PS3: Phil Harrison addresses the real-time vs CGI issue
- Thread starter Megadrive1988
- Start date
- Status
jvd said:
And what were you watching, jvd?
She asked the question, and while I'm not 100% certain he answered "absolutely," he definitely gave an affirmative response.
***edit***
jvd, there was a second interview with Phil Harrison. The other guy was Jack Tretton. Both of Sony; neither from the Killzone team.
Just in case we're talking about different interviews and that's why the confusion.
Sony really are masters of "The Big Lie". Make an outrageous claim and everyone believes you because surely it must be true otherwise you would never make such an unbelievable statement. Sony have lied so many times before. How on Earth can anybody believe a word that Sony PR says? And the devs are obviously not going to say that its pre-rendered and not what it will look like for fear of pissing off Sony and anyway they want the hype just as much to sell their product. Actually a dev might tell the truth but we are talking about an exec here making the KillZone claim and we all know what honest people execs are 
I think it may well be possible to make a tech-demo on the PS3 running in realtime looking close to that good but I very seriously doubt that even 3rd-gen games will look like that in game. Its like saying that you can have games on a X800 that look like the Ruby demo or that the FX5200 can create graphics like the Dawn demo in a real game situation. Not going to happen and it pisses me off that Sony wants to play us for fools like that, its insulting. If I'm wrong, believe I'll be buying a PS3 in a heart beat but I don't think so. A little bit of honesty goes much further than unsubstantial hype with me but I can see that its working for them and hey it worked with the PS2 so why would they change their tactics?
I think it may well be possible to make a tech-demo on the PS3 running in realtime looking close to that good but I very seriously doubt that even 3rd-gen games will look like that in game. Its like saying that you can have games on a X800 that look like the Ruby demo or that the FX5200 can create graphics like the Dawn demo in a real game situation. Not going to happen and it pisses me off that Sony wants to play us for fools like that, its insulting. If I'm wrong, believe I'll be buying a PS3 in a heart beat but I don't think so. A little bit of honesty goes much further than unsubstantial hype with me but I can see that its working for them and hey it worked with the PS2 so why would they change their tactics?
MechanizedDeath
Regular
More was said, but those were the exact (or off by one or two words) wording of the question and the answer. Watch it again. I posted the same thing on #ga while it was running. I also spooged myself over Hevenly Sword. If you actually watched the show, how can you even argue this anymore? Heavenly Sword takes all other presentations and bitchslaps the hell out of them. I'm not stroking DeanoC here, that video was off the chain, period. After you see that, you can't suddenly tell me Killzone2 is impossible. HS is a first-gen game(?) from what I assume is a smaller dev in Ninja Theory. Deano not only vouched for its authenticity, but he vouched for it running at 1080p. I have no doubt in my mind now that KZ2 can be done. Again, maybe the tiny details that Laa-Yosh is able to spot may be absent, but the game is gonna look sweet-ass. No friggin joke.jvd said:
Seriously, everyone should give DeanoC a round of applause, b/c I was amazed by the demo of his game before, but seeing it on tv with a much clearer picture is damn near flooring.
If you think it's hyperbole, wait for the HQ caps from G4. Unreal.Garagoth: Care to mention these "big lies"? If you want to talk about The Getaway, just remember that (a) it was never previewed as a video and bandied around as the real mccoy and (b) eventhough I vaguely remember a Team SOHO guy claiming they were target visuals, I don't actually remember that being an official quote. For all the baseless claims that Sony lies about this and that, there's a damning lack of e-v-i-d-e-n-c-e. I had to spell it out, b/c it's a foreign word to some. If you want to say they were lying, let's try to prove it. Because we can all remember the Raven demo, yet somehow we take the Xbox360 visuals at face value.
Again, just b/c a game/demo for a Sony system looks unreal doesn't mean it's not real. If next year rolls around and KZ2 looks no better than GoW or UE3, you can bet I'll be in line to royally roast Phil on this. He's said it on video. Morgan was direct, and almost as persistent as Sessler was to Allard. There is no way to spin this if it ends up untrue. Can we give Guerilla a stay of execution on this now? Sheesh. PEACE.
MechanizedDeath said:
You think the killzone render looks better than Gears or Unreal 3??? THATS unreal...?
Fanboys on either side are smoking crack this E3. There is nothing that I have seen that if possible on one console is NOT possible on another console. Nothing. Dont let the smooth taste of a render fool you man...
Shaking head :?
I think some people are so quick to debunk these types of things not because they look too good to be true, necessarily, but because their own personal biases prevent them from acknowledging that something not made by their fave company can look so good. (Or, inversely, that something made by a company they don't like can be so good.)
Why, it'd just crush their poor widdle raisin hearts!
P.S. jvd, I'm right. Watch it again. I'm going to.
Why, it'd just crush their poor widdle raisin hearts!
P.S. jvd, I'm right. Watch it again. I'm going to.
quest55720
Regular
This kind of thread just proves how well sonys PR did to distract the world from the Xbox360 launch. Instead of discussing the Xbox 360 and its games the world is talking about the sony presentation. The best part is by next year everyone will forget about most of the sony demos so if the games don't look as good no one will say a word.
The show replays at 11 CT.
Yikes. That IS late, considering how little sleep I've gotten this week.
I don't know if I'll be awake, so I'll try to tape it.
But I distinctly remember Phil and Jack tonight, and I think Morgan asked them both pretty much the same questions. Answers to which I posted earlier.
Yikes. That IS late, considering how little sleep I've gotten this week.
I don't know if I'll be awake, so I'll try to tape it.
But I distinctly remember Phil and Jack tonight, and I think Morgan asked them both pretty much the same questions. Answers to which I posted earlier.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
blakjedi said:
But how do you know that. I mean we still don't exactly know how big the difference between the 2 consoles is.
Kolgar said:I think some people are so quick to debunk these types of things not because they look too good to be true, necessarily, but because their own personal biases prevent them from acknowledging that something not made by their fave company can look so good. (Or, inversely, that something made by a company they don't like can be so good.)
Why, it'd just crush their poor widdle raisin hearts!
P.S. jvd, I'm right. Watch it again. I'm going to.
Now You don't mention me, but I kind of have the feeling that this might have been directed towards me. (maybe I'm just tired, since I should be in bed already it's 6 am), but if it is, then
. I simply stated the obvious, but some people like to hang on to their dreams, no matter what. I think that PS3 is the more powerful one, and I'm more excited about it than I'm about X360, but does it mean that I should throw common sense away and just swallow everything Sony PR throws at me, especially knowing their history. I quess that trying to be in the middle, you always have to be against something .I would just like to point out that I don't trust Microsoft any much more than Sony, in fact my fist instinct is to mark any PR as BS. I don't doubt KZ has the potential to look great or that the PS3 will be capable of at least the level of graphics that the XB360 is capable of but those screenshots simply do not look representative of realtime graphics. Did Sony have any realtime demos of in game graphics at all? As far as I can tell they have shown us only CGI concepts and tech demos, neither a particularly useful indicator of what real games will look like.
Does anybody know where the PS2 "Toy Story level graphics" claim comes from, a direct quote or something because that would be one of the big lies I talked about among others.
Does anybody know where the PS2 "Toy Story level graphics" claim comes from, a direct quote or something because that would be one of the big lies I talked about among others.
MechanizedDeath
Regular
If it's offline rendered to spec like PGR3, and those EA games, then why not? Putting it in big, red letters makes it less valid of a point? Just b/c you don't believe doesn't make it so. Might I remind you again, Phil Harrison has put it on record now, and that should be it. If you want to doubt it, fine, but what reason is there to believe you over him? Like I said, I believe it's offline render, but having seen DeanoC's game in clarity, I think YOU'RE the one smoking the crack.blakjedi said:
The leap from Heavenly Sword to KZ2 *looks* smaller than the leap from GoW to KZ2. And that's the other key. You, me, Laa-Yoh, jvd, Kolgar and others are all eyeballing. We're not computers and we can't see wireframes. We can't tell what's going on beyond our perception. As a result we have to rely on faith, common sense, dev/exec claims, or a combination of the three. The vigor with which some of you want to debunk this is no better/worse than the vigor some are defending it. I'd personally like to believe it's real b/c it's what I expect from this gen. As a result, I'm willing to accept the word of the SCEE president over some forum members, thank you very much. Am I being naive? Maybe, but no more/less than you are. We'd all be wise to remember this. Now that one of the top three guys at Sony has put his ass on the line, I think it's only fair to give him a chance to be proven wrong. Let me say that again.
Now that one of the top three guys at Sony has put his ass on the line, I think it's only fair to give him a chance to be proven wrong.
My, how fanboyish of me.
PEACE.Dr Evil said:
You answered your own question right there. You may want the PS3 to be more "powerful" (a subjective, artful term at best) and the CPU in PS3 in raw horses is twice the power of x360 cpu... but the GPU powers are still up int the air and the efficiency of the CPU<=>GPU designs are still up in the air.. until and unless we can nail down all three of those areas for both boxes, comparisons are useless.
So far all the games shown are kinda smoke and mirrors especially Sony's displays. We have NO idea really what PS3 can do. The tech demos were no better rulers to judge power with, as at least two demos used two (2) cells working in parallel to render .jpgs which were then streamed over a G5 network then recorded...
as if they were a single cells realtime performance... thats false but effective advertising.I can't call it myself, and I have spent this entire week reading and watching everything then asking about everything I saw or read... there are a few peoples best guesses and estimations which I esteem on this board, but in light of new facts from E3, many of them are also confused about the powers (relative and absolute) about the systems. This board appears to be the technical reference of choice for 3d hardware across the internet why wouldnt I believe people with this level of reputation?
As far as my preferences are concerned, I prefer xbox because I prefer xbox IPs from this last generation, but I have every intention of buying a PS3 this generation and maybe Rev too cause this upcoming generation may be the generation of great games NOT to miss.
All of this imho of course.
EDIT: As far as mech is concerned.. I really hope that KZ3 is possible on the PS3.. but 1) i have no doubt that even though GoW is not as dramatic as KZ3, and 2) I have no doubt the GoW looks better than KZ3 in video form. Shrug.
I never asked anyone to believe me, I said dont believe the hype from anyone... I could care less what any company exec says about a game cause I can see for myself whether what they are saying is true... and until its in a reviewers hands as finished product, or running on the game floor, its not real and may not be attainable. None of SCE games were, in the form they presented in video, also running in that form on the show floor...
I would rather believe the technical, knowledgeable, members of this messageboard than the corporate CEO, VP, or salesman anyday, cause they B3Ders ARENT trying to sell me anything...
So far it has been dissappointing from both sides.
Sony has a lot of renders and even admitts as much. If it was not a demo or mentioned to be real time (e.g. UT2007) then it was rendered. The frustration is the it was rendered to "PS3 specs" and that consumers WILL get this with the PS3. Ok, in 10 months we will be checking that
On MS's front you have PGR3 which is clearly a render of some type. Proof? They have no GPU ready at this time and everyone else showing stuff has choppy underwhelming software less a few exceptions. Sure the Xbox 360 has some nice looking stuff (Condemned, Quake 4) but those look like high end PC stuff, if just a wee bit out of reach for PCs right now (unless you got a killer rig). Then we hear about all the stuff we are NOT seeing: Madden, PDZ, and CoD2. It is like MS totally dropped the ball.
But the only apples to apples so far is Gears of War that looked just like UT2007.
Kind of ironic that the only games that were using next gen engines and that looked good were both from Epic, both on the same engine, and both looked the same?
I am sure the new consoles will impress...... someday....... when we see real hardware GoW and UT2007 are good reason for hope.
But in significant ways, especially particles and render quality, they just seems a bit far away from what we saw in MotorStorm and Killzone and probably a whole lot of other titles.
I would like to be pleasantly surprised, but thus far we are all argueing over whether some Rendered footage that may or may not use game assets and may or may not actually represent what gameplay will look like is what we will get
Just easiest to compare the real gameplay shots on real hardware (or at least dev kits). In that regards, Epic really kicked some butt on both platforms with UT2007 and Gears of War. At least Epic is giving us some optimism!
Sony has a lot of renders and even admitts as much. If it was not a demo or mentioned to be real time (e.g. UT2007) then it was rendered. The frustration is the it was rendered to "PS3 specs" and that consumers WILL get this with the PS3. Ok, in 10 months we will be checking that
On MS's front you have PGR3 which is clearly a render of some type. Proof? They have no GPU ready at this time and everyone else showing stuff has choppy underwhelming software less a few exceptions. Sure the Xbox 360 has some nice looking stuff (Condemned, Quake 4) but those look like high end PC stuff, if just a wee bit out of reach for PCs right now (unless you got a killer rig). Then we hear about all the stuff we are NOT seeing: Madden, PDZ, and CoD2. It is like MS totally dropped the ball.
But the only apples to apples so far is Gears of War that looked just like UT2007.
Kind of ironic that the only games that were using next gen engines and that looked good were both from Epic, both on the same engine, and both looked the same?
I am sure the new consoles will impress...... someday....... when we see real hardware
GoW and UT2007 are good reason for hope.But in significant ways, especially particles and render quality, they just seems a bit far away from what we saw in MotorStorm and Killzone and probably a whole lot of other titles.
I would like to be pleasantly surprised, but thus far we are all argueing over whether some Rendered footage that may or may not use game assets and may or may not actually represent what gameplay will look like is what we will get
Just easiest to compare the real gameplay shots on real hardware (or at least dev kits). In that regards, Epic really kicked some butt on both platforms with UT2007 and Gears of War. At least Epic is giving us some optimism!
MechanizedDeath
Regular
They showed "CGI concepts and tech demos" and realtime demos. And "CGI concepts" is a vague term since with games currently a year away from release, and in fragmented states of completion, most totally unplayable, what qualifies as a concept and what qualifies as being representative of the final product? Was Fight Night a mere tech demo, or a demo of the game engine? Was Heavenly Sword a CGI concept, or a tech demo from an early product? Where's the line drawn? Should they show nothing but realtime? What about the videos from EA and the PGR3 team, or the GoW stuff that wasn't playable? Was Oblivion playable? I didn't quite see. Where's the line drawn? Seems to be it's drawn arbitrarily depending on which side of the fence you sit.Goragoth said:
As for the Toy Story level graphics comment, it was from the Graphics Synthesizer press release back in 1999 IIRC. It should be on SCE's press site still. That comment isn't false though (Toy Story level graphics is a vague statement), and was given along with REAL specs. The most detailed specs given all last gen I might add. People harp on the PR bluster like it meant anything, when a whole, long spec sheet was given along with the PR that clearly stated what the machine could or couldn't do. I don't think we should blame Sony for stupid magazine editors who just grabbed the biggest number and ran with it. We all remember NGO's front page "50 MILLION POLYGONS PER SECOND!!!" That was prior to the EE's speed bump. Even then, we spent a lot of time debunking that figure on the NGO forums. PEACE.
The thing is . If sony cgi stuff ms would have blown us all away and now sony is playing the evasive person game and isn't fully answering questions so that when games don't live up to what they showed they can say well they were renderes with in game assets rendered to spec and we never said they were real
- Status