Aldro said:
You are missunderstanding me my friend.
You could argue Halo 4 is the best looking game TECHNICALLY (although sandbox games are in general the most impressive ones technically).
I am trying to tell you that there's a difference between a game being visually stunning and technically stunning.
I am telling you that there is a vast chance that Killzone will be technically more impressive than Ryse. But I am not saying Killzone will be the better looking one visually.
Awards and what people generally go by is mostly visually.
Yes a game that is large is impressive, but if you judge them based on pure looks without taking any of that into consideration => Linear games most of the time will take the win. Hence why Uncharted and TLOU are known as being among this generations best looking console titles.
Now:
Selnor said that Ryse is technically better than Killzone whereas I stated: Due to Killzone looking the way it does compared to Ryse AND running on 1080 => it is unlikely (especially since you have to factor the KIND of games they are here as well). Technically: Killzone is probably doing more than Ryse just like Halo 4 did more than ..say Beyond Two Souls (to make a very clear example).
What will people find more visually appealing and give awards to most likely had Beyond and Halo been released at the same time? Beyond (seeming as Journey even got more than Halo 4 in 2012).
But who knows. Maybe Killzone looks like shit once its released and it was all smoke and mirrors. I am not debunking that Ryse might be visually, better looking. I too am waiting for a release.
|
