I am quite dissapointed by the graphic quality. It has been banded around the internet, that is was almost the same as the NAOMI model 2 board arcade version. NOT!!!!

The game play is spot on, but the amount of jaggies is totally unacceptable in my opinion. It really DOES LOOK blocky (at that is the scenery as well as the fighters). DOA 2 on the PS2 looks better, while DOA3 on the Xbox is miles ahead. I think that tehkan tag looks better.

Is it just me, or has NOTHING ever came close yet to the graphical marvel of GT3 on the PS2 yet???

ICO 'S graphics are good.......devil may cry is impressive.

Agree Shaun, but Kojima did something with his render for Metal Gear Solid 2 that makes the images look anti-aliased.

I'd say MGS2 and GT3 are the best examples of what PS2 can do.

On another note, anyone catch the demos for GeForce4 ? They showed a video of a landscape, that could be run around in, and it had lush thick grass and trees and leaves, none of the flat surfaces we look at today. Really looked amazing, to think you could be running knee deep in grass - with each blade blowing in the direction of the wind. Can't wait to have that kind of detail. Someone give Carmack a kick up the arse and get him OFF Doom and Quake ****e and instead write something worthwhile, hey - given his love of cars, write a GT3 killer!

-DV

Daz,

How good is MGS2...........I have the disk floating around somewhere.....must get chance to give it a blast.

Like I said the game is awesome playwise, but the graphics are really disappointing. I think it shows big time especially considering the small dev time they had on the title.

Never mind...........

MGS2 is VERY, VERY similar to MGS1, but in hi-res, with better graphics, obviously.

The graphics seemed to get better and better the further I got, but then I got a little bored with the ganeplay. The 3D environments definitely make Quake3 and Unreal look like Wolfenstein.

18hrs of play in it.