Halflife 2 also planned for xbox

Sarky

Even if HL2 doesn't live up to the hype (God forbid), I reckon it's still be worth getting for the mods that will surely follow. On the PC, anyway.

Dcully

Maybe so but if you think about it since half life there hasn't been any decent PC FPS that came close to Timesplitters 2,

Think about all the superb mods form half life,counter-strike,day of defeat,firearms,team fortress classic,natural selection.
Thats more than enough to keep any fps fan busy since HL.

Battlefield is an absolutely amazing online experience as is Desert Combat mod for it.
Dues ex was superb,as was system shock 2.
Alien versus predator was great too[bloody scary].
I could go on.

It's just that the PC FPS's are being surpassed by the console ones even if they have dodgy controls.

LOL cmon your kidding right?Thats the best laugh id had this week ,and i have visited 2 of my favourite humour sites this week.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!

theciscokid

dont be surprised if u see hl2 on ps2 and gc , it was hinted at a multi-console release

gc could handle - tis a beast

Thorbar

Originally posted by Retr0gamer
I didn't say it was nice and smooth. I said it was more realistic. You're meant to stop and aim your gun before you shot just like in goldeneye. In real life nobody circle strafes and bunny hops all over the place.

I think this is the second time I've asked this, have you ever actually played counterstrike? If you bunny hop or run around while trying to shoot you will get **** all accuracy and end up just spraying bullets all over the place.

Retr0gamer

I have played CS. And I'm crap at it. I think the aiming system isn't realistic in it either. Well for some people at least. There are some people that use tactics for shooting that would be ridiculous in real life but are very effective in the game.

As for Dcully. How old are System shock, AvsP and Deus Ex. Think of how long it's been since there was a decent FPS on the PC. Also the mods you listed are quite old and are based on the ancient HL engine. If you want to see what i mean about console FPS outclassing PC FPS's then you should play Metroid Prime.

Also in my opinion a drunken 4-player Timesplitters 2 match is far more fun than any tactical clan CS match.

Shinji

Yeah, well, we'll chalk that up to the great big list of things you're wrong about

jesus_thats_gre

Realistically, neither the GC or the PS2 could handle Half Life 2.

Below is the maximum Theoretical\Estimated actual performance of each console:

GC: 12million polygons/second \ 6-12million polygons/second
PS2: 66 million Polygons/second
Xbox: 125million Polygons/second


So much for the GC being a beast, its not as you can see.. The GC manages to produce better looking graphics than the PS2 due to the amount of on board effects supported by the ATI graphics chipset. But the PS2 is more powerful and this has been acknowledged by Nintendo.. Still has the best games though.

theciscokid

are you sure the poly count for gc is right, like i know its great at rendering and lighting fx but off the top of my head that sounds very low..

anyhow its not just the poly count that er counts

Retr0gamer

Hmm, looks like it's Shinji's Retr0gamer bashing month again . Sorry Shinji but is it a crime to prefer fast paced Half-life style deathmatch to the slower paced CS.

I think those figures are the figures that were released by each company. They definitely do not show what each machine is capable of. The GC figures are far more realistic and are more based on in game graphics (still I think your figure is way off). The other 2 are theoretical figures and you will never see them in game. The fact that the GC is a far superior machine to the PS2 in terms of Processor power, graphics card and from what I've seen proves these figures to be unreliable. The xbox is the more powerful machine but the GC can match it for the look of its graphics due to the great ATI card and great programming from Nintendo.

The cube could handle HL2 but would be a lot less nice looking than the xbox version because it would be harder to port and it can't handle levels that are as big as the xbox can handle.

Lastly who gives a sh*t about tech specs.They are usually made up anyway.:D

Shinji

The Xbox and PS2 figures are for theoretical throughput of unlit, untextured polygons.

The GC figure is for real-world throughput of lit and textured polygons.

The Cube isn't a million miles behind the Xbox in terms of power, and it's a much better balanced machine for game development. You're not going to see a lot of Xbox games doing things that can't also be achieved on the GameCube, but you may see some Cube games doing stuff that the Xbox can't do due to the limitations of DirectX and the PC architecture.

Retr0gamer

Wasn't there something on gamecentral yesterday about HL2 not going to be on xbox. One of the execs of microsoft said that it wouldn't be on xbox. I wouldn't beleive it though. The exec types of games companies are usually a bit thick.

Dcully

As for Dcully. How old are System shock, AvsP and Deus Ex. Think of how long it's been since there was a decent FPS on the PC. Also the mods you listed are quite old and are based on the ancient HL engine. If you want to see what i mean about console FPS outclassing PC FPS's then you should play Metroid Prime

Dont forget about Battlefield and its great mods Desert Combat and Eve of destruction.
Devastation is superb as is UT 2003.
Yeah Metroid Prime is good but as with most fps on console ,its too arcade for my liking.
Its better than Halo though.

Retr0gamer

Haven't really play battlefield since my connection is crap. I didn't find devastation all that good and was a little disappointed with UT2003. I prefer the more arcadey approach to sigle player fps. I think it's far more fun than the realistic tripe like SOF2. Thats what I liked about HL so much. The weapons were all crazy but different and all had a use. It was also quite a fast paced game. Well suppose it's what happens when you're brought up on a diet of SF2, R-type and Axelay.

Matt Simis

Originally posted by Shinji
The Xbox and PS2 figures are for theoretical throughput of unlit, untextured polygons.

The GC figure is for real-world throughput of lit and textured polygons.

The Cube isn't a million miles behind the Xbox in terms of power, and it's a much better balanced machine for game development. You're not going to see a lot of Xbox games doing things that can't also be achieved on the GameCube, but you may see some Cube games doing stuff that the Xbox can't do due to the limitations of DirectX and the PC architecture.

While I think the GC is a lot more powerful than people give it credit for, its extremely unlikely the GC could really do anything the XB cant. For one, the GPU (Flipper) on the GC is quite close to a PC GPU (the company first designed integrated AMD chipsets and it supports S3TC, a PC centric compresson tech). Secondly, Flipper chip only features a fixed function T&L unit. The leap from fixed function to programmable is akin to looking a tech demo for a Geforce2 and comparing to a tech demo for a Geforce4. Granted the fixed T&L unit is most likely much better designed and tailered to its job than the early nVidia GPUs, it still at the end of the day is inherently more limited.

The only "limitation" I can see for the XBox is nVidia's (and MS) somewhat understandable rule that devs dont write code "to the metal" but rather to the DirectX API. Since we are talking about a programable chip to begin with however, this probably wont mean much.

In what way is the GC more "balanced" in your view, out of interest?



Matt

PS: On a not very related not, Metroid Prime is not an FPS, its 3D adventure game.

Matt Simis

Originally posted by Retr0gamer
Haven't really play battlefield since my connection is crap. I didn't find devastation all that good and was a little disappointed with UT2003. I prefer the more arcadey approach to sigle player fps. I think it's far more fun than the realistic tripe like SOF2. Thats what I liked about HL so much. The weapons were all crazy but different and all had a use. It was also quite a fast paced game. Well suppose it's what happens when you're brought up on a diet of SF2, R-type and Axelay.

You apparently played a different SOF2 than me, cos I would never put "realistic" and "SOF2" in the same sentence. Operation Flashpoint was realistic, and its leagues above SOF. Its also a game that would be next to impossible to implement properly on a console, due to a myriad of issues (although for some reason its scheduled for Xbox later this year??)


Matt

Dcully

You apparently played a different SOF2 than me, cos I would never put "realistic" and "SOF2" in the same sentence. Operation Flashpoint was realistic, and its leagues above SOF. Its also a game that would be next to impossible to implement properly on a console, due to a myriad of issues (although for some reason its scheduled for Xbox later this year??)

Totally agree SOF 2 is not realistic in the way CS and DOD are.
OF takes this realism even further.

Deadwing

Thos specs are only meant to show the amount of raw polygons that can be shown on screen, and not the actual amount of IN GAME polygons, if it wasnt, that would mean the GC would have inferior graphics to the PS2, and anyone whos played Res Evil or Metroid on GC knows that thats complete bollocks.

Compare first generation PS2 titles with whats coming out now, I.E. Onimusha with Onimusha 2, the difference is unreal, even now comparing something like Silent Hill 3 to onimusha 2 you can see just how much developers are pushing a three year old console. So when you look at first generation GC and Xbox games like Halo and Metroid prime, i dont doubt for a second that given a year to port HL2 or Doom 3, it could be done easily, if the first generation games for these consoles can look this good.

And RetrOgamer, hear hear!! Id much rather sit around a tv, drunk, kicking my friends asses at TS2 or something, rather than playing against some faceless drone via the net.

Retr0gamer

Sorry if you misunderstood but I was saying that the game setting is more realistic than the setting of something like HL. I found it and it's weapons incredibly boring.

The GC is a far better designed piece of hardware than the xbox. It's far easier for programmers to get to grips with and get at most of it's potential than if they were programming on the xbox. For the power of the GC it's much easier to squeeze out that extra bit of performance than for the xbox. Or so some of the guys from konami say. I'm sure thats what Shinji means.

monument

Originally posted by Deadwing
And RetrOgamer, hear hear!! Id much rather sit around a tv, drunk, kicking my friends asses at TS2 or something, rather than playing against some faceless drone via the net.

Often more fun, getting two Xboxs and about 4 to 8 people to play Halo etc... however you can't always that, not any time you want any who.

I'm off now to talk to some people rather than talking to some faceless drones via the net.

Retr0gamer

I'm off now to talk to some people rather than talking to some faceless drones via the net.

Touche!

Dcully

I prefer to play with 63 other guys than 4 .
No comparison really.

monument

Originally posted by Retr0gamer
Touche!

No that’s not fair you all aren’t faceless drones, just some of you

Seifer

I much prefer fps with a mouse and key board but I think bungie did an amazing job of mapping the controls for halo. Basically they've set the bar. And for halo 2 the triggers will be used independantly when using two guns which will just be the definition of cool.
And why do people keep talking about timesplitters 2? Its complete crap with a retarded aiming system that's designed for the ps2 pad (works much better with that but is still crap) and is nearly impossible to use accurately with xbox pad.
I don't see how hl2 on xbox will perform worse than its pc counterpart unless, like some said, its being played on an l33t ninja pc.

Deadwing

Originally posted by Dcully
I prefer to play with 63 other guys than 4 .
No comparison really.

If you cant see the whites of their eyes, and laugh in their face as you whomp em at Virtua Fighter 4, its just not as fun.

Retr0gamer

I prefer to play with 63 other guys than 4 .

I much prefer to Slag some one off face to face when yu beat them. If you do it on the net some twat with no sense of humour who takes the game to seriously will get offended and then you will get yourself banned or kicked unfairly.

Retr0gamer

I think bungie did an amazing job of mapping the controls for halo. Basically they've set the bar. And for halo2 the triggers will be used independantly when using two guns which will just be the definition of cool.

Firstly trhe same control scheme that Halo uses has been used since Quake2 on the PS and plenty of other games before it. Also the independant firing of two guns using the two triggers was used in Red Faction 2 almost a year ago.

Seifer

I find it astonishing that the quake 2 team managed to map the controls on to an xbox controller when they hadn't even been invented. I was refering to the xbox alone not all consoles before it. Anyway it couldn't be the same with the pads being different except for the sticks.
Yeah I just found that out about rf2 but its still cool. In rf2 can you have two different guns in each hand though? Like a pistol in one and an smg in an other?

Dcully

If you cant see the whites of their eyes, and laugh in their face as you whomp em at Virtua Fighter 4, its just not as fun.

So you would sacrifice a 64 player game just to see your mate ?
You obviously never played 64 player games then!
Would you not like to play with or against your friends?
Maybe part of a clan playing against other clans?

Dont get me wrong i regulary have some leagues with friends on Pro Evo soccer 2 ,great fun but simply not in the same class as for example Battlefield 1942 mod Desert Combat online .
Huge 64 player WAR .Would you not enjoy flying a Stuka Bomber in Battlefield with a friend sitting in back as your tail Gunner and a few other friends flying alongside? or 5 or 6 of your mates and yourself jumping into Tanks and forming a Tank Battalion and setting off to take over enemy base?
Ive done this on countless occasions and sometimes with friends all in the same room while playing online together ,if not in same room we use TeamSpeak to chat away while playing.
Different strokes for different blokes and all that but you gotta admit its a lot better than playing Virtua Fighter or whatever with 4 mates ,i guarantee you will never tire of it but you will and i have on countless console so-called multiplayer games,except for PES2 ofcourse

jesus_thats_gre

Go here and look at the raw hardware facts!

http://www.activewin.com/faq/x-box.shtml#General%20Xbox%20questions

Retr0gamer

I have played 64 player games online. However a 20 player lan is even more fun.

The control scheme on quake 2 on PS is the same as Halo. Both use the digital pad as the keyboard and an analogue stick as the mouse. Also the shoulder buttons are used for jumping and firing. exactly like in Halo except with a different pad.