EA has a team with a soul? Dead Space team deserves praise?

[George]

Are we serious?

I disagree with everything you said. Halo Reach the best fps graphical console game? Alright.. i'll take the bait.

Yes, have you checked what a game engine is? They don't just effect the way the game looks, it also effects the physics and most of the times the animation.
http://www.gamecareerguide.com/features ... _game_.php Show me where it says Game Engines = controls.

 I'm sorry that I said X game pushed the 360 than X game. Obviously I don't work for Epic or Bungie, thus I'm wrong and your right.

I said that Gears of War did more to push the 360 than Halo 3, ODST and Reach. One of the examples I gave was the graphics and the Unreal 3 engine.

Here you go, 'Technical FPS' on a console? You bring up textures and polygons... and even lighting. You will sit and say with a straight face that Halo Reach has better lighting than Killzone 2? I'm a bit surprise.

Sorry to tell you, 'color schemes' don't hide jaggies, that is what HDR lighting is for.

Saying that 'Bungie' didn't use superior textures compared to Gears because they knew it would run better with crappier textures  means that Resistance 2 is superior to Reach because it runs smoother. But it isn't tech wise.

Best game? Sounds like an opinion.

I think you should read up on Killzone 2's lighting engine. One of the best in the industry. I was a bit disapointed by aspects of Killzone 2, but the team did a great job with the lighting and graphical engine.

Basically the full lighting engine is 'real time'. No 'texture' tricks. Its funny cuz the developer was 'called out' by neogaf members saying they used trick lighting... but it was the opposite. Just lots of coding hard work.
http://www.ps3blog.net/2007/07/30/killz ... ng-engine/

[Sega Uranus]

You are still kind of going off on weird stuff, I have been constantly saying that the Halo games are usually more "Solid" than other releases, especially stuff like Gears, which I think looks good, but has moments of shitty constant shit shit. I know you know what I mean.

Most of your comments seemed to be around character models, or at least they were before. I was trying to point out that those models are what Bungie made themselves, not the end all means proof their their engine cannot handle higher polygon count faces.

When I said you are not entirely sure what you are on about, I meant that I am not sure if you have even played those games long enough to judge them in any great regard. I did not outright say that because I have no way of knowing outside of asking you, but with how you have mentioned the title, it does not seem like you have.

And when I said it was one of the best games of last year, that is not a personal opinion, it is echoed throughout the industry. I can freely say the same about Red Dead Redemption, a game I never played yet.

*Name drop, link drop, joke drop here*

[George]

How long did you play Killzone 2? Do you own a PS3? I have played Halo Reach, beta and retail for more than 20 hours. I think that is enough not to be impressed by a engine.

MLB game by Sony is 'one of the best games last year', doesn't mean squat when I don't like it.

[Sega Uranus]

How long did you play Killzone 2?

I would say around three hours, but that was literally just the other day, so it is pretty fresh in my head, more so than Reach is. I had also seen a lot about it previously.

Do you own a PS3?.

Yes, now I do, but what does that have to do with anything?

I have played Halo Reach, beta and retail for more than 20 hours. I think that is enough not to be impressed by a engine.

Neither of us were talking about being impressed. I kept pointing out that their games just run better than stuff like Gears. In every regard. It should not matter if Gears looks better in screenshots than Reach does, the game works better in almost every category.

MLB game by Sony is 'one of the best games last year', doesn't mean squat when I don't like it.

Well I was not talking about liking and disliking things, I was on about how things work, and Halo games (with the exception of 2 - And even that is arguable) run extremely well and are top of the line in performance in almost every way. The industry would not give it dozens of awards if it was not good in some manner.

[George]

What the hell does 'having good ratings' have to do with having a technical engine? In this logic Mario Galaxy has a better technical engine than Halo and Killzone.

Y U NO ADD ME?