looks gorgeous on my display 50"DLP and I'll take 60fps and AA with a slightly reduced res any day (on TV not Monitor)
Call of Duty 4: Modern combat trailer up
- Thread starter Rangers
- Start date
looks gorgeous on my display 50"DLP and I'll take 60fps and AA with a slightly reduced res any day (on TV not Monitor)
archangelmorph
Veteran
Or some people formulate their oppinions on the visual fidelity of a game by actually playing it & not by stupid compressed internet videos..
yep... Assassin's Creed was the next coming of the savior until it was announced for 360 and then all of a sudden.... "meh"
CoD4 is suffering the same fate since it can't be held up as an example of what can be done only by the "Powa of Cell!"
CoD4 isn't a "technical powerhouse". It isn't doing anything new, insane, or pushing the quality of any single aspect of known technologies. In fact, I find some parts ugly.
That said, the overall game has a nice punch. 60fps, a lot of particles (and at times characters) on screen, solid texture detail, and so forth. I find it quite impressive that their foliage system draws grass very, very far out. Anyone who has played a game like BF2 or the like knows grass tends to vanish 50m away which detroys the gameplay (he he, that sniper thinks he is hiding in hip high grass he he). CoD4 tosses a lot of known familiar techniques (self shadows, normal maps, etc) and does it at 60fps.
Gears of War was fairly similar in its approach--not a lot cutting edge, but a lot of known/existing techniques leveraged at high qualities to give a good end result. Sometimes pushing proven techniques with a solid tool chain is a much more successful approach when trying to get the most out of your art. A whizbang feature may sound nice, but if the tools and experienced artists aren't there to maximize it and, notably, the expense ration cuts heavily into other effects it can be an overall loss in regards to visual impact.
A technically great game isn't always the best looking game. However you want to peg CoD4, the environments are quite varied and the art is solid and makes good use of their technology choices. And they deserve extra credit for getting a passable PS3 version out--that runs at 60fps. I don't doubt their technology choices played a role in this either.
That said, the overall game has a nice punch. 60fps, a lot of particles (and at times characters) on screen, solid texture detail, and so forth. I find it quite impressive that their foliage system draws grass very, very far out. Anyone who has played a game like BF2 or the like knows grass tends to vanish 50m away which detroys the gameplay (he he, that sniper thinks he is hiding in hip high grass he he). CoD4 tosses a lot of known familiar techniques (self shadows, normal maps, etc) and does it at 60fps.
Gears of War was fairly similar in its approach--not a lot cutting edge, but a lot of known/existing techniques leveraged at high qualities to give a good end result. Sometimes pushing proven techniques with a solid tool chain is a much more successful approach when trying to get the most out of your art. A whizbang feature may sound nice, but if the tools and experienced artists aren't there to maximize it and, notably, the expense ration cuts heavily into other effects it can be an overall loss in regards to visual impact.
A technically great game isn't always the best looking game. However you want to peg CoD4, the environments are quite varied and the art is solid and makes good use of their technology choices. And they deserve extra credit for getting a passable PS3 version out--that runs at 60fps. I don't doubt their technology choices played a role in this either.
Huh, on the 360 anyway, one one my biggest gripes with the graphics has been the use of simple cube maps for reflections on things like the back of the scopes and the water. Are they doing something different on the PS3 version?
Remember the ridiculous hype about Assassin's creed and then it gets announced for the 360. All of a sudden, who?
Yes I remember, and that's what Tap In said.
Exclusive games tend to be hyped more than others. So what?
:smile:Originally Posted by warb
some people might under appreciate fantastic looking multi-platform titles because they can't be used in silly system wars arguments....
It'd be nice if people could just appreciate all the games.
I think he meant that the same game first being for only one platform gets hyped. But then when it will be released for more platforms it gets the 'meh' stamp even though it is the same game with still the same features and graphics! :smile:
I meant what's his point wrt CoD4 besides what has been said or known before.Tap In said:
It'd be nice if people could just appreciate all the games.
It would boring.
Yes he meant that (though I don't recall what AC looked like before X06, I don't think any features were revealed either).
If it's accurate it only means exclusivity is an additional hype factor and isn't exactly news.
Well... if you keep paying attention to fanboys, then that's what you get.
Most people forget that the extra CPU power can also be used for better sound (Some X-platform games already does that), more sophisticated physics and AI (sadly, only for exclusive games only -- See Uncharted).
4D sound.
Everything included (to max out the extra power as much as possible) ? Facial expression, muscle emulation, blended animation, great shadow, hair, trees that sway with wind, good looking water, ... and then finally physics and AI ? I will have to play Orange Box to see if it does all of them.
pipo said:
I remember the DiRT developers mentioned in a E3 2007 interview that the PS3 version has better sound (something like 7.1 surround sound dedicated to 1 SPU ?)
These are all off topic though.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
