PDA

View Full Version : What platform are the screen shots from ?



TS16
21st Jul 2005, 01:21
hey, just curiouse, does anybody know what platform the new screens are from ? they look AMAZING, are they xbox ? ps2 ? pc ? im guessing their probably pc since they want to make the game look the best. i guess im just wondering what us ps2 owners are going to get, a watered down game ? boggled down with long loading times ? does anybody have some ps2 screens, just so i could see how the game looks ? thanks to whoever replys. and does anybody know when we'll get any info for the psp version ? how sweet would it be to raid some tombs while on a long car ride haha. thanks guys. :)


Todd

midroth
21st Jul 2005, 04:06
Apple G5 (XBox 360 dev. system).

CatSuit&Ponytail
21st Jul 2005, 08:49
Apple G5 (XBox 360 dev. system).
That in itself is so disturbing! If stuff is being made on Macs, why is it nothing is being released for them? Also, does that mean that MS couldn't put together a super PC to do the job? :confused:

GoranAgar
21st Jul 2005, 09:02
Maybe one reason is that things that run on an IBM compatible PC leak so easily into the Internet and a lot more people have IBM compatible PCs than Macs.

Acceber
21st Jul 2005, 10:52
*sets up several empty buckets and waits for results*

:D :O :D

TDC
21st Jul 2005, 12:53
Personally, since we know that we won't see the game until 2006, I wonder why Eidos doesn't scrap the PS2 version plans and develop it for the PS3 instead. I have enjoyed my PS2, but I recognize that it's the least powerful of the current consoles. TRL is being developed for at least one next-gen console (Xbox 360), so why not for them all, or at very least for the ones that will be out at/near the release of the game? Granted, PS3 owners will be able to take advantage of the total backwards compatibility, but I miss the point of Eidos not taking advantage of the timing of the PS3's release.

Legend
21st Jul 2005, 13:30
If they did that I think their sales would go WAY down. People are not going to buy a 400$ console just so they can play TR: L, which will be what, 50 - 70 bucks? It is to their advantage to release it while the PS2 is the current system in the Playstation franchise. Everyone has a PS2 right now so it's just a lot smarter to release it while it's current. I mean there are those people that are going to go out and buy the PS3 the very first day it comes out but the average person does not have that kind of money. Also the PS3 is being released in spring and TR:L is being released in the winter of 2006 I believe. Gaming companies don't release the same game for different consoles at different times they release the game all at once. Xbox 360 is being released in November. So that would mean Eidos would have to wait around three more months until they could release Tomb Raider.

TDC
21st Jul 2005, 16:57
Higher prices for games is something that we're going to have to get used to fairly soon - there's no getting around it. Even as much as AoD hurt the franchise, TR still has a significant fanbase that will buy the game sight unseen for whatever price ends up being on the amary case. Why release the game for a console that will be five years old, especially when there will be direct and inevitable comparisons to a version that will play on a system (Xbox 360) that is significantly more powerful than the PS2? Not looking ahead far enough just feels like a mistake, especially when it doesn't require looking all that far.

Gaming companies don't release the same game for different consoles at different times they release the game all at once.Not true. Resident Evil 4 for PS2, ten months after the GC version. Metal Gear Solid 2 for Xbox, a year after the PS2. Beyond Good & Evil, released on three separate dates within a month across the major consoles. Silent Hill 2 for PS2, released three months later on Xbox. It happens all the time. Putting out the best versions possible of a game that has a lot to live up to only makes sense, even if it means a little staggering of release dates.
Xbox 360 is being released in November. So that would mean Eidos would have to wait around three more months until they could release Tomb Raider.Actual release dates are anything but a guarantee until the product physically reaches the stores, and I would guess that the developers wouldn't mind some extra time to tweak the game. No game is ever "finished," they're just "finished enough."

LaraAngelOfDarkness
21st Jul 2005, 23:36
Why release a game on a five year old system? Because 90 MILLION people still play that system. Many of the most wanted games for PS2 still haven't been released and probably won't come out till after the launch of the PS3. I know that I won't buy a Playstation 3(same ofr any other system) as soon as its released until it falls to a price I can afford(or get it as a gift LOL).

midroth
22nd Jul 2005, 00:03
That in itself is so disturbing! If stuff is being made on Macs, why is it nothing is being released for them? Also, does that mean that MS couldn't put together a super PC to do the job? :confused:Hi, PT. The comming XBox 360 has inside 3 PPCs, the Apple G5 has one PPC. Intel hardware can just run on a PPC with/under an emulator. This could be the mayor rason. Could...

TDC
23rd Jul 2005, 14:55
Why release a game on a five year old system? Because 90 MILLION people still play that system.I don't dispute that, but my point is that most of those people won't get the best version possible of the game, which is a disservice to anyone who played TR on a PlayStation 1 or 2. Sony's consoles have been home to every one of the TR games so far, while the other current consoles haven't had a single title. I think it's reasonable to believe that many PS2 owners will buy a PS3, and that the PS3 will continue Sony's success in the game industry. That said, giving the potentially worst looking, slowest loading version of the game to gamers who prefer the PlayStation without giving them another option, even though the PS3 is just over the horizon, is a waste. If the choice was to pick the game for the PS2 or PS3, I think Eidos went in the wrong direction. Both the Xbox and Xbox 360 will get versions, so why not the PS2 and PS3?

Many of the most wanted games for PS2 still haven't been released and probably won't come out till after the launch of the PS3.Sure, there's plenty of life left in the PS2. I'm not saying that it should be abandoned, but there should still be at least one eye on the future. As for the 'most wanted games that probably won't come out until after the PS3 launch,' I did a couple of searches and only found only one hot title that's close with its projected release date - Final Fantasy XII in March.

I know that I won't buy a Playstation 3(same ofr any other system) as soon as its released until it falls to a price I can afford(or get it as a gift LOL).I'm sure there are many who share your point of view, but I just happen to be in the camp of people who plan to get a PS3 as soon as possible. Yes, it will be more expensive, but I'm not the sort who likes to wait, and it could be a long while before the price comes down.

.chio.
15th Aug 2005, 01:07
Don't forget that new technology always have terrible bugs and problems when it first appears in the market, they are solved later, but the best testers are the people buying the product itself, here it took some years for the first playstations two to arrive from america, since sony do not sell them here, so I finally got one, there are so many games to buy and play! I don't even care about psx3 yet :p if a new tr is going to be release for the psx2 it is highly welcome! but instead of buying a psx3 I'll choose to buy a powerful pc :)