By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
totalwar23 on 02 July 2008
Edit Thread
TheRealMafoo said:
HappySqurriel said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Fishie said:

 

Gears runs in a higher resolution then MGS4.

1. fanboys of both sides agree, that don't mean shit.

2. MGS4 looks better than GoW, period.

 

 

Actually, when you're talking about how powerful hardware is the resolution two games are running at makes a huge difference ...

If you have one game that averages 25fps at 1024x768 and another game that averages 30fps at 1280x720, the first game is rendering 70% as many pixels as the second game so it has (roughly) 140% of the time to render each pixel (assuming identical hardware performance). In other words, small differences in resolution and frame rate can have a large impact on how a game looks.

 

So if I run EchoCrome at 1900x1080 @ 60 fps, it looks better then Gears of War?

A response I would expect from you.

But as to HappySqurriel's reply, what he meant was that the fact that MSG4 having a lower resolution and framerate than Gears allows MSG4 to look better than Gears as the hardware wouldn't be so strained allowing it to focus on extra graphical details, textures, et cetera. Obviously Kojima and his team made a compromise in resolution and framerate to allow MSG4 to look the way it does. Epic could have also decided to develop Gears or Gears 2 to run at a framerate of 25 FPS at a resolution of say...600p so its graphics could be better but they chose the standard route in res. and FPS.