Itagaki says X360 is best

By Tom Bramwell Published 26 September, 2005

But he reckons most games are struggling to run at 30fps.

Tomonobu Itagaki, flamboyant head of Tecmo's Team Ninja and one of the Xbox 360's biggest proponents in Japan, reckons Xbox 360 is the best console on the planet – but he also says most developers are struggling to get above 30 frames per second.

Speaking to GameInformer at TGS, Itagaki-san delivered this in response to a question about his confidence in the Xbox 360: "I think Xbox 360 is the best game console on the earth. It's better than PlayStation 3." When pressed as to why, he said, "PS3 has too complicated architecture."

Interestingly though, he doesn't think we're going to see many games running at 60fps, although Dead or Alive 4 will. "[After E3], we’ve brought it up to 60. To be more specific, maybe it’s about 55 fps. From now until launch we’ll bring it up to 60. Other developers are now trying to bring their games up to 30fps. That’s a fact," he said. "Can you think of any other games that are running at 60 fps? Every Party?" he joked.

That seems to tie in with what Project Gotham Racing 3 design manager Gareth Wilson told us at TGS. Asked about hitting 60, he said: "We'll see how we go. It's all about timings. If we had four months we could get it running at 60. It's whether we've got the time." Although he then argued that with the physics running at the full rate and so many visual effects, the difference between 30 and 60 actual frames delivered every second would be difficult for most people to notice.

Getting back to Itagaki-san, the sunglass-loving developer also had some kind words for Nintendo concerning the Revolution controller. "I think it’s good if it can be used as a sword or something like that – it would be really different. [Although] It would be very tiring. If you use that with my games, and it’s speed you’ll end up with a bigger right arm (laughs). Frankly I think Nintendo’s hardware presentation is just great. I just saw the trailer, and saw it multiple times and I was laughing my ass off. To be top notch you need to be able to make people laugh."

The full Tomonobu Itagaki interview is online over at GameInformer.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000. Follow him on Twitter.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (102) Latest comment 7 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Ciaran #1 7 years ago

    "struggling to get 30"?

    Hmm. Don't like the sound of that. Oh well. I'm getting a Revolution anyways. I need bigger arms. ;)

  • Blerk #2 7 years ago

    "Man creating 360 game 'bigs up' 360" shocker! :-)

    Looks like that "HD era" is coming at quite a cost. Lovely visuals, but welcome to the world of jerk-o-vision. :-/

  • statix101 #3 7 years ago

    I guess running games at 1280x720 4xAA isnt free after all........just like a PC.

    And i still cant believe that bullshit statement by PGR3 developers....patronising wankers...

  • bootsy_NL_30 #4 7 years ago

    this is typical itagaki,I think this guy got into games because of his incredibly competative nature...I'm curious as to whether that 30fps is based on a fact or if itagaki is just throwing down the gauntlet like he always does before he releases a new game ....and honestly while I'd love to see Ninja Gaiden 2 in all its beauty running on a 360 I really feel that the dead or alive series plays sooo slow , its like fighting in apple syrup (like def jam new york but then better looking). Soul Caliber 1 is the benchmark for fluidity and movement in fighting games ...hope itagaki comes a little closer this time around

  • hp_on_toast #5 7 years ago

    I think the comments were more in relation to other launch titles as opposed to the console's future catalogue - it's nothing to do with what the console is capable of but the time it will take developers to get used to the new hardware.

  • Genji #6 7 years ago

    TUNE IN NEXT WEEK FOR THE NEXT ENTHRALLING EPISODE OF "WHEN IDIOTS COLLIDE"

  • kangarootoo #7 7 years ago

    Message to EG. That pop up Farcry advert is the most annoying ad you have EVER hosted.

    I can't get Firefox Adblocker to get rid of it either. Anyone know the correct server to block?

    Gaaaaahhhh!!

  • Talha #8 7 years ago

    "[After E3], we’ve brought it up to 60. To be more specific, maybe it’s about 55 fps. From now until launch we’ll bring it up to 60. Other developers are now trying to bring their games up to 30fps. That’s a fact," he said. "Can you think of any other games that are running at 60 fps? Every Party?" he joked."

    Well, Gran Turismo (all of them). Burnout (1 through 4). WRC4. Black (hopefully). And these are the ones that I have played. I think someone needs a reality check here.

  • mr_steve100 #9 7 years ago

    TV programs show at 24fps (sometimes 30fps) and I don't hear anyone complaining about that. 30fps will be fine, and I think 60fps is just a little OTT. Yes, it'll be smoother but at the expense of graphical degradation. And if you've never complained about TV framerates, I don't see how people can complain about not getting 60fps.

  • Thamuhacha #10 7 years ago

    >Message to EG. That pop up Farcry advert is the most annoying ad you have EVER hosted.

    Agreed. A pop up that sits between the article and the scroll bar is just criminal

  • Talha #11 7 years ago

    mr_steve100 : I respect your views, but you don;t have to PLAY in a TV program at all - you can even tolerate it at 20 FPS. 60 FPS, on the other hand, makes a lot of difference especially in shooters and driving games. Playing below that is JUST NOT THE SAME.

    If you don't believe me, trying playing Doom III on a 128 MB system with a GeForce 4. Count the times you die within 30 seconds. Now do the same with an adequate PC and see how easily you can kill off enemies.

    Yeah I know 30 FPS is not disaster, but it is a shame that framerate is the first casualty of a purportedly next gen system with three processor cores.

  • L42yB #12 7 years ago

    "TV programs show at 24fps (sometimes 30fps) and I don't hear anyone complaining about that. 30fps will be fine, and I think 60fps is just a little OTT. Yes, it'll be smoother but at the expense of graphical degradation. And if you've never complained about TV framerates, I don't see how people can complain about not getting 60fps. "

    I completely agree. I bet that if you saw a game running at 30fps on one TV and 60 on another, you would not be able to tell the difference.

  • lennon #13 7 years ago

    Frame rate arguments are so lame.

  • PES_Fanboy #14 7 years ago

    What framerate did the majority of PSX games run at? I ask because, naively, I have no idea what framerate changes actually do *to my own enjoyment*, and I enjoyed PSX games as much as PS2, and didn't notice jerkiness

  • Talha #15 7 years ago

    As I said before, 30 FPS IS NOT JERKY OR DISASTER OR ANYTHING!!! It is just that 60 FPS feels lot more natural and smooth.

  • lennon #16 7 years ago

    The only shame will be on games that are effected by it. And they are unlikley to get much ROI.

  • w00t #17 7 years ago

    I think it is possible to tell the difference. I played some early code once that 'optimised' up to 60 fps when there was less graphics to display, and the change between the two was quite startling. So startling in fact, they made it run at just 30fps throughout cos the bits at 60 made the rest look poorer by comparison.

    EDIT: And 30 fps is just fine. 60 is just finer ;)
    Edited by w00t at 26/09/05 @ 11:51

  • L42yB #18 7 years ago

    Talha: Name one game which you have played at both 30fps AND 60fps... the difference is not as big as you seem to think it is. Visually, you have to look incredibly closely to see the difference and even then I bet you wouldn't be able to tell them apart. As far as playablility and response time is concerned, the difference may be noticeable in a very fast paced game, but as long as the game is designed well, then this will not affect gameplay.

  • Talha #19 7 years ago

    Way to go, Fluffy - maybe they will understand YOU if not me. Well I am not saying that 60 FPS is essential in all games. But it does improve the experience a whole lot in racing games and shooters, thats all I said. Of course it won't much affect platformers or even sports sims.

    But, again my friends, 60 FPS is much smoother and once you experience it even 30 FPS looks a little lame. The difference, though not terminal, IS perceptible.

    At any rate, it is pathetic that devs are chickening out of providing 60 FPS at the world's fastest computer.
    Edited by Talha at 26/09/05 @ 11:55

  • lennon #20 7 years ago

    hence this whole argument is pointless

  • lennon #21 7 years ago

    Are you not a tad tired by the same old merry go round of stories and rumours that occur for every new console? The point is can developers get current machines to run at 60 fps? If the answer to this question is yes then why should be worried that developers may struggle on this next generation?

  • Pirotic #22 7 years ago

    Heh, most developers have only had a few months to work with a final xbox unit, and you can't really optimise anything other than the logic until you have final hardware in your hands. but still, if anything you'd think people would of under-estimated the specs resulting in the launch titles being not so great looking, but easily hitting 60fps.

    it looks here like many developers over-estimated the specifications and now dont have enough time to optimise it to a decent speed. I certainly wont be buying PGR3 is it's clearly been rushed out the door. no doubt they'll release a new version in a years time with all the cut features reintroduced.

  • lennon #23 7 years ago

    Actually I called it lame and pointless :) and no worries.
    Edited by lennon at 26/09/05 @ 12:02

  • Talha #24 7 years ago

    So framerate DOES matter, eh? And it is not 'merry-go-round' - it is a settled argument, only started anew by people by saying things like, 'You can't distinguish between 30 & 60 FPS' with straight faces.

  • lennon #25 7 years ago

    Im more interested in whether it will actually make a difference to my enjoyment of a game. As I dont think it will its not a issue that concerns me. I have in the past found that some games running at 60fps give me head aches so I could argue I dont want to see all games running at it.

  • king_skins #26 7 years ago

    The problem is that people are not getting enough time to optimize there games before launch. This always happens at the launch of any console, its not like game developers are any good at meeting deadlines is it? How many games normally miss there release dates? Launch games can't

    Also, with regard to control most games now have there control input sampling and framerate separate, like Forza. The frame rate is 30fps, but the control and physics are updated 180 times a second.

    Some of the 360 games feature motion blur (DOA4, PGR3, PDZ)... so 30fps shouldn't be much of a problem.

    But I'm one of those people who can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 anyway...

  • PES_Fanboy #27 7 years ago

    Hmm, I see lots of valid points here, but if a game is shit at 30fps, how much shinier the turd at 60fps?

    Translation: I'm hoping that there's at least one decent launch title, otherwise it'll be a boring Xmas stroking my empty XB360

  • tengu #28 7 years ago

    Tecmo says Xbox 360 is t3h b3st?

    Here's another shocker for you: You need Oxygen to live!

  • PES_Fanboy #29 7 years ago

    Yeah, but I hate playing PC games other than glorified databases (Football Manager), so all my gaming eggs are in one basket.

    Playing old gen PES 5 online on my new XB360 will probably be all that happens game wise at Xmas though.

  • L42yB #30 7 years ago

    "Is pes5 any good, is it possible to put the ball in the air without the AI intercepting it 9/10 times? "

    Have u tried using the right thumbstick?

  • drumbaby #31 7 years ago

    When Itagaki speaks, I listen!

    Not.

  • jiveguy #32 7 years ago

    tengu in poor attempt at blerk impression. News at...shit :(

    Anyway, didn't we used to play games at much lower framerates in the past with no complaints? It was games like quake and half-life mods (when I say mods I mean CS) that put forward the myth of people needing high FPS rates. I think it'll be just PC gamers who have a problem with this because they won't be able to post their console max FPS in "Current Popular Shooter: Source" alongside their overclocked system specs and mad frequenciezz.

    I don't know, its all a load of bollocks.

    Also, "The right thumbstick does air balls does it?" sounds really funny out of context.
    Edited by jiveguy at 26/09/05 @ 12:33

  • king_skins #33 7 years ago

    Well Kameo looks good if you like that sort of thing... and if PDZ is as good at the N64 then is should be amazing. Also PGR2 was 30fps and that was an amazing game! So PGR3 should be amazing to.

    I hope they improve the online in PES5!! Leagues and Tourneys would be good and less lag! I haven't seen any details about it though... :(

  • chronom4n #34 7 years ago

    so it is the best console on earth! yet it struggles to produce games that run at 60 frames per second! a good console is one in my opinion does everything perfectly. but no such thing exists.

  • kangarootoo #35 7 years ago

    @Talha

    This thread is a bit lengthy now, so you have probably forgotten writing this,

    "At any rate, it is pathetic that devs are chickening out of providing 60 FPS at the world's fastest computer."

    but I have to pull you up on it anyway ('cos its my mission in life to defend devs from public comment, as you have probably noticed by now if you read my posts).

    Dev aren't scared of running 60fps. Neither are they too lazy to bother (as soooo many people seem to insist on stating). it is simply a payoff between whizzy looking graphics and high frame rate.

    The devs, publishers, or whoever is making the decision (different in each case I'll warrant) is deciding that the level of graphical detail that are shooting for is crucial. From that point, they then optimise to try and get their frame rate up to 60. But a decision has been made at some level that they will not cut detail for fps, and so if they have to settle at 60 then that is what they will do.

    I'm really not sure where bravery comes into this process, perhaps you can elighten me?

    And a small request to close with, whenever anyone considers using the word lazy when referring to the devs of some game they have an issue with, can they please think twice about what they are actually trying to say. I can assure you that the majority of devs work plenty of overtime for no extra cash, so calling them lazy is kind of insulting and just shows how little the insulter in question knows about the games industry.

    /drinks coffee and returns to testing on tiny screen

  • L42yB #36 7 years ago

    Oh, and on the FPS thing... I have seen first hand, the same games running at both 30 FPS and 60 FPS. There is apparently a difference, but it does not make the game "jerky" or anything like that. To be perfectly honest, I could not tell the difference and I think anyone who says that the FPS is the be all and end all for judging a game is making a mountain out of a molehill. Considering that it would take a LOT more processing power to get a game to run at twice the frame rate, it's quite possible that most devs think that having more to your game is more important than having it run unnoticably faster.
    Edited by L42yB at 26/09/05 @ 12:41

  • aabyssx #37 7 years ago

    Instead of talking next gen rubbish all the way get me my Ninja Gaiden Black! You hear me Itagaki?!?

    / shakes fist

  • PES_Fanboy #38 7 years ago

    If you click in the right thumbstick the power meter for air balls is shown, while you direct it with the thumbstick. It's a bit cack-handed if you ask me, I don't use it.

    As for air balls in PES5, can't comment but in Winning Eleven 9 (the Jap version which will be tweaked), there are far more loose balls, including those 'coming down with snow on' Wimbledon punts. I've had goal kicks that have come down to completely unmarked strikers, without anyone heading it.

    Obviously, in those situations, I always try to volley it into the top corner in one move, but am so excited it goes into Row Z

  • king_skins #39 7 years ago

    Maybe its just that they haven't got to grips with the Parallel processing yet...? And they are not using the 3 cores efficiently. It will take some time. Most people think that it won't happen till the 2nd/3rd generation of games.

    The first gen games are single thread games. They will use all the 3 cores but they are not optimized for parallel processing and won't use all three cores effectively or efficiently.

    But most of it is down to time constraints, they have a new system, only had the finally dev kits with all 3 cores for month or so and have to make it out for launch.
    Edited by king_skins at 26/09/05 @ 13:06

  • tengu #40 7 years ago

    "I don't know, its all a load of bollocks."

    I agree, your posts are just that.

  • king_skins #41 7 years ago

    BTW, You can also use the cross/clear button to lob the ball over the defense in PES
    Edited by king_skins at 26/09/05 @ 13:07

  • Talha #42 7 years ago

    kangarootoo : Man no offence, I am not trying to call anyone lazy. It is just that some devs, in my humble opinion, are much better at optimizing games that run well on a large range of setups (think HL2, Doom III).

    Then there are geniuses like Criterion who provide unbelievable effects on Burnout Revenge (hitherto unseen even on a PC) and give it all at 60 FPS.

    While I salute all these devs, it certainly irritates an average PC gamer when some semi-decent looking game struggles to catch 40 FPS on a goodish PC.

  • L42yB #43 7 years ago

    @FluffyTucker: Maybe so... but the fact is, a console is a PC. This console is a PC with plenty of very fast RAM and 3 3.2GH processors... so it only makes sense that the games can look at least as good as the equivelant PC.

  • jiveguy #44 7 years ago

    tengu: oooooh handbags :D

  • kangarootoo #45 7 years ago

    @Talha

    Sure thing, but it is worth bearing in mind that Valve, Criterion etc have teams dedicated to building a super fast engine. Burnout used a customer version of Renderware of course, but it was still a dedicated Renderware team that were working with the Burnout team (this is reasonable supersition on my part I should mentioned, rather than definite fact).

    Both Renderware and Source are built with licensing in mind, rather than just being coded for the game at hand, and so expending a greater amount of time and money can be justified in their development. And that is what it really comes down to in the end.

    A few more licensed engines on consoles might be the answer here. Optimising takes time and money. Any team given an extra year could almost certainly get 60fps out of their title. But if they only have another 3 months alongside other development work, and they are working on a new platform on which noone really has any experience, they are going to find it a trying task.

    The thing that people overestimate IMO, when waxing lyrical about one platform or another, is how easy it is to develop on said platform. The PS3 may have more powerful hardware, but if it is tough to work with a lot of dev teams are simply not going to be able to get the best out of it within the time available.

    My personal prediction is that we will see a wider range of graphical quality on the PS3 than on XB360 in the first year or so, because only teams behind games like MGS and premier inhouse Sony titles are really going to be able to get the most out of the HW. And so the AAA title gap widens, which is a sad thing.

    I know you didn't personally use the L word yourself, but commited the far less heinous crime of saying the devs were scared (sometimes they are, like when they are watching a scary film on TV for example). I was just getting on my soapbox again.

  • glaeken #46 7 years ago

    I wonder if itagaki reads EG comments. It just seems that speech could not have been better targeted for the EG comments section if it tried.

  • tengu #47 7 years ago

    "tengu: oooooh handbags :D "

    Things ladies carry around?

  • Talha #48 7 years ago

    kangarootoo: Thanks for a very enlightening post which really widened my horizons and increased my knowledge about game development twofold. The blame then passes to marketing mavens, I presume, who make the devs rush the products out the door. Even an ignoramus like me can vouch for that since I have seen so many half-finished, half-assed games.

    You are very right in pointing out that companies I praised for their well optimized games (in this case, Valve and Polyphony) have the luxury of unlimited time on their hands, and for the first time in my life I feel a pang of sympathy for PC developers (what has gotten into me?).

    Still, two points are established: (1) Better framerate makes you feel and play better and (2) Games should not be rushed out without giving the devs sufficient time to optimize them, as it is not the DEVS who do not want to optimize, but rather marketing who want the game yesterday at any cost.

    Am I right?

  • jiveguy #49 7 years ago

    I think the biggest overestimation made by fans of either console is the difference in the physical quality of games. Cross platform stuff will be identical (as opposed to now where the xbox version might look slightly better) and from there it will be up to the developers to make exclusives look as good as they can for each machine. Some exclusives on console A will look worse than those on console B and vice versa. As I said, it's all a load of bollocks.
    Edited by jiveguy at 26/09/05 @ 13:49

  • Netfreak #50 7 years ago

    Eurogamer making a big deal about X360 doing 30 fps? Why I am not suprised?

  • kangarootoo #51 7 years ago

    @Talha

    I really wan't sure whether you were being genuine at the start of your post there, or being sarcastic in response to me being patronising. And I still don't :) Apologies if I was being patronising, errr... and thanks if not.

    I think both your final points are pretty much on the money. Though its not necessarily marketing people who are at fault, just whoever hols the purse strings (thought I get the impression that by marketing you actually mean the publisher, in which case you are again spot on).

    I accept that it is a business, and that someone somewhere has to look at their investment and say "will spending an extra £XXX increase the quality of the game to a point where I will make >£XXX in extra profits". And I accept that if the answer is no, then they aren't really justified in spending that extra cash.

    Sure that means that sometimes the quality of a title will suffer greatly, ands that can suck (especially if you are working on said title) but thats life sometimes. If the games industry wasn't a business, it wouldn't be able to provide me with a job, so you take the rought with the smooth sometimes.

    Whenever I read a review (such as one about a game I worked on this year) which essentially says "some nice ideas, but needed more time", I feel satisfied. No one is calling me or my peers crap or lazy, they simply understand some of the factors involved in producing a game, and accept that given more time most dev teams could apply more polish and made a better game.

    EDIT: That Farcry ad is driving me F*CKING NUTS!
    Edited by kangarootoo at 26/09/05 @ 14:01

  • kangarootoo #52 7 years ago

    "Flash Uninstaller"

    Genious, why didn't I think of that? Ah, because I need it for other valid flash applications. Good try though.

    Or are you now going to tell me that flash sucks because it only runs at 30fps and is also than Conker?

    p.s. As I didn't notice your grumpy post before.

    "Who says the PS3 is going to be more powerful, why bring that fucking thing up for? It's not coming out here for years so who gives a fuck about it."

    No one cares except you about my brief reference to the PS3. I was an example to assit me in making a point, not gospel. Have some milk and calm down.

  • Atari_Boy #53 7 years ago

    "And i still cant believe that bullshit statement by PGR3 developers....patronising wankers..."

    Read the entire interview, real world motion blur is mentioned (Not fake “Radial Blur”) Get your facts right before you start your name calling.

  • joey #54 7 years ago

    30fps, 60fps?? Kids these days, don't know when they have got it good.

    When I was a child all we had was a 28k Spectrum, which I think could hit 2fps, given a well coded game.

    All this was green fields.....and you could get 2 games for .....

  • kangarootoo #55 7 years ago

    @Talha

    I just looked up "maven". Good word :)

  • Xerx3s #56 7 years ago

    "reckons Xbox 360 is the best console on the planet" - So, how mouch did MS donate in royalties to this guys bank account?

    "but he also says most developers are struggling to get above 30 frames per second" - That sounds like utter shite. Sound more like most developers are louzy programmers. If engines like Q4, oblivion and U3 run smoothly on it, then so should every other (oke, the statements isnt that solid, but 3 x 2 cores that run @ 3ghz with a good bus + mem + GPU should be able to get 60 fps easily imo).

  • PES_Fanboy #57 7 years ago

    The blame then passes to marketing mavens, I presume, who make the devs rush the products out the door. Even an ignoramus like me can vouch for that since I have seen so many half-finished, half-assed games.

    Not quite as cut-and-dried as that. As with any software project, a project manager / director should be in place from the outset with the facts, such as proposed deadline, all agreed. They then recruit or engage the people that are then responsible for giving estimates on how much time they need to design / write / test the product. The PM then should put this all down into a project plan and work out if they will hit the date.

    If not, solutions such as descoping or further recruitment are mooted.

    Then design overruns, write eats into the testing time, and the thing is rushed out with minimal QA or held back. That's why so many people start out in QA before heading to a better life, like becoming a technical solutions architect - such as myself ;o) - where the idea of weekend working is putting a shelf up in the shed.

    So my point is (I'm sure I had one), it's not always marketing people. They may suggest the release date, but a whole load of stuff happens and people read it before it's missed, so they're accountable too.

    Speaking up for marketing people? Whatever next. I actually had one marketing dude sell a customer a neural network once, I had to have a lie down after reading the business case for that one.

  • kangarootoo #58 7 years ago

    "So, how mouch did MS donate in royalties to this guys bank account?"

    Man you just can't stop yourself can you. You'll be saying the Pope is getting a backhander from God next.

    EDIT: "oke, the statements isnt that solid, but 3 x 2 cores that run @ 3ghz with a good bus + mem + GPU should be able to get 60 fps easily imo"

    What. On. Earth. Did you base that on? How many times must the GFX quality vs FPS point be made? The most powerful machine on earth won't make 60fps if you push it too hard. Gaaaahhh!!
    Edited by kangarootoo at 26/09/05 @ 15:33

  • kangarootoo #59 7 years ago

    @PES_Fanboy

    "As with any software project, a project manager / director should be in place from the outset with the facts, such as proposed deadline, all agreed."

    Sure thing, thought it isn't always that open as I'm sure you've experienced. Sometimes (i.e. all too often for the smaller dev company) it goes more like...

    Dev puts together schedule, says to publisher "we need £3m". Publisher says "you can have £2.5m". Developer thinks "accept deal or go out of business". Accepts deal, runs out of time and resources.

    It sucks, but it does happen. Even in house this happens, even at the biggest publishers. Except in that sort of case it is more like "Head office (for want of a better term) says to department, you can have 40 people and 16 months, done in time for Xmas, no buts or maybes". Department says OK, knowing that crunch hours will have to take up the slack.

  • PES_Fanboy #60 7 years ago

    That's why you always ask for twice as much cash as you need!

  • kangarootoo #61 7 years ago

    I agree, but the publisher knows this too. And if you ask for twice as much cash, and a competing dev doesn't... they get the deal and you go out of business.

  • tengu #62 7 years ago

    "Man you just can't stop yourself can you. You'll be saying the Pope is getting a backhander from God next."

    I didn't know God swung that way!

  • PES_Fanboy #63 7 years ago

    I think you're right in a lot of cases, although I doubt very much that publishers come up with brand new ideas and offer them out to tender to devs.

    Perhaps for yearly updates or established brands they own the rights too, but I was always under the impression (although it's been a while since I worked in the business) that development houses at least came up with designs first, then took them round publishers to see if they'd play ball. So not like the publisher could then offer their ideas to a cheaper dev house.

  • Tonka #64 7 years ago

    What? Launch titles that doesn't fully utilize the new hardware?
    Impossible!

  • kangarootoo #65 7 years ago

    @PES_Fanboy

    "although I doubt very much that publishers come up with brand new ideas and offer them out to tender to devs."

    Doesn't have to be new IP though. A publisher could have a license (lets say for the XXX film franchise or something) and they may be taking offers on doing a game under that license. This does indeed happen all the time.

    On the flip side, a publisher might have budget to fund 3 new titles that year. Even if 10 devs all have a different idea, only 3 of them will get the cash, and how much they ask for will be a key part of the decision.

  • Teeth #66 7 years ago

    This Team Ninja bloke, is he the one who goes around wearing shades the whole time? Bit of a shaft isn't he? Well, maybe not. Anyway, let's make it easier on developers by making the hardware simple and easy to work with! They'll love us for it. Bang on the money, Microsoft. Sony are stuck in the dark ages.
    Edited by Teeth at 26/09/05 @ 16:06

  • kangarootoo #67 7 years ago

    " This Team Ninja bloke, is he the one who goes around wearing shades the whole time? Bit of a shaft isn't he?"

    Its the same guy who, when responding to people complaining about Ninja Gaiden being too hard, said "they should stop complaining and fight". Hmmm.

  • brainbird #68 7 years ago

    I'm all for 60 fps over any other graphical advantages.

    Colin McRae Rally for Playstation had a cheat code which made the game run smoother (with more fps than normal). Try that out and tell me framerate doesn't matter.

  • chrisc_doa #69 7 years ago

    As an ex-programmer i'd just like to point out you can run a game's graphics at 30fps and the game itself at 60fps.
    So it will update just as quickly as you all want, and will look fine to.
    30fps is fine for graphics. It's changes in frame rate that kill a game.

  • skillian #70 7 years ago

    It seems odd to say games will struggle to hit certain framerates. At its most basic level, its a trade-off between graphical flourish and FPS - it'll be up to the developer to find the happy medium.

    At the end of this day, this generation will be much like the last - framerates will vary, and when it gets too low, reviewers and customers will bitch about it and the devs will try not to do it again.

  • Frogger #71 7 years ago

    A better game experience at 60fps seems logical. But then you guys are saying that Forza is only at 30fps. And I never noticed a framerate problem when playing it, or any annoyance of any kind. For me it's just fine.

    And if motion blur is a default visual effect in next-gen games, maybe that these 30fps will be enough after all...

  • Raziel #72 7 years ago

    Played Tekken 4 on the PS2 with 30 and 60 fps.
    If you looked closely, you could see the 30 was better looking, but the 60 played so much nicer...

  • fluff_the_tiger #73 7 years ago

    am i the only one that can notice a difference between 60 fps and 90fps in 3d first person shooter games? 90 is a lot smoother. I think real life (for me) is around 80 ish fps.

    lol!

  • fluff_the_tiger #74 7 years ago

    am i the only one that can notice a difference between 60 fps and 90fps in 3d first person shooter games? 90 is a lot smoother. I think real life (for me) is around 80 ish fps.

    lol!

  • Seifer #75 7 years ago

    "reckons Xbox 360 is the best console on the planet"

    That's true atleast for the next year or so. Stop the MS hate, I am sure if DoA can run at 60fps ,any other game could too. It's just down to the developers.

  • Nikanoru #76 7 years ago

    am i the only one that can notice a difference between 60 fps and 90fps in 3d first person shooter games? 90 is a lot smoother. I think real life (for me) is around 80 ish fps.

    Bullshit, don't think you're somehow superior to the rest of the human race. You can see the flickering from the 60hz refresh rate, but the difference in fluidity of movement is just not noticable to the naked eye.

  • admir #77 7 years ago

    how much did MS pay him to say that

  • Teeth #78 7 years ago

    Isn't it possible that the 360 is actually simpler and easier to develop for than the PS3 admir? That's all he said. Personally I'd rather work on a console that was easy to develop for than some hopelessly convoluted mess with (I am told) shitty libraries.

  • Seifer #79 7 years ago

    Admir why would MS pay Itagaki to praise himself and his team (as he always does) and basically imply that the 360 can't handle a decent frame rate ? If you're talking about the "best console on the planet" bit , that IS true for now is'nt it ? I'm not saying it has a large library of software yet or that it is what everyone should own but for the time being it is the most powerfull (best) console.

  • captain-future #80 7 years ago

    Itagaki is right. Always! Why? Because he was born with shades.

    Also I'd like to see PGR3 at 60 fps. Always! Why? Because PGR2 felt a little slow.

  • admir #81 7 years ago

    Teeth
    it would be much easier to develop for PC, so whats your point, my point is i dont know if he worked on the ps3 yet and everyone knows that the ps3 has complicated architecture (the x360 too)

    Seifer
    MS got the money. best console on the planet is the PC and it will always be, and all games will run on 60fps come on it the nextgen

    Cap.-Future
    if Itagaki would tell you to kill yourself you would do it becaouse he is always right is that what you are telling me

  • Talha #82 7 years ago

    @kangarootoo: Good morning (at least here in Pakistan). I had NO SARCASM INTENDED WHATSOEVER in my post, it was genuine and the only joke in it was on me and my knowledge of game development. In other words my post was genuine and er, erm.. even heartfelt!

    Thanks for agreeing to my points.

    I am editing this post to register my heartfelt hate, downright dread, definite disgust and legitimate loathing for the stupid Far Cry ad. What aggravates the matters is that FC is one of my top three favorite games of all time (and one of the few reasons I am sticking to my PC for gaming), as well as the impression that EG have merged with GameSpot of IGN or something and using their product placement ideas.

    Shame on you, EG, for selling out like that.
    Edited by Talha at 27/09/05 @ 04:45

  • Scimarad #83 7 years ago

    "MS got the money. best console on the planet is the PC and it will always be, and all games will run on 60fps come on it the nextgen "

    Best console on the planet? Uh, no. Consoles are pretty much for gamers who hate having to work to get a game working or sit there mucking around with their hardware settings for hours. If you enjoy it, fine, but I think the reason most people who own PCs and consoles play games on their consoles is because PC gaming rapidly becomes more trouble than it's worth.

    To save time this is point where you reply "it's not to much effort if you know what you are doing" and I reply"but most of us don't and aren't interested enough to find out..."

  • Talha #84 7 years ago

    Scimarad : I fully agree with your comments. Most pro-PC gamers here seem to be pompous, patronizing and ignorant of ground realities. OK I will play shooters only on the PC, as well as RTS games. Also, PC is great since it does a whole lot more than just play games, I do not hate MS or Windows XP, and I have nothing against the PC. But....

    For platformers , sports sims , driving games and extreme sports games , the consoles not only provide you with a better experience, you don't have to mortgage your house to arrange the fucking hardware. Consoles provide immediate and gratifiying experience, console games are generally more consistent in their framerates, and you know that when the sequel to your favorite game will come it will run just as well. I hope PC devs don't get offended here, but a PC game never utilizes your full hardware (for understandable reasons) and keeps you prodding to upgrade your hardware. Console hardware these days is being pushed to 150% resulting in glorious games like God of War and Burnout Revenge.

    Many of us simply can't afford spiralling PC gaming costs. Long live the console!
    Edited by Talha at 27/09/05 @ 07:25

  • Genji #85 7 years ago

    Awesome! Another console vs. PC debate!

  • Talha #86 7 years ago

    Console vs PC debate is not my intention. I was merely responding to 'PC is the best console'. If that's that, then that's that! ;-) To me, it is more like Rich Snobs with Endless Supply of Money vs Average Working Joes with a Salary (I am one of those). Although in my humble opinion the ideal gaming setup (this gen) is a mid-range PC plus either a PS2 or XBox.
    Edited by Talha at 27/09/05 @ 07:37

  • toy_brain #87 7 years ago

    "am i the only one that can notice a difference between 60 fps and 90fps in 3d first person shooter games? 90 is a lot smoother. I think real life (for me) is around 80 ish fps. "

    Probably more like 75fps.
    Y'see, your eye actually has 2 'refresh rates'. One for your direct-vision, and one for your peripheral vision.
    Your direct vision has a fairly slow 'refresh-rate' (around 24 times a second for most people), this is because it works in full colour, so there is a lot of chemical data to transmit across the synaptic gap in the neurons connected to your eye at any one time.
    Your peripheral vision only works in Black-and-white (with your brain filling in the rest of the information) and therefore has less data to transmit at once. Most people's peripheral vision has a 75-times-a-second refresh rate.
    You can see this for yourself by first looking directly at a 60hz screen (should appear flicker-free), then looking away from it so that it is only in your peripheral vision - you should now see a distinct flicker.

    OK, thats your Biology lesson for today. Class dismissed.

  • Talha #88 7 years ago

    toy_brain, that was really useful and fascinating. And I mean that sincerely, just in case.

  • skillian #89 7 years ago

    Eyes don't have a refresh rate, and there's no magic number of frames per second above which we can't see.

  • Talha #90 7 years ago

    Forgive me but I am an absolute ignoramus: I know what framerate is but what exactly is refresh rate, and how does it have a bearing on your perception of smoothness etc?

  • Talha #91 7 years ago

    Thanks Fluffy. First biology then cyber electronics - this is turning into a correspondence university course!

    Seriously though, I gather that framerate is related to what the PC is putting out, and refresh rate is the 'framerate' of what the monitor is showing you, right?

    You said that 85 MHz is 'magical', but surely that would then restrict the allowable desktop resolution? Also, does the refresh rate relate entirely to the monitor or is it in any way affected by the hardware?

    See, give me good answers and I will ask more questions. Duh.

  • Talha #92 7 years ago

    Well you are hardly crap, taking out so much time to explain - I really appreciate that. I knew about VSync and invariably I read everywhere that it is best left turned off, but reading your post it seems that with the right hardware it should provide a better experience.

    Just one last question, if I may. Using FRAPS, I detect framerates in excess of 40 FPS on shooters such as Far Cry etc, but many times it doesn't *feel* as smooth as it should with jerking here and there. Is it a CPU, GPU or RAM issue?

  • Talha #93 7 years ago

    Thanks. As a reward, no further questions this time.

  • Talha #94 7 years ago

    Oh sorry to have offended your Supreme Idleness.

    /Scans the whole register of hardware related questions....

  • king_skins #95 7 years ago

    Thanks for the link to Perfect Dark videos FluffyTucker, looks pretty sweet. Do you know where these videos are taken from?
    Edited by king_skins at 27/09/05 @ 11:54

  • king_skins #96 7 years ago

    Not sure, don't think it was shown there. Can't find any other video's of it from TGS...

  • toy_brain #97 7 years ago

    "Eyes don't have a refresh rate, and there's no magic number of frames per second above which we can't see. "

    'Refresh rate' is probably a bit of a misleading term but its the best way of putting it I could come up with.
    Anyway, I found an article that explains it a bit better - the second paragraph is where it goes into the inner and outer eye and how they differ.....
    http://www.daniele.ch/school/30vs60/30vs60_3.html

  • PES_Fanboy #98 7 years ago

    I think we're confusing eye specification with interpretation of movement, which *is* captured by the eyes but processed and perceived elsewhere.

    This is where our limitation to perceptable framerates differs, as the 'bandwidth' of our eye to brain is perhaps (if this webpage is factual) the bottleneck.

    Perceptable change....that's what this whole argument is based on, isn't it? The people that can tell the difference between 60fps and lesser frame rates, albeit on a PC monitor that's perhaps two feet from their face, and of far better visual accuracy than the average television....

  • SlackMaster #99 7 years ago

    Grr, I was starting to type a response but then that frigging Far Cry ad kept covering half the comment box stopping my typing ... Damn flash ads!!!

  • brombeer #100 7 years ago

    How much did he get paid by Microsoft I wonder?

  • Teeth #101 7 years ago

    Wow, brombeer - you're something like the 800th person to say that in this thread! Must have taken some effort to come up with that one! ;)

  • Toonster #102 7 years ago

    'To be top notch you need to be able to make people laugh.'

    Yet I laugh at the PS3 boomerang.