More Poject Ego screens!!

Amazing!!  





http://www.gamespy.com//e32002/xbox/projectego/7.jpg
http://www.gamespy.com//e32002/xbox/projectego/3.jpg

That does look amazing.

But, and I don\'t mean this in any kind of bashing way or anything, I don\'t want any Xbox fanboys jumping down my throat, after seeing the latest Ratchet and Clank screens, I\'m completely convinced PS2 could do this game without a sweat.  After today, these screens above don\'t impress me as much as they used to.

This is my most anticipated game on any of the next-gen consoles. If they fudge it up, there will be hell to pay.

I must say, with all that has gone wrong for X-box so far, this game definitely appears to give the system a lot of hope for the future.  If I were to get an X-box down the road, based on what I\'ve heard, it would be for this game.

But, yeah, I sure do hope they don\'t screw it up.

Originally posted by nataku
That does look amazing.

But, and I don\'t mean this in any kind of bashing way or anything, I don\'t want any Xbox fanboys jumping down my throat, after seeing the latest Ratchet and Clank screens, I\'m completely convinced PS2 could do this game without a sweat.  After today, these screens above don\'t impress me as much as they used to.

Well I think I have to disagree.... What PS2 is showing now is
that it can absolutely be on par with Xbox and NGC when it comes
to drawing massive amounts of solid geometry as well as fluid
animation and lotsa frames per second. The point where the
NGC and the Xbox do have an advantage imo is the special fx
department. By that I mean the amount of lighting and lighting
fx. Look at MGS2 ; the game has alot of places where the
characters don\'t even have a decent shadow. If you look at Ratchet & Clank you see the same there. Project Ego has mad
amounts of "Fur" geometry and lighting fx. I think PS2 would have
a hard time dealing with that.

Originally posted by nataku
That does look amazing.

But, and I don\'t mean this in any kind of bashing way or anything, I don\'t want any Xbox fanboys jumping down my throat, after seeing the latest Ratchet and Clank screens, I\'m completely convinced PS2 could do this game without a sweat.  After today, these screens above don\'t impress me as much as they used to.

Well, I\'ve seen the Ratchet and Clank screens, and I must say this:

Look very closely at the screens of PG. You\'ll see that the polygon count is much higher than in R&C. Not only that, you\'ll see that the texturing goes through the roof on this one, and texturing is PS2\'s biggest weakness(I\'ve sort of addressed this here:http://www.psx2central.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21239&pagenumber=3). If Ratchet and Clank is any indication, then the PS2 could not even close to doing this game.

Ico had wonderful lightning and so did Silent Hill 2 and Baulders Gate... maybe MGS2 didn\'t have decent shadows at all times, but it sure had some of the best visual effects and lightning in a game to date (if not best). Shadows aren\'t everything and I doubt Project Ego has shadows on every object outthere. And btw; MGS2 is out since November 2001 - when\'s Project Ego coming?

This is the amazing part,  Your face will be shape by your past...........Your future will be shape by you.[/b]    WOW!!!

Originally posted by nonamer


Well, I\'ve seen the Ratchet and Clank screens, and I must say this:

Look very closely at the screens of PG. You\'ll see that the polygon count is much higher than in R&C. Not only that, you\'ll see that the texturing goes through the roof on this one, and texturing is PS2\'s biggest weakness(I\'ve sort of addressed this here:http://www.psx2central.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21239&pagenumber=3). If Ratchet and Clank is any indication, then the PS2 could not even close to doing this game.

Oh and nonamer, I laugh at your comment about the polygon counts regarding both games.

1. It amuses me when people compare screens to videos - and then speculating about which games uses more polygons.

2. Rachet & Clark has A LOT of polygons. I don\'t know how you manage to overlook the city area and that you can view anything from anywhere.

3. The above screens of Project Ego, while impressive, still remains uncertain until in-game movie footage is shown. For all we know, this could be yet another game running at 30 fps or choppy framerate (I doubt it, but those are just screens, no matter how impressive they look).

4. Texture quality? I think both games concentrate on different aspects (Rachet and Clank on polygons, Project Ego more on realism/textures) - but textures are FAR from bad in Rachet and Clank. Just because it\'s cartoony doesn\'t mean the texture quality is lower.

Yeah.. Ratchet and Clank pushes nowhere the number of polygons that Project Ego uses.. I mean just look at it.. :rolleyes:  

Yum!!  Those look REALLY good...please don\'t screw it over.

Originally posted by fastson

That pic is misleading... . .

Originally posted by Clowd


That pic is misleading... . .

It isnt any more impressive then downtown in Twisted Metal Black

Originally posted by Knotter8


Well I think I have to disagree.... What PS2 is showing now is
that it can absolutely be on par with Xbox and NGC when it comes
to drawing massive amounts of solid geometry as well as fluid
animation and lotsa frames per second. The point where the
NGC and the Xbox do have an advantage imo is the special fx
department. By that I mean the amount of lighting and lighting
fx. Look at MGS2 ; the game has alot of places where the
characters don\'t even have a decent shadow. If you look at Ratchet & Clank you see the same there. Project Ego has mad
amounts of "Fur" geometry and lighting fx. I think PS2 would have
a hard time dealing with that.

The way Sony built the PS2 they were able to get a lot more out of less, they really thought about what they were doing and were really innovative about it.  One of the PS2\'s biggest strenghts is supposed to be special effects, it\'s supposed to excel in that area.  Maybe it\'s just me, but I think everyone is still underestimating the system just like before.

It all depends on the developer to get to know the hardware.  ICO proved PS2 can do great lighting and shadows.  Just because MGS2 didn\'t always have the best shadows on the characters doesn\'t mean the system can\'t do them great, it just means Konami didn\'t know the hardware very well at the time.  As they work with it more, they\'ll get to know it better.  It\'s the developers choice to get to know the hardware in order to get better performance out of it.

Sony knew they were making the PS2 hard to develop for, but they knew they were also putting it together in a way no one else has, they were really trying to introduce something new into the industry that no one has done before in hopes of making a new way to create consoles and get more out of less instead of just taking some parts off the shelf and throwing a system together.

Sorry, I\'ve gone off and rambled.  I don\'t wanna put any of you to sleep. :snore: