Quake 4 xbox 360 VIDEO

Status
Not open for further replies.
Who cares what it looks like on the xbox, I want to see it on the computer, which will have better gfx and controls anyway!
 
ScreamingBroccoli said:
Who cares what it looks like on the xbox, I want to see it on the computer, which will have better gfx and controls anyway!
Click to expand...
your a lost cause arent you?have you not seen the specs of the 360?currently better then the precious pc
 
I was just looking at some of those other movies, says its called gears of war ... looks amazing.

Also I just wanted to point this out

from the article said:
This third-person shooter will be available on the Xbox 360 and the PC. We were told by Peter Moore that Gears of War is currently running at 80% of the visual bar that Epic believes it can achieve on 360
Click to expand...

If this is indeed true, my mind is blown. :eek: Just look at the screenshots, and they saw that is only 80% power in the visual department.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/612/612066p1.html
 
Ballz2TheWallz said:
your a lost cause arent you?have you not seen the specs of the 360?currently better then the precious pc
Click to expand...
When your name is broccoli, you've bound to jump to silly conclusions like that...
It'd be cool if you could take the vid card out of the xbox and put it in a PC
 
Rogue4mula said:
When your name is broccoli, you've bound to jump to silly conclusions like that...
It'd be cool if you could take the vid card out of the xbox and put it in a PC
Click to expand...
same was said about the origanal xbox :rolleyes: (if its parts can be removed)
 
unreal3 engine demos only take %20 of XNA power,360 is more powerful then a xna. im sure with the right optimizations(like takeing full use of multithreads,edram,and 48pipes)that %80 could be shaved down to atleast %50-60percent
 
There is no way that a launch title would utilize 80% of the X360's power. Launch titles never tap a system that much.
 
WickedAngel said:
There is no way that a launch title would utilize 80% of the X360's power. Launch titles never tap a system that much.
Click to expand...



And how many times has microsoft released a console?
 
S0m30n3 said:
And how many times has microsoft released a console?
Click to expand...

...what does that have to do with anything?

It's common knowledge in the industry. Consoles are designed to last for at least a few years. There wouldn't be anywhere to go if the launch games pushed 80% of the power that the system was capable of.

Compare the launch titles of any of the current generation consoles with notable games of today if you want to see what I'm talking about. Console deveopment is progressive; it doesn't come all at once like the PC industry.
 
Ballz2TheWallz said:
your a lost cause arent you?have you not seen the specs of the 360?currently better then the precious pc
Click to expand...

The 360 does indeed have incredible specs, but due to technical limitations, the PC version will look better. Doesn't matter how good the 360 specs are, or any other console for that matter.
 
The only limitations seen on this forum are those regarding the mental capabilities of PC elitists...
 
WickedAngel said:
The only limitations seen on this forum are those regarding the mental capabilities of PC elitists...
Click to expand...

lol, I was more talking about the fact that HDTV can't display the same high resolutions as monitors. Also, the number of people who have HDTVs capable of 1080i isn't anywhere near those who have monitors capable of at least 1600x1200.

You also can't blame the elitests because this IS a PC elitist forum after all...
 
WickedAngel said:
There is no way that a launch title would utilize 80% of the X360's power. Launch titles never tap a system that much.
Click to expand...

Soul Caliber 2. Dreamcast. 1999.
 
Ballz2TheWallz said:
your a lost cause arent you?have you not seen the specs of the 360?currently better then the precious pc
Click to expand...

I am going to make a note of this comment, so I can make you eat your words later on.

People always say stuff like this with EVERY new generation of consoles, and they are consistently proven wrong :rolleyes:
 
Maximus825 said:
lol, I was more talking about the fact that HDTV can't display the same high resolutions as monitors. Also, the number of people who have HDTVs capable of 1080i isn't anywhere near those who have monitors capable of at least 1600x1200.

You also can't blame the elitests because this IS a PC elitist forum after all...
Click to expand...
I for one Have both An HDTV and a monitor that runs 1600x1200. The HDTV's 1920x1080 (even if it is interlaced) is FAR more impressive, and that is what people will remember, not the technical specs of it. Your are right about more people having monitors than HDTV's, but isnt that kind of outwieghed by the fact that it would take a MINIMUM $1000 pc at Q4 launch to even look close to what the xbox 360 SHOULD look like? This is of course assuming they do a decent job of utilitzing its power.
 
LeviathanZERO said:
Soul Caliber 2. Dreamcast. 1999.
Click to expand...
Do we really know it used even 80% of the console? It didn't last long enough to find out. Many people thought that Halo on the xbox was going to be pretty much it, then Halo 2 came out 2 years later.
 
Rehevkor said:
I am going to make a note of this comment, so I can make you eat your words later on.

People always say stuff like this with EVERY new generation of consoles, and they are consistently proven wrong :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
point out an instance where they said such and such used so much power in a devkit for a console and it was proven long :rolleyes:
 
Rehevkor said:
I am going to make a note of this comment, so I can make you eat your words later on.

People always say stuff like this with EVERY new generation of consoles, and they are consistently proven wrong :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Just like with the Original xbox.. how many times over will a PC cost that is comparable to the 360 when it launches? 4? 5? 6? At least.
 
diehard said:
I for one Have both An HDTV and a monitor that runs 1600x1200. The HDTV's 1920x1080 (even if it is interlaced) is FAR more impressive, and that is what people will remember, not the technical specs of it. Your are right about more people having monitors than HDTV's, but isnt that kind of outwieghed by the fact that it would take a MINIMUM $1000 pc at Q4 launch to even look close to what the xbox 360 SHOULD look like? This is of course assuming they do a decent job of utilitzing its power.
Click to expand...

Well yeah, there's no denying that the console is good for the money. I was speaking from a graphics point of view. I don't know if it's just what I've seen or what, but I haven't been too impressed with the 1080i setups I've seen. Maybe they weren't hooked up right, or maybe something else was wrong, but I didn't think it looked all that great, especially for being 1920x1080. The thing that it has going for it is screen size. I would much rather play on a huge screen at a lower resolution than on a 19" screen at a high resolution. But, I cannot afford a nice HDTV so I have to settle for either playing on a small screen at high resolution, or 27" screen at regular TV resolution.
 
Rehevkor said:
I am going to make a note of this comment, so I can make you eat your words later on.

People always say stuff like this with EVERY new generation of consoles, and they are consistently proven wrong :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I completely agree, The Xbox 360 does have awesome specs, but a year from now PCs will take the lead again...why?

1) Consoles are influenced by PC technology...and thus for the next generation of consoles to come out and be better then the last generation there needs to be advances in PC technology...

2)...And because these advances will be available to PC's before they will be available for consoles, because you can't upgrade consoles.

This happens every time a new generation of consoles come out. Consoles will never be able to keep up with PCs tech-wise until they can be upgraded by the user. I'm interested in the X-Box 360 (besides the gay name) and think it will do very well.
 
derrickperry said:
http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/740/740717/vids_1.html
Click to expand...

Gameplay wise I'm impressed becuase they managed to speed up the action in the game. From the standpoint of this being displayed on a next gen console...graphically it's not that impressive because it looks just like Doom3 but much brighter...and considering the X360 is supposed to be the end all and be all of graphic technology...then this deserves a meh
:rolleyes:
 
I don't mean to sidetrack from the Quake 4 topic, but speaking of graphics... Ghost Recon 3 looks AMAZING! Both of these games should be looking very good when they come out.
 
WickedAngel said:
:rolleyes: Soul Calibur wasn't even close to showing the full potential of the Dreamcast.
Click to expand...

sure man.
thats why namco said they pushed the system to the limit and werent going to make a sequal so they could focus on their PS2 development. (Ridge Racer V at the time.)

hmm... lets think about it. Soul Caliber 2, 4 years later, looks no better than the first one, which ran on hardware with a MAXIMUM 12/mill polys/sec.

so lets see. SC2 pushes hardware so much that the Xbox version has a fucked HDTV resolution cause the fps would die if it was full widescreen. and you think the first game didnt push the limit of an even more limited hardware? especially after the very people that made the game said so?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: (see? i can click dumb icons too :rolleyes: )
 
You're a fool if you think Soul Calibur was the most the Dreamcast could do. You're basing your foolish assumptions on the idea that it was true because Namco said it was true?

Developers always hype their games as "pushing the system to limits that had never been reached before". I've seen that phrase on at least fifty different game displays. It is rarely ever true.

Shenmue surpassed it, let alone Shenmue 2.
 
WickedAngel said:
The only limitations seen on this forum are those regarding the mental capabilities of PC elitists...
Click to expand...

ohhhhh snap!

IMO the XBOX 360 will have amazing graphics, and I believe that they will surpass teh PC for a while anyway.

This being said, I am much more looking forward to real world physics and fully destructible environments. If I can collapse a building on someone in Ghost Recon 3, I may very well die of sheer enjoyment.
 
Of course there will always be faster PC:s then consoles. Computers drives the technology but we customers have to pay for it ;).

But I heard it will have USB and if I can hook all my pheripherals and my monitor that is capable of 2048x1532 which is higher than most HDTV:s ;) I may very well end up getting one if there is some competent games on that platform which aren´t dumbed down for console kiddies or gamepad optimizations..

But really if the XBOX 360 is a computer I may buy it :D
 
What do you guys think about the videos for Condemned, Full Auto, and of course Gears Of War? I think Condemned looks better than HL2, but you couldnt see any decent draw distances, Full Auto looks very nice, And i wish there as a better Gears of War video.
 
diehard said:
What do you guys think about the videos for Condemned, Full Auto, and of course Gears Of War? I think Condemned looks better than HL2, but you couldnt see any decent draw distances, Full Auto looks very nice, And i wish there as a better Gears of War video.
Click to expand...

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/612/612066p1.html

Ya the one here is kinda dark. Althought they do menton in the article, that the videos are pre renders, but rather ingame engine graphics. :eek:
 
The quake series will always be better on the pc because of the mouse and keyboard and system specs. Even though the xbox 360 has high specs right now at the end the computer will win like always since in the future you could also turn the anti-aliasing or antistrophe higher and stuff. Then theres mods and everything. Personally i'd never play it on a console since i been playing quake 3 on pc for tons of years now.
 
diehard said:
Do we really know it used even 80% of the console? It didn't last long enough to find out. Many people thought that Halo on the xbox was going to be pretty much it, then Halo 2 came out 2 years later.
Click to expand...
Yes, Halo was the best of the games at release by far. But there is absolutely no way that any one could say that Halo is still the crown of XBX games as far as looks go (and imo game play). It was a long time coming.

Two Words: Ninja Gaiden.
 
Rehevkor said:
I am going to make a note of this comment, so I can make you eat your words later on.

People always say stuff like this with EVERY new generation of consoles, and they are consistently proven wrong :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

How true it is... Any one see perfect dark in action (the whole 15 secs of splitscreen glory on mtv last night...)? Didn't look too amazing to me, nothing a good comp can't handle now. And think about it, yes the console may have the same power as a comp right now (or less, and optimized to make it comparable), but can a console do graphics/video editing? How about word proccessing or get updated news and weather right on the spot, what about provide multiple webbrowsers or free online games and free online game play (excluding Dreamcast, which was so sweet, and didn't make people have to pay, 'cept for phantasy star). I can go down the endlist list of what a computer can do that a console cannot, negating, and putting the PC ahead in terms of what you get for the price ! Even if quake4 is comparable on teh xbox when it comes out, there are going to be different graphics setting that many people won't be able to run until maybe a year later (like doom3's and FarCry's ultra high modes) Sorry for my rant but people just think that this console is gonna be so great, but all I see is a more powerful xbox, nothing new what so ever, besides wireless controller, woop-de-do, I already have a 1st person wireless controller for my GC.... Oh yea, if the GFX are only running at 80%, then they aren't trying hard enough, because then that just makes the PC games just that much better. No I'm not a PC Fan-boy, I play all of my FPS on the PC tho, my favorite type of games. I love my Dreamcast and GC, I have over 120 real DC games and about 18 GC games (and then I have more snes, nes, atari, blah, blah, blah) so don't tell me im just sticking up for it...

My 2 cents
-Matt
 
bonkrowave said:
If I can collapse a building on someone in Ghost Recon 3, I may very well die of sheer enjoyment.
Click to expand...

QFT- how many times have you naded someone standing next to something that should have fell on them and killed them? Bring on destructable environments!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top