Red Dead Redemption looked stunning pretty much everywhere and that games a couple of years old now, so Rockstar have had plently of time to really buff up the graphics engine.
Yep, pretty much this I reckon. Rockstar worked wonders on RDR, it's superb graphically compared to their GTA IV, even though they're on the same platforms.
Well, in Max Payne 3 lots of the cutscenes used the in-game environments anyway, just adding extra character animations and in some cases perhaps a more high res characters. If this follows the same trend, it shouldn't look much worse than in the trailer.
Well, in Max Payne 3 lots of the cutscenes used the in-game environments anyway, just adding extra character animations and in some cases perhaps a more high res characters. If this follows the same trend, it shouldn't look much worse than in the trailer.
Patrik
Yep. Same with every Rockstar game since GTA 3, so it's a pretty safe bet that what you see in the trailer won't be far different from the in-game graphics, cutscenes or not...
Yep. Same with every Rockstar game since GTA 3, so it's a pretty safe bet that what you see in the trailer won't be far different from the in-game graphics, cutscenes or not...
Yeah...you can even see bits in the trailer that look like they'll have been taken from missions, but with Rockstar using their "trailer camera angle" to make it look more cinematic...which they've done a lot of with previous GTAs...
You would think by now that all games would use the in-game engine for cut-scenes. After all, cut-scenes that are noticeably different from the in-game engine only serve to lessen the immserion of the game world.
I think Unreal Championshop 2, on the XBox, was the first game I ever saw where the pre-rendered cut-scenes looked worse than the in-game graphics. Then again, I was an N64 user in the N64/Playstation/Sega Saturn days, which was when pre-rendered intros were coming into fashion, and owing to the N64 being cartridge based (and so having not enough storage space for pre-rendered intros) so maybe there were a lot of games prior to UC2 that had pre-rendered cutscenes that were inferior to the in-game graphics.
And of course, one cheeky advantage of cut-scenes that were done in real-time by the in-game engine is that (game allowing) you can mess about with them, such as in Goldeneye or Perfect Dark, where you can throw a hand-grenade or proximity mine into an area and then immediately go into that area to trigger a cut-scene. Then, when the explosion occurs, it injures or kills anyone nearby, yet their voices still sound and the surviving characters go through the script as though nothing has happened. Only amusing for small minds, granted, but if I were smarter I'd be inventing something for the good of all mankind, not killing loads of people in a video game.
Back on topic (GTA IV), what machine will you be buying it on? I'll be buying* it on the 360, as long as there's no significant difference between the 360 and PS3 versions, as I prefer the 360's joypad, and the ability to install it to the hard drive.
One problem with the 360 version might be that it needs more than one disc, especially looking at the graphics on those screen-shots, since the 360's disc only holds 8GB, versus the PS3's 25GB (or 50GB if the PS3 version is on a dual-layer blu-ray, are any current PS3 games dual-layer?). There are a re few 360 games like this now, such as Mass Effect 3, Dead Space 2, and Halo 4. With these games it's no problem, as you just change discs at the pre-set point in the game (you need to keep the disc in at all times, even when playing from the hard drive, to prove that you own the game), but in a much more free-roaming game like the GTA series this will be more of a consideration, though as long as the disc changes are set intelligently (say between each of the three major landmasses), then it won't be a real problem. And if they (as I hope) make it so that when runnning from hard drive you only have to keep DVD 1 of GTA V in the drive at all times, then you won't even notice the game changing from reading one installed DVD of data to another.
If it does later come out on the PC then I'll buy that version if and when there are mods for it that attract my interest.
* Assumng I do buy it, which I will as long as it's like San Andreas (fun), not GTA IV (boring).
I installed Skyrim on my Xbox and I remember being very surprised that it was only a small install! Something like 3.5gb IIRC!
What they might do with GTA 5 on the Xbox (that's the version I'm going to buy btw)is have it spread over 2 or 3 dvd's and have each on be a manditory install (alot of PS3 games have manditory installs). Once the map and game engine etc are in the memory, all that is needed is the sound and cutscene data etc. But, if the optimise things properly, I see no reason why it should spill onto 3 dvd's.
I could well imagine that, especially if these screenshots are running on genuine console hardware. Looking at those in-game screenshots (if that's what they are) it's much easier to believe that they are taken from next-generation proto-type hardware rather than PS3/360 hardware.
I really hope they are 360/PS3 screenshots though, as I'm already drowning in consoles, and want to put off buying a new one for as long as possible - I could do with not buying another game for at least five years, so I can make a dent in my *huge* gaming backlog.
Comments
Yep, pretty much this I reckon. Rockstar worked wonders on RDR, it's superb graphically compared to their GTA IV, even though they're on the same platforms.
they're not going to show you ingame footage, then you'll realise it doesn't look anywhere near as pretty when it moves :D
Patrik
Yep. Same with every Rockstar game since GTA 3, so it's a pretty safe bet that what you see in the trailer won't be far different from the in-game graphics, cutscenes or not...
Yeah...you can even see bits in the trailer that look like they'll have been taken from missions, but with Rockstar using their "trailer camera angle" to make it look more cinematic...which they've done a lot of with previous GTAs...
Looks amazing though! :)
Patrik
I think Unreal Championshop 2, on the XBox, was the first game I ever saw where the pre-rendered cut-scenes looked worse than the in-game graphics. Then again, I was an N64 user in the N64/Playstation/Sega Saturn days, which was when pre-rendered intros were coming into fashion, and owing to the N64 being cartridge based (and so having not enough storage space for pre-rendered intros) so maybe there were a lot of games prior to UC2 that had pre-rendered cutscenes that were inferior to the in-game graphics.
And of course, one cheeky advantage of cut-scenes that were done in real-time by the in-game engine is that (game allowing) you can mess about with them, such as in Goldeneye or Perfect Dark, where you can throw a hand-grenade or proximity mine into an area and then immediately go into that area to trigger a cut-scene. Then, when the explosion occurs, it injures or kills anyone nearby, yet their voices still sound and the surviving characters go through the script as though nothing has happened. Only amusing for small minds, granted, but if I were smarter I'd be inventing something for the good of all mankind, not killing loads of people in a video game.
One problem with the 360 version might be that it needs more than one disc, especially looking at the graphics on those screen-shots, since the 360's disc only holds 8GB, versus the PS3's 25GB (or 50GB if the PS3 version is on a dual-layer blu-ray, are any current PS3 games dual-layer?). There are a re few 360 games like this now, such as Mass Effect 3, Dead Space 2, and Halo 4. With these games it's no problem, as you just change discs at the pre-set point in the game (you need to keep the disc in at all times, even when playing from the hard drive, to prove that you own the game), but in a much more free-roaming game like the GTA series this will be more of a consideration, though as long as the disc changes are set intelligently (say between each of the three major landmasses), then it won't be a real problem. And if they (as I hope) make it so that when runnning from hard drive you only have to keep DVD 1 of GTA V in the drive at all times, then you won't even notice the game changing from reading one installed DVD of data to another.
If it does later come out on the PC then I'll buy that version if and when there are mods for it that attract my interest.
* Assumng I do buy it, which I will as long as it's like San Andreas (fun), not GTA IV (boring).
why not wait for rockstar to make the announcements before you start moaning? :-D
skyrim managed 1 disk. i think gta 5 will be ok.
Says you. I've found every GTA game so far to be immensly fun. You're just doing it wrong. :p
I installed Skyrim on my Xbox and I remember being very surprised that it was only a small install! Something like 3.5gb IIRC!
What they might do with GTA 5 on the Xbox (that's the version I'm going to buy btw)is have it spread over 2 or 3 dvd's and have each on be a manditory install (alot of PS3 games have manditory installs). Once the map and game engine etc are in the memory, all that is needed is the sound and cutscene data etc. But, if the optimise things properly, I see no reason why it should spill onto 3 dvd's.
Found this leaked beta footage on youtube....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dPfkYhaoiQ
:D
...on the next gen consoles ;-)
I could well imagine that, especially if these screenshots are running on genuine console hardware. Looking at those in-game screenshots (if that's what they are) it's much easier to believe that they are taken from next-generation proto-type hardware rather than PS3/360 hardware.
I really hope they are 360/PS3 screenshots though, as I'm already drowning in consoles, and want to put off buying a new one for as long as possible - I could do with not buying another game for at least five years, so I can make a dent in my *huge* gaming backlog.
http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1791154/ps4_announcement_on_february_20_suggests_sony_teaser.html