Killzone 2 pre-release discussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
A little of motion blur ?

tell me a game that cast shadows from projectiles and then let´s go on talking.

Well, that's nothing new. We've seen that since Doom 3. Only difference being Killzone 2 uses shadow maps instead of stencil buffers.

Aye, just blur all the surroundings except focus object and it all ends in drooling (never undestood that). When playing it wont be like that, sure motionblur will make camera movments cool or objects moving fast lock slick. But heck I could make Crysis low look really great having DoF/motionblur bluriness cover the scene even though it looks like crap otherwise (just an extreme example).
Wow, someone who gets it. That's unexpected :p

The motion blur ads to it certainly....it makes it more filmic. But saying that's why we think it looks good is quite frankly BS.
It's one of the things, that's for sure. There are cuts on SP the trailer where there's no motion blur (weird) and it doesn't look as good.
 
I am surprised people only noticed the motion blur in the video. It's how they apply the technologies that make things stand out and stick. Not whether they have Tech A or B. I am sure some other games have motion blur too, but they don't come close to this.

In some scenes, it looks like a painting coming to life. In others, it feels like I'm in a Hollywood movie. Besides the dynamic lighting and shadows, they also capture the sense of space/distance/depth so well. The animation, plus how the characters interact with each other and the environment brings drama to an already highly crafted stage. There are many many little things that click and work together to bring us this battlefield.

My only question is: Does the rest of the game look and play this well ? Feb 2009 can't come soon enough.
 
Link doesn't work ?

EDIT: How come ManuVlad3.0 can see it but it gives me a server error ? :(

EDIT 2: Fixed network on my end.
 
Works for me. I don't think it looks particularly special in terms of destruction. A lot of stuff certainly comes flying out for not actually touching the surrounding structures. Everything that was meant to fall seems to fall?
 
Looks cool, but I doubt much of the game is like that. It's probably somewhat scripted in that you can only destroy certain spots with certain weapons. Like you have to shoot a weak pillar with a rocket or something.

Still, the amount of debris and everything is impressive.

Well i think it's scripted in that....that building can be destroyed. But if you look at the shooting beforehand (Jeuxvideo we're talking about) the building crumbles at every shot he takes...and then of course he hits one certain pillar and it falls to the ground. Cover is also destructible.
 
It's the player's fault. At that point, he should abandon the turret... and leap to the crash site to see what happens next. ;-)
 
Works for me. I don't think it looks particularly special in terms of destruction. A lot of stuff certainly comes flying out for not actually touching the surrounding structures. Everything that was meant to fall seems to fall?

I like the particle effects personally...ie. the dust rolling down.
 
Looks cool, but I doubt much of the game is like that. It's probably somewhat scripted in that you can only destroy certain spots with certain weapons. Like you have to shoot a weak pillar with a rocket or something.

Still, the amount of debris and everything is impressive.

Impressive but obviously selected/scripted part to colapse. Otherwise buildings would start to fall into pieces due to rockets, grenades, tank shells which doesnt happen in gameplay videos (pillar shell do in some parts). Cool anyway! :)
 
Yes, the pillars come apart after some shelling before the entire building collapses. Would be more interesting to see other forms of destructible covers and how enemy AIs react to them.
 
My observations, parroting a number of points already raised - particle effects are the world's best. The persistence of the smoke is very convincing and adds a lot to the atmosphere. The motion blur is fantastic. Yes, it can be used to cover up rubbish graphics, but when you stop and look, and see everything's looking good, you understand that the motion blur is there to achieve an effective, deliberate look, and not hide the weaknesses of the engine! Deepbrown's destructibility gif looks great, but I imagine that's in a scripted area, and destructibility isn't like that everywhere. Like the original bridge destruction gameplay we've already seen, the bridge explodes fabulously, but it's an objective of the game which can be engineered into the script to look great, add to the cinematic experience, but not require a worldwide destruction engine. The animation is excellent, very natural, but the bodies lack mass. The elbowed Helghast sends his comrades leg sliding across the floor as if it were on ice! And finally I haven't watched all the trailers yet, but what I've seen so far doesn't have the world's greatest AI. This could be 'coz the game's in easy mode or whatever, but when you see a beautifully animated Helghast casually climbing over a railing while getting shot at, you're left scratching your head.
 
Yes, I noticed the skating dead body too. The sense of weight for other entities are done very well though. Some tuning for corpses is in order.

For enemy AI, I can only find an old dev walkthrough talking about it here:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/99844.html

The combat AI is not apparent in the 8-minute video. I'd like to see more combined arms approach to enemy AI. They should be able to preserve themselves, recover each other, picked up better weapons, pin me down and flank me together. Keep it coming !
 
I don't get too concerned about AI anymore. It really depends on what the game is aiming for. A game is only fun if it's exciting and challenging. If it relies on AI to achieve those goals, and it fails, then you have a problem. If all you need is the average idiot cannon-fodder enemy from a Rambo film, then I don't really care how smart they are, because I'll be too busy shooting them in the face to notice.

I'd be happy if Killzone2 goes either way, as long as it's fun.
 
It needs to be convincing enough though. Otherwise, the great visuals may highlight the unrealistic behaviour even more. A stupid soldier will stick out like a sore thumb -- just like the skating corpse.

From older demoes, it seems that they are going to go after the smart AI enemies + super (weather) weapons route.

IMHO, the sentry gun (remote camera controlled ?) is a cool addition.
 
I don't get too concerned about AI anymore...

That's true enough. From a technical observation POV, we can talk AI, and everything else, but what every game out there boils down to 'is is it fun or not?' Some of the least technically amazing games can be the most enjoyable!
 
It needs to be convincing enough though. Otherwise, the great visuals may highlight the unrealistic behaviour even more. A stupid soldier will stick out like a sore thumb -- just like the skating corpse.

The skating corpse didn't stick out like a sore thumb to me. I didn't even notice it when I watched the action packed video over 10 times. It only became apparent when it was pointed out in tha animated gif. When I'm playing and in a battle frenzy I don't pay attention to those stupid things.
 
:LOL: That's true. I caught it immediately in the gif but may be not so in the actual game. During gameplay, your attention will be directly on the enemies in front. So it would be hard not to notice any whacky behaviour exhibited by the targeted soldier(s).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top