Originally posted by SlipknoT
Graphics mean shit. All around SA is much better than Halo 2.
Actually graphics have an effect on gameplay.
GTA = Graphics/trees/walls load in at poor draw distances. It looks bad sure, but I wouldn't mind if it didn't actually affect the gameplay the way it does. There have been a few times where I have driven a car at high speeds, hit an invisible wall - THEN it loads up said wall. Same thing has happened in a plane. I'll be flying along perfectly fine when five feet ahead of me loads up a tree. The plane can't move to avoid it and boom!
At least Halo doesn't have graphics that are detrimental to the gameplay itself. Halo 2 does however have dissapointing graphics comparred to Halo 1. Sometimes in cutscenes you'll see textures and LOD load-in. It's over-ambitious and results in a graphical failure for a split second, but it's there, happens a lot, and gets annoying. What adds salt into the wounds is that the game doesn't even look any more detailed or flashy than its predessor. Wierd.
But graphics are very important, to me anyway. Depends on the game. If it's an old school platformer, fine, it can be 16-bit sprites for all I care. If it's something like Halo 2 or GTA, people who buy these games expect above average 3D graphics, or at least graphics that are seamless and don't constantly remind you that it's just a video game.
Don't get me wrong, I like both games, but there's better stuff out there right now.
Re: halo 2 vs GTA san andreas
Originally posted by zl i
on a rating 1-10 10 being higest what would you rate each game and why?
Some poll you made there fella. Which one is better? give me a break. This the old PS2 games vs Xbox games debates that don't go anywhere. Two different genres and then pick the best? I don't think so. Not even when GTA San Andreas comes for Xbox I'm going compare it to Halo 2. Uh-uh no way. This is a joke. I'll just say both are fun games to play. Nuff said for now.