Arch

Can anyone, who would know, give me an idea of how well my system would run it? i have :

CPU: Pentium D 3.4 Ghz
GPU: X1950 PRO 256mb
RAM: 2G running at 667-whatever, each stick

running Vista
would really appreciate a comment.

I wanted to stop readong when the author typed. ".....against Sony's graphicaly superior Playstation 3."

IS THERE SOMEONE OUT THERE WHO DIDNT GET HIT BY SONY's BRAINWASHING?! god i wanted to spit.

so BASICALY what this tells us is that the PS3 is less powerful han the 360. since is SOOO EASY to develop for like all the sony fanboys have been saying for months, and now PROOF!, then i guess that means that the reason why multiplats look better on the 360 is because its more powerful. sorry fanboys. your logic.

SONS OF BITCHES!

they BETTER mean that they will be offered in BOTH languages! All my french friends speak FLUENT english. they learned both fucking languages because this country is a two language standard. friggin french white trash government. this BETTER ONLY mean that they will get both languages (which im all for)but NOT only french games.

For the LAST time. the PS3 is not the powerful machine that everyone thinks. the video card is nothing special and NO bluray is NOT as fast as DVD. NEVER WAS. why the hell do you think the hardrive was standard?

second NO there are NO games on the PS3 with high resolution textures. NONE. why? because the video card + amount of ram is NOT CAPABLE WHETHER YOU FUCKING LIKE IT OR NOT! and KZ2 is a tecchnical piece of crap! im sick of hearing your losers talk about it. KZ2 is the game that is suppose to showcase the FULL potential of the PS3. what do you get? once again LOW RES TEXTURES, nice gun models to, to make it look better, and LOW poly character models with a very nice facial animation. oh and volumetric smoke with linear gameplay.
people have been way to brainwashed by the gritty war ART STYLE.

you want a technical achievement? look at halo 3. 16 KM scale, world HDR, VERY high resolution textures, GREAT environmental textures, and the FIRST console game with movable and destructable vegentation like crysis. (maybe not as detailed) oh and everythign is volumetric too.

everytime a game is said to be only possible on the PS3 you fanboys go insane saying" TEH PWERRRRRRRRRRR"
however when a game is made ofr the 360 and said "only on the 360 you freak out and call blasphemy. and garbage.

ANY developper of sony's touting pre-alpha after MGS4's "pre-alpha" crap at E3 05 should automaticaly be taken with an ocean's worth of salt. MGS4 now, looks worse than MGS4 "pre-alpha" which was the first movie shown and the most impressive.

SIRPILF. There are 5 videos for halo 3, many weekly updates and hundreds of screenshots to show Halo 3s lighting (Global HDR lighting). you say tehre is no proof of halo 3's great lighting over KZ2. there it is. what i think you meant to say was "there is no proof of anything in KZ2" and no. KZ2 does not have more detail in its environment, and that is a simple fact, not opinion. And the scale is 13 miles. WITH that detail everywhere, fully modeled. Water that rivals bioshock should have shut you up before you call someone crazy. sorry.

I dont care what ANYONE thinks. i still strongly believe that halo 3 beats it out technically, with it TEXTURES (this is a big one. one nonexistant in KZ2), Global HDR lighting (a first in any game), art style, AND SCALE. (SCALE IS A BIG ONE. one that normally would not make it fair to compair a linear FPS to one on a scale such as halo 3. however halo 3 still manages to keep up in graphics or better. in my opinion.)

And this comparison proves nothing. Heres an analogy. If im looking at a brick wall in real life, and at the same time looking at a picture of that brick wall, they are identical, however one has the poly's and one has ZERO poly's. not that KZ 2 has zero polys, no its extremely impressive and beat my expectations but this comparison means squat.

At first, i was DISSAPOINTED with the graphics of halo 3. But then i reran the trailer myself and paused hundreds of times. I realised the the speed of the trailer itself gave the impression of bad graphics. when i took a a closer look at the lighting, the water (and dare i say that water rivals bioshock in realism) and the SCALE, it looked phenomenal.Even the foliage was so damn detailed. Usually folliage such as in COD4 is all static and lacks AA. I also noticed how they stayed very close to the art style. Miranda's model was hardly any different because of the art style. However the character models for the covenant have been upgraded to hell. they look amazing.

They even showed a scene from the Announcement trailer. It looked EXACTLY the same besides the chief model because the artists chose to change it.

i advise everyone to go look at the screenshots on bungie.com
http://www.bungie.net/projects/halo3/asset_thumb_viewer.aspx?at=59&cc=21

check out the screenshot with the water. its attention to detail liek this that makes this games graphics phenomenal.

What's with every dev sony touches for an exclusive deal, they turn them into propaganda spewing morons. "YES thats right kids! ONLY possible on the PS3!" it was on the 360 until sony payed them to get it erxclusive. suddenly its the only console possible.