Point is?
It is not the same power needed for handle a corridor than a wide open area with vehicles, enemies (with AI).
Only franchise on PS3 that does scope for a FPS shooter IMO is Resistance.
It is not the same power needed for handle a corridor than a wide open area with vehicles, enemies (with AI).
But Halo environments are really empty and Far Cry 3 do much more than Halo 4 from what i've seen and its proper open world game.Only franchise on PS3 that does scope for a FPS shooter IMO is Resistance.
It's alot easier to pimp a linear game graphically (Uncharted, Gears, Killzone, God of War) to a open one.
Crysis 2 gave you the most check box features for graphics on consoles at the expense of sub HD and a cinematic framerate.
Yet another tech thread lowered by useless comparisons from the console warriors. Just because Halo 4 looks great, that doesn't make other games look any less impressive. Some of you people really need to get over this insecurity over your preferences. It's ok to have amazing looking games on both consoles, really it is.
One thing I don't like in Halo4 from the video I have seen thus far is the Hud, with elements of the helmet getting in the way of the screen. Is there an option to turn it off? Other than that, I think that this game looks simply amazing, much better than UC3 and anything on Ps3.
Remember Bungie?
I don't.
Yep, when Uncharted 3 does ocean simulation and physics of the whole ship and every items/npc on it.
Killzone 3/2 have quite big battlezones and AI is on pair with Halo.
Played about 1 hour of the campaign today, and it looks amazing. But judging by the screens on the analysis, I've seen nothing yet!
btw, the game looks awesome not only graphics.
warthog + water is always fun =D
![]()
![]()
Played about 1 hour of the campaign today, and it looks amazing. But judging by the screens on the analysis, I've seen nothing yet!
btw, the game looks awesome not only graphics.
warthog + water is always fun =D
![]()
![]()
Halo 4 or Halo 3?
Haven't played Uncharted 3 but yeah I just posted in the Halo 4 OT that this is hands down the best looking game this gen. Rivals technical excellence of the best this gen but the art blows anything else out of the water.
That is from Halo 4. I believe the water is still better in 3.
How would you know if you haven't actually played the game? I still find it amazing that someone would make statements without actually knowing what they're comparing. Screens don't look as good as KZ or Uncharted, but they look pretty good.
How would you know if you haven't actually played the game? I still find it amazing that someone would make statements without actually knowing what they're comparing. Screens don't look as good as KZ or Uncharted, but they look pretty good.
LOL @ all the PS3 game talk. Nothing like Halo to bring out the console warriors. I had to make sure I clicked on the proper thread when I saw a page full of Uncharted posts. Congrats to 343 for being able to pick up where Bungie left off and not just carry on the series, but also improve it. Now hurry up and patch in a good Warthog engine sound. The lawnmower just aint cutting it.
With smaller scenarios and not the same AI (and a lot of scripts).
People keep saying "amazing for the X360." Why is GAF always so ignorant?
Doesn't look too hot on a 50" + TV, but the assets, lighting, and overall art are all amazing.
I hope we get a HIQ (my new term for High Quality Image Quality) version on PC or Xbox Next.
People keep saying "amazing for the X360." Why is GAF always so ignorant?
LOL @ all the PS3 game talk. Nothing like Halo to bring out the console warriors. I had to make sure I clicked on the proper thread when I saw a page full of Uncharted posts. Congrats to 343 for being able to pick up where Bungie left off and not just carry on the series, but also improve it. Now hurry up and patch in a good Warthog engine sound. The lawnmower just aint cutting it.
You appear to have missed the second sentence of his post.
But it looks more "natural" than Halo 3.
You need to see Halo 4 on your TV. It is outstanding, images don't make it justice.
It only took four posts into the thread for it to get started.
What does that even mean? lol
Because some actually believed that Uncharted or KZ wasn't possible on 360. They bought into the PR bullshit.
The games looks pretty good in motion imo, but I still don't find it looks that good. I mean, look at this shot:
You've got aliasing, low resolution textures absolutely everywhere... The scenery looks good artistically, definitely not technically.
Do you know what "script" mean in gameplay?
Because some actually believed that Uncharted or KZ wasn't possible on 360. They bought into the PR bullshit.
Now, put a direct-feed shot from U3 or KZ3.
Reach had motion blur, SSAO, anisotropic filtering, full res particles that were light sources and better shadowing system.
--
Its not about perfect scenario, but game that does this
Or doesnt even have proper interaction with shadows, like here
http://i.minus.com/ibzsloJU9CuofO.gif[img]
Cant be compared as technical juggernaut. I really like the idea that it doesnt drop frames, but it sacrifices too much for it. They should optimize tech, not remove it. The only thing that KZ 3 lacks in comparison to KZ 2 is QAA [have MLAA instead] and object motion blur, everything else is better, same goes for Uncharted 3 vs 2, but in Halo 4 You have like half tech features removed ...[/QUOTE]
Lol so this is what great looking games does to people. Also you're wrong on some things but it's a lot funnier watching these types of assumptions.
Graphics are a marriage of art and tech. There is no strict guideline or rule saying your game needs "x-type" of effects to look good or impressive and every game has different requirements that need to be filled. If tech alone is all you go by, than Reach is even more impressive than games like KZ2 & 3, right? I think few would agree with that opinion. NO game checks every box, try to keep that in mind.
Also if you're going to try so hard to single out and exaggerate Halo 4's flaws, why not do it for some other exclusives? Maybe that way you don't seem so lopsided.
Halo battles are considerably larger with both aerial and multiple types of ground vehicles. You can be in a tank one second and then be in the air having a dog fight the next.
Killzone 2 has really good AI no doubt there, my favorite game in the franchise, weird controls be damned.
Both it, KZ3 and U3 operate on a somewhat smaller scale than H4 though.
Uncharted 3 is the only console game I would say looks better than H4, but that game is nearly on rails by comparison.
This is a script:
http://www.abload.de/img/untitledb2xyc.png
Did you mean "scripted"? No, the ocean is dynamically generated and all the objects are fully interacted with it and the characters through Havok. It's not just a bunch of "scripts".
All games are possible on other consoles, with changes. Without changes U3 and KZ2/3 are not possible on 360, just like Halo 4 wouldn't be on PS3.
All games are possible on other consoles, with changes. Without changes U3 and KZ2/3 are not possible on 360, just like Halo 4 wouldn't be on PS3.
I am not talking about the ocean.
Not the first time I've seen you call out one side and not the other. At least there are posters like Reiko who can see both sides acting stupid.
Also if you're going to try so hard to single out and exaggerate Halo 4's flaws, why not do it for some other exclusives? Maybe that way you don't seem so lopsided.
I'm wrong on what things exactly?Lol so this is what great looking games does to people. Also you're wrong on some things but it's a lot funnier watching these types of posts.
.
What were you talking about then? You replied to this "Yep, when Uncharted 3 does ocean simulation and physics of the whole ship and every items/npc on it."