MGS4 is the current console graphics king, followed by Ratchet and Clank. Uncharted definitely looks good, but I truly don't get the hype there, even graphically.

Btw, know what other game needs to be in this convo? Naruto Ultimate Ninja: Storm. I'm serious. I've been playing the demo and holy god it's jaw-droppingly gorgeous. It literally looks better than the cartoon, and it animates much better as well. The animation is simply stunning. Overall, it's by far the greatest use of cel-shaded graphics yet.

I'm hardly some big Naruto fan at all but the game is seriously awesome, especially graphically (which I can't overstate). Controls really well, too.

I also think Super Stardust HD should be in the convo, even though it's a small downloadable. It's obviously more limited than the others graphically since it's doing easier things and on a much smaller scale, but it's also not really any less of a feast for the eyes.

When you get a trophy, does it make a noise?

Sony wrote: Currently, no.

no noise! dammit..i wanted ps3 owners to know what it's like hearing the same sound over and over untill you start hearing it in you're sleep:twisted:

lawlessx

:lol:

That was my favorite question. As much as I don't care about Achievements, I gotta admit there's something about that achievements unlocked sound effect that's strangely enjoyable. :P

I don't know why I have to keep repeating myself, but, again, there is a difference between pre-rendered cutscenes and real-time rendering. Whether you can zoom or not makes no difference, the movie sequences in MGS4 are not being rendered in -real time-, and therefore can benefit from extra post-processing and a general clean up in graphics. I don't see why this is so hard to understand. Whether the graphics used for the cutscenes are in-game, cell shading, cartoons, puppets, whatever, they are pre-done and are NOT the same as actual gameplay. The difference is marginal, as I've said earlier, but there IS a difference in some of the cutscenes from actual gameplay- as there should be, since those scenes are indeed pre-rendered and can benefit from the extra attention to detail since resources aren't being taken away for AI, animation processing, etc. And, I'm sorry, but there are other games on consoles that are better graphically than MGS4. I wouldn't even put Ratchet and Clank in the conversation. I would venture that Uncharted is superior, and even would make an argument for Assassin's Creed. Now if we're going to take PC into account, there are plenty of games that are better graphically. Again, this doesn't mean the game is any less amazing. Its just a discussion, and I now realize that saying anything negative about MGS4 is akin to herecy around here.lockjaw333

Of course there's going to be post-processing in the cutscenes. I certainly wasn't trying to argue that. They are non-interactive cutscenes. The devs would have to be idiots to keep the absolute same graphical fidely in both interactive and non-interactive scenes.

But I believe what the point that I and others are specifically trying to make is that, as you said, the difference is marginal. The game can afford to have split-screen sequences showing gameplay in one and cinematics in the other and not miss a beat. As well as the dynamic motorcycle chase in Act 3, which switches continuously and by player input from cinematics to gameplay and back. These are things we haven't seen any game do, much less console game. The fact that the cutscenes are smoothed out is completely irrelevant when you can barely tell at first glance, and to the extent that cutscenes and in-game gameplay are interchanged regularly throughout the game.

As far as Uncharted, goodness. That game has quite easily got to be the most overrated game of the decade, both from a gameplay and graphical standpoint. Ratchet and Clank is a significantly more impressive game on every level. I'd also say that Assassin's Creed and Mass Effect are both better-looking than Uncharted.

MGS4 is probably the best game I've played so far this gen, certainly the best console game, but it does have its issues. One thing that isn't an issue is gameplay. People claim there's little gameplay, so I'm wondering how I clocked in over 30 hours on my first playthrough. And that wasn't because I suck or I'm slow, but because I was taking my sweet time and doing what I wanted to do. I think people forget that you don't necessarily have to go straight to your objective. There are plenty of enemies in most of the levels to mess around with and try out strategies, and random things to find.

Anyway, the one glaring issue with MGS4, and the only one that comes to mind off the top of my head, is the dialogue. There are way too many problems when it comes to dialogue. Much of it is completely unecessary.

Next time you play through the game, pay attention to what the characters say and how often they say the exact same thing they just said in a slightly different fashion. It happens a lot, and it's a shame, because it's the primary reason the cutscenes are so long, which is also people's primary (if not only) complaint about this game.

Ultimately, it all goes back to the dialogue. Kojima is a great dev, but it's no insult to say that he could use an editor. Editors are a necessary and often called-upon profession for reasons like this.

On consoles, Ninja Gaiden Black, easily.

I used to think that was a three-way toss-up between NGB, Riddick and Chaos Theory. But after having gone back and played it recently, it's definitely Ninja Gaiden Black. It still holds up today.

As far as PC (aka overall graphics king), it was probably Far Cry or Half-Life 2. And maybe Doom 3, though it greatly lacked in physics. Out of the three, I'd lean towards FC. It was highly advanced for its time and the tropical paradise setting was fresh. At this point, if Crytek makes a game, you can pretty much count on it being the overall graphics king (as well as an excellent game in its own right).

HL2 is undoubtedly gorgeous, and I've defended its graphics before to people who feel the Source engine is very outdated. It isn't all that outdated. Playing through Episode 2 at times is quite a graphical experience, especially when it comes to lighting and animation, which HL has always done really well.

But I can also say that almost any advantage that it does have over MGS4 at this point is purely the product of a PC's higher graphical horsepower and capabilities. Very, very few games are going to beat Episode 2 @ 1680x1050 or higher and with 16xAA or higher going. Comparing the two side-by-side on equal grounds, MGS4 is certainly more technologically advanced.

I don't even want to think about how great MGS4 would look on a PC, with high res, high AA and nicer textures.

[QUOTE="ChrnoTrigger"]

[QUOTE="lockjaw333"]Chrono, none of those screenshots are doing anything for your argument....lockjaw333

You've played the game? You see the pic with Meryl and her boys? Yeah.. that moves directly to gameplay without any change at all. I don't see how you can argue against me when I say MGS4 looks light years ahead of HL2. :|

You "realize" that pre-rendered cutscenes transition directly into gameplay? Do you even read what you write? Only two cutscenes in the entire game are pre-rendered, one coming in at the end of Act 3. Also, the stuff with the cooking eggs is CGI. Everything else is in-game. You can tell that the cutscene is in-game when you can zoom in on it. The pre-rendered ones, you can't zoom in on.

And yes, graphically, MGS4 is top tier. The only game that comes close to it on consoles is Ratchet and Clank.