just face it - no game on PC comes close to MGS4

[QUOTE="steve17989"][QUOTE="67gt500"] I would barf too, if I had spent as much money beefing up my rig as some people have around here (to behold Crysis in all of its glory), only to have it trounced by a game that runs on a $400 console...fluxorator

Trolling is against the TOS. Reported.

Then I suggest you read his posts more carefully.

Clearly MGS4 is years behind Crysis when it comes technical graphics, with abundant low-resolution textures and meshes, simple static lighting effects, and lower polycounts for every character model. The gameworld is also much more constrained, not featuring a large, open virtual "playground" that Crysis/Crysis:Warhead offers. Anyone with low-grade reading comprehension and eyes with less than average vision can see this pretty clearly from the articles, specifications, screenshots, and videos, as well as by actually playing each one.

Now to argue MGS4 as a whole is more graphically pleasing due to the style, the animations, the cutscenes, the presentation, which many critics used to justify it's "winning" of 2008's Graphics Award, is completely different.

I think im going to tag this thread and its title will be "Epic Fail for the Epic Troll." No Im not blind crysis looks better than MGS4. No joke to I had an eye doctor appointment yesterday and the doc said my eyes are fins 20/20. So I know im not blind and I know what looks better. I will say I do like MGS4 but not for its graphics.Killfox

gears of war 2 looks better than crysis or mgs4

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/42155.html

hfgjhgjghjghjgh

If it helps you sleep better at night :)

The people here should consider making a religion, seeing how easily they have allowed themselves to be indoctrinated.

To hell with reason and your own two eyes, someone wrote something down so it must be true.

[QUOTE="Killfox"]I think im going to tag this thread and its title will be "Epic Fail for the Epic Troll." No Im not blind crysis looks better than MGS4. No joke to I had an eye doctor appointment yesterday and the doc said my eyes are fins 20/20. So I know im not blind and I know what looks better. I will say I do like MGS4 but not for its graphics.67gt500

[QUOTE="Killfox"]I think im going to tag this thread and its title will be "Epic Fail for the Epic Troll." No Im not blind crysis looks better than MGS4. No joke to I had an eye doctor appointment yesterday and the doc said my eyes are fins 20/20. So I know im not blind and I know what looks better. I will say I do like MGS4 but not for its graphics.67gt500

[QUOTE="steve17989"][QUOTE="67gt500"] I would barf too, if I had spent as much money beefing up my rig as some people have around here (to behold Crysis in all of its glory), only to have it trounced by a game that runs on a $400 console...fluxorator

Trolling is against the TOS. Reported.

[QUOTE="67gt500"][QUOTE="Killfox"]I think im going to tag this thread and its title will be "Epic Fail for the Epic Troll." No Im not blind crysis looks better than MGS4. No joke to I had an eye doctor appointment yesterday and the doc said my eyes are fins 20/20. So I know im not blind and I know what looks better. I will say I do like MGS4 but not for its graphics.JangoWuzHere

In addition, ppl should not confuse between "Best Graphics award" and "Best technical Graphics award". Most of the other websites have given Best Graphics award to MGS4 and not technical graphics award.

The problem is with gamespot because the name of teh award is best technical graphics and there is no doubt that it should go to Crysis Warhead.

Everyone knows that many people in Gamespot staff have lost their jobs recently due to financial crysis. Question is that have they sold their PCs as well?

gears of war 2 looks better than crysis or mgs4

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/42155.html

hfgjhgjghjghjgh

If it helps you sleep better at night :)

Sorry to post pics, but...

Do you honestly think MGS4 Looks better, or are you just being a blind-follower of critic's mistakes? To me it appears to be the latter, justifying your argument with "they said so."

[QUOTE="JangoWuzHere"][QUOTE="67gt500"] On the surface, it almost seems like you're implying that the industry-professional critics/journalists who conferred the award on MGS4 have sub-standard eyesight. Please, bear in mind that these people are professionals who play and rate games to earn their livings - they are infinately better qualified to make such a determination than most of us... saying otherwise would be a slight to their integrity.dk_2007

In addition, ppl should not confuse between "Best Graphics award" and "Best technical Graphics award". Most of the other websites have given Best Graphics award to MGS4 and not technical graphics award.

The problem is with gamespot because the name of teh award is best technical graphics and there is no doubt that it should go to Crysis Warhead.

Everyone knows that many people in Gamespot staff have lost their jobs recently due to financial crysis. Question is that have they sold their PCs as well?

On the surface, it almost seems like you're implying that the industry-professional critics/journalists who conferred the award on MGS4 have sub-standard eyesight.67gt500

I don't know about Killfox, but it's not a case of calling them blind, but people of definitely different opinion on the matter in relation to their own experience with the game.

Please, bear in mind that these people are professionals who play and rate games to earn their livings - they are infinately better qualified to make such a determination than most of us... saying otherwise would be a slight to their integrity.67gt500

Please. People give me that crap all the time. I've read many reviews from many sites, that could be called anything but professionally centered. I've seen reviews written by critics that aren't of higher quality than those written by day to day gamers.

Yes they usually write better than the average person. Yes they win money in life, in doing exactly what they enjoy doing. It may sound like I'm discrediting their work and the difficulty some journalists probably faced to get where they are, but I'm not. There probably are a few reviewers from this very site that are reading these exact messages, and I hardly doubt that they would place any of their views and opinions in above quality to every non-journalist gamer out there.

And I won't even touch the state of current gaming journalism. Which could be a hell of a lot better.

Sorry to post pics, but...

Do you honestly think MGS4 Looks better, or are you just being a blind-follower of critic's mistakes? To me it appears to be the latter, justifying your argument with "they said so."

[QUOTE="67gt500"]On the surface, it almost seems like you're implying that the industry-professional critics/journalists who conferred the award on MGS4 have sub-standard eyesight.StealthSting

I don't know about Killfox, but it's not a case of calling them blind, but people of definitely different opinion on the matter in relation to their own experience with the game.

Please, bear in mind that these people are professionals who play and rate games to earn their livings - they are infinately better qualified to make such a determination than most of us... saying otherwise would be a slight to their integrity.67gt500

Please. People give me that crap all the time. I've read many reviews from many sites, that could be called anything but professionally centered. I've seen reviews written by critics that aren't of higher quality than those written by day to day gamers.

Yes they usually write better than the average person. Yes they win money in life, in doing exactly what they enjoy doing. It may sound like I'm discrediting their work and the difficulty some journalists probably faced to get where they are, but I'm not. There probably are a few reviewers from this very site that are reading these exact messages, and I hardly doubt that they would place any of their views and opinions in above quality to every non-journalist gamer out there.

And I won't even touch the state of current gaming journalism. Which could be a hell of a lot better.

xD TC is a genius... yes, I too am amused that the word of "GameSpot" has more clout than reality. Just think, if GameSpot could have picked a PS2 game for "technically best graphics" and it would be true, because they said it.subrosian

[QUOTE="Killfox"]I think im going to tag this thread and its title will be "Epic Fail for the Epic Troll." No Im not blind crysis looks better than MGS4. No joke to I had an eye doctor appointment yesterday and the doc said my eyes are fins 20/20. So I know im not blind and I know what looks better. I will say I do like MGS4 but not for its graphics.67gt500

you clearly do not listen to podcasts.....

Becuase On ALL the pocasts I listen to(all the major websites and multiple ones on both IGN and 1UP). not a SINGLE person has EVER claimed that Crysis was inferior to ANY game at ANY point, MGS4 included.

No, what has been made clear to me by listening to podcasts is that in general, a handicap was put up against Crysis because it is THAT FAR AHEAD. Rather than giving it to the game that has no competition, they give it to something else and nominate Crysis as a runner up...

Because, no game can compete with this.

There isn't even a point to doing a Best Graphics Award if the above game is truly in contention. They gave it to Crysis last year.... But doing it twice in row was never going to happen.

That is what I have gathered from numerous podcasts.

[QUOTE="67gt500"][QUOTE="Killfox"]I think im going to tag this thread and its title will be "Epic Fail for the Epic Troll." No Im not blind crysis looks better than MGS4. No joke to I had an eye doctor appointment yesterday and the doc said my eyes are fins 20/20. So I know im not blind and I know what looks better. I will say I do like MGS4 but not for its graphics.horrowhip

you clearly do not listen to podcasts.....

Becuase On ALL the pocasts I listen to(all the major websites and multiple ones on both IGN and 1UP). not a SINGLE person has EVER claimed that Crysis was inferior to ANY game at ANY point, MGS4 included.

No, what has been made clear to me by listening to podcasts is that in general, a handicap was put up against Crysis because it is THAT FAR AHEAD. Rather than giving it to the game that has no competition, they give it to something else and nominate Crysis as a runner up...

Because, no game can compete with this.

There isn't even a point to doing a Best Graphics Award if the above game is truly in contention. They gave it to Crysis last year.... But doing it twice in row was never going to happen.

That is what I have gathered from numerous podcasts.

When Crysis launched the gaming world had to pick their collective jaws off the floor at how eye-blisteringly gorgeous the game was... yes, it required a beefy rig to run smoothly and in all of it glory, but it was undeniably the pinnacle of gaming graphics, on any platform.

Then, it's stellar follow-up Crysis Warhead released again to oohs and ahhhs from the gaming community featuring an equally outstanding level of visual fidelity.

Yet, the best that PC could muster wasn't enough to clinch the [graphics] prize from the venerable console game Metal Gear Solid 4. There is much wailing and gnashing of teeth, but the critics have spoken, our peers have voted, and MGS4 is victorious.

But there is good news for PC gamers, after all is said and done - MGS4's victory over Crysis Warhead might inspire PC developers to pick up their game a bit and deliver something that can actually compete with console games with respect to technical graphics...

Maybe 2009 will see a 'return to glory' of sorts for PC, after this irrefutable defeat in 2008.

Thoughts?

Thoughts?

67gt500

Thoughts?

[QUOTE="67gt500"][QUOTE="Killfox"]I think im going to tag this thread and its title will be "Epic Fail for the Epic Troll." No Im not blind crysis looks better than MGS4. No joke to I had an eye doctor appointment yesterday and the doc said my eyes are fins 20/20. So I know im not blind and I know what looks better. I will say I do like MGS4 but not for its graphics.horrowhip

you clearly do not listen to podcasts.....

Becuase On ALL the pocasts I listen to(all the major websites and multiple ones on both IGN and 1UP). not a SINGLE person has EVER claimed that Crysis was inferior to ANY game at ANY point, MGS4 included.

No, what has been made clear to me by listening to podcasts is that in general, a handicap was put up against Crysis because it is THAT FAR AHEAD. Rather than giving it to the game that has no competition, they give it to something else and nominate Crysis as a runner up...

Because, no game can compete with this.

There isn't even a point to doing a Best Graphics Award if the above game is truly in contention. They gave it to Crysis last year.... But doing it twice in row was never going to happen.

That is what I have gathered from numerous podcasts.

Now as much as I defend Crysis, I cannot defend people who put pictures of modded, and tweaked versions of the game up. My computer (specs in sig) wouldn't beable to run that at a playable rate for anything. You can beef up any console games graphics engine to a point where it is photorealistic, doesn't mean its going to run.Wasdie

too bad that IS playable.... 30(ish) FPS. I will admit, the guy who took the screenshot has a massively beefy rig (Dual 4870X2's) but I have seen similar screenshot from him with a FPS counter.... I believe the guy who took the screenshot made the level. Spent forever tweaking the Time of Day settings and has his own custom config. He also tweaks the objects in a level to make the draw counts reasonable. Very good at what he does. But it most certainly would be playable for you at one lower a graphical setting...

Also, how is me posting THAT screenshot any different from all the other people who spam the bullshots and touched up stuff from console games? Gears 2 certainly does not look as good as the one screenshot that is always posted of it. I was just proving a point. A game that is capable of THAT by merely tweaking the Time of Day and doing some slight config modifications is hardly something that can be competed with.

[QUOTE="67gt500"] Please, don't apologize - yes, bring pics by all means. In answer to your question, no, I really don't think that MGS4 looks better than Warhead - MGS4 is a beautiful, well-realized, richly detailed, cinematic game... for a console, and I can understand from a 'Big-picture' perspective why it won, but Warhead is easily the best-looking game that your money can currently buy...Saturos3091

Tasteless trolling is getting old. There's enough talk about this, MGS4 won and that's not gonna change no matter how much you whine.

And no I don't consider MGS4 has better technical graphics than Crysis but if you KNOW this as well I'd say stop beating a dead horse.

Tasteless trolling is getting old. There's enough talk about this, MGS4 won and that's not gonna change no matter how much you whine.

And no I don't consider MGS4 has better technical graphics than Crysis but if you KNOW this as well I'd say stop beating a dead horse.

Rofl.

MGS4 is more of an acheivement for the PS3 than Warhead is for the PC.

It got the pity vote.

Windwaker,a Gamecube game, has more beautiful graphics than MGS4.death919

how so mgs4 is a ps3 game with low res textures and crysis murderes it.PS3Breeder

crysis may be graphicly better then mgs4 but I cant stand it when some one who clearly hasnt played mgs4 (you dont have a psn id) talks about how it has low res textures

[QUOTE="PS3Breeder"]how so mgs4 is a ps3 game with low res textures and crysis murderes it.PrinceofSarcasm

crysis may be graphicly better then mgs4 but I cant stand it when some one who clearly hasnt played mgs4 (you dont have a psn id) talks about how it has low res textures

You dont need a PSN ID or own an uber leet ps3 to have played and beaten MGS4. Havent you heard of 'friends'?

[QUOTE="PS3Breeder"]how so mgs4 is a ps3 game with low res textures and crysis murderes it.PrinceofSarcasm

crysis may be graphicly better then mgs4 but I cant stand it when some one who clearly hasnt played mgs4 (you dont have a psn id) talks about how it has low res textures

Well it does.

[QUOTE="subrosian"]xD TC is a genius... yes, I too am amused that the word of "GameSpot" has more clout than reality. Just think, if GameSpot could have picked a PS2 game for "technically best graphics" and it would be true, because they said it.67gt500

[QUOTE="PS3Breeder"]how so mgs4 is a ps3 game with low res textures and crysis murderes it.PrinceofSarcasm

crysis may be graphicly better then mgs4 but I cant stand it when some one who clearly hasnt played mgs4 (you dont have a psn id) talks about how it has low res textures

Windwaker,a Gamecube game, has more beautiful graphics than MGS4.death919

When Crysis launched the gaming world had to pick their collective jaws off the floor at how eye-blisteringly gorgeous the game was... yes, it required a beefy rig to run smoothly and in all of it glory, but it was undeniably the pinnacle of gaming graphics, on any platform.

Then, it's stellar follow-up Crysis Warhead released again to oohs and ahhhs from the gaming community featuring an equally outstanding level of visual fidelity.

Yet, the best that PC could muster wasn't enough to clinch the graphics prize from the venerable console game Metal Gear Solid 4. There is much wailing and gnashing of teeth, but the critics have spoken, our peers have voted, and MGS4 is victorious.

But there is good news for PC gamers, after all is said and done - MGS4's victory over Crysis Warhead might inspire PC developers to pick up their game a bit and deliver something that can actually compete with console games with respect to technical graphics...

Maybe 2009 will see a 'return to glory' of sorts for PC, after this irrefutable defeat in 2008.

Thoughts?

67gt500

MGS4 has average graphics. It has plenty of jaggies and rough textures. Its still a great game but its just not visually stunning in any way.

Please, don't apologize - yes, bring pics by all means. In answer to your question, no, I really don't think that MGS4 looks better than Warhead - MGS4 is a beautiful, well-realized, richly detailed, cinematic game... for a console, and I can understand from a 'Big-picture' perspective why it won, but Warhead is easily the best-looking game that your money can currently buy...67gt500

[QUOTE="Dystopian-X"]

Tasteless trolling is getting old. There's enough talk about this, MGS4 won and that's not gonna change no matter how much you whine.

And no I don't consider MGS4 has better technical graphics than Crysis but if you KNOW this as well I'd say stop beating a dead horse.

67gt500

That's so much more fun, because the argument isn't as blatantly lop-sided ;)