PlanetCricket Ashes Cricket 2009 Q&A

[Friend863]

Originally Posted by Gilly Fan

Mate, they are all from the same day. It was last month when all those interviews etc. took place. They've just come out at different times.

Ok mate thanks for telling. We can hope now that these were old build.

[Kshitiz_Indian]

Originally Posted by lazy_chesnut

It's true that the animations are part of the gameplay. If you have shoddy animations (not saying that these are) then you won't get a proper 'feel' to the game with respects to shot timing, etc.

The reason PES was ahead of FIFA for so long was the sheer number of animations available. This meant that players would realistically trap an incoming ball depending on their orientation, etc., and would pass realistically depending on how fast they are running, where the ball is in relation to them, etc., so you would get a good feel as they players behaved more like real people than the FIFA games.

The animations are the way in which you visually interact with the game, so complaining about poor animations is not making a u-turn with regards to making gameplay the focus.

Which is exactly why I added in that post that the animations aren't even that bad to warrant such type of a "u-turn" or whatever.

Kshitiz_Indian added 10 Minutes and 33 Seconds later...

Just read the CricketGaming Q and A. Assuming its authentic, a few things about the PC requirements come up.

He says that with a 4850 he can go upto 1280x720, but it "doesn't hurt" to go 1920x1080. I really hope that he just meant that he could go on a 4850 to 1080p but didn't, because if its otherwise [That a 4850 cannot handle it at 1080p], then sorry folks, but this is lazy programming upto its limits.

Seeing the graphics in the videos, even if the game is not very well optimised[Like say, COD4], I'd expect a AMD 3870/9600GT to be easily capable of running it at 1440x900 on the highest quality and with quite a lot of AA, though even saying 1680x1050 wouldn't exactly be wrong, because the game does seem like that.


He said an 8800GTX was "enough". What the bloody hell does that mean? I mean, yes its 2 generations older now, but it still packs quite a punch, enough to run it very well!

At the beginning of the question he claimed that something along the lines of the power of a console GPU. From so many years of experience with GPU chips, I can safely say that the 3870 is far more powerful than the GPU inside the Xbox360 / PS3. Can Heath / someone else from transmission here confirm / dismiss my doubt?

[barmyarmy]

It is a good interview but I'm not sure you needed to link it 3 times in the space of one post!

[omkarjere]

Originally Posted by Kshitiz_Indian

Which is exactly why I added in that post that the animations aren't even that bad to warrant such type of a "u-turn" or whatever.

Kshitiz_Indian added 10 Minutes and 33 Seconds later...

Just read the CricketGaming Q and A. Assuming its authentic, a few things about the PC requirements come up.

He says that with a 4850 he can go upto 1280x720, but it "doesn't hurt" to go 1920x1080. I really hope that he just meant that he could go on a 4850 to 1080p but didn't, because if its otherwise [That a 4850 cannot handle it at 1080p], then sorry folks, but this is lazy programming upto its limits.

Seeing the graphics in the videos, even if the game is not very well optimised[Like say, COD4], I'd expect a AMD 3870/9600GT to be easily capable of running it at 1440x900 on the highest quality and with quite a lot of AA, though even saying 1680x1050 wouldn't exactly be wrong, because the game does seem like that.


He said an 8800GTX was "enough". What the bloody hell does that mean? I mean, yes its 2 generations older now, but it still packs quite a punch, enough to run it very well!

At the beginning of the question he claimed that something along the lines of the power of a console GPU. From so many years of experience with GPU chips, I can safely say that the 3870 is far more powerful than the GPU inside the Xbox360 / PS3. Can Heath / someone else from transmission here confirm / dismiss my doubt?

Do you know anything about 8400GS ? Will it be able to handle this ? I am having p4 2.66Ghz and 1GB ram and 8400GS enough to run smoothly at least at low or medium ?

[hMarka]

that cricket gaming interview had some real garbage here, how can "cheer girls" be one of the main things someone is looking forward too, what are you 13? or just a 20 something virgin?

[Kshitiz_Indian]

Originally Posted by Hmarkas

that cricket gaming interview had some real garbage here, how can "cheer girls" be one of the main things someone is looking forward too, what are you 13? or just a 20 something virgin?

Exactly my thoughts, I mean this is a primarily a Cricket game, not a game used for horny purposes! Yes, Cheerleaders do make a really nice addition, but they only come when the core game is completed!

[ganapati]

Originally Posted by skater

We have seen 3 videos and we have seen the same terrible animations.

Isn't Smith (From Transmission) was saying before that videos are from an older build and many bugs have been fixed since?

[Skater]

Originally Posted by ganapati

Isn't Smith (From Transmission) was saying before that videos are from an older build and many bugs have been fixed since?

I doubt animations would be completely changed.

[DarkBoyBlunder]

Originally Posted by Kshitiz_Indian

Which is exactly why I added in that post that the animations aren't even that bad to warrant such type of a "u-turn" or whatever.

Kshitiz_Indian added 10 Minutes and 33 Seconds later...

Just read the CricketGaming Q and A. Assuming its authentic, a few things about the PC requirements come up.

He says that with a 4850 he can go upto 1280x720, but it "doesn't hurt" to go 1920x1080. I really hope that he just meant that he could go on a 4850 to 1080p but didn't, because if its otherwise [That a 4850 cannot handle it at 1080p], then sorry folks, but this is lazy programming upto its limits.

Seeing the graphics in the videos, even if the game is not very well optimised[Like say, COD4], I'd expect a AMD 3870/9600GT to be easily capable of running it at 1440x900 on the highest quality and with quite a lot of AA, though even saying 1680x1050 wouldn't exactly be wrong, because the game does seem like that.


He said an 8800GTX was "enough". What the bloody hell does that mean? I mean, yes its 2 generations older now, but it still packs quite a punch, enough to run it very well!

At the beginning of the question he claimed that something along the lines of the power of a console GPU. From so many years of experience with GPU chips, I can safely say that the 3870 is far more powerful than the GPU inside the Xbox360 / PS3. Can Heath / someone else from transmission here confirm / dismiss my doubt?

Hi, thanks for picking that up, please ignore the last two sentences for now. I didn't describe those cards as 'enough' though (the word enough is not used), but I had wedged the example of the cards I use between those sentences, so the numbers given in the last sentence don't apply to those cards, I'm simply using them as examples of what I use for outstanding performance, and at much higher resolutions. It kind of should read:

"Sure, ultimately for best results you'll need a machine that can keep up with the equivalent graphics power of the PlayStation 3 or the Xbox 360, so you'll be looking at a 2Ghz+ CPU with 1GB of RAM, with a good Shader Model 3.0 card with at least 256MB of VRAM. This will give you a solid 60hz experience at 1280 x 720, but of course it never hurts to throw more power at it if 1920 x 1200 is your preference!

My work PC has an 8800GTX in it, and I play with a Radeon 4850 at home and both deliver excellent performance."

The reason I originally had written 1280 x 720 is that it's the native resolution of the console versions. I'll follow up with a better indication of what to expect with different cards, and just how hard I can push these cards, but it runs very well on pretty poor cards. We supported Shader Model 2.0 cards with 128MB of VRAM for a while, but we've ultimately decided to make Shader Model 3.0 cards the base now, not because it stopped running well, but primarily because we don't want to hold things back by always supporting SM2 and SM3 implementations of all of our graphical effects.

-Rob.

[MS Dhoni]

A new interview with Ashes Cricket 2009 Developer, Robert Walkley.

Interview with Transmission Games - Ashes Cricket 2009 - Cricket Gaming Forums

[hMarka]

Originally Posted by MS Dhoni

A new interview with Ashes Cricket 2009 Developer, Robert Walkley.

Interview with Transmission Games - Ashes Cricket 2009 - Cricket Gaming Forums

god dammit how many times are u guys going to post this

[hramnani]

I have been planning to buy a Nextgen console for a long time now. Have always been confused between the 360 and the PS3. Also I had been waiting for a nextgen Cricket game to buy the console (am a true Indian). I think the time has arrived for me to invest in the console. The game looks excellent and animations are good enough for me. Now, I only hope that the gameplay is as exciting as they say.

As for my confusion regarding the consoles, a recent market survey has helped me take a decision. A 80gb PS3 is costing me a mere 6K+ compared to a 256mb 360 console. So, PS3 it is.

[barmyarmy]

Originally Posted by MS Dhoni

A new interview with Ashes Cricket 2009 Developer, Robert Walkley.

Interview with Transmission Games - Ashes Cricket 2009 - Cricket Gaming Forums

You realise that that post above yours is by Rob Walkley...

[hMarka]

Originally Posted by hramnani

I have been planning to buy a Nextgen console for a long time now. Have always been confused between the 360 and the PS3. Also I had been waiting for a nextgen Cricket game to buy the console (am a true Indian). I think the time has arrived for me to invest in the console. The game looks excellent and animations are good enough for me. Now, I only hope that the gameplay is as exciting as they say.

As for my confusion regarding the consoles, a recent market survey has helped me take a decision. A 80gb PS3 is costing me a mere 6K+ compared to a 256mb 360 console. So, PS3 it is.

see you on PSN mate, my id is LeftArmFast

[max_dillon2007]

Originally Posted by hramnani

I have been planning to buy a Nextgen console for a long time now. Have always been confused between the 360 and the PS3. Also I had been waiting for a nextgen Cricket game to buy the console (am a true Indian). I think the time has arrived for me to invest in the console. The game looks excellent and animations are good enough for me. Now, I only hope that the gameplay is as exciting as they say.

As for my confusion regarding the consoles, a recent market survey has helped me take a decision. A 80gb PS3 is costing me a mere 6K+ compared to a 256mb 360 console. So, PS3 it is.

Where in India you are getting PS3 80gb for 6K???? Thats like 130$ dude... Lemme know, i'll buy 5 of them unless they are chinese