I like BF2's graphics better, looks smoother than in 2142.
Last edited by التعريفات (2007-03-23 17:02:50)
Last edited by التعريفات (2007-03-23 17:02:50)
But, then again, how many people 150 years ago thought that we would have jets, computers, and many other technological advances that we have today?Cerberus666 wrote:
Besides, BF2 is far more realistic, and i doubt we'll have plasma pistols and hover tanks in less than 150 years...
Last edited by Sub-Zero79 (2007-03-23 17:55:17)
Actually it's kinda the other way around. BF2 models are low poly, ever taken a look on their Sniper? 4 SIDES on the pipe. BF2142 use at least more than that and overall the model look better.jimmanycricket wrote:
pff, maby the textures are slightly better in 2142 (i personally dont think so) but 2142's models really suck. They are really low poly and ugly.
We don't have Plasma pistols in BF2142 and frankly I DO belive we will have some sort of hover tanks within 150 years. We have found materials that are pretty unique and got neat abilities. The question would be if Hover Tanks was actually good for real combat.Cerberus666 wrote:
They use the same engine, but there's more code in BF2142 which is why framerates are lower on the same settings. Im not too sure but i think more code means 'better' graphics, but its entirely opinionated.
Besides, BF2 is far more realistic, and i doubt we'll have plasma pistols and hover tanks in less than 150 years...
Last edited by Zefar (2007-03-25 00:55:30)
rig0rm0rti5 wrote:
Here is somebody who agrees with me.jimmanycricket wrote:
pff, maby the textures are slightly better in 2142 (i personally dont think so) but 2142's models really suck. They are really low poly and ugly.
Last edited by ShawN_ (2007-03-26 05:34:11)