| Aldro said: I probably shouldnt do this but you guys mention Uncharted and best graphics etc console yada yada =>
Its a fucking amazing looking game, but due to the nature of it being open world => Comparing the pure visual fidelity of say the textures and what-not : It falls short in contrast to the very linear games such as Killzone and Uncharted. Theres a lot of usage of CGI as well. I mean have you even seen the character models in engine? Just compare the pre-renderd cutscenes to Uncharteds ingame.
I am not trying to take a hit at Halo 4. At what it does, it does very well. It completely and utterly destroys anything Bungie has done. But would I say it even looks better then Crysis 2? Probably not. But that is where you should put the comparison to. Both are somewhat sandbox-y. I mean can you really completely outlook the fact that linear games simply CAN have more attention to detail than more open games? You can be floored by the technical and aesthetic visuals, but by saying pure visually bar none -> That is just ...no. The best looking game in my opinion on the 360 due to it being restricted and allowing the devs to put details into small areas is by far Gears of War 3.
Just my 2 cents into the whole graphic warfare shit that I love.
As for the game = |
All consoles are limited extremely. The all look bad with a few examples of them looking somewhat good because they pushed the limits and did a few technical tricks to make it look better like Uncharted and Halo. Crysis 2 was a technical mess with jaggies, framerate issues, buildings spawning out of no where, etc. I think people are just excited because yes for a console game Halo 4 runs well and looks well and that is why it will get compared to Uncharted. You compare it to a PC game and it gets obliterated.
