Halo 3

Originally posted by shin_gear
What are they then? Fake images of Halo 3's graphics?

Are they the graphics you play the game with? No, so they are irrelevant. Just another desperate argument in defense of Halo.

The first Tomb Raider had cutscenes better than the graphics you actually play with, just like almost every game, Halo is no different, and they do not count as WE are discussing in game, playable graphics. YOU are the only one grasping desperately for points.

Originally posted by shin_gear
I think I'll mention facts about Halo 3 when I want to, thanks. I don't care if it has nothing to do with the discussion you were in. I'm pointing out the reality that the Halo 3 trailer was in real-time. Go ahead and tell me it wasn't part of the discussion you were in. That would be mentioning another one of my points.

It wasn't part of the discussion, you brought that in on your own, for no reason and without ANY relevance. WE are discussing PLAYABLE GRAPHICS, so why on Earth are you discussing the trailer? It has nothing to do with anything. Unless you do believe the trailer contains gameplay graphics, in which case you'd be an idiot.

Originally posted by shin_gear
You apparently can't debate without being ridiculously biased and insulting people while you're at it. 😂

I'm not biased, the reason this debate is going on is because people cannot accept fact. Your desperation and love for Halo has caused you to try and say "BUT THE TRAILER HAS BETTER GRAPHICS!", so what? What's the point? We are, and have always/only been discussing GAMEPLAY GRAPHICS.

Trailers mean nothing.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That's the best post you've made, and yes, if that's your evidence then you are making it all up about me "always" saying "Bungie is corrupting everyone.".

Because in all of those quotes the only thing you'll find is well constructed points and well founded claims. The one quote (And there is just one) where I said "Bungie owns you all." is in reply to InnerRise who said "Halo 3 owns you all." based on price. It wasn't the heart of my debate, I wasn't going around saying everyone is controlled by Bungie.

If anything you just condensed my argument and made it more powerful by quoting points that damage your case, Newjak.

You got one thing right; I do not believe Halo 3 deserves to be put with Gears and Bioshock, what's the problem?

I love how you clearly spent time grabbing those quotes and it did nothing for you.

-AC

Yet those quotes you actually go on to say that it is the truth that they are better games. Your entire argument has been based on ipinions and the fact is from begining you have been tryinf to take those opinions as fact.

It was the truth that anybody who like Halo 3 was just conforming to Bungie you even posted as such.

It was fact that GOW and Bioshock were better "GAMES" than Halo 3. You even use the word Truth with it. So no it never helped your arguement jsut showing how biased and willing you are to contradict yourself to make yourself seem right.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The only thing Halo has over Gears is lighting, overall Gears is a far more graphically superior game, as proven and as said. I'm not sure what more there is to be deduced.

Textures, mapping, character models and everything else EXCEPT lighting and possibly frame rate is better than Halo 3. It's an overall graphically superior game, you just won't admit it.

Ok, done, moving on.

It's not me LIKING THEM better is it? It's them BEING better. It's the models BEING more advanced, it's the mapping BEING superior. That is what you fail to understand. Me liking them is not why they are better, they are superior because they are, technically.

And that's what your argument is. Done.

We all know you'll keep replying cos you either don't read, can't read or refuse to read. No matter how many times it's laid out, you ignore it.

-AC

So I hardly find the Graphics of GOW being better than than Halo 3.

All I find is you basically taking the parts of the Grahpics you like and saying those are apprantly the only aprts we can go by when determining what ahs better graphics.

Once again you don't actually understand what you are talking about.

Originally posted by Newjak
Oddly enough if you look at the quote and the newer ones you made you actually go on to contradict yourself. You go one to say that all those points about GOW being better and Bioshock being ebtter are your opinions.

YES about the OVERALL QUALITY OF THE GAMES, as I said. Not the graphics capabilities, you ignorant person. You just don't understand my posts.

Originally posted by Newjak
Yet those quotes you actually go on to say that it is the truth that they are better games. Your entire argument has been based on ipinions and the fact is from begining you have been tryinf to take those opinions as fact.

No I do not, this is just ridiculous.

THE GRAPHICS are factually, technically superior, ok? That is all I am saying. That is it. That's all, please for the love of all that's holy please get that through your head. I'm not saying you cannot LIKE Halo's more, I'm saying they're technically not as good.

Not saying any game is factually overall better than any other, never have.

Originally posted by Newjak
It was the truth that anybody who like Halo 3 was just conforming to Bungie you even posted as such.

No I didn't, ever. I said that's the mindset of a lot of people, to hype a game so much before they know ANYTHING that when it actually comes out they'd never admit disappointment. Not that everyone does it and EVERYONE who likes Halo is corrupted, again you're misinterpreting my posts on purpose.

Originally posted by Newjak
It was fact that GOW and Bioshock were better "GAMES" than Halo 3. You even use the word Truth with it. So no it never helped your arguement jsut showing how biased and willing you are to contradict yourself to make yourself seem right.

I've never, ever said, nor believed that. What I HAVE done is explained the opposite to you on many occassions and you're still ignoring the fact that I've NEVER said that. Your mind cannot cope with me making more than one point per post.

A) I do not think ANY game is factually better QUALITY wise than another, it's preference overall.

B) My argument is to do SOLELY with graphics technicality, NOT what graphics are preferred. Just which graphics are ACTUALLY better.

Ok? Do you get it now? Or are you doing to keep telling me what I mean?

-AC

Originally posted by Newjak
actually Halo 3 HAS better framerate, better lighting, better Player Enviroment Interaction, better Scope and range invloving using the Graphics Engine. All part of the Graphics

So I hardly find the Graphics of GOW being better than than Halo 3.

It doesn't matter what you "find", that's the entire point, Newjak.

I admitted Halo 3 has a better frame rate and better lighting, but in EVERYTHING else, Gears is factually better. Environment interaction ISN'T to do with graphics, that's gameplay, we're not discussing that.

Gears has better textures, mapping and character models. On top of the lighting which is STILL amazing, it's a graphically superior game.

Originally posted by Newjak
All I find is you basically taking the parts of the Grahpics you like and saying those are apprantly the only aprts we can go by when determining what ahs better graphics.

Again, you're right. That's what you FIND, you FIND whatever you want to find in my posts. Hence why you will not stop replying. You make stuff up that you believe I've said and you reply to it.

I keep explaining myself and you keep telling me what I do and do not mean. You're a moron, you haven't the first clue of debating, and you've already lost.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
YES about the OVERALL QUALITY OF THE GAMES, as I said. Not the graphics capabilities, you ignorant person. You just don't understand my posts.

No I do not, this is just ridiculous.

THE GRAPHICS are factually, technically superior, ok? That is all I am saying. That is it. That's all, please for the love of all that's holy please get that through your head. I'm not saying you cannot LIKE Halo's more, I'm saying they're technically not as good.

Not saying any game is factually overall better than any other, never have.

No I didn't, ever. I said that's the mindset of a lot of people, to hype a game so much before they know ANYTHING that when it actually comes out they'd never admit disappointment. Not that everyone does it and EVERYONE who likes Halo is corrupted, again you're misinterpreting my posts on purpose.

I've never, ever said, nor believed that. What I HAVE done is explained the opposite to you on many occassions and you're still ignoring the fact that I've NEVER said that. Your mind cannot cope with me making more than one point per post.

A) I do not think ANY game is factually better QUALITY wise than another, it's preference overall.

B) My argument is to do SOLELY with graphics technicality, NOT what graphics are preferred. Just which graphics are ACTUALLY better.

Ok? Do you get it now? Or are you doing to keep telling me what I mean?

-AC

"Second, who said make it like Gears are Bioshock? I said considering you can make games of THAT QUALITY, I find it rather dumb that they threw away an overall $50 million only to come out with a game not only graphically and dynamically inferior objectively, but overall less fulfilling in my PERSONAL opinion."

Once again contradiciting yourself.

from the very begining you have been trying to say that Halo 3 is a Medicore Game compared to GOW and Bioshock and that it is factually true that it is a worse game of less quality.

I;ve already quoted you saying that it is factually true that they are better games. Not opinionaed. You should learn to quote changing what you are saying 😆

Originally posted by Newjak
Actually you go on to state earlier that GOW and Bioshock are actually better quality games not because you beileve they but because they are in your own words.

"Second, who said make it like Gears are Bioshock? I said considering you can make games of THAT QUALITY, I find it rather dumb that they threw away an overall $50 million only to come out with a game not only graphically and dynamically inferior objectively, but overall less fulfilling in my PERSONAL opinion."

Once again contradiciting yourself.

What are you TALKING about? I never, ever said they are better quality games in my own words. That quote actually proves I'm saying they're better quality overall in my PERSONAL OPINION. It's in caps and you still somehow managed to balls up the interpretation. Good job.

Originally posted by Newjak
from the very begining you have been trying to say that Halo 3 is a Medicore Game compared to GOW and Bioshock and that it is factually true that it is a worse game of less quality.

Now I can't tell if you're joking or being serious, because it's a hardcore proven fact that I have never said anything like that, ever.

Originally posted by Newjak
I;ve already quoted you saying that it is factually true that they are better games. Not opinionaed. You should learn to quote changing what you are saying 😆

Where? The quote above? It says "Less fulfilling in my PERSONAL OPINION.". Where in there did you deduce that I am saying a game is of factually better quality overall? More to the point, WHY are you still pushing that? I've told you it's not true.

If you're not going to stop this rabid and intentional misinterpretation of my posts I'm simply not going to give you the grace of a reply, because you're being very, remarkably stupid.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It doesn't matter what you "find", that's the entire point, Newjak.

I admitted Halo 3 has a better frame rate and better lighting, but in EVERYTHING else, Gears is factually better. Environment interaction ISN'T to do with graphics, that's gameplay, we're not discussing that.

Gears has better textures, mapping and character models. On top of the lighting which is STILL amazing, it's a graphically superior game.

Again, you're right. That's what you FIND, you FIND whatever you want to find in my posts. Hence why you will not stop replying. You make stuff up that you believe I've said and you reply to it.

I keep explaining myself and you keep telling me what I do and do not mean. You're a moron, you haven't the first clue of debating, and you've already lost.

-AC

And yes Halo 3 has better Scope and Player interaction and lighting.

So I find GOW and Halo3 to pretty similar Graphics wise.

It just comes done to which atyle you prefer Graphically bigger games with more scope and interaction or smaller games with better textures and models 😬

I do not understand how you are not getting this you know since apprantly I'm the moron who actually understnads what is going on.

Ok to put it into laymens terms.

Let's say Graphics are a product which they are. Let's say like some complex machine.

The machine is going to have different parts do different things for the total qualilty of the product.

Graphics consist of different parts.
Textures
Models
Enviroment Interaction
Scoping Lighting
Framerate

All produce Graphics.

You can tweek any indivdual part and change the perforamnce of that area of the product. Like a car's handling or speed or power.

But the overall product is still a car.

Overall Grahpics is more than just Textures and Characer Models. All the aspects have to work together to get to the final Grahpics.

Hence why it is the GRAPHICS ENGINE that takes care off all these aspects of in-game play.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
What are you TALKING about? I never, ever said they are better quality games in my own words. That quote actually proves I'm saying they're better quality overall in my PERSONAL OPINION. It's in caps and you still somehow managed to balls up the interpretation. Good job.

Now I can't tell if you're joking or being serious, because it's a hardcore proven fact that I have never said anything like that, ever.

Where? The quote above? It says "Less fulfilling in my PERSONAL OPINION.". Where in there did you deduce that I am saying a game is of factually better quality overall? More to the point, WHY are you still pushing that? I've told you it's not true.

If you're not going to stop this rabid and intentional misinterpretation of my posts I'm simply not going to give you the grace of a reply, because you're being very, remarkably stupid.

-AC

Listen you go n to state you find the game less fullfilling in your opinion but that the Quality of the game is less based on the the Graphics and Dynamic gameplay being (INFERIOR).

You were stating like the game is inferior not that it is your opinion.

Anybody can see your trying to cover your trail and doing a bad job. 😆

Jesus, dont the two of you have anything better to do? 🙄

Originally posted by Newjak
Actually Player Envriment Interaction is Grphics because for two objects to interact they each have to graphically designed to interact.

And yes Halo 3 has better Scope and Player interaction and lighting.

Good, walked right into the trap.

If player interaction with environment is what you want to judge on, Gears is so much better than Halo it isn't even funny. Considering the fact that you actually see the CPU and player controlled superior character models interact with the scenery in ways you cannot do so in Halo, it proves my point further.

Originally posted by Newjak
So I find GOW and Halo3 to pretty similar Graphics wise.

Up to you, technically Gears' graphics are superior. Fact.

Originally posted by Newjak
It just comes done to which atyle you prefer Graphically bigger games with more scope and interaction or smaller games with better textures and models 😬

No it doesn't. Gears' graphics are TECHNICALLY superior. If you think Halo makes better use of the graphics it has, that's fine, but they are not better in ANY area save for frame rate and lighting.

Originally posted by Newjak
I do not understand how you are not getting this you know since apprantly I'm the moron who actually understnads what is going on.

Because you are debating with your own mind, you're making things up and chasing your tail. You haven't got a single clue what's going on.

Originally posted by Newjak
Ok to put it into laymens terms.

Let's say Graphics are a product which they are. Let's say like some complex machine. The machine is going to have different parts do different things for the total qualilty of the product. Graphics consist of different parts.

Textures
Models
Enviroment Interaction
Scoping Lighting
Framerate

All produce Graphics. You can tweek any indivdual part and change the perforamnce of that area of the product. Like a car's handling or speed or power. But the overall product is still a car. Overall Grahpics is more than just Textures and Characer Models. All the aspects have to work together to get to the final Grahpics. Hence why it is the GRAPHICS ENGINE that takes care off all these aspects of in-game play.

Oh my goodness.

Why do you keep doing this to yourself? I used your own car analogy against you last time. So what? One car (Halo) may have a couple of things better than another car (Gears), technically (Lighting and frame rate). Gears has MUCH more technical graphics superiority in its favour, fact. When all the pieces are together, you decide which OVERALL PRODUCT you like more, not which one is technically superior.

How many more times must I trash your argument?

-AC

Originally posted by AstroFan
Jesus, dont the two of you have anything better to do? 🙄

So in essence no 😛

So how have you been Ast?

Originally posted by Newjak
Listen you go n to state you find the game less fullfilling in your opinion but that the Quality of the game is less based on the the Graphics and Dynamic gameplay being (INFERIOR).

No, I say the graphics and dynamics are inferior, not that this makes the game quality factually less. Learn to read.

Originally posted by Newjak
You were stating like the game is inferior not that it is your opinion.

No, I was stating the graphics and dynamics are inferior and as a result, the game is SUBJECTIVELY, and in MY OPINION, less fulfilling.

Originally posted by Newjak
Anybody can see your trying to cover your trail and doing a bad job. 😆

I'm not, you're just a desperate idiot, hence why you're now resorting to telling me what I said and what I mean. You're wrong, you got it wrong, fact. It IS a fact because I know what I said, what I mean, the quotes are there, I've explained it.

You're wrong, Newjak.

No game is factually better overall, than another, I've never said otherwise. Stop being a moron.

-AC

Originally posted by Newjak
My classes are done for the day and I have about 4 hours to blow of.

So in essence no 😛

So how have you been Ast?

Good man.

You got Live?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Good, walked right into the trap.

If player interaction with environment is what you want to judge on, Gears is so much better than Halo it isn't even funny. Considering the fact that you actually see the CPU and player controlled superior character models interact with the scenery in ways you cannot do so in Halo, it proves my point further.

Up to you, technically Gears' graphics are superior. Fact.

No it doesn't. Gears' graphics are TECHNICALLY superior. If you think Halo makes better use of the graphics it has, that's fine, but they are not better in ANY area save for frame rate and lighting.

Because you are debating with your own mind, you're making things up and chasing your tail. You haven't got a single clue what's going on.

Oh my goodness.

Why do you keep doing this to yourself? I used your own car analogy against you last time. So what? One car (Halo) may have a couple of things better than another car (Gears), technically (Lighting and frame rate). Gears has MUCH more technical graphics superiority in its favour, fact. When all the pieces are together, you decide which OVERALL PRODUCT you like more, not which one is technically superior.

How many more times must I trash your argument?

-AC

IF you actually ook at all the obstacles in GPW only the Sprites move and teh Enviroment is actually very static.

Unlike in Halo 3 where Barriers can be move vehicles can be blown tossed around, turrets you can both get on and tear off and portals that cna take you from point A to point B. So your point is moot. Considering the only time to Characters interact with the Enviroment is when they are up agianst Static Walls and during cutscneses your trap was kind of pathetic.

So you finally get the concept of biulding a the Graphics up. Good.

Now let's go with me if GOW decided to do the samething Halo 3 did then it would look like GOW. If Halo 3 did the samething GOW did then it would look like GOW.

Thus the Graphics aren't better because one can easily duplicate what teh other did but instead opted for different things.

How it took you so long to put this together is beyond me.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No, I say the graphics and dynamics are inferior, not that this makes the game quality factually less. Learn to read.

No, I was stating the graphics and dynamics are inferior and as a result, the game is SUBJECTIVELY, and in MY OPINION, less fulfilling.

I'm not, you're just a desperate idiot, hence why you're now resorting to telling me what I said and what I mean. You're wrong, you got it wrong, fact. It IS a fact because I know what I said, what I mean, the quotes are there, I've explained it.

You're wrong, Newjak.

No game is factually better overall, than another, I've never said otherwise. Stop being a moron.

-AC

You said people can make games of THAT QUALITY refering to the fact that the games were better quality compared to Halo 3 and then in the next sentence you say it is based on the games being dynamically and graphically superior.

And then you personally felt less fullfilled because of of the Qualitly of the games being different. But you before you stated that the Games were Factually Superior becuase of A)Graphics and B) Dynamics.

Personally I'm just enyoing watching yourself contradict everything you say.

Originally posted by AstroFan
Good man.

You got Live?

Originally posted by Newjak
Really because last time I checked GOW has actually as far less Player Enviroment Interaction.

IF you actually ook at all the obstacles in GPW only the Sprites move and teh Enviroment is actually very static.

That would be why you can destroy furniture and knock it around, wouldn't it?

You have no idea what you're on about.

Originally posted by Newjak
Unlike in Halo 3 where Barriers can be move vehicles can be blown tossed around, turrets you can both get on and tear off and portals that cna take you from point A to point B. So your point is moot. Considering the only time to Characters interact with the Enviroment is when they are up agianst Static Walls and during cutscneses your trap was kind of pathetic.

My point isn't moot, those are not graphics features, they are just things in Halo that aren't in Gears. That's like saying Halo 3 has better graphics cos it has a different gun.

Gears sprites are not only better, but the environment interaction is, as are the overall graphics of both save for frame rate and lighting.

It wasn't pathetic, it proves my point. Environments don't need to be non-static in order for the interaction between player and environment to be better. Bits of concrete chip off and your armour becomes tarnished from charging into it, it's all there, it all counts.

Originally posted by Newjak
So you finally get the concept of biulding a the Graphics up. Good.

I always have, you were just wrong. You refused to accept that your analogy defeats YOUR points, not me. You are arguing overall quality, I am not. I'm arguing specifics.

Originally posted by Newjak
Now let's go with me if GOW decided to do the samething Halo 3 did then it would look like GOW. If Halo 3 did the samething GOW did then it would look like GOW.

What does that have to do with anything?

Originally posted by Newjak
Thus the Graphics aren't better because one can easily duplicate what teh other did but instead opted for different things.

Dumbest point yet. The graphics aren't better because they COULD be the same, but aren't? What a silly point.

The FACT AND REALITY is; Gears is Gears and Halo 3 is Halo 3, they are as they are and Gears' is the graphically superior game.

Originally posted by Newjak
How it took you so long to put this together is beyond me.

You are the one who didn't get it, then tried altering it only for it to end up being the same thing anyway. Mine was pointing out that REGARDLESS of whether you prefer the overall product, the PARTS being better than another cannot be denied, you replied with "Yeah but I might like the overall product more.".

You're lost.

-AC

Originally posted by Newjak
Yup but my 360 is at home and I can not get to it for another 4 hours 😠

Im at work for another 9 anyway. 🙁

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That would be why you can destroy furniture and knock it around, wouldn't it?

You have no idea what you're on about.

My point isn't moot, those are not graphics features, they are just things in Halo that aren't in Gears. That's like saying Halo 3 has better graphics cos it has a different gun.

Gears sprites are not only better, but the environment interaction is, as are the overall graphics of both save for frame rate and lighting.

It wasn't pathetic, it proves my point. Environments don't need to be non-static in order for the interaction between player and environment to be better. Bits of concrete chip off and your armour becomes tarnished from charging into it, it's all there, it all counts.

I always have, you were just wrong. You refused to accept that your analogy defeats YOUR points, not me. You are arguing overall quality, I am not. I'm arguing specifics.

What does that have to do with anything?

Dumbest point yet. The graphics aren't better because they COULD be the same, but aren't? What a silly point.

The FACT AND REALITY is; Gears is Gears and Halo 3 is Halo 3, they are as they are and Gears' is the graphically superior game.

You are the one who didn't get it, then tried altering it only for it to end up being the same thing anyway. Mine was pointing out that REGARDLESS of whether you prefer the overall product, the PARTS being better than another cannot be denied, you replied with "Yeah but I might like the overall product more.".

You're lost.

-AC

And your right you don't need Enviroments to be non-static for Player-enviroment Interaction but Dynamic Enviroments that have multiple things that change and can be interacted with are Graphically harder to do. Thus having a Vehicle Blow up and go flying is harder than sitting shooting a wall to make littel bullet holes.

And the point is Halo 3 could have easily cut back layer-Enviroment Interactions, Scope to have better Texture and Character Models because in the end the Graphics could have easily done so but what have cost it Graphically in other areas.

Just like GOW is Graphically lacking in some areas.