Predicting the Future! Today!
The main reason for the online play is to encourage people to pay money to make the game. Tex doesn't need it, however, online play increases replayability, which means that the game doesn't end when the credits roll. One problem with adventure games has always been replayability. Tex has been at the forefront with multiple paths, however, nowadays with higher budgets and stricter schedules, alternate paths may not make it into the game. As the first Tex game from a slumber, a lot will be riding on it. So, online play.
My blog:
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
Last edited by Alexander on November 08, 2005 • 2:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hi guys!
Truly yours,
Alexander.
(С уважением,
Александр).
Alexander.
(С уважением,
Александр).
Interesting post Vracar,
It would be definitly cool if Tex Murphy would come back, but myself prefer the PC above the X-box, altough the links you provided show very detailled pictures of the games that can be made on the conosole. Maybe if they used that kkind of engine for Tex Murphy we would really love it.
If the game is inh first person like it was in previous games it would be real awesome however a multiplayer option is not what i want to see. I would like to experience the game on my own and find the solutions myself instead working on a solution with others in online gameplay. Money is a cool object we can add to the game like you had cash i pandora to achieve more points etc. The inventory system must be like that was used in overseer.
It would be definitly cool if Tex Murphy would come back, but myself prefer the PC above the X-box, altough the links you provided show very detailled pictures of the games that can be made on the conosole. Maybe if they used that kkind of engine for Tex Murphy we would really love it.
If the game is inh first person like it was in previous games it would be real awesome however a multiplayer option is not what i want to see. I would like to experience the game on my own and find the solutions myself instead working on a solution with others in online gameplay. Money is a cool object we can add to the game like you had cash i pandora to achieve more points etc. The inventory system must be like that was used in overseer.

Would The Adventure Game Company possibly fund this new Tex game?
(http://www.adventurecompanygames.com/tac/index.html)
(http://www.adventurecompanygames.com/tac/index.html)
Nope. Too expensive. They do low budget third person adventure gaming, the point and click stuff. The Gods tell me that Tex will need money. Lots of money, that the Adventure Company cannot provide.
My blog:
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
Indeed. A Tex game is only a Tex game if done WELL.
The PS3 is a more inferior machine, even though it does support newer technologies (like the Blue-Ray Disc and the Cell processor)... however, with PS2 and Xbox games, NO games used more than 70% of the capacity of the DL-DVD or the HD-DVD anyway, making the Blue Ray a useless technology at this stage. Every game developer prides itself on making the games take up as less space as possible to save on loading times and bandwidth issues. DVD is still the more ideal and efficient medium for games for at lest the next two generations.
The PS3 console itself, as I said above uses the Cell processor technology, however, the processor itself only has 1 multi-purpose core running at 3.2 ghz... even though it has 7X SPEs which also supposedly run at 3.2GHZ aswell, but the games must be coded specifically for the Cell to take advantage of these extra hybrid cores. This means that a game which was designed to run on a PC or an Xbox would have to be practically re-designed for the Play Station 2, which means more money, and ultimately will result in less games being designed properly to take advantage of the PS3... leaving most games being processed on one Symmetrical 3.2ghz core… which is pretty bad. Even if a game was designed from the ground up for the PS3 architecture, many developers would not want to risk changing their whole approach to game development with something ultimately more expensive and risky.
After viewing come statistics conjured up amongst game developers for the Xbox 360 and the PS3, we found that only 5% of PS3 game developers were willing to code their games specifically to take advantage of the Cell processor, and only if they were given a significant amount of money by Sony to help them with such an odd learning curve. So if it is not the developers that are out of pocket, it is Sony aswell. I can only imagine how much it will cost to re-design a game and produce it in Blue-Ray format (which is not even mainstream yet!).
The Xbox 360 however has 3X 3.2ghz x86 symmetrical cores, which means all three cores are multi-purpose and can share the workload evenly (in theory we are talking about a system capable of 9.6ghz of bandwidth… but not practically speaking here) . And seeing as the x86 processor design is the most efficient for game developers of this and the coming game generations you will find most games designed for both the PS3 and the Xbox 360 will run much more efficiently on the Xbox 360.
For the cold hard truth, take a look at this article which details a performance comparison between the two systems
Basically, the blue-ray is nice, but not only are the games going to be inefficient on a core most game developers want to steer clear off, but the disc format itself will most likely increase load/read times due to the size of the data it needs to read over and load... that is if the games are even able to take up 20% of a blue ray disc. A total waste of money for developers. Expect to see a lot more opportunities for developers on the Xbox 360 leading to much better, more efficient and a wider range of games.
Thanks.
-Cub. =o)
Au contraire: that is a huge misconception, and Sony is trying to sell their consoles with such bull, I am sorry.IBSmiester wrote:The Xbox 360 will be nice, but sorry, the PS3 will be nicer. Where the Xbox 360 is DVD based (like the original Xbox and PS2), the PS3 is based on Sony's new Blu-Ray Disc format (around 10x larger than DVD) and theoretically, vastly superior. Providing that real, Tex experience.
The PS3 is a more inferior machine, even though it does support newer technologies (like the Blue-Ray Disc and the Cell processor)... however, with PS2 and Xbox games, NO games used more than 70% of the capacity of the DL-DVD or the HD-DVD anyway, making the Blue Ray a useless technology at this stage. Every game developer prides itself on making the games take up as less space as possible to save on loading times and bandwidth issues. DVD is still the more ideal and efficient medium for games for at lest the next two generations.
The PS3 console itself, as I said above uses the Cell processor technology, however, the processor itself only has 1 multi-purpose core running at 3.2 ghz... even though it has 7X SPEs which also supposedly run at 3.2GHZ aswell, but the games must be coded specifically for the Cell to take advantage of these extra hybrid cores. This means that a game which was designed to run on a PC or an Xbox would have to be practically re-designed for the Play Station 2, which means more money, and ultimately will result in less games being designed properly to take advantage of the PS3... leaving most games being processed on one Symmetrical 3.2ghz core… which is pretty bad. Even if a game was designed from the ground up for the PS3 architecture, many developers would not want to risk changing their whole approach to game development with something ultimately more expensive and risky.
After viewing come statistics conjured up amongst game developers for the Xbox 360 and the PS3, we found that only 5% of PS3 game developers were willing to code their games specifically to take advantage of the Cell processor, and only if they were given a significant amount of money by Sony to help them with such an odd learning curve. So if it is not the developers that are out of pocket, it is Sony aswell. I can only imagine how much it will cost to re-design a game and produce it in Blue-Ray format (which is not even mainstream yet!).
The Xbox 360 however has 3X 3.2ghz x86 symmetrical cores, which means all three cores are multi-purpose and can share the workload evenly (in theory we are talking about a system capable of 9.6ghz of bandwidth… but not practically speaking here) . And seeing as the x86 processor design is the most efficient for game developers of this and the coming game generations you will find most games designed for both the PS3 and the Xbox 360 will run much more efficiently on the Xbox 360.
For the cold hard truth, take a look at this article which details a performance comparison between the two systems
Basically, the blue-ray is nice, but not only are the games going to be inefficient on a core most game developers want to steer clear off, but the disc format itself will most likely increase load/read times due to the size of the data it needs to read over and load... that is if the games are even able to take up 20% of a blue ray disc. A total waste of money for developers. Expect to see a lot more opportunities for developers on the Xbox 360 leading to much better, more efficient and a wider range of games.
Thanks.
-Cub. =o)