About the game
- The Chronicles of Riddick: Assaul...
- X360, PS3
- Published by Atari
- Developed by Starbreeze Studios
- French release: 2nd quarter 2009
Top stories
About
- Copyright 2007-2009 Gamersyde SARL
Log in
Express links
- Square Enix providing Deus Ex 3 cinematics
- Contra on NES remade in Half-Life 2
- Dead Space 2?
- Crysis is back to the future
- Bioshock cosplay in real condition
- 10 minutes of Bad Company 2 beta
- Happy 4th birthday, Xbox 360
- Uwe Boll: Bloodrayne 3: shooting in january...
- Revelation of Infinty ward about the Airport level from Modern Warfare 2
- Mysterious new 2K games
- Police: yes kid, parents can take your Xbox
- What kind of anti-violence is that...
- Banned Xboxes flood eBay
- Assassin's Creed 2: 360 vs PS3
- Kane & Lynch 2 got online co-op
Popular games
All comments
I'm pretty sure those are PC-graphics. The graphics of the PS3-demo were not what I expected (in a bad way). I'll be getting this one on PC just to be sure. But day-one purchase because the game is just great.
Still Assault on Dark Athena is a must-have for me (PC version), simply because I enjoyed the original so much and rate it as one of the best first-person action games I've played to date.
Probably 360 graphics, especially with the big 360 controller button prompts on screen. 360 version looks amazing.
LEBATO you're completely wrong. I can see more aliasing in this video than I saw in the demo, the videos don't seem to have any AA at all! When the 360 Riddick demo textures look low res to you, you'd better take a break from gaming.
I played the demo and couldn't even make it out of the first room. Do I suck or what? Anyway it definitely didn't leave a good impression on me, even though Vin Diesel is pretty much god incarnate
Hint: after dropping on the 2 talking dudes, stealth kill the one guy managing equipment. When door opens, hide in the dark, wait for them to stand still, then just jump them from the back. This video will help.
I don't think the demo did a good job showing off the game though. Not enough context, no tutorial for noobs to the game, and way more action (at least than BB had).
You know, now that I look at the videos more, I think this might be the PC version, running at lower details than the 360 version. The 360 version has 2x or 4xAA, but these videos clearly have no AA. Couldn't be the PS3 version because of the 360 button prompts...
http://images.gamersyde.com/gallery/public/10219/1...
This game does NOT use 2009-worthy tech.
No way, come on. Next time you'll tell me this dude doesn't have a hexagonal-looking head.
http://images.gamersyde.com/gallery/public/10219/1...
This game does NOT use 2009-worthy tech.
No way, come on. Next time you'll tell me this dude doesn't have a hexagonal-looking head.
http://images.gamersyde.com/gallery/public/10219/1...
This game does NOT use 2009-worthy tech.
THIS game excels in other areas. Nice use of DOF, higher quality lighting and shadows. It looks better than a good deal of current PS3, 360, and PC games, just can't hold a candle to something like Resident Evil 5 or Killzone 2.
You only ever see him for 5 seconds in the whole game, wtf nitpicking...
Probably using the same head model from the 2004 game, but I agree that doesn't look good. That part is right in the beginning of Butcher Bay. The PC and PS3 version won't be any different. That has nothing to do with anti aliasing, that's simply a low polygon model. His buckles seem more detailed than I remember them being in the original on Xbox or PC (had both versions, still have original PC version).
THIS game excels in other areas. Nice use of DOF, higher quality lighting and shadows. It looks better than a good deal of current PS3, 360, and PC games, just can't hold a candle to something like Resident Evil 5 or Killzone 2.
I personally don't believe it's the same model, it better not actually (what a cheap ass job). But really, they haven't added much at all, I think it is a high-res version of what we saw back then, and not much else.
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2004/reviews/...
http://images.gamersyde.com/gallery/public/10219/1...
And that means that it looks like a lazy job compared to the PC version:
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2004/screen0/...
So obviously the new one looks considerably better, but Gears of War released in 2006? And Killzone just released, it looks poor compared to those, or COD4, or FarCry. This is the same thing that happened with Ninja Gaiden, they impressed last gen, looked barely passable this gen.
And then again, they have such an easy environment, mostly indoor, no geometry at all (all normal mapping), and they still come up with those models/textures/shadows?
DOF is pretty damn good yes, lighting is passable, and shadows are down right dated (sharp as hell and pitch black --no pun intended). Yes it looks better than a handful of other 360 games, but so does Forza and.....well let's not touch that--basically, that's not saying much.
I just dislike the fact that this game doesn't impress at all like the first one did in the graphics department, and the fact that marketing seems to be emphasizing what an amazing job they did technically, how much geometry they could add with the power of the 360, when in fact it looks almost like an automated job at times. Come up with a new lighting model, increase the resolution, improve the models, leave the shadows, and normal map the shit out of everything. And although that may sound good in paper, it really wasn't (example? hexagonal head).
I think overall they took a very conformist attitude when doing this game, I don't know if it was finances or lack of talent, but it shows. And although I love the gameplay and so many other things about this game, their conformist attitude may not be enough to attract many more fans, and lots of comments from different forums make me think this game may not do so well--a shame if true.
Too bad i already finished it once this year, otherwise it would have been a day one purchase for me as well :I
You'd better install the original Riddick Butcher Bay for PC again if you really think that. This version certainly looks as good as it should for the amount of time that has passed since that version of the game came out.
The demo has additional effects such as depth of field and so forth but it is not a big leap over the four year old original. Even the Offical UK Xbox 360 Magazine review said that the graphics are not that great anyway, although they're by no means bad. Just a bit dated IMO. It's certainly no Crysis beater, that's for sure.
also the xbox 360 version looked great on my tv,demo looked and played wicked,
not res evil 5 quality but not far off.
idc about graphics as long as the game is fun but even games like GTA4 and Halo3 have bad graphics in my opinion and theyre still fun...
original riddick was freaking amazing so why would anyone pass this up?
I'm buying the PC version anyway so that will probably look better than the consoles version on maximum settings @ 1920x1200 resolution with a framerate of 60 fps anyway just as Escape from Butcher Bay did over the Xbox version.
The game will be great though, I'm sure, and that's really all I care about.