Anyone else Underwhelmed with Convictions graphics?

  • 78 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by Raven_Sword (3387 posts) -

I just played the demo, and honestly I really hope this is early code, because what I saw graphically did not impress me. It looks a hell of a lot better than double agent, but honestly, in a day and age where we have games like God of War 3 and Uncharted 2 (PS3 I know, but still the two best looking games today on consoles)for visuals, they didnt look impressive. The character models look kinda weird. and there was aliasing and screen tearing. I was kinda hoping this game was a Graphical showpiece, but unless the final game is alot better, I guess I was wrong. the game itself was fun though. I personally really hope that this isnt a sign of 360 maxing out, because I want to see improvement for years to come    Ill still play the game, im just saying its not Graphicaly great by todays standards.  
 
EDIT: and before anyone says "Graphics dont amtter" yes, they do to a extent. Graphics do matter to a point. I really think a fool would say that Graphics have no meaning or dosent mean anything. Better Graphics give you better imersion and better Cinematic feel. If graphics didnt matter, than what would be the point of new consoles? We would all still be playing games on NES or Atari. So Graphics do matter. If a game looks like shit, your going to be put off on playing it.    
#2 Posted by Hitchenson (4682 posts) -

Nope. Looked fine to me. 

#3 Posted by Redbullet685 (5980 posts) -

i thought it looked good. also demo was great! cant wait for full game

#4 Posted by HypoXenophobia (1045 posts) -

I'm personally "underwhelmed" with the whole game. I  haven't really seen anything from the available coverage that makes it worthy of a day one purchase.

#5 Posted by AgentJ (8778 posts) -

Underwhelmed? Not at all.  
Then again, I don't really care much about graphics, so maybe my opinion doesn't count.

#6 Posted by zombie2011 (4941 posts) -

Looks fine to me, not every game can look like Crysis.

#7 Edited by wh1terav3n (652 posts) -
@AgentJ said:
" Underwhelmed? Not at all.  Then again, I don't really care much about graphics, so maybe my opinion doesn't count. "
This
#8 Posted by Raven_Sword (3387 posts) -

Im not saying it didnt look good. im just saying it didnt look like a GOW 3 or a Uncharted.  Im not saying Graphics mean everything, im just saying it would be nice if they impressed.
#9 Posted by Three0neFive (2274 posts) -

I wonder why they didn't release a PC demo - it's like they want their game to be pirated. :/

#10 Posted by MikkaQ (10224 posts) -
@Raven_Sword said:
" Im not saying it didnt look good. im just saying it didnt look like a GOW 3 or a Uncharted.  Im not saying Graphics mean everything, im just saying it would be nice if they impressed. "
I wasn't aware it was trying to do that.  
 
I think at this point in game graphics, anything past 2005 looks great, and differences are in the little details. 
#11 Edited by Kbm600 (446 posts) -

I was shocked at how bland it looked.

#12 Edited by Delta_Ass (3230 posts) -

It looks good to me, except for the jaggies. Apparently, HDR and anti-aliasing don't work together on the 360.

#13 Posted by EnemaEms (153 posts) -

The NPC models looked very bland and almost "Last-Gen". This game should look on par, if not better than, Assassin's Creed 2. I thought the game play was pretty good. Hopefully you can customize the controls because the defaults felt "wrong."

#14 Posted by xyzygy (9624 posts) -

It doesn't have to look like Uncharted. It looks awesome, games don't need to have those kinds of graphics as a standard. Gameplay is what matters.

#15 Posted by sopranosfan (1935 posts) -
@xyzygy said:
" It doesn't have to look like Uncharted. It looks awesome, games don't need to have those kinds of graphics as a standard. Gameplay is what matters. "
Nothing I post can say it better than this.
#16 Posted by Raven_Sword (3387 posts) -

But let me ask you another question: Do you think 360 games will continue to Advance graphically to compete with PS3? Or is it going to hit a wall on 360 where they stop improving ina  meaningful way? If 360 stopped having graphics that competed with PS3 exclusives, is it going to hurt the 360?
#17 Posted by sopranosfan (1935 posts) -
@Raven_Sword: having the worst graphics didn't seem to hurt the PS2 last gen and it doesn't seem to be hurting the DS with portable games.
#18 Posted by Raven_Sword (3387 posts) -
@sopranosfan:

But to the hardcore, dosent it having the worse graphics seem like a Negative thing? A weakness?
#19 Edited by Ryax (4630 posts) -

i think it looked great

#20 Edited by MB (11298 posts) -
@Raven_Sword said:

" @sopranosfan: But to the hardcore, dosent it having the worse graphics seem like a Negative thing? A weakness? "

I think people who are overly obsessed with the "console wars" look too deeply into every little thing and try to find reasons to support their agenda when there isn't anything there to begin with.
Moderator
#21 Posted by chronicsmoke (995 posts) -

I thought it looked good

#22 Posted by sopranosfan (1935 posts) -
@Raven_Sword: I own both and even though exclusives look better on the PS3 I honestly don't think that they look so much better that I even discuss the difference in graphics as a major factor to people that are asking my opinion on which to get.
#23 Posted by carlthenimrod (1579 posts) -

I care more about a smooth frame-rate then pretty graphics. Double Agent had a poopy frame-rate.

#24 Edited by Raven_Sword (3387 posts) -
@MB: 
 
So, you dont think it makes 360 the worse console if it dosent have the best graphics compared to PS3?
#25 Edited by dudeitsdon (76 posts) -
@Raven_Sword:  I don't think there's a sane person who would say that graphics don't matter. Of course graphics matter! If graphics didn't matter, then why bother developing better technology that can render thing-a-ma-bobs quicker or calculate a gazillion of textures a second? However, I think that for most gamers--"hardcore" gamers included--graphics are only a means to an end. 
 
Do the graphics help immerse you in the game world? Think of the first time you saw Uncharted or Gears of War--the engines that powered those games created beautiful worlds--both to look at and to play in. You have the greatest graphics but a terrible framerate, it would adversely affect the enjoyment of the game. If you had terrible graphics, it would keep you from getting immersed  into the world. And of course, as technology progresses and graphical fidelity improves, so does our taste.
 
That being said, I will agree that SC: Conviction's graphics aren't necessarily on par with what is coming out now these days (I heard somewhere in these forums that it's Unreal 2.5), but the graphics don't adversely affect the gameplay so I would say that's it's irrelevant. 
 
Gameplay should be the first priority for gamers. Are you having fun with the game? Great! Are you enjoying the story? Awesome! Are the graphics good? What a bonus!
 
In regards to your final question, I highly doubt that this is the max of the 360's graphical capabilities, but I do believe that it can't get much better than the 360 version of Crysis or ever meet PS3 exclusives.  Game engines are always being tweaked and improved upon (think of the jump from Gears of War 1 to Gears of War 2...and now the Unreal Engine can viably create jungles!), however, so I think will still see really impressive stuff for years to come.  

  @Raven_Sword said:

" @MB:  So, you dont think it makes 360 the worse console if it dosent have the best graphics compared to PS3? "

The fact that the 360 can't produce the same level of graphics that PS3 exclusives doesn't necessarily make it an inferior console. The two systems are trying to achieve different things. Want a Blu-ray player? Get a PS3. Want a great online experience? Get a 360. Beyond that, it's a matter of what exclusive titles you prefer.
#26 Posted by Whisperkill (2969 posts) -
@Raven_Sword: No, graphics honestly don't matter that much. Unless you're like 14...
#27 Posted by MAN_FLANNEL (2460 posts) -

What the fuck is with this kid and graphics?  Cheese and Rice.

#28 Posted by Weltal (2268 posts) -

Not really. Kinda underwhelmed by the gameplay, but no, the graphics seemed good enough.

#29 Posted by goodwood (600 posts) -

you cant expect games to leap frog each other with every new release that comes out. Uncharted 2 and GOW3 are currently at the peak of where graphics are now but you cant demand that every game hit that level. There are certain standards people have of what a game looks like but those two games should not be your standard for all games to look like. I have yet to play the Conviction demo but im looking more toward how the game play is than thinking this will be the best looking game ever.

#30 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -
@Raven_Sword said:
" But let me ask you another question: Do you think 360 games will continue to Advance graphically to compete with PS3? Or is it going to hit a wall on 360 where they stop improving ina  meaningful way? If 360 stopped having graphics that competed with PS3 exclusives, is it going to hurt the 360? "
Duder, can I ask you a question instead?  Why are so many of your posts driven by graphics obsession? I ask because I think you don't really understand what drives success in the gaming business, in many cases the most successful consoles historically speaking  have been the lowest powered systems(Atari 2600, NES and Wii). 
#31 Posted by CraigAA1028 (546 posts) -

Aside from the occasional animation issues (Sam pausing and snapping into a kill animation sometimes, execuitions pausing for a second while the computer decides who Sam should shoot first), the games looks really good. Best of the consoles? No. Best of the Xbox360? Also a no, but its very good overall.

#32 Edited by RandomInternetUser (6788 posts) -

I thought it was fine, nothing amazing of course.  Graphics are nice, but they're not required for a great game.

#33 Posted by JazzyJeff (399 posts) -

I was somewhat underwhelmed. I thought it looked fine, but Splinter Cell games have traditionally been among the best looking upon their release. Conviction looks fine, but is a step behind the games you've mentioned. If 360 fans want a graphics king, they'll have to look towards Alan Wake.

#34 Posted by AgentJ (8778 posts) -
@SeriouslyNow said:
" @Raven_Sword said:
" But let me ask you another question: Do you think 360 games will continue to Advance graphically to compete with PS3? Or is it going to hit a wall on 360 where they stop improving ina  meaningful way? If 360 stopped having graphics that competed with PS3 exclusives, is it going to hurt the 360? "
Duder, can I ask you a question instead?  Why are so many of your posts driven by graphics obsession? I ask because I think you don't really understand what drives success in the gaming business, in many cases the most successful consoles historically speaking  have been the lowest powered systems(Atari 2600, NES and Wii).  "
and PS2
#35 Posted by 234r2we232 (3181 posts) -

When you're worrying over graphics in your video games, you might want to stop, turn the console off and relax by watching some of that HD porn. But be warned. There might be some visible compresion artifacts. Suicide may be the only option.

#36 Posted by graf1k (373 posts) -

Graphically I thought it looked fine but I was somewhat underwhelmed with the new mechanics in the game (last known position, interrogation) and I really hope in the final game the controls are customizable because I threw down a bunch of pocket EMPs and sticky cams trying to reload with the X button. I mean what the hell, L2 to reload? Really?

#37 Posted by ThePhantomnaut (6067 posts) -

Oh there is no high contrast shadowing... Not a big deal.

#38 Posted by wefwefasdf (6729 posts) -

Graphics should not be the first thing that you consider about a game. It is just icing to the cake.
 
And why are random words capitalized? It is so confusing...

#39 Posted by Giantsquirrel (601 posts) -

*Raises hand* I guess it didn't help that I played it inbetween God of War 3 sessions... :P
#40 Posted by ShiningMyDuggy (30 posts) -
@Raven_Sword said:
" @sopranosfan: But to the hardcore, dosent it having the worse graphics seem like a Negative thing? A weakness? "
Dude, how old are you? Four? Jeez if the game was fun for you to play then that's all that really matters. The graphics seemed decent enough (although the face models looked out of place) and the gameplay was an okay experience. I partly blame myself for allowing myself to get super pumped/hyped for this game, but hopefully it won't disappoint at the end of the day.
#42 Posted by 02sfraser (847 posts) -

well i can't speak for the graphics of this game but a lot of developers say they have maxed out the 360 already so i doubt any improvements for years to come. but to be honest it is a exclusive the 360 is getting and if the gameplay is top notch then the poor textures shouldn't take away from the experience

#43 Edited by WinterSnowblind (7612 posts) -
@Raven_Sword said:

" But let me ask you another question: Do you think 360 games will continue to Advance graphically to compete with PS3? Or is it going to hit a wall on 360 where they stop improving ina  meaningful way? If 360 stopped having graphics that competed with PS3 exclusives, is it going to hurt the 360? "

It didn't hurt the PS2 against the original Xbox.
And there was a much bigger divide there.
 
Considering this game has been in development for so damn long, it's hardly surprising it isn't the best of looking games in 2010.  Not exactly what I'd be using to judge the quality of games on the 360.
#44 Posted by Alexander (1720 posts) -

Chaos Theory was, to me, the best looking game on the Xbox, best looking game of last generation consoles, so in that sense you could say Conviction doesn't live up to that. 
 
That said, I was happy with them, they look good. The only thing unexpected was the frame-rate, which didn't seem to get bogged down all that much.

#45 Posted by GunstarRed (4731 posts) -

I thought it looked really nice despite a ton of screen tearing...  The way it played left me really underwhelmed though and i'm a little saddened by it.
#46 Posted by WilliamRLBaker (4777 posts) -
@Three0neFive said:
" I wonder why they didn't release a PC demo - it's like they want their game to be pirated. :/ "
thats going to happen regardless releasing a game on the pc is just asking to have high piracy rates on the pc.
#47 Posted by ArchScabby (5809 posts) -

Yeah I  was kinda disappointed in the graphics, but the game was pretty fun.

#48 Posted by Tofford (523 posts) -

yeh it was kind of mediocre. I loved splinter cell and the demo was a bit of a dissappointment. Lets hope the final game delivers

#49 Posted by dylanderoo (155 posts) -

the bathroom scene was look really good, although i get what you mean, outside it just didnt feel like.. splinter cell

#50 Posted by JiuJitsuka85 (377 posts) -

I found the controls to be a bit weird at first. If there's one thing it's how easy it is, you can just bullrush and hand-to-hand kill them all.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.