HALO REACH is the current FPS graphic king on console. Not KILLZONE 2 anymore.

#2. Tesselation to archieve more characters which means more detailed polygons on screen.monkeysmoke

Reach only uses tessellation on it's water.....

if it's not the best looking game on any system then it's not any kind of king. there's only one king. would you settle for graphics prince?

CaseyWegner

If its a rich prince then I'm fine with it.

yes there is a lot of "grey" but i think it fits the atmosphere well. the game is almost 2 years old now. i think graphically it holds up well. gameplay......well thats a different story.

Evertime i play Sword base my Jaw Drops Look up Vids of it cause it's just so BEAUTIFUL

[QUOTE="xYamatox"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"] Exactly? I have a hard time believing that.:|

Advid-Gamer

No more different than any other FPS I've played. Bigger maps =/= different play experiences.

- Enemies will usually make VERY similar actions

- All enemies basically spawn in the same area

- The same weapons are laid out on the same spots

- Vehicles are place in the same spots.

It's not like Halo Reach re-codes itself each time you play it, the game always ends up more or less the same. Just because you chose to use the Needle Rifle > DMR your second run through does NOT make it a new experience.

Halo is fun, but graphics are meh compared to kz2

#1. lack of colours

monkeysmoke

BTW a battle on the toxic planet shouldn't be colorful, I guess.

#2. Tight linear corridor confined enviroments.

monkeysmoke

Suljeva missions in SP and Pyrrhus Rise in MP say HI

#3. less amount of enemies onscreen

monkeysmoke

KZ2 is enough chaotic already. With more enemies it would be unplayable. Imagine one of those 2D bullet hell shooters, except bullets are invisible.

#4. No split screen co-op campaign. monkeysmoke

#5. low res enviromental textures. monkeysmoke

COMPARED TO Halo reach with ... #3. More than 40 dynamic HDR light effect. monkeysmoke

#4. Different colour array in background. monkeysmoke

As an owner of both games. No just no.

#4. Full 3d rendered epic skybox. monkeysmoke

#5. 4 players split screen co-op campaign local & online. monkeysmoke

Halo reach finally meeting 720p hd monkeysmoke

TRUTH is bitter. monkeysmoke

[QUOTE="mystervj"][QUOTE="monkeysmoke"] What are you talking about? Do you realy know what is technical graphics? Reach uses #1. 40 dynamic HDR lighting effect. #2. Tesselation to archieve more characters which means more detailed polygons on screen. #3. Full 3D skybox #4. Custom AA compared to poor AA used in killzone 2 #5. Full motion blure including per object base. See: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-halo-reach-tech-analysis-article Killzone would've looked like sh!t if it attempted anything close to halo reach (4 player co-op alone is enough to cut it graphics & GG knows that). Halo reach is untouchable when it comes to technicaly graphic considering what the game is pushing.monkeysmoke

Reach only use tessellation on water.

Why don't you look around the thread and see how many people agree with you before make a scene out of urself

BTW if you read the df analysis carefully, it says Reach is Sub-HD :D

Doesn't matter

i have reach and i dont think its even close to graphics king...even MW2 looks better graphic wise imo

KZ 2 does have collor.....

lol 720p means 720x1280, KZ2 is 720x1280, Halo Reach is only 720x1152

[QUOTE="monkeysmoke"][QUOTE="Person0"] 1) Killzone 2 lighting looks as good. 2) Tesselation is overhyped, more characters on screen> 40 is not that much more then killzone. 3)Sky box does not make a game graphics king. 4) Custom AA does not mean good, go to sword base and it is easy to see the alasing on the walls. 5)Killzone two has motion blur. Co-op in reach significantly reduces draw distance and detail. I like how halo looks better, with color and art direction, but it is not as technically advanced ak K2.worknow222

[QUOTE="Person0"] 1) Killzone 2 lighting looks as good. 2) Tesselation is overhyped, more characters on screen> 40 is not that much more then killzone. 3)Sky box does not make a game graphics king. 4) Custom AA does not mean good, go to sword base and it is easy to see the alasing on the walls. 5)Killzone two has motion blur. Co-op in reach significantly reduces draw distance and detail. I like how halo looks better, with color and art direction, but it is not as technically advanced ak K2.monkeysmoke

"2) Tesselation is overhyped, more characters on screen> 40 is not that much more then killzone."

Oh! Now tessellation is overhyped if it was possible on the ps3 it would've been a major weapon for cows to bash with like they do with (teh cell).Tessellation is possible on the ps3, just very costly but it is possible to offload the tessellation to the Cell.And again Halo Reach only uses Tessellation on the water

"3)Sky box does not make a game graphics king." Yeah but it makes killzone 2 2D skybox look OLDSCHOOL.Talking about graphics technicaly,reach's 3D skybox is another advancement in technical aspect against oldschool 2D skybox in killzone 2. Im not familiar with the skyboxes in killzone but a 3d skybox isnt exactly amazing, nor needed in many cases

"4) Custom AA does not mean good, go to sword base and it is easy to see the alasing on the walls." Yeah but its not as worst as the aliasing in killzone 2 espencialy with the overused motion blur Both techniques are flawed and not as good as traditonal MSAA, but neither is definitaly better than the other as both techniques work better at different aspects, also Motion blur works to cover AA incase you didnt know so im not sure what that comment was refering too.

HALO REACH is technicaly more powerful than killzone 2 in every aspect PERIOD!!!! Good luck with that :roll:

Just pointing out, i dont own a PS3 so you cant exactly use the fanboy argument against me, you however might want to learn what you are talking about.

Um, monkeysmoke, Halo Reach is 1152x720.

[QUOTE="monkeysmoke"][QUOTE="Person0"] 1) Killzone 2 lighting looks as good. 2) Tesselation is overhyped, more characters on screen> 40 is not that much more then killzone. 3)Sky box does not make a game graphics king. 4) Custom AA does not mean good, go to sword base and it is easy to see the alasing on the walls. 5)Killzone two has motion blur. Co-op in reach significantly reduces draw distance and detail. I like how halo looks better, with color and art direction, but it is not as technically advanced ak K2.ferret-gamer

"2) Tesselation is overhyped, more characters on screen> 40 is not that much more then killzone."

Oh! Now tessellation is overhyped if it was possible on the ps3 it would've been a major weapon for cows to bash with like they do with (teh cell).Tessellation is possible on the ps3, just very costly but it is possible to offload the tessellation to the Cell.And again Halo Reach only uses Tessellation on the water

"3)Sky box does not make a game graphics king." Yeah but it makes killzone 2 2D skybox look OLDSCHOOL.Talking about graphics technicaly,reach's 3D skybox is another advancement in technical aspect against oldschool 2D skybox in killzone 2. Im not familiar with the skyboxes in killzone but a 3d skybox isnt exactly amazing, nor needed in many cases

"4) Custom AA does not mean good, go to sword base and it is easy to see the alasing on the walls." Yeah but its not as worst as the aliasing in killzone 2 espencialy with the overused motion blur Both techniques are flawed and not as good as traditonal MSAA, but neither is definitaly better than the other as both techniques work better at different aspects, also Motion blur works to cover AA incase you didnt know so im not sure what that comment was refering too.

HALO REACH is technicaly more powerful than killzone 2 in every aspect PERIOD!!!! Good luck with that :roll:

Just pointing out, i dont own a PS3 so you cant exactly use the fanboy argument against me, you however might want to learn what you are talking about.

[Halo reach custom AA destroys the killzone 2 quinx AA. Killzone 2 method of AA is an old very poor method of AA compared to halo reach custom AA which used the embended 10mb EDRAM extensively to archieve it AA. Play reach you'll know it is smoother than killzone 2 NO DOUBT!monkeysmoke

I will like to see a prove of posible tessellation on ps3 (So funny how cows claims every thing can be done on ps3 by offloading to teh cell) stop missleading your ownself please. What makes you think the tesselation was used only on water for reach? Oh! 3D skybox is nothing amaizing right? Because it is something archieved with the 360 console right?(typical COW) 3D skybox proves more on how large & sense of dept present in halo reach.It proves that no space is confined from the sky to the whole enviroment is opened & rendered in full 3D(epic scale).If killzone 2 had done 3D skybox first cows must have labeled it UNIQUE but now it not amaizing because it is on a halo game. Halo reach custom AA destroys the killzone 2 quinx AA. Killzone 2 method of AA is an old very poor method of AA compared to halo reach custom AA which used the embended 10mb EDRAM extensively to archieve it AA. Play reach you'll know it is smoother than killzone 2 NO DOUBT!monkeysmoke

Um, monkeysmoke, Halo Reach is 1152x720.

mitu123

I think tehy got a little to crazy over the games craphics. They look good, but they arent teh best weve seen.

Um, monkeysmoke, Halo Reach is 1152x720.

mitu123

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

Um, monkeysmoke, Halo Reach is 1152x720.

monkeysmoke

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

Um, monkeysmoke, Halo Reach is 1152x720.

Deathtransit

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

Um, monkeysmoke, Halo Reach is 1152x720.

Deathtransit

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

Um, monkeysmoke, Halo Reach is 1152x720.

monkeysmoke

[QUOTE="monkeysmoke"][Halo reach custom AA destroys the killzone 2 quinx AA. Killzone 2 method of AA is an old very poor method of AA compared to halo reach custom AA which used the embended 10mb EDRAM extensively to archieve it AA. Play reach you'll know it is smoother than killzone 2 NO DOUBT!soulitane

[QUOTE="soulitane"][QUOTE="monkeysmoke"][Halo reach custom AA destroys the killzone 2 quinx AA. Killzone 2 method of AA is an old very poor method of AA compared to halo reach custom AA which used the embended 10mb EDRAM extensively to archieve it AA. Play reach you'll know it is smoother than killzone 2 NO DOUBT!monkeysmoke

[QUOTE="soulitane"][QUOTE="monkeysmoke"][Halo reach custom AA destroys the killzone 2 quinx AA. Killzone 2 method of AA is an old very poor method of AA compared to halo reach custom AA which used the embended 10mb EDRAM extensively to archieve it AA. Play reach you'll know it is smoother than killzone 2 NO DOUBT!monkeysmoke

[QUOTE="monkeysmoke"][QUOTE="mitu123"]

Um, monkeysmoke, Halo Reach is 1152x720.

mystervj

I will like to see a prove of posible tessellation on ps3 (So funny how cows claims every thing can be done on ps3 by offloading to teh cell) stop missleading your ownself please. What makes you think the tesselation was used only on water for reach?

Oh! 3D skybox is nothing amaizing right? Because it is something archieved with the 360 console right?(typical COW) 3D skybox proves more on how large & sense of dept present in halo reach.

It proves that no space is confined from the sky to the whole enviroment is opened & rendered in full 3D(epic scale).If killzone 2 had done 3D skybox first cows must have labeled it UNIQUE but now it not amaizing because it is on a halo game.

Halo reach custom AA destroys the killzone 2 quinx AA. Killzone 2 method of AA is an old very poor method of AA compared to halo reach custom AA which used the embended 10mb EDRAM extensively to archieve it AA. Play reach you'll know it is smoother than killzone 2 NO DOUBT!monkeysmoke

Perhaps you missed the little text string at the end of my post saying "I dont own a PS3". So perhaps you can inform me as to how i am a cow or why i would have any fanboy allegiance to killzone 2.

Tessellation withPhyreEngine that uses Tessellated Geometry:

"Now I'll talk a little about our performance.

To give an idea of the scene complexity, there are typically about 20 patches visible on screen in our terrain. If we increased the scale of our terrain, we might have more patches, but all the extra ones would be in the distance, and thus of the lowest LOD and wouldn't massively affect performance.
This gives us around 70,000 triangles on-screen. Note that we're not including any geometry which is rendered multiple times, such as for rendering a show pass.
At runtime, the tessellation of the terrain takes only half of one SPU - this time including processing the terrain for the shadow-map generation. Considering that the terrain accounts for much of the visible scene and contains a lot of geometry, this is a reasonably good use of resources.
Our decompression is more variable and tends to use up whatever SPU time is left over after the geometry and other operations (such as skinning, animation, etc.) The system expects a small amount of lag in the streaming, and in practice it happens quickly enough that it isn't visible to the player."

http://www.technology.scee.net/files/presentations/cedec2008/PhyreEngine_CEDEC2008Speech_e.pdf

I cant remember the link where it was Said that reach only has tessellation in the water, but if you are able to prove me wrong go ahead and show me any proof you have of Reach using tessellation anywhere other than the water.

As for the skyboxes, i was saying that it wasnt amazing because they have been around in games from before any of the current gen consoles were released, but again they are not needed in some games and would just be a waste of resources.

Anti aliasing:

Using temporal AA as the only type of anti aliasing has some major drawbacks. Temporal is great for far away objects but causes ghosting due to a slow response time in closer objects and can cause noticable texture and edge blurring as well. The anti aliasing in kz2 may not be as effective at reducing jaggies as temporal, but doesnt suffer from ghosting and doesnt blur texture and edges nearly as much.

Please dont start touting around Temporal like cows do MLAA, both are heavily flawed methods and neither are a legitimate replacement for msaa.