By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
killerzX on 14 March 2012
Edit Thread
Michael-5 said:
Aldro said:
 

 

Now don't go find a way to go around this. It clearly says Pre-Alpha. I was at the game convention in Sweden called Gamex in 2010?? November. It said Pre-Alpha there and I remember the full version making me drop my pants even more.

Do we know what stage in dev Gears 2 was at E3 2010? I thought Pre-alpha came long before a game was ready for release, not months before release. Also do we know what stage the playable E3 demo was at? I thought alpha was characteristic of games which aren't ready to play yet.

Either Way, E3 2008, IGN said Gears 2 looked better then Killzone 2, both games were incomplete works, both games released relatively close together. Yes KZ2 released 3.5 months later, but it was in dev since earlier too (They also had playable versions as early as Playstation Day in August 2007, same can't be said for Gears 2), so there is no reason to think one game was more close to complete then the other.

 

Also P.S. to the other guy...I think MGS4 looks better then KZ2, can you find an article by some website (preferably a well known one) that says MGS4 looks better then Killzone 2? Otherwise I'll stick to what IGN say and put Gears 2 above KZ2, and personaly put Gears 3 above KZ3 (I know you put KZ3 1 rank above Gears 3, so it's really a matter of preference).

no, i cant because MGS4 doesn't look better than killzone 2. why are you arguing against your own point. i cant find a single site that says MGS4 looks better than Killone 2. but i can find many sites that regarded Killzone 2 as the best graphical game to date. i can also find the well know site, that actually analyses games, Lens of Truth, and they said Killzone 2 is graphically better and more advance than Gears 2. i can also find well know site Digital Foundry, and they said Killzone 2, set graphical benchmarks, with the only game coming close to it was Uncharted 1. they say Uncharted 1 gives it a run for its money, yet they make no mention of your precious Gears 2 (which is a game i love by the way, and like way more than Killzone 2).

but you can go on and hang on to that e3 graphics award gears won, if it really matters that much to you, you really seem to desperately cling to that. but the rest of us will base this off of awards given to finished games, and given by actual technical analysis. not some biased opinion, like yours, grounded in no fact.

 

P.P.S. To add to my preference comment and how every game has their own benefits. L.A. Noire, although overall not that spectacular to look at, has the best face animations out of all games. So if facial expressions are a big deal for graphics for you, L.A. Noire would be your best graphics choice.

no, not really at all, if you actually read the reviews and played the game you would see how jarring, the facial animations actually are. sometimes they are really good, but others they look completely out of place, and ackward. Uncharted (and to a little lesser extent God of war 3) have much better facial animation, and are highly praised. while LA NOIRE does mocap for their faces, Uncharted and GOW3 use hand animated faces, which creates a better sense of emotion in the faces, and avoids the uncanny valley that is often seen in LA NOIRE.