First Killzone screenshot/details? So says USAToday..
- Thread starter Titanio
- Start date
The bad textures get covered up by the post processing + motion blur, also in motion it looks heaps better
it's the reverse ,ignorant peoples.The have a buffer for velocity vectors ,this gives them a very good and cinematique real motion blur.Screens taken in action will all have that blurry/lowres look.
The bad textures get covered up by the post processing + motion blur, also in motion it looks heaps better
Or more like, especially in that last screen cap, post processing effects are giving the impression of low resolution texturing. That looks more like motion blur to me.
Yeah. The second half of this is stunning. Not from IGN but sort of HD
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/21637.html
At the press conference the left & right screens show the extended trailer, but in the center 2 screens the developer continues his game play.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7APPge9mDUM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7APPge9mDUM
True but there where several occassion where I could have taken ss which shows the textures and how they are med/low res (when no motion-blur was active since the camera didn't move/pan). But then many games have that and it is about the whole not about one part!
Yes screen cap 2, 4, 5, 6 has motion-blur at the lower left area.
We're talking about 512 MB of ram folks, only so much can be done..
The streaming-tech is not yet integrated in kZ2, it will be soon.
This is the only reason GoW reaches such high texture-quality, streaming the textures on the fly off the DVD into the memory (like JakIII did on the PS2). Thereby saving a lot of memspace that is normally used to pre-load lots of textures into the memory before a player-level starts. Also note that the leveldesign in Gears is created in such a way that there is only a small but highly detailed part of a map visible. If it would be a massive map where the player can fly over, detaillevels will downgrade dramaticly.
If KZ2 integrates the same tech in the engine soon, texturedetail will increase quite alot, and the free mem can be used again for other assets, like more stuff going on onscreen and more special effects. So there is still alot to win. But for a pre-pre-alpha it looks damn close to Gears already overall speaking (texturequality wise, when you compare the things going on onscreen KZ already has a lot more beef), compare that to the dramatic Gears-alpha's en beta's shown before release and GG should feel pretty confident already that continuous progression at this rate will deliver something pretty damn good when it's released.
This is the only reason GoW reaches such high texture-quality, streaming the textures on the fly off the DVD into the memory (like JakIII did on the PS2). Thereby saving a lot of memspace that is normally used to pre-load lots of textures into the memory before a player-level starts. Also note that the leveldesign in Gears is created in such a way that there is only a small but highly detailed part of a map visible. If it would be a massive map where the player can fly over, detaillevels will downgrade dramaticly.
If KZ2 integrates the same tech in the engine soon, texturedetail will increase quite alot, and the free mem can be used again for other assets, like more stuff going on onscreen and more special effects. So there is still alot to win. But for a pre-pre-alpha it looks damn close to Gears already overall speaking (texturequality wise, when you compare the things going on onscreen KZ already has a lot more beef), compare that to the dramatic Gears-alpha's en beta's shown before release and GG should feel pretty confident already that continuous progression at this rate will deliver something pretty damn good when it's released.
Is there a source on that? Sorry if it was mentioned earlier. Will have some catching up to do later, haven't really seen and of the HD media of the new extended stuff.
I don't know if anyone else viewed the trailer that was available for download on PSN but wow what a difference over the garbage quality trailers I found elsewhere!!! I have downloaded all E3 PSN trailers and my feeling so far is (in terms of graphics):
#1 = Killzone2
#2 = MGS4
#3 = Drake's
#4 = COD4
For some reason COD4 seemed much better to me when viewing trailers available on the web. The versions available on PSN are much better quality and titles such as Killzone don't seem to come across as too dark at all. Also post processing effects are much more evident. For some reason what stood out to me for COD4 after viewing Killzone2 trailer a few times was the aliasing and lack of post processing effects... Haze also lost its impressive qualities on my 51 HDTV compared to KZ2. Drake's textures looked stunning and crisp in the new trailer.
#1 = Killzone2
#2 = MGS4
#3 = Drake's
#4 = COD4
For some reason COD4 seemed much better to me when viewing trailers available on the web. The versions available on PSN are much better quality and titles such as Killzone don't seem to come across as too dark at all. Also post processing effects are much more evident. For some reason what stood out to me for COD4 after viewing Killzone2 trailer a few times was the aliasing and lack of post processing effects... Haze also lost its impressive qualities on my 51 HDTV compared to KZ2. Drake's textures looked stunning and crisp in the new trailer.
I have not heard about it either, linky somebody? :smile:
inefficient
Veteran
Does your Killzone2 trailer hitch a tiny bit in the intro cloud sequence on your PS3? It does on mine for some reason...
MGS4 trailer looks great but the frame rate could have been a little better. Same for the new Lair one, it looked amazing in 1080p but the frame rate was still iffy at times.
Any signs of realtime indirect lighting yet? Can't say I've seen anything in the HD trailer.
You know people can be as picky as they want. Well the things they spot really dont matter.
Because even if we take the shadows off from the original CGI trailer, make some textures a bit less blurred or reduce the poly counts it wouldnt have made any less impact. To tell the truth even the CGI trailer lacked and had flaws yet people were asking for confirmation whether it was real time or not. They simply dont matter.
Actually people were so obsessed to find out if it was real or not that they did found many flaws in it (including me). If I were nitpicky I and many others would have been finding mistakes and supposed bad things in it, and would have still be claiming GoW or COD4 looks close.
Bottom line is Killzone2 did an awesome job at getting close with some smart techniques to what people were expecting to see. A few imperfections dont matter and do not ruin what has been achieved which is something truly stunning.
Finally what made the Killzone CGI trailer so awesome back in 2005 wasnt just the visual detail. I remember myself actually seeing the first emerged screenshots and I wasnt blown away much.
After I saw the trailer though and saw the superb animation, physics, interactivity, atmosphere and the lie likes I went Gah Gah.
This one seems to retain all these and I am all gah gah again
Because even if we take the shadows off from the original CGI trailer, make some textures a bit less blurred or reduce the poly counts it wouldnt have made any less impact. To tell the truth even the CGI trailer lacked and had flaws yet people were asking for confirmation whether it was real time or not. They simply dont matter.
Actually people were so obsessed to find out if it was real or not that they did found many flaws in it (including me). If I were nitpicky I and many others would have been finding mistakes and supposed bad things in it, and would have still be claiming GoW or COD4 looks close.
Bottom line is Killzone2 did an awesome job at getting close with some smart techniques to what people were expecting to see. A few imperfections dont matter and do not ruin what has been achieved which is something truly stunning.
Finally what made the Killzone CGI trailer so awesome back in 2005 wasnt just the visual detail. I remember myself actually seeing the first emerged screenshots and I wasnt blown away much.
After I saw the trailer though and saw the superb animation, physics, interactivity, atmosphere and the lie likes I went Gah Gah.
This one seems to retain all these and I am all gah gah again
Gradthrawn
Veteran
Don't forget to check out the hidden trailers.
turbo4life at AVS said:
Not that I can recall, I'll have to check closer when I watch it again.
LoD System
In the extended trailer, after the first cinematic the player gets control. Some time later we see a couple of soldiers planning behind a cover.
Can anyone see where and when the models change?
To me it looks like the cinematic uses the exact same in-game models, or else they have very good progressive mesh system which I doubt at this point.
In the extended trailer, after the first cinematic the player gets control. Some time later we see a couple of soldiers planning behind a cover.
Can anyone see where and when the models change?
To me it looks like the cinematic uses the exact same in-game models, or else they have very good progressive mesh system which I doubt at this point.
How do people rate the animation/ragdoll physics? From what I seen looks like the best game I have seen for reacting to bullets (at least in a cinimatic sense). Some of the scenes (especally the animation of the head exploding) remindes me of soldier of fortune except next gen !
!
