![]() |
Originally Posted by jdodd
So this game supposedly takes place after GB2, but it still has the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man?
Plus, continuity aside, Stay Puft is the Hoth of Ghostbusters. On the rare chance there is a Ghostbusters game, Stay Puft better damn well be in it. |
Originally Posted by jdodd
So this game supposedly takes place after GB2, but it still has the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man?
Those may not even be parts of the game, but even if they are, who doesn't want to visit them? |
Does a "Writer's Strike" apply only to television, and not videogames?
|
According to one of the podcasts I just listened to, that is indeed the case. Video game writing isn't covered under the strike.
|
you know...I almost don't care how fucking bad this game ends up being, I want to play it. I've always thought that Ghostbusters would make a damn fine game, especially with something like, say, the Resident Evil Engine or Crackdown's Engine.
DON'T CROSS THE STREAMS! |
|
Important safety tip, thanks Egon.
|
Game looks great. Can't wait.
|
|
Wow, that looks a lot better than i thought it would.
|
Originally Posted by PopcornTreeCt
I like the 3rd person view. :up: |
Originally Posted by Giantrobo
Ok...like...WoW! :eek:
I like the 3rd person view. :up: |
Awesome.
Ray Parker Jr in 5.1! :drool: ;) |
Okay if that's legit then I'm impressed...
|
This game must have 4-player online co-op. I doubt they'll put it in, but that would just be awesome.
|
Wow, looks darn good!
|
Which system is the vid? I read Wii and PS3 are totally different games (online, MP will all be different)
Either way, I dont think Ive wanted a game more! |
Originally Posted by PopcornTreeCt
awesome video, I never get tired of the theme song. Graphics look excellent, nice physics on the tables as they are getting Slimer. table cloth moves etc. I cant wait for this game. |
Wow, that looks really good. Love the fact the hotel scene is there :up:
|
http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/0...-as-pke-meter/
Whilst being entertained by Ghostbusters developer Terminal Reality at the Sierra Spring Break 08 in Mallorca last week, studio director John O’Keefe said that the PS2 and Wii versions were being outsourced to Red Fly, and that you’ll be able to connect your DS to your Wii and use it as your PKE meter (the Ghostbusters’ spook-tracker). Details stopped there, unfortunately, although there will be four-way split-screen in the Wii and PS2 versions. Ghostbusters will be released worldwide in October. |
http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/0...stbusters-dev/
Speaking to videogaming247 at the Sierra Spring Break 08 in Mallorca last week, Terminal Reality president Mark Randel admitted that Ghostbusters on PS3 has been held back by the fact will also release on 360, saying that the game would have double the amount of objects on screen if it had been PS3-only. |
^^
I read that somewhere... the Ghostbuster Dev prefers the PS3. You know, i remember reading a lot of comments like no games ever gonna fill up dvd-9 or multiple discs are okay, blah blah. I guess it's time to say "haha, you're so wrong." Edit: Err, never mind, i think i poked the wrong way... i know the capacity has nothing to do the # of objects to be manipulated on the screen (as in the post above in discussion). Let me put it this way, "haha, another dev said the PS3 is complicated to code for" Well, things don't turn out that way... As to disc capacity, while it's OT, but we all know gaming on dvd-9 is not the new gen. |
Disc space has nothing to do with the number of objects that can be rendered on screen.
|
Originally Posted by Groucho
Disc space has nothing to do with the number of objects that can be rendered on screen.
bottom line, same thing "the PS3 is hard to code, devs having so much problem with it." |
They do have nothing to do with one another. Hell, read the article: the reason the dev gives is that the PS3 has more CPUs to do simultaneously processing. Even that's an over-simplification, but it has nothing to do with disc capacity.
It sort of flies in the face of other "developers commenting on the PS3" comments in the past. That, while it was technically more powerful, it was harder to code for and memory access was way slower. Certainly they've found creative ways around that in the last 2 years, but that's the last I read. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:09 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.