MP:

MP2:

MP3:

What is the big deal?

[QUOTE="swamprat_basic"]What makes that better than MP 1 or 2? More flashy lights and hologram panels? I do not understand this hyping of games with decent graphics to the level of the God-like.GamerForca

Wow, have you ever played the other MPs? The graphics of Samus's gun looks far better, the shots are nicer, with different flashy colors mixed in, Samus herself is way smoother than in the other games; it just looks much improved over the other two. And I'm shocked, I didn't realize the game looked this good. I actually used to think MP2 looked about the same.

Yes, I own the other games, and the difference between the three versions looks like the difference between a PS2/Gamecube/Xbox version of the same game.

[QUOTE="njo"]

now judging from the battery sysmbol and it saying recording id assume thats from a cgi cutscene. heres a screenshot from actual gameplay.

i know sony likes to pretend cgi cutscenes are real gameplay footage(from e3 killzone fiasco) but as of not it looks like platic and is jaggedy. they could tighten it up comes launch but as of now it doesnt look to good.

jujutheking

The gameplay doesn't look like that.Thats an horrible screen.Watch the video http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=19634&type=wmv&pl=game

Really? Because I thought that pic looked better than the gameplay I saw in the video. 

after watching gameplay videos uncharted looks better yet the pics look like crap same thing with MGS4 gameplay videos simply look better I can actually show you some cruddy gear pics too.swade

I would have to say the opposite. The Uncharted pics look better than the video. Unless you're just talking about the cutscene within the airplane at the beginning of the video, which does look quite nice, though it does look completely different from the gameplay they show later on.

Maybe if you just looked at that and the picture of the main character fighting those two badguys you could say the graphics rival Gears, but none of the other pics come anywhere close to Gears, and the gameplay in the video looks even worse.

Wasn't it you that said it was locked @ 30?

shungokustasu

Was there a point to that question? Obviously he was talking about single-player, and obviously no game can be guaranteed to never go under a certain frame-rate.

[QUOTE="-RPGamer-"][QUOTE="shungokustasu"]

[QUOTE="MTBare"]Shungokustasu, crysis is something consoles won't be able to reach this gen.shungokustasu

What's your point? Are you saying we fighting for second? no need to argue about graphics then?

I think the overall point is consoles and PCs aren't a very good comparison in terms of where they peak. In the overall sense consoles are fighting for second, b/c they will not reach the overall prowess of PCs by the end of the generation (PCs don't even follow the same concept of generations for that matter). One can be upgraded, the others can not.

I would still say the graphical argument still stands, just within the knowledge that PC and consoles shouldn't really be held to the same standards.

Two standards? aka Double standards? Yeah... I think we shouldn't argue about grpahics at all then. I felt like eveytime I see GeoW put in the graphics comparison, I wonder why is Crysis and the other games are being ignore. When clearly they are better.

Do you know what "double standard" means? It means that you have one standard for yourself, and a different standard for other people. It has nothing to do with having two different standards for two completely different things.

Crysis should look better than Gears of War on the very best PCs, but you keep saying that Uncharted has better graphics than GeOW, and in that respect, you are wrong.

[QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="shungokustasu"][QUOTE="MADVLAD123"]

[QUOTE="swaginator"][QUOTE="shungokustasu"]

Being in the computer field, I know benchmark are set even before they are even out. It should be the same about graphics. I really don't care about reviews because like you told me they are subjective as well. See how this is working?

shungokustasu

don't argue with this guy...he never gives up...even if he knows he's wrong (and this isn't a good thing..) He's terrible at arguing, and he's obviously a blind fanboy. Just leave him alone and he'll get tired and stop posting.

The loser in the wind. Crying doesn't solve anything. GeoW shouldn't be the benchmark anymore and the only reason it is now because of the blind fanboys domination on this board by 360 fans. Every post I read says Crysis should be it, yet people make excuses for not making it.

it's not out yet. See...told you not to argue with him..All these logical responses and arguements go through one year and come out the other in this guy. It's sad really.

"It's not out yet" is a lame excuse. It's obvious the game will look better than GeoW. What's the difference admitting it now than later?

If you really want to get rid of GeOW as the graphical benchmark then you need to show a game that actually has better graphics than GeOW. Very few games look to have better graphics, and there usually are different benchmarks for different genres. Crysis, a shooter, looks to have better graphics than GeOW, and if you want to use it as the benchmark, then go ahead. But that doesn't mean people have to agree with you.