Scouting through various websites for some reviews on a new zelda game I stubled upon some screens I hadn't previously seen and they look pretty cool. Seems resident evil's banged it up a notch (Blam!).






I might have to dust off my unused gamecube for this one Due for release later this year.

wow... is that only a gamecube/ps2 release or will it be out on Xbox?

WOW! looks good

Gamecube only for the time being. They (nintendo) seem to have snagged the resident evil franchise in exchange for a foothold in the GameBoy market (gameboy is currently the most profitable console afterall). Capcom, since doing this exclusivity have developed two zelda games and ported a lot of their best sellers to the 'boy.

Which sucks for people that don't have a gemcube This is why they should scrap the kid's toy and all make games for the pc

no no no. Let the kids have their toys and keep all the morons away from PCs.

but i want Resident Evil 4 on my PC damnit!

Then again, gamecube is the only one that can be emulated on a pc atm God bless PowerPC!

(tried zelda last night, works but is very slow!)

lol... and they will.. the pc is a daying platform for games..

how did you get to that deduction shurlock? What when the industry is at its strongest its ever been and all

That look fookin awesome, havent played an RE game for a couple of years now. I aint the biggest fan of consoles, they always seem so limited to me.

I thought there was no hope for this franchise after I thought nothing quite lived up to the original / direcor's cut. The second was pretty good, and i wasn't too fond of the third.

Then I played the remake on the gamecube... absolutely top notch! Easily the best resident evil game. Zombies stay dead, you now how to burn the corpses and the defence weapons are superb. You die quicker if attacked, but you now how tasers or knives to repel them. A zombie with three knives stuck in its head is quite a sight The story had changed just enough to makes it enjoyable to play even for those like me who played the original to bits on the psx Graphics and atmosphere add to it, but quite frankly the gameplay improvements are what makes it special.

Ummm I do not think so... keep games on console... cause you get a console and you are grenteed at least 3-4 years of quality games.... on PC a year later or even the first game you buy will be to slow to crank.... comparability probs, upgrading vid cards.... it just gose on and on....

A console is all set up... and as a bonus you get more work done as the desktop just has work stuff on it.

Well the main reason is not graphics, but I want to counter your post about graphics a bit further on. I'm talking gameplay... it's infinitely better on pcs. The games last longer and play better. Period.

With consoles they play like shit with terrible inaccurate controls (compare GTA: VCs and see which is easier to control, Quake III, racing games, most things. There are the exceptions, first party games), half the games suck ass (okay on the pc a fair number do too so that one can slip), you get no mods to extend gameplay and internet gaming on a console is totally shit. Apart from those 'minor' drawbacks....

If your pc sucks, upgrade. The reason why you have to upgrade so often is because the game engines grow on a scale the consoles can't handle, or need pushing to the limits to play on the higher settings (ie. higher than that of the console equivalent). console to PC ports play on anything (providing its not a buggy mess due to poor programming, this isn't a platform fault, this is just laziness on the developers part), they really are nothing... the problem is, they should never been made for consoles in the first place, most of the problems with many games spring from designing a game round limited hardware (see dues ex example in a tick). Take Halo for example, what a piece of crap that turned out to be, and started with so much promise. Basically everything was sacrifised from the openness of the pc platforms. Huge levels, modding, network and internet play (actually good!). Instead, although it turned out 'okay', it should have and would have been a lot better!



Sorry but that's rubbish. Firstly, most games suck ass, and you rarely get a full lifespan of 'quality games' You get a few decent games dispersed over several years (I owned a PS2 from launch for about 2 years, and there weren't any 'quality games'. The first one was GTA3 [or GT if you don't find that game mind numbingly boring, but i know lots of people like that]. But that's a subjective thing I guess, I just hate shallow, tinny games. In terms of graphics, sometimes developers can get something really special out of the hardware granted, but normally, the reason is solely resolution and effects... both are severely lacking on the console and hence you need less resources when playing.

Fine, you have an xbox with a primitive nvidia graphics card, or Gamecube with a Radeon 9600, sure things look neat down there playing in 640x480 res (unless its HDTV output, which normally causes slowdown anyway ) and it looks neat.

These can be ported and played on any pc under the sun (providing you have a non-shabby graphics card from about 2 years old to new range). I can play halo, for example, at Xbox tiny res, and it looks okay. Or I can play it on a decent setting, 1240x1024 or 1600x1200, AA and some effects on, and it puts the xbox to shame. This is when you can hit troubles, not emulating the game straight, but playing the game at a higher setting. It takes a hit in terms of fps at the higher res. Then there are the terrible graphics eninge of the xbox, the thing looks terrible... poor AA and hideous blur effect (makes it unplayable on a TFT). Unfortunately, it was a pisspoor port of a okay game, and its been passed over by practically everything.

Then you play it on your pc; 1600x1200, full screen AA and a whole host of added particle effects and you see what a piece of outdated crap the consoles really are. Of course its going to need better hardware to play at the higher settings. If you want to play on a tiny res with no particles turned on, then you may do so on a pc and use TV-out/DVI to S-video, or you can play it on a console.

With a gamecube emulator, all the games *look* better, but unfortunately because the emulator must emulate the whole os and hardware, they are unplayable atm. Regardless however, the reason they look better is because the gamecube is old hardware now

Now just look what happened to Deus Ex because it was designed for a 2 + year old PC/Xbox. You move like 4 steps and you have to wait through ANOTHER loading screen because the game was designed for a system that didn't have enough damn memory. This is a kick in the knackers, as the first game was awesome solely because it took advantage of the PC as a platform. Huge levels and greater interactivity. Then look at GTA:VC, playing it with a keyboard and mouse shows how crap the controls were on the PS2/XBOX. Thanks to the PC (and entirely to the PC), the next GTA will have multiplayer because, thanks to some decent modders, they showed up rockstar, and made a multiplayer mod for both GTA3 and VC.

Gameplay wise, most of the console games I've come across are totally shallow, whilst you get your fair share of duds on the pc, your looking at a harder market to crack. You tend to also get the best out of gaming and longer lasting games (either through the game or because of mods).

The *only* things that the consoles hold over the PC in reality are:
a) plug and play
b) some games are better suited to pads (ones where the company has spent a heck of a lot of time with the hardware. Normally only first party developers, and they could easily spend the same amount of time on the pc and create a great control system for that).

hehe... the only arguement i can see against the pc is that your too poor to buy a good one or you don't have enough harddrive space left to install the game



Nope, you about named it.

Compatability problems is a given, but only when a developer makes a sloppy game is it a factor. Upgrading video cards you have to do if you want to play the very best games on the very best setting. I think this is over stated though. I mean there are the ultimate IX (that was the bug fest right?) and this is solely down to poor programming. But beyond titles like that, I never run into compatibility problems. Last one was Call of Duty crash out, and all I had to do was download some new drivers. Big whoop. For better graphics, gameplay and the whole lot, it's a nonfactor.

If you buy a decent graphics card, you can last for just shy of a consoles lifespan (that's about 2 dreamcasts or 10 and a half virtual boys ). You have to scale down the settings when you get games that push the limits, but you normally stay above the console in terms of visual. Although partly I agree, you have the need to stay on top and play everything as good as possible, and unfortunately this means indulging in a graphics card rather than turning the settings down

Hmmm that seemed to linger on graphics for too long, just trying to tackle what you said about "compatibility probs and upgrading vid cards".

Didn't want to emphasise that, I'm a PC booster because I think making games for consoles totally limits potential, gameplay and lastability {and hence fun!!!} (deus ex, halo, etc. could have been so much more). The poor hardware means, smaller games, smaller levels, lack of features, reduced lifespan and limited gameplay. In lots of types of games you loose precision of controls too, although as said first party and quality games have decent control schemes.

I think that really, beat em ups, platformers and racing games are fine on consoles, in fact probably better suited. Some adventure games too, but everything else just ain't. FPS, third person shooters, most adventure games, RPGs, puzzle, strategy, flight sims, everything really are best suited to pc (bar odd exceptions). It's a shame that consoles is where the money is, and why the developers 'have to' saw their kneecaps off before they've even started production.

I don't want consoles erradicated or anything really, I just feel that all the best games should be designed with the better platform in mind, rather than vica versa. I'd kill to have Zelda taking advantage of modding and network capabilities of my pc, or this new resident evil on my pc... although in these two rare cases there's the problem of loosing the control systems. Normally though its a non-brainer that it would be better designed round a pc.

In my experience with the platforms I have found that especially in the fps genre the maps are cut way down..the controls are sloppy as hell or even in some cases unplayable.I can't beleive anyone would even dispute this between console and PC.As spud said there are a few games best suited for console like the driving games and some of the fighting or wrestling games..but that is about it..give me a keyboard and mouse anyday and a res that really shows something.The limitations of a console are a list a mile long.With Doom3 and Half Life 2 just around the corner...what are you gonna want to play it on?Sure as hell not on a damned xbox unless your some sort of masochist.
I remember getting both gta's for my ps2 and ended up taking them back and trading for something else less than a week later...the expereince was THAT bad from comparing to PC..Same with the Unreal and unreal championship..complete and utter shit..and limited potential.With all the mods released for games on PC it's like cutting your legs off in a race.
By the way..upgrading is just something you accept whe you own a PC...I would rather upgrade my Gfx card and get 3 to 4 or maybe more years use out of it then keep buying system after system that consoles shell out to the public every christmas.

why is it that on all consoles you can just put in the disc and play, rarely with very long loading times, but with the pc you always have to install a gb or something and it still takes the same time to load, if not longer?

Thanks for that, I was begining to think I was a lone wolf going off on tangents again.



I'm really concerned about these too after seeing Dues Ex2, I'm hoping they aren't made with consoles in mind!!!! Playing the betas, I'd say no, but you never know.



I'd also (and do) go for that deal too. You stay on top of the game by leaps and bounds by upgrading every year or so, or buying a top of the range card and last for two years.

PCI express is going to put the pc miles ahead, when it comes out.



Well I'd dispute that with PSX and PS2 loading times, imo it takes just as long in many occasions, but more significantly it's more often than need be. That's the clincher. The hardware can't support huge levels as good as a decent pc (once again Dues EX --> Dues Ex 2 says it all about hardware limitations [sorry to flog that game, it's still pretty decent i mean, but all it is is Unreal engine with rag doll effects. Any PC around can handle big levels in the unreal engine]). However you are kind of right in many cases.

The reason gamecube is instantanieous (virtually), is because it has a f*cking huge disc cache. Absolutely enourmous. It's buffered straight into that and barely uses the disc except to update the cache. Xbox caches in a similar way but uses disc too. PS2 has an okay cache, but its pretty small and I'd argue that loading times are just as long as on the pc.

The problem with PCs in their current stage, is that you have a huge OS and filemanagement system sitting beneathe and your using a standard IDE interface to get at data. Regardless to say, SCSI with PC3500 is faster than ps2 at loading games, and so too does gaming on a very efficient OS There's no disc cache when reading from CD/DVD on the scale of that of the gamecube though, so if data is being read from disc, you will have a bottleneck there.

However, its not that big a factor as one long load time is equated to often many smaller load times. However, loads on games like vice city on the pc aren't that big a factor, it probably loads quicker on my pc than on the PS2.

Oh put a sock in it you PC posterboy !

Here you had to ruin a interesting thread and turn it into a pamflet for the PC church.....

I don't play games on my PC coz there really are only 3 or so genres on it....
I FRIGGIN HATE FPS....wasn't always that way...but that's a different tale.....

As for resident evil 4 .....I'll get right down it when I say I think it's rubbish ?

Where's the haunted mansion feeling ?
Ok then , where's dawn/day of the dead atmosphere ?

GONE....And what do we get in return ? a bunch a vodoo zombies and a damn cave troll from LOTR....

I worry about this VERY much

I see somebody forgot to take their medication today
I am not sure what you expect...for them to keep running into the same old house every game?Sometimes change is good...and if the gameplay is there than I don't think I'll be bitching about it..the gfx look pretty tight too so I am optimistic about it.
As far as Doom3 and Half life 2 goes..I played dooms beta and thought it was great gfx but gameplay was a bit slow...although this was over a year ago so I am sure they have fixed alot of stuff since then..not played a beta of HL2 yet but I have read many reviews on what to expect and I will definately grab that as soon as it's released.I think you are right though spud,I have a pretty hard time picturing these games on a console...I just don't think they will be able to handle the intensive gfx or gameplay without sacrificing something to port it out.

Enough trolling ohgo, if you don't have anything to say... well no need to post Your obviously offended by something but i can't figure out quite what it is yet. Unless of course your a console fanboy, as i gave the consoles a bit of a toasting. But i didn't think undeservedly?

Anyway,


I've never liked any of the doom games, i found them all mind numbingly tedious, and ohgod-style-resident-evil identical between sequels, rendering them pretty pointless. I hated the get they key, then open the door and then get the next key, then shoot a boss, then get the next key just boring, and slow. The strange thing is it was identical gameplay to Quake and Duke3d, but those are two of my favourite games.

I agree though, ultra slow



The one i got is simply a technical demo and 'under construction levels'. Unless your a modder or a level editor, not much to see atm.

----
On Resident Evil specifically:


And you know this without playing? Good for you though, however it does look pretty decent in motion, so if you get the chance take a look if you've enjoyed a RE game.



You can't possibly know there isn't the biggest greatest haunted mansion in existance from those current batch of screenshots, your missing the big picture But if your a fan of the haunted mansion, its done to the nth degree, those are just the latest screenshots.






With a little bit of research you'd have seen the previous batch, which if your a haunted house fan, you'll be more happy about:
































Some of those are the first pictures so it may look very different, but they have been making the mansion bit for longer, so it should be the best bit.

For the most part of the game you are in a haunted mansion, it goes a bit like RE2 i would have thought, outside, inside, lab. But at this stage its very tight lipped However, from the videos I downloaded, its very atmospheric. You are walking through the mansion and have a pistol and are holding the flashlight underneath it, all with dynamic lighting.

Unfortunately those are a bit crappy; photographs of tvs from last years E3

But i'm concerned about gameplay, I want to know if they have the survival weapons of the remake and if they've revamped it with a decent control system. The d-pad to analogue controls of the other RE games its pretty bad. I hear that it will be full analogue control to go with 3d environments (over traditional 3d on 2d).

Some concept art:





There never has been in the resident evil series, its always been a bit dumbed down and mystery franchise. I'd welcome it, but the gameplay would be a bit slow if it was like those.








Looks new, arcadey...


ps. for those that care, its leon from RE2