Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Shadow of Kong

Posted by Zonk on from the brightness-turn-up-now dept.

The BBC is reporting that the makers of the Kong game recommend against purchasing the 360 version of that title. The article states that an Ubisoft rep, Yves Guillemot, stated that the 360 version is just too dark to play well on a non-HD screen. However, Voodoo Extreme got in touch with Ubi for the official party line, and they had something very different to say. From the article: "Ubisoft is actively investigating isolated reports of resolution issues on specific plasma screens, which should be easily resolved by adjusting/increasing the settings. Ubisoft believes that King Kong offers one of the best gaming experiences available on the Xbox 360 and encourages gamers to check it out for themselves."

60 comments

  1. In other news by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 3, Funny
    Ubisoft attends the local emergency ward to have a chair removed from its skull and a rabid ballmer is put back in his pen by MS zookeepers

    Ah well, it is a good laugh.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  2. Well duh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the fuck else is Ubi going to say? Don't buy the game?

    1. Re:Well duh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Although I understand your sarcasm, what I find amusing is that the "something different" that they supposedly said is little more than a claim of "out of context!", followed by "it got good reviews!" and "buy our game! (it's better than the other XBox360 ones)".

      Oh yeah, and a single line acknowledging that there is an issue on some televisions.

    2. Re:Well duh! by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Buy it for one of the other three current consoles, preferably all three."

  3. The Revo strategy makes more sense to me now by Headcase88 · · Score: 0

    Not to knock HD, but I don't have it and the majority of people don't have it.

    Now, with a story like this, you start seeing that HD is quite different from SD. I mean, now with future 360 games that they want to make "dark and atmospheric", they'll have to make an SD option that avoids the darker shades that can't be differentiated on an SD TV. Higher development costs.

    With the Revo, there's a lot less to worry about. Say I make a game. I only have to worry about one type of definition. Think about it, that's a really big plus when you hear stories like this.

    That's not meant to defend Nintendo completely though; there are problems with thier plan. The first is that HD will catch on, who knows how popular it'll be over the Revo's life cycle? If it becomes the standard, will the Revo's graphics start feeling dated when our eyes are spoiled by HD?

    The other (bigger) problem is that apparantly some HDTVs don't show SD stuff very well. However, I really think that's poor on the part of the developers of those TVs. If I bought an HDTV, I'd be very sure that it shows SD stuff perfectly (not just fo the Revo's sake, either).

    Aside: I'd also make sure it's not laggy; I've always been for action packed games, which are hurt by such lag. Hell, I'm a huge fan of rhythm games, probably the single most lag-sensitive genre out there. I've heard bad things about certain TVs on this front. I'd rather my games be playable than hi-res!

    --
    "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    1. Re:The Revo strategy makes more sense to me now by Keeper · · Score: 1

      The first is that HD will catch on, who knows how popular it'll be over the Revo's life cycle? If it becomes the standard, will the Revo's graphics start feeling dated when our eyes are spoiled by HD?

      You act like people can choose to continue purchasing SD tv's indefinately. It isn't a matter of "if it catches on", it is a matter of "when does the government throw the switch?"

      By the time 2007 rolls around, every TV sold in the US (by law) must be capable of receiving an hd signal.

    2. Re:The Revo strategy makes more sense to me now by damsa · · Score: 1

      The law is receiving a digital signal, not necessarily high definition signal.

    3. Re:The Revo strategy makes more sense to me now by rohlfinator · · Score: 2, Interesting
      "By the time 2007 rolls around, every TV sold in the US (by law) must be capable of receiving an hd signal."
      But not every TV sold in the US will be capable of displaying that signal in HD, which is the important part. Also, ~90% of Americans still have SDTVs, and I'd be willing to bet that when the government cuts the analog signals, a lot of people would much rather buy a $30-40 set-top box for their current TV than a new HDTV for $1000+.

      In addition, these consoles are marketed worldwide. The only country with a remotely significant HDTV acceptance ratio is the US, and even here it hasn't caught on as quickly as many have expected. The "HD era" is little more than a buzzword in Japan and Europe.
    4. Re:The Revo strategy makes more sense to me now by paedobear · · Score: 1

      I suspect you'll find the HDTV penetration is around 10% higher in Japan than the US. Europe, yes, just a buzzword (though plenty of people with decent monitors which the 360 will output to fine)

    5. Re:The Revo strategy makes more sense to me now by Keeper · · Score: 1

      The law mandates that TVs be capable of receiving an ATSC signal, which may be transmitted in any of the following horizontal resolutions/fields:

      480i60, 480p24, 480p30 576i50, 576p25, 480p60, 576p50, 720i50, 720i60, 720p24, 720p25, 720p30, 720p50, 720p60, 1080i50, 1080i60, 1080p24, 1080p25, 1080p30

      How the TV chooses to display those signals is up to the hardware manufacturer, but they must be capable of receiving and displaying a hidef signal.

    6. Re:The Revo strategy makes more sense to me now by Keeper · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're arguing that people are going to shun hidef technology -- that it won't catch on. It isn't happening.

      People want that fancy HDTV -- they're just waiting for the price to drop or are waiting for their current set to "expire" before replacing it. All HDTV's don't cost > $1000 either.

      25% of the TV's sold in the US were hidef in 2004. Estimates for 2005 are roughly 50% of the TVs sold. And it is looking like sales of hidef TV's will reach critical mass in 2006.

      I can't see what universe someone can argue that HDTV is just a "fad" that is going to go away.

      There are roughly 100 million households in the US. Using your 2004 penetration estimate of 10%, that means 10 million households have hdtvs. Nearly 25 million tv's are sold in this country every year. If we assume 50% of the hidef TVs sold make it into "new" households, penetration during 2005 will reach 16%. By the end of 2006 we're looking at 25%. By the end of 2007, penetration should be at around 36%.

      One in every 3 customers will have a hidef tv in their house when the Revolution sees it's first Christmas in the states. And this is completely ignoring the demongraphic data (which would suggest that the consumers being targeted are more likely to have a hidef set than not).

      I can't see how anyone can argue that it is an advantage to be selling a new console that doesn't support hidef when 1 in 3 possible customers could take advantage of it -- especially when your competition supports it.

    7. Re:The Revo strategy makes more sense to me now by grumbel · · Score: 1

      Many TVs that display HDTV don't suppert the full resolution, they simply downscale it to something that isn't much better then SDTV. HDTV will for sure catch on, but TV that really can display the full resolution are still very expensive and will probally stay so for quite a while. So till real HDTV is available on a large scale will take at least some years.

      ### And this is completely ignoring the demongraphic data

      Nintendo is targeting the families, children and non-gamer, folks that most likly will not have HDTV anytime soon, especially children will be the very last to get access to a HDTV in their rooms.

      In the end it simply doesn't matter anyway, games are what matters not the technology.

    8. Re:The Revo strategy makes more sense to me now by lotsotech · · Score: 1

      Why in the world are so many claimed tech-heads fighting against HD? I've had my set for a couple years and that was years after sets had already been available. People will buy $500 video cards or better yet 2 of them for SLI or they'll buy whatever handheld gadget is on the market, but balk at the thing they probably spend most of their time watching. You can't play most new PC games on a 10 year old PC and you can't play Xbox 360 games on a Colecovision. You paid $400 for a game console, buy a halfway decent TV to play it on.

    9. Re:The Revo strategy makes more sense to me now by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1
      I mean, now with future 360 games that they want to make "dark and atmospheric", they'll have to make an SD option that avoids the darker shades that can't be differentiated on an SD TV. Higher development costs.

      Yes, I mean they'll have to include a whole new control on the options screen to select from a couple of gamma profiles. Or tell people to turn up the brightness.

      Oh noes! Development costs will skyrocket!

    10. Re:The Revo strategy makes more sense to me now by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      They rolled the date back 3 or 4 times already. It'll be pushed back again. The vast majority of existing hardware does not support it. As such, they can't throw the switch. It will be at least a decade before they do.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    11. Re:The Revo strategy makes more sense to me now by rohlfinator · · Score: 1
      "You're arguing that people are going to shun hidef technology -- that it won't catch on. It isn't happening.
      No, I'm arguing that it hasn't caught on yet, and the government isn't going to "throw a switch" to make that happen. It's pretty obvious that HDTV is going to be the standard eventually. The problem is that it's not big yet, especially outside of the US. And even if a third of all Americans has an HDTV in 2006, they will still be watching SD videos and SD TV shows for a while. The lack of HD support certainly won't be a death sentence for the Revolution.

      "I can't see how anyone can argue that it is an advantage to be selling a new console that doesn't support hidef when 1 in 3 possible customers could take advantage of it -- especially when your competition supports it."
      I agree; the lack of HD support, in and of itself, is a marketing disadvantage. However, the direct results of that decision are big advantages, namely low price and easier development. A low price -- predictions are placing the Revolution at around $150 at launch -- is a huge advantage. Since the competition is selling at a higher price point than past consoles, a budget price will be very helpful. Developer support is a requirement for the Revolution's success. If the controller is ignored by key third parties, the Revolution will fail. Nintendo needs to make Revolution development as risk-free as possible, and encouraging low-budget games is a good way to do that.
  4. 360 - A Complete And Total Disaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At first it was shocking just how bad the 360 was doing.

    Then it got to be funny watching disaster after disaster unfold.

    Now it is just boring.

    Please Sony or Nintendo, release something soon so we can read some good console news for a change. And Microsoft, go away. Please!

    1. Re:360 - A Complete And Total Disaster by drewmca · · Score: 1

      You seriously need to read news from another source besides slashdot, which is right now the only site reporting frequently on the supposed "disaster" of the 360 release.

    2. Re:360 - A Complete And Total Disaster by DoktorSeven · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So read from other news sites that are paid to write glowing, positive reviews of the piece of turd that is the 360?

      We've had power supply problems, subpar games, and graphics that have yet to exceed the worst of the last generation of game systems. How is the XBox 360 *not* a disaster?

      [Since this is obviously flamebait, I'm posting as AC. -- sc]

      --
      This is a sig. Deal with it.
    3. Re:360 - A Complete And Total Disaster by DoktorSeven · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh, never mind, since I missed checking the Post Anonymously button.

      Mod me down as flamebait -- unless you think it is insightful.. ;)

      --
      This is a sig. Deal with it.
    4. Re:360 - A Complete And Total Disaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really don't see how Microsoft can keep the 360 on the market much longer.

      It would take a half and hour to type out the list of problems/disasters that have, are, and will plague(d)(ing) the 360.

      And I really think the harecore Xbox crowd is starting to mentally lose it. Every new disaster is some grand Sony plot. Every post is a potential Sony agent out to spread FUD against their glorious 360. There are people on www.teamxbox.com that are just fucking scary. Total fucking wackos with a bunker mentality.

    5. Re:360 - A Complete And Total Disaster by Threni · · Score: 1

      > You seriously need to read news from another source besides slashdot, which is right now the
      > only site reporting frequently on the supposed "disaster" of the 360 release.

      You need to learn how to use a search engine:

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4525318.stm
      http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3146387
      http://www.forbes.com/2005/12/14/gates-jackson-xbo x-cx_cn_1214autofacescan02.html
      http://news.com.com/2061-10797_3-5995807.html
      http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/675/675720p1.html

    6. Re:360 - A Complete And Total Disaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All those sites were paid off by Sony.

      Do you have any legit links?

    7. Re:360 - A Complete And Total Disaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The BBC has been paid off by Sony?

      Riiight...

    8. Re:360 - A Complete And Total Disaster by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

      As much as I enjoy my Nintendo games, this is really narrow thinking. Some people like Xbox games and I'm sure some people are enjoying the 360 games on the market.

      Now the question of whether those same games would be just as enjoyable on a regular old Xbox is another matter... The jump from N64/PS1 to GC/PS2/XBox seemed to have a little more impact on actual gameplay compared to what I'm seeing from the 360, but I suppose lots of number crunching comes in helpful on certain genres.

      --
      "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    9. Re:360 - A Complete And Total Disaster by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      You were paid off by Microsoft.

      Do you have any legit posters?

      See? Baseless claims work both ways.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    10. Re:360 - A Complete And Total Disaster by AlexMax2742 · · Score: 1
      We've had power supply problems, subpar games, and graphics that have yet to exceed the worst of the last generation of game systems. How is the XBox 360 *not* a disaster?

      Yeah, it's really a disaster when it's impossible to find a new Xbox 360 except on ebay. I think you need to be reminded about what a "complete and total disaster" actually is.

      Let me put something in perspective for you. I was playing a Half Life mod called The Specialists a few days ago. My roomate looked up at what I was playing and asked me if I was playing Halo. How is that for brand recognition...and in only a few years no less. The only complete and total disaster here is your mind when you finally realize that Micorosft is making waves in their gaming division, and they're not going away anytime soon.

      So read from other news sites that are paid to write glowing, positive reviews of the piece of turd that is the 360?

      How is this better than the page after page of Linux-is-awesome, Micorosft-sodomized-my-firstborn-son morons who couldn't string together a constructive argument to save their life getting modded +5 insightful's left and right with rhetoric and terrible arguments. That's just as deceptive, if not moreso because their opinions are being "validated" by invisible moderators who are all drawn from the same crowd. Just because the mainstream press's bias towards Micorosft is bad doesn't mean that Slashdot's anti-Microsoft bias is any better.

      --
      I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
    11. Re:360 - A Complete And Total Disaster by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing you've never played Kameo or PGR3 on XBox360? They are hardly "graphics that have yet to exceed the worst of the last generation of game systems." Call of Duty 2 looks gorgeous as well. I'm sure we haven't even begun to fully tap the capabilities of the system, either (same goes for any new console launch.)

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
  5. Ubisoft rep? by Alarash · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yves Guillemot is not just a "Ubisoft rep.", he's the CEO (being one of the Guillemot brothers, who founded Guillemot - videogames - and Hercules - hardware).

    1. Re:Ubisoft rep? by dtfinch · · Score: 2, Funny

      I guess that means he's not fired.

    2. Re:Ubisoft rep? by Alarash · · Score: 3, Informative

      Guillemot brothers founded Ubisoft - videogames - and Guillemot (later on renamed "Hercules") for hardware. My bad.

  6. Pathetic 360 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What console had a launch like this, a CEO says "please don't buy our software"... Microsoft has to pay its terrible rush.

  7. Huh? by pnevin · · Score: 4, Funny

    As long as you can still see the barrels Kong throws at you, I don't see the problem.

  8. Encouraging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    ...and encourages gamers to check it out for themselves.

    After shelling $50, of course...

    1. Re:Encouraging by StingRay02 · · Score: 1

      $60, actually, for the 360 version.

  9. Conspiracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah I agree, team XBOX is the den of conspiracy theorists and really funny place to watch them explode.

  10. Politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I strongly suspect this issue is 99% political. I have a 360 premium, Kong and a non-HD TV. The game looks absolutely fine to me. No brightness issues at all. Got a few friends in a similar situation, one of whom has a non-HD plasma TV and none of them are having problems either.

    I'd love to see Ubisoft's profit margin on each copy of the game sold for the 360, compared with the other platforms. I'm guessing one of their accountants dropped the ball big-time during contract negotiations and now they're trying to minimise the damage by blowing a bug affecting a tiny proportion of users out of all proportion.

    For what it's worth, Kong's not a bad game at all for a movie tie-in, even if they complaints about it being too short are pretty much justified. I'd say that Kong, Call of Duty 2 and Project Gotham Racing 3 are the only 360 launch titles to really look like next-gen games. The first two look significantly better than their respective PC versions, in fact.

  11. donkey kong by kwoff · · Score: 1

    I was going to ask if anyone knew why it was called *Donkey* Kong. Then I googled "name donkey kong", and it pointed to the Wikipedia entry where it explains that

    The name was chosen by game designer Shigeru Miyamoto as a combination of the word "Kong", since the movie King Kong had caused it 'to colloquially mean monkey' in Japan. According to Snopes, "Donkey", was chosen because Miyamoto intended it "to convey a sense of stubbornness."
  12. You're forgetting something important by brunes69 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    25% of the TV's sold in the US were hidef in 2004. Estimates for 2005 are roughly 50% of the TVs sold. And it is looking like sales of hidef TV's will reach critical mass in 2006.

    Percent of sales of TVs means nothing, because people do not buy a new TV every year. Hell, most peopole buy a big TV maybe once every 15 years.

    Every single person who came of age in the 90s and spent $500 or more on a 32+ inch TV is *not* going to rush out and replace it with an HDTV until absoltely necessary. Why? Theres a multitude of reasons. First of all, they're 40-some years old now with kids to feed, and don't have thousands of dollars of disposable income to drop on a luxury item. Second, they dont give a shit, to them their current TV is just fine.

    Main point - the percent of TV sales in any given year is an infentessimal amount compared to the number of TVs in current use. Hell, I have two 14 inch TVs in my house from 1982-1984 with cable boxes, one on the porch and one downstairs. Why should I have go out and blow $800 bucks on two HDTV-compat. models of simmilar size? You think twice the res makes a huge difference on a 13" screen? You think I can fit a TV any larger on my porch? Think again.

    One in every 3 customers will have a hidef tv in their house

    I would like to know what this statistic is based on - but even if it is true, it still means that 66% of households will *not* have an HDTV. You think any government will piss off 66% of its voting base to push some technology they are not ready for down their throats? It would be political suicide.

    And one more point - all those people in that 66 percent,the ones who wont have HDTVs when the Revolution comes out? All the ones with kids to feed, middle class, etc? Thats the Revolution's target market - cheaper console, lots of kids. Nintendo has never marketed to the 16-24 year old market like the Xbox, they target the 6-18 year old market. You still think it's such a bad move?

    1. Re:You're forgetting something important by leland242 · · Score: 1

      "Every single person who came of age in the 90s and spent $500 or more on a 32+ inch TV is *not* going to rush out and replace it with an HDTV until absoltely necessary. Why? Theres a multitude of reasons. First of all, they're 40-some years old now with kids to feed, and don't have thousands of dollars of disposable income to drop on a luxury item. Second, they dont give a shit, to them their current TV is just fine."

      Is every single person? no, of course not. But I did. And I'm 28, not 40-something. I have yet to meet someone who has seen my hdtv, or any hdtv, and said - "bah, what a gimmick, you can hardly tell the difference! Who would want that!"

      Americans are the greatest consumers in the world - we all want the latest fancy gizmo and gadget. When you can get a reasonably sized HD for about $1000, forget it man - Walmart, Best Buy, Circuit City - they won't be able to keep them in stock!

    2. Re:You're forgetting something important by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Unless that's not a HDTV I've seen the thing on the XBox 360 demo units. I'd buy that for 50-75 Euros (you can get 17" PC monitors for 90 Euros and that HDTV thingie has the drawbacks of being an LCD and widescreen). A nice, simple HDTV->VGA converter would be more useful though. Would need some trickery to make up for the godawful 50 Hz TV has in this country (and the not-much-better 60Hz you can use on consoles).

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    3. Re:You're forgetting something important by Keeper · · Score: 1

      Percent of sales of TVs means nothing, because people do not buy a new TV every year.

      Did you stop reading my post at that point? Of course it doesn't mean that everyone gets a new tv. It means that when people buy a new TV, half of them go for the hidef tv. Next year, more than half of the people who buy a tv will buy a hidef tv. People don't see hidef tv's as some sort of gimick, or something that's too expensive to consider -- they see them as something they want.

      Second, they dont give a shit, to them their current TV is just fine.

      Ah, the wonders of generalizing the feelings of 100 million people in one sentence. Thank you for playing, come again.

      I would like to know what this statistic is based on

      Do you have some reading disorder, or suffer from periodic bouts of memory loss? The figures, trends, math, and assupmtions I used (which WERE on the conservative side) were in the previous paragraph.

      You still think it's such a bad move?

      Again with the lack of reading comprehension. I never said it was a bad move. I said it wasn't a GOOD move. It is not an advantage. It isn't a box you can check off that makes you better than your competition.

  13. Kong 360 blows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've played this game on HD and non-HD TVs. It blows equally hard on each.

  14. Under your logic... by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

    ...I have to buy an Xbox 360 because my TV is capable of recieving its signal. But under my logic, I don't, so I'm not buying one.

    --
    "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    1. Re:Under your logic... by Keeper · · Score: 1

      Are you dense? That's not what I'm saying at all! Being "lowdef" is not a marketing advantage, period. It may not be a huge disadvantage, but it certainly isn't something to be proud of. Any arguement to the contrary is ignorant fanboyism.

  15. So... by rbarreira · · Score: 1

    So... So far we have a company which didn't test its console as well as it should have and now game developers who didn't test their games on normal TVs... Nice!

    --

    The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  16. Define "dark" by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Informative

    This is Ubisoft. When they realize something is too dark that means you're in deep shit. Even "bright" games like Beyond Good & Evil and Rayman 2 are unplayable without turning up the brightness a lot, their definition of "dark" must be close to Doom 3.

    --
    Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  17. Exactly by Taulin · · Score: 1

    I got to see the 360 for the first time the other day at CompUSA and it had this game on a small HD TV display. It is funny reading this article because I thought it was a horrible game to showcase in public since the game looked so dark. Shortly after I saw COD2 at Walmart and also thought it was a horrible game to showcase because it looked like an average game I play on my PC. I would suggest showing DOA4, or at least an exclusive game to the system.

    1. Re:Exactly by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

      So you'd rather spend $1000+ to play CoD2 on your PC, than just $300+$50 for HD CoD2 on your TV?

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
    2. Re:Exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, 'cos obviously playing COD2 is all you can do on a PC, right?

    3. Re:Exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some shithead posts this every time, I'm fucking tired of it. Dell sells PCs for $299 (with monitor), put an $80 graphics card in it and it'll play CoD2. Cheaper than an xbox360+TV, and MUCH cheaper than a non-crippled 360+HDTV.
      PC games cost 2/3 of an xbox 360 game at the moment.

      Try posting a snappy reply on your xbox 2, dick.

    4. Re:Exactly by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

      XBox360 gaming = high def. Your PC = not high def.

      I'd like to know what $80 graphics card can do CoD2 in 1920x1080 with 4x anti aliasing and maintain a smooth 30+ FPS. That's right, there is none.

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
    5. Re:Exactly by Taulin · · Score: 1

      Why would I pay $1000+ for a new PC when I already have one that can play CoD2 at those settings? The best part is, it does a crap load of other things too. I wasn't bashing the XBox in my post anyway. I was just pointing out the games I see showcased really don't help the XBox. They need to get a demo of something unique to the system that can't be compared to anything else and use that in the stores.

    6. Re:Exactly by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

      You're not thinking from the mind of a gamer, or someone who would purchase a console in the first place:

      1) Hi-definition gaming.
      2) Way more advanced/the best console out right now, no competition.

      Also, see my other post about playing "hi def" on your PC; it ain't happening cheap. It'd be much cheaper for you to just get an XBox360.

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
    7. Re:Exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      High definition: 720p = 1280x720 at 60 frames a second. Any remotely modern PC can beat this.

      1080i = 1920x1080 at 30 frames a second (roughly). This has about the same number of pixels (8% different) as 1600x1200, which a mid-end PC can do, and do it without crap-looking interlacing. Probably not the monitor on the $299 Dell box, but spend a little more and you're there. You can get the 30fps on that card, but not the 4xAA - but AA is a really minimal improvement in quality, and you can get the same effect by just defocusing your CRT slightly.

      BTW, I completed CoD2 in two evenings. Really, spending $50 on that game seems excessive, let only buying an entire console where there it's one of (charitably) four games worth playing.

    8. Re:Exactly by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

      It's funny how you're comprimising costs and quality now. Why not just buy the friggin XBox360 to begin with and get HD+4xAA, etc., not to mention an easy to setup system (no motherboard, videocard, soundcard drivers, etc.) We haven't even touched on the fact that there are hardly any soundcards that can encode to a Dolby Digital 5.1 stream. Only one card comes to mind (the nForce and it's MCP)

      If you want a PC, buy a PC. If you want a videogame console (with a few other nice features), buy an XBox360. There ya go.

      Also, your complaint about game prices can apply to PC games as well. You are well within your right to sell your used game. Should be able to sell your Xbox360 games and make back a nice chunk of change.

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
    9. Re:Exactly by Taulin · · Score: 1

      ...and CoD2 does not give the 360 justice since it is just a PC port. I say port because it plays like a PC FPS and looks like a PC game. This is in contrast to games that utilize powers of a specific console (DOA4, Gaiden, etc). There are many console games that can not be ported to PCs because they are architected for a specific console (GoW for example). If CoD2 is just one of the many games that the 360 will have that are mearly PC ports, I will take the PC version anyday, and forget the HD, I will take my extra high res monitor. I can't wait to get a 360, but I am using the same money instead for a 7800 GTX for now.

    10. Re:Exactly by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

      Okay, let me know when XBox/PS2/Gamecube can handle CoD2.

      And don't tell me CoD2 is out for those systems, because it ain't. "Big Red One" isn't the same game; and I dare you to tell me it looks just as good as the XBox360 does.

      You guys are really funny. If you want a PC, that's great, more power to you. But for console gamers, the XBox360 is where it's at right now.

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
    11. Re:Exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, you just said something nasty about the Xbox! No paycheck for you today.

  18. Bullshit! by bVork · · Score: 1

    I have a standard TV. I actually rented both the Xbox and 360 versions of the game to see the graphical differences. I ended up buying the 360 version. The graphics are night and day - this is THE game I suggest to show off the graphical power of the 360. I don't think the game is too dark. Granted, it IS a tad darker, but nothing that affects gameplay. In fact, the slightly darker graphics bring out the brighter effects like fire and sunlight much better. The Xbox version is a bit lighter but has a washed-out look compared to the more saturated colours of the 360 version. The framerate is also considerably worse in the Xbox version.