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

[QUOTE="AtrumRegina"]

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.

Thewbacca

People seem to keep forgetting that.

also its not hard to have all those enemies in Gears 2 when they all run in the same direction, and they are all far away so they dont have to be that detailed.

[QUOTE="MojondeVACA"]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.Thewbacca

[QUOTE="Thewbacca"]

[QUOTE="MojondeVACA"]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

[QUOTE="Thewbacca"][QUOTE="AtrumRegina"]

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.

NinjaMunkey01

People seem to keep forgetting that.

also its not hard to have all those enemies in Gears 2 when they all run in the same direction, and they are all far away so they dont have to be that detailed.

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

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.

Personally i find both games amazing... i admit that R2 is my most anticipated title, but both are great shooters...

Far Cry 2 has already had 9 from OXM and 9.4 from PC Gamer. Both touted that the "open world" worked well.

Gears of war 2 is not small in scale. For example, just look at the first gameplay ever released. Amazing visual design and object geometries. Hundreds of enemies onscreen. In later footage (The one where you fight the brumak and are ready to ride it at the end), you find a large density crowd. The player shoots one, and the crowd attacks him.

Resistance 2 is ok. I like the huge boss battles, and the huge maps. Only problem is, the attention to detail isn't that impressive. For example, in Sony's E3 press conference, they showed of R2 footage. The textures were monotone, and object designs were linear (Too perfect looking rectangular shapes for buildings).

Although neither of the games are out yet, Gears of War 2 has accomplished scale and amazing graphics. Resistance has accomplished a slightly larger scale game with slightly sub par graphics.

I'm not going to lie, I own an Xbox 360, but if you own a PS3...

You should be waiting for Killzone 2, THAT is a good fps and I won't deny it. Pretty much Sony's answer to Halo 3.

What impress me the most about Gears 2 is how consistant frame rates have been maintained despite being visually and gameplay wise grander in scale. Destructible environments, just to render 100 enemies on screen as detailed as they appear, plus the intricacy of the environment with additional light/shadow effect. Gears 2 requires quite alot of additional gpu power but look, a three gen old gpu handled it.

Just as a point of comparison, Gears 2 have very similar graphics as Unreal tournament 3, after all running a slightly more advanced unreal engine gives it is refined look. Whereas Unreal tournament has destructible environments and advance physics capabilities, it requires a 8800 gt on the PC to sustain the stable 60 fps on max details. A graphical comarison of UT3 PC vs Gears 2 360 shows very little disparities. A xbox 360 gpu is roughly a 7800gtx with 128 bit bandwidth! (it'll be outperformed 3 folds by the 8800gt) With quite the inferior gpu, Gears 2 devs squeeze out this much additional upgrades? Never the less, you guys get my point. Just all around amazing this this games running so smoothly.

Ie. this post could either comment on how well console optimizes it outdated hardware or how pathetically PC game optimizes its hardware.

Far Cry 2 has already had 9 from OXM and 9.4 from PC Gamer. Both touted that the "open world" worked well.

Gears of war 2 is not small in scale. For example, just look at the first gameplay ever released. Amazing visual design and object geometries. Hundreds of enemies onscreen. In later footage (The one where you fight the brumak and are ready to ride it at the end), you find a large density crowd. The player shoots one, and the crowd attacks him.

Resistance 2 is ok. I like the huge boss battles, and the huge maps. Only problem is, the attention to detail isn't that impressive. For example, in Sony's E3 press conference, they showed of R2 footage. The textures were monotone, and object designs were linear (Too perfect looking rectangular shapes for buildings).

Although neither of the games are out yet, Gears of War 2 has accomplished scale and amazing graphics. Resistance has accomplished a slightly larger scale game with slightly sub par graphics.

I'm not going to lie, I own an Xbox 360, but if you own a PS3...

You should be waiting for Killzone 2, THAT is a good fps and I won't deny it. Pretty much Sony's answer to Halo 3.

Commando3200

i would be very careful with that statement....

[QUOTE="Commando3200"]

Far Cry 2 has already had 9 from OXM and 9.4 from PC Gamer. Both touted that the "open world" worked well.

Gears of war 2 is not small in scale. For example, just look at the first gameplay ever released. Amazing visual design and object geometries. Hundreds of enemies onscreen. In later footage (The one where you fight the brumak and are ready to ride it at the end), you find a large density crowd. The player shoots one, and the crowd attacks him.

Resistance 2 is ok. I like the huge boss battles, and the huge maps. Only problem is, the attention to detail isn't that impressive. For example, in Sony's E3 press conference, they showed of R2 footage. The textures were monotone, and object designs were linear (Too perfect looking rectangular shapes for buildings).

Although neither of the games are out yet, Gears of War 2 has accomplished scale and amazing graphics. Resistance has accomplished a slightly larger scale game with slightly sub par graphics.

I'm not going to lie, I own an Xbox 360, but if you own a PS3...

You should be waiting for Killzone 2, THAT is a good fps and I won't deny it. Pretty much Sony's answer to Halo 3.

mtradr43

i would be very careful with that statement....

Although I've never played it personally, after seeing gameplay, I can say that it is not a shoddy gimmick like Resistance.

If it is good or not? Well, that is up to the player, my friend.

But the game in response to Halo 3? Maybe, maybe not. Killzone was a flagship shooter for the PlayStation 2, and it should be for the PS3. I stick with my judgement that Killzone was Sony's answer to Halo. Whether they are achieving the same success? Hmmm...

R2 doesn't have free roam gameplay on a large scale. Crysis = Free roam gameplay on a large scale. R2, No. Puckhog04

[QUOTE="Puckhog04"]R2 doesn't have free roam gameplay on a large scale. Crysis = Free roam gameplay on a large scale. R2, No. MojondeVACA

:(

Guess i missed that memo. ;)

[QUOTE="mtradr43"][QUOTE="Commando3200"]

Far Cry 2 has already had 9 from OXM and 9.4 from PC Gamer. Both touted that the "open world" worked well.

Gears of war 2 is not small in scale. For example, just look at the first gameplay ever released. Amazing visual design and object geometries. Hundreds of enemies onscreen. In later footage (The one where you fight the brumak and are ready to ride it at the end), you find a large density crowd. The player shoots one, and the crowd attacks him.

Resistance 2 is ok. I like the huge boss battles, and the huge maps. Only problem is, the attention to detail isn't that impressive. For example, in Sony's E3 press conference, they showed of R2 footage. The textures were monotone, and object designs were linear (Too perfect looking rectangular shapes for buildings).

Although neither of the games are out yet, Gears of War 2 has accomplished scale and amazing graphics. Resistance has accomplished a slightly larger scale game with slightly sub par graphics.

I'm not going to lie, I own an Xbox 360, but if you own a PS3...

You should be waiting for Killzone 2, THAT is a good fps and I won't deny it. Pretty much Sony's answer to Halo 3.

Commando3200

i would be very careful with that statement....

Although I've never played it personally, after seeing gameplay, I can say that it is not a shoddy gimmick like Resistance.

If it is good or not? Well, that is up to the player, my friend.

But the game in response to Halo 3? Maybe, maybe not. Killzone was a flagship shooter for the PlayStation 2, and it should be for the PS3. I stick with my judgement that Killzone was Sony's answer to Halo. Whether they are achieving the same success? Hmmm...

(I know the scale has been improved a bit but its still small compared to R2).

kmadon

The crystal-ball syndrome around here is beginning to get out of hand.