We will always see bigger and bolder trailers than we will games. There has been no end of trailers for films I have seen, like Comedies where the only funny bits in the entire movie are in the trailer and the rest tries. I understand the purpose of the trailer. It needs to convey excitement, anticipation for the game, and a great CG trailer can do this. My problem with this is, not so much the contrasting nature of trailers to games but more so when they try to hoodwink us into think this is using full in-game assets like Killzone 2 trailer. We saw that, we sat back, mouths agap and nothing but praise for the developers especially after they announced this was all real-time. But it was later revealed it was CG but they claimed it was exactly like the in game version, and when released, they were close, close enough that people didn't care by then at the differences. I say, they should try their best at conveying the game, CG or not I am not fussed, but don't try and pull the wool over our eyes and claim it is real time when that is a straight lie. Kara may or may not be like that. But since Quantic Dream have had experience in backing up what they produce in a tech-demo or trailer with the game, I think we can be forgiven for some instances.
What they need to look at more is not so much where we buy but why we get screwed over. I have recently seen steam prices and they are starting to come in line with that of retail places. Not to mention that the excuse for smaller population transporting etc... all fly out the door with digital distribution. We are certainly becoming more and more saavy with our purchases since we are screwed over price on a consistent level.
And THIS is the reason why we go overseas to buy. When I can pre-order a game, for 64 dollars australian, including shipping (as it is free) online, or do it for 100 plus bucks at bricks and mortar for the same game (and I have done that with Dragon Age II) we will see a decline in these traditional shops. I am not saying it is a good thing, but retailers are also to blame for these, having one time when buying a game, Fable II, ages ago, I wanted to know a shop that had one in stock, they brought up their internal catalogue, low and behold it has their wholesale price on it, true or not, it was $50 bucks, so when they add that kind of markup on the game, it isn't about how much it costs, so we should look at the retailers than simply looking at our population, geographical location and goegraphical distribution.
It is obvious that the PS3 has slowly caught up to the 360 in terms of the multi-plat ports. Would be interesting to see that next year, another 12 months in the dev cycle for both, you could say that PS3 might edge out the 360. This would be attributed to the ability to store higher res textures onto the PS3 Blu-Ray disc. Dragon Age was a prime example of that. The difference were either down to the texture resolution being bigger for the PS3, or the 360's compression a lot higher in order to fit them onto the 9GB disc.
I think there is the potential for more development within Australia for this specific sports titles I just believe that the developers or publishers are lacking in their real understanding of how the revenue might be generated. One of the things that US sports don't seem to have, but Australian ones do is sponsors on the uniform. This alone is a possible way to help garner some income to help boost the game and the money that it can potentially generate. I am sure that it is also difficult to secure money fr these token bit of advertising, 3 odd million people might watch State of Origin throughout Australia, you wouldn't have that many copies of a game bought and therefore might be resitrctive in permission only not financial. I believe that there needs to be more Aussie sports game, and also have it bring up to the quality that I have seen the US sports or international sports as well. Looking at MLB 09 the Show, Madden 10 and so on, has really raised the bar in how these games can look. The Rigby League 2 game I played, though I love it, was lacking in that area.
To me, this shows the problem with the developers when it comes to getting the most out of the platform. They aren't trying to get the BEST out of these, and this is obvious with the way the PS3 version (Fallout 3) looks, some of the images in the distance look more like 2D sprites than 3D models. They are trying to hit a deadline, and corners need to be cut. There are jaggies in the PS3 version as well, so Anti-Aliasing wasn't implemented, and for those who might say something about this, the PS3 is capable of doing this, but it needs to be implemented and it is apparent that it wasn't. Difficulty at this point in time shouldn't be a factor as all of the tools used to develop the games are not first versions any more. To me this is not worrying about getting the most out of the platform than it is about making sure the game works, like the others do on the time we are releasing the game, and therefore we need similar performance, we need to cut somethings out because we are unable to spend the time improving the performance. Exclusives will always be the true test of the physical beauty and speed of the platforms. But still, these can
mike_on_mic's comments