Halo Reach vs KZ2 comparison

I just want everyone to know that a 1 1/2 year old game just destroyed Reach, the 360's great hope. I thought Reach was supposed to have ground breaking visuals? It looks just like the other halo 3. Can we put it to rest that the 360 is maxed out. It's just sad that the PS3's 3rd best looking game beats a new game that was supposed to be the one great 360 hope to show the 360 had the power to compete with the PS3. http://gamingbolt.com/2010/02/14/halo-reach-versus-killzone-2-hd-screenshot-comparison/

I know right!!! and when reach CAME OUT, everyone wouldn't shut up about it's graphics!!!

yes reach doesnt look anything special but graphics aside, reach will single handedly destroy majority of ps3 library including killzone 2

OH NO! I fell asleep for several months and missed the release of Halo Reach.

While from what we've seen Reach doesn't look near as good as Killzone 2, I think we all know what game will sell more.

Halo doesn't need graphics to sell, and in the end, that's all Xbox Management care about.

Still, graphically speaking, I would wait until REACH is finally out before making declarations. What we have seen doesn't look all that graphically impressive, but they have all year.

*Shrugs*

Most of those pics are pre-alpha reach, and honestly KZ2 doesn't look much better in those pics.

isnt Halo 3 more played than Killzone 2 to this day, sad, yeah Halo Reach will blow Killzone 2 out of the water.

OH NO! I fell asleep for several months and missed the release of Halo Reach.

DropTarget

First of those are the Alpha builtscreen (m aybe even pre-alpha) and the gameplay is going to be way better than KZ2. Even now I would rather play Halo 3 than KZ2.

I just want everyone to know that a 1 1/2 year old game just destroyed Reach, the 360's great hope. I thought Reach was supposed to have ground breaking visuals? It looks just like the other halo 3. Can we put it to rest that the 360 is maxed out. It's just sad that the PS3's 3rd best looking game beats a new game that was supposed to be the one great 360 hope to show the 360 had the power to compete with the PS3. http://gamingbolt.com/2010/02/14/halo-reach-versus-killzone-2-hd-screenshot-comparison/

gamewhat

While the visuals may not be as good as Killzone 2, Reach is far more technically impressive than Killzone 2. Reach has huge open enviroments, numerous enemies, and vechiles moving around on screen, and is one of the few console games to use ture HDR lighting.

[QUOTE="DropTarget"]

OH NO! I fell asleep for several months and missed the release of Halo Reach.

gamewhat

stop ignoring context.

Killzone 2 is extremely linear compared to Halo 3. Halo Reach follows that design philosophy: large enviornments. There is no way around that. There is no arguement.

First thing, Halo had never really been so much about graphics. There is this little thing called Gameplay, it is pretty important to gaming.
Second thing, the game isn't even out yet (may not even come out this year), so comparisons are pointless.

[QUOTE="gamewhat"]

I just want everyone to know that a 1 1/2 year old game just destroyed Reach, the 360's great hope. I thought Reach was supposed to have ground breaking visuals? It looks just like the other halo 3. Can we put it to rest that the 360 is maxed out. It's just sad that the PS3's 3rd best looking game beats a new game that was supposed to be the one great 360 hope to show the 360 had the power to compete with the PS3. http://gamingbolt.com/2010/02/14/halo-reach-versus-killzone-2-hd-screenshot-comparison/

Arbiterisl33t69

Seriously KZ2 doesn't look much better than the reach pics.

One of these games came out last year. The other is in alpha. What's wrong with this picture?

Also, I think he used concept art for the 3rd comparison.

[QUOTE="gamewhat"]

I just want everyone to know that a 1 1/2 year old game just destroyed Reach, the 360's great hope. I thought Reach was supposed to have ground breaking visuals? It looks just like the other halo 3. Can we put it to rest that the 360 is maxed out. It's just sad that the PS3's 3rd best looking game beats a new game that was supposed to be the one great 360 hope to show the 360 had the power to compete with the PS3. http://gamingbolt.com/2010/02/14/halo-reach-versus-killzone-2-hd-screenshot-comparison/

Arbiterisl33t69

Draw distance: Reach > Killzone 2

Textures: Reach > Killzone 2

Enemies on screen: Reach > Killzone 2

Lightning: Killzone 2 > Reach

Motion blur: Killzone 2 > Reach.

You really have to consider that Reach will sport tons of more action on screen so of course it won't look as "good".

I don't get this attempt to hype Halo's graphics all of a sudden, if anything people should be trying to focus attention away from the graphics.

quoted from another thread:

"10 things Halo: Reach needs to look as good as Killzone 2"Blue-Sky (original poster)

• Smaller environments
• Foggy view distance
• Fixed light sources
• lower color palette
• Less enemies on screen
• more processing power devoted to Gun graphics
• Less vehicles
• smaller peripheral field of view
• scripted AI
• repeated environments

I thought those comparisons shots looked pretty close actually, with KZ2 gun models being the only thing standing out as being clearly better.

But my eyes are bad anyway :P

That whole screenshot comparison is full of fail.

They are using multiplayer images from Killzone 2.

Comparing a 100% complete game with a pre-alpha game.

Comparing a game released in early 2009 to a game releasing late 2010.

Not using the normal resolution for either of the games.

And did they use concept art in one of the pictures? I can't tell.

This is like the Dante's Inferno vs God of War 3 I saw somewhere.

Is it me, or is that last Halo: Reach picture artwork?

Draw distance: Reach > Killzone 2

Textures: Reach > Killzone 2

Enemies on screen: Reach > Killzone 2

Lightning: Killzone 2 > Reach

Motion blur: Killzone 2 > Reach.

You really have to consider that Reach will sport tons of more action on screen so of course it won't look as "good".

Cyberfairy

Halo 3's lighting is technically more impressive than KZ2's.

[QUOTE="Arbiterisl33t69"][QUOTE="gamewhat"]

I just want everyone to know that a 1 1/2 year old game just destroyed Reach, the 360's great hope. I thought Reach was supposed to have ground breaking visuals? It looks just like the other halo 3. Can we put it to rest that the 360 is maxed out. It's just sad that the PS3's 3rd best looking game beats a new game that was supposed to be the one great 360 hope to show the 360 had the power to compete with the PS3. http://gamingbolt.com/2010/02/14/halo-reach-versus-killzone-2-hd-screenshot-comparison/

gamewhat

yep, the person who wrote that "comparison" used concept art in the 3rd section and called it a screenshot. :?

Watch the new video on Bungie.net; the game looks beautiful.Doctor-McNinja

yep, the person who wrote that "comparison" used concept art in the 3rd section and called it a screenshot. :?

Mordred19

I thought those comparisons shots looked pretty close actually, with KZ2 gun models being the only thing standing out as being clearly better.

But my eyes are bad anyway :P

Kickinurass

Agreed. I hate the textures on the character models in KZ2, and the mud. Everything else looks nice though.

Draw distance: Reach > Killzone 2

Textures: Reach > Killzone 2

Enemies on screen: Reach > Killzone 2

Lightning: Killzone 2 > Reach

Motion blur: Killzone 2 > Reach.

You really have to consider that Reach will sport tons of more action on screen so of course it won't look as "good".

Cyberfairy

Comparing a game in alpha v.s. a already released game, that makes sense, that's like those Forza 3 v.s. GT5 physics demo comparisons.:lol:

it's fact said in a very fanboyish way .

Please take the fanboyism else where or at least judge the game when its out. kthxbaipunkrocker163

[QUOTE="Doctor-McNinja"]Watch the new video on Bungie.net; the game looks beautiful.bobbetybob

I just want everyone to know that a 1 1/2 year old game just destroyed Reach, the 360's great hope. I thought Reach was supposed to have ground breaking visuals? It looks just like the other halo 3. Can we put it to rest that the 360 is maxed out. It's just sad that the PS3's 3rd best looking game beats a new game that was supposed to be the one great 360 hope to show the 360 had the power to compete with the PS3. http://gamingbolt.com/2010/02/14/halo-reach-versus-killzone-2-hd-screenshot-comparison/

gamewhat

Try to put 40 enemies and 20 vehicles in KZ2´s engine and it will probably run at 1 frame p second. The funny thing is that even with all of that going on at the same time, reach still looks almost as good as KZ2 ;)

[QUOTE="Cyberfairy"]

Draw distance: Reach > Killzone 2

Textures: Reach > Killzone 2

Enemies on screen: Reach > Killzone 2

Lightning: Killzone 2 > Reach

Motion blur: Killzone 2 > Reach.

You really have to consider that Reach will sport tons of more action on screen so of course it won't look as "good".

gamewhat

Is it me, or is that last Halo: Reach picture artwork?

Ross_the_Boss6

[QUOTE="Cyberfairy"]

Draw distance: Reach > Killzone 2

Textures: Reach > Killzone 2

Enemies on screen: Reach > Killzone 2

Lightning: Killzone 2 > Reach

Motion blur: Killzone 2 > Reach.

You really have to consider that Reach will sport tons of more action on screen so of course it won't look as "good".

gamewhat

Halo 3 already had larger enviorments than Killzone 2. It is a fact that Reach is going in the same direction with larger enviorments. You admit that Reach will have more enemies on screen. So why are even trying to directly compare them and put one over the other?