my comp can't even play crysis porperly how its gonna look good for crysis 2?

So now I just browsed through maybe 100s of posts all from comparing Halo Reach(LOL) to Killzone to the UE 3 demo shown in GDC to calling Killzone 3 lowres(LOWAT?) to saying PS3 owners thinking that they cannot deal with a game looking better than their exclusives to someone talking about reviews.....

Killzone 2 and 3 may have low res textures, but the part that makes them look so fu*king brilliant is not just textures. Textures are not everything, if they were PS3 would have been better than the 360 without using the cell itself because it has a better GPU for textures. The part that makes killzone 2 look so awesome is its weather effects, the sand blowing, the sky lighting, the rain effects, the character models, the anti-aliasing, the gun-models, the enemy models, and finally the textures. 

If you look at crysis 2 what do you see? A Halo styled shooter, with minimal enemies on the map, who are well detailed along with the environments, but no artistic value to the whole scenery. Its just buldings everywhere. You know why? Because art requires effects, and effects require utilising the system's resources effectiviely. That's where the true beauty lies, not in just some kind of textures.

Crysis 2 does have the real time illumination effect, which isn't a big deal because Uncharted 2 has a very good effect of its own. If a game relies on sunlight to look good then that game doesn't look that good at all.

and the funny thing is, kZ2 and 3 are praised for their high res textures

and here is its amazing lighting (i dont know how to embed)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toPnItQIlVg

Actually the Unreal engine has not supported DX11 until that demo and there are no announced unreal engine games announced that support DX11. 

The demo also supports several other techniques that have never been seen before in Unreal engine and some have not been used in any other game, like the Bokeh depth of field effect, Geometry shaders, Image-based reflections, Subsurface scattering, and the move to Deferred rendering with revolutionary MSAA support and a new High-quality dynamic shadow system. This new version of the Unreal engine is a massive improvement and looks far better than old Unreal games on the same hardware, you can play games like Mass Effect 2  on the same hardware it it won't look nearly as good.

to read more http://www.unrealengine.com/news/epic_games_releases_march_2011_unreal_development_kit_beta/ 

let the game speak for itself...really no such need for that. 

Epic fail xDD CONSOLE not Consoles and this was said on 2010 LOL

Really, this thread shows very  well why I don't give my opinion about graphics anymore (usually).How could this thread end up in a debate if Halo:Reach or Killzone 3 is looking better?

Anyway, some people here have to stop commenting on games they haven't played. I see Nsanity trying to prove that Halo:Reach looks better than Killzone 3, although I'm quite sure he never even touched Killzone 3 or any of the big graphical PS3 exclusives. Really man, there are more than enough reviewers who agree that Killzone 3 is the best looking game on the market. Just believing reviewers when they have the same opinion as you is pretty pointless. They are both great looking games, but I find the claim that Reach looks better than KZ3 quite ridiculous (and yes, I own and played both). Really man, that's nothing against you personally, you're a good poster most of the time, but you need to be way more objective...

Then I also see some people who act like the best looking PS3 games can't be beaten. But they can be beaten, they just haven't been yet. And I guess many of you also haven't played games like Halo:Reach... Really, I give you guys the same advice which I give to Nsanity: try to be more objective and just don't comment on games that you haven't played or don't even own the console to play it on.

Just for all you guys again: Please don't take this as an offense!

But well, there are a few posters in here who really made very good comments (like CGI and trasharmdsister).

And finally my take on the topic:
Everything I've seen so far of Crysis 2 looks great and I will judge for myself if it is the best looking game on consoles or not. I'll probably just rent it though because my interest in Crysis 2 isn't really big.

I never said Halo Reach was better than killzone however i did point out that some of the things in Killzone are far from perfect and already been done in other games so cut the crap guys and stop tryn to spin this on one person.

I have to say this thread has inspired me to never fight about graphics again.

That's going to be like quiting smoking though  - probably not going to happen.

I'm not trying to spin this just on you, as I said, there are several people in here who behave ridiculous.

And sorry, but your whole way of arguing in this thread clearly points in the direction that you think that Reach is graphically superior to Killzone 3. Furthermore, every game has parts in it which are not perfect, but that's something that I don't have to tell you. My main complaint is still valid: you shouldn't judge games you haven't played.

And I btw. don't even think that Killzone 3 is the best looking game on the market...