Yeah, if KZ doesn't overtake Gears in the visual department then its going to become debate and ****** fodder for the internet. However, if KZ is critically reviewed as an AAA game on par with the Halo, FF, Gears and MGS's of the world then in all likelihood it will sales tons of PS3. The PS2 lost to the Xbox by a mile so its not imperative that the PS3 beats the 360 in terms of graphics. Yes its pie on Sony's face but past history has shown great games not eye candy sells systems.
Killzone PS3.. in 07?
- Thread starter Hale
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, if KZ doesn't overtake Gears in the visual department then its going to become debate and ****** fodder for the internet. However, if KZ is critically reviewed as an AAA game on par with the Halo, FF, Gears and MGS's of the world then in all likelihood it will sales tons of PS3. The PS2 lost to the Xbox by a mile so its not imperative that the PS3 beats the 360 in terms of graphics. Yes its pie on Sony's face but past history has shown great games not eye candy sells systems.
Not this again?!? First you're just being argumentative. Judging by your BS your first two responses ( that added nothing to what you were saying. We have all watched the trailer. You need to watch the "entire" trailer to realize it can't be done. trying to pic apart a screen shot is a waste of time. I honestly can't believe anyone is STILL arguing this. When will people stop arguing and realize CGI and in game graphics aren't the same thing?
Last edited by a moderator:
I didn't say it wasn't CGI, but to say it was some uber visual demonstration not seen outside CGI movies is a crock. I've seen it, in the original version, during the 2005E3 demo, and in a high quality feed. I don't think any of you guys saw that. If you did, you'd hardly notice it as it was just a trailer among many. Later, when people picked apart the demo they called their bull, and apparently there are a few places where it seems to be unreachable and suddenly the whole thing spun out of control with the "KZ2 iZ teh unPo$$iBL3!!!11" crap. There's really nothing beyond what can be expect this gen, except for maybe polish.
nonamer: Average textures? Normal mapping? You know - instead of going through individual cheackmarks, how about this: Point out a single rendering flaw with these screens.
http://www.killzone2.com/Killzone-2/Screens/1.jpg
http://www.killzone2.com/Killzone-2/Screens/2.jpg
http://www.killzone2.com/Killzone-2/Screens/3.jpg
I can't see one:
poly edge
blurry texture
poor AA level
poor AF level
poor shadow edge or fx
poor lighting
not one.
Gears on the other hand one can find a few flaws here and there. Epic did a great job but they are not perfect. These cgi shots are perfect because the team had no hardware boundaries.
http://www.killzone2.com/Killzone-2/Screens/1.jpg
http://www.killzone2.com/Killzone-2/Screens/2.jpg
http://www.killzone2.com/Killzone-2/Screens/3.jpg
I can't see one:
poly edge
blurry texture
poor AA level
poor AF level
poor shadow edge or fx
poor lighting
not one.
Gears on the other hand one can find a few flaws here and there. Epic did a great job but they are not perfect. These cgi shots are perfect because the team had no hardware boundaries.
I'll take you on! I've always wondered what a third sack would feel like!I bet my left testicle that KZ will be out this year on PS3. Although im not bgetting the other testicle on it looking the same as/better then the trailer
Anyways, I can't believe the E3 vid has surfaced again! I guess some people will never forgive SONY for something some else said!
Last edited by a moderator:
Are you blind to the buildings in the background?
Ground texture on third shot. Also look at the the lower right corner for an error.
First picture, lower right corner. Lack of AA right there.
Poor AF level and ground texture blurriness go hand-in-hand.
It has soft shadowing apparently.
Doesn't even seem to have HDR. I could be wrong. I didn't exactly see raytracing here so I don't know whats the big deal.
You're not even looking for them.
Both have flaws. Just that KZ2 has less.
Serenity Painted Death
Regular
You have it all wrong. YOU are the one who has obviously never seen the Killzone trailer in motion. We are already seeing games with graphics that exceed Gears and are still well short of Killzone.
We're on the same page wrt Game>graphics, and if KZ proves to be a great AAA game then that will obviously be a good thing for the dev team, Sony and ps3 owners. However, It will not convince fence sitters if the game is visually subpar while providing a great gaming experience.
PS3 fans that have the system and ones that are waiting to get the system for whatever reason I'm sure would rather have a great game than a visual showpiece but to those that are not sure about whether to get a 360 or ps3 things become a bit more difficult.
If ps3 was the same price as xb360 I'd agree with the assessment that KZ should aim to be the best game possible. If ps3 had the same game library I'd agree. But with a more expensive pricepoint and a game selection that is lacking, they need to show why it is more expensive to people that don't have an interest in BR.
The hype that was created with KZ has left the impression on many people (true or not) that ps3 is significantly more capable than xb360. I'm saying I know they won't hit the trailer level but it is of the utmost importance that this title outshine Gears in some way.
I'm not sure about the AA levels there (Lightwave has quite a few settings), but keep in mind that to keep render times at a manageable level, the guys there had to use 2D motion blur that works with simple image processing, which results in a lot of artifacts that may look like simple spatial aliasing.
Textures, and assets in general, have suffered a tight schedule and haven't received the level of polish that's nowadays possible, because of more advanced tools and more development time available for game artists. However, in close-ups, details will become pixelated and fake, just because that's the way normal mapping works.
So in some ways, the realtime KZ will look better than the trailer - but in others it won't be able to live up to it. Particularly lighting, shadows, texture filtering, AA, smoke effects and other image quality related issues.
But there's aliasing even in scenes with no motion.
There are pixelated portions on the screen for close objects, and the ground is noticeably more blurry close up. The normal mapping on the ground is pretty obvious too.
Possible, but I bet it will be minor and not major shortcomings. I've never said it's not CGI, but overall the quality is about the same as Gears. Only by nitpicking would someone say "this is impossible" as they clearly never intended to produce something well beyond what the PS3 is able to achieve.
It's possible that they did, but not in a fashion that would be impossible to duplicate in realtime. In Warhawk they used raytracing to produce clouds in realtime since Cell is suited for some limited amounts of raytracing. Soft shadows are possible in realtime too, so even if the shadows are raytraced it's not that beyond what can already be achieved. I need to see objects cast multiple shadows or some kind of global illumination before it's clearly unrealistic.
TurnDragoZeroV2G
Regular
(Bolding mine)
Whiskey... Tango.... Foxtrot.
To shove in my opinion regarding what kind of expectations Killzone has to live up to that has seen some more talk on forums with this news: I'll personally forgive Killzone for not coming within a lightyear of the CGI if they nail some solid gameplay, non-****ty audio, plus more memorable characters. Working AI is a must. I'll certainly laugh at anybody that even suggests it gets close to the CGI with lighting, smoke, polygon budget and so on, but I'll still forgive the game. Maybe OT for what people are discussing now, but honestly, I think that that's what the demo needs to do more than anything else. The graphics are going to technically fall short in many of the biggest areas, period. Therefore, they should make up for it with solid gameplay.
However, don't mind me. I'm just a guy who would like to see that the money wasted on my copy of Killzone sitting at home actually served some kind of purpose.
Whiskey... Tango.... Foxtrot.
To shove in my opinion regarding what kind of expectations Killzone has to live up to that has seen some more talk on forums with this news: I'll personally forgive Killzone for not coming within a lightyear of the CGI if they nail some solid gameplay, non-****ty audio, plus more memorable characters. Working AI is a must. I'll certainly laugh at anybody that even suggests it gets close to the CGI with lighting, smoke, polygon budget and so on, but I'll still forgive the game. Maybe OT for what people are discussing now, but honestly, I think that that's what the demo needs to do more than anything else. The graphics are going to technically fall short in many of the biggest areas, period. Therefore, they should make up for it with solid gameplay.
However, don't mind me. I'm just a guy who would like to see that the money wasted on my copy of Killzone sitting at home actually served some kind of purpose.
Where? Clip a section and post it so we can all see what you see.
More blurry the closer it gets ... hmm.
Interesting : So we should see the KZ the game match the quality of the 2005 e3 video. Funny I would have never thought it possible but appearantly I just wasn't looking at it right.
You mean Ray Casting?
hmm - I've never seen realtime shadows in-game that looked as good as those in the video.
So in summary: KZ will be able to produce shadows never before seen in-game, texture quality above any other ps3 game, 4xaa, Animation above any other fps on the market, soft Hair, Normal mapped animated characters simulating 2mpoly/model, raytracing, perfect lipsynched animation, the best dust particle fx seen in-game, and an occasional flat surface that blurs the closer you get to it.
Where do I sign up?
Last edited by a moderator:
I said any of which, not all of which. Also what's the problem with 2x framerate anyway? Afterall ps3 is "twice as powerful" as the "xbox1.5" isn't it?
Besides I don't think Gears is the be all end all of this gen. It will be surpased graphically both on xb360 and ps3.
Now I know you deliberately was trying to set people up for disappointment by raising the expectations unreasonbly high. It has to have Gears of War level graphics and twice the framerate to be impressive according to you, the same person who repeatedly have stated the xbox 360 and PS3 are roughly equal in power. Care to elaborate why you have so much more faith in Guerilla Games than Epic? Didn't think so.
Any:
1 : one or some indiscriminately of whatever kind: a : one or another taken at random <ask any man you meet> b : EVERY -- used to indicate one selected without restriction <any child would know that>
2 : one, some, or all indiscriminately of whatever quantity: a : one or more -- used to indicate an undetermined number or amount <have you any money> b : ALL -- used to indicate a maximum or whole <needs any help he can get> c : a or some without reference to quantity or extent <grateful for any favor at all>
3 a : unmeasured or unlimited in amount, number, or extent <any quantity you desire> b : appreciably large or extended <could not endure it any length of time>
ME said:
...
Dude I didn't make the video. I appreciate your vote of confidence in my graphics ability though.
Last edited by a moderator:
I've kind of lost my confidence to judge the mainstream nowadays especially with games and have been debating half heartily when it comes to game popularity and influence. I spent sometime with my 16 years old nephew and a bunch of his friends, all of which who own a PS2/3s and/or Xbox 1/360s. What I discovered is that their tastes in games are unlike any typical poster on B3D.
They were playing MK Amagaddeon on the PS2 and I played with them and watch in amazement over their ethusaism over the game and bunch of other so so game that never warrant mentioning in this forum. The whole time I was going "you really like that game?". The response everytime, "Yeah, don't you?". While in my mind I was going "this is the worst fighting game I've played in some time","When did MK get a single player?" and "When did Lui Kang die?" (Dead Lui Kang was a choseable character).
"Huh, whats that?" was the typical response to any mention of any franchise that wasn't well established or known, that included Heavenly Sword, Mass Effect and Bioshock. I didn't ask any questions about KillZone but I doubt that is was on any one of those youngins' wish list.
I'm sorry but if you're serious about that then there's no reason to continue this discussion from this point on.
The greatest problem with the KZ trailer IMHO was, that by implying it to be a realtime demonstration, Sony created the false impression that PS3 game development was already ahead enough to produce such level of graphics and gameplay. Even now, almost two years later, no game has been able to match it; and there are clearly things in there that certainly won't be possible in this generation of games, and may turn out to be too complicated for the next as well. It's been a Bad Thing to do for the entire industry and its audience as well.
The moral issues with Sony are a different thing - what company hasn't ever lied? - and then we could also get into game journalists and so on, but it's not important at all.
The moral issues with Sony are a different thing - what company hasn't ever lied? - and then we could also get into game journalists and so on, but it's not important at all.
- Status