RAZurrection said:
Is that a lot? Assassins Creed has over 10,000 just for Altair in a sandbox environment. Since Uncharted 1- 2 are exclusive and their levels quite linear it should'nt it be a lot more?
I doubt that, Uncharted 1 had horrible screen tearing, no motion blur and no split-screen. It was pretty...for a PS3 game, but technically it was a mess. U2 looks a bit better, they have the motion blur and the screen tearing looks reduced, if it gets split-screen it should be up on RE5/Gears 2 level, however I doubt it will, Naughty Dog just seems to do the bare minimum. |
well, the uncharted number of animations must be quoting something different, as it cant be beaten by a ps2 game by over double the amount according to your source. They say that 300 is a massive number on their website, so 10000 must be something different.
Plus uncharted didnt have horrible screen tearing, i dont know where youre getting that from. I don't know if u even have uncharted, but i do and while admitedly there was some screen tearing in the more advanced environments, it wasnt horrible at all. In fact according to http://www.digitalfoundry.org/blog/?p=167
gears of war has 20 percent dropped frames. Plus on a technical note, uncharted 1 would definietly beat gears of war 1, and i bet u2 would beat gow2. Why? Well it hasmuch higher resolution characters and polygon counts. It definietly was not a mess, have you even completed the game? I don't know what ur syaing about "it was pretty.. for a ps3 game" because many have said uncharted is the best looking console game preiod. I.e. gamerchronicles, eurogamer (supposedly 360 leanings), gametrailers (in their video review).
Naughty dog def did not do the bare minmum, i dont know where you got that from ,thats totally wrong. Epic games had a n engine to work from for gears, uncharted created an engine from scratch, with several different renderers running instantaneously.
