scotland yard said:
ssj12 said:
scotland yard said:
ssj12 said:
They improved it, not bad, not bad at all, not UT3 still quite nice. Water looks a bit plasticy though.. and I dont think the covenant ships are supposed to look like that (color/texture wise), in the books they were more liquidy. And yes Plasma does give off light. Kinda sad to see the same shadow and animation for running between those two. And the face in the mask looks kinda meh. Will be fun multiplier but still was expecting better out of Bungie. Bungie is normally one of the few dev teams which can make great graphics and gameplay (like Square, Polyphony, Epic, and a few others) but this is kinda sad, I think Gears looks better in some ways. I think they rushed this a bit like Halo 2, should have spent another year on it. Made it a 4th gen 360 game. |
There's a big difference between a game like Gears or UT3 and a game like this. Halo 3 will have integrated vehicular combat and their levels are appropriately massive and wide-open to accomodate this. You can't have the same detail in graphics in levels that vast as you do in a 'corridor-style' shooter. If you've seen the single-player videos going on Hi-Def, I don't think you would be calling out Halo 3 on graphics, either. It looks spectacular. |
UT 2004 had vehicle combat since before Halo was released... so your point has a major hole in it. And have you played the maps for UT... even UT 99? I dont think so.. a 1 v 1 map can be small as heck or retardedly massive but layed out to make it fit a 1 v 1 match perfectly. |
I have played UT and enjoyed it thoroughly. But the UT multiplayer maps does not equal the Halo 3 singleplayer maps. They're different beasts in terms of geography size. And I'm not saying one is better than another, just that the technical specifications between the two types of games are different. |
Which is bigger than the other?
