explain this!!

The EE is about 4 times more powerful than a PIII chip.
If MGS2 uses 30% of EE power to do AI, How is it possible to do this on x-box, the AI for MGS2 takes more power than the main prossecor of the x-box(733 Mhz PIII). I know that the Nvida chip is very powerful, but it cant do AI, right?
PLEASE EXPLAIN!!!
If U make a game that uses a lot of AI and physical calculations like wind and rain, doesnt that mean that U would need a lot of main CPU power? The graphic accelerator aint doing this stuff, How is this possible on the x-box? With the power of a PIII chip u dont get any winds and rain in realtime. Or is it something i dont get here? Pease explain this?

Hmm.
Well i dont know for sure but i think that those figures might be alittle inaccurate. If not then I think it could be that hideo kojima is making a different version of metal gear solid for the xbox, so maybe it will have a lot less AI.

thats why you should never underestimate the power of a custom chipset like the PS2 has .
Muhahahahahahaha More inteligent AI is sat MORE !

too many numbers???

ooooooooooooo has pox box taken a hit?

So can anyone please explain this!!!!! I am going crayzy.....


"I want a brain like Saddam Hussein, groovy nasty and totally insane"

Why do all of you keep thinking that the X-Box is just a computer in a box.  It is dedicated hardware and works differently than a pc.  

Have you seen Malice?  Munch\'s Oddyssey?  Halo?  The X-Box is up to PS2 standards, if it\'s beyond we have yet to see.  But stop putting it down, it\'s gonna rock, get over it!

a system rocks because of the games that use ALL the consoles potential. Thus far, only the N64 has been proven to me. The PS2 will be the best proven system after developers choose to do so. Systems are nothing without games. Even though N64 had a lot of easy-kiddie stuff, it proved itself with Golden Eye and Perfect Dark. PS2 is just waiting for its Golden EYE.

yea but i didn\'t dish out 300 bucks for a system like the N64 was - i did it because i am looking foward to a system full of goldeneye great like games not just one

yes, that may be the case with the processor, but overall
x box does have power, but in my opinion, you shouldnt look at the graphics in this generation of games, because they are all very nice in my standards,
i think the reason people should buy a system is for the games...

um...didn\'t konami say that they wouldn\'t make MGS2 for xbox but an enhanced copy of MGS 1 instead becasue of this problem?

Originally posted by wiser than thou
a system rocks because of the games that use ALL the consoles potential. Thus far, only the N64 has been proven to me. The PS2 will be the best proven system after developers choose to do so. Systems are nothing without games. Even though N64 had a lot of easy-kiddie stuff, it proved itself with Golden Eye and Perfect Dark. PS2 is just waiting for its Golden EYE.

funny how you can only name 2 decent titles. how long has the n64 been out?

That\'s because he only chose to name 2 games. I can praddle on complimenting ground-breaking titles like Zelda: Tot, Mario 64, Ogre Battle 64, 1080 Snowboarding, etc. However, it\'s true that Sony had more quality titles in its libaray, but considering the sheer amount of games released for the PSX, that should come as expected. What really comes down to when judging a company is by looking at the software that it has created on its own. Now I understand that Sony only began making games this past generation, but I can count the number of quality titles under Sony\'s belt with one hand alone. I\'m sure they\'ll make a name for themselves with the PS2, but it\'s unfair for you to be criticizing the lack of software that Nintendo suffered.  

Actually hyper, Sony was creating software back in the 16bit days for both Sega and Nintnedo under their "Sony Imagesoft" label. Most people don\'t realise that, but Sony\'s had their hands in the games market for quite a while now.

The thing is, Sony\'s speciality was hardware back then.. it wasn\'t until the release of the PSX that they started buying 2nd party developers and hiring a more substancial in-house development team. And yet again, there aren\'t any legends who work for Sony. Nintnedo\'s got Miyamoto, Sega\'s got Yu Suzuki, ID has Carmack, Konami has Kojima,.. the closest Sony has is Jason Rubin and he\'s not exactly a legend is he.

I think that in this generation you\'ll be seeing a lot more quality come out of Sony\'s inhouse and second party developers, and they will eventually establish themselves as a first rate game producing company.

You learn something new everyday. Can you list some titles that Imagesoft developed for Sega and Nintendo?? I\'d be interested to know how their efforts turned out, and maybe find a few ROM\'s of their games.

I agree that Sony\'s first-parties have not had the time to realize their full-potential, nor the experience to harbor any legends. Even Miyamoto served quite a few years as a mere artist before proving himself. However, it took Nintendo and Sega decades of trial and error to become first-rate development houses that they are today. They needed much more time then one generation of consoles; I don\'t know about Sega, but Nintendo tested themselves in the Arcades and in various other departments long before entering the home industry. If Sony is able to become a quality development house that rivals Nintendo and Sega, and in such a short period of time, I\'d be very much surprised. They\'d also be an unstoppable power, combined with their software talent and the amount of resources they possess.