Is it unfair that I think Killzone 2/3. Uncharted 2/3. and Crysis 1 maxed out all look as good or better than Halo 4? At least technically. Artistically, I'd take Halo 4 over any of them, and it's a fantastic looking game over all, but it's loaded with low res textures up-close (which I know is a bullshit and unfair criticism to have of a game that doesn't run on PC, but they're more noticeable to me than they are in KZ or UC) and jaggies out the goddamn ass. Is it unreasonable that I expected a Microsoft-developed game on a Microsoft platform to actually
not output in sub-HD? I have a 50-inch plasma, and this awful trend of sub-1080 and even sub-720 games is horribly noticeable. The PS3 version of Amalur was a fucking travesty.
Anyways, I'm not trying to say Halo 4 looks bad, because that'd not only be ridiculous, but I'd also be lying through my teeth if I said that coming out of the core or whatever it was where you first meet the Prometheans into that big gorgeous sunlit-valley didn't have my jaw straight to the floor. It's also a fantastic feeling shooter, and I'm loving the shit out of it, laughably-bad story and all, I just feel like it's graphics are getting a bit overrated, when there's better stuff that came out years ago on other platforms, specifically the PC. I mean hell, this was built on five-year old tech, and people are getting all up on Halo 4's dick?