Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anubis

quote:

---

Originally posted by blade
If they were to take 1 extra year they could make a game with hundreds of levels.

---

I doubt anyone will ever do this, I mean most games are just the right amount of length...when games seem to go on for ever and ever they become boring and tedious, unless they add a new edge to the game play and story every so often. As I said before, they're probably using the extra space for breathing room and to impress people that they are using some new cutting edge technology and even so rumours are going around (that have spread from people who understand all this to those who don't) that Sony games are a lot bigger and therefore better than any rival company, the kind of "bling" philosophy.

---

I'm talking more about MMOG MMORPG and Online multiplayer games.

Still, it would take them even longer to build the engine to fill such a capacity and make it live up to the standards of what the machine is worth would it not?

So games would take even longer to manufacture still.

Better Engines = Longer
More Levels = Even Longer.

quote:

---

Originally posted by traxor
Still, it would take them even longer to build the engine to fill such a capacity and make it live up to the standards of what the machine is worth would it not?

So games would take even longer to manufacture still.

Better Engines = Longer
More Levels = Even Longer.

---

No - a good engine takes around a year to two years to make. It doesn't matter what the size of the disk is.

But surely, the engines will be even better than the ones that are already made, you're basing your statistics on the engines that are being made in 2004-2005, I'm talking about engines in the future, better engines, great engines, the engines today are good, but still, the engines in the future will be great, completely and utterly amazing imo.

Dont u think the console games that we play now are good enough?? I still dont understand who will waste 4 years of their life just to make a game with 40 gb and then when they finish that the next best Console will come out.. Anyway when are these due? I mean the consoles

quote:

---

Originally posted by traxor
But surely, the engines will be even better than the ones that are already made, you're basing your statistics on the engines that are being made in 2004-2005, I'm talking about engines in the future, better engines, great engines, the engines today are good, but still, the engines in the future will be great, completely and utterly amazing imo.

---

Yes, but will take just as long as today's.

And IMHO, the Source engine is as good as it'll get for several years, but someone needs to utalize it for a game with more destructability.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hobbes
Dont u think the console games that we play now are good enough?? I still dont understand who will waste 4 years of their life just to make a game with 40 gb and then when they finish that the next best Console will come out.. Anyway when are these due? I mean the consoles

---

Consoles last ~5-6 years, and the next gen ones are due out in 2006 some time.

I'll be going with the PS3, look at Splinter Cell Chaos Theory. This has a new type of texturing, geotexturing, this allows walls and floors and any other thing to be 3D rather than the 2D walls we're all used to seeing in video games, I find it rather annoying that these days walls are still 2D. With the process of geotexturing takes not much longer, as far as I know, than the old 2D way.
Anyway as other People have said, 12 years ago the average HDD wasn't even 8.8GB, but now games like GTA: SA take up all that room, GTA: SA only took two years to make, the same as any other decent game,  whether it was 12 years ago or now. Texturing methods get better and faster, the ways of making the images get better and faster. Computers get better and faster.
It's a rapidly changing world, the way games are made changes, but the time it takes to make a good game hasn't changed all that much. So by the time the PS3 comes out there will have been many more advances in graphic producing, I'm sure, making it faster to make things than before. See my point?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Macabre Wolf
12 years ago the average HDD wasn't even 8.8GB

---

r u kiddin me?

I had (and have) a siemens nixford 133 Mhz from about 1995 or 94 and i think it had about 100 mb originally..

quote:

---

Originally posted by johny

quote:

---

Originally posted by Macabre Wolf
12 years ago the average HDD wasn't even 8.8GB

---

r u kiddin me?

I had (and have) a siemens nixford 133 Mhz from about 1995 or 94 and i think it had about 100 mb originally..

---

Ok 8 years ago, happy?

Nah!...5 years ago phearps...