MGS4 is the better-looking game to me. Uncharted looks fine, and the animation for Drake is simply stunning and probably tops so far, but no creativity went into it whatsoever. The jungle is by far the best-looking environment in the game, but it's nothing we haven't seen before and seen better. The enemies also don't look or animate nearly as well as Drake, with over-exaggerated movements and bland texturing.

Not to mention, the Uncharted jungle everyone always posts pics of only makes up like what, 4 out of the game's 22 chapters? There are considerably more indoor environments, which nobody ever mentions, and none of which look nearly as good as the outdoor. MGS4 simply kills it on an artistic level (artistic doesn't mean "color"), and combined with the supreme character models and fluid cutscene/gameplay transitions, it contains far more wow moments than Uncharted.

I will say that while MGS is better-looking overall, Uncharted definitely tops it technically, and is probably the most technically impressive console game out. The texture work, overall animation (along with Assassin's Creed) and lighting in Uncharted are all tops in the console world.

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"][QUOTE="lettuceman44"]

Yea, but they got posted huge posts telling how groin shots are important and how Bethesda is the devil because there are no groin shots, and I basically was flamed.......

After that I never went back lol. Seriously, what kind of fans are these?

Coyo7e

Reasonable Fallout fans who know what they're talking about don't bring up things like child killing and groin shots as features that Fallout 3 absolutely must have or it's fail. That's not the point.

Stuff like child killing and groin shots are mainly brought up as things that convey Fallout's incredibly open-ended nature, one that essentially allows you to do what you want. Freedom is a Fallout hallmark. Anytime you remove the freedom to do something in the game, you're inherently hurting what makes Fallout Fallout.

That is a very reasonable statement. At the same time they still seem like frivolous complaints.

You know as well as I do the vast majority of those who complain will never voice their dissent in such a coherent and reasonable fashion.

Lets not make excuses for those gamers.

Some of these posts were beyond obnoxious. What makes them even more absurd is that the people that played the original fallout games are likely adults by now. Adults who cry like children when they don't get exactly what they want.

I can't defend some of the posts on hardcore Fallout forums, but I don't think it's particularly different than other forums, on average. With any large and popular forum, like NMA, you're going to have as many trolls and thick-headed posters as good posters. This afflicts pretty much every forum, including the likes of NeoGAF.

Ultimately, "features" like child killing and groin shots, to me, are great examples of things that you might not necessarily ever do, but that you know you can do whenever you want. Even if you never kill a kid the entire game, just knowing the fact that you can whenever you want adds an incalculable amount to atmosphere and immersion.

Whenever you remove the freedom to do things especially in a Fallout game, you're not doing anything but reminding the player more and more than they're playing a video game rather than going through an experience. Fallout 1 + 2 were absolutely an experience and a very personal one at that, with game styles and playthroughs changing drastically from player to player, probably moreso than any series in video game history.

[QUOTE="LockeAteid"][QUOTE="lettuceman44"][QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="VoodooGamer"]

I figured this thread would garner more people...

lettuceman44

Most people are just tired of hearing fallout fans whine, so they avoid these threads.

The reason you were yelled at is that is one of the many of features that's been out right removed for no logically reason by Beth.

After that I never went back lol. Seriously, what kind of fans are these?

Reasonable Fallout fans who know what they're talking about don't bring up things like child killing and groin shots as features that Fallout 3 absolutely must have or it's fail. That's not the point.

Stuff like child killing and groin shots are mainly brought up as things that convey Fallout's incredibly open-ended nature, one that essentially allows you to do what you want. Freedom is a Fallout hallmark. Anytime you remove the freedom to do something in the game, you're inherently hurting what makes Fallout Fallout.

There are so many red flags in that Q&A, especially if you've read Bethesda interviews in the past for some of their other games (especially Oblivion). Anyone who is familiar with Fallout has to be cringing after reading this.

It's like an Invisible War deja vu. They're actually merging together perks and traits and people wonder why there are always complaints of PC games being dumbed down for consoles. Bethesda fails to understand that the main thing that made Fallout so great was the deep customizability and tremendous open-endedness of both the gameplay and freedom of movement. They've nerfed and newbified the hell out of the series.

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"]It's reasons like this why this gen is such a mess. People get far too caught up on stupid numbers. A lot of you are the sad types of people who would have ignored games like Deus Ex and System Shock 2 because they got below AAA from Gamespot.sonicmj1

But I thought that a number from my favorite review site or review site aggregator accurately determined a game's quality!

:o

It seems like it's a phenomenon of this gen. I don't recall so many people paying so much attention to the scores games got nearly to this extent in previous gens. It has to do with the rising popularity of Metacritic and Gamerankings, I guess, and the fact that companies actually use Metacritic scores now as a part of their business model. It's become very influential.

I like those sites, not because they average out the number, but simply because they're easy and instant access to numerous amounts of reviews on a particular game if you need some info.

The point is to actually read the reviews, though, not stare at a number. A lot of people don't seem to get that, and that includes higher-ups in the business. I don't think it's necessarily been shown that high review scores translate to high sales. Too many critically-acclaimed games have bombed commercially, and vice versa.

Mass Effect. I don't understand how people forget about that game...TheRealMC01

Mass Effect on 360 has two huge issues that hold it back in a discussion like this (though it still deserves to be in), which is framerate and texture pop-in. If you look at games like MGS4 and Ratchet & Clank, pop-in is completely non-existant and the framerate is very smooth even with tons going on both on and off-screen.

Other than those two problems, Mass Effect is pretty amazing graphically. Stunning art design, lighting quality and character models, especially.

I also think Assassin's Creed doesn't get its proper due graphically. Frankly, I'd put it right there with Uncharted. There's virtually nothing that AC does graphically that's at less than a high level.

[QUOTE="EVOLV3"]I thought GT5: Prologue would have more votes and MGS4 would have less.


Rikusaki

Yeah, I think it is because they don't like Gran Turismo because it has no damage.

GT5 is an on-rails racer with average-at-best environments. That's why it's not getting any votes. It just isn't doing as much as the others, and it can afford to have highly detailed and polygon-filled vehicles since there's no freedom of movement. They can afford to go easy on the environments, and it shows.

[QUOTE="bahamut-zero"]

Realism:

This one is easy, GT5P tries to be the most accurate racing game ever made, with the most genuine car design, tracks, physics and overall presentation. The games screenshots exhibits near photorealistic quality. MGS4 comes second with great characters that have a very impressive realistic feel to them. MGS4 level design is also very realistic. Gears and Uncharted do a great job, but they both have an exaggerated art direction, that pulls them away from the realism.

GT5P > MGS4 > GeoW Uncharted

Art Direction:

All games are very impressive in this department, but one game truly stands out of the bunch and that game is MGS4. The presentation is top notch. The narration and cinematic direction is a cut and above every game before it. The design is convincing: especially the characters, realistically animated with emotion. The mechanical ones are a sight to behold: Gekkos, the MkII, The Beauty and the Beast unit, both Rex and Ray are superb. The art direction in GeoW edges out Uncharted. The GeoW world is basically richer in art than Uncharted, with basically that convincing post apocalyptic destroyed beauty thing going on. Does GT5P have an art direction? If cars were art....

MGS4 > GeoW>Uncharted>GT5P

Technology:

Gamespot stated that MGS4 is 'the most technically stunning game ever made', I can only concur. You can see that Konami had put everything they could put in a game with the hardware they had. If they made MGS5 on the PS3 years from now, that game would not look much better than MGS4. The detail, lightning and animation is brutal. Uncharted and GeoW are in terms of scale and detail very similar games. But Uncharted edges out GeoW in this department with basically beating GeoW in its own game. It just look slightly better. GT5 will rock with 60fps, 1080p, 16 cars, brutal lightning and what not, but for now GT5P just isn't as impressive as the other games in this department. Also I must say as a racing game (the other three games are third person action games) it is hard to compare.

MGS4>Uncharted>GeoW

MGS4 IS CONSOLE GRAPHICS KING.

Rikusaki

Very good post. I agree, but I think in the Art Direction area, MGS4 and Uncharted would be tied.

Uncharted's art design is really quite generic and doesn't bring anything new to the table, particularly when it comes to the indoor environments, of which there are many. The character models beyond the main characters are also straight out of Stranglehold. The hand-painted textures are nice, though.

MGS4' art design is striking, especially the character models, which manage to look cool without seeming like they're trying too hard. Almost any other artist but would have made Snake look completely laughable in an Octocamo, but he doesn't in MGS4. It just works, and that's mainly because the art is so cohesive throughout. The Beauty & The Beast unit also give off a disturbing vibe partly because of the way they are drawn and modeled.