This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="toast_burner"][QUOTE="Vadamee"]Its just you. I've yet to see in-game shots from any PS3 game. All we've seen were photomode, replay, cutscene or saturated down-scaled off screens of PS3 games. Halo 3 players can capture their own screens as can Forza 3 players. The new slogan should be: PS3 graphics king, in photos only.themyth01thats a joke right? I believe people call it an opinion. an opinion is a personal preference.
saying that all ps3 screen shots are edited and 360 ones aren't isn't a opinion its just ignorant
I believe people call it an opinion. an opinion is a personal preference.[QUOTE="themyth01"][QUOTE="toast_burner"] thats a joke right? toast_burner
saying that all ps3 screen shots are edited and 360 ones aren't isn't a opinion its just ignorant
Not necessarily. Depends on his frame of reference. If the only ss he's seen are from cutscenes, then he'd be right according to the set available to him. Read his second sentence.[QUOTE="toast_burner"]an opinion is a personal preference.[QUOTE="themyth01"] I believe people call it an opinion. themyth01
saying that all ps3 screen shots are edited and 360 ones aren't isn't a opinion its just ignorant
Not necessarily. Depends on his frame of reference. If the only ss he's seen are from cutscenes, then he'd be right according to the set available to him. Read his second sentence. "I've yet to see in-game shots from any PS3 game" how is that not ignorance?no he doesnt. the only people saying it will be a grphical marvel (granted there are now VERY few) do not represent the vast majority of "lems". hell even they can see what it is. hes talking about a topic thats been long since established. honestly, whos saying its a graphical marvel nowadays anyway? plus he IS bashing it, just in a very inconspicuous way. mabey you should grace the last few pages again...that's what i meant by "hes not very good at saying it" hes correct that there's little indication that its going to be a graphical marvel. but he comes across as a complete fanboy and confuses the minority with the majority i see what youre saying now and i agree.[QUOTE="slvrraven9"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]he has a point but hes not very good at saying it.toast_burner
while i see the only reason you bash halo is because your a ps3 fan
i hate it because it is the worst , most unoriginal ala perfect dark title ive played and im not buying odst , no way - 50 for a add-on , ,
silly microsoft
and i do not trust in halo reach does look just like halo 3 ,which halo 3 look just like 2 , ,
bungie just continues to disappoint i think we need a new first person shooter,
cause this halo trash is over played!
oh wait we got one , timesplitters 3 , ,
perfect dark
resistance
all these and more so theres no reason halo reach should be on any ones wish list unless their fanboys of the series and cant play anything else
heres how i rank the best fpses on a scale of 1-10 10 being worst
1-goldeneye
2 perfect dark
3 timesplitters 3
4 quantum of solace
5 resistance
6 kill zone
7 kill zone 2
8 timesplitters2
9 time crisis 4
10 -halo -thisi s the worst ever
Its you. There is no denying the graphical improvement from Halo 3 to Reach. If it actually releases with the same visual fidelity of the videos, then I say it blows the Halo 3 version away! They also state that its looking better then the Alpha videos that we were seeing. So it must be you.But everyone is entitled to their own opinion and judgement, I myself however, think the game is going to look and be great.
Reach looks great. Its not going to be the best looking game on the market, but it will be up there, guaranteed. And if you really think its barely better than Halo 3, then really, just get out of here. That statement is just absolutely stupid. I own a PS3, and traditionally don't think much of Halo. But come on, Reach looks nice.beekayjayWell put!I have a PS3 also and I think Uncharted 1 and 2 look outstanding, but to say Halo Reach doesn't look any better than Halo 3, must need glasses.
[QUOTE="toast_burner"][QUOTE="CwlHeddwyn"] just stop right there Cow.slvrraven9he has a point but hes not very good at saying it. no he doesnt. the only people saying it will be a grphical marvel (granted there are now VERY few) do not represent the vast majority of "lems". hell even they can see what it is. hes talking about a topic thats been long since established. honestly, whos saying its a graphical marvel nowadays anyway? plus he IS bashing it, just in a very inconspicuous way. mabey you should grace the last few pages again... i'm going to say its going to be a graphics marvel, it might not have the best overall look, but its going to be looking just shy of the best looking games with huge battles and lots of boom going on.
reach in alpha already looks better than halo 3. I think the people not seeing a visual difference between the two games haven't seen halo 3 enough to compare the two.
lawlessx
Stop with this "its only in alpha" argument. They said the exact same thing with Halo 3. The final build isn't going to be leaps and bounds better.
[QUOTE="lawlessx"]
reach in alpha already looks better than halo 3. I think the people not seeing a visual difference between the two games haven't seen halo 3 enough to compare the two.
Superbored
Stop with this "its only in alpha" argument. They said the exact same thing with Halo 3. The final build isn't going to be leaps and bounds better.
well then u havent been keeping up with the info the alpha stage has placeholders so how bout we stat **** when we get finished footage[QUOTE="lawlessx"]
reach in alpha already looks better than halo 3. I think the people not seeing a visual difference between the two games haven't seen halo 3 enough to compare the two.
Superbored
Stop with this "its only in alpha" argument. They said the exact same thing with Halo 3. The final build isn't going to be leaps and bounds better.
the alpha already looks leaps and bounds better vs halo 3, any one who says otherwise is probably just comparing the art direction and saying they're the same, no **** but no one complained about it in star wars/uncharted/gears/zelda/mario EVERY SEQUEL EVER MADE LOOKS LIKE ITS PREDECESSOR you just have to look at the details which is what makes the difference.while i see the only reason you bash halo is because your a ps3 fan
i hate it because it is the worst , most unoriginal ala perfect dark title ive played and im not buying odst , no way - 50 for a add-on , ,
silly microsoft
and i do not trust in halo reach does look just like halo 3 ,which halo 3 look just like 2 , ,
bungie just continues to disappoint i think we need a new first person shooter,
cause this halo trash is over played!
oh wait we got one , timesplitters 3 , ,
perfect dark
resistance
all these and more so theres no reason halo reach should be on any ones wish list unless their fanboys of the series and cant play anything else
heres how i rank the best fpses on a scale of 1-10 10 being worst
1-goldeneye
2 perfect dark
3 timesplitters 3
4 quantum of solace
5 resistance
6 kill zone
7 kill zone 2
8 timesplitters2
9 time crisis 4
10 -halo -thisi s the worst evermariokart64fan
:|shaking my head.....shaking my DAMN head. where do i begin to start on your epic FAIL.
well i guess technicaly i cant because its all just your opinion. probably one of the worst opinions ive read on here but it is what is is. Ive used a lotta "fail" pics in my time but i dont have an epic fail pic that described your level of "fail" bad enough.
BTW im pretty sure halo scoredhigher than most all in your lineup so by SW logic You....
halo isnt really relevant anymore.damnyoyoyo
:roll: when ANY expansion that sony owns can sell almost 5 mil copies as a standalone unit at full price.....you let me know
[QUOTE="damnyoyoyo"]halo isnt really relevant anymore.slvrraven9
:roll: when ANY expansion that sony owns can sell almost 5 mil copies as a standalone unit at full price.....you let me know
One could argue odst watered down the brand. I don't know anyone outside of system wars who was happy with that purchase.
[QUOTE="slvrraven9"]
[QUOTE="damnyoyoyo"]halo isnt really relevant anymore.topgunmv
:roll: when ANY expansion that sony owns can sell almost 5 mil copies as a standalone unit at full price.....you let me know
One could argue odst watered down the brand. I don't know anyone outside of system wars who was happy with that purchase.
I know I'm also using system wars, & I am a massive Halo fan, but I really did enjoy ODST. I had Halo 3, but didn't have many of the map packs, so getting the map packs as well as the ODST portion was great for me. The ODST campaign was fun, but it was firefight that disappointed me. It was by no means bad, but I love Horde mode in Gears & couldn't help but compare the two. Also, the skulls being compulsory annoyed me. I thought it was a great game.
It also gives me access to the Reach beta, & being a Halo tragic, I would have paid just for that.
My 360 just RROD what do I do? I had gaylo 3 in it someone help...... Nevermind I'm goona buy a Ps3 like I should of done in the first place.iLiekSquirrelsyou fail on so many levels
/Thread. Happy??
siddhu33
Never understand why show Keyes in there when they could have shown a regular marine. Unless.....:shock:
[QUOTE="KittenWishes"]Cows are so ridiculous. Obviously haven't bothered looking at any of the tech demos or Reach Alpha footage, so why should they be able to judge what the game looks like? Master_ShakeXXX
I have watched them. Why would I start a debate like this without doing any research? Please point out these giant graphical leaps between Halo 3 and Reach. I'm dieing to see them.
Seeing how they obviously aren't jumping out at you, there's little to nothing anyone could do to change your mind. You've already made it up and there's no point in us wasting our time with you anymore. From the sounds of it, it seems as if you're merely going off of the beta multiplayer trailer and that's a big no no. Videos and screen shots from months before prove that Reach is a massive step forward in the graphics and you're just letting your blind devotion to one company determine what you see. Take off your blinders.[QUOTE="slvrraven9"]
[QUOTE="damnyoyoyo"]halo isnt really relevant anymore.topgunmv
:roll: when ANY expansion that sony owns can sell almost 5 mil copies as a standalone unit at full price.....you let me know
One could argue odst watered down the brand. I don't know anyone outside of system wars who was happy with that purchase.
I enjoyed the single player and firefight more then anything in Halo3. Having the Halo3 MP as an added side bonus was just one more bit of goodness to the ODST package.[QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]
[QUOTE="topgunmv"]
Reach looks like halo3 just like GoW3 looks like GoW2.
Arbiterisl33t69
Overstatment of the year. GoW3 looks almost infinitly better than GoW2, while Reach looks minimally better than Halo 3. Only the biggest lems would deny that.
So a cow's opinion is correct but a lem's opinion is blatantly wrong... :| If you're talking about graphics, Reach will look much better than Halo 3, no one's calling it a "graphical marvel" but compared to Halo 3 it's a big improvement so far. If we're talking about gameplay, Reach looks REALLY different and better than Halo 3Every lemming in System Wars is saying it looks better then Heavy Rain and Uncharted 2. I would think that means it's a graphical marvel in their books. At least on a console.While I don't get all the hype about Reach's graphics I certainly do see the upgrade over Halo 3...Well as much difference as you can see in a few internet vids. Games ALWAYS look different on our tv's then on our moniters...
Another thing I dont understand is all this hype over it's graphics when statistics show a large number of these lemmings don't even have an HDTV to enjoy them. Whatever though as far as I can tell when it comes to graphics GOW3>Uncharted 2>Killzone 2>GeOW2>Uncharted>GeOW>MGS4. Until new games release this is the current order...
It's pretty easy to see that the Marines are better. But why not compare environments and everything else? No need to focus on any one thing. Anybody saying that Reach doesn't look better then Halo 3 is simply in denial.More Marines from Halo:Reach
Now tell me that reach does not look better than Halo 3....
siddhu33
It's pretty easy to see that the Marines are better. But why not compare environments and everything else? No need to focus on any one thing. Anybody saying that Reach doesn't look better then Halo 3 is simply in denial.[QUOTE="siddhu33"]
More Marines from Halo:Reach
Now tell me that reach does not look better than Halo 3....
xX-Incubus-Xx
Eviriment
Topic Fail
[QUOTE="Arbiterisl33t69"]
[QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]
Overstatment of the year. GoW3 looks almost infinitly better than GoW2, while Reach looks minimally better than Halo 3. Only the biggest lems would deny that.
So a cow's opinion is correct but a lem's opinion is blatantly wrong... :| If you're talking about graphics, Reach will look much better than Halo 3, no one's calling it a "graphical marvel" but compared to Halo 3 it's a big improvement so far. If we're talking about gameplay, Reach looks REALLY different and better than Halo 3Every lemming in System Wars is saying it looks better then Heavy Rain and Uncharted 2. I would think that means it's a graphical marvel in their books. At least on a console.While I don't get all the hype about Reach's graphics I certainly do see the upgrade over Halo 3...Well as much difference as you can see in a few internet vids. Games ALWAYS look different on our tv's then on our moniters...
Another thing I dont understand is all this hype over it's graphics when statistics show a large number of these lemmings don't even have an HDTV to enjoy them. Whatever though as far as I can tell when it comes to graphics GOW3>Uncharted 2>Killzone 2>GeOW2>Uncharted>GeOW>MGS4. Until new games release this is the current order...
put banjo ahead of gears 2, very overlooked game.[QUOTE="xX-Incubus-Xx"]
[QUOTE="siddhu33"]
More Marines from Halo:Reach
Now tell me that reach does not look better than Halo 3....
It's pretty easy to see that the Marines are better. But why not compare environments and everything else? No need to focus on any one thing. Anybody saying that Reach doesn't look better then Halo 3 is simply in denial.Eviriment
Topic Fail
come on HALO 3 doesn't look that bad use a better screen. I whole heartedly agree that Reach is loads better than 3 in graphics and enviroment but that screen (halo 3) is unfair to halo 3. but its nice to see the improvment in the drainsNot to say GOW3 looks bad but the ground textures look horrid. The detail on the rest of the terrain look good but low poly(look at the rocks), but being that they are rocks it suits it. SM was smart with the PS3, I mean how often do you see a close up of the ground? They know how to hide bad looking things, more power too them.MC3887
i agree. its all a matter of folks here looking at things through fanboy glasses. at the end of the day, there's really not a vast difference in the 360 and PS3 capabilities.
[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]1. pebbles are flat when you aren't looking at them close up. 2.thats moss not grass, and when you aren't looking close up moss looks flat.... Its the side of a sheer cliff how good is it supposed to look? its the ground as in dirt...how good is it supposed too look?roddollente
this good.
and to the people who'll say these are bullshots, "hahahahah!". i sorry, this is all running in 40fps.
Reach will definitely look better than Halo 3. but not this good.
Going by what people have been saying, I was under the impression that it looked better. :?Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment