{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
6/26/2010 1:55:45 PM
245
GAMESPOT E3 2010 Awards... REACH EPIC FAIL
[url]http://e3.gamespot.com/best-of-e3-2010/game-of-the-show/index.html[/url]
[u]Nominees Best E3 Game:[/u]
[b]Castlevania: Lords of Shadow
Disney Epic Mickey
Dead Space 2
EA Sports MMA
Kirby's Epic Yarn
Child of Eden
Killzone 3
Shogun 2: Total War
Mortal Kombat
Gran Turismo 5[/b]
[i]Oh. Where is Reach?[/i]
[u]Best 360 Game:[/u]
[b]Dead Space 2[/b]
[i]No Reach too[/i]
[u]Best Shooter:[/u]
[b]Killzone 3[/b]
[i]Seems like Bungie's game disappointed some people outside of this forum. What a surprise...![/i]
My conclusion is: [b]the outdated graphics have their price...[/b]
-
You DARE question bungies decisions? Better get [url=http://media.photobucket.com/image/Flamethrower/Badenhal/FlamethrowerC.jpg]this out[/url]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] davadude [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Elite assassin 1 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] davadude [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Aiden QD[/quote] Wow, just wow. I own BFBC2. It looks NOTHING LIKE THOSE PICTURES. I play on a standard E109 tv, and it looks like crap. The game, though, is awesome. But listen, gameplay is more important. Graphics are unimportant. You have been owned multiple times by multiple people on this forum, but you don't quote because you know you're wrong. Those pics are from the PC version of BCBC2, because they are not from the game. Also, ever seen a game apart from SW that is just as original as Halo? Didn't think so. Graphics don't give if the content is right. [/quote] Seriously. Buy another TV. No joke. And look, again, at this video: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j4UcYkkiiA&hd=1[/url] [b]NO PC VERSION[/b]. If your BC2 dont look like that, you have a problem with your TV. Look at [b][i]01:36[/i][/b], there is a surprise for you.[/quote] My TV supports HD, so nope, it's fine. The snowy textures in BC2 are carp, and the vegetation may be removable, but it looks horrible.[/quote] You`re blind BC 2 looks great. Your TV must be a piece of crap.[/quote] Zoom in on any BFBC2 texture with a sniper. Then do the same in Halo 3. BFBC2=Blurry Hell. Halo 3= Looks O.K. Also, my TV is TOTL, and if all my other games display correctly, then I think I may express the truth. [/quote] I was not even comparing the two
-
Gamespot doesn't like it? As-in the Gamespot who thinks that KZ3 is the original cake for having jetpacks(fresh much)the Hunter Killers* from Terminator and changing brown and grey for white and grey and adding orange lines(!!!!!11!!) to the -blam!-Combine bad guys? Um ye, I'll go cry myself to sleep.:)
-
So, you're saying people don't like Reach because of the graphics? Didn't you notice what game gamespot chose for game of the show? Yeah, graphics mean very little compared to gameplay. My conclusion is: Gameplay > Graphics P.S. Reach's graphics look fine to me.
-
i don't understand why people say Reach has outdated graphics, let alone say that it somehow affects the quality of the game as much as they say.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Aiden QD [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ubercow92 the quadbike looks good, but reaches vehicles look much better than that jeep, and those character models do look worse and yes it has bigger maps and more players. does that make it a better game? does reach epically fail because it hasnt got the best graphics on the market? the game looks good. it isnt the best out there, but it is by far good enough to not merit complaints. so if you consider that a fail, then yes, bungie have failed by delivering one of the best playing shooters ever with tonnes of content with slightly above average graphics. poor them[/quote] Slightly above? Not really. Just mediocre, that would fit it better. And [b]YES[/b], Bungies fails delivering their LAST HALO GAME without the work and dedication it deserves in every single aspect for a project like that, promising something they just dont achieve [b]BY FAR[/b].[/quote] [b]CAPS + BOLD = MORE VALID OPPINION DUUUDES!!!![/b]
-
Just cuz Halo Reach didn't win doesn't make it suck. There is a lot of competition this year, bud.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Aiden QD [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ubercow92 the quadbike looks good, but reaches vehicles look much better than that jeep, and those character models do look worse and yes it has bigger maps and more players. does that make it a better game? does reach epically fail because it hasnt got the best graphics on the market? the game looks good. it isnt the best out there, but it is by far good enough to not merit complaints. so if you consider that a fail, then yes, bungie have failed by delivering one of the best playing shooters ever with tonnes of content with slightly above average graphics. poor them[/quote] Slightly above? Not really. Just mediocre, that would fit it better. And [b]YES[/b], Bungies fails delivering their LAST HALO GAME without the work and dedication it deserves in every single aspect for a project like that, promising something they just dont achieve [b]BY FAR[/b].[/quote] you are completely lying to yourself if you think they missed the VGAs by FAR. granted they arent quite there, but the difference isnt huge. and you are ignoreing the main part of what they said. you are saying that, despite making a brilliant game with more content than most shooters out there, they have somehow epically failed. so awesome gameplay, tonnes of gametypes, tonnes of customisation, heaps of new features, they all apparently pale beside the perfectly acceptable level of graphics they have given us
-
Who cares about awards. *Gets flamethrower*
-
Gamespot has been out to kill Halo for years. Fact.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ubercow92 the quadbike looks good, but reaches vehicles look much better than that jeep, and those character models do look worse and yes it has bigger maps and more players. does that make it a better game? does reach epically fail because it hasnt got the best graphics on the market? the game looks good. it isnt the best out there, but it is by far good enough to not merit complaints. so if you consider that a fail, then yes, bungie have failed by delivering one of the best playing shooters ever with tonnes of content with slightly above average graphics. poor them[/quote] Slightly above? Not really. Just mediocre, that would fit it better. And [b]YES[/b], Bungies fails delivering their LAST HALO GAME without the work and dedication it deserves in every single aspect for a project like that, promising something they just dont achieve [b]BY FAR[/b].
-
The ironic thing is that Halo: Reach will outsell most of those games.
-
Make the graphic threads stop! :'(
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Aiden QD [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ubercow92 actually no, beachhead looks awful. i was thinking more of the campaign demo and powerhouse. the two games vegetation look just as good, but battlefields stuck out more and looked horribly fake because they were more prominant oh yeah, and you ignored everything else i said. reach has better character models, gun models and vehicle models[/quote] Yes, looking horribly fake. Sure... And better vehicle models? Not really: [url]http://xbox360media.gamespy.com/xbox360/image/article/101/1015385/battlefield-bad-company-2-20090819011616539_640w.jpg[/url] [url]http://www.gameguru.in/images/battlefield-bad-company-ss2.jpg[/url] Better character models? Not really: [url]http://xbox360media.gamespy.com/xbox360/image/article/104/1043249/battlefield-bad-company-2-20091109022902271_640w.jpg[/url] [url]http://www.holyfragger.com/images/pictures/6699L.jpg[/url] With 24 of them simultaneously ingame in Multiplayer. The [b]ONLY[/b] thing where Reach looks better are the weapon models: [url]http://consolecreatures.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/bfbc2machine_gun.jpg[/url] Having more players on screen, totally destructible maps, lots of vehicle types (including helicopters) and much better explosions and particle effects. Launched almost one year before Reach. Wow, great work Bungie. Applause. [/quote] the quadbike looks good, but reaches vehicles look much better than that jeep, and those character models do look worse and yes it has bigger maps and more players. does that make it a better game? does reach epically fail because it hasnt got the best graphics on the market? the game looks good. it isnt the best out there, but it is by far good enough to not merit complaints. so if you consider that a fail, then yes, bungie have failed by delivering one of the best playing shooters ever with tonnes of content with slightly above average graphics. poor them
-
They base their stuff on graphics alone... pretty much.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] emperorzhang66 They basically said that Killzone 3 introduces two things that games have had for ages. Vehicles that you can control (unlike the ones in killzone 2 which were rails) and jetpacks. While Reach has jetpacks it dosen't really on them to sell the game. The graphics (main selling point) looked worse than the 2nd (without all the lense glare) and the gameplay was sub par. Also how does it get best shooter but not be in the top ten ? And what is so amazing about dead space 2 ? on a side note: Rage, twisted metal, GT5, where were they? They look awsome. :)[/quote] Tribes, a 1998 game, had jetpacks. So this doesn't make Killzone 3 the least impressive, using an age old mechanic as a selling point...
-
cod isn't there and I can't wait for that one either. Reach is my primary cause for wanting September to come closer, however, COD is still a good example
-
If one bases a game's quality on the rewards it got at E3, they are retarded.
-
Well, you're just a negative Nancy.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Aiden QD My conclusion is: [b]the outdated graphics have their price...[/b][/quote] [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRDjMM-76N8]What the...[/url] are you blind? The graphics in Reach are just fine... that doesn't make or break the game. And BTW, Killzone 2 had the most boring campaign ever... and no one plays online on Killzone anymore... I had high hopes for it. My expectations for Killzone 3 are below average. [Edited on 06.26.2010 1:27 PM PDT]
-
Its because halo has a 3 year period before the game transfer. Most people were probably like 'dude, whats halo'. CoD didnt help either. But dont listen to 'em, how is killzone the best?. Reach is gonna pwn all, if not at least keep us fans happy.
-
Kirby's epic Yarn? ... what a joke.
-
Troll nuff said
-
Gameplay > Graphics. And i see no problem with them anyway...
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Elite assassin 1 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] davadude [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Aiden QD [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] davadude [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Aiden QD[/quote] Wow, just wow. I own BFBC2. It looks NOTHING LIKE THOSE PICTURES. I play on a standard E109 tv, and it looks like crap. The game, though, is awesome. But listen, gameplay is more important. Graphics are unimportant. You have been owned multiple times by multiple people on this forum, but you don't quote because you know you're wrong. Those pics are from the PC version of BCBC2, because they are not from the game. Also, ever seen a game apart from SW that is just as original as Halo? Didn't think so. Graphics don't give if the content is right. [/quote] Seriously. Buy another TV. No joke. And look, again, at this video: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j4UcYkkiiA&hd=1[/url] [b]NO PC VERSION[/b]. If your BC2 dont look like that, you have a problem with your TV. Look at [b][i]01:36[/i][/b], there is a surprise for you.[/quote] My TV supports HD, so nope, it's fine. The snowy textures in BC2 are carp, and the vegetation may be removable, but it looks horrible.[/quote] You`re blind BC 2 looks great. Your TV must be a piece of crap.[/quote] Zoom in on any BFBC2 texture with a sniper. Then do the same in Halo 3. BFBC2=Blurry Hell. Halo 3= Looks O.K. Also, my TV is TOTL, and if all my other games display correctly, then I think I may express the truth.
-
You want current gen games graphics comparison? [url=http://www.gamercenteronline.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Call-of-Duty-Modern-Warfare-2_2009_09-16-09_03-1024x576.jpg]Modern Warfail 2[/url] [url=http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_X1IWXuEbgXI/S3R5qAHALuI/AAAAAAAACHs/JaIHq8IVOIo/s640/reach+game+play+screen+shot.jpg]Reach[/url] [url=http://img395.imageshack.us/img395/3923/comparison.png]Another better looking Reach Screenshot[/url] Reach looks better in my opinion.
