CGI-Quality said:
Oblivion86 said:
CGI-Quality said:
Your opinion is fine, but Killzone 2 didn't have any pop-in (which is ironic since Gears 2 did) and I've never heard of "clunky" textures.
|
clunky meaning disportional or odd looking.. I noticed quite a number of pop-ins in the later levels, never did I notice one in GoW2 SP, that is just my experience..
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/949/949161p2.html
"That being said, there are still some technical issues that crop up here and there. There are a number of low resolution shadows that pop up on environments and character models, particularly when they're talking, which can detract from the action that's going on. The same can be said for the texture pop-in that will snap into view, frequently on camera pans of a location. Add to this some of the aliasing and even the grain filters, which give the game depth but are also a double-edged sword because it almost feels like they're overused in some areas."
|
Clunky is a representation of a feeling or movement, not a look. Low-res textures it had, yes (although, so did Gears 2).
As for that review, I don't recall it personally, maybe they saw something I didn't. Could be wrong. I'll play through it again.
And I'd suggest playing Gears 2 again, because one of the things that plagued the game is texture pop-in. It was improved from Gears 1, but it was definitely there.
|
Gears had fade-in effect, different and more subtle from the obvious texture pop-in towards the later stages of KZ2.. Clunky can be used to describe an object or graphics by treating it as a metaphor meaning "disportionate or inconsistent from reality.."
coming back to my original opinion..
UC2 > Crysis 2 > KZ 3 & GoW3 > Gears 2 > Killzone 2
