This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not make non-constructive posts.
But COD doesn’t have bad graphics… I’m so confused.
It all makes sense to me now.
Haha this is pretty good. You’re gonna have one angry dude when he reads this.
How mature and productive.
-10
/thread
This community is getting more crazy day after day. I hated the graphics in CE, sometimes it stops me from playing it.
People quit playing Halo because Reach changed MP that everyone loved in H2-H3 thats why they quit they wanted more of the same. H2-H3 was simplistic which is why it was so good not because of graphics.
> People quit playing Halo because Reach changed MP that everyone loved in H2-H3 thats why they quit they wanted more of the same. H2-H3 was simplistic which is why it was so good not because of graphics.
I’m glad to see the concept of satire isn’t going over your head.
> This community is getting more crazy day after day. I hated the graphics in CE, sometimes it stops me from playing it.
It’s sad to see the day when players see graphics > gameplay.
You stopped playing just because of the graphics? That’s a shame.
Oh boy…
Well, really, all the Halo’s graphics were considered stunning for their time.
> But COD doesn’t have bad graphics… I’m so confused.
Yes it does.
> Oh boy…
>
>
> Well, really, all the Halo’s graphics were considered stunning for their time.
The first 2 were.
IDK. I think Gears had better textures than Halo 3. And then Gears 2 blew both out of the water. On a texture and model standpoint, Reach had excellent grphics, but with more cometition from other top notch graphics like Crysis, BF, Gears 3 and so on. It just look as good as it couldve been. Same with CEA, and possibly Halo 4.
But still, graphics shouldnt be the biggest concern for a game, it should be how it plays over how it looks.
Personally because of Halo 3’s lighting i like the graphics in Halo 3 than i do on Reach. Everything looks bland in Reach compared to Halo 3 where Armor, weapons, envierment all look different and not as if part of one single image like a picture. In Halo 3 things stood out, textures looked differet for each object.
> > But COD doesn’t have bad graphics… I’m so confused.
>
> Yes it does.
No, it doesn’t.
> > Oh boy…
> >
> >
> > Well, really, all the Halo’s graphics were considered stunning for their time.
>
> The first 2 were.
>
> IDK. I think Gears had better textures than Halo 3. And then Gears 2 blew both out of the water. On a texture and model standpoint, Reach had excellent grphics, but with more cometition from other top notch graphics like Crysis, BF, Gears 3 and so on. It just look as good as it couldve been. Same with CEA, and possibly Halo 4.
>
> But still, graphics shouldnt be the biggest concern for a game, it should be how it plays over how it looks.
It should be all about graphics. Gameplay should be nailed from the get go. In my head a game’s gameplay should be one of the first things they should have down before adding graphics. After that they should focus all attention to the visuals and the audio. Get what i’m saying? Parent companies need to remove pressure from Dev’s so they have more time to create as great as a product as they can. F rushing things out the door.
Wait… people are taking this seriously?
Faith in humanity: -1
facepalm
> But COD doesn’t have bad graphics… I’m so confused.
i confuzeled to, but i think i know what he means. i was playing halo 3 today and realized how easier it was to tell what armor someone was wearing in game rather than in reach. It’s all those pixels. its soo detailed you cant even see the helmets
> Wait… people are taking this seriously?
>
> Faith in humanity: -1
Way to live up to your name: -2