By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Nice vids. To give a more serious answer, however, I view the visual image based on following:

1 - technical graphics - i.e. resolution, AA, lighting effects, character detail, frame rate, graphical effects (particle effects and the like) plus any issues - screen tear, dropped frames and the like

2 - art direction - the look of the assets in the game and their suitability for the title

If speaking purely about graphics technically then in general (there are always exceptions) better frame rate, higher resolution, no screen tearing, etc. = better graphics by comparison between titles. So 60 fps is better than 30 fps. 1080p is better than 720p. Higher resolution textures look better than lower resolution textures, etc.

As an example, Uncharted featured screen tearing plus some other issues, although on the whole it had very good graphics by other criteria.

Uncharted 2 however, has better graphics than Uncharted because it has far less graphical issues and at the same time features improvements in certain areas. So technically, it's fairly easy to say the graphics of Uncharted 2 are better than Uncharted.

(see how I avoided any cross platform comparisons? Wisely I suspect!)

However, for a more holistic judgment I consider Art Direction and then the game itself and the platform it's running on - for example I don't compare Super Mario Galaxy graphics technically to Killzone 2, what would be the point?

However, I would look at Super Mario Galaxy graphics/art direction relative to the title and it's platform and say they were very, very good.

Likewise I would do the same for Killzone 2.

I probably wouldn't overly try and compare them - I think you just get into silly attempts to compare apples and oranges when you do that.

When comparing similar titles, it depends on whether I'm considering purely the graphics or the more holistic view. As an example, if I look at the PS3 version of MW2 and Killzone 2, then technically I'd say both have very good graphics, that Killzone 2 has superior technical graphics in some aspects, however this is balanced by MW2's technical advantages in other areas, primary frame rate. Purely technically, I'd give Killzone 2 the nod as it excells more overall, but more holistically I'd see them pretty even, given their different goals and the 60fps frame rate advantage of MW2.

So that's how I view graphics.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...