Which NFS has the best graphics??

Toshiro · Post by **Toshiro** » 18 Dec 2006, 03:46

To the people who say they look like toys:

What's the difference, when rendered in a game, anyway? It's basically the engine sounds, and knowing it's supposedly a real car that makes you think it's a real car.

I say Carbon. Cars look real nice in the garage, too.

93360 · Post by **93360** » 18 Dec 2006, 04:20

NFSMW FTW ^^

rushdrift · Post by **rushdrift** » 18 Dec 2006, 04:44

4me its nfsu the blur effect and the car lamp lightning is awsome nfsc just look like a piece of crap its so unrealistic and the wheel spin look fake i tink because thy rush every year 2 produce a new nfs i tink thy should giv at least 2 years.

SP4RCO · Post by **SP4RCO** » 18 Dec 2006, 22:39

nfsu/nfsu2 obviously not.

Now read this carefully: NFSMW and NFSC got exactly the same graphics engine. I laugh at people who say "zomg nfsc is obviously better", or... "no!! NFSMW is way cooler!! Its right!!"

it's 99% THE SAME

then NFSC got some additions like a new painting and vinyl system which is without a doubt the best graphical improvement from previous games. But nothing special, just more colors.

The road is the same:

|

and so are the car models, etc.

I noticed nevertheless that buildings and the overall world look crappier at NFSC. This is what made me vote for NFSMW (apart from everything looks nicer at daylight). Finally, this is a work done for NFSMW. At NFSC they just copied everything and then added some things, the same way NFSHS is a graphically a copy of NFSHP with various additions (damage, driver model...).

Tyrant · Post by **Tyrant** » 18 Dec 2006, 22:53

I can't give a objective judgement because I haven't played all games with the same gfx card! I would love to say Carbon looks awesome, but that's also due to the fact that I played that with a 6600GT while playing the others with a crappy MX440. But like Dani said, the game engine is exactly the same

.

Jana · Post by **Jana** » 18 Dec 2006, 23:09

well,i havent played carbon yet because of my graphic card,so nfsmw i say!but i have to say that im not satisfied with graphic from nfsu2,because nfsu is better than nfsu2

Turbocharger · Post by **Turbocharger** » 19 Dec 2006, 02:04

I have to agree there

rushdrift · Post by **rushdrift** » 19 Dec 2006, 16:58

just one thing i dont like about nfs is the crash graphic they should make it like BURNOUT for god sake its their game why dont they make it like that dont you agree

Fadeproof · Post by **Fadeproof** » 20 Dec 2006, 02:54

the graphics of the actual world in carbon is better than MW was, but the cars looked alot better in MW than carbon IMO.
but i havnt been able to play carbon in a month now, so im going on memory..i could be wrong

curtydc · Post by **curtydc** » 20 Dec 2006, 16:24

NFSUnderground had the best details on the City, but that's probably because they took the most time on it. Reflections area's were good in that game, if it had the same car graphics as the current games it would be the best I think. I think everyone agrees that Underground 2 had the worst graphics, an obviouse lowering of standards after the first game.

reputated · Post by **reputated** » 21 Dec 2006, 18:55

for me underground1 because if u see the motion blurr effect, anyone with good eyes will say that yes this is the best mblurr effect in all games of nfs else mw rocks!

2fast4all · Post by **2fast4all** » 24 Dec 2006, 22:53

Carbon is more detailed imo

rushdrift · Post by **rushdrift** » 26 Dec 2006, 19:03

I agree with reputated if they combine nfsu1 motion blur and light effect with overall nfsmw effect it will be awesome!