I remember how lemmings fapped over open world games as far a graphics were concerned last gen (red dead) and scoffed at linear games with impressive graphics (GOWIII)
it's funny to see lemmings try to win a graphics debate with linear Ryse over open world/sandbox Infamous Second Son now as if they haven't been dismissing linear games with good graphics for an entire generation.
No, I don't remember that at all
lol, of course 'you' wouldn't
why is that?
and you base this one what?
To help your selective memory, since I don't have time to baby you and your wasteful round of questions playing dumb, here from one thread. There a more but this is all I will do, you can look up the rest yourself.
Since you say you didn't remember that AT ALL we know your memory isn't worth a damn or you are just a worthless troll, either way you can stop trying now.
- Member Since:July 30, 2007
- Forum Posts: 856
- Followed by: 0
- Reviews: 0 Stacks: 0
#39 Posted by EG101 (856 posts) - 1 year, 8 months ago
GOW3 sacrifices so much to be pretty. Fixed cameras so that the PS3 doesn't need to render every side of an object plus every level is literally a tight corridor even when its an outdoor level. Anyway PS3 is better at rendering tight levels that fit into PS3's dual 128 bit busses while 360 is better at doing open world games that don't fit into PS3's 128 bit x 2 bus but can be tiled to fit into 360's ED Ram. Each console has their advantage but the fanboys on System Wars won't let the stupid argument die.
- Member Since:September 22, 2007
- Forum Posts: 17000
- Followed by: 43
- Reviews: 2 Stacks: 0
#41 Posted by delta3074 (17000 posts) - 1 year, 8 months ago
GOW3 looks empty and plain comparign to both Gears 3 and Witcher 2 and the coming Halo 4 too
Look how small the coriddors are and how empty every area is, it has great rendering, but does not touch the 360 ones overall
it destroys gears and witcher 2 xbox version, better AA and higher detailed models.
Gow 3 has better AA but the models in gears 3 are easily on par with Gow 3, Gears 3 has a better lighting system and better/more impressive partical effects, you are also comparing a Game with a fixed camera against a game that has a full 3D camera 'What the game may lack in terms of anti-aliasing it more than makes up for with a raft of extremely well realised effects. Aside from a general increase in the overall detail level, perhaps the most impactful improvement made to the game concerns the lighting. In previous Gears titles, the effect has always been direct, often overly bright and unnatural, giving a somewhat harsh look to the highly detailed art, with specular elements in particular sticking out somewhat (and adding to aliasing issues in their own way). Things are different in the new game: the team has utilised the Unreal Lightmass global illumination tech to excellent effect: light and shadow now have real depth and volume and work in combination with UE3 real-time effects such as the god-rays/sun-shafts we saw in the Xbox 360 and PC versions of Bulletstorm released earlier this year. ' 'Another notable inclusion in the VFX toolbox is the excellent implementation of atmospheric rendering, giving a real sense of scale and ambience to a variety of levels. Alpha and particle effects in general are quite remarkable - a real improvement over what we've seen before in previous Unreal Engine games, and reminiscent at times of the gritty atmosphere evoked by Killzone 3 and Resistance 3. The fact that Unreal Engine 3 throw so many transparencies about while maintaining its performance level to the extent that it does is another feather in the cap of the Epic engineers.' 'It's safe to say that Gears of War 3 is one of the most advanced video games of this generation, and a ringing endorsement of what the Xbox 360 is capable of handling when the right people, the right tech, a lengthy development cycle and an inordinately large budget are in play. From a technological perspective, with just a few caveats that we've touched upon, the overall presentation is first class.' http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-gears-of-war-3?page=2 Personally i would gears 3 the nod but it's really close and Gow 3's use of MLAA is very impressive, i would say that Gow 3 is definitly an awesome looking game, Best in the hack and slash genre and probably the most jaggie Free exclusive on consoles to date. And those people saying gears 3 doesn't come close to any of the top end Ps3 exclusives are just talking rubbish, fanboyism at it's finest,lol......http://auth.gamespot.com/forums/system-wars-314159282/no-game-on-the-xbox360-looks-better-than-gow3-on-p-29230792/
The thing about GOWIII on PS3 though is that it wasn't just the best looking console game of it's time, it also had technically impressive merits to back it up. The best AA of it's time MLAA, 720p and high frame 30 - 45 rate that never faltered.
These are technical feats that Ryse, despite being extremely impressive on base graphics, fail to achieve. Ryse, even in it's linear setting, can't compete with Infamous SS on any technical level which is why it's funny lemming are even trying now knowing the arguments they came with in the past.
...so your examples of people dismissing linear games with pretty graphics are two posts that state how great the graphics are in GOW3? And one of those examples is LoosingEnds who was a troll that used to claim that Witcher 2 on 360 looked better than the PC version.
And honestly, you shouldn't be calling anyone out as a worthless troll