Also, if you want, post pics of your choice. Here is Rainbow Six: Vegas on my PC, maxed out at 1024x768: Not the best shot, but it shows the gun well enough.
Factoring in artistic quality, Half-Life 2. Other engines may have more potential, but Half-Life 2 has amazing artistic values. Rainbow Six looks horrible to me. F.E.A.R's good, but there's better. Especially given F.E.A.R's requirements. Oblivion would probably be second.
Oblivion looks pretty good, but heck, the only full game I have on that list is the Source games (shut up I just recently got a new video card that can actually play games :P).Â
I'd say Half-Life 2, but you included other source engine games into the option. I've seen serious problems with CS graphics (either that or my local gaming cyber cafe has them on low). Anyways, F.EA.R. looks the most awesome to me.
Factoring in artistic quality, Half-Life 2. Other engines may have more potential, but Half-Life 2 has amazing artistic values. Rainbow Six looks horrible to me. F.E.A.R's good, but there's better. Especially given F.E.A.R's requirements. Oblivion would probably be second. Teuvan
Good point. When Gamespot hands out its awards, for instance, it breaks graphics into technical and artistic achievment categories. They're very different concepts.
i cant believe what people vote for. this isnt an opinionated thing, its def without a question rbow vegas. like if you havnt played all of those games dont vote jsut for whatever one you own. everyone should be voting for rbow vegas, its a no braininer, voting for any other is lying
i cant believe what people vote for. this isnt an opinionated thing, its def without a question rbow vegas. like if you havnt played all of those games dont vote jsut for whatever one you own. everyone should be voting for rbow vegas, its a no braininer, voting for any other is lyingncderek
Of course it's an opinion thing. You can't quantify "best graphics" in hard terms. Really evaluate the totality of what might mean, and the notion is so complex your head will explode. You can make a good argument for or against any of these games, because we all value different things.
i cant believe what people vote for. this isnt an opinionated thing, its def without a question rbow vegas. like if you havnt played all of those games dont vote jsut for whatever one you own. everyone should be voting for rbow vegas, its a no braininer, voting for any other is lyingncderek
How is it lying? Throw R6: Vegas into Google along with "performance" or "image quality" as additional keywords.
You'll find debates over the version of the new Unreal engine used, low-resolution textures all alongside a central theme of "shoddy port". Even with decent PC rigs, the game chugs, hardly keeping up with the action on-screen. An anemic video options menu makes squeezing performance out of the game difficult.
If you happen to own an nVidia/older ATi video card, you can forget about AA. With as many objects on screen as R6: Vegas, the jaggies are very pronounced, definitely to the point of distraction.
I've played the X360 version, and it's much more tolerable than the PC version. I'm sorry, but shoddy implementation seriously undermines whatever advances in gameplay Vegas might have brung to the table. Oftentimes, much talk is about the high hardware requirements forcing PC Gaming to take 1 step forward, but 2 steps back. This is a case-in-point example.
On topic, go Source-based games. Rarely have I seen such mindblowing vistas than those from HL2. FEAR, in my opinion is grossly overrated in terms of graphical prowress. Any level that isn't immediately inside a warehouse/office complex looks like a peek back to 2002.
I'm surprised people like Source so much. It's a nice engine, but it looks very dated when compared to most other engines. I personally like the Doom III engine much better than source.
How is it lying? Throw R6: Vegas into Google along with "performance" or "image quality" as additional keywords.
You'll find debates over the version of the new Unreal engine used, low-resolution textures all alongside a central theme of "shoddy port". Even with decent PC rigs, the game chugs, hardly keeping up with the action on-screen. An anemic video options menu makes squeezing performance out of the game difficult.
If you happen to own an nVidia/older ATi video card, you can forget about AA. With as many objects on screen as R6: Vegas, the jaggies are very pronounced, definitely to the point of distraction.
I've played the X360 version, and it's much more tolerable than the PC version. I'm sorry, but shoddy implementation seriously undermines whatever advances in gameplay Vegas might have brung to the table. Oftentimes, much talk is about the high hardware requirements forcing PC Gaming to take 1 step forward, but 2 steps back. This is a case-in-point example.
On topic, go Source-based games. Rarely have I seen such mindblowing vistas than those from HL2. FEAR, in my opinion is grossly overrated in terms of graphical prowress. Any level that isn't immediately inside a warehouse/office complex looks like a peek back to 2002. Aspyred
I've played both versions and the performance of Vegas on the 360 is terrible, too. There's many areas where the game gets in to the low 20 fps range (I can tell by looking) and I'm sure it's even dipped lower than that, in to the teens when the scenes get more complex.
The game is pathetically optimized for the PC too, though. It's really sad to see how poor Ubi's track record is with PC games. Not that it bothers me too much with this game..since it isn't something I'd want to play over and over either way. Even for the multiplayer..
Actually, Rainbow Six Vegas runs about the same as oblivion. I can run Rainbow Six Vegas completely maxed on all settings at 1024x768 at very playable frame rates. Only slightly worse then Oblivion. And yes, we all know it uses an older version of the UE3 engine, but it still looks great. I can't wait for UT3 though. UT3 looks WAY better then both this and any other game out right now.
I'm surprised that people rate graphics acording to the system requirements of the game: "Oh I get 20 FPS on a 8800GTX, it must be a great game, awsome graphics". Graphics isn't all about sysreq or engine date. I'd say a good implementation of an engine and great artistic talent is way better than unjustified sysreq, that are meant to force an upgrade.
Fear is demanding , but Oblivion is even more hardware Demanding , & isn't Rainbow six vegas built on Unreal Engine 3 ??? but H-L 2 engine is the far more compatable with older hardware .
I'm surprised that people rate graphics acording to the system requirements of the game: "Oh I get 20 FPS on a 8800GTX, it must be a great game, awsome graphics". Graphics isn't all about sysreq or engine date. I'd say a good implementation of an engine and great artistic talent is way better than unjustified sysreq, that are meant to force an upgrade. reconwg
20 fps on a 8800GTX is crap. It also depends on your comp, if you get low fps.Â
I'm one of the few who didn't find BF2 graphics all that special. Maybe back then they were, but they never stood out to me. Vegas has some amazing graphics, but the frame rate problems just ruin it for me. Out of that list I'll have to say Oblivion.Â
Oblivion. Easily. The detail in everything in that game is amazing. Probably FEAR second for me, just because of the physics and destructibility of the environments. Vegas is a great game, but i am disappointed by what i've seen of people playing it "maxed" out. it look the same as what I have it on, which is probably somewhere between med and high.
I never saw Oblivian before but It looks very good. After I visited the page. Right now I would have to sat Dark Messiah is the best with the Source Engine. Next would be Quake 4 on ultra settings. But well see when UT 3 comes out.
Rainbow Six runs like absolute hell on my computer, which can run Oblivion on ultra high with a decent framerate. I just got Vegas recently, and it's a relief that other people are having issues and I'm not just crazy.
I couldn't pick a winner, but the definite "not winner" would have to be Vegas.
Not the best shot, but it shows the gun well enough. 
Log in to comment