XSamu said:Well I'm not going to stop you from fapping, this is your day, KZ2 looks better than Halo 3. But it doesn't come near Crysis you retarded fanboy.
jmdajr said:so is this for holiday 2008?
gcubed said:To say it looks better then Crysis.. meh, a little overdrive on the hype...
:lolBusty said:Someone PM a mod. Xsamu's account has been hacked!!!
THe CoD 4 love is really surprising me. Well not really surprizing me, it does look good it's just that, well... making a good looking game (especially a console one) is all about how well you can "fake" things to look better while still maintaining adequate performance.XSamu said:Yeah except for Crysis and Alan Wake. I know you're all excited cuz in the end it looks pretty good, I understand that, but lets not overreact here.
Apparently you haven't seen the HD footage of the E3 presentation, otherwise you would not be saying this.
I can make a lot of screenshots with bad textures in Killzone 2 as well, but we're looking at HD gameplay movies here, and I'd say CoD4 really tops Killzone 2, sorry.
PleoMax said:So what did i miss? How does it look?
urk said:lolz
Yeah, Crysis is pretty much the benchmark at the moment. Nothing is coming close. But this does look great. Watched it twice in HD. Sony was smart to mirror the original reveal. I said it yesterday in the Halo 3 IRC before the trailer and I'll say it here, Sony and Guerrilla have a couple of pairs of big old balls to release this when and how they did.
Razoric said:Wow, they actually delivered on Killzone 2. Looks amazing.
And one last time:
;p
Norml said:my old laptop pc is even weaker but works fine with HD.
1.2ghz & 250mb
This is certianly not out of the 360s range. esp not with pre baked texture lighting
jmdajr said:FROM 1UP
What we like: The presentation and attention to detail are key. The game doesn't look as good as the 2005 trailer, naturally, but it looks close to as good as any other console shooter. We'd say that currently Gears of War tops it, and a few other titles are on the same visual level, but the game looks extremely nice.
What we dislike: There doesn't seem to be much big picture stuff in here we haven't seen yet in other games. This likely has more to do with Sony being very secretive about the features at the moment than a lack of innovation in the game, given its importance to Sony and the company's hints at online features, but at this point it's hard to pick out one or two big things that will help separate the gameplay from what we've seen in other war shooters
hate coming in... 3... 2... 1 :lol
jmdajr said:FROM 1UP
What we like: The presentation and attention to detail are key. The game doesn't look as good as the 2005 trailer, naturally, but it looks close to as good as any other console shooter. We'd say that currently Gears of War tops it, and a few other titles are on the same visual level, but the game looks extremely nice.
What we dislike: There doesn't seem to be much big picture stuff in here we haven't seen yet in other games. This likely has more to do with Sony being very secretive about the features at the moment than a lack of innovation in the game, given its importance to Sony and the company's hints at online features, but at this point it's hard to pick out one or two big things that will help separate the gameplay from what we've seen in other war shooters
hate coming in... 3... 2... 1 :lol
Ben Sones said:Both Killzone 2 and CoD4 look really pretty. However, CoD4 is a sequel to a really good game, and Killzone 2 is a sequel to a really mediocre game. Given that, I have a hard time understanding the excitement level for this one.
Ploid 3.0 said:For you? Average.
PleoMax said:holy shit
Just saw the trailer. *Scratches head* That looks wow
Ben Sones said:Both Killzone 2 and CoD4 look really pretty. However, CoD4 is a sequel to a really good game, and Killzone 2 is a sequel to a really mediocre game. Given that, I have a hard time understanding the excitement level for this one.
:lol I didn't realize my opinion was so definitive.Madman said:Draft agreed it looked better than COD4. There really isn't any point left in discussing it after that.
gljvd said:
look at this shot , low res textures in the upper right , no shadow for the guy in the bottom left .
the game looks great , but as you can see the consoels of this gen are hampered by only having 512 megs of ram.
This is certianly not out of the 360s range. esp not with pre baked texture lighting
Yea, that's about spot on.jmdajr said:FROM 1UP
What we like: The presentation and attention to detail are key. The game doesn't look as good as the 2005 trailer, naturally, but it looks close to as good as any other console shooter. We'd say that currently Gears of War tops it, and a few other titles are on the same visual level, but the game looks extremely nice.
What we dislike: There doesn't seem to be much big picture stuff in here we haven't seen yet in other games. This likely has more to do with Sony being very secretive about the features at the moment than a lack of innovation in the game, given its importance to Sony and the company's hints at online features, but at this point it's hard to pick out one or two big things that will help separate the gameplay from what we've seen in other war shooters
hate coming in... 3... 2... 1 :lol
C4Lukins said:This will make things more fun.
GAZERK said:Uh huh. Jealous much, fanboy?
GAZERK said:Uh huh. Jealous much, fanboy?
Pistolero said:A good fellow to repost the link to the HD trailer (at gametrailers)...I've only sene the low-res ones...