God of War 3 impressions

So those that have played the God of War 3 demo, what did you think?

Keeping in mind that i'ts a VERY old build, I definitely had some criticisms about the game.

-Framerate was not locked at 60 FPS, as they're aiming for. At times, I'm pretty sure it even dipped below 30, but I can't say that positively.
-Texture work was really mixed. Overall, they just felt... not very clean.
-Lacked that epic feel that GOW2 had. For example, the opener in GOW2, when you fight the Collosus of Rhodes, you're interacting with him, you really get a sense of his size and power. The Titan in the GOW3 demo just felt like background, and the way they looped the same animation of him fighting Helios just looked took away from the scale of what was going on.
-Played like the same old God of War.

+Sound direction is amazing
+One ups that visceral, brutal feeling from previous GOWs
+The air vent sequence was jaw dropping, in terms of graphics and scale
+Played like the same old God of War :P

- Voice acting for this wasn't great. Same moan and groans over and over...only cool thing was the guy flying over the giant.
-Visuals were not "out of this world" like they made it out to be. The giant was cool, but Resistance 2 did it better.
-They are trying way too hard to be epic. Just let it happen, write the story and let the epic scenes come to you, dont make the entire game one epic button smashing fest

+Sound effects were awesome
+I liked how gory and dark feeling it was, hope it stays that way.

so is this demo the excact same build from E3 or is it just the same demo but the build from what they have rite now??

• It is a lot better looking on your TV
  The HD videos you find on gametrailers do not do the game justice. There are
  lots of subtleties you will notice from reflection on the golden fleece to the lighting effects,
  GOW3 will be able to stand its ground visually with the other PS3 exclusives.
  
• Kratos has learned some new moves
  The controls have been refined a bit and Kratos has a few new options in battle,
  holding the R1 trigger changes what the face buttons do, giving some new
  attacks like grabbing enemies at a distance. He can also now charge a few
  moves by holding the button a little longer, noticed this on the heavy attacks.
  
• Magic recharges!
  Yes, no more hunting for green orbs, It may just be for the demo but what I
  experienced was a regenerating magic bar. This is a welcome addition
  personally speaking because magic was not a regular part of my arsenal in
  the previous 2 games.

Originally Posted by SaintAvi

• It is a lot better looking on your TV
  The HD videos you find on gametrailers do not do the game justice. There are
  lots of subtleties you will notice from reflection on the golden fleece to the lighting effects,
  GOW3 will be able to stand its ground visually with the other PS3 exclusives.
  
• Kratos has learned some new moves
  The controls have been refined a bit and Kratos has a few new options in battle,
  holding the R1 trigger changes what the face buttons do, giving some new
  attacks like grabbing enemies at a distance. He can also now charge a few
  moves by holding the button a little longer, noticed this on the heavy attacks.
  
• Magic recharges!
  Yes, no more hunting for green orbs, It may just be for the demo but what I
  experienced was a regenerating magic bar. This is a welcome addition
  personally speaking because magic was not a regular part of my arsenal in
  the previous 2 games.

dont u have this post in another thread

I made a thread with this title a few days back and it got locked, this was the post from it ;D

can anyone explain to me what framerate is lol? how can u see if it 60 or 30fps or whatever?

Originally Posted by XRAVE

can anyone explain to me what framerate is lol? how can u see if it 60 or 30fps or whatever?

FPS stands for frames per second. A frame is an image, and when multiple frames are overlapped on to each other, it creates the illusion that something is moving. Think of it like a flip book - you have a bunch of different pictures that are slightly different from each other, but when you flip through them quickly, it animates.

Games are the same way. A game that runs at 30 FPS shows 30 different frames in one second, while a game that runs at 60 FPS shows 60 different frames per second. 60 frames is more, which means the animation is going to be a lot smoother. Going back to the flip book example, thats like a flipbook with 30 pictures VS a flip book with 60 pictures, trying to show the same animation.

30 FPS is the industry standard, anything that drops below that is considered to have framerate issues.

Well, I haven't played GOW I or II before. I will be getting the new versions for the PS3 though. I have been looking forward to GOW III but from what I am hearing I shouldn't get my hopes on it being epic as it has been advertised. For Sony's sake it better deliver on par with UC II or it could be a disaster.

i dont have the demo are they going to release the demo to the public soon?

Originally Posted by Dipchit02

i dont have the demo are they going to release the demo to the public soon?

i sure hope they do lol

I've read that the human eye can really only register 25 frames/sec so 60 is overkill

Originally Posted by SaintAvi

I've read that the human eye can really only register 25 frames/sec so 60 is overkill

It's a really tricky subject. 24 FPS is the bare minimum amount of FPS needed for motion to not be perceived as choppy. We can see faster than that, though. You can visibly notice drops in frame rates if a game plunges from 60 to 25. I was trying to find an example of it, but I guess YouTube only encodes 30 FPS max.

Yeah i know this because of film lol

29.(7?) is the standard framerate for internet videos etc...I think its because of how they are processed or something.

For tv its the lower twenties frames a second, its changing because of the whole digital transition though, i dont know what its changing too. In PAL regions i believe its 27 but im not sure.

Obviously for video games its 30 or 60, even though sony said the ps3 would do 120 haha

For film its 24 to thirty for standard def. It went up with High Def into the 30's i dont know where though, havent looked.

For slow motion things its like 100 and something frames a second, at which the eye cant see. For example dropping a ball, you would see it flatten out as it hits the ground, your naked eye would never register that as it cant see that fast. I looked up exactly what the eye see's and no one will give an exact answer, it was all science terms on how its based on lighting yatta yatta. They said it on mythbusters before, it was like 80-100 or something.

also want to mention that sometimes the blur effect on games go wonky, thus making you believe the framerate dropped and it didnt. Go make an animation or something and when you render it will ask if you want to add motion blur and how bad etc...if you choose not to, it will look like crap.

if the human eye can only see about 25 fps why do we have 60 fps

lol that sony said ps3 would 120 fps

Originally Posted by Nick

FPS stands for frames per second. A frame is an image, and when multiple frames are overlapped on to each other, it creates the illusion that something is moving. Think of it like a flip book - you have a bunch of different pictures that are slightly different from each other, but when you flip through them quickly, it animates.

Games are the same way. A game that runs at 30 FPS shows 30 different frames in one second, while a game that runs at 60 FPS shows 60 different frames per second. 60 frames is more, which means the animation is going to be a lot smoother. Going back to the flip book example, thats like a flipbook with 30 pictures VS a flip book with 60 pictures, trying to show the same animation.

30 FPS is the industry standard, anything that drops below that is considered to have framerate issues.

ah ok now i get it thanks nick :)

Originally Posted by trediddy

if the human eye can only see about 25 fps why do we have 60 fps

lol that sony said ps3 would 120 fps

No, it's not that we can only see 25 FPS, that's just the minimum needed to make pictures look like they animate fluildly. Anything lower and it will look choppy.

Our visual system doesn't really run on a frame per second basis, so there really is no conclusive answer to how many frames per second we see. We do know human's can see consequences to items moving to fast. Like Dustin said, we can't perceive items flattening as the approach free fall, or when you look at car wheels when they are going fast, they appear to spin backwards. Our maximum FPS could be up to 80-100 FPS

Originally Posted by Nick

No, it's not that we can only see 25 FPS, that's just the minimum needed to make pictures look like they animate fluildly. Anything lower and it will look choppy.

Our visual system doesn't really run on a frame per second basis, so there really is no conclusive answer to how many frames per second we see. We do know human's can see consequences to items moving to fast. Like Dustin said, we can't perceive items flattening as the approach free fall, or when you look at car wheels when they are going fast, they appear to spin backwards. Our maximum FPS could be up to 80-100 FPS

oh im kinda gettin it now

If you want the actual science of the human eye. We dont see in frames we see with light, as long as light is reflecting off the object we can see it. If the object moves too fast, there isnt enough light bouncing back to register an image in our head. The best example is to move your hand really slowly across your face, watch it as it moves. Now do it exactly the same but go fast to where its a blur. You could see every step when it was slow, but not when its fast.

i see what ur sayin