Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

For me, star wars loses by default... hate that universe. Not a single good thing I can say about it except...




ITS A TRAP!

What about the tie fighters? They make an awesome noise when they move.

If you want epic space battles, read the stuff that Dan Weber puts out, for space battles most notibly the second book in the Dahak series, i belive it was called Armagedens Inheritance. In this "universe" we have an Imperium that fights with ships called planitoids, as they are the same size as a large moon.

Star Wars books are awful, even if you like Star Wars.

That's a shame to hear. I do like star wars and all of the pew pew lasers...

Some of the games are pretty fun though. Empire at War became a favorite of mine, but I also enjoyed Sins of a Solar Empire. Nice space battles in Sins.

my vote went for the ps3 because of the exclusives that i DID buy the system for... most notably, Killzone 2, and Metal Gear Solid 4.

Even MGS4 on its own is worth the cost of the system.

As has been mentioned before, the reliability issues of the 360 pushed me away, as did the size and shape of the controller, as did the graphics.

Im sorry, but put any sports games side by side, each system hooked up to an HD TV with HDMI cable, and you will notice how much better the playstation looks, if you dont, you need an eye exam.

There was a thing that the 360 had issues with in terms of graphics.

I heard that at a far enough distance enemies in Halo are non-3d pixels to let it run smoother. Don't know if this is fake or not though.

One thing I do know is that the 360 has issues with movement. If you play a sports game and make sudden movements the graphics get a little blurred and lead to a lower definition image. It is noticeable, but won't really ruin the game for anyone.

halonachos wrote:I heard that at a far enough distance enemies in Halo are non-3d pixels to let it run smoother. Don't know if this is fake or not though.

This is true of more games than just Halo (The birds that "flew" in the sky in Halo 2 weren't fully rendered in 3D, and I do seem to remember reading an article about this but not about enemies). It's a common technique with background, very small, or far off objects. It's not like you need to fully 3d render something that a player will never see close up. That's just a waste of processing power.

EDIT: Ah hold on. Misread . Yes. The above is true. Though it's not pixels. Pixels are never 3D. It's polygons. There are algorithms that decrease how many polygons are used to draw an object, not just enemies any object, to decrease how much processing you need to do and to keep everything smooth. It's not unique to the 360. In PC versions of Unreal Tournament, It's possible to see the switch from fewer polygons to more in an object if you have the right graphics card and set the settings just right.

One thing I do know is that the 360 has issues with movement. If you play a sports game and make sudden movements the graphics get a little blurred and lead to a lower definition image. It is noticeable, but won't really ruin the game for anyone.

The game has issues with you making sudden movements, not the 360. I don't play sports games, but I've never noticed blurring that wasn't intentional in any of the games I've played that was the fault of a perfectly running 360 just because I moved the analog stick suddenly. Are you spinning the character around wildly? You'll see a lower definition image on almost any computer system doing that because it stresses the processors. The image isn't really losing definition, the frames are just jumping and this can create an optical illusion.

Halo Reach FTW

Okay then, like I said its not much of a difference. Sure its there but I don't know too many people who decide the greatness of a game based on the blurring of motion. That stuff with the polygons and such bothers me a bit, but not too much.

I just feel proud that in killzone 2, everything is in 3d, even the backgrounds.

Except everything isn't... A large amount of the background, just like any other game, is rendered in 2D.

Hell, even the Support Drones that you get in MP are 2D until they actually enter play.

Except it was stated in the developement notes tht everything even the background was 3d. Now the sky and such may not be 3d, but all of the buildings and such were said to be actual 3d.

Then they lied. Because a large amount of the buildings are rendered in 2D.

halonachos wrote:Except it was stated in the developement notes tht everything even the background was 3d. Now the sky and such may not be 3d, but all of the buildings and such were said to be actual 3d.

Development notes? Those are more lists of ideas that may or may not be in the final version of the game. Lots of times things are listed in development notes that never materialize. That's why they're development notes.

Man, there was a video talking about it on youtube before the game came out but now I can't find it. I will keep looking for it, but I will let you know it did win Best Graphics in G-phoria.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Another thing for me is the story. I just like Killzone's over Halo's as some like Halo's over Killzone's I can't explain that.

The first person view in the entire game makes me very happy along with the fact that the character reaches out to push buttons and doesn't use telekinesis to do it. Not very major, but still fun.

I guess that's the basic thing about a game though, whatever makes it fun.

As far as I can remember... isn't killzone just ww2 in space?

Dutch people made it, so it needs nazi's.

Isn't Halo just WW2 in space?

Same basic storyline:
1) Someone was invaded/attacked.
2) The invaded/attacked people fight back.
3) The invaded become the invaders.
4) The enemy has an idealistic leader/leaders who are more or less dictators.

Its just that Killzone had the balls to make it more obvious.

halonachos wrote:Isn't Halo just WW2 in space?

Halo is self admittedly: "Robocop and the Colonial Marines vs Predator and Zombies." I prefer to think of it as Starship Troopers vs Predator vs Tyranids.

Most of the things you listed are typical of many video games. The thing for Killzone is that the enemies look noticeably like German SS in winter gear. I don't really think that's a it's a bad idea though. Calling on collective cultural images can really help get a point across. Lucas did the same thing with Vader's helmet in Star Wars (Which used the same distinct helmet design you see on enemies in Killzone). Can't get any more evil than Nazi's right

Zombie nazis, or vampire nazis, or robotic vampire zombie nazis. Now that may be even more evil.

halonachos wrote:Zombie nazis, or vampire nazis, or robotic vampire zombie nazis. Now that may be even more evil.

Robotic Zombie Ninja Nazi's. They're in the apocalypse somewhere I swear.

Robotic Zombie Ninja Vampire Nazis formed together in some kind of Frankenstein's monsterish creature that was created by a pact with the devil himself.

I chose PS3 because, well I own 1! Plus PS3 also has Exclusives that are just as good as Xbox 360 exclusives.

Such as:
LittleBigPlanet
Killzone 2
Metal Gear Solid 4
God of War III and a bunch of others

HiyoshixMasa wrote:I chose PS3 because, well I own 1! Plus PS3 also has Exclusives that are just as good as Xbox 360 exclusives.

Such as:
LittleBigPlanet
Killzone 2
Metal Gear Solid 4
God of War III and a bunch of others

But Halo rules them ALL....

HiyoshixMasa wrote:I chose PS3 because, well I own 1! Plus PS3 also has Exclusives that are just as good as Xbox 360 exclusives.

Such as:
LittleBigPlanet
Killzone 2
Metal Gear Solid 4
God of War III and a bunch of others

Of those, only four I can think of are good.

Resistance 1+2(counts as one, since they're very very similar to each other)
MGS4
Killzone 2
inFamous

Pretty much every other game on the PS3 is either completely blargh or a shared game with every other platform out there.

Which kinda negates the whole "we have better exclusives than you" angle that PS3 owners seem to take, and then leads them to their fallback of "But everything looks better on the PS3!"(which really, it doesn't. It depends on the TV you're using--a crummy TV is going to have a crummy image, period).

I bought a Xbox 360, and I regret it. I should have bought a ps3. Seriously, I hate paying monthly fees.

Well, considering that Sony is moving to a monthly fee structure--you'd be just as regretting it there too.

Kanluwen wrote:Well, considering that Sony is moving to a monthly fee structure--you'd be just as regretting it there too.

The Playstation Plus network is going to be voluntary. The free version will remain with full features, for now.

I won't be surprised if a year or two down the road they cut the free version and just keep the paid subscription one.

Except Xbox Live Gold is just as voluntary, wouldn't you say?

I mean Silver nets you the 'basics' of playing online.

Kanluwen wrote:Except Xbox Live Gold is just as voluntary, wouldn't you say?

I mean Silver nets you the 'basics' of playing online.

You can't play a game online with a silver account. Silver is just a normal online account with access to basic features yes, but you can't play a game online without Gold. That's the most important feature. You can't get it without a Gold account. As far as I know, PS+ won't be adopting that model. The free version of the network still gives multiplayer access.

Pretty sure I've seen people in-game with Silver accounts, so I highly doubt that.