Which NFS has the best graphics??

geese howard · Post by **geese howard** » 08 Dec 2006, 00:21

For me, Most wanted, no doubt.

Abrams · Post by **Abrams** » 08 Dec 2006, 00:27

MW - Too much chrome and washed out/movie like textures.

NFSC - Better car models and nice shader effects.

darknight788 · Post by **darknight788** » 08 Dec 2006, 00:52

w/o visual treatment MW looks awesome

EVO_VIII · Post by **EVO_VIII** » 08 Dec 2006, 01:34

MW is better

Carbon just looks so crappy for me(with my bad graphic card)

Skyline_man · Post by **Skyline_man** » 08 Dec 2006, 02:36

NFSMW for me for sure, NFSC has increased car reflections which make the car look so bad sometimes.

korge · Post by **korge** » 08 Dec 2006, 02:58

At the time, Underground was the BEST most fresh and new graphics at the time imo.

prince1142003 · Post by **prince1142003** » 08 Dec 2006, 02:59

Skyline_man wrote:NFSMW for me for sure, NFSC has increased car reflections which make the car look so bad sometimes.

Agree with you there. In Carbon, the cars look like they're plastic toys rather than things made out of metal. But environmentally, I think Carbon has some superb features. There's a lot more depth to the darkness compared to Most Wanted. But then again, Most Wanted was set in daytime and possessed some really awesome sunset scenes if your graphics card was good enough.

My vote goes to Most Wanted.

korge · Post by **korge** » 08 Dec 2006, 03:17

cars shouldnt look like metal... they should have a semi gloss appearence.

Darth Meatloaf · Post by **Darth Meatloaf** » 08 Dec 2006, 03:39

I like nfsc way more all the car models look good-
the skyline is finnally proper in underground and the 2nd one it was wider than a hummer

Everything looks more polished, to bad they didn't do the the same with the game play

Tuners Rock · Post by **Tuners Rock** » 08 Dec 2006, 03:53

I gotto go with Carbon, for PS2 it has better graphics, and mw makes the cars look faker than the game makes it look like, Carbon makes them look more real.

DarrenR21373 · Post by **DarrenR21373** » 08 Dec 2006, 16:41

I'm probably one of Most Wanted's biggest fans, but I have to say that on my PC Carbon's graphics are better. I actually quite like the highly polished effect...

Blaindless · Post by **Blaindless** » 08 Dec 2006, 16:48

mOST wANTED!

Darkness · Post by **Darkness** » 08 Dec 2006, 17:13

Most wanted FTW

i can run carbon and mw on full gfx

but the gfx of carbon ar crappy as hell

and i think carbon is to dark

krazyammo · Post by **krazyammo** » 08 Dec 2006, 18:16

most wanted

xturbo · Post by **xturbo** » 08 Dec 2006, 18:18

Most Wanted!!!
i hope to see in the next NFS (maybe U3) day and night....

geese howard · Post by **geese howard** » 08 Dec 2006, 22:54

Skyline_man wrote: Agree with you there. In Carbon, the cars look like they're plastic toys rather than things made out of metal. But environmentally, I think Carbon has some superb features. There's a lot more depth to the darkness compared to Most Wanted. But then again, Most Wanted was set in daytime and possessed some really awesome sunset scenes if your graphics card was good enough.

My vote goes to Most Wanted.

I agree...in NFSC cars looks like plastic toys, totally irreal...
and Most Wanted, incredible sunset scenes!

MrPalmont · Post by **MrPalmont** » 13 Dec 2006, 03:16

MW have the best graphics

SkeeteRX7 · Post by **SkeeteRX7** » 13 Dec 2006, 21:13

Of those.....Carbon.

Of the others...Porsche Unleashed.

champ · Post by **champ** » 14 Dec 2006, 05:33

i have played mw and carbon on ps2. mw is worse than a prank call. the graphics are so bad on mw it makes me want to puke. also i hate being p0ursued by cops for bounty. it is a real pain in the a***. carbon rules the nfs kingdom.

p.s. mw is so old that even the graphic card on my 6 year old computer looks better.

Ceska666 · Post by **Ceska666** » 14 Dec 2006, 06:41

I dunno, NFSC is very unrealistic...i have 7600GT, but car is too shiny, it looks...too shiny

In game, i almost cant see any vinyls because all that stupid shiny effect. I think MW graphix is better...dunno.

RVD · Post by **RVD** » 14 Dec 2006, 17:48

alrlright, putting MW and Coarbon up there makes sense, but why did you even think about putting U and U2 into it???

and for me, you cant really compare those 2 too well, one is daytime, the other is nighttime, which gives a very different view, but i like them both

t3ice · Post by **t3ice** » 14 Dec 2006, 19:38

Carbon has better textures (higher resolution) , and the paint shaders are really impressive..like the candy paint!

S2000_Skyline12 · Post by **S2000_Skyline12** » 14 Dec 2006, 19:43

For me...Carbon.

MrPalmont · Post by **MrPalmont** » 14 Dec 2006, 20:48

Carbon is looking more like u driving toy cars in there

vee12 · Post by **vee12** » 18 Dec 2006, 03:40

I dont like the road in Carbon, too grainy and unrealistic, like it was shaded with gray crayon on rough drawing paper. Also the aliasing in Carbon is atrocious (especially the lines/boundaries around the road), even when anti-aliasing set to 4. The 'speed lines' applied to the cars when they're going fast looks like that in a comic book. The scenery or surroundings can be beautiful in Carbon, but thats not so much the graphics as it is just the nice California scenery (which I think should have been rendered better). Some parts of the game look nice while other parts dont. Also in Carbon, when you turn up the eye candy at high res (1600x1200), theres a heavy performance hit on anything but the top graphics cards (I have a 7900gt and FPS can dip below 30).

NFS-MW similarly has some parts looking nice and others not. The scenery, esp the downtown buildings look like they were painted with colors chosen by a 6 year old. The metallic colors of the cars however are the most realistic I've seen in any game, not just NFS. The autumn trees on the twisty roads looked nice too.

NFSU2, very nice graphics, nice scenery, was very impressed when it was first released, but showing its age now.

NFSUnlimited.net