bbsin said:
Garnett said:
bbsin said:
Garnett said:
bbsin said:
Garnett said:
bbsin said:
Garnett said:
bbsin said:
Garnett said:
Snaaaaaake said:
Best looking games of the PS3:
1. Killzone
2.Heavy Rain
3. Uncharted
4. MGS4.
Killzone 2 is a huge way off number 2 though. |
Fixed!
And people are amused so easly,Those are what i call "fake" physics,Its like this...
Each part of the wall gets a hit point say 30.
When a player shoots the wall it recieves damage like a player would.
It then puts the crumbling animation and it looks like it really blew apart
There fake physics in a nutshell,real physics are much more than that,and what kind of bullets are they using .50 cal?
I know all this from PC gaming,They used this kind of stuff in Project Reality mod for BF2,They took a simple Bridge in BF2 and recolored it and put 3-4 into a house and made entire citys and with 64 players and fake physics its crazy!
But this game is shaping up to be awesome!
|
It really doesn't matter if it's "fake" or "real", devs have been using techniques to replicate effects since the beginning of time. Take GT5P for example, it used ray tracing on the garage menu, car looks great. Then PD takes Ray tracing off for real races and replaces with relecting textures to replicate ray tracing, cars still looks great. Another example would be WipeoutHD, it's said to be in 1080p 60 FPS, but as the action gets intense, the resolution sales below "true" 1080p but ends up still looking good. There are games with better physics that look far less impressive than KZ2, because it's not about whether the devs are using the "real deal" that makes the game impressive, it's how they present the illusion that makes the game look impressive.
Either way, it's really the geometry of the level and objects that are truly impressive. Probably took Guerilla a long time to get it done.
|
What are you talking about,im talking about physics not graphcis you silly duck!
|
And I was talking about the general look of the game which includes physics and how devs use other methods to keep the game looking impressive, you crazy hoot!
|
Physics dont affect how the game looks,Physics are how objects are destroyed and basically anything that the CPU does other than AI,Number of enemys on screen,how objects are destroyed and how many pieces they break into,how fast they are flying apart ect.
and CRAZY HOOT LOL!!!! I NEVER EXPECTED THAT LOL
|
Ofcourse physics affect the graphics and looks of a game. Maybe not in screens but in motion, physics play a HUGE part in the general look. The pieces that break apart and the dust/debris that fly up as a result of physics are graphics no? Also, the number of enemies on screen (which you say are part of physics) can be referred to as scale, which can be used in context of how good the graphics are in a game. Would crysis be as graphically impressive if all the object in the game were rock solid and unmovable? I think not.
and on a serious note... I KNOW, I NEVER USE THE WORD "CRAZY HOOT"!! BWAHAHA!
|
No no my good sir,You have it missunderstood,The Texture make the game look good,physics just make the pieces fall apart,anything the game looks good in is from the GPU,Crysis is good cause of the graphics and the physics,also note Crysis does not have real physics either.
also LOL MAN CRAZY HOOT,THAT IS THE FUNNIEST THING I HEARD IN A LONG TIME LOL!!!!!!!!
|
Blasphemy! Crysis have some of the best physics I've seen, especially in the map editor. But the GPU thing isn't entirely true. Graphics are more than just lighting, textures, and particles. When people refer to how good the graphics are in a video game, they're describbing how good the game looks, which includes animation, color palette and physics. I do recognize that physics can be a factor in actual gameplay aswell, but when a building collaspes and particles are flying all over the place, the first thing that comes to mind is how good the game looks, which is basically saying how good the graphics are.
and ..............fo shizzle.
|
Animation is preprogramed,which is done by the CPU and color and particles are done by the GPU,you can have a simple animation and Crysis graphics and the game will have good graphics,with no physics,also if Animations were included in graphics than even average looking games would get huge marks for high graphics.
and -------------Indeed
|
So you're saying animation and physics are not factors of how visually impressive a game looks? If so, i cannot agree with that. Graphics is just another way of saying "visual presentation", IE: what you see on the screen in motion or not. There's nothing that really says that graphics are tied to textures, lighting, etc. I always thought of graphics as how good a game looks visually, this is why a falling building, or life like animations, or anything visually stunning is considered graphically impressive.
word. .
|
