The Official Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood thread!

[jAkUp]

I don't consider this game having auto-aim. The only weapon that I have seen use auto-aim is the dual pistols because you have no iron sights, all other weapons don't seem to have any auto-aim.

Honestly, I am having a blast with this game, I definitely think it is better than the original in most areas. (I miss the old bullet time though)

IMO, the graphics are the best I have seen since Crysis, I also think it looks better than ARMA2, but ARMA2 looks great too. The only thing that looks bad in CoJ is the lip syncing and the water effects.

Also some may say it is a console port, but it is a good console port IMO.

[JohnDio]

My only complain is with the "limited" shadow casts. What i mean is that you get shadows only when there is the sunlight. The other environmental light sources (for example lamps or fire) do not cast any shadows and make the indoor areas flat.

Apart from that, it looks great with some amazing textures

[HiCZoK4]

the game is GREAT! it looks fantastic and somehow it runs faster than first one!

[Ancient76]

Originally Posted by jAkUp

I don't consider this game having auto-aim. The only weapon that I have seen use auto-aim is the dual pistols because you have no iron sights, all other weapons don't seem to have any auto-aim.

Honestly, I am having a blast with this game, I definitely think it is better than the original in most areas. (I miss the old bullet time though)

IMO, the graphics are the best I have seen since Crysis, I also think it looks better than ARMA2, but ARMA2 looks great too. The only thing that looks bad in CoJ is the lip syncing and the water effects.

Also some may say it is a console port, but it is a good console port IMO.

Let's be serious people
It's a standard graphic for a multiplatform game. Lack of advanced graphics elements is hiden with good art dizajn, or at least they have tried. And it's not a console port. Game is developed in the same time for both platforms.

[crainger]

Originally Posted by Ancient76

Let's be serious people
It's a standard graphic for a multiplatform game. Lack of advanced graphics elements is hiden with good art dizajn, or at least they have tried. And it's not a console port. Game is developed in the same time for both platforms.

Well to me saying good graphics means it looks good. Sure the tech is not as flash, but thanks to art it has good graphics. It's impressive and credit is due. The game has awesome graphics and it is quite a feat a multi platform game can match Crysis.

[nutcrackr]

The auto aim on dual pistols was a obviously a technique they used because otherwise they would not be as useful as the single pistol with ironsights due to the accuracy. I think they perhaps could have done something else, like faster reload or dual crosshairs that you can use the mousewheel to move apart.

The engine is pretty good but I can't ignore the very aggressive LOD scaling esp on ground cover. The open missions show the good qualities of the chrome engine but I don't think it matches crysis although performance wise it's very friendly. It runs so well I'd love a simple scale command to increase the pop in of ground cover a notch, it doesn't have to be much really but at it's current level it's a bit too short.

The star is so damn tiny and it's required for those open missions. Honestly against the sandy landscape I lost it a few times. It's a real non issue for me. Auto healing was bound to happen, I think I've gotten use to it anyway for most games. It's not like this is a tactical or rpg like game where health packs add to the atmosphere.

I think it's a good game, onto my second open level where you get a few quest that you can choose to do or not. They are forumlaic and the duels at the end aren't quite as fun as before but it's still alright.

[JohnDio]

In addition (to the lighting system and the shadows), i still think from what i've played so far that the first game had better (and most of all, richer) vegetation. Here are some reminders of the first CoJ

I think the original looked to sharp. The soft look of this game makes it look like an old western movie.

Ancient & Crainger, Totally agree that if a game has good art and style it can overcome and technical limitations regarding graphics. Arma 2 might have better tech backing it back because they chose to go as close to realistic as possible it looks worse because the flaws and weakness stick out more.

[Jonelo]

Very funny the comparisons of Crysis and Arma 2 with a game that have the change of the LOD to 10- 15 meters and really is just a large corridor with some great prerenders 2d in the horizon on most maps. Very nice graphics, but limitated for a game like Arma 2 or even Crysis

[Mr. Hunt]

Originally Posted by Jonelo

Very funny the comparisons of Crysis and Arma 2 with a game that have the change of the LOD to 10- 15 meters and really is just a large corridor with some great prerenders 2d in the horizon on most maps. Very nice graphics, but limitated for a game like Arma 2 or even Crysis

Better than looking at ArmA2... yuck. Besides, what do you care? You probably didn't actually buy either game.

[Mr. Hunt]

Oh, and at least this game runs well. Can't say the same for certain other games.

[tornadog]

Originally Posted by Mr. Hunt

Better than looking at ArmA2... yuck. Besides, what do you care? You probably didn't actually buy either game.

Arrr....