By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
ninjablade on 18 March 2013
Edit Thread
cbarroso09 said:
ninjablade said:
MDMAlliance said:
ninjablade said:
snowdog said:
ninjablade said:

you guys do realize the game is sub HD, draw distance is bad and so is frame rate, the only thing impressive is motion blur but i guess looking through rose tinted glasses make even a ok looking current gen game look next gen. i'm saying this based on the 43% that say its nextgen and barley, so the reality is its all bias, people way over exaggerate, a game's graphics just to feel good about the console they love.



Sub-HD..? Got any sauce with that..? I assumed it was 720p native..?

And you might want to have a look at the draw distance again and see an optician if you don't think the draw distance is impressive.

you have a neogaf account, it's been confirmed to be sub-hd on neogaf, look at page 12.


http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=50344158&postcount=551 You mean this?  (I didn't read the entire thread btw)

To me, this seems entirely baseless and by no means is a confirmation.

edit: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=50448360&postcount=607  We can argue that this post confirms it's native 720p if we look into it the way you looked into that neogaf post that was hypothetical.

noffi is a huge nintendo fan and if he thinks its sub hd, its probably is, we will find out soon enough probably tomorrow, and has for your draw distance comment, how is it impressive if its not consistent.

do you realize you can't use person opinions to validate an statement. 

more impressions neogaf claiming its sub hd http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=50645976&postcount=1509, i would say the game is sub hd 99% confirmed, since i habe never seen neogaf be wrong about this.