First Killzone screenshot/details? So says USAToday..

[Obakan]

I see, so they touched it up and removed loads of buildings.

Loads of buildings? I don´t think they touched-up the screenshots in that way, they used photo shop or some other program to some change colors and add some effects/stuff, I think.

Seb Downie (developer): "There was a little bit of colour-correction done and some minor polish, but nothing major,"

 

[Betanumerical]

Loads of buildings? I don´t think they touched-up the screenshots in that way, they used photo shop or some other program to some change colors and add some effects/stuff, I think.

Yes, for me reason the touched up shot has buildings missing.

 

[Neb]

I also think they used a framebuffer grab whereas the old ss is from the video. In that way it is sharper and represent the graphics better as it would be than the other ss.

Othersie it is the colors and the frame shadow aswell as the overall darkness of the screenshot. The eye lights are also better pronounced and it looks slick to see it fall on the weapon (right guys weapon) although no indirect light. I wonder why they did retouch it instead of releasing untouched framebuffer grabs though.

 

[Obakan]

Yes, for me reason the touched up shot has buildings missing.

Yes, I just noticed that aswell, very strange. Maybe they have done some changes in the map, I´m not sure, all I know is that the touched-up screenshots are the newest they have released.

I also think they used a framebuffer grab whereas the old ss is from the video. In that way it is sharper and represent the graphics better as it would be than the other ss.

Othersie it is the colors and the frame shadow aswell as the overall darkness of the screenshot. The eye lights are also better pronounced and it looks slick to see it fall on the weapon (right guys weapon) although no indirect light. I wonder why they did retouch it instead of releasing untouched framebuffer grabs though.

They same question can be asked about the pre-rendered video from E3 2005, nothing we would like to start a discussion about, I guess :smile: .

 

[Neb]

Same question can be asked about the pre-rendered video from E3 2005, nothing we would like to start a discussion about, I guess :smile: .

But it doesn't really look better, just different. The E3 '05 video was completly another thing with a 'night and day' difference.

 

[Obakan]

But it doesn't really look better, just different. The E3 '05 video was completly another thing with a 'night and day' difference.

So far I have noticed difference in the lights on the helmets (they are stronger), the dust (but that´s probably because of the scene), the brightness is different (much darker) and the colors are less green and more red.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

So far I have noticed difference in the lights on the helmets (they are stronger), the dust (but that´s probably because of the scene), the brightness is different (much darker) and the colors are less green and more red.

3 out of 4 of those can be accomplished in engine at next to no effort. They are artistic changes to add contrast and give a different feeling to the artwork. They haven't drawn in more geometry than the game is outputting, haven't added GI that the game doesn't have, have drawn in shadows that the game doesn't actually render, or anything major, with one possible exception. That's the volumetric light beam, which could have been added in PS and yet not be featured in game.

However the explanation was clear. They touched up the colours and added nothing major. That means tweaking the contrast and saturation, and not drawing wholesale effects into the scene. Thus what we see should be being rendered in game with perhaps a little difference in contrast, less of the vignetting, a change in Helghast light saturation, or other minor adjustments. If they have drawn in the foggy light without it being in game then there's reason to complain, but at the moment any outrage at what we've seen is totally misplaced. This certainly isn't 'smoke and mirrors' to make the game engine look more capable than it really is.

 

[Obakan]

3 out of 4 of those can be accomplished in engine at next to no effort. They are artistic changes to add contrast and give a different feeling to the artwork. They haven't drawn in more geometry than the game is outputting, haven't added GI that the game doesn't have, have drawn in shadows that the game doesn't actually render, or anything major, with one possible exception. That's the volumetric light beam, which could have been added in PS and yet not be featured in game.

However the explanation was clear. They touched up the colours and added nothing major. That means tweaking the contrast and saturation, and not drawing wholesale effects into the scene. Thus what we see should be being rendered in game with perhaps a little difference in contrast, less of the vignetting, a change in Helghast light saturation, or other minor adjustments. If they have drawn in the foggy light without it being in game then there's reason to complain, but at the moment any outrage at what we've seen is totally misplaced.

Avtually that´s what I was thinking of but then why don´t they do the changes in the game, maybe they prefer when the colors are more blend?
The more intense lights on the helmets are probably not in the game unless the orange color is a part of the helmet texture and the foggy light wasn´t in the un-tpuched screenshot.
Anyway I think it look good on both screenshots and I hope they add those extra effects to the full.

This certainly isn't 'smoke and mirrors' to make the game engine look more capable than it really is.

Not at all, I think they can achieve much better graphics than the touched-up screenshot with their Engine.

 

[DJ12]

Yes, I just noticed that aswell, very strange. Maybe they have done some changes in the map, I´m not sure, all I know is that the touched-up screenshots are the newest they have released.

Or maybe they have done a lot of work since the original screenshot was taken and just did some colour correction work as the guy said.

You posted the picture to "illustrate" how much work they've done to the picture from it's "original" state, and it is nothing of the sort, it's not even close to being the same picture.

 

[Obakan]

Or maybe they have done a lot of work since the original screenshot was taken and just did some colour correction work as the guy said.

You posted the picture to "illustrate" how much work they've done to the picture from it's "original" state, and it is nothing of the sort, it's not even close to being the same picture.

Indeed, could be the case aswell.
It´s not the same picture but it´s a picure of the same place on the same map, just that one of the soldiers is standing on another position.

 

[Skrying]

Wow. People are actually defending this. Amazing. It doesn't matter that its possible in the engine, even easily. The fact that they did touch up the images is enough for me to once again put no trust in these developers.

 

[DJ12]

And the flats behind seem to be missing, and bits of brick in the column.

There are lots of differences between the two, some like the flats, indicating just how much has changed between the two builds.

Wow. People are actually defending this. Amazing. It doesn't matter that its possible in the engine, even easily. The fact that they did touch up the images is enough for me to once again put no trust in these developers.

I am not defending it, just pointing out that the offered proof of the work done is nothing of the sort.

 

[Neb]

3 out of 4 of those can be accomplished in engine at next to no effort. They are artistic changes to add contrast and give a different feeling to the artwork...

But that leaves a question hanging in the air. Namely if this is just some simple tweaks that require low to no extra resources then why edit it in [Image Editor] instead of posting a true framegrab?

I mean if they said they touched the screenshot up to make it look more like the game looks now (for the devs) then why not instead release a true framegrab that should then look as that +/- light ray?

 

[Obakan]

And the flats behind seem to be missing, and bits of brick in the column.

There are lots of differences between the two, some like the flats, indicating just how much has changed between the two builds.


I am not defending it, just pointing out that the offered proof of the work done is nothing of the sort.

Well just the fact that the developers has to touch-up their screenshot is a bad thing.
Yes there seem to be some differences between the two builds (excluding the colors) for example some buildings are missing in the new build.
I think the biggest question is: what does this "minor changes mean"?

But that leaves a question hanging in the air. Namely if this is just some simple tweaks that require low to no extra resources then why edit it in [Image Editor] instead of posting a true framegrab?

I mean if they said they touched the screenshot up to make it look more like the game looks now (for the devs) then why not instead release a true framegrab that should then look as that +/- light ray?

You have a very good point there.

 

[deepbrown]

And the flats behind seem to be missing, and bits of brick in the column.

There are lots of differences between the two, some like the flats, indicating just how much has changed between the two builds.


I am not defending it, just pointing out that the offered proof of the work done is nothing of the sort.

Uh there's a wall in the way of those flats in the background...each pic is a diff perspective.

 

[deepbrown]

Well just the fact that the developers has to touch-up their screenshot is a bad thing.
Yes there seem to be some differences between the two builds (excluding the colors) for example some buildings are missing in the new build.
I think the biggest question is: what does this "minor changes mean"?



You have a very good point there.

I've never seen an image of a game that isn't touched up. In fact I think these are some of the least touched up screens I've seen for a game.

 

[Neb]

...some buildings are missing in the new build.

I dont think the building(s) are removed, it is just that the window section has been blown out (destroyed) in one of the screenshots. Hence why there are bricks flying in the air?

Uh there's a wall in the way of those flats in the background...each pic is a diff perspective.

Same perspective.

 

[Obakan]

I've never seen an image of a game that isn't touched up. In fact I think these are some of the least touched up screens I've seen for a game.

The least touched-up screenshots I´ve seen are in-game screenshots that have been taken and then uploaded by the devs, it´s very simple also.

I dont think the building(s) are removed, it is just that the window section has been blown out (destroyed) in one of the screenshots. Hence why there are bricks flying in the air?

Can´t notice any brick by the building (that are not there) but maybe you are right.

 

[archangelmorph]

Wow. People are actually defending this. Amazing. It doesn't matter that its possible in the engine, even easily. The fact that they did touch up the images is enough for me to once again put no trust in these developers.

What's there to defend??

Dude they didn't kill your mom!?

Like most here seem to be able to recognise they made minor tweaks to make the images a little more interesting.. That's pretty much the nature, point & purpose of all promotional stills..

To be honest it pretty much looks like they've done a quick run through that scene in the game taking a few frame-grabs & then just composited parts here and there whilst doing some colour-correcting here and there to make the shot more dynamic & artistic.. The touched up shots don't look at all "better" than the in game shots on a technical level however they do look more lively & interesting..

This is the smart way to get a good promo shot, the alternative being fighting with the dynamic nature of the gameplay systems + AI, trying to find a good viewing position for a 'perfect' shot in real time.. It just saves time..

There really isn't any "sin" here!

 

[Shifty Geezer]

But that leaves a question hanging in the air. Namely if this is just some simple tweaks that require low to no extra resources then why edit it in [Image Editor] instead of posting a true framegrab?

Because they already had the framgrab ready to go out when the lead artist popped in and said, "Hey guys! We're going to go darker and moodier now. Can you PhotoShop those screenies to match the previs we had in on Wednesday."

'Touch up' means minor tweaks rather than wholesale artistry. There could be some cheating going on with them using the term 'touch up' very loosely, but IMO that's paranoia. As has been mentioned, it's common in the industry. Heck, in all industries where there's marketing involved! Like game scaling which was common last gen, it's just people don't know about things and it comes as a shock when they find out with one title/product and think that one is out of the ordinary.