The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
OK, this is a bit of a spur of the moment post, so don’t expect it to be good.
The good:
• Absolutely fantabulistic graphics!
• Great handling
• Harder than before
• Not possible to buy a super-powerful car from the off
• More tracks
• 2001 cars
• Swish presentation
• Virtually no loading times
• Cool music
• Favorite music tracks playlist option
• Force feedback wheel available
• 6 players
• It’s Gran Turismo!
• It’s Gran Turismo!
• One more time: It’s Gran Turismo!
The bad:
• Can’t turn the music up
• New menu-like presentation isn’t as good as the last one
• Takes longer to navigate
• Not much of a sequel
• More bloody license tests!
• Not as many options
The missing:
• 300+ cars
• Second hand cars
• TVR Cerbera (allegedly). If I find that’s not there, someone will die.
• Polish
• The Corrs
• Damage (still, but I know why)
• High Speed Ring
Verdict: Very good, but shows signs of being rushed. Could have had a little more thought put into it.
The good:
• Absolutely fantabulistic graphics!
• Great handling
• Harder than before
• Not possible to buy a super-powerful car from the off
• More tracks
• 2001 cars
• Swish presentation
• Virtually no loading times
• Cool music
• Favorite music tracks playlist option
• Force feedback wheel available
• 6 players
• It’s Gran Turismo!
• It’s Gran Turismo!
• One more time: It’s Gran Turismo!
The bad:
• Can’t turn the music up
• New menu-like presentation isn’t as good as the last one
• Takes longer to navigate
• Not much of a sequel
• More bloody license tests!
• Not as many options
The missing:
• 300+ cars
• Second hand cars
• TVR Cerbera (allegedly). If I find that’s not there, someone will die.
• Polish
• The Corrs
• Damage (still, but I know why)
• High Speed Ring
Verdict: Very good, but shows signs of being rushed. Could have had a little more thought put into it.
Page:
I think it's called middleware.
Ö=ResŒvilfan=Ö wrote:
> That is actually true!!
Sony send kits out called the middle
> engine or sommin which has a whole heap of cool features and saves
> time on the programmers side by doing all the work.
I have a book
> which explains it all, i remember one is if a stone is dropped into
> the water it will measure the force of the drop and make the splash
> and ripples of the same force. all the programmers have to do is
> make the enviroment,sound etc and add it to the game.
yeah thats true, a seperate company designs a gaming engine ( i think thats what its called) The guys who designed the one for the PS2 and X-Box where an Irish company called Havok. My lecturer at uni is friendly with most of them and has been telling us about it all and showing us some of their clips. To see what Im going on about go to www.havok.com and look at the poker simulation.
> That is actually true!!
Sony send kits out called the middle
> engine or sommin which has a whole heap of cool features and saves
> time on the programmers side by doing all the work.
I have a book
> which explains it all, i remember one is if a stone is dropped into
> the water it will measure the force of the drop and make the splash
> and ripples of the same force. all the programmers have to do is
> make the enviroment,sound etc and add it to the game.
yeah thats true, a seperate company designs a gaming engine ( i think thats what its called) The guys who designed the one for the PS2 and X-Box where an Irish company called Havok. My lecturer at uni is friendly with most of them and has been telling us about it all and showing us some of their clips. To see what Im going on about go to www.havok.com and look at the poker simulation.
That is actually true!!
Sony send kits out called the middle engine or sommin which has a whole heap of cool features and saves time on the programmers side by doing all the work.
I have a book which explains it all, i remember one is if a stone is dropped into the water it will measure the force of the drop and make the splash and ripples of the same force. all the programmers have to do is make the enviroment,sound etc and add it to the game.
Ninty's do make up alot of false facts don't they.
The person behind the res evil series who is currently working on devil may cry said when they first began programming for the PS2 they first made the screen go red and then easily came in touch with it's potential.
just have a look at devil may cry! man is it sweet
Sony send kits out called the middle engine or sommin which has a whole heap of cool features and saves time on the programmers side by doing all the work.
I have a book which explains it all, i remember one is if a stone is dropped into the water it will measure the force of the drop and make the splash and ripples of the same force. all the programmers have to do is make the enviroment,sound etc and add it to the game.
Ninty's do make up alot of false facts don't they.
The person behind the res evil series who is currently working on devil may cry said when they first began programming for the PS2 they first made the screen go red and then easily came in touch with it's potential.
just have a look at devil may cry! man is it sweet
Veron 4 wrote:
> Did it ever cross your mind that
> they are being biased? only the neutral sources will tell the
> truth.
The interviews are 3rd-party software developers. Several have said it's 'unusual'. Even Oddworld Inhabitants (the most outspoken on PS2's 'difficulties') originally claimed that PS2 gave them 'everything they needed' to realise the next stage in the development of the Oddworld games - Munch's Oddessy, at the time the most eagerly awaited PS2 game.
Then they started claiming 'difficulties' and that it didn't do what they wanted. And then it emerged that MS had paid them quite a lot of money to make the game an Xbox exclusive; while it may seem cynical, it wouldn't surprise me at all if the change of opinion on PS2 was not also part of the deal.
The most interesting comment came from the TimeSplitters team, Free Radical.
I no longer have the magazine (early PSM2 issue), so I can't quote directly. But the general gist of the comments were that PS2's architecture makes it 'different' to code for.
They said that if you go about designing a game in the same way as you would for a PC or another platform, or try to do a 'simple' port from another system, the game will work just fine, but you won't get the best out of the machine. To get the best from PS2's abilities, you need to go about designing and creating the game from a different point of view.
In other words, you need to put in a bit of effort, rather than taking the 'easy' route.
So, Oddworld Inhabitants have been shouting loudest about it. Several interviews (remember, independent 3rd-party developers) have said that PS2 gives them no problems. Of those who have admitted to problems, practically all of them have said that Sony are extremely helpful in assisting with solutions and/or work-arounds.
Every new system presents developers with its own specific set of problems, and some are - inevitably - easier to code for than others. You only have to look at the games available and forthcoming to know that there's nothing serious enough to put developers off.
> Did it ever cross your mind that
> they are being biased? only the neutral sources will tell the
> truth.
The interviews are 3rd-party software developers. Several have said it's 'unusual'. Even Oddworld Inhabitants (the most outspoken on PS2's 'difficulties') originally claimed that PS2 gave them 'everything they needed' to realise the next stage in the development of the Oddworld games - Munch's Oddessy, at the time the most eagerly awaited PS2 game.
Then they started claiming 'difficulties' and that it didn't do what they wanted. And then it emerged that MS had paid them quite a lot of money to make the game an Xbox exclusive; while it may seem cynical, it wouldn't surprise me at all if the change of opinion on PS2 was not also part of the deal.
The most interesting comment came from the TimeSplitters team, Free Radical.
I no longer have the magazine (early PSM2 issue), so I can't quote directly. But the general gist of the comments were that PS2's architecture makes it 'different' to code for.
They said that if you go about designing a game in the same way as you would for a PC or another platform, or try to do a 'simple' port from another system, the game will work just fine, but you won't get the best out of the machine. To get the best from PS2's abilities, you need to go about designing and creating the game from a different point of view.
In other words, you need to put in a bit of effort, rather than taking the 'easy' route.
So, Oddworld Inhabitants have been shouting loudest about it. Several interviews (remember, independent 3rd-party developers) have said that PS2 gives them no problems. Of those who have admitted to problems, practically all of them have said that Sony are extremely helpful in assisting with solutions and/or work-arounds.
Every new system presents developers with its own specific set of problems, and some are - inevitably - easier to code for than others. You only have to look at the games available and forthcoming to know that there's nothing serious enough to put developers off.
Slaveunit wrote:
PSm2 has an interview every
> month, and of all the ones that they asked "is it hard to code
> the ps2?" all of them said no.
Did it ever cross your mind that they are being biased? only the neutral sources will tell the truth.
PSm2 has an interview every
> month, and of all the ones that they asked "is it hard to code
> the ps2?" all of them said no.
Did it ever cross your mind that they are being biased? only the neutral sources will tell the truth.
Meka_Dragon wrote:
There must be something really wrong with the development
> tools they're using if they have to spend so much time creating each
> car.
Come on! They made a 3000 polygon, pixel perfect replica of a brand car and you say a week is too long?
> Oh, by the way, did you know that the GAMECUBE is designed specifically so that developers have to spend less time on the graphical aspects, so that they have more time to devote to gameplay. ;-)
I have no doubt that making cars of that standard would take just as long on the GC.
PSm2 has an interview every month, and of all the ones that they asked "is it hard to code the ps2?" all of them said no. It had original teething problems as the code libraries wernt available, but now they are.
There must be something really wrong with the development
> tools they're using if they have to spend so much time creating each
> car.
Come on! They made a 3000 polygon, pixel perfect replica of a brand car and you say a week is too long?
> Oh, by the way, did you know that the GAMECUBE is designed specifically so that developers have to spend less time on the graphical aspects, so that they have more time to devote to gameplay. ;-)
I have no doubt that making cars of that standard would take just as long on the GC.
PSm2 has an interview every month, and of all the ones that they asked "is it hard to code the ps2?" all of them said no. It had original teething problems as the code libraries wernt available, but now they are.
I bought GT3 yesterday, and being a pessimistic sort, I expected the same old same old, but was pleasantly surprised. Definitely the best game in my PS2 collection so far. Until I buy ATV Offroad fury that is.
Making the models is easy, it's getting them into the system which is the hard part.
Super Gohan wrote:
> The main reason there aren't as many cars in this one is
> because it one week to create a car. That a lot of weeks. Imagine
> how much longer we would have had too wait if there were 300 more
> cars. I don't care to think about it.
(Allow me to stir a little)
It takes that long for each?
There must be something really wrong with the development tools they're using if they have to spend so much time creating each car. Oh, by the way, did you know that the GAMECUBE is designed specifically so that developers have to spend less time on the graphical aspects, so that they have more time to devote to gameplay. ;-)
Turbonutter wrote:
>Verdict: Very good, but shows signs of being rushed. Could have had a little more thought put into it.
Rushed, after all of those delays? That PS2 must be really difficult to program for....
> The main reason there aren't as many cars in this one is
> because it one week to create a car. That a lot of weeks. Imagine
> how much longer we would have had too wait if there were 300 more
> cars. I don't care to think about it.
(Allow me to stir a little)
It takes that long for each?
There must be something really wrong with the development tools they're using if they have to spend so much time creating each car. Oh, by the way, did you know that the GAMECUBE is designed specifically so that developers have to spend less time on the graphical aspects, so that they have more time to devote to gameplay. ;-)
Turbonutter wrote:
>Verdict: Very good, but shows signs of being rushed. Could have had a little more thought put into it.
Rushed, after all of those delays? That PS2 must be really difficult to program for....
Oh yeah, forgot about that.
Realistic graphics or not, a racer with realistic phsics would have been nice.
Realistic graphics or not, a racer with realistic phsics would have been nice.
Page: