Killzone 2 still challenges crysis 2 graphically

I mean really, before we even get to killzone 3 can we top kz2 first please.

I got a PS3 and I played Killzone 2 and honestly for the majority of the game I didnt like its graphical style at all. The game was so grey that it blew my mind. However the desert mission and the one with the nuked city looked pretty sweet.

Unless I'm going blind, I see no difference. Sorry TC. DroidPhysX

^ agreed

Killzone 2 looks really good, but it uses lots of motion-blur, and in-your-face lens flare and depth of field effects, Crysis 2 looks a lot more like real-life (not just in an setting sense either).

What's up with the heavy dof and motionblur in KZ?

Aren't those the 360 version pics, if so kz2 still owns it .

More comparisons added, it's crazy to see how an almost 2yr old game competes favoritably with a late 2010 Crysis 2.

Can we agree that they both look awesome.

What's up with the heavy dof and motionblur in KZ?

strangeisland

Take off the fanboy goggles. Crysis 2 looks noticeably better.

The fire in killzone looks nowhere close to the fire in crysis.That's all i see.genaroll

Second KZ3 shot looks like KZ2. But yea on console it challenge crysis 2.

Take off the fanboy goggles. Crysis 2 looks noticeably better.

Phoenix534

Second KZ3 shot looks like KZ2. But yea on console it challenge crysis 2.

Espada12

Console Crysis 2 looks like **** KZ2 destroys it IMO. Only this Crysis 2 has is scale.

The fire in killzone looks nowhere close to the fire in crysis.That's all i see.genaroll

[QUOTE="genaroll"]The fire in killzone looks nowhere close to the fire in crysis.That's all i see.killzowned24

I got a PS3 and I played Killzone 2 and honestly for the majority of the game I didnt like its graphical style at all. The game was so grey that it blew my mind. However the desert mission and the one with the nuked city looked pretty sweet.

argetlam00

I could really care less, I own KZ2 now and will have KZ3 and Crysis 2 in my collection ASAP.

So stop the comparisom or the kitty gets it!

Having played both KZ2 and Crysis, I have to say that KZ2 isn't even the same *room* as Crysis, let alone a comparable game. Screw screenshots, get a high-end PC and you'l understand, Crysis is god, KZ2 is a slug.subrosian

why are the images comprssed

Second KZ3 shot looks like KZ2. But yea on console it challenge crysis 2.

Espada12

KZ3 shot? Where's the KZ3 shot? Do you know somethingI don't?

[QUOTE="killzowned24"][QUOTE="genaroll"]The fire in killzone looks nowhere close to the fire in crysis.That's all i see.moose_knuckler

That's because the flame from the flamethrower was made to look like it was coming from a stream of fuel. Not the most ingenious thing to do, but it wasn't bad from a graphical standpoint.

No....but it does look nice.

Anyone who even consider these two games to be in the same league must suffer from something unknown to man.

KZ2 looks pretty good but from a pure technical stand point it's nothing to boost about.

Pre-rendered physics, pre-baked lightning, environments copied and pasted straight from a tetris game. It's smudgy, low res, bad textures and once again somebody should teach the Helghast how to actually build. The buildings are almost only steel plates and some steel rubble here and there, how convenient (low poly count)....kind of reminds me when I was a punk kid playing paintball except our backgrounds where made of wood and oil-drums. Everything looks looks so fake and unrealistic. Sometimes it's even hard to tell the difference between a garbage bag and a stone. I've never had any problem separating a garbage bagfrom a stone before, not even in bob'n rumble on the C64. + The characters has a low poly count and crappy textures.

So now to the praise. The animations and some of the effects are good. Also the weapon models are very good. They are actually the best looking part of the game which is why it covers 50% of the screen. To sum it up, Gerilla spent 90% of the resources to blind people into thinking that the game is more than it is. Effects and animation stand out very well so does a gun that covers half of what you see.

Anyone who even consider these two games to be in the same league must suffer from something unknown to man.

KZ2 looks pretty good but from a pure technical stand point it's nothing to boost about.

Pre-rendered physics, pre-baked lightning, environments copied and pasted straight from a tetris game. It's smudgy, low res, bad textures and once again somebody should teach the Helghast how to actually build. The buildings are almost only steel plates and some steel rubble here and there, how convenient (low poly count)....kind of reminds me when I was a punk kid playing paintball except our backgrounds where made of wood and oil-drums. Everything looks looks so fake and unrealistic. Sometimes it's even hard to tell the difference between a garbage bag and a stone. I've never had any problem separating a garbage bagfrom a stone before, not even in bob'n rumble on the C64. + The characters has a low poly count and crappy textures.

So now to the praise. The animations and some of the effects are good. Also the weapon models are very good. They are actually the best looking part of the game which is why it covers 50% of the screen. To sum it up, Gerilla spent 90% of the resources to blind people into thinking that the game is more than it is. Effects and animation stand out very well so does a gun that covers half of what you see.

fireballonfire

The pure ignorance in your post is hard to bear sir. Killzone 2 has proper physics based particles which are affected by wind, bounce off surfaces and thick plumes of smokes linger on screen far longer than any other games. Environment desctructions are just diverse as in crysis 2. The textures are not nearly as bad as you fabricate it to be. You are clearly mistaken motion blur and depth of field with low res, go read up some technical forums beofre you spill misinformed arguments.

Anyone who even consider these two games to be in the same league must suffer from something unknown to man.

KZ2 looks pretty good but from a pure technical stand point it's nothing to boost about.

Pre-rendered physics, pre-baked lightning, environments copied and pasted straight from a tetris game. It's smudgy, low res, bad textures and once again somebody should teach the Helghast how to actually build. The buildings are almost only steel plates and some steel rubble here and there, how convenient (low poly count)....kind of reminds me when I was a punk kid playing paintball except our backgrounds where made of wood and oil-drums. Everything looks looks so fake and unrealistic. Sometimes it's even hard to tell the difference between a garbage bag and a stone. I've never had any problem separating a garbage bagfrom a stone before, not even in bob'n rumble on the C64. + The characters has a low poly count and crappy textures.

So now to the praise. The animations and some of the effects are good. Also the weapon models are very good. They are actually the best looking part of the game which is why it covers 50% of the screen. To sum it up, Gerilla spent 90% of the resources to blind people into thinking that the game is more than it is. Effects and animation stand out very well so does a gun that covers half of what you see.

fireballonfire

tetris game? yeah sure

helghast to build? helghan is POOR industrial wasteland of a planet

To be honest, if what we've been shown is representative of the console build of C2, then it's noticeably better than KZ2. Not by a lot, but by enough. Also, KZ3 hasn't really shown itself to be much better looking than KZ2. Perhaps it's because all they've shown is the artic level, and it's pretty bland. If you're gonna compare screencaps from a vid, make sure you do it both ways.

I had to reformat my hdd, so I just used what was present in my photobucket. Didn't have the 720p version of these KZ2 grabs, so I just used the 960x540(720p@75%) versions.

Let's not forget Rage, as it easily stands toe-to-toe with both KZ2/3, C2, and UC2 as well. Not to mention it does it at 60fps. Did some 720p side-by-side comparison videos of like environments and it holds it's own, no problem. Hell, I did some 720p side-by-side vids of Reach beta MP and KZ2 MP, and Reach held it's own. KZ2 had better looking guns, but it was blurry and the building textures looked smudged compared to Reach.

Find some quality 720p vids, sync up similar clips/areas, and you can see it too. I'll upload some good comparison vids and pics in the next few days. Why don't you do the same? We could have a nerd party. :P

---

P.S.- Here's what I was saying about KZ3 compared to KZ2. At this point in development, KZ3 doesn't look much better than KZ2. Seriously.

Crysis 1 beats both. Oh wait, you haven't played it.

2 months and we will see the dx11 version of crysis 2? right?

KZ2 looks fantastic indeed, so does KZ3, Rage, Crysis2, Gears3, etc. whats the point of trying to figure which one is technically better when they all have completly diferent engines and artstyle?

KZ2 looks fantastic indeed, so does KZ3, Rage, Crysis2, Gears3, etc. whats the point of trying to figure which one is technically better when they all have completly diferent engines and artstyle?

PAL360

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

KZ2 looks fantastic indeed, so does KZ3, Rage, Crysis2, Gears3, etc. whats the point of trying to figure which one is technically better when they all have completly diferent engines and artstyle?

TheShadowLord07

No one here knows exactly which game is technically more impressive out of so many good looking games. But yeah, we all have opinions, here´s mine:

Crysis2 > KZ3 = Gears3 = Rage > RDR > U2 = KZ2 > GoW3 = GeoW2 = Alan Wake

Literally all I can see from Killzone is blur and colour filter.

[QUOTE="subrosian"]Having played both KZ2 and Crysis, I have to say that KZ2 isn't even the same *room* as Crysis, let alone a comparable game. Screw screenshots, get a high-end PC and you'l understand, Crysis is god, KZ2 is a slug.gpuking

SYSTEM wars not CONSOLE wars. Crysis blows Killzone out of the water, there's not even a comparison. The HD 4870 is not "high end", Crysis with mods on a more powerful rig is insane.

Killzone 2 is on the same level but if those pictures are from the xbox360 version, Crysis 2 ownz Killzone 2 on consoles graphcally im sorry.

Everyone knows by now, Crysis on PC = The one and real Graphics King

On Consoles however = Killzone is teh winner!

I don't see Crysis 2 on consoles looking better then KZ2, KZ3 will knock it out of the ball park. The large majority of gaming press all agreed at E3 that KZ3 was the most visually impressive titles on consoles.