selnor said:
Hynad said:
selnor said:
Hynad said:
True to himself, Selnor reads, interprets and twists whatever he reads to make it fit whatever he wants to believe as true. DF says "the LIKES of Naughty Dog and Santa Monica Studio". They don't say nor even imply that those studios are the only ones that push the technical envelope.
Selnor is again trying to make what he reads fit his extremely unreasonable bias.
|
ROFL how may Sony fans do this day in day out. But but but but.
DF In an Era where SMS and Naughty have defined graphical state of te art. You cant get muc clearer than that.
But in true VGC sony fandom. You interpret things to fit your agenda.
|
Nope. You make DF say that ND and SMS are the only ones that gave the PS3 an edge, because they name only those two. But their wording doesn't even imply that this is what they mean. But I understand that a person such as you needs to be told every single little details, enumerated with great length, even pictures and diagrams if possible, otherwise your head just doesn't keep up. I'll refrain from geting into more specifics, because you've proven times and times again throughout the years that you never get the picture.
|
???????????? They clearly say SMS and ND dominated this generation. Using the word dominated. Not GG. Why would they say Halo 4 has a shot a best visuals ever this gen against theses 2 studios? They would have mentioned them. The fact that ONLY Uncharted and God Of War 3 are mentioned in the entire Halo 4 article as a reference point says everyting. Otherwise they would have used KZ3 as a reference which they dont because GOW3 and UC2 and 3 all look better than my copy of KZ3. KZ3 is not quite in the same league as UC2 and 3 and GOW3. Having played them all KZ is the least impressive of those PS3 games.
Crysis 2, UC2 and 3, GOW 3, Halo 4, Forza Horizon are all better tecnically than KZ3. KZ3 and Gears 3 are a step down from the titles mentioned before.
|
Stop making a fool of yourself.
