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

Forums - Gaming - Which Game do you believe will have the Best Graphics for 2008?

starcraft on 14 April 2008
BCNR34 said:
starcraft is it physically impossible for you to admit you're wrong?

About what?  Is it impossible for you to ever include any logic or analysis in your posts beyond squealing that everyone is a fanboy if they don't believe in Sony's ultimate virtue and capability for boundless triumph?

Honestly, what was I wrong about in this thread? 

 



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

Around the Network
Gnizmo on 14 April 2008
tombi123 said:
Art direction should not be taken into account. This is because it cannot be debated. It is completely subjective. I believe art direction is just as important as having technically good graphics, but art direction can't be debated, where as graphics from a technical stand point can.

@Starcraft, nice flamebait/trolling.

Art direction absolutely must be taken into account. Otherwise there is no room for discussion at all. Find the game with the highest polygon count that uses the most shaders and what have you and bam your done. Who cares if it looks like ass so long as it is hard for a console to produce.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

cringer8 on 14 April 2008

Hmm, I'm hoping that Soul Caliber IV will have a place in this discussion by year's end. Only because I'm sooooo looking forward to it.



My End of 2008 Hardware Predictions (console only):

Wii : 50 million

360: 28 million

PS3: 24 million

These predictions were made on January 3rd and won't be revised

LINK

tombi123 on 14 April 2008
Gnizmo said:
tombi123 said:
Art direction should not be taken into account. This is because it cannot be debated. It is completely subjective. I believe art direction is just as important as having technically good graphics, but art direction can't be debated, where as graphics from a technical stand point can.

@Starcraft, nice flamebait/trolling.

Art direction absolutely must be taken into account. Otherwise there is no room for discussion at all. Find the game with the highest polygon count that uses the most shaders and what have you and bam your done. Who cares if it looks like ass so long as it is hard for a console to produce.


 Well there still is a debate if you don't consider art direction. The question should be, 'Which game do you believe will technically have the best graphics for 2008?'. Because we don't know about Gears2 or MGS4 polygon counts, it is still up for discussion.

Where as art direction. You could say that the art direction of Okami is the best, and I could say the art direction of R&C is the best, and we are stuck and the discussion ends. The point I was trying to make is that it is very hard to debate about art direction because there is no right or wrong answer. 



ironmanDX on 14 April 2008

This may sound repetitive to other peoples reply's, but judging by those screen shots of Gears2, Gears Of War 2 look dam fine!



Around the Network
Gnizmo on 14 April 2008
tombi123 said:

 


 Well there still is a debate if you don't consider art direction. The question should be, 'Which game do you believe will technically have the best graphics for 2008?'. Because we don't know about Gears2 or MGS4 polygon counts, it is still up for discussion.

Where as art direction. You could say that the art direction of Okami is the best, and I could say the art direction of R&C is the best, and we are stuck and the discussion ends. The point I was trying to make is that it is very hard to debate about art direction because there is no right or wrong answer. 


The debate becomes when do you need to stop pushing polygons and effects because the world looks good enough. There may be no final answer for art direction, but it beats no room for discussion with technical prowess. If we don't know the hard numbers on the games, then we can't debate their technical prowess now can we? Random screen shots give us more an idea of what kind of direction the art is going in.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

DMeisterJ on 15 April 2008
Zucas said:
DMeisterJ said:
Is it just me, or does anyone else think that 'Art Direction' is a cheap way of saying 'System X is not as strong as System Y, and the games aren't even close to one another graphically, but as an artist, this games looks excellent'.

It reminds me of comparing a pretty girl/boy to an ugly girl/boy and instead of someone being ashamed of being with an ugly person [which they should (sorry I'm so shallow)], they point out personality. It's just a cop-out. Graphics are graphics. The thread is graphically, the best game of 2008, but somehow, we got into art-direction.

/rant.

Is it just me or does anyone else think that assuming that graphics only means what looks the most real is not only shallow but narrow as well, considering that graphics are made up of not only quality but originality, artistic style, and how the image reflects the story, setting, and general message of the game.

It reminds me of people who say beauty is only what's on the outside however your only as beautiful as your character.  You can put a dress on a pig and stuff it with makeup, but its still a disgusting pig.  It's really just the truth.  Graphics are good because they fit the game and they are original.  This is why Okami is easily had the greatest graphics in recent years because it was original, polished, and fit the game beautifully.  It didn't dress up a pig to look great even though on the inside it was terrible.  It complemented a beatiful game with one of the greatest graphical achievements in video games.  Alot better than the gritty overused washed out pallet of most "realistic" games today.

/owned


You sound like one of the people who don't look as good as other people, but have 'personality'.  

But seriously, I am shallow, and narrow.  I like my games pretty, beautiful, and graphically impressive, dynamic lighting, as much physics as you can pack in, etc.  

I am shallow.  That's why I asked if I was the only one or not.  No reason to 'own' me.  It's just my view.  



Rock_on_2008 on 15 April 2008
starcraft said:
Fable 2 will compete, especially in terms of the environments. Banjo Kazooie and in my opinion SSBB will both compete due to the brilliant art direction of the latter and what I anticipate will be the brilliant art direction of the former. What I'm worried about is the fact that at least one franchise on your list has a history of severely dodgy gameplay, which is far worse than poor graphics.

Wow thats blatant stealth trolling. I hope you are not bagging my top choice on my list. I said best graphics game for this year. Anyway Gears of War 2 fits the description of a game that may have great graphics but have questionable gameplay.



Audiomatic on 15 April 2008
Zucas said:
DMeisterJ said:
Is it just me, or does anyone else think that 'Art Direction' is a cheap way of saying 'System X is not as strong as System Y, and the games aren't even close to one another graphically, but as an artist, this games looks excellent'.

It reminds me of comparing a pretty girl/boy to an ugly girl/boy and instead of someone being ashamed of being with an ugly person [which they should (sorry I'm so shallow)], they point out personality. It's just a cop-out. Graphics are graphics. The thread is graphically, the best game of 2008, but somehow, we got into art-direction.

/rant.

Is it just me or does anyone else think that assuming that graphics only means what looks the most real is not only shallow but narrow as well, considering that graphics are made up of not only quality but originality, artistic style, and how the image reflects the story, setting, and general message of the game.

It reminds me of people who say beauty is only what's on the outside however your only as beautiful as your character.  You can put a dress on a pig and stuff it with makeup, but its still a disgusting pig.  It's really just the truth.  Graphics are good because they fit the game and they are original.  This is why Okami is easily had the greatest graphics in recent years because it was original, polished, and fit the game beautifully.  It didn't dress up a pig to look great even though on the inside it was terrible.  It complemented a beatiful game with one of the greatest graphical achievements in video games.  Alot better than the gritty overused washed out pallet of most "realistic" games today.

/owned


  Hmm little big planet owns okami, in artistic style and graphics that is.



I like technology when its moving forward..

PSN: methys

starcraft on 15 April 2008
Rock_on_2008 said:
starcraft said:
Fable 2 will compete, especially in terms of the environments. Banjo Kazooie and in my opinion SSBB will both compete due to the brilliant art direction of the latter and what I anticipate will be the brilliant art direction of the former. What I'm worried about is the fact that at least one franchise on your list has a history of severely dodgy gameplay, which is far worse than poor graphics.

Wow thats blatant stealth trolling. I hope you are not bagging my top choice on my list. I said best graphics game for this year. Anyway Gears of War 2 fits the description of a game that may have great graphics but have questionable gameplay.

Lol, ok.  Your more than welcome to voice that opinion.

 



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS