Small scale, great graphics (GeOW2) = Large scale, good graphics (R 2)

Allright so in my opinion Gears 2 looks much more beautiful than the Resistance sequel. But if you look at this technically, Resistance 2 features a much larger scale of area and enemies than GeOW2 (I know the scale has been improved a bit but its still small compared to R2).

So if you were to follow logic, the larger the area is, polygons/shaders/blah blah have to spread out more thinly (i know that doesnt sound sophisticated at all but thats the best way I know how to explain it with my limited technological experience)

Therefore IMHO even though viscerally and aesthetically Gears 2 seems more impressive, from a purely technological standpoint Resistance 2 is level as a virtue of its larger scale.

Opinions?

No matter what Lems are gonna say Resistance 2 looks like crap while at the same time defend a game like Fable 2 by saying "you have to take the scale of the game into consideration"

This is what fanboys do, when in reality both games look great.

No matter what Lems are gonna say Resistance 2 looks like crap while at the same time defend a game like Fable 2 by saying "you have to take the scale of the game into consideration"

This is what fanboys do, when in reality both games look great.

W1NGMAN-

R2 does NOT have mediocre graphics... But the point is still clear that smaller scale games have can have better graphics than larger ones.Cedmln

Excuse me. I mean VISUALS!

Is R2 a larger scale then assassins creed??jasonheyman

i think that the graphics for gears are overrated. they only look good in screenshots like ut3shakmaster13

Is R2 a larger scale then assassins creed??jasonheyman

Technically yes it is. If you put all the levels of R2 together with all enemies and little things it is much bigger than Assassin's Creed.

[QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"]

No matter what Lems are gonna say Resistance 2 looks like crap while at the same time defend a game like Fable 2 by saying "you have to take the scale of the game into consideration"

This is what fanboys do, when in reality both games look great.

EuroMafia

SHHHH!!! Saolin might hear you :|

Except Gears 2 has a larger scale, with tons of open environments, improved draw distance, huge baddies, and hundreds of enemies on screen at once. It'd say from what I've seen R2 has bigger enemies, while Gears 2 has more enemies. And both will be linear as hell anyway so it's not like scale is much of an issue anyway. Plus if we go by scale, halo 3 must be the best looking game ever, because it has a huge draw distance and an amazing sense of scale.

Except Gears 2 has a larger scale, with tons of open environments, improved draw distance, huge baddies, and hundreds of enemies on screen at once. It'd say from what I've seen R2 has bigger enemies, while Gears 2 has more enemies. And both will be linear as hell anyway so it's not like scale is much of an issue anyway. Plus if we go by scale, halo 3 must be the best looking game ever, because it has a huge draw distance and an amazing sense of scale.

Vaasman

This man speaks the truth. Why dont people do some research before posting? Gears 2 scale is huge. Many videos show this, many previews state this, and from what ive seen they are aiming for a more war-like scene, with loads of stuff going on. Seriously look at the videos, Trees falling down , explosions everywhere, bullets flying, everything on movement, brumaks running around, boomers shaking their flails, blood everywhere, etc. Plus people forget the new destructible enviroments (new videos confirm its gonna be really outstanding) AND water and BLOOD (yes, blood) physics. Blood and water are affected by the wind, and splats stay on walls like real blood would (dont believe me? check the first campaing footage and look carefully at the blood). All the little things make Gears 2 way more technically advanced.

Gears 2 is larger scale than the first. and it still looks great.

R2 looks meh. not good.

You know how the lems have been toting 100's of baddies on screen?

The technology is called high density crowds, its basically a bunch of drones walking a predetermined path but these ones have the ability to keep spacing from each other and other objects. Its been toted that "100's of bad guys" would be shooting at you and each would have a mind of its own and coordinate fire with one another. I've seen several high density crowds and eachtime they never seem to react realistically to your actions.

The water that has also been bragged about has also been done in games before (MGS4) and really isn't as impressive as said to be.

The destructible enviroments are nice i'll admit but you won't see pillars falling over and crushing badies and leveling entire buildings (red faction 3), just pieces of rock flying around. The destuctible enviroments won't affect the enemies either because euphoria has not been implemented nor has dmm (digitial molecular matter).

So i guess GeOW 2 (don't say GOW2, that belongs to god of war) isn't as advance as lemmings say.

Except Gears 2 has a larger scale, with tons of open environments, improved draw distance, huge baddies, and hundreds of enemies on screen at once. It'd say from what I've seen R2 has bigger enemies, while Gears 2 has more enemies. And both will be linear as hell anyway so it's not like scale is much of an issue anyway. Plus if we go by scale, halo 3 must be the best looking game ever, because it has a huge draw distance and an amazing sense of scale.

Vaasman

The draw distance actually looks better in the first gears. :?

The draw distance actually looks better in the first gears. :?

TheGrat1

Gears of War 2 has much bigger draw distances than Gears 1.

How is Gears 2 small scale? I have seen small areas, I have seen large areas.EuroMafia

If you compare them to the large areas in R2 you'll understand what he means.

[QUOTE="TheGrat1"]

The draw distance actually looks better in the first gears. :?

opex07

Gears of War 2 has much bigger draw distances

It looks georgous but the far background is art not the real actual graphics dimension.

[QUOTE="Vaasman"]

Except Gears 2 has a larger scale, with tons of open environments, improved draw distance, huge baddies, and hundreds of enemies on screen at once. It'd say from what I've seen R2 has bigger enemies, while Gears 2 has more enemies. And both will be linear as hell anyway so it's not like scale is much of an issue anyway. Plus if we go by scale, halo 3 must be the best looking game ever, because it has a huge draw distance and an amazing sense of scale.

TheGrat1

The draw distance actually looks better in the first gears. :?

It looks georgous but the far background is art not the real actual graphics dimension.

Kratos-PS3

The sky and sun, etc.. are backdrops but the mountains, and deep parts of the cave are rendered objects. There have been several different pictures released showing the mountains and cave objects being rendered at different angles.

[QUOTE="Vaasman"]

Except Gears 2 has a larger scale, with tons of open environments, improved draw distance, huge baddies, and hundreds of enemies on screen at once. It'd say from what I've seen R2 has bigger enemies, while Gears 2 has more enemies. And both will be linear as hell anyway so it's not like scale is much of an issue anyway. Plus if we go by scale, halo 3 must be the best looking game ever, because it has a huge draw distance and an amazing sense of scale.

TheGrat1

The draw distance actually looks better in the first gears. :?

are you joking?

GOW2 is just as advacned as "lemmings" say, you just clearly misconstrue what "lemmings" are saying. GOW2 is on a bigger scale than the previous games and has tons of new features and improvements to the core game. Regardless of what you want to try and force yourself to believe, GOW2 is going to be amazing, and an improvement on the first (a GOTY game).

Also an acronym can share several meanings. Anyone who knows anything about the English language knows this. A certain acronym does not "belong" to anything.diped

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/32198.html

tell me what you see before you overexaggerate the technologies behind GeOW2. Be honest.

Also, don't lecture me about english when you can't spell correctly (advacned?)

FAIL

Gears 2 is as big as resistance .
Hundreds of enemies at once and rideable brumarks = win .

All resistance showed is 1 big enemy and some big bland buildings.

[QUOTE="TheGrat1"][QUOTE="Vaasman"]

Except Gears 2 has a larger scale, with tons of open environments, improved draw distance, huge baddies, and hundreds of enemies on screen at once. It'd say from what I've seen R2 has bigger enemies, while Gears 2 has more enemies. And both will be linear as hell anyway so it's not like scale is much of an issue anyway. Plus if we go by scale, halo 3 must be the best looking game ever, because it has a huge draw distance and an amazing sense of scale.

Vaasman

The draw distance actually looks better in the first gears. :?

In some threads pics of an IGN multiplayer comparison are posted. The pics are of the same level, that alone gives it more weight than comparing gears 1 to some new environment. In said screens, the draw distance is better in gears 1. I'm not going to hunt for them, maybe killzowned will come in and post them because he has done it twice before.

[QUOTE="Vaasman"][QUOTE="TheGrat1"][QUOTE="Vaasman"]

Except Gears 2 has a larger scale, with tons of open environments, improved draw distance, huge baddies, and hundreds of enemies on screen at once. It'd say from what I've seen R2 has bigger enemies, while Gears 2 has more enemies. And both will be linear as hell anyway so it's not like scale is much of an issue anyway. Plus if we go by scale, halo 3 must be the best looking game ever, because it has a huge draw distance and an amazing sense of scale.

TheGrat1

The draw distance actually looks better in the first gears. :?

In some threads pics of an IGN multiplayer comparison are posted. The pics are of the same level, that alone gives it more weight than comparing gears 1 to some new environment. In said screens, the draw distance is better in gears 1. I'm not going to hunt for them, maybe killzowned will come in and post them because he has done it twice before.

[QUOTE="Vaasman"][QUOTE="TheGrat1"][QUOTE="Vaasman"]

Except Gears 2 has a larger scale, with tons of open environments, improved draw distance, huge baddies, and hundreds of enemies on screen at once. It'd say from what I've seen R2 has bigger enemies, while Gears 2 has more enemies. And both will be linear as hell anyway so it's not like scale is much of an issue anyway. Plus if we go by scale, halo 3 must be the best looking game ever, because it has a huge draw distance and an amazing sense of scale.

TheGrat1

The draw distance actually looks better in the first gears. :?

In some threads pics of an IGN multiplayer comparison are posted. The pics are of the same level, that alone gives it more weight than comparing gears 1 to some new environment. In said screens, the draw distance is better in gears 1. I'm not going to hunt for them, maybe killzowned will come in and post them because he has done it twice before.

Well yeah that's the reason GTAIV looks the way it doesCouth_

explain crysis then, best graphic and has some of the biggest levels of any fps, same happend in 2004 with farcry what about fc2? huge levels and great graphics.

[QUOTE="shakmaster13"]i think that the graphics for gears are overrated. they only look good in screenshots like ut3xgraderx

sure gears2 looks good but it isn't that amazing graphics game it was in 2006 when nothing much else was close. now gears 2 looks pretty average graphics. bioshock, mass effect, hl2 ep2 all look basicly as good

No matter what Lems are gonna say Resistance 2 looks like crap while at the same time defend a game like Fable 2 by saying "you have to take the scale of the game into consideration"

This is what fanboys do, when in reality both games look great.

W1NGMAN-

The fact remains...Fable 2 doesn't look like crap...just because the artstyle isn't realistic, doesn't mean it looks like crap. A game like RE2 is trying to be graphically realistic but obviously fails...I don't think it looks like crap I just think it looks underwhelming.

[QUOTE="Couth_"]Well yeah that's the reason GTAIV looks the way it doesimprezawrx500

explain crysis then, best graphic and has some of the biggest levels of any fps, same happend in 2004 with farcry what about fc2? huge levels and great graphics.

its called the pc. hardware is so much more advanced than consoles that it can pull it off. if consoles want crysis like textures and detail it needs to shrink to tiny linear levels like gears. and even gears' textures have nothing on the best ones in crysis

crysis reigns supreme in ever single aspect of graphics and has the largest levels to boot.

No matter what Lems are gonna say Resistance 2 looks like crap while at the same time defend a game like Fable 2 by saying "you have to take the scale of the game into consideration"

This is what fanboys do, when in reality both games look great.

W1NGMAN-

then what about crysis? best graphics AND huge scale? oh yeah that game is ultimate in terms of technical standpoint.TheMistique

Well yeah that's the reason GTAIV looks the way it doesCouth_

And is why it plays like absolute crap on consoles anyways. Hard as crap to aim when any action is going on, vehicles are sluggish from the framerate *not the handling physics*, and everything just feels delayed from when you press a button.

That goes for both 360 and ps3.

But back to the topic at hand, from what I've seen, Gears of war 2 looks pretty massive scaled if you ask me. Deffinatly so, compared to the first one. At least resistence does look, decent this time around. The first resistence, even the chronicals of riddick beat it graphically. Well....then again, it beats the 2nd game as well *judging from videos that will probably be final, with it being this late*.

Bah, killzone 2 will own resistence 2 BY A FRICKEN LONG SHOT, and looks to be about on par with gears of war 2. Maybe just a tad better. But insomniac, can't make good looking games this gen. Even rachet and clank, didn't look that great. Felt flat, had that crappy skip-like animations of a pixar movie *that I just can't stand*. The first resistence was filled with yellow/brown fog, that made everything look ugly. Plus, the animations where jerky as well.

No matter what Lems are gonna say Resistance 2 looks like crap while at the same time defend a game like Fable 2 by saying "you have to take the scale of the game into consideration"

This is what fanboys do, when in reality both games look great.

W1NGMAN-

[QUOTE="jasonheyman"]Is R2 a larger scale then assassins creed??Couth_

i think that the graphics for gears are overrated. they only look good in screenshots like ut3shakmaster13

This is not true. UT3 looks ridiculously good on my TV, much better than any screen shot, as does Gears. The screen shots make the games look worse than they are. You can make an overrated comment for any hyped game. Some deserve it, Gears 2 does not. It does look very good, and it should look better when I get to play it.

Is R2 some kind of special linear shooter? because it didn't the memo when the game was confirmed to be an open world game :roll: linear is linear and both R2 and gears 2 are LINEAR.MojondeVACA

Gears 2 is as big as resistance .
Hundreds of enemies at once and rideable brumarks = win .

All resistance showed is 1 big enemy and some big bland buildings.

AtrumRegina

People seem to keep forgetting that.