I think it's also important to note that Gears of War is a TPS and Killzone 2 is a FPS. Killzone 2 seems to have better character models, especially if you find close up screenshots. Gears of War 2 doesn't need the extra detail because you will almost never find yourself viewing an enemy from that close. In addition, Killzone 2, being a FPS, needs to render a gun model and it's animations. It might be a small difference, but there is a difference between what each game needs to do.
I think it's pretty pointless to argue about organic vs inorganic art assets when you completely fail to mention things like particle effects, lighting, animation, and physics, all of which play a part in a game's graphics and graphics engine. Not to mention that Killzone 2 has per pixel motion blur and could result in some people believing the game has blurry textures based on certain screenshots.
It's depressing that the eyes of a "programmer" focus solely on organic vs inorganic art assets instead of the technology powering the game engines and what each game engine is doing. Are you really a programmer? A real one that has worked on real games?
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
