[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="Baranga"]

/thread

SamiRDuran

how?

i still think K2 looks better, from an artistic/lighting point of view....while crysis looks much more detailed. sorry.

seriously after seeing those pictures of crysis and crysis warhead you can say that with a straight face? i dont think so...

i can and i have.:|

Crysis looks amazing, in every way yes, but K2's just grabs my attention more when seen in motion. just the overall look is phenomenal and suits my tastes BETTER. you see.

/thread

Baranga

how?

i still think K2 looks better, from an artistic/lighting point of view....while crysis looks much more detailed. sorry.

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"]

imo, art-wise and the overall look of the title it screams realism and war torn mayhem...like being in a battle.

Mainly due to animations/effects, etc..but artstyIe-wise its pretty impressive and stick out even against the most realistic titles. even if doesn't looks as good as crysis, so again, it stands out and is a great techinical achievement for consoles. I think thats what many people don't understand, when i say it looks better than any other shooter, i obviously know it isn't as detailed as say crysis for obvious reasons, but the developers have marveoulously shaped its own unique look, with a heavy use of amazing lighting/ effects. Not seen in a console game yet.

its the combination of animations, lighting, effects, and style of gameplay that brings it to life and makes one just step back and say wow. (visually speaking)

while i'm also mentioning animations, Crysis's animations arn't realistic in comparison, its like your typical static shooter with straight forward movements and what not, while KZ has a more weighty/swaying look to it, like everything alive and in motion. (at least for me) weither its from jumping over objects or jumping in general it looks real as one would do it in real-life and thats what GG's goal is. that level of realism, which i don't see in any other shooter.

gameplay is questionable, i know i will like it as i did the first, but i'm not getting into that.

so is this how many K2 lovers feel regarding its looks or am i the only one?

IgorVitaly

Sorry but Crysis has far better animations and not to forget realistic animations than KZ2.

Facts in these gifs, period.

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26493460&page=2

fine thats your opinion, regarding animations, but in mine, holding the gun while moving and shooter without much movement or recoil, isn't realistic. K2 aniamtion have depth and weight seen in actual combat. Crysis gameplay animations are a lot like your typical shooter, imo. but whatever.

Obviously you (TC) never experienced war + dont know lot about art + probably never played crysis

Lidve

thanks for dodging completely to what i said. Are you denying K2's graphics? its looks realistic, its looks real it looks amazing and even compared to the technical marvels (visiaually out there) it stands out on its own.

I jsut prefer the artwork in K2 and its overall looks:

all i'm trying to say it, Crysis rely's heavlily on powerfull hardware, with K2 running on less powerfull hardware in comparison, K2 still manages to look GOOD when compared. it looks realistic and REAL, for a console shooter and i think many see this, including my self.

shows you, that a lot has to do with the developers skills in the overall art of the game and design choices made, which more than enough makes up of K2's beauty.

so next time when you think why do people think it looks better than crysis, thats why. (atleast for me and i'm sure many others)

really depends on your taste of its overall art work and design, weither its the gritty, bloomed dark look or the overall lighter realistic colored one, etc.

dude come on.....

artistically crysis is still better....you cannot beat realism.

yes kz2 looks good for a CONSOLE game but dont compare it to a pc game cos you will end up getting owned by many ppl here on these forums.

just a warning

superjim42

warning for what? i've already admitted crysis looks better, we all know that....but people who express an opinion on K2 looking better, is probably mainly due to its art-styIe the developers have used. you can't compare, yes...but K2 sticks out and even when compared K2 stands its own ground, visually...even if it isn't as good looking.

imo, art-wise and the overall look of the title it screams realism and war torn mayhem...like being in a battle.

Mainly due to animations/effects, etc..but artstyIe-wise its pretty impressive and stick out even against the most realistic titles. even if doesn't looks as good as crysis, so again, it stands out and is a great techinical achievement for consoles. I think thats what many people don't understand, when i say it looks better than any other shooter, i obviously know it isn't as detailed as say crysis for obvious reasons, but the developers have marveoulously shaped its own unique look, with a heavy use of amazing lighting/ effects. Not seen in a console game yet.

its the combination of animations, lighting, effects, and style of gameplay that brings it to life and makes one just step back and say wow. (visually speaking)

while i'm also mentioning animations, Crysis's animations arn't realistic in comparison, its like your typical static shooter with straight forward movements and what not, while KZ has a more weighty/swaying look to it, like everything alive and in motion. (at least for me) weither its from jumping over objects or jumping in general it looks real as one would do it in real-life and thats what GG's goal is. that level of realism, which i don't see in any other shooter.

gameplay is questionable, i know i will like it as i did the first, but i'm not getting into that.

so is this how many K2 lovers feel regarding its looks or am i the only one?