Granted, Uncharted 3 has an amazing art style, and Naughty Dog are generally technically proficient developers but there's a reason Uncharted 3 doesn't deserve its nominations. Notice how the the models are far lower resolution in multi-player, and generally in all graphical aspects. It's one thing to have amazing graphics in all areas, but Uncharted 3 literally takes a step back from Uncharted 2. Uncharted 2 was mostly consistent between its campaign and multi-player well Uncharted 3 is not. That's not a technical achievement as awards seem to state, not like what other developers such as Epic have done with Gears of war 3 creating stunning graphics technically and visually in both multi-player and single player. You shouldn't awarded for taking a step back and graphical inconstancy.
It´s a viaually great looking game but, i dont get how can a console game wins technical graphics over the best looking PC games! It honestly does not compute.
It´s a viaually great looking game but, i dont get how can a console game wins technical graphics over the best looking PC games! It honestly does not compute.
PAL360
It's not plausible to compare a console game with a PC game in any instance.
It´s a viaually great looking game but, i dont get how can a console game wins technical graphics over the best looking PC games! It honestly does not compute.
RoflCopteryy
It's not plausible to compare a console game with a PC game in any instance.
Then, if the standards are different, there should be console and PC graphic awards.
It´s a viaually great looking game but, i dont get how can a console game wins technical graphics over the best looking PC games! It honestly does not compute.
PAL360
It's not plausible to compare a console game with a PC game in any instance.
Then, if the standards are different, there should be console and PC graphic awards.
Doesn't matter if it looks darn good, it's supposed to be a technical achievement. And it doesn't look darn good at all in half of its main aspect, multi-player. An aspect in which some people prefer to spend far more time in. If you ask me, what ND had to do to achieve its graphics in SP wasn't a technical achievement at all. Especially when there's developers who easily push there technical achievement into multi-player as well. Much like for instance Epic Games did with Gears of war 3.
Doesn't matter if it looks darn good, it's supposed to be a technical achievement. And it doesn't look darn good at all in half of its main aspect, multi-player. An aspect in which some people prefer to spend far more time in. If you ask me, what ND had to do to achieve its graphics in SP wasn't a technical achievement at all. Especially when there's developers who easily push there technical achievement into multi-player as well. Much like for instance Epic Games did with Gears of war 3.
Doesn't matter if it looks darn good, it's supposed to be a technical achievement. And it doesn't look darn good at all in half of its main aspect, multi-player. An aspect in which some people prefer to spend far more time in. If you ask me, what ND had to do to achieve its graphics in SP wasn't a technical achievement at all. Especially when there's developers who easily push there technical achievement into multi-player as well. Much like for instance Epic Games did with Gears of war 3. it............still..........looks.............good
Doesn't matter if it looks darn good, it's supposed to be a technical achievement. And it doesn't look darn good at all in half of its main aspect, multi-player. An aspect in which some people prefer to spend far more time in. If you ask me, what ND had to do to achieve its graphics in SP wasn't a technical achievement at all. Especially when there's developers who easily push there technical achievement into multi-player as well. Much like for instance Epic Games did with Gears of war 3. it............still..........looks.............good But "good" isn't deserving award quality.
[QUOTE="RoflCopteryy"][QUOTE="Chris_Williams"][QUOTE="RoflCopteryy"] Doesn't matter if it looks darn good, it's supposed to be a technical achievement. And it doesn't look darn good at all in half of its main aspect, multi-player. An aspect in which some people prefer to spend far more time in. If you ask me, what ND had to do to achieve its graphics in SP wasn't a technical achievement at all. Especially when there's developers who easily push there technical achievement into multi-player as well. Much like for instance Epic Games did with Gears of war 3. it............still..........looks.............good But "good" isn't deserving award quality. but what is, we will use witcher 2 as an example, if i showed gamers gameplay of the witcher 2 MAX OUT and i showed them gameplay of uncharted 3, some will say witcher 2 looks better, some would say uncharted 3 looks better, its all subjective
What are you talking about? The gaming bible Gametrailers gave Uncharted 3 the best graphics award. It is clear that PS3 has the best graphics and even PC has nothing even close to it.
[QUOTE="Chris_Williams"][QUOTE="RoflCopteryy"][QUOTE="Chris_Williams"] it............still..........looks.............good But "good" isn't deserving award quality. but what is, we will use witcher 2 as an example, if i showed gamers gameplay of the witcher 2 MAX OUT and i showed them gameplay of uncharted 3, some will say witcher 2 looks better, some would say uncharted 3 looks better, its all subjective Except, that's not what I'm stating. I'm not referring to visual quality, I'm referring to technical quality. What most awards generally favor as the highest aspect of choice. And Uncharted 3 as explained above doesn't achieve this in any quality.
Gears 3 looks much better than Uncharted 3 considering the scale and things going on.
Linear games looking better isn't a good accomplishment.
lazerface216
gears 3? scale? what are you talking about? gears 3 is just as linear as uncharted 3, if not more.
Gears of war 3 is far less linear then some thing such as Gears of war 2 or 1. This is mainly due to the four player co-op aspect and the need for far more open areas. Granted, it's still linear but stays the same quality in all instances.
The reason why BF3 is getting partially eclipsed by U3's graphics is because BF3 is only impressive by a purely technical standpoint. The overall net visuals are otherwise unimpressive.
Who judges graphics by multiplayer? Multiplayer is always hindered, I think it makes more sense to look at the campaign.
ActicEdge
not when campaigns are extremely linear. you can do all sorts of things to make it pretty, that being said uncharted 3's campaign isn't no where near the best.
It deserves every last piece of praise it gets. ND, Santa Monica, and a few others have been the pioneers, this gen, of graphics unlike any that have been seen before. 360, pc, and Wii don't even come close.
Who judges graphics by multiplayer? Multiplayer is always hindered, I think it makes more sense to look at the campaign.
NotAFanboy7
not when campaigns are extremely linear. you can do all sorts of things to make it pretty, that being said uncharted 3's campaign isn't no where near the best.
Which is great. What best graphics includes is up to those that give out the award. Obviously many people thought it had amazing graphics and the campaign was visually striking. If you can't handle that then learn to suck it up buttercup, the world is a harsh place.
It deserves every last piece of praise it gets. ND, Santa Monica, and a few others have been the pioneers, this gen, of graphics unlike any that have been seen before. 360, pc, and Wii don't even come close.IBeVanquished
Pioneering console graphics is laughable. Even then, I've played all these games, you guys are easily impressed, great looking games but that's literally nothing worth gooing nuts over. They didn't achieve Crysis here. they achieved inferior to Crysis 5 years after. :|
I found those really worth noting in a system that is already 5 years old I mean, I was lost sometimes only seeing how good the sand and the boat level looked ND did a great job, now just imagine them working with a new hardware =D
Gears 3 looks much better than Uncharted 3 considering the scale and things going on.
Linear games looking better isn't a good accomplishment.
RoflCopteryy
gears 3? scale? what are you talking about? gears 3 is just as linear as uncharted 3, if not more.
Gears of war 3 is far less linear then some thing such as Gears of war 2 or 1. This is mainly due to the four player co-op aspect and the need for far more open areas. Granted, it's still linear but stays the same quality in all instances.
seemed just as linear as the previous games when i played it. no more or less linear than uncharted 3 at least...
i remember opening the journal the first time in that museum level when nate was a kid and i happened to be standing in front of the window and the shadows looked like giant squares on the page and that made me laugh out loud but that is just nitpicking overall it is a fine looking game.
I think UC3's graphics are beautiful, just like Gears 3. Most of the newer games are so close in graphics that it doesn't really matter much anymore. That being said, I am still playing UC3 right now and I am not wowed so far at all but they are beautiful.
It's not getting grahpical acclaim because it looks the best, it's getting it because the visuals produced on it are astounding seeing how it's performing on 6 year old hardware.
Log in to comment