to be referred to as something different than "Ruby demo" to call attention to it, really.tEd said:
At least nVidia's demos kept changing the character on us. Hehe... Also, hearing it referred to as a "port" made me think of the old one, since the new one wasn't out or anything.)That would indeed have been a good thing to call attention to during their premiere presentation, then.
Why should MS show THIS at their PC??So they can counter sony??Sounds a bit stupid to me.....
I think that MS' policy at this E3 was not to announce everything they have for the xbox360.Despite the 1st day impressions,things look to have turned around anyway(after playable GoW,new Japanese games,PD:0 not looking like shit,e.t.c).
In fact after the details of the xbox360 GPU and system details(and he positive comments on it) it seems that sony is trying to run another round of laughable hype,saying the demos were created only using the cell and not the nvidia gpu.After that i expcet the ps3 launch games(which will,obviously,use both cpu+gpu) to blow the sony tech demos away
I think that MS' policy at this E3 was not to announce everything they have for the xbox360.Despite the 1st day impressions,things look to have turned around anyway(after playable GoW,new Japanese games,PD:0 not looking like shit,e.t.c).
In fact after the details of the xbox360 GPU and system details(and he positive comments on it) it seems that sony is trying to run another round of laughable hype,saying the demos were created only using the cell and not the nvidia gpu.After that i expcet the ps3 launch games(which will,obviously,use both cpu+gpu) to blow the sony tech demos away
fulcizombie said:
Because it is a reasoable example of what we can expect the finished hardware to be capable; I don't see anything stupid about showing that. I think showing what they acutally have as far as games go is great, but it should have been qualified up front as early development examples running on far less than the final hardware and suplemented with examples of quality attainable by finished products.
Look gorgeous, but the animation is still crap...
fulcizombie said:
Quick Marketing Lesson.
Pretty videos/demos = Lots of kids going OOOOO = Lots of hype over the powerful hardware = Big sales.
What MS have done instead, was showing crappy demos from the beginning, and that is just not healthy, marketing wise, because the first impression is always the most important.
I'm not saying MS should have gone all out with lots of prerendered videos, but what the hell, if they had this and PD0 looking gorgeous, why show crappy videos instead? To me THAT is stupid.
L-B only sony is able to do that . They are able to show things and never deliver but other companys can't
Look at nintendo with zelda . They showed that beautifull zelda at the trade show and then released wind waker and people bashed them for it to no end and even now with the new zelda people claim it looks nothing like those videos
What ms did was show us unfished games that look better than this gen with 5 months left to go . Sony showed us cgi . You can't compete with that but if ms did it and launched in 5 months then the memory would be fresh in everyones head of the cgi and when the games fell short there would be problems . Sony has a year to make people forget and let thier fan base cover it up.
Look at nintendo with zelda . They showed that beautifull zelda at the trade show and then released wind waker and people bashed them for it to no end and even now with the new zelda people claim it looks nothing like those videos
What ms did was show us unfished games that look better than this gen with 5 months left to go . Sony showed us cgi . You can't compete with that but if ms did it and launched in 5 months then the memory would be fresh in everyones head of the cgi and when the games fell short there would be problems . Sony has a year to make people forget and let thier fan base cover it up.
jvd said:
Good god that's one of your best comments in a while
And that addendum adds to the fire.
You make it sound like Sony only showed CGI.
I was talking about showing DEMOS, like Sony did. I never mentioned CGI. Which by the way, also MS showed, a lot too. But i guess it's more convenient for you to believe MS showed 100% realtime material and Sony showed 100% CGI.
And before you reply, i NEVER mentioned Sony. Once again you've taken the thread into flaming ground.
Is there a difference between 2 real time demos that with one you can freeze and pan the camera around? Sony had 1 of each in the conference, Unreal 3, which was interactive freeze and pan, and the Nvidia Luna one which had preset camera controls which panned around the objects. Why does the lack of interactivity invalidate the ATi Ruby one if it was real time? They all seem quite capable for the maturity of the technology available.
