This topic is locked from further discussion.
R1 and R2 were 30 fps and in HD, R3 is sub HD and 30 fps either insomniac are lazy or R3 is doing alot more on screen that it has to be sub HD.TheGuardian03i could have sworn that they were 60fps. it looks like there are a lot of crazy effects going on at the same time like smoke and dust and fire and all that atmospheric effects. maybe
960 x 704 res to be exact.
It's also using Quincunx AA which works well with R3's style.
They might use the AA samples to reconstruct 720p like they did in RAC: A crack in time, but I'm not sure yet.
R3 has much better visuals than the previous games, and btw TC would you even know if it was good or bad if you didn't know the resolution? Most people complain about sub-HD but only after they actually discover it's sub-HD in the first place.JohnF111iti's just my tv is really big and shows a lot of flaws. example: infamous 2 looked amazing on my 32in hdtv, but on my larger tv, it looked pretty average
Gee, what a downgrade, at least it's better than the 1st 2 graphically.960 x 704 res to be exact.
It's also using Quincunx AA which works well with R3's style.
They might use the AA samples to reconstruct 720p like they did in RAC: A crack in time, but I'm not sure yet.
theuncharted34
Gee, what a downgrade, at least it's better than the 1st 2 graphically.[/QUOTEis that resolution confirmed? can i see a link?[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]
960 x 704 res to be exact.
It's also using Quincunx AA which works well with R3's style.
They might use the AA samples to reconstruct 720p like they did in RAC: A crack in time, but I'm not sure yet.
mitu123
[QUOTE="mitu123"]Gee, what a downgrade, at least it's better than the 1st 2 graphically.[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]
960 x 704 res to be exact.
It's also using Quincunx AA which works well with R3's style.
They might use the AA samples to reconstruct 720p like they did in RAC: A crack in time, but I'm not sure yet.
SpeedsterCards
[/QUOTEis that resolution confirmed? can i see a link?
link
It's at the bottom of the page.
Gee, what a downgrade, at least it's better than the 1st 2 graphically.[QUOTE="SpeedsterCards"][QUOTE="mitu123"]
[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]
960 x 704 res to be exact.
It's also using Quincunx AA which works well with R3's style.
They might use the AA samples to reconstruct 720p like they did in RAC: A crack in time, but I'm not sure yet.
theuncharted34
[/QUOTEis that resolution confirmed? can i see a link?
link
It's at the bottom of the page.
It was originally 1280x704(and dropped to 960x704)? Would had been sub HD either way.:lol: Not to say it's bad though.:PGee, what a downgrade, at least it's better than the 1st 2 graphically.[QUOTE="SpeedsterCards"][QUOTE="mitu123"]
[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]
960 x 704 res to be exact.
It's also using Quincunx AA which works well with R3's style.
They might use the AA samples to reconstruct 720p like they did in RAC: A crack in time, but I'm not sure yet.
theuncharted34
[/QUOTEis that resolution confirmed? can i see a link?
link
It's at the bottom of the page.
that says it's from the battle la blu ray demo.... remember the god of war 3 demo on (i forgot which blu ray movie). i hope this means it can improve as much as gow3 did after the blu ray demo[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]
[QUOTE="SpeedsterCards"] Gee, what a downgrade, at least it's better than the 1st 2 graphically.
[/QUOTEis that resolution confirmed? can i see a link?mitu123
link
It's at the bottom of the page.
It was originally 1280x704(and dropped to 960x704)? Would had been sub HD either way.:lol: Not to say it's bad though.:PIf it was 1280x704 you couldn't really tell the difference between that and 720p really :P
After hearing rumors that the single player will be sub-hd, i am a little worried because i have a pretty large tv. I know an earlier build was supposedly sub-hd, but what about now? is this confirmed? because i think the e3 demo looked really good! it has an amazing atmosphere... and also, isn't r3 30fps now? r1 and 2 were 60fps and were also in hd! can this really be true? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OcnuGCtbqcSpeedsterCards
R2 wasn't 60fps. Can't remember if R:FoM was 60fps, but I don't think it was.
[QUOTE="theuncharted34"][QUOTE="SpeedsterCards"] Gee, what a downgrade, at least it's better than the 1st 2 graphically.
[/QUOTEis that resolution confirmed? can i see a link?SpeedsterCards
link
It's at the bottom of the page.
that says it's from the battle la blu ray demo.... remember the god of war 3 demo on (i forgot which blu ray movie). i hope this means it can improve as much as gow3 did after the blu ray demoNo, it says they were going to analyse that movie demo but then they got a hold of a much newer build from sony.
that says it's from the battle la blu ray demo.... remember the god of war 3 demo on (i forgot which blu ray movie). i hope this means it can improve as much as gow3 did after the blu ray demo[QUOTE="SpeedsterCards"][QUOTE="theuncharted34"]
link
It's at the bottom of the page.
theuncharted34
No, it says they were going to analyse that movie demo but then they got a hold of a much newer build from sony.
oh yea, my bad, i misread then, but still, the improvements can still amaze us...maybe[QUOTE="theuncharted34"][QUOTE="SpeedsterCards"]is that resolution confirmed? can i see a link?SpeedsterCards
link
It's at the bottom of the page.
that says it's from the battle la blu ray demo.... remember the god of war 3 demo on (i forgot which blu ray movie). i hope this means it can improve as much as gow3 did after the blu ray demoThe GoW 3 demo came with the District 9 Blu ray. It's an awesome movie. I didn't like the demo that much (though I'm not a big fan of God of War anyway :P).
The beta to me looks better than Resistance 2 multiplayer did, remember multiplayer often looks a little worse/different from single player. Hopefully it turns out to be 720P though especially the campaign, if they dropped the resolution that far it would be embarassing for Insomniac as developers. They almost would have been better to just "reskin" Resistance 2 at that point, surely they could have "tweakd" that engine, lowered the player count, and achieved 720P EASILY. So it almost doesn't even make sense for the game to run 900x700 or whatever is being claimed.
That being said Resistance 3 online is just another boring shooter anyway. I don't like the way it plays, so unless the campaign is jawdropping (which it won't be), then I can't see myself picking this game up until it's $19.99.
I think it looks great, the art style is fantastic.TheGuardian03
Yeah, this looks great... on PS2. :P lol
[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"][QUOTE="TheGuardian03"]I think it looks great, the art style is fantastic.wis3boiYeah, this looks great... on PS2. :P lol I think I threw up a littleu Lol people are trippin. It still looks a thousand times better then Halo Reach. Gears 3 is not that much better then Resistance 3 graphics either. So if your saying that Resistance 3 is ugly then what your really saying is that Gears 3 is not that far off from being ugly as well
The campaign looks hella fun, and 64 player online with dedicated server is nothing to sneeze at. Resistance has always been a series that's more fun to play than it is to talk about.ZombieKiller7I thought it was 16 players for Resistance 3. I know Resistance 2 is in the 60s though.
Yeah, seriously, most of them are useless and not worth using. It was fun for the first 5 minutes, though.After Crysis 2, I'm staying away from MP that use killstreaks. All it does is promote camping. I played a little R2 last year and it wasn't bad, it seemed like a lot of running and gunning. What turned me off was there were only cult players left and it was hard to get the hang of it.[QUOTE="Grawse"]
Yeah, the real problem is it has killstreaks LOL. Glad I didn't wait for the beta to finish downloading, what a joke. Why must games do this.
TrapJak
[QUOTE="wis3boi"][QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]Yeah, this looks great... on PS2. :P lol gameplaycontrolI think I threw up a littleu Lol people are trippin. It still looks a thousand times better then Halo Reach. Gears 3 is not that much better then Resistance 3 graphics either. So if your saying that Resistance 3 is ugly then what your really saying is that Gears 3 is not that far off from being ugly as well
You are joking,right?
[QUOTE="wis3boi"][QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]Yeah, this looks great... on PS2. :P lol gameplaycontrolI think I threw up a littleu Lol people are trippin. It still looks a thousand times better then Halo Reach. Gears 3 is not that much better then Resistance 3 graphics either. So if your saying that Resistance 3 is ugly then what your really saying is that Gears 3 is not that far off from being ugly as well
you bet your sweet bippy I'm gagging at those R3 screens when there's games out there look like this....over a year ago
Lol people are trippin. It still looks a thousand times better then Halo Reach. Gears 3 is not that much better then Resistance 3 graphics either. So if your saying that Resistance 3 is ugly then what your really saying is that Gears 3 is not that far off from being ugly as well[QUOTE="gameplaycontrol"][QUOTE="wis3boi"]I think I threw up a littleuwis3boi
you bet your sweet bippy I'm gagging at those R3 screens when there's games out there look like this....over a year ago
You're not really proving any points by showing the PC version of Metro 2033 though.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment