| Kantor said: To quote the IGN review, Gears 2 graphics score- 9.5 MGS4 graphics score- 10 Granted I haven't seen Gears of War 2 in action yet, I have no doubt that it has the best graphics on 360, but I honestly don't see any graphics feasibly being better than MGS4, short of Killzone 2 and Gran Turismo 5. You know what? This calls for a comparison shot.
There's another thing. Even if Gears 2's graphics were better than MGS4, they would be nowhere NEAR GT5.
|
Aside from all of your opinions being subjective (in which case, as wrong as each others), we won't know which game is graphically better until we get a textures on screen and frames per second count (exact amounts, not PR numbers) for both Gears and Metal Gear Solid 4.
Also, "Because IGN said so", well done, you've brought yourself (and us for reading it) back into the 2nd grade. Are you unable to formulate your own judgement and allowing that to be good enough instead of taking the opinions of a person who's a self admitted MGS4 fanboy (Jeff Haynes).
And finally may I remind you:
http://au.ign64.ign.com/articles/150/150437p1.html
Check out the graphics score there, does that mean MGS4 = OoT in graphics? Nope. Yes I know, "But but but, that was a review from 10 years ago", missing the point? Here: MGS4 came out in June, and back then, the graphics may have deserved a 10/10, but now it's November (similar to how it's 2008 and NOT 1998). The graphics in gaming have improved over the last 6 months and perhaps Gears doesn't deserve a 10/10 by November 2008's standards, but does that necessarily mean that it looks worse than MGS4? No. Does it necessarily mean that it definitely looks better? Also no.
Next argument PS3 fanboys if you don't mind.
