SEGA Rally Revo - VIDEO

Xbox 360 - PlayStation3 - IBM PC Quicktime SD http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19646&type=mov&pl=game Windows Media SD http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19646&type=wmv&pl=game Quicktime HD http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19645&type=mov&pl=game Windows Media HD http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19645&type=wmv&pl=game video does not seem to show off the 60fps framerate. colors are nice. It almost has that old-school MODEL 2 hardware look. The mud & particle effects look good, everything else looks kinda meh, as if it was last-gen. Howeve that could be because of the video, or because it's an early build, or because the game sucks, we'll see. Need to see more before making a final judgement. I have no doubt it;ll be better than Sega Rally 2006 on PS2, the question is, will Revo live upto the arcade version of Sega Rally 2.

"AirRaid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (24 lines)

> > Xbox 360 - PlayStation3 - IBM PC > > Quicktime SD > http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19646&type=mov&pl=game > > Windows Media SD > http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19646&type=wmv&pl=game > > Quicktime HD > http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19645&type=mov&pl=game > > Windows Media HD > http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19645&type=wmv&pl=game > > > video does not seem to show off the 60fps framerate. colors are nice. > It almost has that old-school MODEL 2 hardware look. The mud & > particle effects look good, everything else looks kinda meh, as if it > was last-gen. Howeve that could be because of the video, or because > it's an early build, or because the game sucks, we'll see. Need to > see more before making a final judgement. I have no doubt it;ll be > better than Sega Rally 2006 on PS2, the question is, will Revo live > upto the arcade version of Sega Rally 2.

Very disappointing. That isn't even close to 60fps and the graphics look like hell. This is why I don't believe a thing until I see it for myself. I read a report earlier in the week where the journalist said it was shaping up to be the best looking next gen racer yet (mainly graphics). Sega better get their head in the now because that demo looks dated.

AirRaid <[email hidden]> wrote in news:1179526666.605611.4590 @q23g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

Quoted text (25 lines)

> > Xbox 360 - PlayStation3 - IBM PC > > Quicktime SD > http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19646&type=mov&pl=game > > Windows Media SD > http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19646&type=wmv&pl=game > > Quicktime HD > http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19645&type=mov&pl=game > > Windows Media HD > http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19645&type=wmv&pl=game > > > video does not seem to show off the 60fps framerate. colors are nice. > It almost has that old-school MODEL 2 hardware look. The mud & > particle effects look good, everything else looks kinda meh, as if it > was last-gen. Howeve that could be because of the video, or because > it's an early build, or because the game sucks, we'll see. Need to > see more before making a final judgement. I have no doubt it;ll be > better than Sega Rally 2006 on PS2, the question is, will Revo live > upto the arcade version of Sega Rally 2. >

I'll check these out when I get home but I thought the vidoes that appeared on Gamespot a couple of days ago looked quite promising... Watching the car move through the newly formed ruts looked impressive. Noot exactly a sim though it ;)

"boodybandit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (34 lines)

> > "AirRaid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> >> Xbox 360 - PlayStation3 - IBM PC >> >> Quicktime SD >> http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19646&type=mov&pl=game >> >> Windows Media SD >> http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19646&type=wmv&pl=game >> >> Quicktime HD >> http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19645&type=mov&pl=game >> >> Windows Media HD >> http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19645&type=wmv&pl=game >> >> >> video does not seem to show off the 60fps framerate. colors are nice. >> It almost has that old-school MODEL 2 hardware look. The mud & >> particle effects look good, everything else looks kinda meh, as if it >> was last-gen. Howeve that could be because of the video, or because >> it's an early build, or because the game sucks, we'll see. Need to >> see more before making a final judgement. I have no doubt it;ll be >> better than Sega Rally 2006 on PS2, the question is, will Revo live >> upto the arcade version of Sega Rally 2. > > Very disappointing. > That isn't even close to 60fps and the graphics look like hell. > This is why I don't believe a thing until I see it for myself. I read a > report earlier in the week where the journalist said it was shaping up to > be the best looking next gen racer yet (mainly graphics). Sega better get > their head in the now because that demo looks dated.

Why does it matter if it runs at 60fps? you would not be able to tell anyway unless it starts chopping out, then you know it running less than 24fps.

On May 24, 11:17 am, "Kevin" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > Why does it matter if it runs at 60fps? you would not be able to tell anyway > unless it starts chopping out, then you know it running less than 24fps. that just is not true in the case of videogames. many games are developed with 60fps in mind, especially fighting games. you'd never see a 30fps Virtua Fighter (except for the original game). people can & do see the difference, even though many people will say that can't tell the difference between 60fps and 30fps. Most 3D arcade racers, from 93's Ridge Racer, 94's Daytona USA on forward, were 60fps. Both arcade Sega Rally games were 60fps. not all games need to be 60fps, but faced-paced games benefit greatly from it.

AirRaid <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (15 lines)

> On May 24, 11:17 am, "Kevin" <[email hidden]> wrote: > >> >> Why does it matter if it runs at 60fps? you would not be able to tell anyway >> unless it starts chopping out, then you know it running less than 24fps. > > > that just is not true in the case of videogames. many games are > developed with 60fps in mind, especially fighting games. you'd never > see a 30fps Virtua Fighter (except for the original game). people can > & do see the difference, even though many people will say that can't > tell the difference between 60fps and 30fps. Most 3D arcade racers, > from 93's Ridge Racer, 94's Daytona USA on forward, were 60fps. Both > arcade Sega Rally games were 60fps. not all games need to be 60fps, > but faced-paced games benefit greatly from it.

TV seems so much smoother at relatively slow FPS because of built in motion blur. There are lots of resources on this. Gamers can and go appreciate more than 60fps.

On 24 May 2007 10:36:03 -0700, AirRaid <[email hidden]> wrote: >you'd never >see a 30fps Virtua Fighter (except for the original game). LOL! Make up your mind already. Console boiz have become too finicky about the whole "it has to be 60fps, or else!", as if it really matters. Just like some of the PC gamers who think all games should run in 1600x1200 (minimum) with 256x antialiasing. Otherwise their eyes start bleeding. Oh no!