Epic wants to maintain visual leadership,; Bleszinski teases GEARS 3 teaser!?!?

[QUOTE="Hahadouken"]

1) No need for insults, they don't get you anywhere.

2) This isn't the only gaming source on the internet. Far from it. The "general consensus" is something that exists far beyond the scope of System Wars on Gamespot.

3) Gears wasn't even NOMINATED. Whether or not they screwed up by not giving it to Crysis Warhead (a rehash if you ask me, what's more impressive, a game you merely upgraded since last year, or a cinematic masterpiece made with it's own engine that took years to complete?) is besides the point, Gears wasn't even NOMINATED. If Crysis just releases a new "standalone expansion" every year, should they continue to get the graphics awards even though they are just tweaking the same old stuff from last year? No thanks, I like a system that rewards innovation in that sense.

You are getting overly worked up over this. I have all of these games, Gears 2 isn't even on the list for best graphical games out there. This is just how I see it. I run a 50" Samsung plasma @ 1080p and my PS3 and 360 are both running HDMI. It's been a long time since I compared MGS4 to Gears 2, so let's leave that alone for now, because the point is moot - it's not touching any of the other graphical showcases atm, so why get all bent out of shape over it?

Epic has done it once, they CAN do it again, but all the overhyping of Gears 2, graphics and just in general, is downright disturbing to anyone who played it AFTER hearing all the hype.

opex07

enough info has been released about the games to know which one is better graphically and MGS4 is certainly not. MGS4 suffers from a low native resolution that isn't considered to be HD, below 30FPS average frame rate, lower poly characters, lower rez textures, doesn't support split screen, less going on on-screen, and more linear maps, and requires several installs. overall MGS4 isn't very impressive in any area, except for character models, which even those are still behind gears 2 as mentioned above.

They have the money and talent to do it.

I should say that he's probably referring to consoles when he says, "visual leadership." Crytek is obviously Master of the Universe when it comes to PC graphics.

I have to point out that MGS4 has 15000 polygons on the characters, Gears uses around 10 or 12000 if I'm not mistaking. And the texture and detail work is alot better in MGS4 aswell. Even if MGS4 uses a low native resolution, they've done a pretty good job of hiding it. And was'nt this only in the online bit?? MGS4 has a very clean and real look to it compared to Gears. Martin_G_N

MGS4 has less poly's than even Gears 1 my link doesn't seem to go to the source from kojima any more but there was a big thread about it, and MGS4's textures were the biggest complants about the game. MGS4 doesn't look any more real than Gears, which is clearly shown in MGS4s one tone face colors on every character.

[QUOTE="hamzah1235"]

-Snooze-...:lol:, yes i did realize that Gears 1's graphical fidelity at the time was mind blowing, but KZ2, U2, and GOW 3 are in their own leagues compared to Gears 2...no fanboy can ever deny this irrefutable fact, no matter how hard they try

PAL360

If by "their own leagues" you mean a bit better, then i agree. Still a few games like Alan Wake and Crysis2 will change that soon...

how can they maintain visual leadership when they havent had it since 2007? i want to maintain my bentley... oh wait

The only time gears was graphics king was when the 1st one was released. At least for consoles, I dont really remember what was out for the PC that year.

The only time gears was graphics king was when the 1st one was released. At least for consoles, I dont really remember what was out for the PC that year.

GTSaiyanjin2

GEOW was overall graphics king, then GEOW 2 took it back(for consoles0, then KZ2 took it and the rest is history.

The only issue is that the Gears series isnt known as the tour fe force in graphical fidelity....Its gone to KZ2, U2, and GOW3...:)

hamzah1235

haha look at the comments, ridiculous fanboys everywhere!!!!!!!!!!!

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="hamzah1235"]

-Snooze-...:lol:, yes i did realize that Gears 1's graphical fidelity at the time was mind blowing, but KZ2, U2, and GOW 3 are in their own leagues compared to Gears 2...no fanboy can ever deny this irrefutable fact, no matter how hard they try

Chutebox

If by "their own leagues" you mean a bit better, then i agree. Still a few games like Alan Wake and Crysis2 will change that soon...

Crysis 2? Most likely.

Alan Wake? Nope.

Well, none of us have played Alan Wake yet. Still i believe the guys from the preview werent lieing. They played it and stated that the game does look at least at U2 and KZ2 level.

Visual Leadership? :lol: What about gameplay?

Or how about this: Leadership in innovation.

We need something fresh. We can't just rehash the same game over and over again with updated graphics.

Remember these:

Yeah i thought so

Alan Wake? Nope.Chutebox

Sure but when Gears 2 came nothing on consoles compared to it.I dont care if cows say its that "sub HD ugly textures all around me" MGS4,the thing is till KZ2 came Gears 2 was the best.

Bus-A-Bus

In your opinion right? Professional game journalists seem to disagree with you there. MGS4 was the most visually praised game of 2008 whether you like it or not.

Epic wants to maintain visual leadership? lmao. Sorry thought I was still thinking not typing.

Visual Leadership? :lol: What about gameplay?

Or how about this: Leadership in innovation.

We need something fresh. We can't just rehash the same game over and over again with updated graphics.

Rikusaki

Um, your PSN card scares me:|

Visual Leadership? :lol: What about gameplay?

Or how about this: Leadership in innovation.

We need something fresh. We can't just rehash the same game over and over again with updated graphics.

I would put Epic in the top 5 or so for graphics, but they haven't had "visual leadership" in quite sometimeEmperorSupreme

Since the last time they released a game :P

Gears 1 was undisputed graphics king when it came out,UC1 then looked better,and then Gears 2 put MGS4 to shame in 08,then KZ2 and UC2 took it back and thats how you make babies....

I dont care what you fanboys tell me,MGS4 looks like ps2 game compared to Gears 2.You obviously havent played Gears 2.MGS4 has some of the ugliest textures this gen,lightning is far cry even from Gears 2 and it runs in sub HD res.

Gears 2 is superior in all ways possible,its not even a contest.Only reason why MGS4 was crowned technical(yes technical) is because its OVERHYPED and it is MGS.Here,video in HD of both of them,lot of variety so you dont tell me i chosen bad shoots or videos...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Seja4yLH-qk

vs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-J5pgdNtN4&feature=related

Pay attention to details textures and framerate.Gears 2 kills it...

-Snooze-, its not just my opinion, its almost every reviewers video review of GOW3 that have stated so...

hamzah1235