Archive for October, 2006

So, with specs of the Nvidia GeForce 8800 Series released, the question is being asked around the web, and on many forums of what ATI has in the pipeline.

Well, if they have something big coming, they’re keeping it tight to their chests.

To give a bit of background, their current best offering is the Radeon X1950. This is a DirectX 9 card, but is arguably the best DirectX 9 Card.

Ultimately, since Nvidia’s G80 8800′s aren’t actually on shelves yet, ATI is not losing. In fact since Nvidia seems to be treading water, ATI may be inching ahead. We may yet see the 8800′s mid-November launch pushed out, which would leave ATI in a stronger position. There is nothing to stop ATI announcing their R600 cards a week before they’re shipped, and as long as the 8800′s have’t been out for months, they should be ok.

Timeline

13th October – R600 has an external 512 memory bus

2nd October – R600 has over 500 million transistors

15th June – ATI Talks Direct3d 10 – Paraphrase: “We’re in the Direct3d 10 game”

12th June – Some sites reported that ATI’s R600 chip for Direct3d 10 had been “taped out”. What this apparently means is that mass production is a number of months away, and these sites expected the chip to be on sale before the end of the year.

13th April 2007 – Update and links to pics at The Inquirer.

Post to Twitter

Yesterday, upon finding out that the demo had been recently released, I picked it up from my favorite demo source.

I was pretty excited about playing this demo, since the last game of this genre I played was Transport Tycoon and to this day, that game would have to be in my top five.

The file was a pleasant size ~200mb and installed quickly and easily. It also loaded quickly, and I was able to crank up the graphics settings (probably a bit too much in hindsight) and get into the tutorial pretty quickly. The tutorial was fairly typical, asking you to carry out actions and then moving on to the next topic. It occurred to me that it was fairly likely that you would mess something up, and thus break the tutorial. If you couldn’t “complete” what the tutorial wanted you to do, then it wasn’t going to continue.

It didn’t take long.

After attempting to create a second train on my track, they ended up facing each other at an impasse, and no amount of extra track and signal building seemed to be able to resolve the problem. In transport tycoon you could quite easily skip a train’s destination, and hence make it turn round. I’m sure there’s something like that here, but it wasn’t immediately apparent.

The in-game graphics were pretty cool. The cities looked alive, and I’m sure that as time passes, and they develop and modernise, the graphics will look even more impressive.

Sid Meiers Railroads Screenshot

I thought the train looked a little cartoonish, but I’m sure that’s a subjective question. The environment was very nicely detailed and all the bits and pieces in between operated well. On the graphics front however, there was one notable exception, this:

Sid Meiers Railroads Screenshot

The aberration pictured above is the “route planning” window. The actual process is pretty simple. You get to this screen by creating a new train. You then add carriages in the modal window displayed, and then select it’s destination by clicking on the massive white dot which represents a station.

So the process is good, but when so much effort has been put into the other graphics of the game, it’s a bit of a letdown to come to this screen and for things to have been done so poorly. For instance the icons for the carriages don’t look like what they are, which could be easily resolved. Perhaps it will be patched, or perhaps this simplicity is necessary for managing the complexity of later stages of the game, but I felt it let them down.

I’m glad I started this article by saying that the last game of this genre I played was TT. Because I think many of my perspectives are strongly influenced by that game. For instance, in that game you had to do everything yourself. You had to own the land, build the tunnels, the bridges, the stations and track, manage earth moving and a huge number of other tasks.

In fact, when you eventually managed to build a profitable route, it was the pinnacle of a costly and time consuming project management exercise. Seeing the train chug through the tunnels and across the bridges you had agonised over was what made the game what it was.

I also loved the fact that in order to build the large airport in the middle of a massive city, you had to be an utter bastard. Since no council was going to let you bulldoze buildings in the central city in later stages, I would pick a few cities, and bulldoze huge areas and build unconnected roads which would later be bulldozed to build a massive airport.

In my play of the game (which was extremely limited) it seemed that all these tasks were automated. For example, one of the instructions in the tutorial was. “Click on the ‘build tracks’ button and drag your tracks from Baltimore into the centre of Washington.”

Upon releasing the mouse button, the PC carried out earthworks, built a tunnel, the track, bulldozed the necessary sections in Washington and took some money for it.

I was left thinking, “hmm, that was effortless.” And once the train started chugging I felt no sense of achievement whatsoever.

So, I think this game is well made, looks good, and seems to carry and improve a number of aspects of previous similar games. However I do wonder whether, by simplifying the game play, they’ve lost a key aspect of what makes these games what they are.

I won’t be picking it up.

Post to Twitter

Google Image Labeler

Author: Pete

Google really does come up with some interesting things.

I was trawling through my google sitemap data today and I noticed a new menu item. Google Enhanced Image Search.

To summarise, it sounds like google has quite a few things in the pipeline to liven up their image search. The first of these, is google image labeler.

Basically, what happens is that you have a certain amount of time (about two minutes) and it’s like a gameshow. You get partnered with someone else, and as images appear, you have to use words to describe them.

If you both pick the same word, then it’s considered a “match” and you get points (which aren’t useful for anything as far as I can tell).

It’s fairly addictive, and an interesting exercise in psychology.

Let’s take this image that came up in my last round:

Red, Muslim

Now, my first thought was “I wonder whether my partner is from the US.”

I decided I’d kick off with a couple of fairly politically correct answers and try “muslim” and “arabic”.

“Hmm, no match. Ok, let’s try the American response.”

“Terrorist.”

Still no match. At this point with every picture, you start to try and think of the lowest, most generic attribute of the image. “Red”. Matched!

As it turns out, my partner guessed; diphosphonate, entrepreneurialism and red.

So, what do I think of the system? It seems pretty cool, but what always happen is that you drop to guessing extremely generic terms just to get a match. For instance a picture of a city map will always be matched as “map” which isn’t going to help anyone searching for ‘Auckland Map’. And it extends to anything, an iconic Indian building will match as “building” and a famous painting may match as “painting”, “art” of “person”.

I think this idea has it’s merits, but detailed categorising, and matching of people with categories that they have knowledge of would make the system a lot more useful.

Post to Twitter

Someone recommended I watch the Gears of War trailer today.

Gear of War Trailer Screenshot

Wow.

Gears of War Trailer Screenshot

Sadly, it’s only coming for the 360, but if those graphics are in-game, then you microsoft junkies are definitely in for some fun.

I guess one of the bonuses of a console is that if those are in-game graphics, then you know that if you pick up the game, then that’s how it’s going to look.

When I watch the stunning Unreal 2007 trailers, I have to resist shaking at the thought of the PC power that’s being used to push those graphics.

It wasn’t really much of a surprise for me that the guys behind Gears of War (Epic Games) are the same guys behind the Unreal series.

I’ve spent most of my gaming time over the last few years playing the battlefield series, and Unreal Tournament 2004. It’s a rare week when I don’t abuse the poor programming and quality control of EA and their rushed release stuffups. On the other hand, I’m known to wax lyrical about the wonderful programming, evidenced by stunning performance and load times of Unreal Tournament 2004.

I’ve been hearing and reading a lot about Gears of War, but until now have been turning a blind eye. Now I know what all the fuss is about.

Post to Twitter