Creating games in 3D is an arduous task, with the need to render two separate frames (one for each eye) baring a heavy load both on the consoles and for the developer, the quest to reach that mythical 18080p status weighing in on the back of their minds against the ever increasing demands of the consumers this generation.
The solution then, it seems, is simply not to participate in such an endeavour in the first place, instead dictating somewhat more manageable terms to developers and anyone looking to venture into the 3D space. And this is exactly what Sony are said to be doing, mandating a standard of 720p for all developers wanting to make their games in 3D.
Just a few weeks after Housemarque and Ilari Kuittinen revealed on the PlayStation Blog that they had Super Stardust HD running at 1080p and 60fps in 3D, Sony's Simon Benson recently commented at the Develop conference in Brighton that the company was planning to enforce a 720p maximum resolution mandate to developers. This means that even if you are able to get your game running at a higher resolution it will be downscaled by the machine into 720p, much like what will be happening Super Stardust HD as soon as the next PS3 firmware arrives.
The reason behind the move is simple. It’s partly due to the HDMI 1.4 specification not supporting 1080p60 officially (1080p24 is the highest it will go), and to make things easier for developers by taking the pressure off in trying to get things running in 3D at 1080p by removing the option. Perhaps that is not such a bad thing as many games struggle to render in native 720p let alone 1080p, and at 60fps that whole scenario dramatically worsens considerably.
Benson also came to this conclusion and mentioned at the conference that despite the mandate being applied to most games, some ‘more cinematic’ titles which could benefit from using a higher resolution and lower framerate would be allowed access to the 1080p24 3D rendering mode supported by the console. No games would be able to use 1080p60 even if the developers had comfortably implemented it.
Sony’s argument over the use of 1080p60 then, or rather, 1080p for 3D gaming in general seems to be directly aimed at the stresses of getting games running to that standard in the first place. Benson emphasised the difficulties that many developers would be facing and told attendees that this mandate was a way of curtailing that. A preventative measure of some sorts, restrictive but at the same time ultimately beneficial, especially when you think that having more stuff on screen at 720p is usually far more impressive than a game being cut back in order to hit 1080p.
However, rendering at 1080p60 in 3D doesn’t have to mean rendering one frame for each eye, as Crytek has shown so enthusiastically at this year’s E3. Instead it is possible to render in one single frame for 3D, like with normal 2D rendering, and to simply apply a form of 2D displacement tech to the image (2D to 3D conversion) thus creating a final 3D display without any of the usual workload involved. We talked about Cytek’s solution here, although Sony have also said in the past that they were working on something very similar.
So the question is why are Sony restricting the rendering resolution on 3D games when clearly they have, or will have in the near future, a solution which circumvents rendering two frames instead of one. Surely that in itself would make things much easier for developers without taking away another all important check-box feature. But perhaps that’s the point, that for this generation 1080p is largely just that, a check-box feature that has more use on paper than practically in games development, and when you consider the potential performance costs incurred by running in 3D then it makes perfect sense.
Either way, the removal of 1080p60 and 1080p24 does very little to harm the end user. When you consider how many titles actually use the resolution effectively, and that contain more detail and visual effects when running in this mode, you can see why the chase for the supposed holy grail that is 1080p isn’t particularly justified, and could even be described as wasted.
That said, there is no doubt that some of us out there will still salivate over the potential of seeing another title pushing that magical 1080p60 resolution on consoles. It’s an incredible feat when you see it in 2D, so how much more spectacular would it be seeing it in 3D, full 1920x1080 no less. This is not something that we will be able to tell you with Sony’s proposed plans, but is it really going to make all the difference? I suspect a resounding no is the answer.
Personally I’d much rather be seeing more titles running in full 720p and with at least 2x multisampling anti-aliasing, or morphological AA at 60fps than a misguided attempt at 1080p with absolutely none of those benefits. And judging by Sony’s reaction, and indeed Crytek’s 2D displacement tech, many developers feel the same way.
Wednesday, 21 July 2010
Tuesday, 20 July 2010
New Xbox 360 Announced, Kinect Pricing Revealed
Yesterday we brought you our in-depth hands-on with the new 250gb Xbox 360 S, and a few days before we reported that a potential replacement for the 360 Arcade was on the cards. Well, today Microsoft officially announced not only the brand new version of the ‘Arcade’ console, but also full pricing details and bundle information for Kinect.
For the latest version of the 360 Microsoft have dropped the ‘Arcade’ suffix instead naming both the current S and the new machine by their memory capacity. The 4gb Xbox 360 becomes the new entry level console, and will be released on 3rd August in North America, priced at $199.99, and 20th August in the UK for £149.99, with the rest of the world taking delivery of the unit sometime later this month.
This new 360 will have 4gb of flash memory instead of a 250gb hard drive, whilst keeping the full functionality and other features of the 250gb model, including the built in Wi-Fi adaptor. The hard drive used inside the 250gb slim will also be compatible with the new model (in which the expansion bay is empty), although Microsoft currently have no plans to release it separately, or in any other sizes at this point in time. You can probably expect another announcement about this later on down the line.
Like with the 250gb 360 S that launched last month in the US, and last week in the UK, the 4gb version will feature the very same slimmed down design, complete with the trademark chrome highlighting and touch sensitive buttons. However the shiny aesthetics of the 250gb S model has been discarded for a more favourable matt finish, much like the old model 360’s and PS3 Slim.
Along with confirmation of the Xbox 360 Arcade’s replacement Microsoft also announced full pricing details for Kinect, both as a solus bundle (Kinect + game) and as a package with the new 4gb 360 console.
Kinect will be released sometime this November (date to be confirmed) and will come bundled with Kinect Adventures. The device will retail at $149.99 in the US, and £129.99 in the UK. All first-party software will retail for of $49.99, and £39.99 respectively. Third-party games will have no baseline retail price, with the publishers of individual titles being able to set their own price brackets accordingly.
Both the Kinect and 4gb Xbox 360 S console will be available as a package. It will be available the same day Kinect launches and will retail for $299 in the US, and for £249.99 in the UK.
Microsoft also confirmed that around 15 games will be available at launch, with a large selection of first and third-party titles being available.
On a final note, the revelation that the console and Kinect bundle will contain the 4gb version of the machine is perhaps unsurprising.
Previously many people suspected that the Kinect + 360 would contain the higher-end model of the console. However, this simply isn’t the case with Microsoft opting to instead package their entry level model with the device in order to maintain a cheaper price point. Interestingly this puts the machine and Kinect in the same bracket as the stand-alone 120gb PS3.
For the latest version of the 360 Microsoft have dropped the ‘Arcade’ suffix instead naming both the current S and the new machine by their memory capacity. The 4gb Xbox 360 becomes the new entry level console, and will be released on 3rd August in North America, priced at $199.99, and 20th August in the UK for £149.99, with the rest of the world taking delivery of the unit sometime later this month.
This new 360 will have 4gb of flash memory instead of a 250gb hard drive, whilst keeping the full functionality and other features of the 250gb model, including the built in Wi-Fi adaptor. The hard drive used inside the 250gb slim will also be compatible with the new model (in which the expansion bay is empty), although Microsoft currently have no plans to release it separately, or in any other sizes at this point in time. You can probably expect another announcement about this later on down the line.
Like with the 250gb 360 S that launched last month in the US, and last week in the UK, the 4gb version will feature the very same slimmed down design, complete with the trademark chrome highlighting and touch sensitive buttons. However the shiny aesthetics of the 250gb S model has been discarded for a more favourable matt finish, much like the old model 360’s and PS3 Slim.
Along with confirmation of the Xbox 360 Arcade’s replacement Microsoft also announced full pricing details for Kinect, both as a solus bundle (Kinect + game) and as a package with the new 4gb 360 console.
Kinect will be released sometime this November (date to be confirmed) and will come bundled with Kinect Adventures. The device will retail at $149.99 in the US, and £129.99 in the UK. All first-party software will retail for of $49.99, and £39.99 respectively. Third-party games will have no baseline retail price, with the publishers of individual titles being able to set their own price brackets accordingly.
Both the Kinect and 4gb Xbox 360 S console will be available as a package. It will be available the same day Kinect launches and will retail for $299 in the US, and for £249.99 in the UK.
Microsoft also confirmed that around 15 games will be available at launch, with a large selection of first and third-party titles being available.
On a final note, the revelation that the console and Kinect bundle will contain the 4gb version of the machine is perhaps unsurprising.
Previously many people suspected that the Kinect + 360 would contain the higher-end model of the console. However, this simply isn’t the case with Microsoft opting to instead package their entry level model with the device in order to maintain a cheaper price point. Interestingly this puts the machine and Kinect in the same bracket as the stand-alone 120gb PS3.
Monday, 19 July 2010
Feature: Hands-On With The Xbox 360 S
On Friday 16th July gamers in the UK were finally graced with the release of the brand new Xbox 360 S; a slimmer, quieter version of the current Elite model 360, with a 250gb hard drive and built-in wireless adaptor. It comes as no surprise that early sales of the machine have been brisk, with many stores opening up on midnight in order to generate further hype for the launch. And by and large it has been largely successful, bar perhaps the odd complaint of having a faulty hard drive, or trouble with the new machine recognising the Data Transfer cable.
Naturally, I took it upon myself to pick up one of these new slim consoles in order to write this in-depth report for IQGamer, in which we’ll be covering the machine’s design, connectivity, build quality, and of course operating noise.
On first impressions, and before holding the unit for the first time, the 360 S appears better in every single way than the old ‘fat’ models that came before – especially compared to my original 20gb launch unit (just about going strong) – although on further inspection it is clear that not all is quite so perfect. But then again, it doesn’t really matter given the massive improvements that have been made in almost ever area with the new machine.
The first thing you’ll notice is that upon initial viewings the packaging is pretty similar to the one that housed the old 360, featuring the same square shape, whilst instead having bottom-opening flap allowing easy access to the contents inside. If you haven’t seen the old box in a while then the new one looks to be the same size, maybe only slightly smaller. However, side-by-side comparisons show a clear inch or two being cut off the sides, whilst being slightly taller overall.
Seeing as the actual console is almost the same size as the old 360 it isn’t at all surprising to see a similarly sized box that keeps it all together. However it does weigh noticeably less than my 20gb Premium when boxed up, although by no means light, simply commanding less strength in order to lug it from the retail store to the bus stop, and then home than the older model.
Inside, the 360 S is packaged similarly to before, except that now the individual compartments for holding the controller and other accessories are better organised allowing for things to be unboxed and boxed up again more easily. Underneath where the actual console sits are four distinct compartments, each housing the different peripherals that come with the machine. The largest one contains the controller and wired headset, whilst the two on either side contain the power cable and composite lead, along with the scart adaptor. At the end of these three compartments is where the power supply lives.
The overall internal layout is much simpler this time around, thus making it easier to pack away the console if need be in the future. Also, two of the sections are clearly marked with small stickers dictating what should occupy these specific spaces just in case you forget. Yet another improvement over the horridly packaged ‘fat’ model 360.
In terms of the actual console, noticeably, Microsoft have gone to town in producing a sleeker, more high-end looking aesthetic for their new Xbox 360 S. The old matt plastic look has been replaced with a smooth, glossy finish that only comes in black. Chrome highlights provide a small contrast between the black contours synonymous with the Xbox 360 Elite; the new power button and both outer edges of the machine benefiting from this touch of class. Round the back the aesthetics again change slightly, instead becoming a combination of the new shiny gloss design with a slight hint of the old matt finish around the various ports.
Annoyingly, this new shiny design as stylish and sexy as it is, is prone to attracting dust and fingerprints which can cover the machine in seconds if you’re not careful. Likewise, the 360 S also scratches really easily. Even using a fine micro fibre cloth regularly used for cleaning the PSP and ‘fat’ PS3 can leave very slight marks. Although these are only visible in certain lighting conditions and from a specific angle, so its not too much of a problem.
The previous inhaled design remains on the ‘S’, although now it is complemented by a new angular focus with sharpish curves leaning inwards on both the front and back of the machine. Initially this looks somewhat strange, especially when resting the machine in its standard horizontal position. However, standing upright it looks incredibly stylish and far more desirable than the old console. This new look and feel is accentuated by the use of touch-sensitive buttons for powering on/off the unit, and for opening and closing the disc tray, which remains a traditional slot loading drive.
Surprisingly, the new 360 S is still rather heavy, more so than I expected, and the overall build quality is superior to the old versions of the console. However there are some parts of the design which feel decidedly cheap to the touch. Like with the plastic casing on both the top and bottom of the machine, which tends to creak as you hold it. The console also feels a touch softer and more flexible too - no doubt made this way to better enable the plastic to constrict and contract as the internal temperature of the machine heats up during use, and cools down after.
Compared to the old 360, the ‘S’ is only slightly smaller in size covering almost the entire length of the original console, though it is slightly shallower as well. For something rumoured, and sometimes officially recognised as the 360 Slim in passing it’s quite disappointing how similar in size to the original it is, especially when you consider that the power supply is still external. Sony, with their Slim PS3 should really be commended on their engineering prowess seeing as both the power supply and hard drive are both built-in, and the machine itself runs a little bit quieter overall.
Despite this, Microsoft’s first entry into redesigning a console midway through its life-cycle has much to offer, and the use of the old-fashioned slot-loading DVD makes shrinking down the internals that much harder. Effectively how much smaller can you make that drive, is the question you should be asking.
Either way the new ‘S’ variant of the 360 hardware looks far more sophisticated, and highly stylized.
In terms of connectivity the new 360 S features the standard two USB ports situated around the front of the machine, under a flap next to the new rectangular shaped controller sync button. The disc tray remains a slot loader like the previous models of the console, although it is much quieter and feel a tad more solidly built. Round the back you have a further three USB ports, along with an Ethernet port, optical output, one HDMI port, multi-AV out, and a special port design solely for powering and interfacing with the Kinect unit.
Like with the Pro and Elite model 360’s, it is still possible to use the HDMI cable with the AV audio adaptor if you require the option of analogue stereo sound from the machine going into a hi-fi system or external amplifier.
The machine also features the use of a semi-built-in hard drive located on the bottom, or right hand side of the unit depending on whether you have it laying flat or standing up. I say semi-built-in as although the HDD is housed inside the 360 itself, it is fully removable and comes locked away in its own plastic casing. As we first revealed here, the HDD is a Hitachi HTS545025B9SA00 1.5Gbps hard drive which connects to the 360 using a standard SATA connector.
Moving on to the controller, and you can see that Microsoft have made similar aesthetic changes in order for it to match the new style of the console. The entire controller, save for the four face buttons and the Guide button have been made uniformly black. The underside of the pad is now finished in glossy black rather than the matt grey of the Elite and Pro models, or the shiny metallic silver of the Core and Premium units. Both the D-Pad and analogue sticks have also gone through a similar change, appearing black instead of dark grey, while the Guide button has given a shiny chrome finish representative of the highlights present on the console.
Other than the look of the controller not much else has changed. The D-Pad does feel slightly more responsive compared to the one that came with the controller with my launch unit, although it doesn’t appear to have full eight-way precision like the on the Japanese Sega Saturn pad. In that respect, playing fighting games using this new D-Pad is still a chore with certain quarter-circle type movements being incredibly fiddly to pull off. At least all four directions actually work this time around, unlike on my launch 360 controller in which parts of the D-Pad have always been largely unresponsive requiring a heavy push in order for the press to be recognised.
Outside of the console and controller both the hated power supply unit, and AV cables have been given a complete makeover, appearing to match the new styling present for the entire range of ‘S’ accessories and hardware.
Styled in black, with a matt finish, the PSU is now much smaller and lighter than before. Curved in its appearance it can finally be considered stylish for the first time, though more importantly it seems to accompany the main hardware pretty well, rather than looking like an eyesore trailing out from behind the 360. The power cable that goes from the PSU to the 360 also slots into the back of the machine almost effortlessly; a stark contrast with the constant wiggling and pushing required to get it coonected with the old non-HDMI models.
The same principles when it comes to styling have been applied to the AV cables, which now have a more angular look to them. They are less rounded compared to the old ones, but still display just enough of the smooth curves to be consistent with both the 360 brand as a whole while matching the new 360 S console.
Sure enough, from a purely design and aesthetics point of view the new 360 S is lovely, but all that isn’t going to count for much if it still sounds like a Jumbo Jet taking off from Heathrow now, is it? And the less we talk about the noise problems of prior versions of the old console the better.
However Microsoft have made waves with this new design, the newly fabbed Valhalla chipset demonstrating some noticeable decreases in operating temperature, and most importantly, noise, especially when inserting a game disc into the system.
Powering on the console for the first time using the touch sensitive button on the front of the unit, you are almost immediately graced with a fairly loud, but smooth ‘bing’ sound coming from the machine. It’s s very welcoming and goes well with the aesthetic style Microsoft have created for the console, and the new sound effects used in the NXE 360 dashboard.
Reassuringly, this is the most noticeable noise to come from the console at start up.
One of the main complaints about previous models of 360 was the high level of operating noise coming from the machine, especially when a disc-based game was inserted into the system. Installing games onto the hard drive partially solved this problem on the old 360, but now this is no longer required for an all-round quieter experience. Claims by Microsoft of the new unit being ‘whisper quiet’ were initially to be taken with a pinch of salt. However, when idling the new 360 is actually barely audible unless turned on in a completely silent room. By contrast my 20gb launch unit can be heard at all times whether or not a disc has been loaded into the system.
Like with my 20gb Premium, installing games into the new 360 S leads to an even quieter gaming experience. When playing a game via a disc however, the fan speed still ramps up on this new model and the familiar electronic humming noise appears, albeit no longer drowning out the sound coming from the TV. Installing the game means that this never happens, with the fan speed sticking at idling levels for the duration of your gaming session.
Installing games then is still the best possible way to experience just what the 360 can deliver, with less noise leading to greater levels of immersion and less in the way of a distraction. But does the new HDD equate to shorter install times and quicker loading compared to standard disc-based approach?
In short, yes and no. You see whilst I found the new 360 S quicker to load up games off the hard drive I also found it slightly slower in installing them in the first place. Right off the bat I can tell you that average install times for the few games that I tested (Alan Wake, Halo 3, VF5, Gears 2, and Resident Evil 5) was about one to two minutes slower than on my 20gb Premium. Loading times however, were either on par or slightly faster, as was the case when trying out Bungie’s Halo 3 on both machines.
This is an interesting find to say the least, but also somewhat confusing as I’m not too sure why it should be happening. Could the size of the hard drive have something to do with it? Or perhaps something to do with cache size and speed. Maybe we shall do a proper investigation into this later on at IQGamer, as our initial results are surprising.
In conclusion, from all my time spent with the new Xbox 360 S I can definitively say that the machine IS what the original 360 console should have been. Even though it isn’t that much smaller – in fact it’s pretty much the same size – it looks a whole lot nicer and runs far quieter than any of the old models. It should also be noted that we shouldn’t be seeing any more of that RROD death problem which plagued most original and Falcon chipset 360’s, not least of all because the rend ring physically doesn’t exist on the new model, but simply due to the reductions in operating temperature and better cooling provided by the 45nm Valhalla revision to the CPU and GPU.
So, in the end the 360 S represents an improvement over the previous design in almost every way, minus perhaps the shiny finish which will certainly see the unsightly disfiguration of many consoles before reaching the end of their natural life-cycle, and shows how much time has been spent consolidating the hardware, and making changes where necessary.
Outside of the sleeker look, quieter operating noise, and built in wi-fi and 250gb hard drive there isn’t much to sound off about, and a much to be content with. Some may complain that the machine isn’t really a ‘slim’ version of the console, but given the technological and financial constraints it is unlikely at this point in time that Microsoft could have done any better. The end result is a highly polished successor to the long running line of original Xbox 360 consoles, and a brief look at the future of the platform.
Naturally, I took it upon myself to pick up one of these new slim consoles in order to write this in-depth report for IQGamer, in which we’ll be covering the machine’s design, connectivity, build quality, and of course operating noise.
On first impressions, and before holding the unit for the first time, the 360 S appears better in every single way than the old ‘fat’ models that came before – especially compared to my original 20gb launch unit (just about going strong) – although on further inspection it is clear that not all is quite so perfect. But then again, it doesn’t really matter given the massive improvements that have been made in almost ever area with the new machine.
The first thing you’ll notice is that upon initial viewings the packaging is pretty similar to the one that housed the old 360, featuring the same square shape, whilst instead having bottom-opening flap allowing easy access to the contents inside. If you haven’t seen the old box in a while then the new one looks to be the same size, maybe only slightly smaller. However, side-by-side comparisons show a clear inch or two being cut off the sides, whilst being slightly taller overall.
Seeing as the actual console is almost the same size as the old 360 it isn’t at all surprising to see a similarly sized box that keeps it all together. However it does weigh noticeably less than my 20gb Premium when boxed up, although by no means light, simply commanding less strength in order to lug it from the retail store to the bus stop, and then home than the older model.
Inside, the 360 S is packaged similarly to before, except that now the individual compartments for holding the controller and other accessories are better organised allowing for things to be unboxed and boxed up again more easily. Underneath where the actual console sits are four distinct compartments, each housing the different peripherals that come with the machine. The largest one contains the controller and wired headset, whilst the two on either side contain the power cable and composite lead, along with the scart adaptor. At the end of these three compartments is where the power supply lives.
The overall internal layout is much simpler this time around, thus making it easier to pack away the console if need be in the future. Also, two of the sections are clearly marked with small stickers dictating what should occupy these specific spaces just in case you forget. Yet another improvement over the horridly packaged ‘fat’ model 360.
In terms of the actual console, noticeably, Microsoft have gone to town in producing a sleeker, more high-end looking aesthetic for their new Xbox 360 S. The old matt plastic look has been replaced with a smooth, glossy finish that only comes in black. Chrome highlights provide a small contrast between the black contours synonymous with the Xbox 360 Elite; the new power button and both outer edges of the machine benefiting from this touch of class. Round the back the aesthetics again change slightly, instead becoming a combination of the new shiny gloss design with a slight hint of the old matt finish around the various ports.
Annoyingly, this new shiny design as stylish and sexy as it is, is prone to attracting dust and fingerprints which can cover the machine in seconds if you’re not careful. Likewise, the 360 S also scratches really easily. Even using a fine micro fibre cloth regularly used for cleaning the PSP and ‘fat’ PS3 can leave very slight marks. Although these are only visible in certain lighting conditions and from a specific angle, so its not too much of a problem.
The previous inhaled design remains on the ‘S’, although now it is complemented by a new angular focus with sharpish curves leaning inwards on both the front and back of the machine. Initially this looks somewhat strange, especially when resting the machine in its standard horizontal position. However, standing upright it looks incredibly stylish and far more desirable than the old console. This new look and feel is accentuated by the use of touch-sensitive buttons for powering on/off the unit, and for opening and closing the disc tray, which remains a traditional slot loading drive.
Surprisingly, the new 360 S is still rather heavy, more so than I expected, and the overall build quality is superior to the old versions of the console. However there are some parts of the design which feel decidedly cheap to the touch. Like with the plastic casing on both the top and bottom of the machine, which tends to creak as you hold it. The console also feels a touch softer and more flexible too - no doubt made this way to better enable the plastic to constrict and contract as the internal temperature of the machine heats up during use, and cools down after.
Compared to the old 360, the ‘S’ is only slightly smaller in size covering almost the entire length of the original console, though it is slightly shallower as well. For something rumoured, and sometimes officially recognised as the 360 Slim in passing it’s quite disappointing how similar in size to the original it is, especially when you consider that the power supply is still external. Sony, with their Slim PS3 should really be commended on their engineering prowess seeing as both the power supply and hard drive are both built-in, and the machine itself runs a little bit quieter overall.
Despite this, Microsoft’s first entry into redesigning a console midway through its life-cycle has much to offer, and the use of the old-fashioned slot-loading DVD makes shrinking down the internals that much harder. Effectively how much smaller can you make that drive, is the question you should be asking.
Either way the new ‘S’ variant of the 360 hardware looks far more sophisticated, and highly stylized.
In terms of connectivity the new 360 S features the standard two USB ports situated around the front of the machine, under a flap next to the new rectangular shaped controller sync button. The disc tray remains a slot loader like the previous models of the console, although it is much quieter and feel a tad more solidly built. Round the back you have a further three USB ports, along with an Ethernet port, optical output, one HDMI port, multi-AV out, and a special port design solely for powering and interfacing with the Kinect unit.
Like with the Pro and Elite model 360’s, it is still possible to use the HDMI cable with the AV audio adaptor if you require the option of analogue stereo sound from the machine going into a hi-fi system or external amplifier.
The machine also features the use of a semi-built-in hard drive located on the bottom, or right hand side of the unit depending on whether you have it laying flat or standing up. I say semi-built-in as although the HDD is housed inside the 360 itself, it is fully removable and comes locked away in its own plastic casing. As we first revealed here, the HDD is a Hitachi HTS545025B9SA00 1.5Gbps hard drive which connects to the 360 using a standard SATA connector.
Moving on to the controller, and you can see that Microsoft have made similar aesthetic changes in order for it to match the new style of the console. The entire controller, save for the four face buttons and the Guide button have been made uniformly black. The underside of the pad is now finished in glossy black rather than the matt grey of the Elite and Pro models, or the shiny metallic silver of the Core and Premium units. Both the D-Pad and analogue sticks have also gone through a similar change, appearing black instead of dark grey, while the Guide button has given a shiny chrome finish representative of the highlights present on the console.
Other than the look of the controller not much else has changed. The D-Pad does feel slightly more responsive compared to the one that came with the controller with my launch unit, although it doesn’t appear to have full eight-way precision like the on the Japanese Sega Saturn pad. In that respect, playing fighting games using this new D-Pad is still a chore with certain quarter-circle type movements being incredibly fiddly to pull off. At least all four directions actually work this time around, unlike on my launch 360 controller in which parts of the D-Pad have always been largely unresponsive requiring a heavy push in order for the press to be recognised.
Outside of the console and controller both the hated power supply unit, and AV cables have been given a complete makeover, appearing to match the new styling present for the entire range of ‘S’ accessories and hardware.
Styled in black, with a matt finish, the PSU is now much smaller and lighter than before. Curved in its appearance it can finally be considered stylish for the first time, though more importantly it seems to accompany the main hardware pretty well, rather than looking like an eyesore trailing out from behind the 360. The power cable that goes from the PSU to the 360 also slots into the back of the machine almost effortlessly; a stark contrast with the constant wiggling and pushing required to get it coonected with the old non-HDMI models.
The same principles when it comes to styling have been applied to the AV cables, which now have a more angular look to them. They are less rounded compared to the old ones, but still display just enough of the smooth curves to be consistent with both the 360 brand as a whole while matching the new 360 S console.
Sure enough, from a purely design and aesthetics point of view the new 360 S is lovely, but all that isn’t going to count for much if it still sounds like a Jumbo Jet taking off from Heathrow now, is it? And the less we talk about the noise problems of prior versions of the old console the better.
However Microsoft have made waves with this new design, the newly fabbed Valhalla chipset demonstrating some noticeable decreases in operating temperature, and most importantly, noise, especially when inserting a game disc into the system.
Powering on the console for the first time using the touch sensitive button on the front of the unit, you are almost immediately graced with a fairly loud, but smooth ‘bing’ sound coming from the machine. It’s s very welcoming and goes well with the aesthetic style Microsoft have created for the console, and the new sound effects used in the NXE 360 dashboard.
Reassuringly, this is the most noticeable noise to come from the console at start up.
One of the main complaints about previous models of 360 was the high level of operating noise coming from the machine, especially when a disc-based game was inserted into the system. Installing games onto the hard drive partially solved this problem on the old 360, but now this is no longer required for an all-round quieter experience. Claims by Microsoft of the new unit being ‘whisper quiet’ were initially to be taken with a pinch of salt. However, when idling the new 360 is actually barely audible unless turned on in a completely silent room. By contrast my 20gb launch unit can be heard at all times whether or not a disc has been loaded into the system.
Like with my 20gb Premium, installing games into the new 360 S leads to an even quieter gaming experience. When playing a game via a disc however, the fan speed still ramps up on this new model and the familiar electronic humming noise appears, albeit no longer drowning out the sound coming from the TV. Installing the game means that this never happens, with the fan speed sticking at idling levels for the duration of your gaming session.
Installing games then is still the best possible way to experience just what the 360 can deliver, with less noise leading to greater levels of immersion and less in the way of a distraction. But does the new HDD equate to shorter install times and quicker loading compared to standard disc-based approach?
In short, yes and no. You see whilst I found the new 360 S quicker to load up games off the hard drive I also found it slightly slower in installing them in the first place. Right off the bat I can tell you that average install times for the few games that I tested (Alan Wake, Halo 3, VF5, Gears 2, and Resident Evil 5) was about one to two minutes slower than on my 20gb Premium. Loading times however, were either on par or slightly faster, as was the case when trying out Bungie’s Halo 3 on both machines.
This is an interesting find to say the least, but also somewhat confusing as I’m not too sure why it should be happening. Could the size of the hard drive have something to do with it? Or perhaps something to do with cache size and speed. Maybe we shall do a proper investigation into this later on at IQGamer, as our initial results are surprising.
In conclusion, from all my time spent with the new Xbox 360 S I can definitively say that the machine IS what the original 360 console should have been. Even though it isn’t that much smaller – in fact it’s pretty much the same size – it looks a whole lot nicer and runs far quieter than any of the old models. It should also be noted that we shouldn’t be seeing any more of that RROD death problem which plagued most original and Falcon chipset 360’s, not least of all because the rend ring physically doesn’t exist on the new model, but simply due to the reductions in operating temperature and better cooling provided by the 45nm Valhalla revision to the CPU and GPU.
So, in the end the 360 S represents an improvement over the previous design in almost every way, minus perhaps the shiny finish which will certainly see the unsightly disfiguration of many consoles before reaching the end of their natural life-cycle, and shows how much time has been spent consolidating the hardware, and making changes where necessary.
Outside of the sleeker look, quieter operating noise, and built in wi-fi and 250gb hard drive there isn’t much to sound off about, and a much to be content with. Some may complain that the machine isn’t really a ‘slim’ version of the console, but given the technological and financial constraints it is unlikely at this point in time that Microsoft could have done any better. The end result is a highly polished successor to the long running line of original Xbox 360 consoles, and a brief look at the future of the platform.
Saturday, 17 July 2010
Killzone 3 To Have More Responsive Controls
Killzone 2 suffered a lot of criticism from many gamers surrounding its controller response time, as a fair few found it laggy, and somewhat inaccurate at high speed compared to the likes of Call Of Duty. Initially, it was simply believed that the developers had attempted to deliver the sensation of weight much like when physically holding each of the weapons in real life - a crude approximation if you will. Although later on it was discovered that there was more latency between button presses compared with other comparative first-person shooters.
Some sites reported that Killzone 2 featured lag up to 150ms from when pressing a button on the controller to a visible response on screen. Compare that to the likes of Halo 3, which provided just 100ms of delay, and you have an either a noticeably more sluggish experience, or a heightened sensation of weight envisioned by the development team for the title.
For the upcoming sequel Killzone 3, Guerrilla Games has been looking into the issue and aim to bring about the same sense of realism without the lag that so many found intrusive to the experience.
Via the official site Guerrilla Game Director Mathijs de Jonge wrote:
"Our first priority when we started working on the controls for Killzone 3 was to listen closely to Killzone 2's players - what they liked, what they disliked, and how they felt things could be improved," He said. "Accuracy and responsiveness consistently came up as the top issues. At the same time, a lot of players were saying they loved the weighty feel."
On top of this he also stated that the team were hard at work in delivering an optimal degree of controller response time for Killzone 3, hopefully preserving the feeling of weight without sacrificing the fluidity required, and indeed expected from such a high-end FPS.
"Right now it's still a work in progress," Mathijs explained. "But we're definitely getting there. We've recalibrated the dead zone to be more responsive and significantly reduced the input lag, resulting in far better accuracy. Best of all, we've managed to retain that sense of weight that set Killzone 2 apart from other shooters. I can't wait for people to try it out."
This can only be good news for the people who felt Killzone 2’s controls to be a little too slow for their needs, especially when the sensation of weight doesn’t necessarily have to mean any additional input lag to facilitate it.
Some sites reported that Killzone 2 featured lag up to 150ms from when pressing a button on the controller to a visible response on screen. Compare that to the likes of Halo 3, which provided just 100ms of delay, and you have an either a noticeably more sluggish experience, or a heightened sensation of weight envisioned by the development team for the title.
For the upcoming sequel Killzone 3, Guerrilla Games has been looking into the issue and aim to bring about the same sense of realism without the lag that so many found intrusive to the experience.
Via the official site Guerrilla Game Director Mathijs de Jonge wrote:
"Our first priority when we started working on the controls for Killzone 3 was to listen closely to Killzone 2's players - what they liked, what they disliked, and how they felt things could be improved," He said. "Accuracy and responsiveness consistently came up as the top issues. At the same time, a lot of players were saying they loved the weighty feel."
On top of this he also stated that the team were hard at work in delivering an optimal degree of controller response time for Killzone 3, hopefully preserving the feeling of weight without sacrificing the fluidity required, and indeed expected from such a high-end FPS.
"Right now it's still a work in progress," Mathijs explained. "But we're definitely getting there. We've recalibrated the dead zone to be more responsive and significantly reduced the input lag, resulting in far better accuracy. Best of all, we've managed to retain that sense of weight that set Killzone 2 apart from other shooters. I can't wait for people to try it out."
This can only be good news for the people who felt Killzone 2’s controls to be a little too slow for their needs, especially when the sensation of weight doesn’t necessarily have to mean any additional input lag to facilitate it.
Thursday, 15 July 2010
Review: Earthworm Jim (XBLA & PSN)
Earthworm Jim was one of my favourite Megadrive games of all time, although it didn’t start out that way. When I first played the game I was confronted by a steep difficulty curve and a unforgiving level design structure that confused me more than it cared to entertain. After a few goes over three days I took the game back to the rental shop thinking that it nowhere as good as the likes of Aladdin or Cool Spot; two of Shiny’s best MD platformers.However, a few months later something finally made me pick up EWJ again and alas, I found myself renting it for the second time. Surprisingly the game made more sense this time around. The previously confusing level layouts and cheap enemy positioning didn’t seem half as bad, merely providing a much needed challenge to an otherwise simplistic title. Maybe Sega Magazine was right about Jim - that it was one of the most essential must have titles released that year, along with Treasure’s guaranteed spectacular, Dynamite Heady. Or so it seemed.
Out of the two challengers to Sonic’s crown it was Shiny’s Earthworm Jim that most caught on with the general games playing public. The story was as simple as it was idiotic; a man-sized space suit had came crashing down from the sky and the stars above, landing straight on our invertebrate protagonist turning him from an ordinary earthworm into a alien blasting, cow saving super hero. This suit brought Jim intelligence, plus a whole host of enemies wanting to blow him to pieces and steal back that powerful suit he was wearing.
Tasked with battling your way through a bizarre mix of enemies, and something about saving a princess who’s name he can’t remember, the game saw your jumping, blasting, and swinging your way through eight levels themed around junkyards, hell, internal organs, a laboratory, and an underwater base, whilst also delivering its own unique brand of humour.
EJ was always a funny game, with enemies ranging from a psychotic cat with genius levels of IQ; a goldfish with an eye for world domination; and a wealth of bizarre creatures ranging from killer crows to a Jekell and Hyde type puppy dog. It was also incredibly tough, requiring some precision jumping, and extremely quick reflexes in order to navigate some of the devious levels the designers had waiting for you.
Earthworm Jim HD then, is more of the same. In fact, it is almost exactly the same, right down to the obviously amusing character designs and twisted level layouts. What you have here is the 1994 original, remade with brand new, hand-drawn HD graphics, a reworked soundtrack, and disappointingly, completely new voice acting for all the characters and some less than stellar sound effects.
In terms of looks you can tell that every single frame of the original game’s animation has been re-drawn in HD for this version. The vast majority of animations still look really smooth, and almost Disney-like at times - just one of the trade marks of Shiny’s 16bit output. Everything from when Jim scrunches up his face in anger, to when his big eyes almost burst out of his face when hit are all accurately represented here in this HD take on things. Jim’s range of moves is also identical, being armed with a plasma pistol and his own wormy body as a whip, used both to grapple on hooks and to slap the enemy into submission.
The only qualm is that the new flash-like visuals lack some of the personality and raw detail to be found in the original’s 16bit bit sprites, though admittedly not all, with much of the humour based off the graphics still coming through. More importantly, every last sprite created for this remake is at least trying to accurately represent the original artwork, rather than completely re-envision it for modern day audiences. Essentially the flash-style nature of the work does this instead without cheapening the overall look and feel of the game too much.
Gameplay wise, some fifteen years on from its original release Earthworm Jim is still a solid enough title, challenging and reasonably fun after a while, even if being a little too abstract in its design to be completely successful today. Initially frustrating, the game regularly presents you with some rather confusing level design choices and some limitations with regards to how much Jim can use himself in order to traverse certain areas of his environment. For example, he can only jump down from hanging onto wires or hooks, rather than being able to jump up to reach higher ledges or platforms. Instead the game makes you find alternative routes to reaching a previously unreachable destination. Sometimes this pays off and reveals a rather cleverly thought out approach to the strange level design. More often that not though, it simply leads to more frustration and another trip to the continue screen.
However, It is also apparent that EWJ isn’t all that hard once you get back into the swing of things, learning the layouts of each stage and knowing where to jump, and which parts of the environment to touch or avoid. In this respect EWJ HD is as faithful as it could be to the original MD game, and to an extent that is actually a good thing. Some of the design choices that initially seem bizarre to modern day audiences start to make some kind of sense, and you can begin see how the developers have tried to craft a fine balance between a fair challenge and impossible odds. Jim has always had less in common with contemporary platform games in this regard, although in 2010 this maybe does him more harm than good.
Combined with its off-the-wall sense of humour, strange characters, and filled with originality, EWJ is still a potentially enjoyable game even if it doesn’t quite hold up as well as you remember. Newcomers to the series, and old fans without the patience required to enjoy it will surely be disappointed. Give it a chance though, and Jim can be a reasonably entertaining and particularly challenging alternative to other 16bit platformers of the time. Worthy of the HD remix treatment? Maybe not, but better than another poor attempt at a 3D sequel.
Sadly, not everything is quite as forgivable with this release. Whilst some of the gameplay deficiencies can be overlooked (more a deliberate part of the design than anything else), the use of new sound effects and poorly arranged soundtrack simply cannot.
The developers at GameLoft have taken the liberty of changing the voice work for Jim and some of the other characters, making them sound annoying different whilst also taking away some of the endearing personality they had in the original. Voices sound scratchy, and appear to be slightly compressed lacking the clarity they need, thus doing more harm than good for the experience. The brand new arranged soundtrack doesn’t fare so well either. It’s more upbeat and electric than the16bit tunes of the MD original, giving the game a more modern feel but at the cost of becoming intrusive during play.
However, the new sound effects, voices and music do suit the new flash-styled visuals on offer in EWJHD, which is not really all that surprising as the visuals themselves lack some of the detail and personality contained within the original’s 16bit pixel art, but appear fresher and more modern as a result. But perhaps that’s the problem; all these changes cheapen the experience somewhat, and only help to heighten the gameplay issues as you become less immersed in Jim’s world as the game’s outrageous humour loses its sparkle throughout all the tampering.
Despite some annoyances with this HD remake, Jim holds itself together pretty well and provides fans of the original with the best conversion of the first EWJ game since the Win 95 and Mega CD releases. Misguided audio aside there’s very little to complain about in terms of the game being authentic, and certainly, there’s none of the sloppy control problems and graphical slowdown which ruined both GameBoy Advance iterations of the first two games. Perhaps the only real downer is that the game design hasn’t aged very well, often proving to be incredibly frustrating at times, and that the new multiplayer features included in this release are next to useless seeing as very few people appear to be playing it online at the moment.
Earthworm Jim HD may well be worth checking out for die-hard fans of the series, who are likely to quickly become accustomed to its unforgiving nuances, though it isn’t quite as easy to get into as it should be with the level design and gameplay issues putting a dampner on some interestingly twisted characters, and a genuinely warped sense of humour. It that respect, it is almost exactly as you remember it, which is both a blessing and a curse, depending of course just how you decide to approach it and whether or not you care to get around the game’s initially confusing design choices.
VERDICT: 7/10
Wednesday, 14 July 2010
New Xbox 360 S 'Arcade' Coming Soon?
The brand new 250GB Xbox 360 S was just the beginning of Microsoft’s strategy for the their remodelled version of the console. After replacing the now discontinued 360 Elite the company now apparently have plans to reintroduce an arcade version of the 360 based on the new slim design.
According to Amazon.de an new "Xbox 360 4GB Arcade System Bundle" will be released on the 20th August and comes with a speculated 149 Euro price point. However the news isn’t exactly fresh, as Microsoft has recently discussed their interest in releasing another Arcade model 360 based on the new design exclusively for the US market, although European support seems at this point to be out of the question – officially at least.
In an interview with Eurogamer, Microsoft’s Neil Thompson stated that the company had no plans to launch another model of the new 360 in Europe, instead focusing on the current 250GB slim and the continuation of the original 360 Arcade unit.
"The Elite model we'll slowly phase out, but we're continuing with the Arcade model as it stands,"
This response was the exact opposite to what Microsoft’s US arm has said in the past, although that would explain the current situation with many retailers in which the Elite model is completely sold out, but the Arcade in comparison is still reasonably stocked.
The other point is that he could mean that the existing Arcade SKU will be moved into the slim design but without the 4GB storage space listed by Amazon, being more or less an exact continuation of the current system. Of course this is very unlikely, and all signs simply point to his stance being more centred around the company wanting to make a proper official announcement on the matter nearer the time, and after supplies of the old 360 Arcade have run dry.
Either way we should find about this ‘new’ version of the 360 Arcade soon enough.
According to Amazon.de an new "Xbox 360 4GB Arcade System Bundle" will be released on the 20th August and comes with a speculated 149 Euro price point. However the news isn’t exactly fresh, as Microsoft has recently discussed their interest in releasing another Arcade model 360 based on the new design exclusively for the US market, although European support seems at this point to be out of the question – officially at least.
In an interview with Eurogamer, Microsoft’s Neil Thompson stated that the company had no plans to launch another model of the new 360 in Europe, instead focusing on the current 250GB slim and the continuation of the original 360 Arcade unit.
"The Elite model we'll slowly phase out, but we're continuing with the Arcade model as it stands,"
This response was the exact opposite to what Microsoft’s US arm has said in the past, although that would explain the current situation with many retailers in which the Elite model is completely sold out, but the Arcade in comparison is still reasonably stocked.
The other point is that he could mean that the existing Arcade SKU will be moved into the slim design but without the 4GB storage space listed by Amazon, being more or less an exact continuation of the current system. Of course this is very unlikely, and all signs simply point to his stance being more centred around the company wanting to make a proper official announcement on the matter nearer the time, and after supplies of the old 360 Arcade have run dry.
Either way we should find about this ‘new’ version of the 360 Arcade soon enough.
Monday, 12 July 2010
Tech Analysis: Infamous 2 - Early Screens & Trailer
Infamous 2 made its debut at this year’s E3 showcasing a slight change in art style and numerous graphical upgrades. For the first time the series looked reasonably impressive, throwing around more detailed characters and environments with even greater use of the fancy lighting effects which propped up the first game.
The look was clearly refined, and the tech powering the game enhanced over and above the original. And that is exactly why we are going to be looking at Infamous 2 today, having a peek at what lies beneath the graphical upgrades you might have witnessed in the game’s E3 trailer and demonstration footage.
The original Infamous wasn’t particularly graphically impressive, with no anti-aliasing creating loads of crawling jagged lines, and the somewhat poor texturing, combined with the dark and gritty art style often counteracting the game’s technical proficiency. So it pretty surprising to see this sequel actually appearing relatively impressive this early on in the game, especially when you think about how the build shown off at E3 was pre-alpha code with many engine improvements yet to be implemented.
Sucker Punch has looked at the criticisms levelled at the first game’s visuals and has set about improving them in every way, with a more refined art style backed up with a range of noticeable technical enhancements.
Most interestingly is the announcement that the developers are targeting 60 frames per-second in time for the game’s release – that’s double the framerate of the first game, no mean feat considering the series open world nature. Coincidently, I actually stated whilst playing Infamous, that I though it looked like a 60fps game but running at 30fps, one that appeared to be held back by a lack of optimisation and certain compromises usually associated with titles striving for that rarely seen benchmark in smoothness.
Considering the size and scope of the game it is unlikely that a constant 60fps will be obtainable in this sequel. Instead I expect that Sucker Punch will be able to deliver a framerate that fluctuates between 60fps and 30fps, with the average count hitting around 40-45fps in most scenarios (much like in God Of War 3). So better than 30fps, but not quite the revelatory solid 60fps that is considered the Holy Grail then? We shall have to wait and see.
Like with the original, Infamous 2 appears to be rendering in 720p (1280x720) with no anti-aliasing of any kind, though given the compressed nature of the screenshots it can be quite hard to tell. It could well be 640p, no AA, but both the blur effect combined with the compression artefacts prevent any flawless pixel counting from taking place. Either way, from these screens the game looks closer to 720p with blur than anything else.
In terms of the no AA claim, initially I found that there could be some kind of selective edge smoothing could be going on, however this isn’t actually the case at all. What is basically happening is some reduction in jagged lines caused by the games use of blur and post process effects, which in motion do little to alleviate the overall appearance of aliasing, but in stills do help to cover up the jagged nature of the game’s visuals - although not to the extent of using a proper AA solution. Evidence of aliasing can be found in parts of the image being blurred, which again further proves the lack of any AA.
However, seeing as Infamous 2 is only at the pre-alpha stage it is possible that the developers may well include some form of AA in the game. A strong possibility is the use of morphological anti-aliasing, which is relatively easy to implement if you have a few SPU cycles spare. Although just a guess, it would make perfect sense, and it’s pretty unlikely that someone at Sucker Punch hasn’t already considered the approach for this sequel.
Outside of the resolution and lack of anti-aliasing Infamous 2 is sporting a whole host of obvious engine improvements. The characters in particular have been completely reworked, looking far more detailed than before using more geometry and greater levels of texturing. The art style, although still dark and gritty, now has strong influences from Naughty Dog’s Uncharted series, in particular Uncharted 2, looking smoother and more polished as a result.
Looking closer still, you’ll find that it’s not just the characters that have seen a large increase in detail. The buildings which make up the cityscape, and the cars which populate it have also seen noticeable improvements. The buildings are more detailed, and like the characters, benefit from having better use of texturing and increased levels of geometry. In particular the game’s LOD system seems to be less aggressive compared to the first Infamous with buildings retaining detail much further on in the distance compared to before.
Of course, texture detail and geometry complexity are only part of what makes up a graphically impressive game world. In order to make it truly convincing you need to have a balanced and consistent lighting system, with realistic and dynamic shadowing - something which the developers are keen to showcase with Infamous 2.
From the screenshots used in this feature, and from the E3 live demo, and recent trailers it is clear that Infamous 2’s light sources have a greater range compared to the ones used in the first game. Notice not only how the light travels further away from its point of origin, but also how it affects objects all around it, lighting up surrounding shadowed areas and casting some new shadows in others. Unfortunately, at this point none of the dynamic lighting given off by the games visual effects actually casts a shadow of itself anywhere on the environment. Instead it simply creates new or extended shadows for environmental objects.
Enemies do however cast shadows this time around - the fact that they didn’t before is something that looked a little odd, and there appears to some evidence of screen-space ambient occlusion (SSAO) going on in the environment. Just focus your eyes on the signpost to the right-hand side of the street, looking at the shadowing behind it. There are clear signs here that SSAO has been included in this sequel, and the result is a greater amount of natural depth to the overall image. This was something that the original Infamous sorely lacked, and is something which clearly benefits this sequel.
Moving on, the particle system featured in the first Infamous was quite impressive at times, especially when the screen became filled with lightning and sparks began to fly off surrounding metal objects and vehicles. So for Infamous 2 Sucker Punch have also upgraded this part of the engine. Particles are larger and the lightning effects themselves seem to have more of an effect on the surrounding environment than with the first game.
Most of these visual effects all appear to be running at the same resolution as the rest of the game, although compression once again prevents us from accurately gauging this one hundred percent. We can also see that some are clearly rendered using a lower resolution alpha buffer, though the difference is very slight indeed. Sadly the same cannot be said of the smoke particles to be found in the game, which are not only low res, but are also flat 2D sprites which occasionally stand out when combined with the other 3D effects. Still, this issue is only apparent in certain situations, and is unlikely to be noticeable during gameplay as it is in still video captures.
On top of all the improvements that Infamous 2 is delivering we can also glimpse from the E3 live demo, and recent trailers that there is far more in the way of destructible scenery compared to the last game. The sheer amount of things that can be blown up, and that can catch on fire is noticeably greater, as is the level of detail in these objects, which have all benefited from improved texturing and better modelling.
From what we’ve seen so far Sucker Punch has upped the ante for this sequel, refining and building upon an already solid game engine with an even better one. The improvements to character and environmental modelling are obvious, as is the improved lighting and larger special effects, all of which help to create a better sense of depth to the image and generally gel together in creating a more polished look in accordance with the adapted art style.
Surprisingly, the developer also hope to have the game up and running at 60fps by the time of release sometime next year. Surprising, because Infamous 2, like its predecessor, is an open world game, one which features sprawling environments, and at times, densely populated areas which will no doubt compromise the engine’s ability to maintain the targeted 60fps.
However, if this sequel sticks to the level design blue print of the first game then there shouldn’t be so much of a problem. The original Infamous made use of having various tall buildings obscuring distant streets, and denser parts of the environment in order to maintain framerate, so it’s highly likely that the developers will do the same thing here in this sequel. This controlled use of your viewpoint in a game in which the player controls the camera, and in which the engine cannot predict the load, is particularly important in maintaining a smooth framerate - let alone 60fps, especially when optimisations in other areas may not be so convenient when you’re pushing around more onscreen at any given time.
Either way, Infamous 2 is shaping up rather well. Graphically, at this early stage (its pre-alpha) it already looks noticeably superior to the last game and still has ways to go until it’s finished. Nailing down that now seemingly mythical 60fps is going to be the toughest challenge the developer faces, along with maintaining resolution and overall environmental detail at the same time. But so far it all looks to be going smoothly, with controlled use of lower-res transparencies, and only minor such cutbacks in image quality in order to sustain the various improvements we are seeing.
As more developments surface we shall be taking another look at the technology behind Infamous 2 in the future. Hopefully some uncompressed framebuffer grabs come our way finally allowing us to properly determine rendering resolution and clear up any inconsistencies we might be finding.
The look was clearly refined, and the tech powering the game enhanced over and above the original. And that is exactly why we are going to be looking at Infamous 2 today, having a peek at what lies beneath the graphical upgrades you might have witnessed in the game’s E3 trailer and demonstration footage.
The original Infamous wasn’t particularly graphically impressive, with no anti-aliasing creating loads of crawling jagged lines, and the somewhat poor texturing, combined with the dark and gritty art style often counteracting the game’s technical proficiency. So it pretty surprising to see this sequel actually appearing relatively impressive this early on in the game, especially when you think about how the build shown off at E3 was pre-alpha code with many engine improvements yet to be implemented.
Sucker Punch has looked at the criticisms levelled at the first game’s visuals and has set about improving them in every way, with a more refined art style backed up with a range of noticeable technical enhancements.
Most interestingly is the announcement that the developers are targeting 60 frames per-second in time for the game’s release – that’s double the framerate of the first game, no mean feat considering the series open world nature. Coincidently, I actually stated whilst playing Infamous, that I though it looked like a 60fps game but running at 30fps, one that appeared to be held back by a lack of optimisation and certain compromises usually associated with titles striving for that rarely seen benchmark in smoothness.
Considering the size and scope of the game it is unlikely that a constant 60fps will be obtainable in this sequel. Instead I expect that Sucker Punch will be able to deliver a framerate that fluctuates between 60fps and 30fps, with the average count hitting around 40-45fps in most scenarios (much like in God Of War 3). So better than 30fps, but not quite the revelatory solid 60fps that is considered the Holy Grail then? We shall have to wait and see.
Like with the original, Infamous 2 appears to be rendering in 720p (1280x720) with no anti-aliasing of any kind, though given the compressed nature of the screenshots it can be quite hard to tell. It could well be 640p, no AA, but both the blur effect combined with the compression artefacts prevent any flawless pixel counting from taking place. Either way, from these screens the game looks closer to 720p with blur than anything else.
In terms of the no AA claim, initially I found that there could be some kind of selective edge smoothing could be going on, however this isn’t actually the case at all. What is basically happening is some reduction in jagged lines caused by the games use of blur and post process effects, which in motion do little to alleviate the overall appearance of aliasing, but in stills do help to cover up the jagged nature of the game’s visuals - although not to the extent of using a proper AA solution. Evidence of aliasing can be found in parts of the image being blurred, which again further proves the lack of any AA.
However, seeing as Infamous 2 is only at the pre-alpha stage it is possible that the developers may well include some form of AA in the game. A strong possibility is the use of morphological anti-aliasing, which is relatively easy to implement if you have a few SPU cycles spare. Although just a guess, it would make perfect sense, and it’s pretty unlikely that someone at Sucker Punch hasn’t already considered the approach for this sequel.
Outside of the resolution and lack of anti-aliasing Infamous 2 is sporting a whole host of obvious engine improvements. The characters in particular have been completely reworked, looking far more detailed than before using more geometry and greater levels of texturing. The art style, although still dark and gritty, now has strong influences from Naughty Dog’s Uncharted series, in particular Uncharted 2, looking smoother and more polished as a result.
Looking closer still, you’ll find that it’s not just the characters that have seen a large increase in detail. The buildings which make up the cityscape, and the cars which populate it have also seen noticeable improvements. The buildings are more detailed, and like the characters, benefit from having better use of texturing and increased levels of geometry. In particular the game’s LOD system seems to be less aggressive compared to the first Infamous with buildings retaining detail much further on in the distance compared to before.
Of course, texture detail and geometry complexity are only part of what makes up a graphically impressive game world. In order to make it truly convincing you need to have a balanced and consistent lighting system, with realistic and dynamic shadowing - something which the developers are keen to showcase with Infamous 2.
From the screenshots used in this feature, and from the E3 live demo, and recent trailers it is clear that Infamous 2’s light sources have a greater range compared to the ones used in the first game. Notice not only how the light travels further away from its point of origin, but also how it affects objects all around it, lighting up surrounding shadowed areas and casting some new shadows in others. Unfortunately, at this point none of the dynamic lighting given off by the games visual effects actually casts a shadow of itself anywhere on the environment. Instead it simply creates new or extended shadows for environmental objects.
Enemies do however cast shadows this time around - the fact that they didn’t before is something that looked a little odd, and there appears to some evidence of screen-space ambient occlusion (SSAO) going on in the environment. Just focus your eyes on the signpost to the right-hand side of the street, looking at the shadowing behind it. There are clear signs here that SSAO has been included in this sequel, and the result is a greater amount of natural depth to the overall image. This was something that the original Infamous sorely lacked, and is something which clearly benefits this sequel.
Moving on, the particle system featured in the first Infamous was quite impressive at times, especially when the screen became filled with lightning and sparks began to fly off surrounding metal objects and vehicles. So for Infamous 2 Sucker Punch have also upgraded this part of the engine. Particles are larger and the lightning effects themselves seem to have more of an effect on the surrounding environment than with the first game.
Most of these visual effects all appear to be running at the same resolution as the rest of the game, although compression once again prevents us from accurately gauging this one hundred percent. We can also see that some are clearly rendered using a lower resolution alpha buffer, though the difference is very slight indeed. Sadly the same cannot be said of the smoke particles to be found in the game, which are not only low res, but are also flat 2D sprites which occasionally stand out when combined with the other 3D effects. Still, this issue is only apparent in certain situations, and is unlikely to be noticeable during gameplay as it is in still video captures.
On top of all the improvements that Infamous 2 is delivering we can also glimpse from the E3 live demo, and recent trailers that there is far more in the way of destructible scenery compared to the last game. The sheer amount of things that can be blown up, and that can catch on fire is noticeably greater, as is the level of detail in these objects, which have all benefited from improved texturing and better modelling.
From what we’ve seen so far Sucker Punch has upped the ante for this sequel, refining and building upon an already solid game engine with an even better one. The improvements to character and environmental modelling are obvious, as is the improved lighting and larger special effects, all of which help to create a better sense of depth to the image and generally gel together in creating a more polished look in accordance with the adapted art style.
Surprisingly, the developer also hope to have the game up and running at 60fps by the time of release sometime next year. Surprising, because Infamous 2, like its predecessor, is an open world game, one which features sprawling environments, and at times, densely populated areas which will no doubt compromise the engine’s ability to maintain the targeted 60fps.
However, if this sequel sticks to the level design blue print of the first game then there shouldn’t be so much of a problem. The original Infamous made use of having various tall buildings obscuring distant streets, and denser parts of the environment in order to maintain framerate, so it’s highly likely that the developers will do the same thing here in this sequel. This controlled use of your viewpoint in a game in which the player controls the camera, and in which the engine cannot predict the load, is particularly important in maintaining a smooth framerate - let alone 60fps, especially when optimisations in other areas may not be so convenient when you’re pushing around more onscreen at any given time.
Either way, Infamous 2 is shaping up rather well. Graphically, at this early stage (its pre-alpha) it already looks noticeably superior to the last game and still has ways to go until it’s finished. Nailing down that now seemingly mythical 60fps is going to be the toughest challenge the developer faces, along with maintaining resolution and overall environmental detail at the same time. But so far it all looks to be going smoothly, with controlled use of lower-res transparencies, and only minor such cutbacks in image quality in order to sustain the various improvements we are seeing.
As more developments surface we shall be taking another look at the technology behind Infamous 2 in the future. Hopefully some uncompressed framebuffer grabs come our way finally allowing us to properly determine rendering resolution and clear up any inconsistencies we might be finding.
Saturday, 10 July 2010
PS3 Gets More 3D Features
It’s not just games and BluRay movies that you’ll be able to view in 3D on the PlayStation 3. At an exclusive London event Mick Hocking, Sony Worldwide Studios head of 3D games, revealed that support for both 3D TV shows, and YouTube 3D was coming in a future firmware upgrade for Sony’s flagship gaming system.
"Crucially for us, PlayStation 3 will be able to store all types of 3D content. And we can do this through properly upgrading the Firmware on the platform.
Hocking also mentioned that Sony have plans to release a full 3D update for their PlayTV PVR add-on for the PS3, which will enable users to record both current HD broadcasts along with 3D Freeview content when it finally arrives. In addition, support for 3D photos and video camera recordings will be hitting the PS3 by the end of this year, although no firm dates were revealed.
"So you'll see 3D games in the next 12 months, you'll see Blu-ray movies in 3D, and as soon as the broadcasts start through our PlayTV services, you're going to watch 3D content [via that].
"YouTube will be supporting 3D content over the next 12 months as well - and you'll be able to watch that on the PlayStation 3. And as you start taking 3D pictures of your family or 3D camcorder movies, you can play those back on PS3, too."
This news means that not only is the PS3 vastly becoming a solid destination for all music, video, and games media, but also for all 3D entertainment content too.
All in all, Sony’s plan in attempting to conquer the living room appears to be going well, with BluRay becoming the next disc-based movie standard after a short format war with HD-DVD, and with strong support for 3D gaming already in motion, the inclusion of 3D TV show and YouTube support is the icing on the cake.
"Crucially for us, PlayStation 3 will be able to store all types of 3D content. And we can do this through properly upgrading the Firmware on the platform.
Hocking also mentioned that Sony have plans to release a full 3D update for their PlayTV PVR add-on for the PS3, which will enable users to record both current HD broadcasts along with 3D Freeview content when it finally arrives. In addition, support for 3D photos and video camera recordings will be hitting the PS3 by the end of this year, although no firm dates were revealed.
"So you'll see 3D games in the next 12 months, you'll see Blu-ray movies in 3D, and as soon as the broadcasts start through our PlayTV services, you're going to watch 3D content [via that].
"YouTube will be supporting 3D content over the next 12 months as well - and you'll be able to watch that on the PlayStation 3. And as you start taking 3D pictures of your family or 3D camcorder movies, you can play those back on PS3, too."
This news means that not only is the PS3 vastly becoming a solid destination for all music, video, and games media, but also for all 3D entertainment content too.
All in all, Sony’s plan in attempting to conquer the living room appears to be going well, with BluRay becoming the next disc-based movie standard after a short format war with HD-DVD, and with strong support for 3D gaming already in motion, the inclusion of 3D TV show and YouTube support is the icing on the cake.
Friday, 9 July 2010
Tech Report: A Look At The EDRAM On Valhalla
We brought you our inside the 360 slim feature just over a week ago, revealing the internal layout of the console, and the all important details surrounding the chip and die shrinks contained within. However, one piece of the puzzle was missing – both the size and exact whereabouts of the EDRAM in the CPU/GPU package. This is something which is of particular interest seeing as this piece of silicon has always been behind in terms of process node changes, and has yet to be intergrated into the same die as the GPU.
This still seems to be the case - as you will see in the image of the console’s motherboard below – that the EDRAM is a separate entity from both the CPU/GPU combo, which now appears to be housed on a single die.
So, both the GPU and CPU are firmly on a single die, and the EDRAM is once again separate, all of which is housed on a single package, codenamed Valhalla. The CPU/GPU is now on a 45nm process node, although the EDRAM looks to be noticeably larger. The overall die size is some 34% smaller than the Jasper chipset’s CPU and GPU combined, inc EDRAM. And is 53% smaller than the ones used in the first 360 chipsets. For reference the Jasper chipset featured both the CPU and GPU at 65nm, whilst the original 360 featured 90nm versions of both chips.
From the above image it doesn’t look like the EDRAM has been fabbed at 45nm – it’s far too large in size for that. Instead all signs point to it being around 55nm or 65nm as speculated in our original article from a couple of months back. Interestingly, this is opposite to what the latest pieces of scattered information were saying in our later article – in which a 45nm EDRAM was hotly expected to be included.
Why the difference in die size compared to the other chips then? Well, the EDRAM itself has always been behind on process reductions, with complications in shrinking the chip being the main reason behind such slow comparative progress being made. Cost is also another factor. It could be that it is simply too expensive to economically reduce the EDRAM in size whilst obtaining optimal yields during production (a certain number of chips produced are unusable). Plus, the slower progress of reliable die shrinks to the EDRAM could have also held back development of the Valhalla CPU/GPU combination, with the complex integration of the EDRAM at a different size posing unnecessary problems and expenditure.
Integrating all three chips (CPU, GPU and EDRAM) would take the cooperation of ATI, NEC and IBM in order to make it happen given the increased complexity required for such a design. The cost of which would have been larger than simply producing three separate chips, or in this case two on one package. Another issue is getting the design and final production grade silicon ready on time, and given the increased complexity it is unlikely that this was ever going to happen. Effectively, all things considered, the cost/benefit ratio to having not only die shrinks, but also complete integration of all three chips on one die was perhaps too poor for consideration.
That’s not to say that later on down the line the EDRAM won’t be included in another internal revision of the 360, because it is very likely that Microsoft are working to do exactly that at some point in the future. It is possible for this to happen now, just not quite being the cost saving measure they are after at this point in time. Maybe with the next, and possibly last revision to the hardware, we will find that all three chips will have been completely integrated into a single die, rather than a single package. At that point, we expect that the EDRAM along with the now combined CPU/GPU will all be produced on the same process node.
With the current Xbox 360 S (slim) we have here what is clearly the best price/performance ratio available at this point in time with regards to heat reduction, and overall saving in silicon. Whatever changes we (and many others) might speculate, there is no doubt that Microsoft have done their very best in producing the most efficient, and cost effective version of the 360 to date. It is also the quietest and most solidly built too, which is not something you can really say about the console before the Slim’s arrival.
This still seems to be the case - as you will see in the image of the console’s motherboard below – that the EDRAM is a separate entity from both the CPU/GPU combo, which now appears to be housed on a single die.
So, both the GPU and CPU are firmly on a single die, and the EDRAM is once again separate, all of which is housed on a single package, codenamed Valhalla. The CPU/GPU is now on a 45nm process node, although the EDRAM looks to be noticeably larger. The overall die size is some 34% smaller than the Jasper chipset’s CPU and GPU combined, inc EDRAM. And is 53% smaller than the ones used in the first 360 chipsets. For reference the Jasper chipset featured both the CPU and GPU at 65nm, whilst the original 360 featured 90nm versions of both chips.
From the above image it doesn’t look like the EDRAM has been fabbed at 45nm – it’s far too large in size for that. Instead all signs point to it being around 55nm or 65nm as speculated in our original article from a couple of months back. Interestingly, this is opposite to what the latest pieces of scattered information were saying in our later article – in which a 45nm EDRAM was hotly expected to be included.
Why the difference in die size compared to the other chips then? Well, the EDRAM itself has always been behind on process reductions, with complications in shrinking the chip being the main reason behind such slow comparative progress being made. Cost is also another factor. It could be that it is simply too expensive to economically reduce the EDRAM in size whilst obtaining optimal yields during production (a certain number of chips produced are unusable). Plus, the slower progress of reliable die shrinks to the EDRAM could have also held back development of the Valhalla CPU/GPU combination, with the complex integration of the EDRAM at a different size posing unnecessary problems and expenditure.
Integrating all three chips (CPU, GPU and EDRAM) would take the cooperation of ATI, NEC and IBM in order to make it happen given the increased complexity required for such a design. The cost of which would have been larger than simply producing three separate chips, or in this case two on one package. Another issue is getting the design and final production grade silicon ready on time, and given the increased complexity it is unlikely that this was ever going to happen. Effectively, all things considered, the cost/benefit ratio to having not only die shrinks, but also complete integration of all three chips on one die was perhaps too poor for consideration.
That’s not to say that later on down the line the EDRAM won’t be included in another internal revision of the 360, because it is very likely that Microsoft are working to do exactly that at some point in the future. It is possible for this to happen now, just not quite being the cost saving measure they are after at this point in time. Maybe with the next, and possibly last revision to the hardware, we will find that all three chips will have been completely integrated into a single die, rather than a single package. At that point, we expect that the EDRAM along with the now combined CPU/GPU will all be produced on the same process node.
With the current Xbox 360 S (slim) we have here what is clearly the best price/performance ratio available at this point in time with regards to heat reduction, and overall saving in silicon. Whatever changes we (and many others) might speculate, there is no doubt that Microsoft have done their very best in producing the most efficient, and cost effective version of the 360 to date. It is also the quietest and most solidly built too, which is not something you can really say about the console before the Slim’s arrival.
Wednesday, 7 July 2010
Editorial: A Taxing Problem
On Tuesday 22 June 2010 George Osbourne and the Conservative / Lib Dem coalition government unveiled their emergency budget, a budget apparently designed to get business moving again, and kick-start the British economy working towards reducing our increasingly high national debt. As part of this plan the budget included both a rise in VAT from 17.5% to 20% (a 2.5% overall rise), and the announcement that tax breaks were no longer on the agenda for the games industry.
This news has seemingly deflated the industry, with retailers worried about the large dent in profits this will have for their business as they struggle to compete on price with supermarkets and chain multiples, and developers left wondering if the British government actually takes their industry seriously.
In the last couple of years much progress has been made between the UK games industry (represented by ELSPA) and the government. This resulted in the acknowledgement that the games industry was perhaps in the position to best regulate itself with regards to age restricted sales, finally making the PEGI (Pan European Games Information) system not only legal (comming into effect later this year), but also replacing the BBFC system used for the last fifteen years or so in rating software. That, and the acceptance that in order for British companies to compete in games development on a worldwide scale that they would need some kind of tax break incentive.
Whilst the budget obviously doesn’t impact on the newly reformed PEGI system, it does however completely discard the industry’s need for some kind of tax break initiative in order to bring in a constant pool of talent, and a firm reason to stay in Britain, rather than let that talent slip through their fingers and into the hands of Canadian or European software houses, thus further shrinking our regressing industry. The government however doesn’t now appear to see this as an issue, or rather it doesn’t think that the games industry ‘needs’ prioritisation - to be thought about outside the realms of every other business.
Just a few months ago the Labour Government was looking into providing some kind of support for the industry, not necessarily tax breaks, but something along those lines in order to help us become major players on the world stage. With the new government, and the budget announcement, the need for industry help has being thrown completely back into it’s face, with Osbourne stating: “We will not go ahead with poorly targeted tax relief for the videogame industry”. A clear sign of either misunderstanding of the industry, or simply the feeling that the government thinks it isn’t important enough to consider.
The result is that more publishers might well up ship and move abroad where it is cheaper to set up a development studio and make games, taking any potential talent with them. Another issue is with what happens to all the potential talent in this country. Will they be nurtured and then cultivated into the next inspiring leaders of software development, or will they simply fade away without proper training, or the right guidance in order to make this happen?
These are just some of the questions the industry is asking, and indeed worried about, something which the government should really be taking stock of given the fact that videogame sales and the industry brings in a lot of money for the British economy as a whole.
Thankfully the changes made to both Corporation Tax, and Capital Gains Tax do present a small beacon of light to British businesses, although the changes in CGT are said to make more unattractive for foreign investors to invest in British business. Any reductions in taxes bestowed upon businesses is likely to help the games industry as much as any other, and in which case the setbacks that have been felt are not the be all and end all of the issue. ELSPA will continue to campaign for greater understanding, and more help for the industry, whilst publishers, as always will take their business elsewhere sending a clear message to the British government as a whole.
Now it’s time for the organisation to once again build bridges with the government and the issue of videogames, perhaps attempting to bring about another chance at understanding our industry and what it means to the economy, and society as a whole. Only then will we see progress being made, and it’s progress that this industry needs to see.
Whatever the outcome, in the meantime it is likely that the UK’s position on the world stage of games development will further decrease, much like it has been doing these past few years. This isn’t something that will benefit our economy, not will it be something which threatens the amount of stellar games that reaxh our shores. It’s just that more of these games will be produced elsewhere, further stagnating our industry growth and creative impact in the future.
The battle on this front is far from over, that’s for sure. But what about the retail sector and the rise in VAT?
This is equally as interesting, mainly because it has so much more of an impact on the everyday consumer, than the closed, behind the scenes workings of the industry. Any changes here are easily going to felt by you and me, everyone that at least purchases videogames from the high street.
In January 2011 the government plans to increase VAT by 2.5%, from the established threshold of 17.5% to 20%. What this means is that for every sale the company will be handing over more of their profits to the taxman rather than being able to re-invest it back into their business, or as it seems with the larger chain retailers, back into executives, and shareholders pockets. Small independent retailers are likely to be hit the hardest with this decision, with RRP’s rarely being stuck to, and a massive price cutting war ensuing on almost every major release.
Most games actually carry an RRP of either £44.99 or £49.99, however, pretty much every chain retailer, games or otherwise sells these titles at either £39.99 or £44.99 reducing their amount of margin in order to compete, but at the same time making it impossible for smaller stores to even break even when selling these games. All the while the consumer thinks that its okay for the price to drop blissfully unaware that development costs are spiralling out of control, and that pretty soon the price of games ‘will’ have to go up, or perhaps the size and cinematic scope will have to drop right back down again.
Either way this particular debate is a minefield of shorts, with valid opinions on both sides, and the retailer usually the one to back down when it comes to the crunch.
So what happens when the VAT rise comes into effect? Well, the most obvious thing is the drop in revenue felt by retailers everywhere. Fewer profits mean a harder business to run, with fewer opportunities for expansion, and less of a reason to focus on the customers needs, instead pushing towards an even harder sales culture. Some may even expand more aggressively into the online sector, one which will largely be unaffected by the rise in VAT. Well, if you’re based in Jersey that is.
There are a few ways this could go. One, the retailer takes the hit keeping retail prices at the current level, ignoring the RRP given to them by the publisher. Two, they could raise the price of games in accordance with the rate of VAT. Though this would mean prising up titles to the nearest pound, rather than the nearest five pounds as historically done over the last twenty years or so. And three, the retailer adheres to the RRP set on games by the publisher, with the consumer seeing a large price hike on most software titles across the board.
The implications will be felt on choosing any of the three options above. If the retailer decides to take the hit by absorbing the additional rise in VAT, the consumer benefits by having similarly priced games, but at the cost of better customer service. With overall profits down shareholders aren’t likely to be happy, and the executives of most chain retailers are likely to demand that they keep their bonuses at the expense of customer or staff satisfaction. At the same time the age old trend of expansion and growth will be much harder to achieve resulting in a far greater push towards the hard sell.
This hard sales nature, constantly expecting the customer to buy add-ons with every purchase, to take ‘that’ warranty even if they don’t really need it, will become far more prevalent as the main driving force behind some businesses. We have already seen this trend manifest strongly with the chain multiples over the last five or six years, with the focus less on good customer service and more on getting unrealistic results every time a sale is made. If stores decide to take the hit on tax, then it seems that this course of action is far the most obvious one, though not really the best, as more and more customers have been turning away from traditional retail and into the online marketplace due to this reason, and of course the reduced prices these sites provide.
Raising the retail price on games instead, perhaps in order to preserve some of those profits, has it’s own set of problems. Namely, the online retailers, in which this 2.5% tax rise has little to no meaning other than more potential sales for them. You see, most large online retailers are based in Jersey, a region of the UK unaffected by our VAT rises and reductions, and this allows them to continuously not only compete on price, but also see them slashed in an attempt to gain valuable sales from traditional bricks and mortar outlets.
The advantage is that any potential high street stores looking for a break could well turn to online in order to achieve it. With lower prices, but also lower taxes to pay, they could still stand to compete against both online and the supermarkets.
You also have to look at how the market has changed over the last fifteen years or so, and how the customer base has changed. If prices are in fact raised, who will be happy enough to continue paying the raised amount? And for how long? If you look at how people shop it is clear that most customers expect games to become cheaper, or rather, they expect the average new release price to be no more than £40, and quite often look for it to be less than that. With this in mind raising the overall price threshold for games in accordance with the tax hike, or maybe to the nearest £5, isn’t such a good idea as many customers will instead take their business online, or to someone who isn’t doing the same.
Ultimately, today’s so-called ‘specialist’ chain retailers have very little to offer customers outside of being a ‘one-stop’ shop for games. They very rarely stock niche, or hardcore titles, and if they do it is always in extremely small numbers. Plus overall service has largely diminished over the last few years. In essence, there’s very little to keep customers coming back into stores, thus making the VAT predicament all the more difficult to deal with.
Indies on the other hand have the toughest decision to make. They largely operate on the low-margin, high-quality service model, in many cases going that extra mile to differentiate themselves from the large multiples. For them keeping prices low is going to be hard, and I can see that many simply won’t be able to compete in this area, meaning it’s down to whether or not the customer thinks the service, and shop itself, is worth them spending the extra £5 or so.
And then you have the large entertainment chain stores, ones that stock everything from music and DVD to videogames and MP3 players. This segment of the retail community is perhaps the toughest of them all, with competition from online stores and supermarkets, to the likes of digital distribution with iTunes and other download services.
Having prices go up is simply not an option, consumers already see both music and films as largely disposable, and videogames are strongly heading that way, if not already. For them I suspect that most titles will stay below the increased VAT price, with the business taking the added hit as a result. Maybe the use of promotions, and worked out deals with suppliers will negate these issues slightly. But then again, everyone will be looking to maximise margins.
Currently, it’s far too early to see how well the retail sector in general will react to this change. I’m guessing that many hours of consumer research, and cleaver marketing will no doubt help to carve out a temporary solution until something more concrete can be worked out. Either way, many are predicting that customers will be lining up to grab a bargain before the tax increase takes place in January next year, with many retailers likely to grabbing every last slice of the pie before the challenge really sets in.
In conclusion, the budget announcement has done no favours for the industry as a whole, creating yet more issues on either side of the fence. On one hand you have a lot of hard work between ELSPA and the old Labour government seemingly, if not partially wasted. And on the other, the whole retail sector if left with yet another ‘price’ problem to deal with. But perhaps it’s not all doom and gloom. Instead businesses in general have had some tax breaks (which will help the games industry), and with regards to the VAT increase, every retailer is in the same boat. Although it has to be said, that videogames and entertainment retail is amongst the toughest in the world, and this increase is hardly going to make it any easier.
This news has seemingly deflated the industry, with retailers worried about the large dent in profits this will have for their business as they struggle to compete on price with supermarkets and chain multiples, and developers left wondering if the British government actually takes their industry seriously.
In the last couple of years much progress has been made between the UK games industry (represented by ELSPA) and the government. This resulted in the acknowledgement that the games industry was perhaps in the position to best regulate itself with regards to age restricted sales, finally making the PEGI (Pan European Games Information) system not only legal (comming into effect later this year), but also replacing the BBFC system used for the last fifteen years or so in rating software. That, and the acceptance that in order for British companies to compete in games development on a worldwide scale that they would need some kind of tax break incentive.
Whilst the budget obviously doesn’t impact on the newly reformed PEGI system, it does however completely discard the industry’s need for some kind of tax break initiative in order to bring in a constant pool of talent, and a firm reason to stay in Britain, rather than let that talent slip through their fingers and into the hands of Canadian or European software houses, thus further shrinking our regressing industry. The government however doesn’t now appear to see this as an issue, or rather it doesn’t think that the games industry ‘needs’ prioritisation - to be thought about outside the realms of every other business.
Just a few months ago the Labour Government was looking into providing some kind of support for the industry, not necessarily tax breaks, but something along those lines in order to help us become major players on the world stage. With the new government, and the budget announcement, the need for industry help has being thrown completely back into it’s face, with Osbourne stating: “We will not go ahead with poorly targeted tax relief for the videogame industry”. A clear sign of either misunderstanding of the industry, or simply the feeling that the government thinks it isn’t important enough to consider.
The result is that more publishers might well up ship and move abroad where it is cheaper to set up a development studio and make games, taking any potential talent with them. Another issue is with what happens to all the potential talent in this country. Will they be nurtured and then cultivated into the next inspiring leaders of software development, or will they simply fade away without proper training, or the right guidance in order to make this happen?
These are just some of the questions the industry is asking, and indeed worried about, something which the government should really be taking stock of given the fact that videogame sales and the industry brings in a lot of money for the British economy as a whole.
Thankfully the changes made to both Corporation Tax, and Capital Gains Tax do present a small beacon of light to British businesses, although the changes in CGT are said to make more unattractive for foreign investors to invest in British business. Any reductions in taxes bestowed upon businesses is likely to help the games industry as much as any other, and in which case the setbacks that have been felt are not the be all and end all of the issue. ELSPA will continue to campaign for greater understanding, and more help for the industry, whilst publishers, as always will take their business elsewhere sending a clear message to the British government as a whole.
Now it’s time for the organisation to once again build bridges with the government and the issue of videogames, perhaps attempting to bring about another chance at understanding our industry and what it means to the economy, and society as a whole. Only then will we see progress being made, and it’s progress that this industry needs to see.
Whatever the outcome, in the meantime it is likely that the UK’s position on the world stage of games development will further decrease, much like it has been doing these past few years. This isn’t something that will benefit our economy, not will it be something which threatens the amount of stellar games that reaxh our shores. It’s just that more of these games will be produced elsewhere, further stagnating our industry growth and creative impact in the future.
The battle on this front is far from over, that’s for sure. But what about the retail sector and the rise in VAT?
This is equally as interesting, mainly because it has so much more of an impact on the everyday consumer, than the closed, behind the scenes workings of the industry. Any changes here are easily going to felt by you and me, everyone that at least purchases videogames from the high street.
In January 2011 the government plans to increase VAT by 2.5%, from the established threshold of 17.5% to 20%. What this means is that for every sale the company will be handing over more of their profits to the taxman rather than being able to re-invest it back into their business, or as it seems with the larger chain retailers, back into executives, and shareholders pockets. Small independent retailers are likely to be hit the hardest with this decision, with RRP’s rarely being stuck to, and a massive price cutting war ensuing on almost every major release.
Most games actually carry an RRP of either £44.99 or £49.99, however, pretty much every chain retailer, games or otherwise sells these titles at either £39.99 or £44.99 reducing their amount of margin in order to compete, but at the same time making it impossible for smaller stores to even break even when selling these games. All the while the consumer thinks that its okay for the price to drop blissfully unaware that development costs are spiralling out of control, and that pretty soon the price of games ‘will’ have to go up, or perhaps the size and cinematic scope will have to drop right back down again.
Either way this particular debate is a minefield of shorts, with valid opinions on both sides, and the retailer usually the one to back down when it comes to the crunch.
So what happens when the VAT rise comes into effect? Well, the most obvious thing is the drop in revenue felt by retailers everywhere. Fewer profits mean a harder business to run, with fewer opportunities for expansion, and less of a reason to focus on the customers needs, instead pushing towards an even harder sales culture. Some may even expand more aggressively into the online sector, one which will largely be unaffected by the rise in VAT. Well, if you’re based in Jersey that is.
There are a few ways this could go. One, the retailer takes the hit keeping retail prices at the current level, ignoring the RRP given to them by the publisher. Two, they could raise the price of games in accordance with the rate of VAT. Though this would mean prising up titles to the nearest pound, rather than the nearest five pounds as historically done over the last twenty years or so. And three, the retailer adheres to the RRP set on games by the publisher, with the consumer seeing a large price hike on most software titles across the board.
The implications will be felt on choosing any of the three options above. If the retailer decides to take the hit by absorbing the additional rise in VAT, the consumer benefits by having similarly priced games, but at the cost of better customer service. With overall profits down shareholders aren’t likely to be happy, and the executives of most chain retailers are likely to demand that they keep their bonuses at the expense of customer or staff satisfaction. At the same time the age old trend of expansion and growth will be much harder to achieve resulting in a far greater push towards the hard sell.
This hard sales nature, constantly expecting the customer to buy add-ons with every purchase, to take ‘that’ warranty even if they don’t really need it, will become far more prevalent as the main driving force behind some businesses. We have already seen this trend manifest strongly with the chain multiples over the last five or six years, with the focus less on good customer service and more on getting unrealistic results every time a sale is made. If stores decide to take the hit on tax, then it seems that this course of action is far the most obvious one, though not really the best, as more and more customers have been turning away from traditional retail and into the online marketplace due to this reason, and of course the reduced prices these sites provide.
Raising the retail price on games instead, perhaps in order to preserve some of those profits, has it’s own set of problems. Namely, the online retailers, in which this 2.5% tax rise has little to no meaning other than more potential sales for them. You see, most large online retailers are based in Jersey, a region of the UK unaffected by our VAT rises and reductions, and this allows them to continuously not only compete on price, but also see them slashed in an attempt to gain valuable sales from traditional bricks and mortar outlets.
The advantage is that any potential high street stores looking for a break could well turn to online in order to achieve it. With lower prices, but also lower taxes to pay, they could still stand to compete against both online and the supermarkets.
You also have to look at how the market has changed over the last fifteen years or so, and how the customer base has changed. If prices are in fact raised, who will be happy enough to continue paying the raised amount? And for how long? If you look at how people shop it is clear that most customers expect games to become cheaper, or rather, they expect the average new release price to be no more than £40, and quite often look for it to be less than that. With this in mind raising the overall price threshold for games in accordance with the tax hike, or maybe to the nearest £5, isn’t such a good idea as many customers will instead take their business online, or to someone who isn’t doing the same.
Ultimately, today’s so-called ‘specialist’ chain retailers have very little to offer customers outside of being a ‘one-stop’ shop for games. They very rarely stock niche, or hardcore titles, and if they do it is always in extremely small numbers. Plus overall service has largely diminished over the last few years. In essence, there’s very little to keep customers coming back into stores, thus making the VAT predicament all the more difficult to deal with.
Indies on the other hand have the toughest decision to make. They largely operate on the low-margin, high-quality service model, in many cases going that extra mile to differentiate themselves from the large multiples. For them keeping prices low is going to be hard, and I can see that many simply won’t be able to compete in this area, meaning it’s down to whether or not the customer thinks the service, and shop itself, is worth them spending the extra £5 or so.
And then you have the large entertainment chain stores, ones that stock everything from music and DVD to videogames and MP3 players. This segment of the retail community is perhaps the toughest of them all, with competition from online stores and supermarkets, to the likes of digital distribution with iTunes and other download services.
Having prices go up is simply not an option, consumers already see both music and films as largely disposable, and videogames are strongly heading that way, if not already. For them I suspect that most titles will stay below the increased VAT price, with the business taking the added hit as a result. Maybe the use of promotions, and worked out deals with suppliers will negate these issues slightly. But then again, everyone will be looking to maximise margins.
Currently, it’s far too early to see how well the retail sector in general will react to this change. I’m guessing that many hours of consumer research, and cleaver marketing will no doubt help to carve out a temporary solution until something more concrete can be worked out. Either way, many are predicting that customers will be lining up to grab a bargain before the tax increase takes place in January next year, with many retailers likely to grabbing every last slice of the pie before the challenge really sets in.
In conclusion, the budget announcement has done no favours for the industry as a whole, creating yet more issues on either side of the fence. On one hand you have a lot of hard work between ELSPA and the old Labour government seemingly, if not partially wasted. And on the other, the whole retail sector if left with yet another ‘price’ problem to deal with. But perhaps it’s not all doom and gloom. Instead businesses in general have had some tax breaks (which will help the games industry), and with regards to the VAT increase, every retailer is in the same boat. Although it has to be said, that videogames and entertainment retail is amongst the toughest in the world, and this increase is hardly going to make it any easier.
Monday, 5 July 2010
Tech Report: The 3D Behind Crysis 2
During E3 Crytek boasted about it’s incredible method of displaying games in 3D with minimal performance hit. Previously many developers have spoken out about how difficult it would be to get high-end fully featured titles running in this format on consoles, sighting performance issues, and especially the limitations caused by having to render every frame twice (one for each eye) for the effect to be possible. However the ambitious developer of the massively anticipated Crysis 2 has managed to get the game up and running with far less impact on performance.
At E3 Crytek demonstrated a version of Crysis 2 running in full stereoscopic 3D, claiming that the effect cost them only an extra 1.5% of processing power over rendering the game in traditional 2D. Mightily impressive you might think, and that was exactly my thoughts after reading about their presentation. How could it be that a resource heavy game like Crysis was running in full 3D – and in 720p for that matter – without the kind of noticeable impact on performance that the likes of Killzone 3 and Motorstorm seem to be suffering from? The answer is in ‘how’ the effect is created compared to those games.
You see, for Crysis 2 the developers are using a cheat of sorts, a method of 2D to 3D conversion, much like the process that goes on behind the scenes in taking an old 2D movie and then processing it in certain ways so it displays in 3D, complete with a reasonable level of natural depth. Although Crytek themselves haven’t shed any light on the process, it is plainly apparent on what options they might be using, and all signs point to a pixel-shift, plus depth buffer approach to creating the 3D effect.
This type of 2D displacement tech is very similar to the ones used in film production, and the process works in much the same way in videogames. The only difference is that you are relying on a mathematical algorithm in order to fill in any gaps left behind the pixel shift, and of course using the Z-buffer for depth information. All work in 2D displacement is done on a pixel level, nothing geometry-wise is processed at all, it is a completely post process effect.
Here's how it works:
Starting off, the Z-buffer gives you the depth information from a single point of view (POV) required to create the 3D scene. After which the overall viewing distance for the eyes is calculated, thus creating an ideal viewing position in which to determine how far away certain objects are from the screen, etc. Next, the pixels are moved from left to right, and vice versa in order to create the images for each eye using the above Z-buffer info and calculated viewing distance.
You now have a rough approximation of two separate frames (one for each) in order for the 3D effect to be displayed. Essentially rendering is done for one viewpoint, and then two different views are created by shifting pixels around left to right, and vice versa. However, you may also have a few holes in the image arising from changes in what is visible on screen from one frame to the next after the left/right pixel shift has occurred.
Like with the post process conversion of 2D film stock into a 3D print, these holes need to be filled in with information that is not longer there. But unlike with that conversion process – in which a post production artist manually creates new details on a frame by frame basis – for videogame rendering it has to be done in real time by a cleverly designed algorithm instead.
This of course creates problems, seeing as it isn’t easy for a mathematical routine to fill in the gaps left behind in the image without some side effects. Just look at how the upscaling process can leave so many unwanted artefacts if not done carefully, and with a high degree of accuracy. The same thing is equally important here, with the developer needing to create something that carefully determines what information has been cut out, and what needs to replace it.
In Crytek’s case, their method of converting a 2D image into a 3D one in real-time is particularly successful, with little in the way of apparent side effects according to the press who have seen it running. The amount of depth perception is said to be lower than the likes of Guerrilla Games’ Killzone 3 – which actually renders individual frames for each eye – although still appearing fairly natural with only a slight hint at that cardboard cut out look which plague most 2D to 3D conversions.
Impressively, Crytek are also using 3D in a way no other developer seem to be doing at the moment. Rather than having images (such as explosions and particles) jump out at you during play, they are instead using the effect to create a natural depth which extends into the television set, acting as an extension of your natural peripheral vision.
So far the 3D tech behind Crysis 2 has certainly impressed, although Crytek it seems are not the only ones to be using it. Sony are also developing a similar process for first and third party usage in order to make 3D a little more achievable on the PS3, negating the heavy performance cost that comes with rendering the effect for real.
With the 3D race now officially on, it will be interesting to see how developers implement the effect into their games, especially with regards to either rendering in proper 3D with individual frames for each eye, or with the 2D displacement tech talked about on this page today.
Crytek has shown that it is possible to convincingly include support for the format without having to completely rewrite their engine in order to include it, whilst Guerrilla Games has also showcased the advantages of actually downgrading image quality in order to create an unparalleled natural depth that can only e achieved by actually rendering in 3D.
What is apparent is that the two different approaches to including 3D in the latest software releases provide clear support for developers on both sides of the coin when it comes to adopting the format.
At E3 Crytek demonstrated a version of Crysis 2 running in full stereoscopic 3D, claiming that the effect cost them only an extra 1.5% of processing power over rendering the game in traditional 2D. Mightily impressive you might think, and that was exactly my thoughts after reading about their presentation. How could it be that a resource heavy game like Crysis was running in full 3D – and in 720p for that matter – without the kind of noticeable impact on performance that the likes of Killzone 3 and Motorstorm seem to be suffering from? The answer is in ‘how’ the effect is created compared to those games.
You see, for Crysis 2 the developers are using a cheat of sorts, a method of 2D to 3D conversion, much like the process that goes on behind the scenes in taking an old 2D movie and then processing it in certain ways so it displays in 3D, complete with a reasonable level of natural depth. Although Crytek themselves haven’t shed any light on the process, it is plainly apparent on what options they might be using, and all signs point to a pixel-shift, plus depth buffer approach to creating the 3D effect.
This type of 2D displacement tech is very similar to the ones used in film production, and the process works in much the same way in videogames. The only difference is that you are relying on a mathematical algorithm in order to fill in any gaps left behind the pixel shift, and of course using the Z-buffer for depth information. All work in 2D displacement is done on a pixel level, nothing geometry-wise is processed at all, it is a completely post process effect.
Here's how it works:
Starting off, the Z-buffer gives you the depth information from a single point of view (POV) required to create the 3D scene. After which the overall viewing distance for the eyes is calculated, thus creating an ideal viewing position in which to determine how far away certain objects are from the screen, etc. Next, the pixels are moved from left to right, and vice versa in order to create the images for each eye using the above Z-buffer info and calculated viewing distance.
You now have a rough approximation of two separate frames (one for each) in order for the 3D effect to be displayed. Essentially rendering is done for one viewpoint, and then two different views are created by shifting pixels around left to right, and vice versa. However, you may also have a few holes in the image arising from changes in what is visible on screen from one frame to the next after the left/right pixel shift has occurred.
Like with the post process conversion of 2D film stock into a 3D print, these holes need to be filled in with information that is not longer there. But unlike with that conversion process – in which a post production artist manually creates new details on a frame by frame basis – for videogame rendering it has to be done in real time by a cleverly designed algorithm instead.
This of course creates problems, seeing as it isn’t easy for a mathematical routine to fill in the gaps left behind in the image without some side effects. Just look at how the upscaling process can leave so many unwanted artefacts if not done carefully, and with a high degree of accuracy. The same thing is equally important here, with the developer needing to create something that carefully determines what information has been cut out, and what needs to replace it.
In Crytek’s case, their method of converting a 2D image into a 3D one in real-time is particularly successful, with little in the way of apparent side effects according to the press who have seen it running. The amount of depth perception is said to be lower than the likes of Guerrilla Games’ Killzone 3 – which actually renders individual frames for each eye – although still appearing fairly natural with only a slight hint at that cardboard cut out look which plague most 2D to 3D conversions.
Impressively, Crytek are also using 3D in a way no other developer seem to be doing at the moment. Rather than having images (such as explosions and particles) jump out at you during play, they are instead using the effect to create a natural depth which extends into the television set, acting as an extension of your natural peripheral vision.
So far the 3D tech behind Crysis 2 has certainly impressed, although Crytek it seems are not the only ones to be using it. Sony are also developing a similar process for first and third party usage in order to make 3D a little more achievable on the PS3, negating the heavy performance cost that comes with rendering the effect for real.
With the 3D race now officially on, it will be interesting to see how developers implement the effect into their games, especially with regards to either rendering in proper 3D with individual frames for each eye, or with the 2D displacement tech talked about on this page today.
Crytek has shown that it is possible to convincingly include support for the format without having to completely rewrite their engine in order to include it, whilst Guerrilla Games has also showcased the advantages of actually downgrading image quality in order to create an unparalleled natural depth that can only e achieved by actually rendering in 3D.
What is apparent is that the two different approaches to including 3D in the latest software releases provide clear support for developers on both sides of the coin when it comes to adopting the format.
Saturday, 3 July 2010
Editorial: Kinect - The Price Of Admission
The price of any new product is always hotly debated, especially when the item in question is being positioned for consumption by the mass market, the largely mainstream segment of gaming society. This is exactly what has been happening this past week with Microsoft’s Kinect. Ever since the estimated launch price for the US was revealed, people have speculated on how much the device would cost in the UK; how much it should, or would need to sell for in order to be successful, no more so than when ShopTo.net revealed what it believed would be the price for the unit here in the UK.
North American retailers have been pricing the Kinect at $150 for the last couple of weeks, which roughly translates to around £100 in direct conversion, and allowing for other market factors to effect overall cost. At the end of last week UK site ShopTo.net started taking preorders for the device set to cost £129.99 in the UK. Or so they are estimating. Many other retailers have also spoken out on how much they think Kinect will retail for when it hits the UK in November this year. A vast majority believe that anything from £100 to £150 is possible, squarely in the range of Nintendo’s Wii console, and firmly ahead of Sony’s PlayStation Move.
The price then, roughly equates to a direct, or near thereabouts conversion between US and UK, with the overall bracket set to ensure the best return for Microsoft but not the most value for money for consumers. Playstation Move on the other hand, is relatively cheap. It has a confirmed RRP of just £59.99 for both the Move controller and PlayStation Eye camera. The Navigation controller will go on sale separately for £24.99, taking the total cost of getting the complete Move experience to just £84.99, some fifteen pounds less than the £100 entry price so many retailers believe is necessary for the Kinect to have widespread success at launch, outside the standard core Xbox 360 user.
Speak to any retailer, or in turn most market analylists, and they will tell you that a sub-£100 price point is absolutely essential to drive forward sales aimed at the casual market - the Wii’s market. Many in that market won’t already have a 360 console, so in essence Microsoft would need to provide both to the consumer at an almost impulse buy price, something below £200 but confortably above the Wii. Though, for this to happen they need to have the base Kinect unit selling for somewhat lower than the £130 ShopTo.net seem to be suggesting.
£79.99 for the Kinect on its own, or maybe with one bundled set of mini-games is exactly the price tag most retailers in the UK, both on the high street and online want to see. A price tag that appears instantly more affordable to the casual user - something that isn’t going to break the bank, and that will tempt them in on there own accord. Suffice to say, that might not be happening, and might not actually be possible, as various sources have stated that the Kinect actually costs close to $150 dollars to make, meaning that Microsoft will be loosing money on every sale, or at least only just breaking even.
In that sense you can see why the company is being rather coy with UK pricing. Perhaps it is testing the waters, seeing how much interest there is for the device if it was to be priced up at over the £100 mark. And in this regard the low amount of preorders as reported by ShopTo.net seems to show that there is very little.
Of course it may not just be the price putting people off. At E3 most hands-on reports of software for the Kinect was poorly received, plagued by a high amount of lag, and a lack of any real precision when tracking player movements. Now, whilst this is unlikely to matter to the mainstream consumer – who is likely just to see the device and think ‘that looks like fun’ no matter the technical issues – it does create a negative buzz around the unit somewhat, especially when the PlayStation Move has already started to prove its worth in games like Socom, in which the response time and accuracy is said to be incredibly impressive - a substitute for the standard DualShock controller. You then begin to see just how important it is for Microsoft to get the launch price right. Too little, and they loose too much money for it to be viable as a way of propping up 360 sales, and too high, and they’ll fail to attract the mainstream consumer.
And that’s the point. Unlike PlayStation Move Kinect isn’t designed to be some kind of hardcore device that also plays up to the casual market. It IS designed and aimed at precisely that particular market, and in order to meet the needs of that market has to be priced accordingly. The Move can been seen as a premium product as such, tied in with the PlayStation 3 brand but at a fraction of the cost of what ‘premium’ means to most people. Microsoft on the other hand, seem to be aiming Kinect at everyone but at a higher more premium-like price tag, if ShopTo.net have in fact got their estimations right.
So, I think it’s clear that in order to guarantee the success that Microsoft would like it is essential that the price of Kinect stays low, around £100 would just be the clincher, though at £79.99 everyone can be tempted in for a go. And ‘guarantee’ they must, as Nintendo’s Wii can be picked up for as little as £149.99 in most places, and for £169.99 with a game in others. Move also looks very attractive in its £59.99 guise, and especially at around £85 for the whole set.
Microsoft definitely needs to consider these things in addition to their target audience – they don’t appear to have the sometimes fanboyistic nature of the core gamer behind Kinect – and perhaps should meet at some kind of compromise. After all, while the device sounds promising on paper it has failed to back up any of its initial fanfare with any revolutionary, must-have pieces of software, something that the Move is slowly heading towards with the likes of Killzone 3 and Socom.
At the end of the day both companies need to come out flying, and so far neither of them has done anywhere near enough to justify a massively successful, sell-out launch. Pricing aside, the quality of software for both Kinect and PlayStaion Move leaves a lot to be desired. You need more than just a bunch of Wii-too mini-games, or a singularly impressive, hardcore experience in order to make this work. You arguably need a bit of both, coupled with the right price tag to boot. Just look at the Wii as an example, it’s a perfect combination of brilliant marketing, and some solid, but overly sparse, high-quality software.
The price given for Kinect on ShopTo.net is just an estimate, and not the final RRP of the unit. Microsoft have yet to set a final retail price for the device, although most reports strongly place it in the £100-£150 price bracket.
North American retailers have been pricing the Kinect at $150 for the last couple of weeks, which roughly translates to around £100 in direct conversion, and allowing for other market factors to effect overall cost. At the end of last week UK site ShopTo.net started taking preorders for the device set to cost £129.99 in the UK. Or so they are estimating. Many other retailers have also spoken out on how much they think Kinect will retail for when it hits the UK in November this year. A vast majority believe that anything from £100 to £150 is possible, squarely in the range of Nintendo’s Wii console, and firmly ahead of Sony’s PlayStation Move.
The price then, roughly equates to a direct, or near thereabouts conversion between US and UK, with the overall bracket set to ensure the best return for Microsoft but not the most value for money for consumers. Playstation Move on the other hand, is relatively cheap. It has a confirmed RRP of just £59.99 for both the Move controller and PlayStation Eye camera. The Navigation controller will go on sale separately for £24.99, taking the total cost of getting the complete Move experience to just £84.99, some fifteen pounds less than the £100 entry price so many retailers believe is necessary for the Kinect to have widespread success at launch, outside the standard core Xbox 360 user.
Speak to any retailer, or in turn most market analylists, and they will tell you that a sub-£100 price point is absolutely essential to drive forward sales aimed at the casual market - the Wii’s market. Many in that market won’t already have a 360 console, so in essence Microsoft would need to provide both to the consumer at an almost impulse buy price, something below £200 but confortably above the Wii. Though, for this to happen they need to have the base Kinect unit selling for somewhat lower than the £130 ShopTo.net seem to be suggesting.
£79.99 for the Kinect on its own, or maybe with one bundled set of mini-games is exactly the price tag most retailers in the UK, both on the high street and online want to see. A price tag that appears instantly more affordable to the casual user - something that isn’t going to break the bank, and that will tempt them in on there own accord. Suffice to say, that might not be happening, and might not actually be possible, as various sources have stated that the Kinect actually costs close to $150 dollars to make, meaning that Microsoft will be loosing money on every sale, or at least only just breaking even.
In that sense you can see why the company is being rather coy with UK pricing. Perhaps it is testing the waters, seeing how much interest there is for the device if it was to be priced up at over the £100 mark. And in this regard the low amount of preorders as reported by ShopTo.net seems to show that there is very little.
Of course it may not just be the price putting people off. At E3 most hands-on reports of software for the Kinect was poorly received, plagued by a high amount of lag, and a lack of any real precision when tracking player movements. Now, whilst this is unlikely to matter to the mainstream consumer – who is likely just to see the device and think ‘that looks like fun’ no matter the technical issues – it does create a negative buzz around the unit somewhat, especially when the PlayStation Move has already started to prove its worth in games like Socom, in which the response time and accuracy is said to be incredibly impressive - a substitute for the standard DualShock controller. You then begin to see just how important it is for Microsoft to get the launch price right. Too little, and they loose too much money for it to be viable as a way of propping up 360 sales, and too high, and they’ll fail to attract the mainstream consumer.
And that’s the point. Unlike PlayStation Move Kinect isn’t designed to be some kind of hardcore device that also plays up to the casual market. It IS designed and aimed at precisely that particular market, and in order to meet the needs of that market has to be priced accordingly. The Move can been seen as a premium product as such, tied in with the PlayStation 3 brand but at a fraction of the cost of what ‘premium’ means to most people. Microsoft on the other hand, seem to be aiming Kinect at everyone but at a higher more premium-like price tag, if ShopTo.net have in fact got their estimations right.
So, I think it’s clear that in order to guarantee the success that Microsoft would like it is essential that the price of Kinect stays low, around £100 would just be the clincher, though at £79.99 everyone can be tempted in for a go. And ‘guarantee’ they must, as Nintendo’s Wii can be picked up for as little as £149.99 in most places, and for £169.99 with a game in others. Move also looks very attractive in its £59.99 guise, and especially at around £85 for the whole set.
Microsoft definitely needs to consider these things in addition to their target audience – they don’t appear to have the sometimes fanboyistic nature of the core gamer behind Kinect – and perhaps should meet at some kind of compromise. After all, while the device sounds promising on paper it has failed to back up any of its initial fanfare with any revolutionary, must-have pieces of software, something that the Move is slowly heading towards with the likes of Killzone 3 and Socom.
At the end of the day both companies need to come out flying, and so far neither of them has done anywhere near enough to justify a massively successful, sell-out launch. Pricing aside, the quality of software for both Kinect and PlayStaion Move leaves a lot to be desired. You need more than just a bunch of Wii-too mini-games, or a singularly impressive, hardcore experience in order to make this work. You arguably need a bit of both, coupled with the right price tag to boot. Just look at the Wii as an example, it’s a perfect combination of brilliant marketing, and some solid, but overly sparse, high-quality software.
The price given for Kinect on ShopTo.net is just an estimate, and not the final RRP of the unit. Microsoft have yet to set a final retail price for the device, although most reports strongly place it in the £100-£150 price bracket.
Wednesday, 30 June 2010
Review: Super Mario Galaxy 2 (Wii)
The original Super Mario Galaxy was unquestionably my 2007 game of the year. With it’s magical atmosphere, delightful art styles, stunning graphics, and exemplary level design it was one of the best games to come out of Nintendo since the N64 days, and Super Mario 64 itself. This is made even more impressive as during the GameCube generation, with the exception of Donkey Kong Jungle Beat, Nintendo failed to create anything quite as captivating, or as awe-inspiringly beautiful as their N64 masterpiece.SMG displayed the kind of wondrous personality and gameplay mastery associated with the company for the last twenty years or so, providing all who ventured into its grasp with some of the most refined and downright amazing platforming on any videogame system to date. It was to many, myself included, beyond just being a sequel to one of the best games of all time, firmly stamping its own mark into a genre long since forgotten amongst today’s mainstream gaming crowd.
The use of gravity as a gameplay mechanic, throwing players around from planet to planet; and the use of switching perspectives, 3D to 2D, and back again, brought forward deviously fresh gameplay which had never been seen before. Not quite like this, and all the more refreshing as a result. Huge bosses, unique level designs and challenges, new and old characters, all contributed even more to the experience. And that’s not even mentioning the whimsical nature of the affair, steeped in a lovingly polished goodness of visual beauty and orchestrated audio delights, quite possibly the closest thing to perfection in a long while.
This sequel in many respects is more of the same, partially streamlined to be more accessible, but more hardcore at the same time, without compromising on the style and gameplay foundations which worked so well the last time around. But it’s more than just a rehash of what has gone before, and the concepts established in the first Super Mario Galaxy. It’s an attempt to bringing together something fresh and altogether familiar at the same time.
At first glance SMG2 is undeniably similar to the last game. The intro sequence in particular being a 2D homage to the opening of the original SMG, with Bowser once again invading Princess Peach’s castle and stealing her away from Mario once more, thus yet again introducing us to the use of space travel and the need to collect those delightful golden stars. From this point on, the mechanics are pretty much identical to the last game, and the use of gravity, the combination of traversing across large and tiny planets are all so familiar. The difference is, that this sequel mixes it up far more than seen in the original SMG.
It’s a testament to the minds at Nintendo’s EAD team that they’ve managed to plunge so much originality in what could be seen as a rehashed, homage title of sorts. Calling it a rehash though, simply doesn’t do SMG2 any justice, as the game is brimming with brand new ideas, excitingly tough and imaginative levels, and perhaps the best orchestral score used in a Mario game to date. It is definitely in many ways a homage title though, more so than the last game.
SMG2 also expands upon the gravitational ideas and shifting perspectives introduced to us in the first game, whilst adding practically a new gameplay mechanic almost in every level. Nintendo have taken onboard what worked, and ditched perhaps what didn’t, or rather what did, but just not as well as it could have. At the same time they have also reduced the number of stages which favour Mario 64’s brand of exploration, instead focusing on obstacle course style level layouts. These stages have a definitive beginning, but the end sometimes feels out of place and strangely positioned into what appears to be the most challenging to reach area in the stage, whether it makes sense of not.
Despite this the game still manages to be an awesome experience through and through - just not quite as amazingly perfect as I would have liked - and this is further upheld up by the inclusion of cool new power-ups, and the return of an old friend from Super Mario World. The finely crafted orchestrated sound track, and magical nature of the game also plays a large part in this too, with the usual Nintendo touch being applied without restraint.
The first thing that you’ll notice has changed in SMG2 is the use of a hub world to serve as entry to one of many galaxies to be found in the game. Instead of featuring a large and expansive hub in which to both explore and to act as a gateway to new stages, you now have Starship Mario, and the return of a traditional map system. This new map system is very much like the ones found in both New Super Mario Bros and Super Mario 3. Levels are clearly marked in order along with the amount of stars possible to collect in each one, and the amount required to unlock the next stage. There are also branching pathways which lead to bonus levels or other normal stages.
The map can also be zoomed in and out, to show either individual galaxies, or simply the stages to be found in each one. It is a far more convenient way of displaying all of the game’s levels, which are now easier to find and keep track of, than to have to hunt around for them in the old hub world. Sadly the map system lacks some of the same charm and magical quality compared to SMG1’s ‘observatory’, although Starship Mario certainly does not.
Starship Mario itself is a smaller version of the hub found in the original SMB, complete with hidden areas, and a cool reproduction of one of the last game’s observatories, which acts as a museum of sorts for displaying power-ups found and artefacts uncovered on your journey. The Starship looks like Mario’s face, and you can run all around it, venturing into unlocked rooms and talking to the inhabitants that arrive at certain points throughout the game. Jumping on the pressure pad in front of the steering wheel (yes, a wheel) takes you to the game’s map screen, in which you browse through, and select your levels.
Outside of the new hub world and map system, most of the changes and improvements are contained within the gameplay itself. The biggest addition to SMG2 is the inclusion of Yoshi, who has been missing in action for far to long in a Mario game. He hasn’t changed much from his debut in Super Mario World on the Super NES, keeping both his tongue grabbing and hovering abilities at the forefront of what he’s all about.
Yoshi is only used in certain stages, most of which have a new mechanic, which uses him in different ways from just running around and doing the usual platform jumping. For example, some stages will require you to keep Yoshi fed with fruits enabling him to walk on otherwise invisible platforms. At other times eating a blue coloured fruit will see him puff up like a balloon and enable him to float up in the air to areas out of reach using the standard Mario/Yoshi combination. Likewise, the game will also test your basic tongue-lashing capabilities by having you swing from objects suspended high up in the air before reaching a specific location.
After Yoshi comes the use of brand new power-ups, including Cloud Mario, Rock Mario, and a funky looking drill that Mario can carry above his head (Drill Mario?). These are awesome, especially Rock Mario, which sees the little fellow take the form of a rocky boulder when waggling the Wii Remote, causing him roll around on screen at speed, much like Morpthball Samus in Metroid Prime.
Cloud Mario has the ability to create a few temporary platforms in which to stand on, allowing you to reach previously out of the way areas. Simply by jumping up and then waggling the Wii Remote creates one of three clouds for Mario to stand on. These clouds can be created in jet streams allowing Mario to glide across the sky, or just to gain a little extra height. After using up all three clouds it simply a case of grabbing another power-up to refill your supply, and away you go.
Like with Yoshi levels are all specifically designed to use these abilities, and in many cases new mechanics are presented for the player to learn and master. The range on offer is pretty incredible, with an almost constant barrage of new, or quirky things coming your way, all of which are done extremely well.
If there is one complaint about an otherwise near perfect experience, it’s that a lot of the levels are very linear in nature, and with little exploration to be had. You never really get to ‘know’ the levels like in Mario 64, or even parts of the first SMG. Instead the levels feel like a design homage to the likes of Super Mario Bros: The Lost Levels, or Super Mario World, created more in the way of testing your hardcore platforming skills rather than delivering the most intoxicating, and expansive Mario game yet.
However, the challenges set in nearly every world are as imaginative as the last, and a lot of effort has gone into making this one of the most inspired Mario titles yet. It also works beautifully as homage to the old 2D Mario titles, with redone orchestral music, and faithfully styled level designs. Approaching the sequel in this way, rather than putting it on a ten out of ten, revolutionary, and perfectionist pedestal, is perhaps the way to go.
And this is in itself the way that Nintendo views the game – as a hardcore instalment of the series designed for the most experienced, and dedicated Mario fans. In which case the game succeeds with flying colours, earning its Koopa wings, but maybe not in making it the ‘best’ Mario game of all time. Perhaps not quite as sublime as the first SMG either, though that will be debated for years, I’m sure.
Moving forward, there is plenty to do once you’ve finished the game. After getting 120 stars you unlock another 120 green stars to collect, taking the challenge up a notch, and giving you another chance to play through every level once again. Getting stars is only one part of the challenge though. Throughout every level is a hidden comet coin, and picking this up unlocks specific challenges in addition to the main task required to getting a star. So, for example you might have to do a timed run of a specific star challenge, or a race to the end of the stage.
Occasionally I thought that some of the challenges the game has to offer are just a little too frustrating, especially later on when the slightest mistake leads to a lost of life. In these situations it isn’t so much the level design or actual challenge itself that is the problem, but it’s these elements combined with what appears to be occasionally restrictive camera placement that impacts on the overall polished nature of the experience. It’s nothing overly bad, or even enough to tarnish the delights that Nintendo have managed to cram in here, but it does in my opinion make it less of an overall exemplary experience compared to the first game.
So, you could say that while this sequel does much to improve on the original, it doesn’t quite beat it outright, at best matching the original’s brilliance, and at worst not quite hitting the same highs. Either way, however you slice it, Super Mario Galaxy 2 is still one of the best games to be released in the last ten years or so, and well worth picking up, essentially so, even if it’s not as awe-inspiringly fantastical as SMG was.
Overall SMG2 does so much right. The inclusion of new characters and power-ups are suitably inspired as they are superb, as is the streamlined map system and the extra challenges that keep you going after finishing the game, not to mention the beautiful visuals on offer – Nintendo have really pushed the Wii in this regard, shiny and beautifully lit graphics all at a lavish 60fps. That said, this sequel isn’t quite as groundbreaking as the first game, and not quite as finely balanced either. However, you do have to appreciate the fact that Nintendo very rarely makes a Mario sequel, and in this case it’s one of the best they’ve ever made, minor issues aside.
Perhaps, at the end of the day that’s all that matters, because whilst Super Mario Galaxy 2 might not be as revolutionary as the first, it’s still full of imagination, atmosphere, and some of the most impressively creative level designs to date. Sure it can be frustrating at times, and the reduction in larger level exploration is mildly disappointing. But by the same token it is complete celebration of what gaming used to be about, not what it is about now, and with this in mind it is an undeniable success.
VERDICT: 9/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
