Recent articles
There was a sense of genuine, and uncommon, excitement before entering the presentation for James Cameron's Avatar: The Game yesterday at a swish location in central London. Squeezed into a darkened room, perched on the edge of our seats with state-of-the-art 3D specs in place, the showcase to privileged journalists got underway.
Before us a gigantic flat-screen JVC TV displayed images of the kind you will not yet have seen. Nor will you, in fact, unless you have in the region of £6-7000 to spend on a new telly in time for the release of Avatar (for which you'll need to apply directly to JVC apparently). You need to know this before getting too excited at the prospect of experiencing at home what we're about to describe.
With Avatar, James Cameron returns to his familiar stomping ground of action-oriented science-fiction. Events take place on a fictitious planet called Pandora that we humans are hoping to colonise, with all the ethical baggage that comes with it. Cameron's movie tells the tale of a Pocahontas-style encounter between a man called Jake and planet Pandora native, via new-fangled body-snatching technology. Before all this can happen, however, there needs to be an invasion. This is where Ubisoft's videogame fills in the gaps... or rather riddles it with bullet holes.
The 3D effect is honestly astounding. Journalists ducked involuntarily as branches of trees leapt out of the screen while a military drop ship sped toward its destination. Drinking in the uncanny scene, resembling a tour of a Games Workshop diorama sprung to life, this short journey was filled with high expectation indeed.
Upon touch down, however, I must confess that my heart hit the ground also. Avatar on Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 is essentially a third-person shooter that will be forced to compete in the same league as Gears of War, Halo 3, Far Cry 2 (it uses the same graphics and physics engine) and, well, all of the usual suspects. James Cameron's Avatar: The Game does change the face of videogames, just not the soul.
Absolutely I was transfixed by the ground-breaking 3D theatre being staged on the next generation JVC display. The tale end of the drop ship almost poking me on the nose as it waggled left and right through the jungle canopy. Similarly the other vehicles, resembling jeeps and elaborate gun-laden dune buggies, had a bizarre plastic model-kit quality about them. I felt as though I could reach out into the lush forestation and pick them up, brushing my hand on surrounding foliage.
When human soldiers encounter a Hammerhead, a Pandoran behemoth that looks to be a cross between a rhino and hammerhead shark, its 3D form is breathtaking. This imposing creature looks absolutely like muscle and bone writhing inside bullet-proof skin and armoured plates. Firing rocket launchers into its hide, watching the smoke trail arc quite naturally into the distance, becomes hypnotic like a fireworks display.
Deeper into the jungle terrain the lighting becomes softer and darker, shades of blue instead of green, as tiny luminescent creatures dance in the air. Beneath your soldier's feet there are many fish swimming in shallow waters, all picked out convincingly in exquisite 3D. I tried to shoot them. You can't.
We're describing a graphics technology here, not a game. Apart from an Experience Point system that will lead to character upgrades, and the choice between human or Na'vi character to complete missions from Act Two onwards, Avatar could be almost any shooter albeit one hugely benefiting from a James Cameron created universe.
More importantly, the kind of technology required to show Avatar in this way is not commercially available until spring 2010. And even then it will be out of reach for most pockets, especially with everyone still surviving what's left of the recession.
Avatar, then: The best game you'll never see?
Comment on this article
Please sign in to add your comments.
User comments
So they have released a game that no-one can afford to play? Genius!
Posted by: lisamckay06 on Fri Oct 09 05:25PM | Report abuseCod4 4 life
Posted by: ryan.pack on Fri Oct 09 05:27PM | Report abuseWould love to have one of these in the lounge....might even postpone my World Cup footy holiday and do this instead.......
Posted by: jowitherden on Fri Oct 09 05:37PM | Report abuseYou DO NOT have to spend £6-7000 on a new TV to play this game if you have anything that displays at 100MHZ refresh rate then you can play the game (and these screens can go for as little as £300). yes you will need the 3D Nvida Specs (which the journo fails to mention) and for a PC a beefy video card but all these are available RIGHT NOW! I wish these people had a clue what they were talking about.
Posted by: ilander66 on Fri Oct 09 05:46PM | Report abuseSounds amazing!! If I had that kind of money to spend on it, I would buy it!!
Posted by: alannahbanana on Fri Oct 09 06:45PM | Report abuseOr get it on PC and you'll get it for like £400
Posted by: michaelfield001 on Fri Oct 09 06:56PM | Report abuseexpensive
Posted by: onadaustria on Fri Oct 09 07:36PM | Report abuseyeah I need a new TV soon thats how its all going to go too the TV just needs a built in PC
Posted by: greg.gray on Sat Oct 10 05:14AM | Report abuseIf you want 3D right now, just get yourself the new nVidia stereoscopic system for the PC (and a 120Hz monitor), for much less $$$. I recently acquired a rig; playing World of Warcraft, and Call of Duty, in 3D sounds very similar to the report for Avatar here. 3D does look like the next big thing.
Posted by: joncopley on Sat Oct 10 09:46AM | Report abusemore crap we don't need
Posted by: carsonback on Sat Oct 10 07:50PM | Report abuse