I think this is the common problem with this debate.
Everyone reverts to more photorealism = better. And if that is what the games are going for it works. But when two games have cartoony style the super high detailed glare coming from every surface type effects you see rampant on the PS3/360 are not always better.
SMG looks great because it stays true to the simple Mario style, while still having a tremendous amount of detail and flare. If you want to say R&C pushes more polygons you are correct, but to say one looks better than the other is sort of like comparing two supermodels and having two guys argue over which one looks better.
At the end of the day they both are very attractive and have their own merits, but neither is definitively better looking than the other because its all based in opinion. Stating that one is better when you own one and have never played the other is pretty disengenious to say the least.
PS - Most SMG videos have been very low quality Griff, so comparing based on that is useless. Wait until you play the game. I would say "or compare to similar quality R&C vids" but the mind has a way of filling in detail where there is none when it knows what to expect.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
