Am I the only one who sees that God of War 3 has average graphics?

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="TheSterls"]

Lol but its average textures, lvl design and character models dont count heh?As far as graphics go yes that argument is always escalatd by the hermits . Whenever someone talks about how great a game looks ( evnen if there saying its not the best looking game out) you get a flood of Crysis pics and how bad all consoles game look yet they totally ignore the fact that Crysis decimates anything on pc.

Another reason why people talk about visuals is although they are not everything usually games with great visuals happen to be great games.

TheSterls

Its textures are not far beyond anything on consoles by any means and its levle design is open and bland lots of wide open fields and a few trees , it gets murdered by Crysis in every conceviable way. Hell even the cryengine 3 demo shown on conosles blows it away in pretty much every area. Now compare the Gun Models, lighting effects, animations and charcter models to KZ2 and how is it far beyond anything on consoles? All it has on them is scale at the expense of bland level design.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]What's wrong with the textures and level design? The only thing that isn't that great are the character models and animations. Everything else looks better than what you can find on consoles, while also being in an open world with more than 100 miles of land to freely explore.gamewhat

[QUOTE="TheSterls"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] It is simple. Arma II's scale makes it graphically beyond anything on consoles. It's not hard to grasp this concept. Also all this forum talks about is graphics, so what should i be bringing up in graphical threads? Super Mario Galaxy?AAllxxjjnn

Lol but its average textures, lvl design and character models dont count heh?As far as graphics go yes that argument is always escalatd by the hermits . Whenever someone talks about how great a game looks ( evnen if there saying its not the best looking game out) you get a flood of Crysis pics and how bad all consoles game look yet they totally ignore the fact that Crysis decimates anything on pc.

Another reason why people talk about visuals is although they are not everything usually games with great visuals happen to be great games.

Sorry man, this game looks like a$$. http://www.arma2.com/home_en.html Or should we just all agree it looks better than any console game just because its on teh PC

off topic, who are the people in your avatar and your sig

Yeh, barely any trees. Average textures. The game nearly looks photo realistic. This is getting too off topic now. Either way, all I said was I can't judge **** from a tiny scan and NAPK1NS basically got offended. So, he pulled his usual "Oh you must not like any games", like i've seen so many times before. Notice how I've never ACTUALLY said GoW or U2 look 'bad' or 'average'? AAllxxjjnn

[QUOTE="gamewhat"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]What's wrong with the textures and level design? The only thing that isn't that great are the character models and animations. Everything else looks better than what you can find on consoles, while also being in an open world with more than 100 miles of land to freely explore.AAllxxjjnn

you're not alone. imo, it doesn't look very good either. looks like a ps2 game with 1080p res and hdr lighting. uncharted 2 looks so much better. they should have went the 720p route instead, then they could achieve much more. consoles don't have enough vram to keep up with the needs of extremely high res games without sacrificing the graphics. i loled when cows claim they can see the pores on kratos' face, **** fanboy claim, other than the scars there's nothing that is superbly detailed on his face.

you're not alone. imo, it doesn't look very good either. looks like a ps2 game with 1080p res and hdr lighting. uncharted 2 looks so much better. they should have went the 720p route instead, then they could achieve much more. consoles don't have enough vram to keep up with the needs of extremely high res games without sacrificing the graphics. i loled when cows claim they can see the pores on kratos' face, **** fanboy claim, other than the scars there's nothing that is superbly detailed on his face.

Syaz1

:|

Yea, a PS2 game that looks better than any 360 game.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="TheSterls"]

Lol but its average textures, lvl design and character models dont count heh?As far as graphics go yes that argument is always escalatd by the hermits . Whenever someone talks about how great a game looks ( evnen if there saying its not the best looking game out) you get a flood of Crysis pics and how bad all consoles game look yet they totally ignore the fact that Crysis decimates anything on pc.

Another reason why people talk about visuals is although they are not everything usually games with great visuals happen to be great games.

iKINGBOBi

Sorry man, this game looks like a$$. http://www.arma2.com/home_en.html Or should we just all agree it looks better than any console game just because its on teh PC

off topic, who are the people in your avatar and your sig

I think god of wars graphics are pretty darn good actually, kinda excited to see a god of war on a next gen console. That being said do I think there are better looking games on consoles, yes. Mass Effect 2, Alan Wake, Cryengine game, Uncharted 2 all look/will look better. Time will tell though.

No i've noticed, that although the graphics are next gen, there definitely not Gears of War or Uncharted 2 graphics by any means.

No gameplay videos or screenshots suggest otherwise. The A lot of articles I read are saying this games graphics are PHENOMENAL and BREATHTAKING but it really isnt all that good. It like, doesn't even look THAT next gen. I mean its graphics are FINE. But, since the gameplay is essentially exactly the same as before with kind of better graphics and just a different barbaric story, why should I buy this. Thoughts? (Not a joke, the graphics dont look good) IMO

Hathesulacon

[QUOTE="HavocV3"]

[QUOTE="GreenGoblin2099"]

Yes, it has average graphs for a PS3 game... which tops anything on the 360.

Ok, sorry. Couldn't resist.

omfg Crysis owns all.

couldn't resist. apologies around;)

It must look good, because the damage control is already in full effect. Seriously, we all know it cannot compete with what you can get out of a monster rig, but it is far from being "average." Let's be real here, folks. It is a fine looking game and is looking to easily be one of the best looking games on consoles. However, seeing some gameplay from these scenes will tell the tale.

No gameplay videos or screenshots suggest otherwise. The A lot of articles I read are saying this games graphics are PHENOMENAL and BREATHTAKING but it really isnt all that good. It like, doesn't even look THAT next gen. I mean its graphics are FINE. But, since the gameplay is essentially exactly the same as before with kind of better graphics and just a different barbaric story, why should I buy this. Thoughts? (Not a joke, the graphics dont look good) IMO

Hathesulacon

i think it has above average graphics, but nothing mind blowing. i've always thought that about the GOW series in general. that being said, i think the game will be great.

i think it has above average graphics, but nothing mind blowing. i've always thought that about the GOW series in general. that being said, i think the game will be great.

clone01

[QUOTE="clone01"]

i think it has above average graphics, but nothing mind blowing. i've always thought that about the GOW series in general. that being said, i think the game will be great.

mD-

From what I've seen and played, GOW3 is a very good looking game. Probably not on the level as sopme of this gen's best looking tit;e, but definitely above average.