Battlefield is "that game"

I meant that the destruction in that game, shits bricks on KZ's

Barozi said: That's beyond epic ! Even with this low quality video it looks about on par with Crysis.

LOL. It's funny how single First party devs have not achieved that yet. But a 3rd party dev is the first to be considered. Ok, so Consoles may look a little worse, but according to those who have played Rage for example on both PC and Console say there is only a difference in AA, AF. If thats the case here, it's 3rd party devs for the world!

CGI-Quality said: ^ ^ It's got some pretty flat ground and wall textures. It's pretty yes, but not better than the top visual console games on the market currently.

Hmmm. To many people put to much emphasis on textures and close up objects. For example. KZ2 and Gears 2 and Uncharted 2 didnt really have huge sprawling areas like Crysis, Bad Company 2 and ME2. When your modelling much more ( and in Bad Company 2's case best destruction ever seen ) then things look better and are technically better on a whole. I'd rather slightly less texture models, but have an extra 2 miles of rendered draw distance and fully destructible scenery. It looks visually more impressive. Its a hard one. But lately seeing KZ2 being played isnt as impressive as it once was.

KylieDog said: How are Killzone 2 graphics when a player causes a building to collapse in non scripted events?

This sir is spot on. People big certain games up, talking about textures and lighting only. They completely make irrelevant more impressive things, like 2 miles of rendering view, fully destructable non scripted scenery and more than 10 enemies onscreen at once. I'd rather a game that makes a happy medium with all the things, rather than having fairly small levels and encroahed views as to not have to render environments in full 3d.

leo-j said: um no Sorry you guys need to replay Killzone 2 like I did the past couple of days.. not close at all.. The destruction is definately better in that game, by far

Um, you do know KZ2's destruction is only superficial ( you cant bring down ANY building in the game ) and the big destruction points are scripted right? Means it barely taxes the game engine. Bad Company 2's is destruction of anything. You can wipe out any building. You know level it. That is very taxing.

I don't really appreciate selnor, how you'll jump at any game and love it just so you can bash Killzone 2, Uncharted 2, Heavy Rain, or GT5.

My love for this game is based on actually looking forward to the gameplay, not to make my internet dick seem bigger. I've stuck to supporting this game for the past few months, because I actually put a lot of weight where I put my support into. My support isn't cheap.

You have been hyping up so many games in such quick succession that it makes it feel very unbelievable that you truly are fans of any of them. Your fervor isn't based on passion for the countless games you hype up solely on graphics, but your passion to start arguments and conflicts where they're not needed.

I would like everyone, not to focus so much on the beautiful graphics, but the application of Destruction 2.0, integration of infantry and vehicular based combat, team oriented gameplay, all in a large and varied map.

CGI-Quality said: Akvod said: I don't really appreciate selnor, how you'll jump at any game and love it just so you can bash Killzone 2, Uncharted 2, Heavy Rain, or GT5. My love for this game is based on actually looking forward to the gameplay, not to make my internet dick seem bigger. I've stuck to supporting this game for the past few months, because I actually put a lot of weight where I put my support into. My support isn't cheap. You have been hyping up so many games in such quick succession that it makes it feel very unbelievable that you truly are fans of all of them. Your fervor isn't based on passion for the countless games you hype up solely on graphics, but your passion to start arguments and conflicts where they're not needed. I would like everyone, not to focus so much on the beautiful graphics, but the application of Destruction 2.0, integration of infantry and vehicular based combat, team oriented gameplay, all in a large and varied map. He's a friend of mine and all but I unfortunately have to agree with this.

The only problem is people forget when I say good. I think probably because I'm a 360 fan. Example:

In my top 10 graphics list for the gen so far in December, I put Uncharted 2 at number 1. Noone noticed this at all, and slated where I put MW2. 2nd KZ2 was not my cup of tea, but I again had that at number 1 before christmas last year.

CGI knows I have never slated Heavy Rain, In fact I am very intrigued to play it. As for GT5. I have evry GT game up to 5. To me they have all gone downhill, or more to the point never evolved. GT5 looks to evolve, but instead of weather effects etc, I want them to get the mechanics right. I dont want 120 hertz gameplay from the physics engine ( GT5P ). I'm used to the more precise control and feel of 360 or more. I want tyre deformation ( the most important part of the car is tyres, they touch the road ). Etc etc. I dont want to argue here in this thread about these games, but I am simply defending myself. Many people see it as bashing. Only because I disagree with top graphics as of now? Or that Rage and Bad Company both have phenominal engines which to me are doing things far more impressive than textures or lighting?
 Try not to forget what Ive actually awarded these games in the past guys.

EDIT: @ Akvod

You assume I posted this for graphics. When I made no indication of that at all. I actually thought the game itself looked EPIC. It was everyone else that posted in here about it being up there with Crysis not me. A few disagree, but the majority of posts are about how awesome it looks. Dont single me out when I didnt even post about graphics till page 3?!

selnor said: CGI-Quality said: Akvod said: I don't really appreciate selnor, how you'll jump at any game and love it just so you can bash Killzone 2, Uncharted 2, Heavy Rain, or GT5. My love for this game is based on actually looking forward to the gameplay, not to make my internet dick seem bigger. I've stuck to supporting this game for the past few months, because I actually put a lot of weight where I put my support into. My support isn't cheap. You have been hyping up so many games in such quick succession that it makes it feel very unbelievable that you truly are fans of all of them. Your fervor isn't based on passion for the countless games you hype up solely on graphics, but your passion to start arguments and conflicts where they're not needed. I would like everyone, not to focus so much on the beautiful graphics, but the application of Destruction 2.0, integration of infantry and vehicular based combat, team oriented gameplay, all in a large and varied map. He's a friend of mine and all but I unfortunately have to agree with this. The only problem is people forget when I say good. I think probably because I'm a 360 fan. Example: In my top 10 graphics list for the gen so far in December, I put Uncharted 2 at number 1. Noone noticed this at all, and slated where I put MW2. 2nd KZ2 was not my cup of tea, but I again had that at number 1 before christmas last year. CGI knows I have never slated Heavy Rain, In fact I am very intrigued to play it. As for GT5. I have evry GT game up to 5. To me they have all gone downhill, or more to the point never evolved. GT5 looks to evolve, but instead of weather effects etc, I want them to get the mechanics right. I dont want 120 hertz gameplay from the physics engine ( GT5P ). I'm used to the more precise control and feel of 360 or more. I want tyre deformation ( the most important part of the car is tyres, they touch the road ). Etc etc. I dont want to argue here in this thread about these games, but I am simply defending myself. Many people see it as bashing. Only because I disagree with top graphics as of now? Or that Rage and Bad Company both have phenominal engines which to me are doing things far more impressive than textures or lighting?  Try not to forget what Ive actually awarded these games in the past guys. EDIT: @ Akvod You assume I posted this for graphics. When I made no indication of that at all. I actually thought the game itself looked EPIC. It was everyone else that posted in here about it being up there with Crysis not me. A few disagree, but the majority of posts are about how awesome it looks. Dont single me out when I didnt even post about graphics till page 3?!

Yes yes, I'll disregard everything you said after page 3, what you said on this page, and the one before that, and the countless threads you have made in your long history here.

As much as this game desperately needs hype, you're the last person I wish would do so, since you don't actually care about Bad Company 2, just like all those other forgotten PC/360 games you've hyped up. I don't want fucking shit like this:

"Um, you do know KZ2's destruction is only superficial ( you cant bring down ANY building in the game ) and the big destruction points are scripted right? Means it barely taxes the game engine. Bad Company 2's is destruction of anything. You can wipe out any building. You know level it. That is very taxing."

THIS IS ABOUT BAD COMPANY 2, NOT ABOUT KILLZONE 2. You're telling people to look AWAY from the game with your inflamatory messages when I want people to look AT Bad Company 2.

 

Now I understand why KylieDog didn't appreciate the Modern Warfare 2 comparisons. It's because of people like you, Geoff, and those who don't care about the game itself, but just the conflict.

@Akvod
Actually, if you read the thread you will see that selnor wasn't the first person to talk about KZ2. He just explained why he thinks that Bad Company 2 has better graphics than Killzone 2 (after someone already said something about KZ2's graphics). He also gave some good points and since it's a forum, we can argue and talk about it.

He isn't saying bad things about Killzone 2 or Uncharted 2, he is just explaining why he thinks that BC2 has better graphics than KZ2, if you disagree you are free to give your argument and show that Selnor is wrong.

If you are angry because KZ2 is in this thread you should talk with Aldro or aragod and not Selnor.

Akvod said: selnor said: CGI-Quality said: Akvod said: I don't really appreciate selnor, how you'll jump at any game and love it just so you can bash Killzone 2, Uncharted 2, Heavy Rain, or GT5. My love for this game is based on actually looking forward to the gameplay, not to make my internet dick seem bigger. I've stuck to supporting this game for the past few months, because I actually put a lot of weight where I put my support into. My support isn't cheap. You have been hyping up so many games in such quick succession that it makes it feel very unbelievable that you truly are fans of all of them. Your fervor isn't based on passion for the countless games you hype up solely on graphics, but your passion to start arguments and conflicts where they're not needed. I would like everyone, not to focus so much on the beautiful graphics, but the application of Destruction 2.0, integration of infantry and vehicular based combat, team oriented gameplay, all in a large and varied map. He's a friend of mine and all but I unfortunately have to agree with this. The only problem is people forget when I say good. I think probably because I'm a 360 fan. Example: In my top 10 graphics list for the gen so far in December, I put Uncharted 2 at number 1. Noone noticed this at all, and slated where I put MW2. 2nd KZ2 was not my cup of tea, but I again had that at number 1 before christmas last year. CGI knows I have never slated Heavy Rain, In fact I am very intrigued to play it. As for GT5. I have evry GT game up to 5. To me they have all gone downhill, or more to the point never evolved. GT5 looks to evolve, but instead of weather effects etc, I want them to get the mechanics right. I dont want 120 hertz gameplay from the physics engine ( GT5P ). I'm used to the more precise control and feel of 360 or more. I want tyre deformation ( the most important part of the car is tyres, they touch the road ). Etc etc. I dont want to argue here in this thread about these games, but I am simply defending myself. Many people see it as bashing. Only because I disagree with top graphics as of now? Or that Rage and Bad Company both have phenominal engines which to me are doing things far more impressive than textures or lighting?  Try not to forget what Ive actually awarded these games in the past guys. EDIT: @ Akvod You assume I posted this for graphics. When I made no indication of that at all. I actually thought the game itself looked EPIC. It was everyone else that posted in here about it being up there with Crysis not me. A few disagree, but the majority of posts are about how awesome it looks. Dont single me out when I didnt even post about graphics till page 3?! Yes yes, I'll disregard everything you said after page 3, what you said on this page, and the one before that, and the countless threads you have made in your long history here. As much as this game desperately needs hype, you're the last person I wish would do so, since you don't actually care about Bad Company 2, just like all those other forgotten PC/360 games you've hyped up. I don't want fucking shit like this: "Um, you do know KZ2's destruction is only superficial ( you cant bring down ANY building in the game ) and the big destruction points are scripted right? Means it barely taxes the game engine. Bad Company 2's is destruction of anything. You can wipe out any building. You know level it. That is very taxing." THIS IS ABOUT BAD COMPANY 2, NOT ABOUT KILLZONE 2. You're telling people to look AWAY from the game with your inflamatory messages when I want people to look AT Bad Company 2.   Now I understand why KylieDog didn't appreciate the Modern Warfare 2 comparisons. It's because of people like you, Geoff, and those who don't care about the game itself, but just the conflict.

You sir, for all I care can hate me to the very end. I couldn't care less. I have been gaming a very long time. Ever since I owned my first Commodore 64 I have been a slave to games. Pretty much every game I have hyped Ive loved. Some more than others. What I choose to say to someone spouting what I believe to be nonsense is my choice. You may take my posts as infutile or passed judgement. Where I see it as stopping the nonsensical PS3 all powerful BS thats been on this site to long. I think it's best to not talk to you at all. Because your last post was very detrimental to me, and I took it more personally than internet chatter. If you were saying that to me in real life, I would not be talking to you calmly. Yu dont own this site, you dont own me, and you have no right to tell me what games I like and what I hype. I think you are the most obnoxious person on this site after that. Never have I seen someone act so almighty. Good day to you sir.