By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - World's Best Graphics On Consoles! Top 10 by GameReactor

CGI-Quality on 22 April 2011
BenVTrigger said:
CGI-Quality said:
BenVTrigger said:
MikeB said:

@ Aldro

Not only that, technically Uncharted 1: Drake's Fortune had better lighting, anti-aliasing, higher quality textures and higher polygon counts. It's general art style was more appealing to me, such as Drake vs Markus character design.

Of course, I understand Gears of War 2 has a certain cool-factor amongst many XBox fans and it's still a very good looking game.



I've played the shit out of Uncharted: Drake's Fortune.

And it in no aspect is better looking that Gears of War.  It just isn't.  Its a beautiful game sure, but is nowhere near current standards inlcuding Gears 2. 

Actually he's got a point (and quite a bit of reviews agreed). Uncharted 1 did have smoother aliasing and less frame drops than Gears 1, not to mention higher detailed textures, better water effects, and higher polygon character models. Lighting was a toss up, and Uncharted had more screen tearing, but overall, Uncharted 1 etched Gears 1 out on a technical level.

Gears 2 changed the game, and even though Uncharted still beat it in charatcer models, Gears 2 got overall more respect visually. Of course Uncharted 2 put to rest any debate about Gears vs Uncharted visually, but that's irrelevant.

I don't care about technical terms and all this stuff people throw around to be perfectly honest.  A game can have 1 million polys and it can be ugly as hell.

Gears 2 is a better looking game than Uncharted.  By quite a bit.

You initially said Gears of War, not Gears 2. If it's about Gears 2, I agree (for the most part), as made evident in my post. As for technical stuff, whether you don't care for it or not, that plays a factor when determining which games are ahead of others. Personal opinions are fine, but the tech stuff isn't based on opinion. And frankly, Uncharted 1 was anything but ugly.

Either way, if I misunderstood, you have my apologies.



                                                                                                                                                           

Around the Network
BenVTrigger on 22 April 2011
CGI-Quality said:
BenVTrigger said:
CGI-Quality said:
BenVTrigger said:
MikeB said:

@ Aldro

Not only that, technically Uncharted 1: Drake's Fortune had better lighting, anti-aliasing, higher quality textures and higher polygon counts. It's general art style was more appealing to me, such as Drake vs Markus character design.

Of course, I understand Gears of War 2 has a certain cool-factor amongst many XBox fans and it's still a very good looking game.



I've played the shit out of Uncharted: Drake's Fortune.

And it in no aspect is better looking that Gears of War.  It just isn't.  Its a beautiful game sure, but is nowhere near current standards inlcuding Gears 2. 

Actually he's got a point (and quite a bit of reviews agreed). Uncharted 1 did have smoother aliasing and less frame drops than Gears 1, not to mention higher detailed textures, better water effects, and higher polygon character models. Lighting was a toss up, and Uncharted had more screen tearing, but overall, Uncharted 1 etched Gears 1 out on a technical level.

Gears 2 changed the game, and even though Uncharted still beat it in charatcer models, Gears 2 got overall more respect visually. Of course Uncharted 2 put to rest any debate about Gears vs Uncharted visually, but that's irrelevant.

I don't care about technical terms and all this stuff people throw around to be perfectly honest.  A game can have 1 million polys and it can be ugly as hell.

Gears 2 is a better looking game than Uncharted.  By quite a bit.

You initially said Gears of War, not Gears 2. Nevertheless, I agree with Gears 2, as made evident in my post. As for technical stuff, whether you don't care for it or not, that plays a factor when determining a games visuals. Personal opinions are fine, but the tech stuff isn't based on opinion. And frankly, Uncharted 1 was anything but ugly.

Either way, if I misunderstood, you have my apologies.

1.  His comparison was between Gears of War 2 and Unchrarted 1.  He claimed UC1 was better looking than Gears 2.  Obviously when I respond Gears looks better its using the two games he originally compared, Gears 2 and Uncharted Drake's Fortune.

2.  When did I ever in any way, shape, or form insinuate that Drake Fortune was ugly?  I directly said and I quote, "It's a beautiful looking game for sure."



CGI-Quality on 22 April 2011
BenVTrigger said:

1.  His comparison was between Gears of War 2 and Unchrarted 1.  He claimed UC1 was better looking than Gears 2.  Obviously when I respond Gears looks better its using the two games he originally compared, Gears 2 and Uncharted Drake's Fortune.

2.  When did I ever in any way, shape, or form insinuate that Drake Fortune was ugly?  I directly said and I quote, "It's a beautiful looking game for sure."

Again, in your intial post, you said Gears of War in one area then Gears 2 in another. The mishap is understandable.

Also, I didn't say you called Drake's Fortune ugly, I insinuated that the analogy didn't work there (as in it's not ugly, and therefore wouldn't work in that context of "more polygons doesn't make an ugly game a pretty one").

It's a simple misunderstanding of words and I agree with your overall point of Gears 2 > Uncharted 1. Therefore, chillax.



                                                                                                                                                           

BenVTrigger on 22 April 2011
CGI-Quality said:
BenVTrigger said:

1.  His comparison was between Gears of War 2 and Unchrarted 1.  He claimed UC1 was better looking than Gears 2.  Obviously when I respond Gears looks better its using the two games he originally compared, Gears 2 and Uncharted Drake's Fortune.

2.  When did I ever in any way, shape, or form insinuate that Drake Fortune was ugly?  I directly said and I quote, "It's a beautiful looking game for sure."

Again, in your intial post, you said Gears of War in one area then Gears 2 in another. The mishap is understandable.

Also, I didn't say you called Drake's Fortune ugly, I insinuated that the analogy didn't work there (as in it's not ugly, not accusing you of calling it that).

It's a simple misunderstanding of words and I agree with your overall point of Gears 2 > Uncharted 1. So chillax.

Understandable, its all good.

MikeB's posting style just frustrates me sometimes is all so my bad.



MikeB on 23 April 2011

@ BenVTrigger

 

> I don't care about technical terms and all this stuff people throw around to be perfectly honest.

Sorry, but if you want to use subjective metrics, then I find Markus and his team of oversized bodybuilder space marines quite repulsive. There's no way I can self-identify with such characters.

Basically I know I am certainly not alone at this. Ask just about any female and they usually think in a quite similar manner. I think it's mostly amongst many adolescent/teenage males that are most attracted to characters like Markus and story telling as found in Gears of War.



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

Around the Network
Booh! on 23 April 2011

This late discussion is funny. Many people on this site (and elsewhere tbh) said that GeoW2 was graphically a step back from the original Gears of War.

And now Uncharted is certainly better than Gears of War but not better than Gears of War 2.



Doobie_wop on 23 April 2011

People really have to go back and play Gears of War 2, I love the game, but come on, most of the multi-platform games from 2008 and up have easily surpassed it. It wasn't a huge step up from Gears of War 1, which was a great looking game in 2006, but not so much in 2008, especially when it's stacked up against MGS4, Dead Space, Uncharted and Killzone 2, which was only released a few months later. I added it to my list just so it wouldn't be so slanted, but I could easily find 10 more games that look better or as good as it and they would have all been released within a year of it.



Bet with Conegamer and AussieGecko that the PS3 will have more exclusives in 2011 than the Wii or 360... or something.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3879752

jhuff394 on 23 April 2011

This is a great article... RANKS THE GRAPHICS DEAD ON (Killzone 3/Uncharted 2 could be flopped in some viewers eyes..)

Oh and I hope this was excluding sports MLB 10 THE SHOW is so freakin realistic its almost wierd, countless times people have walked in asking me if the Indians game was on lol.

 

Cant wait for Uncharted 3... Naughty Dog is all set up for the kill this holiday season... Now its all about executing..

I'm sure we all have some kind of idea of the graphics in Uncharted 3, but somehow I have a feeling we have no idea what we are truly about to see.



“Absolutely, we can do much more with it. I don’t know if we are even close to 50 percent of PlayStation 3’s power at this point,” said Asmussen about God of War 3.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME???

Oblivion86 on 23 April 2011
MikeB said:

@ CGI-Quality

I don't agree:

http://kineticninja.blogspot.com/2009/01/naughty-dog-realtime-graphics-and_31.html

Technically Gears of War 2 really shows its age in comparison with the best graphics this gen and personally I dislike the character models (especially as in art style).

I am not saying it's a horrible looking game and maybe not the worst looking one in this list, but I even consider one of your favourites, Heavy Rain, to top this head & shoulders in terms of graphics and that didn't make the list.


Gears 2 IMO deserves a spot above KZ2, because of it's art style, direction, and character models.. It is one of the smoothest games of this gen.. Meanwhile KZ2 has clunky textures, mono-palette scheme, and some awful pop-ins, so yeah..



CGI-Quality on 23 April 2011
Oblivion86 said:
MikeB said:

@ CGI-Quality

I don't agree:

http://kineticninja.blogspot.com/2009/01/naughty-dog-realtime-graphics-and_31.html

Technically Gears of War 2 really shows its age in comparison with the best graphics this gen and personally I dislike the character models (especially as in art style).

I am not saying it's a horrible looking game and maybe not the worst looking one in this list, but I even consider one of your favourites, Heavy Rain, to top this head & shoulders in terms of graphics and that didn't make the list.


Gears 2 IMO deserves a spot above KZ2, because of it's art style, direction, and character models.. It is one of the smoothest games of this gen.. Meanwhile KZ2 has clunky textures, mono-palette scheme, and some awful pop-ins, so yeah..

Your opinion is fine, but Killzone 2 didn't have any pop-in (which is ironic since Gears 2 did) and I've never heard of "clunky" textures.