UT3 learns from Gears News

Much respect to Epic then, no doubt it will also come in rather handy when they eventually decide to bring Gears to the PC also. Oh and first!

Shame the "Gears" experience hasn't helped in getting the UE3 running well on the low spec PS3.

That's just evil Bad! but still teh funneh! XD

...but will it run on the PS3?

Not normally my type of comment, LMAO comparing 360 with low end pc. hehehe

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L19GBNqlo4U

Hogwash. Any game claiming to do well by Low End PC's usually doesn't. I'd love to be proven wrong on this.

P.S. I also frowned at the 360/low end PC comparison. But I think that the measly 257 MB of RAM (other than video RAM) and the necessity to read off data from optical media DOES hamper it. Not that you'd know it looking at some of the titles!

Aye, I wish I could get many of my own PC games to both look and run as awesomely as Gears does on the 360. And I own a fairly competent machine.

Optimizing the living shit out of any new game is the real future of gaming if you ask me.

PC have gigantic higher (memory) specs than 360 and PS3s, so yes optimizing code for reduced memory is a good thing.

Hmmm, it reads to me like Epic are saying that the Xbox 360 is equivalent to a low-to-mid specced PC... which it probably is in terms of memory. It doesn't even have the advantage of a hard drive as standard either which must make it difficult to get the best out of the hardware. I mean look at how glitchy Saints Row was and even Gears of War suffers from the odd texture error due to having to rely on streaming data from the slower DVD drive. If anything I'd expect the PS3 version of UT3 to have the slight advantage over the 360 version as every console ships with a HDD built-in... look at PS3 Oblivion for example...

What's classed as a low-end / mid-range PC nowadays?

mid-range is probably a 8800gs, top range 8800 ultra, bottom range - 6800 maybe? not sure. the 76 series has been nerfed by the 8800gs range now.

Well, a high-end PC nowadays would be a quadcore with a 8800 GTX (possibly SLI) and 3-4 GB of Ram.

Which means a Dualcore with 2 GB and a good DirectX9 card or 8800 GTS would be "mid-range" - and would be the sensible thing to buy at the moment.

Heh.

And yeah, ultra, not GTX. :)

Judging by Sweeney's comments it looks as though a system with a DirectX 10 graphics card, dual or quad core processor, and over 2 gigabytes of RAM is what you'll need to get the most out of the game.

Why on earth would I spend the money needed for aforementioned system on a PC, that needs to be upgraded every two years just to play the most recent _good_ games, when I am able to buy a X360 for less and play all games with the same setup?

Same applies to PS3, albeit it's more expensive. It's still dirt cheap compared to some of the PC graphic cards, which cost the same or just a bit less than Sony's latest console. And that's just for the graphic card!

Haloboy!: Optimizing the living shit out of any new game is the real future of gaming if you ask me.

Optimizing the crap out of game is not the real future of gaming. It should be standard of game developing.

"If anything I'd expect the PS3 version of UT3 to have the slight advantage over the 360 version as every console ships with a HDD built-in... look at PS3 Oblivion for example... "

The PS3 version of Oblivion benefitted from extra developement time not power or the HDD, the devs have said this already.

eg. Interview: Bethesda Softworks' Pete Hines;

http://www.shacknews.com/extras/2007/020...

"Shack: Can you offer any insight into how much of that was made possible by the PS3 hardware versus simply the additional development time?

Pete Hines: It was entirely due to extra development time. It's not like the PS3 can do this and the others can't, it's actually something we were considering doing for the other platforms as well."

Hence the PS3 is not using the HDD in any way different to the 360 version. They both use the HDD for caching (except for gamers with the core 360 of course).

Therefore I doubt UT3 will be much different. If Epic choose to use the HDD to improve performance, they can still do so on the 360, where 360 gamers with a HDD will benefit and those without a HDD will not.

@UncleLou: What, my machine which cost an arm and a leg, a midrange PC??? Go to hell!! ;-)

/weeps.

asphaltcowboy - "What's classed as a low-end / mid-range PC nowadays?"

I'd say a low-end PC is a single core Pentium or Athlon 32-bit CPU, 1 GB of RAM and a GeForce 6/RADEON X800 graphics card. Mid-range is like my system, dual-core CPU (Athlon64 X2 4200+), 2 GB of RAM and a GeForce 7/RADEON X1800/X1900 graphics card (in my case, I have a 512 MB GeForce 7900 GT).

I can still run most games on high settings at 1680x1050 with 2X AA but games like Colin McRae DiRT seem to be pushing my rig to its limits and I had to disable motion-blurring and reduce shadows to medium in order to get it running a playable 20 fps. I expect I'll have to upgrade my system completely within the next 6-12 months or else have to run everything on medium settings!!!

@Talha: That's why I gave up on PC gaming a couple of years ago. Seeing the technically inferior original xbox doing a decent job of running half life 2 was the final nail in the coffin.

My PC now gets used for the sims and the odd rts.

/EDIT - irrelevance

@Yaz - The PS3 version of Oblivion installs a 4 GB "cache" file to the HDD giving loading times that are half those of the 360 version or faster in some cases. This cache file is permanent but with the limited size of the 360 HDD I very much doubt that was ever an option for Bethesda because it has very little free space as it is. Hence the system is still limited by its hardware and having to cater for the HDD-less core owners.

If you call a pc a "rig" you are a twat.

Oi stop insulting our rigs! >:(

@UncleLou: What, my machine which cost an arm and a leg, a midrange PC??? Go to hell!! ;-)

/weeps.

But I did say it's the sensible thing to buy at the moment! ;-)

'Optimizing the crap out of game is not the real future of gaming. It should be standard of game developing.'

I remember bringing this up in the past, that pc devs were being lazy and relying on high end systems to sell their games instead of optimizing for low end systems. Id and Epic were especially guilty of this; so hopefully at least one good thing will come of cross platform pc games after all.

@SBfistfun - Then I must be then... but, honestly, it's just a word... like twat... /rolls eyes

@Uncle: Yes, thanks for the support. I think we can safely say that 99% of games at any point in time run well with all the settings on high on a midrange PC - it is those poorly optimized behemoths that you need the high end ones for.

But I am happy to report that DiRT is running smooth as silk with everything set to high on my 8800 GTS equipped, 2 GB, 1.86 GHz Core 2 Duo rig. Perhaps it is because thanks to my low-end LCD the reslution has to be limited to 1440x900, but hey, who's complaining!

My guess : quadcore, 8800gtx sli and 4gigs of ram will be mid-range by the time UT3 comes out, i.e. some times in 2008 ! Hence the change of name form UT2007 to UT2008.

I hope i will be prooven wrong on this one :)

You already have been proved wrong in your own quote. They changed it from UT2007 to UT3, as you seemed to point out and then you went on to rename UT2008.

Plus on a side note - I never think an SLi set up (or crossfire) will be classed as mid-range per se, and will always be thought of in the light of a comparable single card solution.

Too bad the game companies and graphics card firms can't come together and agree on a standard specification for PC games that would be valid for say 5 years.

If you really think this then PC gaming just isn't for you. The console market has this method sewn up, but the constant technological push forward with improvements virtually every month will always be a part of proper computing.

The cost is often greatly exaggerated, but there's no denying its a very different experience to console gaming. And that's why we like it.

If you really think this then PC gaming just isn't for you. The console market has this method sewn up, but the constant technological push forward with improvements virtually every month will always be a part of proper computing.

This might be true, but it doesn't mean it's in any way sane way of doing business. Although, may be there just is enough people with enough money to upgrade their system every so often. If it weren't for the fact that some games are still best to be experienced on a keyboard and mouse setup, I'd be out of the PC gaming. It's ridiculously expensive and usually not even worth it.

Any mention of Rig's just makes me think of the Dance sequence in the Starsky & Hutch film.


"Driving that Disco Big Rigg...." lol

Christ! What the hell do Epic view as a "low-end PC"? As it's clear that is what they are referring to the 360 as.

In my eyes, anything capable of running any of the PC games released in the last couple of years is far from a "low-end PC". And the 360 is clearly more capable than that....

edit: If the 360 is the equivalent of a "low-end PC", then what the fuck is my 192mb SD RAM, 866mhz piece of shit classed as? I think if a PC was anywhere near capable of Gears' graphics, then I hardly think you could call it "low-end" to be perfectly honest.

This might be true, but it doesn't mean it's in any way sane way of doing business.

It's definitely a good way of doing business for hardware and software manufacturers, and that's really what the PC is about.

Even when it comes to games, if PC games weren't showing graphics/technology improvements over console games, what would be the point? PC gaming would eventually just be replaced with console gaming.

So yes, I think it's good business for everyone.

OK fine - I am prepared to accept by 360 as equivalent to a low-end PC.

Even so, let's talk about results and feel rather than technicalities - I have a feeling that there will be hardly one or two games on PC that LOOK better and PLAY better on PC than Gears of War. Take the likes of Forza 2 and GT4. Technical merits or de-merits aside, can you find any driving games on PC that look better or play more smoothly other than the likes of GTR? Thing is, even in cross platform titles, on a PC you have to jump through hoops in order to get basic features like anti aliasing and a good framerate (no fault of the PC, rather the devs), while these 'features' are on by default on GOOD console games.

AS for mouse and keyboard setup, as someone playing shooters on both PC and 360, in recent months I have developed another view. WHile it is true that mouse/keyboard is ideal for shooters, it also makes them too easy. Having to manipulate a clumsy thumb-stick is close to wielding a real gun and presents a similar degree of instability and guess work when shooting.

OK laugh all you want - I am willing to be stoned to death on this one!!!

@skilian: what about those who are paying through their noses to keep this whole righteous shebang propped up?

I think that consoles have replaced a large section of the PC community this time round.

And for me the Shadowrun game has, I feel, thrown up a very valid argument.

Namely, if it is all but impossible, to tell the difference between the joypad (360) and keyboard players (PC). Then clearly the argument should follow - Why not support keyboard and mouse on the 360 with the same balancing? Thus allowing people to interact as they see fit, as opposed to being dictated.

Clearly the only reason that makes any sense, is that MS are worried about cannibalising their own market. However, the reality would seem to be that most people, just switch off eventually, so in the long run, it may prove to be a short sighted decision.

@skilian: what about those who are paying through their noses to keep this whole righteous shebang propped up?

That's their choice, and to be fair to the earlier adopters, they help get the price down to a reasonable level for the rest of us. This is the same as the world of TVs , hi-fi equipment etc.

Personally I only buy a £150ish GFX card every two years, so it's hardly an extravagant expense. Less frequently I'll have to get a new CPU or something, and these usually cost me less than £100 too.

@skillian: Wow - we are on the same upgrade policy then! Personally I have found that if you go for the second-best everytime you get an urge for a processor or a card, that's the best value for money.

go for the second-best everytime

This is the secret to good value PC gaming. To many people get annoyed that they can't afford the top-end cards, but they don't need them, just like they don't need £1000 hi-fi speakers.

My 7900GT plays everything on the market right now, usually at top settings. If I need to turn down a few options for a good frame rate, I don't start getting disillusioned with the state of PC games.

@Talha

“Stop! Stop! Will you stop that! Stop it! Now, look!
No one is to stone anyone until I blow this whistle! Do you
understand? Even, and I want to make this absolutely clear,
even if they do say Jehova!”

For me it has to be mouse & keys, after discovering the joys of it on the original PC Quake it is so difficult to go back.

I have just completed Perfect Dark (finally after having it from release a lack of new games has forced me to play it !) and to be honest – playing on a joypad makes me feel like my character has arthritis.

Or at least a neck brace on, with the constant velocity turn around (which has to be relatively slow to achieve any kind of accuracy). The only thing that I have benefited from with playing it, is doing more Strafe aiming (popping out sideways having lined up the shot), which is something I loath as it feels unduly false – you’d move and aim, not slide out sideways with gun in position.

Clearly both of the methods are stilted as in effect – everyone has the gun fixed to their head, something that Shiny made great use off, even if sarcastically.

I think the Wii is probably, the closet yet (shame where it is pointing has no direct relation to where it is ACTUALLY pointing to on the screen – but would otherwise need the centre of the screen to emit the infrared it locks onto). Playing using Wii controls, with 360 graphics, with no cursor from the remote – but it being where you are pointing and having to “see” where your shots have gone. Now that would be class.

EDIT - Shiny = MDK game.

@BadBoyBonner: Actually that's precisely my point - playing shooters with a joypad is NOT fun, but rather closer to the actual act which is painful and gets cumbersome after a while. Obviously given a choice, it will be mouse and keys for me too!

Moving your hand in free space - is much more of a flicking action with rapid acceleration and deceleration.

If you imagine you are looking down at your desk and the mouse has a pistol grip sticking up off of it, and there were targets projected onto the surface of the desk, moving the mouse would be EXACTLY the same as moving the pistol. If the same situation, but now with something controlling a tracking device (joystick) the movement is not proportional but learned.

Read this document

http://www.hcibook.com/e3/online/fitts-c...

Describing the law of physical motion and understanding with pointing devices (it is more interesting than I it sounds lol)

Main bit is “The logarithmic number of steps to the target is also dependent on the maximum speed of the device allowing a virtually complete movement to target within one hand-eye cycle. If this is not the case then a series of smaller steps will need to be taken and a different timing behaviour would be observed. For a screen size of around 1000 pixels, this means the device must be able to support movement speeds of the order of 5000 pixels per second.
Similarly at the lower end, the minimum (non stationary) movement speed must be such that the target is not missed entirely within one hand eye cycle. For example, if the target is 10 pixels across, the minimum speed needs to be around 50 pixels per second.
In informal experiment with game controllers Kiel Gilleade found that most of the small thumb joysticks on these did not obey Fitts' Law because they broke one or more of the constraints above. This is not to say they are not good controllers, just they are not Fitts' Law ones. In fact Kiel observes that real gamers simply push the controllers to max all the time anyway! “
http://www.hcibook.com/e3/online/fitts-c...

@BadBoyBonner: Thanks. I can testify that I have read every word and have fully internalized all the implications. ;-)

hahaha. OK I will resolve it down to this.

If you closed your eyes

Moving the mouse, you can judge it by distance.

Where as.

The velocity and direction of a joypad, requires you to judge by time taken.

I prefer a joy pad, I hate sitting hunched-over in front of a computer tying to enjoy myself. Also it's about the experience for me, not a speed test in hand-eye co-ordination.

The 360 is not concerned with specs, it just pump's out great graphics.

Perhaps restaurants should rid themselves of all tables to stop diners feeling hunched over, and allowing them to eat comfortably off their own lap.

Obviously being a little facetious there; wireless - keyboards, mice, joypads, handhelds and laptops mean you can be where you like, sat how you like.

"Perhaps restaurants should rid themselves of all tables to stop diners feeling hunched over, and allowing them to eat comfortably off their own lap."

Definitely, if they ate for more than an hour non-stop.
I guess I also forgot what it is like to have a half decent PC for playing games on...

"The 360 is not concerned with specs, it just pump's out great graphics".

And that's exactly why mediocre games such as Gears of War are heralded as the best thing since sliced bread by countless 360 owners. While to many PC owners it's more a case of astoundingly fantastic graphics saddled with dull as dishwater style game play.

GoW is just not all that and I expect the 360 to churn out something that looks just as good if not better but still with far more substance within the next 2 years.

@Darren

"@Yaz - The PS3 version of Oblivion installs a 4 GB "cache" file to the HDD giving loading times that are half those of the 360 version or faster in some cases. "

An option they could choose due to extra developement time (there are no details of the size of the HDD cache on the 360 version), not because of a HDD in every PS3. There are also other PS3 games which offer this option because of the slower speed of the Blu-ray drive compared to the DVD drive in the 360. Bethesda's solution on the PS3 version of Oblivion is also to REPEAT data in multiple areas across the Blu-ray disk to improve seek times.

As for you saying "but with the limited size of the 360 HDD I very much doubt that was ever an option for Bethesda". There are many PS3 gamers out there with 20GB HDDs ALSO (yes not as much as those with 40GB, but they exist), so why is the 360's 20GB HDD a special case?

"Hence the system is still limited by its hardware"

Just as the PS3 is limited by it's hardware, hence devs work to try to get the most out of each console when they can.

"GoW is just not all that and I expect the 360 to churn out something that looks just as good if not better but still with far more substance within the next 2 years."

Gears of War 2? ;)

I agree, but don't think it will be that long as my money is on GTA IV.