Killzone will be shown next year

Status
Not open for further replies.
A year later and you still can't tell the difference between engine generated scene frames and frames from an art package like Maya or Lightwave... You don't even need to step through the frames it is so obvious for anyone with even a moderate amount of computer graphic experience.

Perhaps GAF or GameFAQs is better suited to your technical level?

MODS lock this thread please
 
I expect to be underwhelmed.

I am way more hyped about Resistance 2 than Killzone 2 (or 3 whatever it is now). Resistance, we know, has at least some good quality to it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Letting go of the whole witch burning at the stake thing because of the CGI, which by the way is OLD story... But why would you have such high expectations of Killzone on PS3?
It's a serious question. The first one was hardly the best game of the year, and all the hype surrounding the next one is due to the CGI movie, and not the game itself...
I'm saving my expectation coupons for other much much more interesting titles to be honest.
Fair enough. Save your vouchers, you stinch.:devilish:

As for me, I'd be happy to put some on Guerilla. The original Killzone, although it wasn't the best game, it had alot of promise. The reviews to me kinda implied that with a little more time, and a little more power (maybe on XBOX), Killzone would've been a really solid title! Well, they've got the best hardware this gen can offer, and they've got WWS to support them (since they're sharing their technical know-how with PS3 software development) so I am really excited at the possibilities this brings for Killzone PS3. My expectations aren't really based off the trailer, but based off the ability of Guerilla to create a great game (read: Killzone Liberation on PSP) and being provided with great tools (better than PS2) and processing power to spare! So there! They're not taking all my vouchers, but I'd be happy to drop some in their bucket. ;)
 
If Guerilla could make a "great" game on the PSP, then "lack of power of the PS2" excuse can't be used for the failings of first Killzone. Killzone has never lived up to the hype, the only reason why people were attracted to the game in the first place was the term, "Halo Killer".

How can your expectation not be based off the anything but the trailer? Killzone is nothing but a mediocre game from a mediocre developer without the trailer and Sony's support. However, noone equates Sony support with guaranteed hit. Plus, there are numerous mediocre PS2 games that could have been alot better with a little more time and expertise, yet noone is hyping their PS3 interation with "what could of been"s.

People griped about the trailer, but CG or not if Sony can make the Killzone's experience live up to the trailer then Sony will have justified the use of such a controversial method.
 
It's the animation and behaviour that I think needs to be spot on. If they lower poly counts, replace the super complex wheels with some normal mapped wheels for example, that'll still be 'in the same ball park' I think. But if the animation and behaviour doesn't match the trailer (which will be...hard...as it was all scripted) then it won't have anyone thinking they've met expectations.

After all the GOW negativity over normal maps--when indeed all UE3 tech demos were using them and GOW has never shown anything else--I don't think it will pass under the radar at all.

But you are right on the smoke. There have been a number of demos that give some hope for some killer smoke if they budget it in. My current craving: I want every game to have particle systems like Lost Planet. If they can work on realtime disapation drooool...
 
:LOL:

And you're still trying to claim Sony made any such claim about the Killzone engine footage...(hint: the realtime quote had nothing to do with Killzone in the interview...)

Not complete true. While there is some debate about one quote, there were numberous others, including an outright statement it was realtime. Do a search. Your arguement is the same one applied to Motorstorm, yet there is a video of the developer saying the CGI was realtime.

What we can hope is that KZ shapes up as well as MS did and that KZ catches the essense of the CGI in a convincing and enjoyable way.

A year later and you still can't tell the difference between engine generated scene frames and frames from an art package like Maya or Lightwave... You don't even need to step through the frames it is so obvious for anyone with even a moderate amount of computer graphic experience.

Perhaps GAF or GameFAQs is better suited to your technical level?

I guess you will now berate the interviews post-E3 2005 where industry people confirmed via interviews that it was CGI? I believe some fans did a youtube video with one of the project guys (I think it may have been Blur).
 
A year later and you still can't tell the difference between engine generated scene frames and frames from an art package like Maya or Lightwave... You don't even need to step through the frames it is so obvious for anyone with even a moderate amount of computer graphic experience.

Perhaps GAF or GameFAQs is better suited to your technical level?


Not entirely sure since your posts are relatively few if you know that Laa-Yosh is one of and probably the most vocal and technically astute CG artist/graphics designers accessible to any site on the web... if memory serves correct he actually knows folks from the studio that produced the Killzone "target render" and called it while everone else on the web was buzzing about it being "realtime gameplay"...

Since I dont know you or your background, theres nothing more to say than unless you have some relevant technical counterpoint to any of Laa-Yosh's thousands of creatively and technically accurate descriptions and assessments of games (all of which are searchable).... you should probably reserve your "sturm and drang" for another day and probably another poster altogether....

Just offering fair warning....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top