Killzone Prerendered E3 Trailer Talk

[dubert]

The bolded underlined part is exactly what I feel will happen. Almost as in "If you don't play the same 5 second clip of the flying ship getting blown up 10 times straight in a loop it will look basically the same and give you that same wow factor" is all I need.

Xbd is talking about certain people like me viewing marketers words as religon is false. It's the devs own words that give me this clinging on to it feeling. Dubert you just said to the untrained eye it could look almost as good. What else do I need? That means to me Guerrilla could pull it have. Maybe not technically, but to the "untrained" eye they would.

Indeed, and you should stick to that state of mind.
My post means exactly that.

 

[3DGE]

I've always known that I'm an amateur; but note that no PS3/X360 developers visiting this forum have made any comment about that KZ video...

I for one agree that video is just that...a video and that the final game won't be possible *exactly as shown* on PS3. What I contest is people ASSUMING until proven that it is completely false and not representative of the quality of the game to act like their are 100% right and other are assuming. That's all. Only when the E3 video will be PROVEN utterly false one should take the right to call other people hopes or assumptions as false. That's imho.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

The false belief that the E3 video was a realtime demonstration remains a false belief though, no matter how the final game will look like. Don't confuse the two different points that some people try to make here.

 

[Tesselator]

xbdestroya wrote:
This paragraph just shows how far this topic has strayed from the
core of the issue, which is the technology.

The god-like beings they are? 'Unscrupulously' build unrealistic
expenctations? 'Limited social chaos'?

Okay, so you still can't get it.


I think you read into - or care - too much about this stuff. No
one's rioting over some stupid trailer.

Except you you mean? You seem to be banging your head against
this pretty hard. Calling people unprofessional, aggravational,
destructive, immature... etc.

No one is inciting a riot here. No one is trying to. The consumer
force is more powerful than Sony, MS or Nintendo. This is what
small minds do not consider. We control them. By our purchasing
habits, by the word of mouth influence, and etc.


Perhaps you feel it's a holy cause to bring people out of their
graphics stuppor, but let me tell you that coming from a marketing
background, you are way out there if you think that there is going to
be some sort of 'revolution' heralding in an era without glossy trailers
and hype. It's simply good business. Sony, MS, whoever - they build
hype. You are being marketed to; we all are. Caveat emptor.

This is a very silly remark imho. It's bad business. It promotes
elitism and stifles progress. It creates tensions where congruity
should exist. In its elevated form it's illegal and is the reason MS
was nearly forcefully restructured into smaller sections.


I want to quote Laa-Yosh here:

...................................................
...................................................
...................................................​

I think this paints an accurate picture in that it frames the whole
thing almost in terms of religion. There are people who simply take
on faith what will be achievable or not, and they believe the
marketers as if they were priests of their console religion. I agree
that 'faith' in consoles is misplaced, in fact I'm not one for putting
faith in much of anything. But at the same time all I am saying is
that attacking someone's faith - which is how this thread started, is
not often a good way to start off to get good results in terms of
discussion, because indeed we see people here reacting as if it
were their religion being attacked.

Console religions? That's how you see things? Oh my... Very poor
perceptive abilities. UG!



It doesn't matter now - the whole thing's cooled down.

But seriously Tesselator, I think you have to keep this whole thing in
perspective. Sony DOES have an agenda - and it's the same as MS'.
To get you to buy their console. Sony is no shadier than any other
company; on the contrary SCE marketing is on the whole simply
better than the other companies.

Well, get it straight. No on attacked anyone here. No one attacked
Sony and if they did it was simply a human brain-fart. You really
are having difficulties reading?



People want...

OK, if you dislike this particular discussion so much simply don't
participate in it. The thread topic is NOT about the worthiness
of the thread itself so at least stay on topic and don't offer crits
about the people trying to discuss an issue that to them IS an
issue. Don't believe me? Look at the read-count on this thread
if the text itself isn't making sense to you.


​

 

[Carl B]

Whatever Tesselator.

Yes I do see console fanbo*ism as a religion (or cult). If you don't, well I guess you must be a fanboi yourself, because the similarities between the two are obvious.

The read count of this thread is not due to it's merits - I assure you - but due to the firestorm it's set off across the Internet and interested readers coming in to view it.

This is the first thread you've ever participated in on this forum, so believe me when I say this thread has progressed in a less than ideal fashion. Maybe you'll come to that realization in time.

You say there is something here that *IS* an issue to you worth discussing. Pray tell, in one sentence, what is that issue? IMO this thread should have been locked and a redirect placed to the prior threads discussing the subject post-E3, but that's not what happened.

 

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

Deleted it cus i made a boo boo

 

[Bad_Boy]

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=60856

Now can we end this thread??

No offence or anything, But you should read the part after your quoted text in the link you provided.

 

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

No offence or anything, But you should read the part after your quoted text in the link you provided.

oh poo

 

[nelg]

You say there is something here that *IS* an issue to you worth discussing. Pray tell, in one sentence, what is that issue?

To an artist a reasonable facsimile is an ocean apart from an original.

There is your one sentence.

Tesselator and dubert have been extremely patient and provided a lot of useful information (thanks) and have never once said that you cannot produce stunning visuals with the PS3. They just have a problem with deliberate misrepresentation and I agree with them.

 

[Carl B]

To an artist a reasonable facsimile is an ocean apart from an original.

There is your one sentence.

Tesselator and dubert have been extremely patient and provided a lot of useful information (thanks) and have never once said that you cannot produce stunning visuals with the PS3. They just have a problem with deliberate misrepresentation and I agree with them.

But does that deserve it's own thread... again? (because this isn't the first)

IMO it does not.

Your one sentence reply is along the lines *exactly* of what I felt a proper thread to promote discussion on this topic should have been: 'Limits of Next-gen real-time rendering'

Seriously when you start a thread to tear down a pre-conceived notion a lot of people have, and you do so in a righteous manner, well that's just not a thread I can endorse or that is going to be played 'cleanly.'

And no offense to Dupert on that, because I think overall he's a cool guy with a lot to offer.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

But does that deserve it's own thread... again? (because this isn't the first)

Once again: the thread was created by a moderator, separating it from the RE5 thread; and the starting post had nothing to do with KZ.

 

[Carl B]

Once again: the thread was created by a moderator, separating it from the RE5 thread; and the starting post had nothing to do with KZ.

Right, but that doesn't lessen the point of my post, now does it?

 

[dubert]

But does that deserve it's own thread... again? (because this isn't the first)

IMO it does not.

Your one sentence reply is along the lines *exactly* of what I felt a proper thread to promote discussion on this topic should have been: 'Limits of Next-gen real-time rendering'

Seriously when you start a thread to tear down a pre-conceived notion a lot of people have, and you do so in a righteous manner, well that's just not a thread I can endorse or that is going to be played 'cleanly.'

And no offense to Dupert on that, because I think overall he's a cool guy with a lot to offer.

Hehe, yes, I do agree.
But you do remember that I didn't start the thread as is?

 

[Tesselator]

I don't understand how the Killzone E3 demo being a movie *proves*
that the game won't *look* or *feel* the same or better. This is
what will matter to users and, as of now, you and your friends have
absolutely NO proof demonstrating that the final game will be so
much different from E3, even more so since you are not coding on
final PS3 hardware. To me, your attitude to divulge ASSUMPTIONS as
FACTS for the good of the world are just as arrogant and misleading
as the alleged lies Sony are spreading.

Well I don't like agreeing with you on this but in a way I have to. I
think it's a rather obscure tangent that your point takes though and
here are the reasons why:

• In assuming that others are like yourself and that they don't
  care if it doesn't look the same as long as it's kinda close you have
  put yourself in the same category that you say we and Sony belong
  together in. No proof, assumptions, and actually by reading this
  thread it at least appears the contrary.
  
  
• You are saying that we don't "know" that it can't look as good
  when in fact we actually do know. Any third year computer science
  major would be able to tell you the same things given only the spec.
  and the video - assuming of course they understand the video and
  how it was created.

But I do agree with you. If we are saying it will be "so much different
from E3" like GBA quality on a $500 console then indeed we are no
better than Sony or Nintendo when/if they plot to deceive. The thing
is "so much different from E3" is not quantifiable nor qualifyable in
any way that I know of. I suppose we have used a few of those as
well but usually not without great efforts to define the terms first
or as in some cases shortly after.

Please read back into the thread if you have not already done so.
Additionally I will try harder not to use terms like "so much different"
without qualifying them where they haven't already been so in
previous posts.


​

 

[Carl B]

Hehe, yes, I do agree.
But you do remember that I didn't start the thread as is?

Yes I do know that, I placed too much of the blame on you initially and for that I do apologize Dubert.

 

[nelg]

Seriously when you start a thread to tear down a pre-conceived notion a lot of people have, and you do so in a righteous manner, well that's just not a thread I can endorse or that is going to be played 'cleanly.

I can certainly overlook any righteousness when addressing an issue in which someone is intentionally misleading people. Furthermore I think that the term "indignant" better sums up the tone of the original post.

 

[TGL]

Laa-Yosh, dubert or anyone. Any idea how much processing power would be nedded to actually run the CG trailer realtime ?

 

[mckmas8808]

• In assuming that others are like yourself and that they don't
  care if it doesn't look the same as long as it's kinda close you have
  put yourself in the same category that you say we and Sony belong
  together in. No proof, assumptions, and actually by reading this
  thread it at least appears the contrary.

​

Don't care that it doesn't look the same as long as it's kinda close? It's that like a oxymoron? Kinda like saying "I'm cold in a warm kinda way". I guess it's perception, but to me if it's close that means that to 95% of the people playing the games the E3 video and the real product look will look damn near indistinguishable if one seen one at 2:00 pm and the other at 3:00 pm.

And like your boy Dubert even said it could even look close to the same to the untrained eye. To me if it's that darn close then it would be an obvious win for Guerrilla, Sony, PS3 owners, and Xbox 360 owners indeed.

 

[Carl B]

I can certainly overlook any righteousness when addressing an issue in which someone is intentionally misleading people. Furthermore I think that the term "indignant" better sums up the tone of the original post.

I don't even know anymore - are you and I even disagreeing?

I guess just because I'm 'corporate' in my mentality, none of this 'misleading' phases me. I mean honestly it's much less a transgression than MS' *promise* of 4xMSAA and 720p in every game, only to silently rescind, right? But I don't care about that either. MS had a target - proved unrealistic for launch. Oh well. Sony had an industry show coming up, very important. Great demo gets put together, their call: show it and let questions linger. Sure it's dishonest in some people's view. What can be said?

In this industry it's easier to ask forgiveness than ask permission, that's just the sad reality. But it's the reality in so many fields in life.

 

[dubert]

Laa-Yosh, dubert or anyone. Any idea how much processing power would be nedded to actually run the CG trailer realtime ?

I'm not sure exactly. The example I did before with a single hypervoxel would need a processor that's 970920 times faster than the AMD X2 I rendered in on. And that was just a single voxel. With dozens of those, Monte Carlo global illumination, and realtime SDS with hundreds of thousand of polygons to transform and propably some procedural textures, etc. It's impossible to say. Alot more than a cpu that is only 970k faster than a X2. You'd have to ask alot more intelligent person than me.