>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/06/2002 12:54:25 >>> > I think MGS2 impressed me much more than any screen from Q3. Okay they > have dynamic shadows? So what? Shadow algorithmen are over 20 years old.
I agree MetalGearSolid2 does look very good, the attention to detail does stand out above most PC based games. That's always been the consoles edge, having low res and standard hardware has allowed more dev time on the little things and many very high quality visuals. This is part of the problem, console developers certainly produce some the best quality games out there and that is where the big bucks are. But a good PC has 5x the power of any console yet few PC conversions of top games exist. A lot is politics (like any XBox game should run on a good PC, but then MS would be competing with them selves! :) and the rest is either differences in control methods (like the unplayable spiderman :) or scalablilty problems (you don't have to worry how the game scales on a console, but on a PC there's >VGA res and other processes to worry about. Like GFA3 once you get to 2nd island, turns slow and jerky on a P3-1Ghz,512MB, GF3 PC. :) You'll not see J3D on a console anytime soon, there just isn't the memory to run it. So you won't see the big buck companies developing in J3D either. The handheld micro Java devices might help there when a J3Dme gets released. > Well IIRC Quake3 came 99. And still even games coming out > now or in a few months still use the Q3-engine. So where's your problem? Maybe that I'm not aware of anyone making a J3D game *today* that has Q3 engine abilities and runs okay on the same hardware. Okay in a years time when everyone has Ghz processor, 256mb ram and GF3 as standard it'll be a reality, but not just yet (and then Doom3 engine will be spawning new games). There's certainly some jaw dropping simulators out there at the moment, few of them using ground breaking technics, but they do have horse power that the humble PC owner couldn't even dream of yet. > Not really. For example the Shrek-character was 10x the polygon count as > the characters in Doom3. So raw polygon-rasterization-burning is definitly > not the right way. I think transfering raytracing-technology to gfx > hardware might be the real way to get cinema-feeling to games. Again I agree there, raytracing like features in hardware would certainly go along way to providing real world graphics, current polygon racing advancements haven't done much to remove the 2D feel of PC/console graphics. Movement capture has probably helped more! > Look at PS3. Of the latest plans of Sony. PS3 won't have any storage media > installed but rather use highband-internet-connection as storage. Not sure I agree with Sony on this, consoles have never been internet dependant and are only just starting to utilise online gaming advantages. I think they'd at least add a memoryStick slot like every other Sony gadget. :) Jason. PS I've realised now that I've completely lost the plot in this thread, so excuse my random ramblings above and I shall desist in trying to continue what ever points I might have been trying to get across. :) =========================================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
