The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Doom 3'.
CVG interviewing id CEO Todd Hollenshead:
'How about the Xbox version?
Hollenshead: We're literally in the early stages of getting the technology up and running on the Xbox. The Xbox is completely within the specs of what the target for Doom III technology is.
You'll be seeing a lot of unique textures that literally make the world just the way you might imagine if Hell really had erupted on a spacestation.
What about a PS2 version?
Hollenshead: Frankly, the PS2 couldn't do the math calculations for the geometry acceleration, real time shadows and light. GameCube is the same thing, no version planned.'
I hope that's enough to silence the moronic fanboys?
'How about the Xbox version?
Hollenshead: We're literally in the early stages of getting the technology up and running on the Xbox. The Xbox is completely within the specs of what the target for Doom III technology is.
You'll be seeing a lot of unique textures that literally make the world just the way you might imagine if Hell really had erupted on a spacestation.
What about a PS2 version?
Hollenshead: Frankly, the PS2 couldn't do the math calculations for the geometry acceleration, real time shadows and light. GameCube is the same thing, no version planned.'
I hope that's enough to silence the moronic fanboys?
Page:
Maverick42 wrote:
> B*llocks.
>
> There's barely a difference between the GameCube and Xbox.
Yes, Microsoft must have paid ID Software to say what they did. It's all just a big conspiracy against Nintendo. You're right, Watson!
> B*llocks.
>
> There's barely a difference between the GameCube and Xbox.
Yes, Microsoft must have paid ID Software to say what they did. It's all just a big conspiracy against Nintendo. You're right, Watson!
B*llocks.
There's barely a difference between the GameCube and Xbox.
There's barely a difference between the GameCube and Xbox.
> Why would you even reply to that? And why would you lie?
> I know someone who has their P4 clocked at 3.8GHz with 2GB 400MHz RAM
> running in dual-channel. Am I jealous of them? No. Why? Because
> it's overkill and I think buying such high spec. stuff is a waste of
> money.
>
> Carry on, though.
Oh and tell your friend he was pretty stupid to buy 400mhz RAM for a chip that has an FSB of at least 533mhz...
> I know someone who has their P4 clocked at 3.8GHz with 2GB 400MHz RAM
> running in dual-channel. Am I jealous of them? No. Why? Because
> it's overkill and I think buying such high spec. stuff is a waste of
> money.
>
> Carry on, though.
Oh and tell your friend he was pretty stupid to buy 400mhz RAM for a chip that has an FSB of at least 533mhz...
> Why would you even reply to that? And why would you lie?
> I know someone who has their P4 clocked at 3.8GHz with 2GB 400MHz RAM
> running in dual-channel. Am I jealous of them? No. Why? Because
> it's overkill and I think buying such high spec. stuff is a waste of
> money.
>
> Carry on, though.
I replied because I just read what you said. Unlike some people, I don't spend every hour of every day here...
I haven't lied about anything. (?)
I don't want you to be jealous. (Double ??)
I gave my spec to illustrate that I will not be in any need of greater resolution, since you have such a large monkey up your back-side about that subject. Or at least you did. But now it seems you've changed your mind about that. Strange co-incidence there.
And why is buying a machine that is going to last years a waste of money? Surely buying a lower spec machine that has to be replaced a lot sooner is the more foolish idea? Especially when you consider that I built the machine myself and got all the parts nicely discounted after including them in a bulk order of over 200 machines?
The door's that way --->
> I know someone who has their P4 clocked at 3.8GHz with 2GB 400MHz RAM
> running in dual-channel. Am I jealous of them? No. Why? Because
> it's overkill and I think buying such high spec. stuff is a waste of
> money.
>
> Carry on, though.
I replied because I just read what you said. Unlike some people, I don't spend every hour of every day here...
I haven't lied about anything. (?)
I don't want you to be jealous. (Double ??)
I gave my spec to illustrate that I will not be in any need of greater resolution, since you have such a large monkey up your back-side about that subject. Or at least you did. But now it seems you've changed your mind about that. Strange co-incidence there.
And why is buying a machine that is going to last years a waste of money? Surely buying a lower spec machine that has to be replaced a lot sooner is the more foolish idea? Especially when you consider that I built the machine myself and got all the parts nicely discounted after including them in a bulk order of over 200 machines?
The door's that way --->
Gar-J wrote:
> Hmm. My PC:
> Athlon 3200XP+ Barton, 1Gb 400Mhz DDR ram, 256mb Ati Radeon 9800 Pro
> and 280Gb serial ATA HDD.
>
> I think I'll be ok in the resolution department, but thanks for
> caring.
Why would you even reply to that? And why would you lie?
I know someone who has their P4 clocked at 3.8GHz with 2GB 400MHz RAM running in dual-channel. Am I jealous of them? No. Why? Because it's overkill and I think buying such high spec. stuff is a waste of money.
Carry on, though.
> Hmm. My PC:
> Athlon 3200XP+ Barton, 1Gb 400Mhz DDR ram, 256mb Ati Radeon 9800 Pro
> and 280Gb serial ATA HDD.
>
> I think I'll be ok in the resolution department, but thanks for
> caring.
Why would you even reply to that? And why would you lie?
I know someone who has their P4 clocked at 3.8GHz with 2GB 400MHz RAM running in dual-channel. Am I jealous of them? No. Why? Because it's overkill and I think buying such high spec. stuff is a waste of money.
Carry on, though.
Strafex wrote:
> Besides, it's much nicer to use than a mouse that
> keeps getting stuck or running out of space or...
Can you say 'optical mice'?
> Besides, it's much nicer to use than a mouse that
> keeps getting stuck or running out of space or...
Can you say 'optical mice'?
Memorandum! wrote:
> I'll be playing it on my PC where I can have a HIGHER RESOLUTION and
> HIGHER FRAME RATES because my PC is INCREDIBLY POWERFUL, more
> powerful than your puny PS2s, GCs or Xboxes.
>
> I hope the fact that it's MORE POWERFUL AND CAN DO BETTER STUFF is
> enough to silence you MORONIC FANBOYS etc.
>
>
> Does the person who posted it even realise how intensely hypocritical
> he is?
Hmm. My PC:
Athlon 3200XP+ Barton, 1Gb 400Mhz DDR ram, 256mb Ati Radeon 9800 Pro and 280Gb serial ATA HDD.
I think I'll be ok in the resolution department, but thanks for caring.
> I'll be playing it on my PC where I can have a HIGHER RESOLUTION and
> HIGHER FRAME RATES because my PC is INCREDIBLY POWERFUL, more
> powerful than your puny PS2s, GCs or Xboxes.
>
> I hope the fact that it's MORE POWERFUL AND CAN DO BETTER STUFF is
> enough to silence you MORONIC FANBOYS etc.
>
>
> Does the person who posted it even realise how intensely hypocritical
> he is?
Hmm. My PC:
Athlon 3200XP+ Barton, 1Gb 400Mhz DDR ram, 256mb Ati Radeon 9800 Pro and 280Gb serial ATA HDD.
I think I'll be ok in the resolution department, but thanks for caring.
Or if Dreamcast was still alive, you could have a keyboard or a controller.
Bah...
Bah...
Put it this way:
In my gaming hayday (on Goldeneye and Perfect Dark), I could get instant accurate headshots using an analogue stick.
My friends can do a similar thing on Halo, and I was almost getting quick clean headshots after borrowing an Xbox with the game for 2 weeks.
And yes, PC and keyboard players tend to be even better, and that's because they've been doing it for 10 years, rather than 2 weeks.
And they still have the advantage, but the hardcore controller userbase is growing now.
They started their skills on Goldeneye, which was the first game where headshot meant anything (the PC finally surpasses the power of the N64, hyping it's users up with the grandaddy of videogames Quake 2, and finds that Rare's innovation and cleverness leaves the superior polygon pusher biting the dust in every other way!).
Now when Halo 2 is fully Xbox live, I expect the eventual PC version will finally allow the Xbox owners to battle with the PC owners.
PC owners will be in general a LOT more experienced in online FPS, but the Xbox owners will have had more time to practice (the Xbox release coming first).
Oh, and another thing.
While the PC might compete with doing the controller's job at the main FPS action, it will SUCK when the players try and jump into a Warthog or a Tank!
The keyboard and mouse is an evolved make do for modern games.
The controller has been especially designed for modern games.
The analogue stick to slow and jumpy? Looks like someone can't handle is properly yet. Besides, it's much nicer to use than a mouse that keeps getting stuck or running out of space or...
... or doing other mess ups which happen when you try to use an operating system scroller as a games controller! :-P
In my gaming hayday (on Goldeneye and Perfect Dark), I could get instant accurate headshots using an analogue stick.
My friends can do a similar thing on Halo, and I was almost getting quick clean headshots after borrowing an Xbox with the game for 2 weeks.
And yes, PC and keyboard players tend to be even better, and that's because they've been doing it for 10 years, rather than 2 weeks.
And they still have the advantage, but the hardcore controller userbase is growing now.
They started their skills on Goldeneye, which was the first game where headshot meant anything (the PC finally surpasses the power of the N64, hyping it's users up with the grandaddy of videogames Quake 2, and finds that Rare's innovation and cleverness leaves the superior polygon pusher biting the dust in every other way!).
Now when Halo 2 is fully Xbox live, I expect the eventual PC version will finally allow the Xbox owners to battle with the PC owners.
PC owners will be in general a LOT more experienced in online FPS, but the Xbox owners will have had more time to practice (the Xbox release coming first).
Oh, and another thing.
While the PC might compete with doing the controller's job at the main FPS action, it will SUCK when the players try and jump into a Warthog or a Tank!
The keyboard and mouse is an evolved make do for modern games.
The controller has been especially designed for modern games.
The analogue stick to slow and jumpy? Looks like someone can't handle is properly yet. Besides, it's much nicer to use than a mouse that keeps getting stuck or running out of space or...
... or doing other mess ups which happen when you try to use an operating system scroller as a games controller! :-P
someone in this thread wrote:
> I'd say controller wins on physically manoeuvering FPS characters.
maybe for you, but if you watch a sensible, concentrated keyboard user you will SO agree that he is hard to even keep track of. it also depends on wether you're a moron or not. as in holding your finger on the left arrow key and the left mouse button in quake 3, which hurls you into a spin-on-the-pot with a peashooter. that's NOT the way it's meant to be played...
> I'd say controller wins on physically manoeuvering FPS characters.
maybe for you, but if you watch a sensible, concentrated keyboard user you will SO agree that he is hard to even keep track of. it also depends on wether you're a moron or not. as in holding your finger on the left arrow key and the left mouse button in quake 3, which hurls you into a spin-on-the-pot with a peashooter. that's NOT the way it's meant to be played...
Page: