Having an opinion different than yours does not mean that I am trolling GOW3. You were the one that brought it up anyway.
Like I said, I did like GOW3, I just think it was a little overrated by many reviewers. I played through everything GOW3 had to offer and it was pretty good, but there were quite a few things I think could have been done better. The narrative was kind of weak in my opinion and the game felt pretty short. I mostly used the same moves throughout the game...
Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. God of War 3 was good, but it definitely wouldn't get a 10 in my book. I am almost certain that I will enjoy Castlevania more. I like everything about it better, from the lead character, to the environments, to the variety of the gameplay, to the quality of the voice acting. I think Castlevania just looks better on nearly every level.
I think the main character is easier to relate to and the storyline seems more exciting and well done to me. The gameplay seems more varied and the graphics seem richer and more detailed. So yeah, I agree with you guys that it looks better than God of War 3.
You owned yourself by making such untruthful and exaggerated statements.
You say Reach doesn't even come close to Killzone 2 and that is nothing but a fanboy statement. They are in fact very close, each with some advantages over the other.
Where is the evidence that Killzone is pushing more pixels and polys? I seriously doubt that.
Halo Reach is far, far better looking than the Resistance games. But the reason they didn't compare to Killzone 3 is because that game isn't finished yet.
There are a ton of improvements.
The engine is pushing far more polygons; the characters and gun models are especially improved in that regard.
The engine now supports deferred lighting which allows them to have many different light sources in a scene, all casting their different colored glows onto the environment.
Screen space ambient occlusion has been added to the engine.
Per-object motion blur has also been added.
Yeah way to list something that has literally 0 impact on image quality. The fact that the horizontal resolution is slightly below 1280 is such a minuscule difference.
I compared Halo Reach against Killzone 2 and guess which one looked crisper? Halo Reach did. I see no signs of blurriness or degradation of fine details.
Also, it does have anti-aliasing, it just doesn't use the standard hardware supported MSAA. It uses temporal anti-aliasing. Whic...
It is easily one of the best looking games on the 360 and one of the best looking games I have played on any console.
Edit: Yes, it did look crisper. Killzone 2 looked somewhat softer. Are you even familiar with how resolution affects image quality? With too low of a resolution or with poor upscaling the image quality tends to look softer and fine details start to become lost. As I said, I saw none of that in Halo Reach and it did in fact have a crisper look than Killzon...
Nope, the textures are nearly uniformly great. The textures on rocks, characters, buildings, vehicles and so on are all of a high quality. Just like any game there are some that are better than others, but in general they are extremely good by current generation standards.
Even zooming in on other characters in my unit I was amazed to be able to see the smallest scratches and other details in their armor.
The ground textures look excellent on my HDTV as well.
Indeed. I remember playing the original Shinobi in arcades back in the late 80s. Although, come to think of it Ninja Gaiden dates back nearly that far as well. I think Shinobi was just a little bit before.
Looks excellent.
I will get this on release day too. I am impressed by the gameplay, the graphics and the story that it seems to tell.
Me encanta Meristation. This was a good review. I read the original version in Spanish and it was one of the best reviews I have read. They always do a good job reviewing games. Halo Reach es lo maximo!
What a liar. I have played through RE5 and Uncharted and the amount of screen tearing is pretty similar. That is, it didn't ruin either game. There are lots of games that have much worse screen tearing.
This is their second game on the PS3, so obviously they have had plenty of time to learn its ins and outs.
When are you guys going to realize that the PS3 is not the mega-powerful console Sony has led you to believe? The PS3 and 360 each have strengths and weaknesses and depending on what a developer is trying to do with their game it might not work as good on one of the platforms.
They developed Enslaved on both platforms simultaneously and both versions sh...
Enslaved looks better than Heavenly Sword without a doubt. I wonder what game you have been looking at.
I've enjoyed every one of the Halo campaigns. They tell great stories. Not to mention that most reviews I have read have said that Halo Reach has the most well-structured story of any of the Halo games and a nearly perfect ending. I am sure I will enjoy the tale of Halo Reach.
@jneul
That's not at all true. The Xbox almost always had the better looking multi-platform games even though they were often ports.
That is why it is kind of silly to use that as an excuse for why multi-platform games usually look worse on the PS3.
If the PS3 was truly more powerful it should have no problem regularly producing the better graphics in multi-platform games. Especially after nearly 4 years on the market. Blaming it on de...