Allard downplays graphics, talks creativity

[Domination]

Speaking in an exclusive interview, Microsoft's J Allard has downplayed the importance of graphics in the next generation of consoles - saying that it's creativity, not visual quality, which will sell the next 100 million consoles.

"We can't get all hung up as an industry and say it's all about graphic fidelity," Allard commented. "I kind of put the 'does it look better?' secondarily. Not because it's not important, not because I don't think we're not going to have a system to do it, but because we're almost good enough."

"We're almost at the point now visually where we're like, in videogames, do we need better visuals than what we saw on Monday night?" he continued. "A little bit. It's not the thing that's going to sell to the next 100 million people. The thing that's going to sell to the next 100 million people is creativity; creativity for labouring, creativity from a designer's point of view and so a hard drive can provide those tools."


Source (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=9097)

[HGwells]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Coming from him that is hilarious and tells me what i need to know about the Xbox 180.

[Garfunkel]

is allard to xbox
as Mr K is to playstation :?:

xbox 360 is a pretty crap name, it means it's spinning around in circles because it's too stupid to go anywhere :D

PS i know how to fly, just throw yourself at the ground and miss, very easy

[the legendary ice man]

Allard is Vice President of Xbox Division isn't he? He's somewhere very high up in that division of the Redmond super-company.

anyway. I agree - I don't buy games for what they look like, I buy them for how long I can play them for.

I won't ever buy a GT game because they are too long.

Final Fantasy are good games and shows you can do both.

[Z]

that is a natural thing to say. Whether true or not it doesn’t matter. If a console rep says graphics aren’t important, you know his console doesn’t have the best graphics. If one says tech specs isn’t important, you know his doesn’t have the highest specs. And so on and so forth.
For the two extreme standpoints: Ninty says not graphics nor specs are important, thus we know Rev will have the least power and graphics. On the other hand Sony says EVERYTHING is important, thus we know PS3 is the leader in ‘all’ fields (graphics, games, variety, support, power, specs, multimedia, etc). not an easy competitor to topple, believe you me.


having said that, a good way of talking is to mention the obvious. no one will disagree when someone says gameplay is the most important. heck, everybody is saying that. but how many dare say graphics are also very important? or powerfull hardware is also very important? how many dare say our goal is to deliver the most in every aspect? not many, my friend, not many at all. ;)

[Fats]

I think people are forgetting that it was quite the opposite at one point, graphics were clearly the marketing spin with the current X-box.

[HGwells]

that is a natural thing to say. Whether true or not it doesn’t matter. If a console rep says graphics aren’t important, you know his console doesn’t have the best graphics. If one says tech specs isn’t important, you know his doesn’t have the highest specs. And so on and so forth.
For the two extreme standpoints: Ninty says not graphics nor specs are important, thus we know Rev will have the least power and graphics. On the other hand Sony says EVERYTHING is important, thus we know PS3 is the leader in ‘all’ fields (graphics, games, variety, support, power, specs, multimedia, etc). not an easy competitor to topple, believe you me.


having said that, a good way of talking is to mention the obvious. no one will disagree when someone says gameplay is the most important. heck, everybody is saying that. but how many dare say graphics are also very important? or powerfull hardware is also very important? how many dare say our goal is to deliver the most in every aspect? not many, my friend, not many at all. ;)

Exactly, this is coming from Microsoft, have we all forgotten how Power was at the forefront of the Xbox? Have you forgotten the canned advert of Malice smashing the PS2 with her hammer? As the graphic were so great they blew the Ps2 away. (a game that got ported to the PS2 later on :lol:)
To now go from "graphics are the most important thing" to "Graphics aren't that important" stinks of fear to me.
They need to downgrade their expectations of selling one billion Xbox 180's.

[the legendary ice man]

technology is always useful and having the extra technology allows more diverse games to be developed and played and it also improves the experience you have from it.

But you still get games that have graphics far superior to a level of gameplay that is acceptable. Killzone could be one game argued like this.

There is nothing wrong statements such as Allards - mostly because Xbox focuses on the LIVE! system to connect and appeal to users.

Somewhere along the line, a stage is going to have to be reached about the graphics level and playability.

A lot of new games I'm putting down and am playing older games.

I recently borrowed a copy of F1 2004 from a friend and went back to playing F1 2001 because it was more enjoyable.

Same with The Sims 2, I still play the old version more.

Of course, Ace Combat and FF are perfect examples of what games should really be like. Combining story, graphics and playability together.

Such a shame AC5 doesn't have online play :'(

[The_One]

For the two extreme standpoints: Ninty says not graphics nor specs are important, thus we know Rev will have the least power and graphics. On the other hand Sony says EVERYTHING is important, thus we know PS3 is the leader in ‘all’ fields (graphics, games, variety, support, power, specs, multimedia, etc). not an easy competitor to topple, believe you me. Uh.... I believe you and me :lol:.

[nemesis121]

This turned into a tech battle over who has the best specs, the industry as of right now sucks, sure the games are selling and sony, ms, and big N is making money, but since playstation was release all the gaming genre's has been slutted out to the max, alot of gamers will say well next gen will be innovative, but all next gen will do is add more physics, better AI, and of course great graphics. Alot of gamers will think how kool 5000 enemies on screen at once and think that's innovative, but all that is technical stuff that ps2, gc, and xbox couldn't do.

I can already see it next gen some developer will try and mix a fps with pokemon features and call it innovative, hardware limitation is the only reason why we haven't seen games with outstanding physics, perfect example Half life 2 great engine, very good physics, the gravity gun is kool, but it didn't change the FPS genre I thought HL2 was a boring and dull game, it had some nice graphics just like doom 3, but both of those games were whack.

Since the industry knows that innovation is rare, there latest pitch is that we create games that are better than movies, you can play a movie, as a game designer I am trying to tell a story about a character going to hell, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, what they industry doesn't realized is that they have to make games with a story otherwise people won't buy it.

The industry knows that they have to find a way to innovative otherwise sooner or, later games will be a thing of the past like the 60's and 70's era.

[The_One]

Better physics, better AI, and better graphics, what more could you want? Sure, better gameplay is all good, but there's only so much "new" things you could add to a FPS game that isn't already used :roll:.

Really, the only barrier that stands between awsomeness and crapsomeness is the AI. Even Halo's AI is below par. I mean, the Elite are so bugged that when they hide behind a rock, they won't move until you shoot them first :roll:.

Screw innovation, the day we have AI that can whoop your butt to the moon and back, that's the day we don't need innovation anymore. Just bring on 5000 soldiers that can whoop my butt to the moon and back :lol:.

Point to note:
-Mercury is innovative, but it's also very boring
-NDS games are "considerably" innovative, but doesn't really add anything new either.

Many "innovation" are just boring gimmick in disguise, it's far better to go with tried and true strategies and beef up the AI 8).

[stuffedsquirrel222]

Speaking in an exclusive interview, Microsoft's J Allard has downplayed the importance of graphics in the next generation of consoles - saying that it's creativity, not visual quality, which will sell the next 100 million consoles.

"We can't get all hung up as an industry and say it's all about graphic fidelity," Allard commented. "I kind of put the 'does it look better?' secondarily. Not because it's not important, not because I don't think we're not going to have a system to do it, but because we're almost good enough."

"We're almost at the point now visually where we're like, in videogames, do we need better visuals than what we saw on Monday night?" he continued. "A little bit. It's not the thing that's going to sell to the next 100 million people. The thing that's going to sell to the next 100 million people is creativity; creativity for labouring, creativity from a designer's point of view and so a hard drive can provide those tools."


Source (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=9097)

Is J. Allard that bald guy? If he is, I find that article to be considerabley humorous, in that when G4 was interviewing him, he would always say "There's a monster in there! Haha!", but then never actually explain what's in the system, because he didn't want to sound inferior to PS3.

Actually, I've heard him say that there is a monster in the 360 all sorts of times. I think he said it on the Our Colony video also. Oh well, I don't really like monsters, so that's all the more reason not to buy it, I guess...

[Z]

that's a whole different topic. you are talking about how games will end up. that is directed to the game creators. we are talking about the next-gen systems themselves. think about it as giving you the tools. now it is up to you imagination and creativity to do something special. think about consoles as Photoshop, and the devs as you and me. now we all have the latest Photoshop program, but how many of us can create work of are that appears in Expse 3, and how many are just content of strechting aunt Helda's nose from here vacation pics?

[KKS]

I agree with the statement that the next-gen games will fail to be innovative, except by combining different gameplay styles in to 1, which have been done already. Hell, days of innovation have been for a long time in my opinion. They had to resort to gimmicks like eye-toy to bring this so called 'innovation' to table, which, suffice to say, was not very fun for hardcore gamers.

What I look for in games is atmosphere and I believe better graphics can help on that. Gameplay is important but what truly makes a game memorable to me is its atmosphere.

[Fooly Cooly]

The only reason allard is saying that is because he seen the PS3 and knows their beat in terms of graphics he is now trying to say what nintendo has been saying all along that graphics are not everything just wait till Revolution it will have its inovation sure will be something super good and PS3 with its super graphics too XBox 360 will have nothing but Halo 3 and thats about it, they be stuck nowhere to go but down

[Ironlungz]

..and how do you market creativity?

I can see someone marketing their console as the most powerful or that the games matter the most.

But what happens when you can't claim more power or better games...

I can see this becoming a marketing problem real fast.

[the legendary ice man]

How do you market Electroplankton?

How do you market Nintendogs?

They are creative and are hugely successful titles...

[Z]

MS is mainly focusing on online. So far, we need to see what the competition has in answering to that.

[Gaminglegend]

I haven't laughed so hard for so long!

What's this? Microsoft claiming that graphics aren't everything? That creativity is!? Damn, doesn't sound like Microsoft to me - rather, more along the lines of the creative Nintendo.

[Coded-Dude]

MS is mainly focusing on online. So far, we need to see what the competition has in answering to that.

Thats what I'm screaming dude.....er Z 8)
Sony has revealed virtually NOTHING about their online plan, and I don't know if thats a scary thing or a "know when to hold em"(willie nelson) thing.
Are they not boasting about their online plan becasue they don't have one that can compete, or do they have the spaid and are just waiting to trump M$ one more time.

All I know is....they better have some info available by 360 launch.

[Z]

well, the thing is with online services it is not about technology, but rather smart ideas. X2’s new Live features are achievable in PS2. it is all software and internet. As long as you have broadband you can use it. So Sony is being very cautious as to not give MS ANY ideas of cleaver online features or tricks since they can copy and use them overnight. Ninty is also that cautious.
And if ANY one has the SLIGHTEST doubt that PS3’s online service will be poor, think about this; every freakin’ thing about PS3 is stunning- better than expected. Do you think they will screw up on something virtually simple to do like online services? Also, to give you a whiff about their crazy imagination, we don’t even realize the potential of PSP/PS3 connectivity. People mocked Sony for copying Ninty’s GBA connectivity. Little did anyone know how far out it would be. Streaming data from/into PS3 (movies, music, playing games, HD saves, etc.) to PSP on the go?! Full P2P networking?! HD IP cameras to stream live or archived to any PS3 or PSP in the world?! PSP and a controller with live streaming of games and other media!? Challenging somebody in a PS3 game anywhere in the world while you are in school with your PSP?! And more?!

All that spells one thing that describes Sony as being one of the most ambitious companies in the world:

MOMMAMIA!!

:shock:

[The_One]

Challenging somebody in a PS3 game anywhere in the world while you are in school with your PSP?! And more?! Yeah, that sound sweet and all, but how would you simulate the right analog stick? And R2/3 and L2/3? :lol:

[Z]

come on now, have a little imagination. it isn't really the end of the world :wink:

also, you are not using the PSP as a full-time controller. so IF it is convienvent, well, play something else.
:D

[Domination]

well, the thing is with online services it is not about technology, but rather smart ideas. X2’s new Live features are achievable in PS2. it is all software and internet. As long as you have broadband you can use it. So Sony is being very cautious as to not give MS ANY ideas of cleaver online features or tricks since they can copy and use them overnight. Ninty is also that cautious.
And if ANY one has the SLIGHTEST doubt that PS3’s online service will be poor, think about this; every freakin’ thing about PS3 is stunning- better than expected. Do you think they will screw up on something virtually simple to do like online services? Also, to give you a whiff about their crazy imagination, we don’t even realize the potential of PSP/PS3 connectivity. People mocked Sony for copying Ninty’s GBA connectivity. Little did anyone know how far out it would be. Streaming data from/into PS3 (movies, music, playing games, HD saves, etc.) to PSP on the go?! Full P2P networking?! HD IP cameras to stream live or archived to any PS3 or PSP in the world?! PSP and a controller with live streaming of games and other media!? Challenging somebody in a PS3 game anywhere in the world while you are in school with your PSP?! And more?!

All that spells one thing that describes Sony as being one of the most ambitious companies in the world:

MOMMAMIA!!

:shock:

I didn't know this, but the PSP has game sharing. Which means you can borrow someone elses UMD disc, boot it up on your PSP, and then get rid of the disc or pass it around and play wirelessly with others. That means a single disc can feed a hundreds others until a new game is loaded into the handheld. :shock:

Anyway, back on topic....

I already know Sony is going to better their online service next-gen. Maybe they'll even try to out do LIVE. It remains unknown, though, at how far they can push a new online server without running into a few bumps. For definitely, though, Sony more than have the right sources to pull it off. I just hope it turns out well.



nemesis121, how do you expect innovation to emerge without the proper hardware? Would you even say it was possible 15 years ago to even make a game like GTA? The point is, it couldn't be done.

Allard said it will be be the games that matter, and this is true. This has and will remain the standing factor next-gen. He shoudl stick to that, however.

Also, the first Eye Toy was a test. Sony said themselves.

Aside from great graphics, there is still room for innovation - starting with online. Microsoft mentioned awhile back that LIVE would allow the player to become one of the dozen foes you'd have to face in a game instead of the same old standard AI formula. Imagine games like Splinter Cell, Doom, etc.. You will never be left unchallenged no matter how many times you play.

[Z]

Microsoft mentioned awhile back that LIVE would allow the player to become one of the dozen foes you'd have to face in a game instead of the same old standard AI formula. Imagine games like Splinter Cell, Doom, etc.. You will never be left unchallenged no matter how many times you play.

that is a great idea. And best of all, you don’t even have to realize anything. You just play normally, and someone on the other side of the world can enter and control an enemy and fight you. You will only notice the different behavior an enemy is going through to think that it has to be someone controlling him. Of course, you can always turn this feature off from the hardware itself.
That is a great idea indeed. And this is what online gaming has; great ideas. Hardware is pretty much capable of running the same features on all consoles. You just need clever ideas to out do your competitor and win more gamers over.

[Domination]

Part Two

Goto: How do you look at the PS3 architecture? It takes a very different approach from that of XBOX 360.

Allard: I was asked who is the winner of the next-gen. The answer is simple. IBM. IBM that designs all of next-gen game consoles is the biggest winner (laugh)

In various ways, I'd suspected Sony's announcement would have something more. Yet basically it's only the technical spec. About the technical spec, I think it has some misleading points in the comparison of the 2 systems' performance. You'll find an interesting thing if you look at those specs more macroscopically by comparing the transistor counts.

The transistor counts for those two are almost the same. We and Sony arrange the same number of transistors at the same timing. Since the transistor counts are the same, the relative performances aren't much different. The only problem is how you arrange the transistors.

I think (between Sony and MS) there's a fundamental difference in where to put priority. The biggest difference is we give priority on what game developers want. Fon instance we didn't take a split memory architecture. We adopted the 512MB unified memory architecture, for no developer wants memories split by 256MB like PS3. This flexibility can be a strength of XBOX 360.

G: But, because of the heterogeneous architecture of simple CPU cores, Cell has twice the floating point power of the XBOX 360 CPU.

A: They are right on their claim. Indeed their FP performance is twice of ours in the system totals. It's because their hardware is designed for FP operations. But what you forget is, in today's game programs FP operations are 20% and the rest 80% are general integer operations or operations such as branching. They ignore that part. Integer operations are the most computation-cycle demanding part in game programs. Now, XBOX 360 has 3 times the integer processing performance of Cell.

One more important point is the eDRAM in the ATI part. This is another plus against PS3. Both XBOX 360 and PS3 have 512MB memory so it seems 10MB eDRAM makes no difference. However it becomes a different story if it's put on the graphics chip. If a super wide-bandwidth memory is connected with the graphics chip, it allows a shader program to access the memory with a very low latency.

You can conclude that XBOX 360 equals to PS3 by the transistor counts. But, for the arrangement of transistors, I think we could win by optimizing it to the need of game developers. For a system like a game console that is complicated and highly refined, the true key is software. It's indisputable that we can deliver better softwares.

G: How do you look at the difference that XBOX 360 CPU is symmetric multicore and Cell is asymmetric multicore?

A: I think it's an advantage as programmers have experienced multiprocessing already. In the PC side, Intel is migrating to the same type of architecture. So, even if a programmer is not accustomed to multiprocessing, he can get information as much as he want since all books, tools, and lectures at universities focus on this style of programming.

As a computer geek I like the spec of PS3 and from the viewpoint of an electronic engineer it's very interesting, it's interesting also from computer science. But the important thing is games, and developers.

For developers, it's not so easy to understand a whole architecture. So it gets important to offer a software. Then, with the more complicated hardware, Sony has to offer software tools better than ours. But we'll be able to offer better softwares as we are experienced in such things.

G: In the CPU business, processors dedicated to stream processing of data, such as Cell SPE, are catching attention.

A: For Cell SPE, synchronization can be a problem. Also the cache will be a problem too. I think they have not disclosed all the details about the cache architecture. Anyway, these problems will be bottlenecks for the system like in PS2.

G: SCE says "let's create whole computer entertainment beyond games." It's the vision that by creating a wonderful platform for computer entertainment you can also play games on it. Furthermore, they hope to change the computing paradigm by an innovative architecture.

A: Are they serious? (laugh)

I think the focus at E3 should be properly set on games. It was about games also at the press conference.

However, it's not that we ignore entertainment beyond games. I briefly mentioned about such experiences by XBOX 360 too. For example, we told about the innovation that allows us to hear all music we want in a game play. You can have fun by connecting USB tools like music players and digital cameras, you can make photo slide shows, you can voicechat with friends on the internet.

If you want to deliver such experiences, not technologies, to people, you have to explain them more concretely. How Gigabit Ethernets relate to entertainment, how 2 HDMI ports that support 1080 dots HDTVs relate to entertainment. I'm interesed in what experiences those design decisions by Mr. Kutaragi lead to.

My desicion is the fusion of hardware and software service, and it offers users unbelievable experiences. We focus on experiences and design a hardware to realize those experiences. It's different from making a hardware and afterwards thinking about services.

G: The approach of SCE in which the vision was presented rather than the game itself got a favorable reception.

A: You remember PS2 had an IEEE1394 port. It had an HDD port and a USB port. Besides, do you remember what they told about PS2 in '98-'99? They talked about a big dream like changing the computing paradigm and talked about the future of comprehensive computer entertainment. Internet browser, LCD screen, mouse... they talked about various things but almost nothing realized.

Why? It's simple. The important thing is experience, namely games. Unless focusing on there it makes no sense. Therefore we design a product for games.

G: How do you look at the vision of Cell computing by SCE?

A: I want to create an amazing game. No customer wants to buy a new distributed computing paradigm (laugh)

G: More real game graphics becomes, more important the reality of behavior of in-game characters and objects gets. It's because a real picture that doesn't move realistically is unnatural. So I expect physics simulation will be more important down the road...?

A: There are many factors that lead next-gen games to success. If you focus only on realism, then your opinion that physics is important is right. For other factors, for instance, I point out that lighting is also important. The ability to generate textures and geometries in realtime that I call "procedural synthesis" is important too. Even if you create a forest with perfect lighting and a perfect design, it'll be unnatural if all trees are the same. Why we write a program to generate a tree, why we write a program to generate textures to be pasted on trees, that's because they all look different.

These things are also important for realism, I think. So at E3 we made a 90 seconds trailer that focused on how this synthesis looks visually.

But, I want to repeat, from such a technical viewpoint, the both platforms, XBOX 360 and PS3 are very alike. If you look at the total performances the both can do the same things.

G: Do you think the high performance of next-gen consoles will innovate games? There are voices that only with hardware specs there'll be no differences.

A: Looking back, there were 4 important game ideas in these 10 years. Pokemon, Grand Theft Auto, Sim Series, and Halo. All of these had no special 90 seconds trailers. Halo is the only one with amazing graphics, physics and realism.

Therefore I think we should expand the concept of what to challeng to. I think Realism and physics are important factors. But you should not forget that what drives this industry is a great innovation.

A platform and an innovation on it have a close relationship. The PC platform is a right platform to innovate Sim Series. If you see the combination of Gameboy and Pokemon you know it's a right platform too. We did all kinds of things to make Halo a success on the XBOX platform. Xbox was a platform to innovate Halo. But, for GTA, graphics was not important. It's innovative that it's a new game metaphor.

By looking things like this, you know you should be cautious about the view that the spec drives gaming. I believe I designed a super high-performance system with competitive power that surpasses Sony's.

But the task we have is to make game developers think about the future. For that purpose experience is more important than technology. What kind of new game experiences we can promote, what new services we can offer. By that service, developers can innovate and offer users new ideas.

A new idea may be a thing that has unbelievable realism, graphics, and physics that exploits XBOX 360 power like Halo in XBOX 1. Or, it may be just a wonderful idea like GTA. To produce various innovative games, not only technical specs but also hardware, software and service, all should be offered as one, that's the important thing we think.

Source (http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2005/0603/kaigai185.htm)

Is it me or can anyone else spot the accessive amount of holes in Allards's answers?

[imported_Amadeus]

The only graphics that matter are bad graphics.

One thing I can't understand, is Xbox fanpeople (politically correct) would always make fun of the other consoles, and their owners, because the Xbox was the most powerful system. PS2, and Gamecube owners had no problem living with that, because we knew we were still getting great games, regardless of the graphics being top notch.

Now, Xbox fans simply can't admit that the playstation 3 will be the most powerful. They have to constantly argue to try to make the 360 look more powerful "It has a total of 9.6 ghz of processing power! Blu-Ray will fail because people buy HD TVs, not BLU-RAY TVs!!!!"

The Resident Evil, and Metroid games on the GC look just as good, if not better than any Xbox game. So, that's proof that good programming is what really only matters.

However, there isn't anything wrong with designing a system that will give developers the most creative freedom.

I hate J. Allard, and "Major" Nelson.

[raVen]

Just wondering: what great physics did halo have

Edit: Just read through that again, J. Allard is stupid and he isnt a gamer- In ten years there have been many great game ideas; ff7, Metal Gear, Devil May Cry, Resident Evil, Madden 2000 (I believe) are a few that come to mind

[Z]

J Allard behaved better in this interview than how he did in previous ones. Still, that doesn’t mean he did well. Literally laughing at the competition and their unique directions is extremely low. How many times did he laugh here? Also, he plays dumb and insults the consumers as if they don’t understand a thing, so why bother giving them new advanced options? This is really an embarrassing behavior in front of world wide press. How will the respectful engineers, devs, publishers, and partners view such childish remarks and attitudes?

And by the way, Halo is a good FPS and that’s it. There is absolutely nothing special about it. maybe it was the first to offer automatic health refilling but I could be wrong. It sold so well on Box because there aren’t many good games on the thing. If the game came out on PS2 it wouldn’t reach half those sales. the thing that I liked about Halo was the orchestra sounds. You feel you are in a major blockbuster movie with those tracks and music. That is until Ace Combat 5 came along. Just watching the intro movie beat Halo’s soundtrack offer. Now that’s one fine game! Still, that doesn’t mean Halo is bad, it is just silly when you over praise a game even after it is released.

[The_One]

Just wondering: what great physics did halo have

Edit: Just read through that again, J. Allard is stupid and he isnt a gamer- In ten years there have been many great game ideas; ff7, Metal Gear, Devil May Cry, Resident Evil, Madden 2000 (I believe) are a few that come to mind I could be wrong, but I believe the physics in Halo was on par with Half-Life 2. They were both using the Havok engine, unless HL2 was using Havok 2, then HL2's physics would have been better.

Eitherway, the physics in Halo wasn't that bad, although I hate how the dead bodies still swing their hands and move their legs like they were alive when you blow them into the air.

[GTShotoKen]

Just wondering: what great physics did halo have

Edit: Just read through that again, J. Allard is stupid and he isnt a gamer- In ten years there have been many great game ideas; ff7, Metal Gear, Devil May Cry, Resident Evil, Madden 2000 (I believe) are a few that come to mind I could be wrong, but I believe the physics in Halo was on par with Half-Life 2. They were both using the Havok engine, unless HL2 was using Havok 2, then HL2's physics would have been better.

Eitherway, the physics in Halo wasn't that bad, although I hate how the dead bodies still swing their hands and move their legs like they were alive when you blow them into the air.

Well, they both used the same engine, but the depth of physical interaction between objects in the game were no where close to HL2.

Many games use the Havok physics engine actually. Most games just limit the engine to high-flying rag-dolls though.

[raVen]

to me the physics in halo are nothing new, don't get me wrong it was a great game thinking about it now I have to agree that alot of the appeal there was in the immersive sounds

[The_One]

to me the physics in halo are nothing new Same here, but not being new doesn't mean it was bad.

[Domination]

In one of Allard's comments, he said something about seven wireless controller being pointless. I don't see how this is so. First of all, sports games of various kinds will utilize the feature quite well without ever having to split the screen in sections. Second, this is an excellent feature for dual screens on just about ANY type of game. I don't know how you all read that interview, but he seems a bit envious because he didn't think of the idea first. He was so clung to his HD era, which I still don't feel is worth gloating about, that all the really important things that would have made games better had gone over his head.

And the irony in his comment about HDTV is beyond ridiculous. He actually criticises Sony for having the PS3 support 1080p. If I remember correctly, I believe it was HE who kep talking about the HD era for the 360. All he kep talking about was how games went from 2D to 3D and now to HD. Infact, he got Samsung to give away television sets, not to mention his comment about he wanting developers to drop no lower than 720p for their titles. But as soon as someone like Sony comes along and surpasses this ambition of his, he wants to talk down on it. I'm not sure what this guy took before he came to work, but I hope he knows that Sony is a hardrware supplier. They build freakin' television sets (some of the best, if I may add) for crying out loud. What made him think that something as simple as HD support would slip through their fingers after it already getting as popular as it did in the last five years?

When the Xbox launched, Microsoft's console didn't differ much from what the others offered. It was like they only took the Xbox hardware and features and step them up, and a small one at that, higher than the competiton. For instance, PlayStation had online, Microsort came up with Live and did it better. They extended the Xbox controller cords. They made the HDD internal instead of external.They gave the console HD support, and they made it more powerful than the others.

Don't get me wrong. Xbox Live is a great online server, but a lot of their ideas are mostly leftovers. It seems they tried to do the samething with the next-gen; only this time, the competition isn't 2 years behind. This is the reason I say Microsoft is more of a responsive company than a company that acts, or in other terms, a company that initiates the path. If I were to classify them in dominance, i would say that they are more of a brute force kinda company. They plow over their competitors with funding alone. While a company like Sony would normally plow over their competitors by simply out thinking them technically.

As I said before, the gaming industry is a place where you have to constantly push the envelope. There is no slacking off after one great idea. Now I'm not trying to sound bias in anyway, but a company like Sony is built for a field such as this, because they have to compete with equal competitors of the such every single day.

[Z]

the really ironic thing is MS boasting over the *echo effect* “HD eraaaa” by supporting 720p. okay, and what?.... just that? Funny how hard Xfanboys prais HD-DVD over BD to find out that their box doesn't even support any...
Now, Sony is walking all over them in that direction as they too support 720p…and then more; HDIP camera, dual HDMI outlets and a freaking HD platform (BD)!! Hell, HTAT is what I call an HD era.

That goes for controllers as well; PS3 has 7 ‘bluetooth’ controllers (God knows how many other by Wi-Fi (PSPs) and USBs you can add). And not just sports games that can comfortably support multiple players, but also party games and family games (gameshow games anyone?)
So PS3, like X2, supports 4 wireless controllers….and then some more.
PS3, like X2, supports DVD….then some more (BD, and other current formats)
PS3, like X2, supports 720p…..then some more (the highest ever HD quality there is- 1080i!!)

I fail to see the point in bashing a competitor that does EXACTLY what you are doing…then some more.
And to think a big company like MS actually allows such official acts for the entire world to look down on…

As I said before, you can downplay a competitor, just do it smartly. Don’t insult yourself and the company you represent in the process. Sound like good professionals that know what they are doing, not some narrow minded fanboys.

[Domination]

Exactly.

Also, another thing I have been looking to point out since 2003 is listening to consumers to push your hardware. I absolutely agree with Allard that this is an excellent strategy, and that it should remain intact. However, basing all of your ideas around this would be like putting a hole in your fuel tank. I say that because we as consumers don't always know what we what, and what we do want isn't always a new idea. Some are even far fetched like virtual reality in which Microsoft has no experience in reinventing the wheel on. The majority of the ideas from consumers are ideas in which we have already experienced somewhere else. As a prefessional company, Microsoft should be trying to think outside of the box.

The Eye Toy is a good example because consumers don't really think about things like this. The Conga drums that Nintendo invented isn't something a consumer thinks about on a daily bases. Things like a better looking game is mostly what a consumer thinks abouts, and that's fine. But there should also be things inwhich we've never experienced before that will help push the gaming industry into a new direction. This is not an OS. Microsoft has to practice on leading their own path sometimes and not copying everyone elses.