Killzone: first pics

[Phil]

Chap:

2) "In average, yes, IQ is a problem on PS2 - just as framerate seems to be a problem on Xbox. In case you want to argue it on Xbox, be aware though that I am not dishing the hardware as it is very capable of it, but in average, framerate does seem to be on the lower side (just as you see IQ as a problem on PS2 hardware). "

-Dont you think my statements made more sense now?

Unsuprisingly, you missed the point I was trying to make. I brought up the 30 fps to show your ignorance (and double standard) about image quality on PS2. You can argue that the majority of games lack good IQ, but that doesn't mean the hardware itself is not capable. The same applies to Xbox: while I may see the majority of impressive games running a very bad framerate, it doesn't mean the hardware isn't capable. Now lets just let this pointless argument go, okay?

Weeeell, my previous post was made in accordance to this 2 statements brought up:

1) "you look at the best looking ps2 games on screen they definatly look on par..Just look at sh3 "

-In my books, on par = equal, exact, samey same. I brought up RE4 because it certainly looks better than SH3.

What good is it to bring up a game that isn't even out yet? How do you know how well those screens stack up to the real picture?

 

[LisaJoy]

You are showing cutscenes there. You cant see anything to judge.

Show the gameplay, the textures everywhere in SH3 are horrid.
compare it to RE4 if you like then, its fully 3d, yet still manages nice textures.

they spent all the room for highres textures on her hair, so the rest of the game suffered. look at those walls, the Sega Saturn would laugh at those textures.

 

[Paul]

Your true bias shows Lisa. That screenshot was taken at 640X and then scaled up to some insane resolution; of course it's going to look like garbage.

Be fair, I know it's a little hard for you.

LASTLY, i think console exclusives are dwindling as we go on.

Yea right.

You will be proved even more wrong next gen when you have a PS3 using Cell which will be such a pain in the ass to port a game to a new system because you'll be re-writing alot of the code.

 

[chaphack]

Unsuprisingly, you missed the point I was trying to make. I brought up the 30 fps to show your ignorance (and double standard) about image quality on PS2. You can argue that the majority of games lack good IQ, but that doesn't mean the hardware itself is not capable. The same applies to Xbox: while I may see the majority of impressive games running a very bad framerate, it doesn't mean the hardware isn't capable. Now lets just let this pointless argument go, okay

I admit i am more, whacha say, stringent in judging PS2 games(since they are getting a fair amount of whacha whacha around), but i definitely did not missed the point.

I can name a majority of PS2 games that runs at less than 60fps. But, can we, all fairs and share no hating ol' googles, say the same thing about the average Xbox games IQ vs PS2s'?

Need i remind people that the better IQ on PS2 seems to be running on a semi-fixed camera angles/cutscenes/dull textures. Less flowing vibrant 3D less IQ artifacts. A few games dont make PS2 anymore capable in IQ than the competition. Why then did the many other games have piss-poor IQ, why is it that developers are so much cooler in extracting better IQ off other systems? Its been years since PS2 launched, and the IQ troubles still plagued games today. Isnt that a flaw? Seems like the current NV30 vs R300 DX9 fiasco. Doesnt it?

Seriously, need people still defend such a direct misgivings of PS2? I mean, dont be saying me no likie the system, since I loooove how PS2 implement cinematics framebuffer effects. Very nice. Thats good. But the IQ is not. Its bad its bad. No offense, but some of you are liking the Sony's version of Lazy8 to me.

 

[chaphack]

Your true bias shows Lisa. That screenshot was taken at 640X and then scaled up to some insane resolution; of course it's going to look like garbage.

Be fair, I know it's a little hard for you.

LASTLY, i think console exclusives are dwindling as we go on.

Yea right.

You will be proved even more wrong next gen when you have a PS3 using Cell which will be such a pain in the ass to port a game to a new system because you'll be re-writing alot of the code.

Hurhur, and your screens are taken from 1000X res and downsampled to 400X res.

As for you last point, we shall see. But look at the "exclusives" today, far lesser than the old 32bits days. Oh! PIA porting might also mean no coding for the PIA system.

 

[chaphack]

Forgot this,

What good is it to bring up a game that isn't even out yet? How do you know how well those screens stack up to the real picture?

I am sure i am not the first, nor the only one, ever to bring up an unreleased game in a graphics comparison. I do hope you will apply your "screens stack/no-stackie" comment all over the board fairly.

 

[Paul]

Hurhur, and your screens are taken from 1000X res and downsampled to 400X res.

Hurhur and this is how the game looks when played, unlike a picture scaled up to ungodly resolutions to make it look like a piece of s hit.

 

[chaphack]

Hurhur, and your screens are taken from 1000X res and downsampled to 400X res.

Hurhur and this is how the game looks when played, unlike a picture scaled up to ungodly resolutions to make it look like a piece of s hit.

hurhur..unless PS2 renders SH3 internally at 1000x and output at AAed progressive scan and you have a tiny TV screen. In fact, i say blown up pics are far more reasonable when you have a big TV, thats also partly why no progressive scan is hurting PS2 display on extended screen.

Furthermore that blown up screen, i believe, is from KCET themselves. Thats also a problem when you have limited textures and try to scale up the resolution for PR purposes. I hope they upped the textures for the PC version, cause PC gamers are very unforgiving against poor textures.

 

[PC-Engine]

Actually Lisa's screenshot isn't blown up at all

It's a high res DTOOL framebuffer grab

 

[Paul]

No.

I played the game normally, that's the gist of how it looks. Just tinker with your TV settings. Or get a better TV.

That blown up screen isn't how the game looks, end of story.

 

[chaphack]

No.

I played the game normally, that's the gist of how it looks. Just tinker with your TV settings. Or get a better TV.

That blown up screen isn't how the game looks, end of story.

Right! I hope that you, like phil, are not that type who goes yikity-yikes against PR screens.

 

[Paul]

BTW, did you ever get Otogi yet? Or Brute force?

 

[chaphack]

I played a BF demo. The one at the treetop house or something, Tex gotta save some Brutus creatures. It was alright i guess. Graphics are nice, loved the BM on the tree trunks! The game is pretty smooth. in fact it doesnt really feel like 30fps to me.

No Otogi. :? Waiting for the .... heheh

 

[Paul]

The BF swamp levels are way better. The game has horrible art, but makes up for it in pure graphics.

Otogi is insanely hard in many parts, looks incredible though. Pixel shading on the monsters.

 

[chaphack]

(snip)
nevermind. dont wancha people coming for my IP again.

 

[rabidrabbit]

To judge consoles image quality by screenshots is just so ignorant.
For example, just look at Midtown Madness on xbox.
All the screenshots look super sharp and clean, but on your TV the game is a jagged, shimmering mess.

 

[Phil]

chap:

I can name a majority of PS2 games that runs at less than 60fps. But, can we, all fairs and share no hating ol' googles, say the same thing about the average Xbox games IQ vs PS2s'?

Need i remind people that the better IQ on PS2 seems to be running on a semi-fixed camera angles/cutscenes/dull textures. Less flowing vibrant 3D less IQ artifacts. A few games dont make PS2 anymore capable in IQ than the competition. Why then did the many other games have piss-poor IQ, why is it that developers are so much cooler in extracting better IQ off other systems? Its been years since PS2 launched, and the IQ troubles still plagued games today. Isnt that a flaw? Seems like the current NV30 vs R300 DX9 fiasco. Doesnt it?

The thing is, you're ignoring the facts at hand. For instance the games Marconelly pointed out all have at least UP TO PAR IQ with any Xbox or GameCube game. If you can't admit that, then you're really blinded by your own bias. And no, not all those games in that list have a semi fixed camera angle/cutscenes/dull textures.

PC-Engine

Actually Lisa's screenshot isn't blown up at all

It's a high res DTOOL framebuffer grab

Which doesn't make it anymore valid since the PS2 does not render in such a high resolution. The game does not look like that, period.

 

[LisaJoy]

Lol, my Bias.. I didnt MAKE that screenshot, its from IGN's media library.

I am not Biased against any console, PS2 was the first I purchased, but I am not going to pretend I have been happy with the hardware at all.. the games keep me owning one, but I have had to own more than one... its cheaply made, cheaply thought out and poorly designed.

 

[Phil]

LisaJoy:

Lol, my Bias.. I didnt MAKE that screenshot, its from IGN's media library.

I am not Biased against any console, PS2 was the first I purchased, but I am not going to pretend I have been happy with the hardware at all.. the games keep me owning one, but I have had to own more than one... its cheaply made, cheaply thought out and poorly designed.

Of course you're not. By saying cheaply made, cheaply thought out and poorly designed, what exactly are you refering to? I'm still puzzled by the fact that you seem to be judging the hardware by many developers incompetence. I'm still waiting for some feedback on the last reply from me directed at you though - can I count on a reply or have you lost the argument?

 

[zidane1strife]

Here are some better looking pics.(at 640x480 rez)

... and a nice looking big one: