By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
CGI-Quality said:
coolbeans said:
CGI-Quality said:
Kantor said:
disolitude said:
Were you making these threads last year when Gears 2 was the king?

Why would he? He has no interest in Gears. He doesn't even own a 360.

Beyond that, at that time, many sites and gamers alike thought MGS4 was the "graphical King".

You sure? Yeah sites still give the credit for having some of the best (the best last year) animations on consoles but technically I've seen more that dive into the comparison to find Gears 2 better.

It received more awards for best graphics from sites, apparently. How do i feel, I call them even. But, even at the main award's show, it was nominated for best graphics (MGS4).

Regardless, what happened in 2008 is irrelevant.

People are saying that I am not contributing to the graphics talk... so I'll start ehre.

MGS4 is not anywhere clsoe to the best looking game on any close. The engine for that game is seriously underdeveloped.

The game runs in 1024x768 native resolution which is lower than the usual 1280x720 resolution most console gams run today. The draw distance in the game is pathetic as cliffs and walls limit the view in order to keep a decent frame rate. Speaking of frame rate, its supposd to be locked at 30 but it dips in to low 20s in intense battles such as the ship level.

The game has very detailed models and faces and that what make people think the game is visually impresive. Bodies disapear 30 seconds after being shot, there isn't any impressive lighting...etc. I have not seen uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 looks amazing. But MGS4 does not belong on the 10 best looking games list this gen...