Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
This is wrong. PS3 games are looking better and better as time goes by since launch and studios make their 2nd, 3rd game for the system, etc, and Sony and various studios share techniques. Though of course, the overall man-hours put into a game's graphics is also important, and KZ2 presumably had a lot of that (though they had to build their engine for that game). Amount going on on-screen is probably also a factor. Why did you feel the need to deny that a game brought out later, but with similar amount onscreen, can't look better? Resistance 1 says 'hi'. There are and will be later games with similar amounts onscreen that look better.
|
The KZ devs build their engine to the bone of the system. There is obviously room for some improvements, but I think they hit in the up 85 to 90 precent of the reality of the systems preformance. I also think that the only way you get noticable improvements from a game that hasn't had the same level of intensive programming as KZ2 is through less things on screen at the same time... much like God of War 3 will have(or not have depending on how you look at it).









