CyberCerberus posted...Governator00 posted...
Maybe it's because I'm used to playing Call of Duty currently. I dunno, I guess different people's eyes react differently.
It's because this game looks amazing and due to the xbox's graphical constrictions needs a much slower framerate to compensate. However, COD on xbox looks like utter s*** with the most basic graphics and can therefore support a higher framerate.
If you saw this game on a high end computer like my mate has, you'd be blown away with how smooth it runs, but how utterly perfect it looks.
Dude u r tripping. Call of duty has insane graphics. The textures are smoother and the framerate is probably double far cry's. And it's not bc they have "basic" graphics. The environments are packed with just about everything you would see in the real world and they also produce a ton of on screen enemies so I don't see how you could possibly say they are basic. I would guess you haven't even played black ops 2. Either that or you are just flat out retarded. They are able to pull it off bc it's a linear(not open) world. They can have load screens between each area which also helps. It doesn't hurt that they dump a boat load of money into the game either.. When u have an open world as large as far cry's it's hard(impossible on 360) to run at 60 frames per second. I'd be surprised if far cry even gets 30. Cod runs a smooth 60 non stop. It's obvious you have no clue what u are talking about bro.
Facebook | 
Twitter
