Video of Unreal 2007 being played on PS3

Since 7592 Days

http://zdmedia.vo.llnwd.net/o1/New_Folder/GDC_1_wm...

or

http://zdmedia.vo.llnwd.net/o1/New_Folder/GDC_1_qu...

its after the rubber duckie demo

In reply to

Acert93

Since 7548 Days

And not the best game I have ever seen...

Crytek > Epic

0_o

Ok, and now my non-silly comment. Hard to compare Crytecks nice demo, which while a little nicer than the UE3 engine demo from 2004, it is also 2006. UT2007 has not inspired me much so I am not the fairest observer, but the guy playing really sucks!

In reply to

I am too poor to own a 360... therefor I play with paper statistics. The results of my indepth scientific anaylisis determined the most important benchmark is Pi. As in The Ring of Light.

wuffyx

Since 7555 Days

The problem of UT2007 is that its all been done before.

In reply to

PlumbDrumb

Since 7570 Days

That's just a circular room with a few barrels in it; I'd hardly call it UT2007.
More like a playable weapons/movement demo, with a shitty framerate.

Oh well, I guess it's better than nothing.

Anyway, one shouldn't expect massive amounts of detail everywhere in a UT game, even if it is running on a badass engine (nor should one want all that detail... it just gets in the freakin' way).

In reply to

wuffyx

Since 7555 Days

http://www.filelodge.com/files/room14/344959/roffl...

Wow...the physics completely missed that part.

In reply to

Acert93

Since 7548 Days

Yeah, I saw that too Wuffy.

But as Plumb said, it really is not a demo. Just a room and a gun. I am not the biggest UT2007 art fan, but the engine is solid enough and Epic makes good UT games if you like that style. I would not worry much.

In reply to

I am too poor to own a 360... therefor I play with paper statistics. The results of my indepth scientific anaylisis determined the most important benchmark is Pi. As in The Ring of Light.

Slabs

Since 7607 Days

Quake 4 looks better than that demo, what's the point of showing it?

In reply to

Jato

Since 7454 Days

I've seen some footage of UT2007 before and I think GOW is a much better looking game.
Most people would probably disagree with me though, especially the pc-fanboys.
But seeing this game just doesn't do anything for me, whereas GOW does....

In reply to

PlumbDrumb

Since 7570 Days

Well, you could call me a PC fanboy, Jato, but I'd have to agree with you on the graphics.

UT series (except for the first title) was never really about pushing visual boundaries.
The game is very focused on fast paced DM style combat, and you can't have all kinds of crazy shit happening in your field of vision, or geting in your way, because the style of play is already extremely fast and sometimes confusing.
The fact that each UT game has been among the best looking titles of their time though is really attributed to the fact that Epic make and update a great engine that is usually toward the forefront of technology.

The fans already had a field day with UT2003 and it's over-the-top use of static meshes and "snaggy" architecture... something Epic (mostly) remedied in UT2004.
This series is all about gameplay, even if it doubles as an engine showcase at times.

Gears is in a different league stylistically.
It's not a fair comparison.

Still, I wish they would have went ahead with UC3 for consoles... leave the UT's on PC's.
(maybe the project is so big they just wouldn't have room for developing 3 concurrent titles; would make sense)

In reply to

Well, you could call me a PC fanboy, Jato, but I'd have to agree with you on the graphics.

UT series (except for the first title) was never really about pushing visual boundaries.
The game is very focused on fast paced DM style combat, and you can't have all kinds of crazy shit happening in your field of vision, or geting in your way, because the style of play is already extremely fast and sometimes confusing.
The fact that each UT game has been among the best looking titles of their time though is really attributed to the fact that Epic make and update a  great engine that is usually toward the forefront of technology.

The fans already had a field day with UT2003 and it's over-the-top use of static meshes and "snaggy" architecture... something Epic (mostly) remedied in UT2004.
This series is all about gameplay, even if it doubles as an engine showcase at times.

Gears is in a different league stylistically.
It's not a fair comparison.

Still, I wish they would have went ahead with UC3 for consoles... leave the UT's on PC's.
(maybe the project is so big they just wouldn't have room for developing 3 concurrent titles; would make sense)

Jato

Since 7454 Days

I know, but I mention this cause I've heard so many times that the next-gen graphics will start with UT2007. According to some pc fanboys I personally know, GOW doesn't even come near UT 2007 graphically.
And I just can't see that...

In reply to

GriftGFX

Since 7577 Days

Posted by PlumbDrumb

Well, you could call me a PC fanboy, Jato, but I'd have to agree with you on the graphics.

UT series (except for the first title) was never really about pushing visual boundaries.
The game is very focused on fast paced DM style combat, and you can't have all kinds of crazy shit happening in your field of vision, or geting in your way, because the style of play is already extremely fast and sometimes confusing.
The fact that each UT game has been among the best looking titles of their time though is really attributed to the fact that Epic make and update a great engine that is usually toward the forefront of technology.

The fans already had a field day with UT2003 and it's over-the-top use of static meshes and "snaggy" architecture... something Epic (mostly) remedied in UT2004.
This series is all about gameplay, even if it doubles as an engine showcase at times.

Gears is in a different league stylistically.
It's not a fair comparison.

Still, I wish they would have went ahead with UC3 for consoles... leave the UT's on PC's.
(maybe the project is so big they just wouldn't have room for developing 3 concurrent titles; would make sense)

Hell yea Plumb, I'll second that call for UC3..I really enjoyed UC2..it tried something different and I thought it was pretty damn good myself. Personally I don't agree with the GOW comparison..personally I like the look of UT more myself..and in some ways I find it a bit more impressive too..can't deny they're both pretty simular though.

In reply to

[quote=PlumbDrumb]Well, you could call me a PC fanboy, Jato, but I'd have to agree with you on the graphics.

UT series (except for the first title) was never really about pushing visual boundaries.
The game is very focused on fast paced DM style combat, and you can't have all kinds of crazy shit happening in your field of vision, or geting in your way, because the style of play is already extremely fast and sometimes confusing.
The fact that each UT game has been among the best looking titles of their time though is really attributed to the fact that Epic make and update a  great engine that is usually toward the forefront of technology.

The fans already had a field day with UT2003 and it's over-the-top use of static meshes and "snaggy" architecture... something Epic (mostly) remedied in UT2004.
This series is all about gameplay, even if it doubles as an engine showcase at times.

Gears is in a different league stylistically.
It's not a fair comparison.

Still, I wish they would have went ahead with UC3 for consoles... leave the UT's on PC's.
(maybe the project is so big they just wouldn't have room for developing 3 concurrent titles; would make sense)[/quote]

Hell yea Plumb, I'll second that call for UC3..I really enjoyed UC2..it tried something different and I thought it was pretty damn good myself.  Personally I don't agree with the GOW comparison..personally I like the look of UT more myself..and in some ways I find it a bit more impressive too..can't deny they're both pretty simular though.

PlumbDrumb

Since 7570 Days

Posted by Jato

I know, but I mention this cause I've heard so many times that the next-gen graphics will start with UT2007. According to some pc fanboys I personally know, GOW doesn't even come near UT 2007 graphically.
And I just can't see that...

yeah, I would have to say they are dead wrong.
But UT2007 is looking beautiful.

In reply to

easynow

Since 7538 Days

Posted by Jato

I've seen some footage of UT2007 before and I think GOW is a much better looking game.
Most people would probably disagree with me though, especially the pc-fanboys.
But seeing this game just doesn't do anything for me, whereas GOW does....

i was kinda thinking that, but about the "footage" very poor indeed, i would have thought they would have showed something with a little more "wow" factor, and sony sure do love that rubber ducky demo didnt they use something like that for the ps2 lol

In reply to

Acert93

Since 7548 Days

Anyone have sales numbers on UC2? I heard it did not sell well.

In reply to

I am too poor to own a 360... therefor I play with paper statistics. The results of my indepth scientific anaylisis determined the most important benchmark is Pi. As in The Ring of Light.

Jato

Since 7454 Days

Posted by PlumbDrumb

yeah, I would have to say they are dead wrong.
But UT2007 is looking beautiful.

Oh yes, by all means, it still looks beautifull, but somehow it just doesn't do it for me as I mentioned earlier.
And indeed, with this game the nice graphics is just a plus, rather than a must...

In reply to

Myro

Since 7505 Days

Still early days for the PS3 and it's games guys. I'm sure UT 2007 will look much better in 8 months

In reply to

I am the pwnage

Slabs

Since 7607 Days

Posted by Myro

Still early days for the PS3 and it's games guys. I'm sure UT 2007 will look much better in 8 months

Of course it will, but why the heck would you put that on a booth and call it a tech demo?

They supposedly had UE3 running perfectly on even the early devkits last year (the scene with the guy running from the robot down a hallway) but this is a far smaller environment with no visible characters and an apparent graphical downgrade and it chugs like a bitch..

In reply to